I'll tell the players the monster attack bonus, or they can infer it from the dice roll plus the AC I say it hits.  With monster AC etc they can work it out pretty quick from their attacks, I may state it eventually.

I don't fudge the dice rolls, but neither do I let players see what I roll nor blurt out game information like stat lines and attack bonuses.  They'll figure it out during the course of the encounter.

Quote from: Beedo;597375It's much more dramatic and exciting for the players for the DM to roll in the open and tell the players what the monsters need to hit them; I'm with Noisms.

Plus, dice fudging is the devil.  (There are already long threads here discussing that particular sin).

The only things I tend to roll semi-secretly are wandering monster checks and wilderness encounters, because there's more tension when the players don't know those particular results when they rest, make camp, etc.

Very much this.

I think transparency leads to a much greater level of excitement and engagement, because when that monster rolls a nat. 20, or their damage dice all explode (depending on the game in question) everyone knows things just got serious, and the GM isn't going to bail them out by fudging the result; the whole process is hanging out in the open all pink and naked for everyone to see.

They also know when THEY roll well (and knowing what you're rolling against is part of knowing if you rolled well) what that means and cheers erupt spontaneously.

I won't blurt out stat blocks or anything (that's boring) but as the scores become relevant I say what they are "I attack the dragon with my axe" "ok, you need to beat ". That sort of thing.

I think alot of GMs think concealing things like this from their players is generating "surprise" or something. I think building suspense is much more powerful than trying for the "surprise" that the bad guy had an AC of 23 or something, and dice really can help with building that suspense, as long as you know what the result means.

And no, it doesn't slow anything down. It actually speeds things up, because the players can do most of the math themselves. If they know an opponent's Armor Class or Parry Score, they know what they need to hit and can calculate that themselves and go right to rolling damage if they succeed.

Quote from: Doctor Jest;597635Very much this.

I think transparency leads to a much greater level of excitement and engagement, because when that monster rolls a nat. 20, or their damage dice all explode (depending on the game in question) everyone knows things just got serious, and the GM isn't going to bail them out by fudging the result; the whole process is hanging out in the open all pink and naked for everyone to see.

They also know when THEY roll well (and knowing what you're rolling against is part of knowing if you rolled well) what that means and cheers erupt spontaneously.

I won't blurt out stat blocks or anything (that's boring) but as the scores become relevant I say what they are "I attack the dragon with my axe" "ok, you need to beat ". That sort of thing.

I think alot of GMs think concealing things like this from their players is generating "surprise" or something. I think building suspense is much more powerful than trying for the "surprise" that the bad guy had an AC of 23 or something, and dice really can help with building that suspense, as long as you know what the result means.

And no, it doesn't slow anything down. It actually speeds things up, because the players can do most of the math themselves. If they know an opponent's Armor Class or Parry Score, they know what they need to hit and can calculate that themselves and go right to rolling damage if they succeed.

Not buying this at all.

There is no suspense when everything is out there for everyone to see, I may as well be playing Decent or Talisman.

How hard is it for players to roll dice and announce what AC they hit and the damage they cause if they hit?

The only time I have shown my rolls was when I ran a few sessions of 4E. The boardgame-y feeling of it all made it easy to be explicit.

Otherwise, I rarely, if ever, show what I roll. I tend to clue the players in by various means, like reputation ("A single Farrignian palace guard is equal to five veteran soldiers!") or by describing clever/economical/embarrassing/crude movements, nervousness/calm, whatever. It usually works.

Quote from: John Morrow;597402I prefer to roll for anything the PCs can observe and know about in the open.  I think that letting the players compare the raw die rolls to the result, which might include factors they aren't aware of such as skill bonuses, helps replace intuitive information their characters would have, if they were really there, about how good or bad their opponent is.

Totally in this camp.

I describe everything as well. So in combat its not the barbarian rolls a 8 misses. Its the barbarian feints left then brings is axe round in a swing aimed at your legs, rolls an 8. It scream past harmlessly missing by almost a foot.

When I am doing Amber and therfore there are no dice the description is all the PCs get to work out relative skill.

So the barbarian lumbers forward. His style is primitive all strength over skill. He swings a low blow but even as he swings you know it will go wide and you see an opportunity.

Might be seen as this my someone with lower warfare

The barbarian moves like a linebacker, all pent up power, he obviously knows his weapon and is no stranger to combat. He swings his axe in a low arc (and here in Amber he would hit if the PC is far worse then he is) but it screams harmlessly by, luck saving you again (Good Stuff being a possible reason for this first blow of the exchange to miss)

My PCs usually know how relatively good an oponent is based on my description but sure the dice help.

I roll everything in the open, except when the pc is utterly incapable of detecting the event in question.

Quote from: Bill;597943I roll everything in the open, except when the pc is utterly incapable of detecting the event in question.

How do you go about it when a NPC makes under powered attacks, 'hiding' his actual skill to lure the characters?

I make secret rolls (checking to detect players who are sneaking, morale checks and other unnecessary rolls to "scare" players into thinking something is happening, etc...) behind a screen. Otherwise, I roll everything in the open but never disclose what the NPC or foe's mechanics are and how they work. Since ZWEIHÄNDER Grim & Perilous RPG is a percentile-based system, the players may have an inkling of their enemy's might if they really wanted to scrutinize my rolls. But I tend to roll quick and move the narrative forward at lightning pace, so that they don't have time to consider every dice roll I make before them.

Quote from: Sommerjon;597953How do you go about it when a NPC makes under powered attacks, 'hiding' his actual skill to lure the characters?

That would be something quite rare. I would allow any pc or npc to attack at a weaker level than they are capable.

In that case, they would simply choose how much to drop from their to hit roll. (before they roll)

Thats not a problem at all.

I would allow a chance to notice that the enemy was holding back as well.

Quote from: ZWEIHÄNDER;597984I make secret rolls (checking to detect players who are sneaking, morale checks and other unnecessary rolls to "scare" players into thinking something is happening, etc...) behind a screen. Otherwise, I roll everything in the open but never disclose what the NPC or foe's mechanics are and how they work. Since ZWEIHÄNDER Grim & Perilous RPG is a percentile-based system, the players may have an inkling of their enemy's might if they really wanted to scrutinize my rolls. But I tend to roll quick and move the narrative forward at lightning pace, so that they don't have time to consider every dice roll I make before them.

I use narrative to hint at danger. Instead of a hidden roll that might be an unseen foe, I would say "this dark alley is soooo perfect for an ambush"

Quote from: Bill;598003That would be something quite rare. I would allow any pc or npc to attack at a weaker level than they are capable.

In that case, they would simply choose how much to drop from their to hit roll. (before they roll)

Thats not a problem at all.

Is that not fudging the dice roll?

Quote from: Bill;598003I would allow a chance to notice that the enemy was holding back as well.

Why?

Quote from: Sommerjon;598058Is that not fudging the dice roll?

No.

Quote from: Sommerjon;598058Why?

Because its something that can possibly be noticed.

Unless it is something the party is entirely unaware of I roll openly. Yes, even though any good player can reverse engineer enemies after about two rounds of combat. The fight's over then anyways, who cares?

Quote from: John Morrow;597402I prefer to roll for anything the PCs can observe and know about in the open.  I think that letting the players compare the raw die rolls to the result, which might include factors they aren't aware of such as skill bonuses, helps replace intuitive information their characters would have, if they were really there, about how good or bad their opponent is.

I am pretty much in this camp.  I don't roll stuff that might promote major metagaming in front of them (listening at doors, detecting traps, etc), but other than that, I roll in front of them.