Extra Secret Rolls

Hey, could there be a kind of GM-roll that the players make (freeing up time and effort on the GMs side) that only the GM see the result of? It'd be really nice, and feasibly it shouldn't be that different from the GMrolls that already exist, right? Perception rolls and plenty other checks could take good use of such a feature.

/gmroll already does this. Whoever makes the gmroll, only the GM(s) can see it.

You misunderstand. A roll that ONLY the GM can see. Not the GM AND the player. That way, the player makes the roll, let's say: /hiddenroll 1d20+15 Perception and it appears on the GMs screen, but the player cannot see how well he did. This has two main advantages:  1. It removes meta knowledge ("Ah, I did poorly, there's probably something I missed... I'll prepare my character for combat anyway", or less so, but people tend to meta-game subconsciously when they know how well they did on such rolls). 2. The GM doesn't have his text-box cluttered and having to GM roll everything himself (making it easier and takes less effort).

I have said it before, but I will say it again: I would love it if this was implemented. And /hiddenroll or /hroll would be a good command, I think.

+1 on that, yeah, though personally I don't mind it that much to have to do those rolls. I usually just make a macro for the entire party (for perception anyways) that I can just click and then fill in the penalties/bonuses in a query.

Good to know there are others who feel the same way. :) My GM is somewhat unwilling of doing this, but I'll try to introduce him to macro-buttons for party-wide perception rolls. Actually, a macro button would be great for more seamless initiative rolls! That way we don't get the classic/dreaded "roll for initiative guys!" "Oh shit, we're in combat-mode now, stop the roleplaying!" So.... what the chance of this being implemented then? I mean, /hr /hroll or /hiddenroll doesn't seem that hard to pull off from the surface of it..., right?

+1

Just roll it for them. They wouldn't be able to see the result anyways, so I don't see why the players would get anything out of being the ones typing it in, instead of the GM. /gmroll already serves that function. 

It's a placebo. It makes the player feel like they're the ones in control of their character when they make all the rolls.

Yeah, what HoneyBadger said (at least a bit), and it makes it easier for the GM

Yes +1 for this. My players want to be the ones making the roll even if they can't see the results. This adds to the mystical "I hope I can influence this roll with some luck!" experience on the PC side.

I'll give this a +1

This would be great!

This sounds really odd... I mean, if it's just to give the players a "feel like..." thing, why don't you tell your players to make a macro "/em rolls the dice", then as the GM you roll the dice.. ...what's the difference? :)

++1

The difference, G, is that in your example there isn't the direct influence people feel like they have. It doesn't change much on the player's end, but it streamlines things for the GM, at least a bit. One less thing for them to have to worry about.

Really seems like many others like the idea. :)