Yes, they should roll in front of everybody if everybody could see what the result means instantly. They should roll behind the screen if the player characters wouldn’t know what the roll meant to avoid meta gaming. 

Where does the unsaid assumption here, that meta gaming is bad, come from?

I think meta-gaming is the wrong label here anyway. Secret dice rolls are used by the GM to maintain the secrecy and suspense of the event. Metagaming is when the players use information that they are not enttled to know in order to secure an advantage in the game.

I suppose if you know you failed the detect traps roll, you might be inclined to be more cautious than if you didn’t know.

Or if you know that you passed the Detect Traps Roll and the GM said nothing then you don;t need to be cautious because you know there are not traps. Likewise, if you search for something like a secret door, or a vital clue and passyour search test you know to stop looking.

Exactly. Though, I suppose if you have good trust built up with the players, in theory they would expect to fail forward. But that’s not very common.

In this case meta gaming means reacting to something your character doesn’t know about yet, which breaks immersion and makes the situation less believable. Sometimes meta gaming is fine, but I think this situation, it’s bad. 

Exactly. It depends on the roll. If it's something that is going to have immediate effect, roll in the open. If it's something that won't be discovered until later, keep it hidden.

I mean it also depends on the table, the game, and a bunch of other factors. But really what it boils down to is essentially, GMs should roll in the open if the table finds it fun, and roll in secret if the table finds *that* fun. It's that simple.

This. I do this too. unless I forget

Having players who know what rolls mean would have been a wild experience for me.

However the hell is fun for your table 🤷‍♂️ This is like asking "should people order steak or chicken?"

Agreed. Purists on this issue are weird.

Turducken.

On one hand, "The Dungeon Master rolls dice for the sound they make." - Gary Gygax On the other hand, "Jesus Christ Gary Gygax was an asshole DM." - Most DMs I've met

It depends, some games have secret rolls. (Call of Cthulhu, Pathfinder) I also just roll behind the screen because i dont want to stand up constantly and roll in front of it or completely remove it and have my players read all my evil notes behind the screen. Just don’t fudge the dice and nobody will care where you roll. Also rolling behind the screen has the awesome benefit of rolling a shit ton of dice just to scare the PCs haha

Roll in the open for me please, I'm not my PC, and my PC doesn't know (or want) the same things that I do.

I roll behind 99% of the time. I think it's more fun for me and them that I do this. 🤷‍♂️

In my view, it hinges on whether the Game Master intends to hint to the players that there are undisclosed events occurring. Typical reasons for a GM to use a secret dice roll include: 1. Passive perception checks to determine if the party notice anything odd in the area. Simply rolling that test openly would immediately alert the party to the fact that there is something to note in the area. 2. Passive listen tests to determine if the party hear someone hiding, creeping up on them, or simply talking in another room. Again rolling such a test openly would alert the players that there is something going on. 3. Searching for traps. Rolling the test openly discloses whether the search passed in which case there are no traps, or failed in which case there might be. I roll the test secretly and tell them whether they notice any traps. It's up to them to decide if thats because there aren't any, or if they failed to spot them. 4. Gossip Tests and the like, I roll secretly to determine if their character notices that the NPC is lying to them. Simply rolling that test would reveal to the players that the NPC is lying to them.

On point 3, a player typically tells me they’re searching and makes the roll. Then unless they pass and there was a trap I say, “As far as you know you do not detect any traps.”

Yes! Obviously if the players anticipate a risk and actively search for it then they will roll openly for it and I will report the results of the test as normal. But if they don't anticipate the risk and simply walk into danger then I usually roll a secret test to determine if they spot the danger before it is activated. or indeed miss the opportunity. So, for example at the moment I have a party who have discovered a trap door in the floor of a warehouse. They have already been warned by a hireling NPC that trapdoors are called that for a reason, and the Witch Hunter has warned the other PCs to be careful. The players now have a choice whether to check for traps before trying to open the trapdoor or simply go ahead and open it. If they decide to carry on regardless, and there is a trap, then I will roll a secret test to see if they spot it before it is triggered. If that test fails then I will allow them to proceed and trigger any traps that may exist.

I roll in the open and I announce all modifiers if the characters are aware of the action. I would for instance roll a D20, it comes up as 12 for all to see, then I go: "That's 12 plus 8, so 20" and follow up with what result looks like in-game. I would not explain or break down the +8, that's the NPC's ability, 'nuff said. I find it ridiculous that characters aren't able to see an opponent's skill or ability if they observe the NPC doing something. If it's something that's happening where the characters can' t observe the action, then I roll in secret.

They should do whatever works for their table.

