So this has come up a few times in campaigns I've been running recently. I'll be running a creature with an ability that requires a fortitude save but doesn't have an immediate effect, in this case a disease. I ask the player to make a save. Eventually, someone fails. Worried about the failed roll they ask what happens or what they notice, which in this case was nothing.
Later they check with a healer and end up getting a remove disease cast on them or a long term care check and a cloak of resist borrowed for the night or whatever.
It's not always a meta gaming issue, as sometimes its obvious they've been exposed to a contagion and checking with a healer is a smart move in character, though they are certainly more likely to check if they've failed a saving throw recently.
I'm considering making checks for disease in secret behind the screen. In my mind it would increase the odds of there actually being consequences to getting hit with a disease instead of having the players always savvy enough to get what amounts to preventative treatment almost every time.
Usually I avoid making rolls for my players, as it feels too much like playing their characters for them.
Does anyone else do this, or have a reason not to? Are there other types of saves that people roll in secret?
My group doesn't do secret rolls that involve a modifier from a character sheet. But, I understand why you would do it, as I've been there before. I say give it a try, and let the player have a chance to notice something is wrong, particularly if he or she receives long term care. Its up to you if you tell the players about the rule change ahead of time, and up to you if you continue it. An part of this experiment, try to keep the consequence minimal.
|
I make these kinds of rolls secretly. I have all the PCs' saving throw bonuses written down on a sticky note on my GM screen. I also roll some skill checks "behind the screen," such as Perception (search for traps) and Disable Device, and others from time to time. It heightens table tension for the GM to make some rolls for the players.
-Skeld
Perception, sense motive, and disable device rolls have to be secret.
I just ran into the disease thing last session and I'm definitely doing that in secret next time. Of course, sometimes my players have foggy memories and little details like a ticking onset clock may escape them.
Pretty much: If you can't know if anything happened, it is a secret roll.
This is a pretty straightforward situation in my eyes: the player rolls his check as normal, but is not told the DC nor whether he passed or failed. All he knows is that he was asked to make a fortitude save, rolled a number, and didn't notice anything afterwards.
Well if his total check is like a 9 and he's level 5 he might assume that whatever it was, he failed. Or if he rolled a nat. 1 he knows he failed.
And then nothing happens? That can't be good! best abandon the dungeon and get out of here now!
One way to disguise it might be to give it a secondary effect. "You failed. You feel sickened for 1 round as the stench of the room whifs into your nose. (also you're now diseased)"
That way they think they save was against the stench, when the stench is just the byproduct really of whatever infects the character.
However such things don't always work.
There are those who brag that even their GM makes every roll out in the open. However, if you read through the actual rulebooks, there are plenty of situations where the rules recommend you roll in secret, and really not doing so ruins the situation.
At the same time, this can depend on the player. I have a player who has to be reminded that there are rolls I need to make for him, for sake of suspense and to avoid metagaming. But it took twenty years to get to this point with him. For a long time, he was so jealous of his rolls that he would become frantic and even leave the game if he felt too "violated" about it.
At the same time, I have players who are only too happy to let me roll whenever I wish. I find those players have a better time with things like disease, infection, poisoning, what-have-you, because it sneaks up on them, and they like that. But Player A still demands to know that I really, really, absolutely 100% am not lying that I really did make a roll for his character and it really was a legitimate failure, and sometimes he gives me a look like he doesn't believe me.
I guess I'm saying, know your players. Some might not want to give up the rolls. Explain to them carefully why you want to do it that way, and go ahead and make exceptions for the ones who feel rolling is part of the fun for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Old DM tactics
Each player rolls 10 D20 at the start of the session. When a secret roll is needed the DM can roll a D10 to see what was rolled.
Also nice to get a more narrative way of letting players discover thing.
|
You can also make a habit of periodically asking for random checks that do absolutely nothing. :) When they inspect a mundane portrait on the wall that has nothing to do with anything, the two nearest players make a reflex save. When they listen to voices on the other side of the door, those that succeed at Perception also make a will save. Then when the plague zombie explodes, everyone makes a fort save.
Thanks for the responses :)
I think I will switch these to secret rolls.
If you are worried about metagaming, get their saves (and also perception, stealth, and other skills) written down on a chart in front of you. When it comes time to do a roll that they shouldnt know the result of immediately dont even tell them what you are doing, just roll it, then describe the effects when they matter.
Old DM tactics
Each player rolls 10 D20 at the start of the session. When a secret roll is needed the DM can roll a D10 to see what was rolled.
Also nice to get a more narrative way of letting players discover thing.
That's a great idea. I should try that too.
I normally roll Perception, Sense Motive, Knowledges and Monster attacks in secret.
TO THE OP: You could have the characters do Knowlegde, Heal or even Perception checks[or do those secretly] to have the characters find some symptoms of the disease.
Perception, sense motive, and disable device rolls have to be secret.
While I know that this is a common practice for many GMs I do not believe that these roles must be made in secret. A PC can certainly roll any of these checks for all to see, and the GM can then explain things without getting meta-gamey. In particular, I don't know why you would want to roll a Disable Device check secretly. A rogue is the one disabling, they should be able to roll the die themselves, especially if a failure to disable might trigger the trap.
Examples:
Perception
PC: I rolled an 11, plus 7 that's a total of 18.
GM: (DC is 20 to locate the trap) You don't notice anything unusual.
PC: I walk to the door.
GM: You trigger a fireball trap.
Sense Motive
PC: I think the barkeep is lying, I roll a sense motive. I rolled an 8, plus 6 that's a total of 14.
GM: (Rolls the Barkeep's Bluff check behind the screen and comes up with a total of 21) As far as you can tell the barkeep is telling the truth.
I certainly invite discussion on this, but I don't think the rules ever explicitly state that these rolls must be made behind the screen.