[3.5] Justification for GMs rolling PC checks/saves secretly?

[Maginomicon]

If an event happens that would invoke a "no action" skill check of its type, is the character entitled to the skill check (that is, is the GM obliged to ask for the check)?

I ask because it seems like we as GMs often say things like "everyone make spot checks" or "roll me a listen check" whenever something happens nearby that would call for it. However, doesn't the very act of saying something like that tell the players out-of-character that there's something out there to spot or listen, regardless of whether they succeed on the check?

It seems to me that for things like this, the GM should roll this check secretly. Is there something in the DMG or DMG II to justify this?

If so, what skills would a GM be obligated to make these secret rolls for? Might the following be reasonable as required of the GM?

Spot (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/spot.htm)? (to see something they aren't explicitly looking for)
Listen (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/listen.htm)? (to hear something they aren't explicitly listening for)
Sense Motive (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/senseMotive.htm) when vs Bluff (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/bluff.htm)? (which is part of the bluffing action and thus not an action for the PC)
Knowledge (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/knowledge.htm)? (per category, to identify something on sight such as a creature)
Spellcraft (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/spellcraft.htm)? (for all the Spellcraft entries that are "not an action")
Psicraft (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/skills/psicraft.htm)? (same reasoning as Spellcraft)


What about saving throws? Doesn't the act of telling them to make a save against something that they couldn't be aware of beforehand inform the players out-of-character that there was something to save against (and thus skew their actions in the future just like asking them to make a spot check in an "empty" room)?

When we ask for fort saves to resist poison and disease, aren't we essentially telling players out-of-character that there was something to save against? Thus, wouldn't it make a lot of sense for the GM to make that fort save roll secretly using the PC's modifier?

Why is it that when trying to dodge a trap that relies on a reflex save (such as a scythe blade trap) the player is just as likely to save against it the second time they walk through the area as it is the first time when they were unaware that it could happen? That first time, wouldn't it make sense to make the reflex save roll secretly?

When a PC interacts with what as GM you know is an illusion, aren't you as GM out-of-character informing the player that there was something to Will save against by telling them to make a will save (to disbelieve)? Wouldn't it thus make a lot of sense for the GM to make that will save roll secretly?

Wasn't there something in the DMG, DMG II, or Rules Compendium about some extrasensory tingling effect that happens when a character succeeds on a save? If so, isn't it the same sensation regardless of whether it's a fort, reflex, or will save, and thus you as GM ruin nothing by only telling them that they feel "that tingling sensation"? (Admittedly, it's harder to justify not telling them what caused a reflex save, but then again the imagery of the "dumb luck unaware" trope of dodging traps Mr-Magoo-style as they speed on by is potentially an interesting thing to roleplay as GM)

I know there's a lot of questions here, but my goal was to make you think more than to get answers to every question.

----------

On a separate note: Personally, I make this distinction mechanically through a house rule I call "pressing your luck", an optional choice a player can make when their character either isn't flatfooted or is deliberately attempting to accomplish the associated goal (such as actively trying to listen out for something or actively trying to dodge a trap).

I thus personally call anything of the above topics that they couldn't be aware of and also occurs when they're flatfooted a "passive" check/save and roll it secretly (although I treat some checks as "passive" even when the character's not flatfooted -- such as knowledge or spellcraft -- and even when the PC asks for the check they roll it but I forbid them from pressing their luck on those checks). Thus, I keep a table of the skill modifiers (of the skills listed above) and saving throw modifiers of the PCs so I can just roll them without telling the players about it when a passive roll is called for. Personally I feel this adds a lot of suspense to the situation. (Since some players know that's what I'm doing, I sometimes make meaningless rolls to throw them off-track.)

... That's just me though.

[Emperor Tippy]

In real life, when we play with dice and not an automated roller, we spend the first ten minutes rolling d20's and record the numbers before handing them to the DM along with our characters Spot, Listen, and Sense Motive modifier and each of our saves (plus any relevant special abilities for them).

As such rolls are needed the DM just goes down the list and crosses them off one after the other. It's not perfect but it generally works and tends to speed up play while cutting down on metagaming.

[PlusSixPelican]

Make them make around three spot checks for every one time something happens. ^.^

Should screw with them enough not to expect spot checks to mean things.

[Belial_the_Leveler]

The solution is simple; ask players to roll spot/listen for every location or event and sense motive for every interaction.

That way, they won't know when there actually is something to see hear or a lie to discover.

[RogueDM]

I keep the modifiers for passive checks recorded behind the DM screen and as required will ask my players to roll an unspecified d20 and then add the modifiers myself. They don't know if they're making a will save, spot check, listen check... Additionally I will call them to make d20 rolls when nothing is there to react to, and simply respond to all rolls with "okay" and then move on.

[Slipperychicken]

I like Tippy's suggestion, although it's somewhat time-consuming. Here are some others:

[Disclaimer: I cannot attest to the quality of any of these suggestions. This is just stuff I heard about]


If your players are that bad about it, start compulsively rolling d% and d20s (it makes a cool sound) and asking for spot/listen/sense motive checks and Will saves whenever the players do anything or stay still.

Alternatively, you can ask the group about having the PCs "passively" Take 10 on such checks whenever they don't declare their roll. This does take some trust, though, and gives you the responsibility to not fudge it.

Ask your players for their modifiers on these checks and saves beforehand (before the game begins) and make the rolls secretly. Inform the player if his PC perceives anything as a result. Ask them to update their modifiers as appropriate.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Add will saves against scrying/enchantment effects that they shouldn't know about either because of silent/still spell or other reasons. I normally roll the save behind the screen in these cases, and then tell the players about those saves if they pass it.

[Belial_the_Leveler]

A character always knows whenever he has to roll a saving throw for a spell that targets them. It's in the general rules for magic.

[Emperor Tippy]

A character always knows whenever he has to roll a saving throw for a spell that targets them. It's in the general rules for magic.

No it isn't.
"Succeeding on a Saving Throw

A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells. "

That is the entire relevant portion and it only points out that the character knows when they make a successful save (and even then they just know that they were attacked).