Show Rolls but not Modifiers to clients?

[unindel]

Hi everyone. I've been messing around with the options in Fantasy Grounds (just got it this past week) and am wondering if there's any way I can show all my GM rolls to the clients without necessarily showing them the modifiers?

This is mostly just relevant for the Bard in our group since the players can choose to spend Bardic Inspiration after they roll and see the number but before they know if they hit or not. Same thing on the NPC end for him where if I attack he sees the roll and decides if he wants to use Cutting Words or not before I figure out if it hit. That said it'd be helpful in general for other stuff too like the Wizard's Shield spell or if anyone takes the Lucky feat later, etc.

If I have GM rolls off entirely, I have to tell them what I rolled each time. This is unfortunate because I prefer them to see the roll out front so that they don't think I'm fudging. But if I have it turned on then the modifier shows up immediately which I'd rather hide if possible.

Also as a sidenote, what's the best way to do something like a trap in Fantasy Grounds? Like for example if I want to have arrows shoot at some members of the party, have them all do dex saves at a specific DC and then apply damage to those who failed, half to those who succeeded? I could just do a /die roll in chat but then I'd have to manually recalculate the WND on all the targets after asking them to roll and all that.

Thanks!

[Thegroo]

Don't know anything about the rolls.

But you could set up the trap as an npc and add it to the compat tracker.
The you can just attack the pc's

[Zacchaeus]

No, there isn't an option to hide only the bonus. GM rolls are either on or off. There is another option 'Show results to client' which you can have on or off. This latter shows more or less information on the roll depending on which setting you use. You can for example show whether the roll hit or missed with the options in there, and also only the total roll is shown; it isn't broken down in any way. This is perhaps what you are looking for. I'd suggest you play with these settings until you find the ones you want.

However I'm not clear on what your point about the bonus is. Bardic inspiration allows for a d6 to be added to any roll of the players choice. He can use the roll once made but before he knows if it hits or not. That roll includes the bonus so I'm not sure why you don't want the players to see the bonus. It would make no difference whatever to whether they would want to use Bardic Inspiration or not. Or am I missing something?

As Thegroo says set up traps as NPCs. You will have to set up effects in the actions tab for whatever the trap does. Just use the same kind of syntax as you would see in a spell entry which required a saving throw, then damage, then possibly also an effect. This way you can also give the trap hit points and an AC etc for use if the PC's attacked it. When you open the encounter on the CT just make sure that the trap isn't visible until the PCs either trigger it or find it via a search or whatever.

[unindel]

Hi Zacchaeus,

It's not a huge deal but Lore Bards have an adaptation of Bardic Inspiration called Cutting Words which lets them use it on enemy attack rolls. If a monster does an attack roll of 14+5 = 19 against the fighter in splint with 17 AC. The way we've been playing it, I roll the d20 for the attack and would tell them "14" and then he'd have to decide whether it's worth it to use Cutting Words for that attack. You're right though in a normal use of it for a player on their attack roll, they know what their modifier is already so it wouldn't matter.

Same thing with Shield, if the Wizard see an attack coming in from an Ogre of 8+6=14 and the Wizard knows he has 15 AC, he knows he's safe to not use Shield for sure. If he just sees the 8 and saw that the Ogre was hitting the Fighter earlier despite rolls that were below the AC he might use it anyway. Again, I don't think it's a huge deal but I'd rather players just play on gut (makes for faster battles) rather than trying to do the math of exactly what the chance to hit is after seeing the roll.

[Moon Wizard]

It's an interesting concept, since reaction-based rolling has been coming up here and there. My first step in considering a new feature is to figure out what it should look like, so I can determine how much work it is and the impact to the UI.

Here's what I am currently thinking:
* Add option to GM rolls to show only dice
* If option set, then for GM rolls, only the dice will be shown (i.e. number modifiers removed)
* Potentially, also remove effect modifier text from roll as well. (depending on feasibility)

Remember, this would apply to all GM rolls. Would that work for you?

Regards,
JPG

[JohnD]

It's an interesting concept, since reaction-based rolling has been coming up here and there. My first step in considering a new feature is to figure out what it should look like, so I can determine how much work it is and the impact to the UI.

