Seeing DM rolls (for reactions)

[JeenLeen]

Are players supposed to see DM rolls?

The reason I ask is that, for abilities like casting Shield, this changes whether or not I'd use it at times.
For Shield, I know I can activate the power after I know I'm hit. But Shield won't help me at all if they rolled a natural 20, and I'd rather not waste the spell slot. Hence the question.

Likewise, for the Lucky feat, would you see the DM's roll?

[Ninja_Prawn]

As far as I'm concerned, it's a question of style. It's okay to hide rolls, and it's okay to do them openly. Page 235 of the DMG has a bit of a discussion on it.

In my own games (which are all PbP), I roll openly as much as possible; I only roll off-screen for things that don't matter (like loot generation), or for random encounters (which I roll in batches using an excel macro). It does give the players a slight edge, but I don't mind that. I can always make challenges harder to compensate.

[MrStabby]

Personally I like to roll in the open.

We play tough(ish) campaigns and characters do run the risk of death. The Players, where possible need to know I am not pulling any punches.

[PeteNutButter]

Reading the various rules its generally implied that all rolls are visible. More specifically some DMs, say 15 on the die, any reactions... etc. Abilities like Cutting Words wouldn't make sense if you didn't see the die. You have to choose whether or not to use it after die is rolled, but before the DM determines the result...

As DM, generally I roll in plain view with the exception of things like stealth and social interactions.

[Phoenix042]

Are players supposed to see DM rolls?

The reason I ask is that, for abilities like casting Shield, this changes whether or not I'd use it at times.
For Shield, I know I can activate the power after I know I'm hit. But Shield won't help me at all if they rolled a natural 20, and I'd rather not waste the spell slot. Hence the question.

Likewise, for the Lucky feat, would you see the DM's roll?

I roll where my players can see, after many years of hiding the rolls, because I find that the game is much more satisfying for the players when they can plainly see that the results of enemy activity are not DM fiat. For example, it's a lot less epic to survive a near-death experience because the DM "didn't think it would be fun for you to die," then because, at the critical moment, the dice fell in your favor. Then you can actually say that you narrowly avoided death, instead of that death was never really a possibility.

Obviously, that means you can't save your PCs if something goes horribly wrong, then, but that's kind of the point.

Many DMs do it differently, and either way is fair, but I'd say the DM should at least tell you the roll (but not necessarily the total) and give you a chance if you have a power like "shield" available.

It's worth a lot less, otherwise.

[Ruslan]

I usually say "he hit AC 19" or something to that effect. Then the player can use (or not use) a Reaction.

[famousringo]

It's a style question, but the value of certain abilities really hinges on knowing at least what's on the die.

At our table, DM rolls are hidden and he announces hits, misses, or crits. If somebody wants to use a roll-manipulation power, such as the lore bard's Cutting Words, the DM tells us if the roll (in this case a d8) could make the difference. He won't know if his odds of stopping the hit are 100% or 12.5%, so it's a gamble, but at least he knows the ability won't be a total waste.

[JAL_1138]

For attacks and opposed physical skill checks, I'll announce the number. "Does 17 hit your AC?" or "Can you beat a 15 grapple check?" for example.
Because it saves me the trouble of keeping up with everyone's numbers and lets them decide whether to use certain abilities. I may change up if certain spells become a problem; they haven't yet when I've DMed. One of the main reasons I don't do open rolls is simply convenience--it's kind of annoying to reach around the DM screen to roll on the table if I have the screen far enough away to accomodate all my notes, other materials, and dice; I like using a screen to have useful info available at a glance and as a backstop for my rolls. I will generally lift the screen for crits, occasionally for botches, or sometimes for otherwise ridiculous luck (string of really good or really bad rolls, of really improbable rolls, for instance).

NPC and enemy stealth checks, deception checks, sleight of hand, insight, etc. stay behind the screen generally.

[fbelanger]

Are players supposed to see DM rolls?

The reason I ask is that, for abilities like casting Shield, this changes whether or not I'd use it at times.
For Shield, I know I can activate the power after I know I'm hit. But Shield won't help me at all if they rolled a natural 20, and I'd rather not waste the spell slot. Hence the question.

Likewise, for the Lucky feat, would you see the DM's roll?