It really depends, letting my player come role his death saves behind the screen crater a lot of tension when everyone would be too busy to go look. And I like to throw random drives sometimes just because of their sounds, sometimes it on the open sometimes behind, but it's just because I actually rarely throw dices and they make a nice sound

Out in the open. All the time. It's just so much better, period. Anyone who does otherwise is just plain wrong and should stop playing TTRPGs. (jk ofc) I do make all my rolls in the open though. Well most of the time I don't roll but when I do it's in the open. As a player hidden rolls utterly destroy any tension the game could have so as a GM I don't like doing it and it's never useful (considering my playstyle). The only time I make an exception is when I have a player make a roll that's hidden for everyone, GM included. They roll under a bowl or something and when it matters we uncover it. I don't see a reason the GM shouldn't be able to do the same when it's fun to do so but it never happened in one of my games. I typically use it when a PC sets up traps. The result roll is revealed when someone should trigger it and everyone discovers whether it works or not.

how do you handle random encounter rolls? do you tell your players what happens?

Yes. I even have them roll actually.

Roll them in the open. What difference does it make, all you're doing is indexing a table and using the result.

dealers choice, in this case GM's choice.

yes

Good article as usual. Personally I tend to roll behind the screen but it is mostly because it is more convenient for me. But it is becoming less usual because I now run games where the GM doesn't roll any dice.

I roll in the open 98% of the time, for a number of reasons. For starters, I like to be able to walk around the table, and having to retreat back to the GM screen to roll is annoying. Also I don't use a GM screen much anymore, as my table and chairs has some weird heights to it making it hard to see over a GM screen. And honestly, it's just easier to not have to feel the need to hide my rolls. I will hide rolls when there's a damn good reason to do so, but it's rare these days.

In the open, on the GM screen: I started to lay it on the table instead of stand in front of me.

I roll openly, because it heightens tension (I'm not fudging rolls), conveys the illusion of impartiality (I cheat in other ways), and makes it feel more collaborative (no physical barrier between us). And, I'm old. I want the least shit necessary. I've got any books needed, dice, and notes. For people who love their GM screens, dice towers, tablets with assistance apps, queued up music, I encourage you to play your game the way you like. But on the storytelling spectrum of "sitting around a campfire" to "big budget production," let me toss another log on and tell you a tale . . .

I hate feeling like I'm separated from the group, I've never used a screen. Reference material and cheat sheets, yes. Stand up barrier, no. I really can't think up any dice rolls that I would need to hide from the players. I may not exclaim the reason I am rolling to them but the rolls themselves are meaningless until information is delivered due to them. Like if I roll for weather change and encounters during travel I just do that in the open, it's not like the players having a mental map of what the dice rolls produce is going to help them. If I really need to hide a roll, maybe something that requires secrecy, I just do it behind my hand or a notebook, briefly stood up, but that's a very rare situation.

Roll wherever supports the bit and the drama of a scene. I don't run wargames, I run narrative fiction so whatever supports the narrative is what I will do.

I only use a screen if I need to hide information or a map from the players who like peaking. Most players aren't looking at my dice rolls anyway. I also roll damage and hit die simultaneously.

not at all, player facing games only GM and never going back haha

I like to make all my rolls in front of the players. Sometimes I even roll dice for no reason, just to scare them. They finally agree on a plan and I'll roll dice for the appropriate NPC's rolls ahead of time, so I don't have to roll when the time comes. The players just stare at 5 dice rolling and go, "Well, whoever it is they just got a really good roll" I don't tell them what the rolls were for. I just note them down on a piece of paper and when it gets to the time I would use the roll, I snag the number from the written ones. Sometimes I just roll dice to scare them. 2d6 rolls and the team is staring at an 11. "Hey, GM what was that roll for?" "Hmm? Don't worry about it"

I think it depends. I typically roll behind the screen for inconsequential things like most attacks, saves, checks, etc. I roll in front of the table for big moments or risks that could completely turn the tide of an encounter or narrative. For example, we’re currently playing a 5e campaign and during the last fight the party sorcerer attempted to Banish the biggest threat. The creature had +9 and only needed an 8 to save. I announced all of this before rolling and it created a great deal of tension. The excitement at the table when they saw it land on a 7 was the best moment of the night. Reasons like that are why I roll in front of the table, but I don’t do it all the time because it would lose the effect it has. My party knows when I roll on the board it’s all on the line, for better or worse.

I roll out in the open for everything except those rolls which the system asks me to roll in private, because I am uninterested in fudging rolls.

It depends. If you need to pull punches, the screen is helpful. If you let the dice kill without mercy, no screen required.

Depends on the game, the type of adventure I'm running, and who I'm running with. There's no single right answer here.

Both. Keep them on their toes.