Here's what I am currently thinking:
* Add option to GM rolls to show only dice
* If option set, then for GM rolls, only the dice will be shown (i.e. number modifiers removed)
* Potentially, also remove effect modifier text from roll as well. (depending on feasibility)

Remember, this would apply to all GM rolls. Would that work for you?

Regards,
JPG

Oh yes please... have wanted something like this for a while now.

[unindel]

Here's what I am currently thinking:
* Add option to GM rolls to show only dice
* If option set, then for GM rolls, only the dice will be shown (i.e. number modifiers removed)
* Potentially, also remove effect modifier text from roll as well. (depending on feasibility)

Remember, this would apply to all GM rolls. Would that work for you?

Regards,
JPG

I'd love something like that. It'd need to not do the math of adding up the modifier as well of course (no mystery if it only shows a 10 on the roll but says 14 for the total!)

It'd be best if I could still use the Dice Tower to hide the whole roll as well.

[Zacchaeus]

Hi Zacchaeus,

It's not a huge deal but Lore Bards have an adaptation of Bardic Inspiration called Cutting Words which lets them use it on enemy attack rolls. If a monster does an attack roll of 14+5 = 19 against the fighter in splint with 17 AC. The way we've been playing it, I roll the d20 for the attack and would tell them "14" and then he'd have to decide whether it's worth it to use Cutting Words for that attack. You're right though in a normal use of it for a player on their attack roll, they know what their modifier is already so it wouldn't matter.

Same thing with Shield, if the Wizard see an attack coming in from an Ogre of 8+6=14 and the Wizard knows he has 15 AC, he knows he's safe to not use Shield for sure. If he just sees the 8 and saw that the Ogre was hitting the Fighter earlier despite rolls that were below the AC he might use it anyway. Again, I don't think it's a huge deal but I'd rather players just play on gut (makes for faster battles) rather than trying to do the math of exactly what the chance to hit is after seeing the roll.

I'm slightly confused here. In your first post you say you want to be up front and show the players the roll, but in the second post you are in fact deliberately misleading them but telling them that the roll is only 14 when in fact it is 19. If the Bardic Inspiration rule were being used in Paper and Pen then the player would have no knowledge whatever of what the die roll was and would have to decide whether to use the 1d4 based on other criteria (such as how hurt they already are etc). By giving them a bit of information like you are doing (and since your players know you are deliberately misleading them) I would have thought they would spend a lot of time agonising over whether to use it and it would also encourage considerable computation of dice rolls to figure out the maths. But then again, maybe that's just me :)

[Zacchaeus]

It's an interesting concept, since reaction-based rolling has been coming up here and there. My first step in considering a new feature is to figure out what it should look like, so I can determine how much work it is and the impact to the UI.

Here's what I am currently thinking:
* Add option to GM rolls to show only dice
* If option set, then for GM rolls, only the dice will be shown (i.e. number modifiers removed)
* Potentially, also remove effect modifier text from roll as well. (depending on feasibility)

Remember, this would apply to all GM rolls. Would that work for you?

Regards,
JPG

Why is there a need for this or am I missing something really obvious here?
It seems to me that the dice roll includes any modifiers and if you don't want the players to see the dice roll the option already exists to not show the DM rolls to the player. If you decide to show the players the dice roll then why do you not want them to see the modifier?

Reaction based rolls generally modify a roll that has already been made, so the functionality that would be desirable would be to have the reaction roll relate to that roll and reduce/increase it and then reinterpret the result as a hit/miss or whatever. This is something which I have no doubt at all would take a considerable amount of coding - and for very little gain I would have thought.

I am willing to be convinced otherwise, but for me I don't see this as either desirable or necessary.

[unindel]

I'm slightly confused here. In your first post you say you want to be up front and show the players the roll, but in the second post you are in fact deliberately misleading them but telling them that the roll is only 14 when in fact it is 19. If the Bardic Inspiration rule were being used in Paper and Pen then the player would have no knowledge whatever of what the die roll was and would have to decide whether to use the 1d4 based on other criteria (such as how hurt they already are etc). By giving them a bit of information like you are doing (and since your players know you are deliberately misleading them) I would have thought they would spend a lot of time agonising over whether to use it and it would also encourage considerable computation of dice rolls to figure out the maths. But then again, maybe that's just me :)

So if I played pen and paper I'd roll the d20 out in the open but I wouldn't necessarily tell them what the modifier was. I haven't ever played with a group that considered the "roll" to be the result of the d20 as well as the modifier. So in that example I'd roll the d20 out in the open and they'd see the 14 themselves. That's what I did in roll20 as well when we switched to VTT's; I'd just add the modifier on my own to see if it hit.

