Situation A allows less metagaming. If you are actually confused and nervous as to what is happening then you are more likely to play a more authentic confused and nervous character.

>>45904931
Situation A is better. Prevents meta-gaming and also allows you to call for random checks whenever you want to keep players paranoid.

I'm curios actually, in what ways do you think situation B is better, OP?

>>45905054
>>45905093
Metagaming happens as soon as a notice roll is called for. Why hide what it is they are trying to notice?

>>45905054
Why would a character be confused or nervous because the player made a notice roll? That makes for even worse roleplaying.

>>45905093
Calling for a notice to "spot the ninja" makes the players even more paranoid if they fail. The
players know there is immediate danger they cannot react to in character. Also calling for random notice checks for no reason is not a good thing for GMs to do.

>>45905168
Metagaming can be prevented by simply doing random checks such as >>45905093 says.

>>45905137
Notice roll generally can be used to find anything from random clues, treasure, hidden enemies, or anything in between. It is more suspenseful if a player knows the failed notice roll they made was specifically for a hidden enemy.

>>45905228
Dulling the suspense of roll is not a good way to prevent metagaming. Calling for random notice rolls for no reason makes them uninteresting.

>>45905168
>Calling for a notice to "spot the ninja" makes the players even more paranoid if they fail. The
players know there is immediate danger they cannot react to in character. Also calling for random notice checks for no reason is not a good thing for GMs to do.

People who know there is a ninja lurking around are more likely to 'conveniently' walk to the other side of the room, or take out their weapon to sharpen it or something that puts them at an advantage they wouldn't be at if GM chose option A

>>45905286
Even with random notice rolls, suspense can still be built by the setting.

>>45905054
>>45905093
Agree with the two of you.

As a dm I make characters roll for things without knowledge of why. If they succeed great they get knowledge if they all fail they all have 0 knowledge vs knowing what's happening prior and therefore influencing their decisions.

At times I'll even get them to roll and have them notice unimportant things just so that they don't all get battle ready whenever they have to make a spot or listen. As fuck them if the wizard wants to cast bluff spells everything they all fail a check then they can but not every time is going to matter; your hunches will not always be right.

>>45905291
>People who know there is a ninja lurking around...

Bad roleplayers do this. Penalize this.
Good roleplayers roleplay their characters. Reward this.

The best option is having the DM rolling spot checks for characters instead so they don't know if they rolled well or not and then moving on from there.

Of the two you listed, the first option is better because they don't know what they didn't see.

>>45905344
In a movie suspense is you, the viewer, knowing that the victim in the movie you are watching is about to walk into the murderer's trap and there is nothing you can do to help them.

In a game suspense is you, the player, knowing that the character is about to be attacked by an assassin and there is nothing you can do to help them.

>>45905431

ALTERNATIVELY

Have your players roll a notice check every single time they enter a room out of habit by hitting their ass with a trap of some sort every single time they don't.

>>45905383
Sounds like your players metagame a lot.

>>45905462
This. I choose anon's option C

>>45905431
Why is it better if a player doesn't know what a character sees or doesn't see?

>>45905471
It might not be that they metagame... It's similar to how if someone knows they're being filmed then they'll act differently.

Instead of 'silence,' it should be something like, 'you notice nothing out of the ordinary' or 'you notice nothing amiss.'

The thing that annoys me is when a GM tells the whole party to roll a check, so some people notice the enemies or treasure, and others don't, but where if one person had tried and failed no one would know there was an enemy or treasure, now the whole group can't help but know that there's treasure or an enemy, and the player is more than likely going to inform the rest of the party, especially if it's an enemy.

>>45905488

If they don't know what they don't see it makes sense.

The tension is in place because they had to roll to spot something and they missed it. However, was it a gelationous cube? Was a secret door left ajar? Was it the flap of a cloak leaving a window toward the outside?

They don't know if they should expect a fight, have to investigate something, have to prepare for a sprung trap, or if they should just leave the room altogether because their target just left and is heading elsewhere.

>>45905576
The tension is in the fact that there is an assassin lingering around and the characters cannot react to it. There is no tension in mystery. There is tension in suspense.

>>45905567

The better option is that they actually notice something, but it wasn't the ninja.