Shield have no problem, the reaction is trigger by a hit.

For lucky and cutting word, it depend on the DM. Using these abilities on a blind roll is frustrating, but RAW look like you are not sure of the result of the attack.

At our table DM tell the result before, and then let players decide to use those abilities.

[JeenLeen]

Thanks for the feedback.


Shield have no problem, the reaction is trigger by a hit.

For lucky and cutting word, it depend on the DM. Using these abilities on a blind roll is frustrating, but RAW look like you are not sure of the result of the attack.

At our table DM tell the result before, and then let players decide to use those abilities.

I think the crux of it is being sure of the result (hit/miss) verses the result (dice roll).
If Shield, I might know I was hit, but if I see a 14 rolled then I have a good idea that another +5 will save me. If I see a 19 (or a 20), I know it's likely no benefit.
With Lucky, it does seem obvious that one would see the roll.

[Malifice]

Some rolls they see, some they dont.

I like to keep them guessing.

[Maxilian]

I let them see most rolls, but there's always that couple of rolls they don't see, in most cases, when i need to make my rolls, i make them in the open, when i don't want them to know, i just roll, they will have no idea why i'm rolling.

[Zevox]

I don't DM much, but personally, I'd roll anything the players are aware is happening openly, and keep secret only things they're not supposed to know about. For instance, if a disguised Succubus tries to charm someone in the party, that save I'd roll in secret, to avoid raising suspicions by telling them they're making a save when there's no apparent reason they would be.

Just regular combat and skill stuff though? Open, no question.

[Squeeq]

I personally would tell them what the die roll is, and then knowing their AC or whatever let them know if it hit afterwards if this comes up - generally with the bounded accuracy they can guess how likely hits are to happen, and guess accordingly, and it does let them figure out more or less the modifiers after a couple rounds. That being said, I'm not usually too concerned about them knowing that, since the luck of both the d20 and the cutting words can ruin even very solid plans

[Balain]

In the past, while dming, I would have my rolls hidden. The last campaign I ran, all the rolls were open. In the current campaign I am a player and all the rolls are open.

Personally I think open rolls are better, and wish I had done it sooner. Old school D&D when I was a kid, dms hid rolls. That was just the way things happened, or at least how I was introduced to the game. Other groups I played with, also did the same, so I just kept doing it that way.

Anyways, I would have all your rolls hidden or all your rolls open. As said all ready, if hidden and power adds a d8 or something, tell them if it won't make a difference, so it isn't wasted.

[Safety Sword]

I'm surprised by the number of DMs that DO roll openly in this thread.

I don't like the players to know why I am rolling or what I get when I roll. I prefer the action to be described rather than just be a stream of maths. I like to keep the math "behind the screen".

I guess I'm Old School.

[Plaguescarred]

I will often roll openly when it happens i'm standing and have a d20 in hand ( it happpens still quite often as i stand and walk a lot when DMing!) , but most of the time i roll when sitting behind my DM screen, calling the roll result if its close i.e AC 18 etc... If the roll is very low or very high i will just say it miss or hit. I don't usually call the number unless its a nat 20 :smallsmile:

But if a PC has an ability that work off a die roll, i am open to tell him or even undo what i did to let course of it. I.e if i called AC 19 and rolled damage and ask to make a CON save, but he uses a Lucky feat die, i will disregard the damage and effect that was dealt.

[EvilAnagram]

I run a tough campaign, so I roll out in the open. I also call out crits.

[Anonymouswizard]

I tend not to roll in the open, although that's not for any particular reason. I've got no problems with rolling all of my dice in the open, depending on the game and the group.

I've got a GM who lets players roll their own perception checks (although he never runs to what they rolled (which has lead to a lot of 'can I point the hidden enemy out to him so he gets a reroll?'), but that's also a group which is very open to social PVP (we roll detect lies and deception against each other a lot) and isn't adverse to physical PVP in social situations (although it's only happened once) so I agree it might be unusual. In some systems the GM will roll openly, in some he won't it depends.

Now, personally I always roll Perception and Sense Motive checks in private, but anything else I'm willing to roll on the table so the players can see. Rolling behind the screen has got me accused of making the game too easy (I just happened to have rubbish d6s).