To give an example of this usage of the terminology, consider the Halfing Lucky trait "When you roll a 1 on an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw, you can reroll the die and must use the new roll." If the roll included the modifier, it'd almost never happen, right? It doesn't bother to say "natural 1", it's just that it's talking specifically about the roll and not the post-modifier value. So by that interpretation I take it to mean that things like Bardic Inspiration can be used after knowing the d20 roll but not the modifier.

There's value to showing the roll even if you don't show the modifier anyway. There's still some uncertainty at the beginning of combat as to what the enemy's "to hit" and saving throws are. They know I'm not fudging the roll to pull punches if I'm rolling low for a bunch of attacks when they're in danger. Anyway it's just how I've always played and how others in my group did too (including the one who first DM'd for me when I learned some years back).

[Zacchaeus]

Well, that is interesting. I always made rolls behind the DM screen (and have never known anyone to ever do anything else) so the players never got to see the roll. Likewise they don't see it in FG either. I suppose I view the roll as the total roll and it either hits or misses. The way my players usually use Bardic inspiration is to immediately use it on their next roll; I've set up an effect which just adds in the extra dice to whatever roll (either to hit or save) they want to make it for. Our Bard (who 'died' at the player's request because he didn't like the class) never got around to using the Cutting Words feature.

So, I guess it's partly interpretation and partly how we play (differently). If that's how you play then I can see why you would want the modifier hidden. Not sure I agree with the interpretation though, but then that's what makes this game pretty good. Each of us can use the rules however we want.

[Andraax]

So if I played pen and paper I'd roll the d20 out in the open but I wouldn't necessarily tell them what the modifier was. I haven't ever played with a group that considered the "roll" to be the result of the d20 as well as the modifier. So in that example I'd roll the d20 out in the open and they'd see the 14 themselves. That's what I did in roll20 as well when we switched to VTT's; I'd just add the modifier on my own to see if it hit.

So, do this in FG. Turn off the "hide GM rolls" option. When you need a roll, roll a d20, and add or subtract the modifier in your head.

[Trenloe]

So if I played pen and paper I'd roll the d20 out in the open but I wouldn't necessarily tell them what the modifier was. I haven't ever played with a group that considered the "roll" to be the result of the d20 as well as the modifier. So in that example I'd roll the d20 out in the open and they'd see the 14 themselves. That's what I did in roll20 as well when we switched to VTT's; I'd just add the modifier on my own to see if it hit.
I completely get rolling out in the open, I do that all the time.

However, I'm a little confused as to how you get to hide the modifier from the players - if you roll out in the open and roll 14, for example, do you say to the players "Does a 22 hit your AC?", which allows the players to work out the modifier, or do you know all of the player's ACs, etc. and you work it all out in your head?

I'm not criticizing, run your game how you want to run it. I'm just curious...

[JohnD]

The problem here is the player needs to make the decision to use after the roll but before knowing the outcome. Kind of blows FG automation out of the water.

[Griogre]

Yeah, I feel for my bard player. I am considering changing Show Results to the Player to Off or PC once I'm sure what the PC setting is. That would give a more face to face feel. I was thinking that maybe a solution might be to have an effect that stops the display of the result when something with that effect is on them, basically temporarily setting show results to off while the effect lasts only for when PC or NPC has the effect and only on his attacks, a local switch only on that creature.

[unindel]

I completely get rolling out in the open, I do that all the time.

However, I'm a little confused as to how you get to hide the modifier from the players - if you roll out in the open and roll 14, for example, do you say to the players "Does a 22 hit your AC?", which allows the players to work out the modifier, or do you know all of the player's ACs, etc. and you work it all out in your head?

I'm not criticizing, run your game how you want to run it. I'm just curious...