DM: Roll for a notice check
PC: Rolls and fails
DM: You see a small treasure chest along the back wall

That way there is some way for the players to assume they got the check even when they didn't.

>>45905618

There is absolutely nothing you can think of that will put your players on edge more than what they can think of themselves.

>>45905625
What if you don't have both a treasure chest and a ninja? What would you do then?

>You see the door at the end of the hall.
>You see a rock with some pretty patterns.
>You see that it's a nice day for having a nice day.

>>45905639
There is absolutely nothing you can think of that will cause players to metagame than what they can think of themselves.

>>45905648

You include the god damned treasure chest.

You make it empty because the owner of the chest took whatever was inside it OR you make it have shitty clothes or something else that would be in a chest but has no real value.

The chest is a diversion.

IF you can't think of shit like this on the fly, you fail a DM. A lot of DM work is thinking of shit on the fly.

>>45905648
Those are all viable options. Most rooms have something in them that stands out or reveals something about who's room it is. Not everything that comes out of the GM's mouth has to advance the plot.

>>45904931

Situation C.
GM: "What's your notice level?" (Or already knows it.)
>Rolls the result on his own.

>>45904931
Or what if you could let the player do the notice roll at anytime, but if he doesn't and the ninja is there, he takes a hit to initiative?

>>45904931

I prefer this myself:

GM: "Roll notice."
Outcome 1: Player fails. GM: "You see that *insert here other detail unrelated to the threat depending on how high the result is* "
Outcome 2: Player succeeds. GM: "Your character spots the ninja hiding in the room."

>>45905625
This, tension us silly I prefer surprise and shock.

What was the point in me having that hidden ninja if I can't spring him from the shadows to stab the softest person in the kidneys.

If I'm not enjoying the game as the dm why bother. Having the meta knowledge is the fun part of dming.

Seeing how the party reacts is the funny part as having to think in the moment like their characters would have to. Knowing theirs a ninja we you don't really know in game allows them to plan in their heads; even if they don't plan shit together out loud.

>>45906186
I've always done this. Even better, i would pass a slip of paper to the person who passed the notice check detailing what they sensed/smelled/saw.

>>45905454
Not necessarily. Suspense In both scenarios comes from tone and setting.

If your players are in a dark crypt, with blood oozing out of the walls, a notice roll is going to be a heck of a lot heavier than if they were rolling for it in a tavern or something.

Setting is key.

>>45904931
You're a fucking idiot

>Your character doesn't notice anything suspicious

>>45905681
Come on - what if you made it fairly clear you were in an empty room (wanting them to notice clues for a puzzle)? You can't just throw in a random chest because the check calls for something to be there.

I always use situation B. I mainly run CoC and other horror systems but it's so much more suspenseful when you ask the party for a listen check, they all fail, then you laugh and continue what they were doing as if nothing happened.

I choose B.

Players are co-writers of what's happening at the table. Hiding info from them cripples their ability to do that job. Trust them to run their characters appropriately, and be explicit when you think they're misusing the info you gave them as players.

>>45906547
No matter what the players will meta game with the knowledge that there is something they failed to notice.

This is why the GM should be the only one rolling these kind of checks in most circumstances.

>>45904931
Why does the ninja in Situation B turn into an assassin? Those are two different classes.

>>45907546
Who said we're playing a game with classes?

>playing a game without defined passive perception
shafrul dispraay

>>45907546
Because saying "ninja this ninja that ninja ninja ninja ninja" is fucking stupid.

I don't mention the DC for spot checks. Whenever someone fails a DC for something but gets close, I pick something out in the room and fluff it out, saying something like, "that decorative suit of armor is scratched and worn with use, and is quite intimidating for something painted bright blue and yellow," or "that sword in the display case must be worth five hundred denars."

>>45908116
If my GM did this all I would think is "this required a spot check why?"

>>45905488
>Why is it better if a player doesn't know what a character sees or doesn't see?

not knowing you dont know its one of the biggest aspects of not knowing.
if people knew they didnt know stuff, they could just try to find a way to learn and then know

>>45908152
Which is good in its own way as it doesn't make them metagame to the fact that there is something wrong here.