Tired of the famous secret roll done by GM, I've developed this type of matrix.

I like that players do rolls, even for something they shouldn't know, like awareness, stealth, etc.
For two reason:

• They should have a feeling of how their doing. One should know, more or less, if it's doing a mess or no. We all do have feeling of how something is getting done.
• It's fun for player and GM

What do you think?

EDIT: Update Secret Roll Matrix Table

_________________
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I Signori della Guerra: http://www.isignoridellaguerra.com

Nice matrix, but more rolls?

I actually like to let players make some of those 'secret' rolls themselves and in the open, if just as a test of their roleplaying abilities. Are they collaborators in an evolving story or just out there to minimax anything that moves? I actually enjoy providing them a reminder to ask themselves that question from time to time.

_________________
«Fair is what we see, Fairer what we have perceived, Fairest what is still in veil.»
—Nicolaus Stenonius

MegaTraveller (?), had a similar mechanic, the player rolled and the GM rolled, so the player had some idea how successful they were, but overall?

Then tell them how they are doing or how bad they are doing. You as the GM should have an idea how they are doing, if the PCs need to sneak past the guard, is that the planned encounter? or is the planned encounter inside? So by having the players stopped by the guard and fight it out makes no sense; albeit if they just waltz in making no attempt to hide that is another story, but if the players take the necessary precautions, then build on the suspense of whether or not the guards hears them, but let the players make it past and get to the planned encounter inside.



What do you as the GM gain by making the players search for fun? Having the players pull teeth to find out something that will move the adventure/story/etc along or worst miss something and have to struggle to figure out something.

I have learned that there is nothing gained from rolling dice to roll more dice - it slows the game down. Take my own group of 4-5 players, if each player wanted to roll dice for everything, the story/adventure would slow down to a snail pace. My players get their fun from the challenging encounters I think up for them, which is where I as the GM get my enjoyment setting up the encounters and lending just enough help when needed. Each player gets some enjoyment knowing that at any moment their character could be called upon to make a difference in the adventure.

_________________
For what it's worth, that's the way I see it

Star Wars had the option for Uncertainty Dice.

They Player would get a bonus like 2d6 to his dice pool.
The GM in secret then would roll 2d6 and subtract that from the score.


A matrix could be created that shifts results.

+1 success level (A MS would turn into a CS)
+2 success level (A MF would turn into a CS)

-1 sucess level (A CS would turn into a MS)
-2 success level (a MS would turn into a CF)

Why ?



Oh boy, are we on the same page here. Any psychological torture I can inflict on my PC's is icing on the cake.
The essence of suspense is the most enjoyable part of the game, be it RPG's or anything else.
(Blackjack, Hunting, Poker, Movies, etc., etc.)
I've had very enjoyable sessions where there was no combat at all, the political/intrigue element being the focus.
AND, my PC's enjoy it just as much.
If your players are hell bent on rolling dice, then let them. Look over the screen and say "ooh my" and disregard any impact their dice have.
Sure, any result that would be insantly known, should be rolled openly. Any result whose outcome would not be instantly known, should be rolled secretly by the GM.

_________________
"Leave the gun, take the canolli"

Yes,
I've taken the idea from Twilight 2000 e Traveller: TNE.

I use this type of secret roll by quite some time now. And I found it much better than anything.
The rolling time is the some. When only the GM would roll, now PC and GM roll and results cross indexed.

In addition if the roll is really secret (you don't have a clue at all) the GM can always roll secretly, alone.

I use this matrix as an aid. It doesn't mean that replace good sense or promote Rollplaying

_________________
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I Signori della Guerra: http://www.isignoridellaguerra.com

It depends on the GMs style of running things.

I find it to be a very good optional mechanic that can be used in certain situations. To me a GM is about being fair and neutral. Rolling dice helps break up natural bias and helps promote one of the fundamental pillars of roleplaying, improvisation. When you start taking dice out of the players hands, it changes the mood of the game. A game is a shared journey between the players and the GM. "Psychological torture" goes against the basic spirit of searching for adventure in my opinion.

GMs that use a screen are errecting a barrier between themselves and the players. Roleplaying tends to be about subtle cues and a screen obfuscates some of that intimate detail. I find reactions between players and GM that happen fast create the best flow. A cocoon around the GM impedes that.

And the players style also i would say.

My group favours the screen and my hidden rolls, because they know that I tend to fudge rolls in their favour. I only roll in the open to scare the crap out of them... my rolls as a GM tend to be very lethal against players.

Unfortunately that dice luck does not extend to me as a player.... go figure.

_________________
Ok, let me get this straight. These guys come in, trash the place, slap Agrik & Larani around, and the most intelligible thing they said was "Zog!"?

People should play in whatever manner makes them happy. It is all about fun.

When I firsted started to play AD&D, we would have a Dungeon Masters screen set-up. For years upon years I ended up playing RPGs this way. Then a buddy made his own system up, and when we played we had no screen. Then it slowly dawned on me how much better the game went from a roleplaying perspective. Players interfaced with GM and each other in a much more natural way.