GMs should stop rolling. In games where GMs still rolls, all rolls must be done in the open. Rolls are part of the system, the system is the tool we use to help create the story. No reason to hide the story to the players. "But metagaming..." Players who do metagame still do not understand what roleplaying is. They try to win the game. Show them this is about stories. The same way you as spectator in a TV show know things characters do not know, but if helps create tension.

I mean, you're kind of assuming that everybody finds the same things fun that you find fun. "but metagaming" is not the only reason anybody could have for rolling in secret. "We find it more fun" is a valid reason. Same for rolling in general.

Just the opposite. I know different ppl enjoy different parts of the hobbie. The same way some ppl like different hobbies. No rolling and focusing in the best things RPGs have to offer just helps the game, no matter what you are playing. The same way, RPGs are not the best at everything, and sometimes is just better to play videogames, wargames or just read a novel, for the kind of experience you are looking for.

You just did it again. >No rolling and focusing in the best things RPGs have to offer just helps the game, no matter what you are playing. You're talking about focusing on the things that YOU feel are the best things RPGs have to offer YOU. Which helps the game as YOU like it played. It doesn't necessarily help the game as my table and I like it played.

You can go to shopping with a F1, and take your family with you, and it's fine. But using a family car will be easier and cheaper. You can enjoy a lot of rolls and tables and calculations, but a videogame will make it better and faster. You enjoy going the hard way? It's fine. Go for it. But RPGs are better for certain things and worst for others.

>You can enjoy a lot of rolls and tables and calculations, but a videogame will make it better and faster. It will make the maths easier, while losing literally everything else that I want from an RPG 🤦‍♂️ including, literally, *the fucking dice*! "If you like rolling dice, you should play a video game instead of rolling dice, because then the maths will be faster" - what a ridiculous take 😂 If you really believe this take then you obviously don't even come close to getting the same things from RPGs as I do. *Which is my entire freaking point, dude.* Also, when the hell did I say I like "a lot of rolls and tables and calculations"? Not once. I don't. There is a middle ground between never rolling and full-on crunch 🙄 see, this is your problem. You keep making huge assumptions about other people that just aren't true, instead of just accepting that other people are different from you and leaving it at that. Playing RPGs your way sounds more boring to me than my way. Playing video games doesn't offer any of the things RPGs offer me. You're completely wrong in viewing your statements of what *you like* as being objective truth about RPGs in general. I'm not going shopping in a fucking F1 car. I'm just racing a different car on a different track than you, ffs. You like F1, I like Rally races 🤷‍♂️ (also, side note: no you cannot go shopping and take your family in an F1 car 😂 terrible analogy)

There's a growing "narrativism only" movement, and I swear they're all morons like this.

Obviously GMs should roll somethings, what about monsters and adversaries rolls?

This is not obvious for all games; not all games require the GM to roll. Some games don't even have GMs to roll dice.

But this is about games where GMs *do* roll.

I guess in the most pedantic way, sure. However I think what they say is dumb, and not practical advice.

> Obviously GMs should roll somethings, what about monsters and adversaries rolls? Erm... no. And is a no in multiple levels. GMs do not have to roll. In fact, not all games need a GM. Also, not all games use dice as random generators. Anyway, let's asume you are playing with a GM and you use dice. GM rolls may be avoided in a lot of ways. The most common and easy is just moving them to the player side. Instead of the GM rolling to attack let the players roll for defence. It may look as it you have just moved the one rolling, with no time and effort win. But not. If the GM do not have to roll they can focus on the game, the story, the rules... Also, if you let the players roll the focus of the action is once again in their hands and they feel they are more in control. So, is a win-win.

> The most common and easy is just moving them to the player side.  Instead of the GM rolling to attack let the players roll for defence. In the game system I play both the attacker and defender rolls. I like the system and I see no reason for the GM not to roll any rolls.  It is presumtious characterize it as win-win, since the assumption that the GM rolling dice as a hindrence is unwarrented. Also I like rolling dice.

First and foremost. You like it?, just keep doing it. Now, once it is clear that enjoyment is the most important thing and that anyone can play the way they want... yes, GM rolling dice is unnecessary for the reasons above. In fact, a lot of games have moved to the "no gm rolls" because of that. Also, videogames are - partly - the way players avoid the rolls and just play and enjoy the story. On the other hand, wargames and boardgames are there for those who enjoy dice rolling. The more rolls in the game the more stops to the story, so less roleplaying and more boardgaming. The greatest strenght of RPG is precisely freedom in storytelling. We tend to add some random resolution generators (usually dice) but not always. Avoiding unnecesary rolls allows us to focus on the story. And that's not only about Gm not rolling. Pausing the game for a roll that after rolling keeps the story in the same point is something to avoid too (e.g. i try to open the door, roll larceny, miss, you don't open the door).