Ownership of dice rolls

[Dr. Bidlo]

I have been thinking about the implications of players rolling dice and wanted to get the thoughts from the community. Even with GM determined difficulties, players generally know if they rolled high enough to succeed in a test or not - especially if they roll a 1 on the wild die. In combat, this is no problem because you either hit or you don't (or damage/don't damage). However, when it comes to the roleplaying skills, I have often found that players rolling their dice gives them more information than their characters would know and often they react in a way that is at least influenced by their information about the roll. Sure, you can say that is just bad roleplaying, but it is hard to do something with your character when you know it will be bad.

For example: you want to try to walk on a frozen lake and try to see if it is stable. You take a skill test (whatever skill that would be) and roll really poorly and get a 1 on your wild die. When the GM says "It is perfectly safe and stable" would you just run out on that ice or would you take an extra cautious approach?

So, I ask everyone's thoughts on the GM rolling on behalf of players in some situations. Or as an alternative, maybe the GM just rolls the wild die on the player's behalf in some situations. I am not advocating not having the players roll at all - what fun would that be?

Thoughts?

[DougRed4]

Some games have some form of meta currency, and Character Points are this in 2R&E.

Maybe rolling a 1 on the Wild Die is simply that moment where you start to step out on the ice and notice that it cracks a bit. Or when you roll a 6 it's when you get the impression that it is quite stable.
_________________
Currently Running: Villains & Vigilantes (a 32-year-old campaign with multiple groups) and D6 Star Wars; mostly on hiatus are Adventures in Middle-earth and Delta Green

[pakman]

It would have to be incredibly rare situation where I would roll for a player - like maybe only a secret check they are not supposed to know about.


I think I am lucky that my players are mature enough to role play getting a 1.

Now, on the bad ice thing - I would say "you think it is safe....".
And I would find it reasonable that a player would say "well, then we advance cautiously...".

Forcing them to "run on to the ice...." seems a bit....much.
Players might feel penalized too much for the 1 - after all, it IS 1 in six chance.
_________________
SW Fan, Gamer, Comic, Corporate nerd.
Working on massive House Rules document - pretty much a new book. Will post soon....

[Dr. Bidlo]

Those are good suggestions. Thanks.

[Whill]

I rarely roll for players, and when I do it is mostly for Perception rolls to see if they passively notice something the players wouldn't otherwise know is there. And other times I just roll dice behind the GM screen for no reason at all.

In general, preventing players from knowing any meta-knowledge is pointless. Do players not know all sorts of Star Wars knowledge that their characters wouldn't know? Do players never get a bird's eye view of an area from a top-down-looking 2D map when really their PC would only have the POV of their character? Don't players know the stats for things? Can't players see skill dice codes on other PCs' character sheets? Does the GM not call out to the group a PC wound's status? (In-universe, how would a character instantly know whether their party member is incapacitated, mortally wounded, or dead?)

There is a certain amount of meta-gaming built into the game, and it is ok. Players are pretending to be a fictional character in a fictional universe toward the goal of co-creating entertaining stories for everyone at the table. Part of the fun is taking chances and rolling dice. I'm ok with players having a better look at the odds of something that their character realistically wouldn't quite have in-universe. It's a game.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage

[garhkal]

[Dr. Bidlo]