With no screen, the GM makes better contact (body language) with all the players. Having attended different game conventions I also noticed this trend. When I played in a game with a GM that didn't bother with excessive paraphernalia the experience was much richer.

If rolls need to be shielded from the players eyes, it easy so easy to cup your hand over the dice roll.

1) A screen is a useful piece of cardstock/paper/wood/wax on witch the more often checked up rules are written.
2) Following point 1 I can set screen up, or down, as I deem appropriate.
3) I can use (as I do) a paper sheet to hide my roll, when I want to do this. No screen. I hate playing hiding behind a screen.

So, what you are talking about is, to me, another issue. From what I've understand you do NOT make secret rolls. Fine.

But, IN CASE, just to make a roll as a GM alone, you do a double check.

I found this very fun and gives Player/GM a fun ambivalence.

_________________
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I Signori della Guerra: http://www.isignoridellaguerra.com

Don't know why, but if my GM screens aren't up, my players get very nervous.

_________________
«Fair is what we see, Fairer what we have perceived, Fairest what is still in veil.»
—Nicolaus Stenonius

Back when one of my groups got into D&D3e (near when it was first released), I had each of the players roll 20 d20's, and have them written down. I'd keep these and cross them off in order when I needed secret rolls. I also kept track of their skill levels in the skills that would regularly need secret rolls.

The benefit is that the players felt they had a bit more control over the process of secret rolls, and of course, they knew if they rolled badly they couldn't blame the GM when poor secret rolls resulted

After a week or two they generally wouldn't know how far through the list of rolls they were (unless they had a photographic memory), so it wouldn't be like they could game the results. If I did get the sense, I could just jump down a few spots on the list.

I am inclining, as I get older, to think that players should not have any dice... and the GM should use them as little as possible.

_________________
··<SableFox>··
AKA Jonathan M Davidson

I do not see the need to roll secretly...could someone explain?

_________________
Plots and schemes are the same thing..

The most common need, IME, is for rolls relating to perception or awareness: in a lot of games, and with a lot of players, if you tell them to roll a Spot/Notice/Perception/Awareness/Listen/whatever check, they're going to figure there's something to notice, and will act on it (even by just paying attention to someone). Context will often let them deduce what there was to notice anyway. If keeping a secret secret from them is important, rolling secretly may be necessary.

There's a few ways to counter this:
1. Keep track of the PCs' relevant skills, and roll secretly.
2. Bogus rolls: tell them to roll perception-type checks a lot, for no reason - pass or fail, you just go "mmhmm, mmhmm".
3. Undefined rolls, best combined with 2: "Roll. Hmmm. Okay... [play continues] "
4. Pre-rolls on a list. This was actually recommended in Cyberpunk 2020 for Notice checks, IIRC.
And probably others I'm not thinking of right now.

This is, obviously, a facet of a certain type of gaming - a specific idiom/paradigm. It's by no means necessary for all groups, playstyles, or games. As time goes on, more and more games move further from this essentially adversarial style to a cooperative style where keeping secrets from the players isn't as necessary.

I find it's perfectly possible to run a game where there are no secret rolls, especially if you dispose with a lot of rolling anyway. In a lot of situations, there's no reason for the PCs to notice things: this applies, for instance, in almost all Call of Cthulhu scenarios, where noticing things is mandatory for play to continue! (Something Trail of Cthulhu wonderfully fixes, I find.)

IMO the main importance of this kind of rolling is for ambushes and traps: if you don't use some kind of random roll, but spring the ambush/trap automatically, the players will (rightly) complain, because you've deprived them of agency very meaningfully, harming their characters. If you tell the players to roll such-and-such, they will usually contextually deduce the threat and react to it, even just a little.

The other is for noticing clues that are not obvious, but I think this one is fraught with danger. Like I indicate above, a lot of Call of Cthulhu scenarios hinge on this, and it is a bad idea, because failure on a single roll can stop the entire story. Instead, I'd use it for "extra" clues: for instance, a PC is left alone in their employer's office, and the player does not state they are doing anything, so the DM makes a secret roll and, on success, informs the player that they notice a paper sticking out of a pile of papers that catches their eye, and on inspection, reveals that the employer is probably intending to double-cross them. (Secretly evil employers always write that stuff down!) If the player had been told to make a perception check, on a failure they might have decided to snoop around and would have reasonably discovered the paper anyway.

There's a lot of equally good approaches, of course, but that's just some reasonings.

Oh...you mean juvenile players..we all used to be those once I guess

_________________
Plots and schemes are the same thing..

Yep, you find it most in the competitive gamist type of groups where the mentality of the players is to win. I hate the Players vs GM mentality. My last gaming group was in early 2004, which had exactly this type of style.



