Should players know the results of saves?

[Angra Mainyu]

When GMing, I tend to have a conflict with myself over telling players the results of a spell save. Spells with a visual effect if the save fails are easy (suffocation for example). But, what about ones where there are no visual clues that something has happened? For example, a witches misfortune hex or doom. Any GMs out there have an opinion?

Edit: I should have put in there that the players would be casting the spell. Should they know if their spell failed basically.

[VRMH]

When you succeed in a save, you know. You may not know what you saved against, or by how big a margin you made it, but you know.

But one may remain blissfully oblivious of a failed save.

[Angra Mainyu]

VRMH wrote:

When you succeed in a save, you know. You may not know what you saved against, or by how big a margin you made it, but you know.

But one may remain blissfully oblivious of a failed save.

Sorry, my fault. I meant if the players were casting the spell.

[Fromper]

On a similar note, I've been wondering if it's visually possible to tell if an enemy has the shaken condition. I built a high charisma bard who likes to go around demoralizing enemies to give them this condition (using Perform: Comedy instead of Intimidate, thanks to Versatile Performance - he's a professional insulter). Would he know when the shaken condition ends in order to know it's a good idea to do it again on the same enemy?

[Fromper]

VRMH wrote:

When you succeed in a save, you know. You may not know what you saved against, or by how big a margin you made it, but you know.

But one may remain blissfully oblivious of a failed save.

I'm not sure I agree with that. Let's say you're making a fort save against a disease that won't actually do anything until a day later if you fail it. Why would the PC know (in character) that they were even exposed to a disease, let alone whether or not they successfully resisted it?

[Kazejin]

I think he meant things like "If I cast Charm Person, do I know if it worked, or if the person is just pretending to be friendlier?"

(...Yes they could attempt a Sense Motive check in that specific case, but I'm just giving a generic example here.)

To which, it's really up to the GM to decide if players should or shouldn't know whether their enemies made the save or not. It's worth noting that some spells are made useless (or close to it) if you don't know when they are, or aren't, successful. It is, however, bordering on metagame knowledge which not everyone is comfortable with.

[VRMH]

Angra Mainyu wrote:

if the players were casting the spell.

There has been a developer clarification that the caster does indeed know. Dunno how though.

Fromper wrote:

Why would the PC know (in character) that they were even exposed to a disease, let alone whether or not they successfully resisted it?

They wouldn't. They'd merely be aware they made a Fortitude safe, and have no idea why it was needed in the first place.

[Kayerloth]

From the Core Rule Book:

Quote:

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.

[RumpinRufus]

Yup, Kayerloth got it.

If you cast a targeted spell, you know if they make their save.

If you cast an area spell, you don't know who made their save.

When someone targets you with a spell and you make your save, you know you were the target of something.

[Charender]

RumpinRufus wrote:

Yup, Kayerloth got it.

If you cast a targeted spell, you know if they make their save.

If you cast an area spell, you don't know who made their save.

When someone targets you with a spell and you make your save, you know you were the target of something.

Added for emphasis. These rules are for spells only. If you make a save against a poison, disease, or anything else that isn't a spell, these rules do not apply.

Since witch abilities are supernatural and thus magical, I would err on the side of treating them like a spell, but there is plenty of room for interpretation there.

[Stazamos]

For spells, the quote Kayerloth posted covers both agent and target. If someone is administering poison or a disease, I'd say they have to make a heal check, but only once the onset time has elapsed, and I'd give a small circumstance bonus since they're looking for something specific. Alternatively, divination spells could work.

One thing to consider: If a character casts a targeted spell, that character knows whether the target saved, but suppose there are conditions that alter what happens, such as a random duration. The character may not necessarily know when that random duration has expired. I can't think of any good examples off-hand, maybe Power Word: Stun? Now, perhaps a character could tell by looking, but perhaps there's a wily villain that fakes being stunned (I said I couldn't think of any good examples).

This is the type of information I like keeping hidden from my players, as well as how long their conditions last on failed saves. I also don't typically reveal DCs, unless a bunch of saves need to be made. I keep ACs of new enemies to myself until a couple attacks have been made. So, that's kind of my advice: keep it secret if you can, and if it's not too much of a burden.

[Charender]

Actually, the power words are a great example. Since they allow no save, there is no way by RAW for the caster to know if they took effect.

Another thing is spell resistance. If a creature resists the spell, there is no saving throw. This means the creature is unaware they were targeted with a spell, and the caster is unaware if their spell succeeded or failed.

Side note: I often make players roll a d20 for no reason at all. The first couple of times they freak out and search the entire room top to bottom for no reason, after that they realize that it was nothing, and they stop reading too much into it when I ask them to roll a d20.