Yeah, I knew their AC's. When we did Roll20 we didn't bother with the built in character sheet since it slowed down many of our browsers. I had all their sheets in a Google Spreadsheet and then had a GM sheet that had all their stats. When we did Pen/Paper I'd just ask them their AC if I didn't remember it; usually I'd just need to be reminded once per session. So something like "What's your AC?" "16" *describes the hit in RP*


So, do this in FG. Turn off the "hide GM rolls" option. When you need a roll, roll a d20, and add or subtract the modifier in your head.

Yeah that's an option. I guess I could use the Fantasy Grounds Party sheet as a quick reference for their AC if I need it. The main reason I was trying to stay away from that was because it won't take into account Effects the way grabbing the attack d20 off the combat tracker does (e.g. if the enemy is Prone or Frightened or some similar effect, auto-roll with disadvantage, or if target is then give advantage, or any spells that affect those rolls).

Anyway, until/if this feature is added I think I'll probably just switch to not hiding the modifiers. The ease of use and increase to combat speed from taking full advantage of Fantasy Grounds' automation will let us get through more content per session which is the main reason we switched anyway. It'll just make the Bardic Inspiration stuff a bit stronger but I guess that's fine.

[Griogre]

I think you can get close to what you want by showing GM rolls and setting show results to off. As GM you will get all the results, the players won't, but if you are describing the effects of the swing then they don't need to see it. But yeah, it will slow things down some since they can't roll damage until they know about the hit or miss. :(

[Wulfgangrpg]

when my players have the shield spell they only use it when they can see that the NPC barely hit them and that the +5 AC bonus would make the hit a miss, that the only time they use the shield if I was playing Table top behind a screen then I could say you get hit, but before I roll damage or apply damage to the character the player could say I want to cast shield. They would not know if that +5 AC bonus would be enough to stop the hit or not... so I think it would be nice to have a way to not show what the total hit number would be, just if it is a hit or a miss ( of course show if it is a fumble or critical hit). However on the other hand I think it would be a lot of work to code this in, and with them being able to see how much the NCP rolled over their AC and saying ok that +5 bonus will not help me with this hit is not game breaking.

however I did have a player once decide to roll a INT check DC 12 on a success you would cast shield on a fail he would not cast shield, I thought that was cool of him,
PS his Ideal not mine.

[Zacchaeus]

when my players have the shield spell they only use it when they can see that the NPC barely hit them and that the +5 AC bonus would make the hit a miss, that the only time they use the shield if I was playing Table top behind a screen then I could say you get hit, but before I roll damage or apply damage to the character the player could say I want to cast shield. They would not know if that +5 AC bonus would be enough to stop the hit or not... so I think it would be nice to have a way to not show what the total hit number would be, just if it is a hit or a miss ( of course show if it is a fumble or critical hit). However on the other hand I think it would be a lot of work to code this in, and with them being able to see how much the NCP rolled over their AC and saying ok that +5 bonus will not help me with this hit is not game breaking.

however I did have a player once decide to roll a INT check DC 12 on a success you would cast shield on a fail he would not cast shield, I thought that was cool of him,
PS his Ideal not mine.

This is a very old thread and I can't remember what the options were back then.

At any rate currently you have two options that you can set in respect of dice rolls and what the players see in chat. The first of these is Show DM Rolls which can either be on or off. On is the default and it shows the player the DMs dice roll in detail; in shows the actual dice rolled, the bonus, the type of attack and weapon used and whether it hit or missed the target. With this option off then the player does not see the dice and they don't see the modifier. They get a message that they have been attacked and that the total roll was x and the roll hit or missed.

The second option is Show results to clients and it has three states, on, off, and friendly. When on (the default) the players see the results of the DMs roll (the hit or miss part). When set to off the players do not see the hit or miss part of the roll. When set to friendly the players only see the results of rolls which are made between friendly characters. So in other words they would see the result of a healing spell cast on their character by another player but they will not see anything else. So if you switch off Show DM rolls and set show results to players to friendly the players will see nothing at all about the DMs rolls; they won't see a dice, the modifier, who was attacking and what with, and they won't see whether it was a hit or a miss.

So I'd play about with these two options so that you might find a combination of the options that suit the way you play your game.