To be honest, I'd consider it bad adventure or scenario design for a scenario to hinge upon the success or failure of one or more rolls. If failure means stopping the entire story, and you know that ahead of time, you have two choices. Assume an auto-success for the sake of the story, or plan to run a new scenario. Of course, I prefer more open-ended scenarios, since we all know that PC's tend to always find themselves going off course

Perhaps the best way to eliminate secret rolls is to just use what the average roll would be. To use a d20 example, 10 (or Taking 10), so if if the DC for a spot check is 18, only those who have a +8 or more to spot will notice it. Of course, this is a bit different in harnmaster due to the fact that a successful or unsuccessful result could be critcal or marginal. In such a case, just roll a single d10 with a (1)0 or 5 a critical.

I think I was implying why not just roll all rolls in front of the players?

You can keep the reason reason secret if you wish..or say "this really important; success is below 60 etc"..or even say "there is a trap here; I am rolling below 60 to see if you stand on it".

If the characters start acting like they know there is a trap there..well how unprofessional

(Not a common example in my games, but hey hunters sometimes put traps about the place)

_________________
Plots and schemes are the same thing..

I don't think it's necessarily telling of any kind of adversarial style, though. I use plenty of different kinds of secret rolls, fake rolls, etc. (pretty much all the techniques I listed), but it's always with an eye toward creating tension or suspense, or otherwise helping the players' immersion by making sure they don't have a surprise or suspenseful situation spoiled by their own uncanny ability to guess things. (I've done a D&D campaign where they pretty much predicted every enemy that was about to jump at them.)

I don't feel any kind of need to win against my players, but they do except an element of challenge and danger, and not telling them everything going on around their characters is often a component of it - but in order to be fair and give them agency (e.g. make the way they've developed their skills matter), I need to use the dice.



That's the D&D 4E approach, isn't it? Your Passive Perception is 10+modifier, etc.? I like it, too. I'm a big believer on averages like that in general - I've used them for D&D 3.X (groups of enemies use the highest perception modifiers + the average roll, or the lowest stealth modifiers + the average roll,e tc.).

For HârnMaster, I found the discussion in another thread about the Value Enhancement Table tremendously useful.

I also use a table similar to DFA's, though I think I like his a little bit better.

I run three Harn games currently, Two on alternating Saturdays with different groups, and a monthly game on Friday or Sunday with a group. Though this one may also become a little more frequent.

My Saturday games are with a mixed bag of people, some slightly on the rules-lawyer side, some inexperienced, some experienced... you get the idea. I experience some of the trials that GMs have, one player sees that another made a bad spot roll, and so saunters their character over to check out the area that may have been missed. Not good RPing, but it bring up the dilemma of do I smack them down slightly for being a game mechanic.. or do I let it slide so as not to disrupt the game. The uncertainty table fixed that. For searches, spots, whatever that has an uncertainty factor, I use a table like DFA's and roll on my side of the screen. Now, if the player get's a tick on their skill if they CS or what is based on their roll only.

It seems to work for my groups and even my more experienced players love it. Sometimes both rolls go bad and they get a red herring. It makes them think, rather than just rely on rolls.

Just my tuppence.

Without criticising anyone; my thoughts on this are: if the party are strong and need a bit of a challenge then this is one trap that they just happen to fall right in to; if on the other hand the party are down on their luck, weak and the trap will derail the story, then start dropping heavy hints. Don't rely on chance, interpret the situation to provide a suitable level of challenge and fun.

_________________
··<SableFox>··
AKA Jonathan M Davidson

Different folks, different strokes. I don't like (especially in an old-school game like HârnMaster) to change the world to suit the party, and I don't do "plotting" or "directing the story" - I want to create a story organically, using the dice as a randomizer (primarily for dangerous things). The risk is a large part of the fun, and I know my players appreciate being challenged.

Anyway, generally a PC's death can't derail a story nearly as much as the things my players have done (like the time one of them killed the heir apparent of the kingdom in a tournament melee, scrapping everything I had sketched out and altering the course of the campaign wildly; fortunately, that wasn't a lot of work lost, because I know better than to plot things out beforehand, and the prince was going to end up dead anyway).

That's not to say I don't understand your line of thinking, too - I've used it myself. There are some games (or campaigns in games) that are more story-driven, even if I do that sort of thing less and less now. It's not wrong to change things the players don't know are being changed, if it ends up in more fun and less frustration for the players (surprisingly many GMs forget that part).

Well this is an interesting discussion. I think I'll put my vote down for secret GM rolls. Not because I think player's can't role-play these well or that they will game the system, though that is possible. More from my own perspective as a player. I get to play so infrequently, that when I do, I really want the element of surprise, and being able to roll my own secret rolls takes away some of the fun element of the game. Go ahead and roll mine secretly thanks.

_________________
There is no truth to the vile rumor that I am a fireball throwing Peonian Priest!

I think that rolling secretly for the GM is a thing that many players find intriguing.

I also think that players should have a input on how the overall thing is proceeding.

If you are Andrè the Giant and you'll hide yourself

This will not remove the possibility of completely secret roll by part for the GM.

_________________
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I Signori della Guerra: http://www.isignoridellaguerra.com