That seems pretty penalizing. I was only talking about "training" players so they know how those rolls are used. I haven't actually had to do this since my second EotE session.

GM states to PC roll against vigilance, player rolls and does not succeed, then PC states he wants to roll perception cause he knows something is up. GM states no, this could dissolve into a bad experience because PC is already out of character.

If they want to roll Perception, I'd say "You just did, that's what the Vigilance roll was for". Then I'd explain there are multiple "perception" skills depending on context. If the player is the type to pursue it, then no amount of "hidden rolls" are going to solve the problem, which rests with the player.

And that's a good explaination and can use it if I ever GM again.

I'm curious with the many people saying that the PC's should always roll how you deal with certain things suddenly becoming worthless. Ie a threat dice added to checks against the player for certain rolls or upgrading the difficulty of checks against the player on certain rolls etc (caused by talents or advantages).

The easiest example would be the foe say having the appropriate gear for searching giving them a boost die to perception vs stealth (say night vision goggles or something), if the player is the only one that ever rolls then that bonus the npc would normally get never gets factored in in any situation.

Just flip it, in this case the NPC's talent or equipment adds a setback to the PC's dice pool.

I'd like to point out that the dice pool does not necessarily favor the active character. For example: Ignoring advantage/threat, GGYPPR gives a 46.7% chance of success.

Another way to look at it is a single green die in a simple check has a 50% chance of success since only 4/8 sides have any successes. Adding a purple die just lowers the chance of success.

Just flip it, in this case the NPC's talent or equipment adds a setback to the PC's dice pool.

The only problem with that is the fact that the dice themselves are not perfect inversions. Adding an ability die to an NPC's pool will have a statistically different result than adding a difficulty die to a PC's pool, and vis versa. Inverting a dice pool will tend to benefit the active character. Perhaps someone could help me locate the blog post where an intrepid statistician actually graphs the individual probabilities of each die getting a given result. I can't seem to find it at the moment.

Edit: Typo.

Second Edit: Found it.

Talking about this one? Well its an online die roller that gives the probability for success of the rolls for your die pool.

http://game2.com/eote/#ability=4&difficulty=3

Just flip it, in this case the NPC's talent or equipment adds a setback to the PC's dice pool.

true but look at your dice sides difficulty are not mirrors of ability nor are challenge mirrors of proficiency nor boost mirrors of setback, so your getting slightly different results with that method

Just flip it, in this case the NPC's talent or equipment adds a setback to the PC's dice pool.

The only problem with that is the fact that the dice themselves are not perfect inversions.

True, but the GM/NPC gets the bad end of the conversion. As the GM having the dice favour the players in a small way just isn't something I am going to lose sleep over. The advantages of having the PC make the roll is worth every bit of the 3.3% it costs my NPC.

You could just have both parties make simple checks with the difference in successes retained and the difference in advantages used as advantage (if the greater number is held by successful party) or threat (if the greater number is held by the unsuccessful party). This evens out the dice for both sides and removes discrepancies based on who is initiating the activity.

Just flip it, in this case the NPC's talent or equipment adds a setback to the PC's dice pool.

true but look at your dice sides difficulty are not mirrors of ability nor are challenge mirrors of proficiency nor boost mirrors of setback, so your getting slightly different results with that method

If this were intended to be a tactical, statistically accurate simulation that might matter.

For me, it makes a basic kind of sense and is an easy rule to apply on the fly at the table. Works for me.

Just flip it, in this case the NPC's talent or equipment adds a setback to the PC's dice pool.

true but look at your dice sides difficulty are not mirrors of ability nor are challenge mirrors of proficiency nor boost mirrors of setback, so your getting slightly different results with that method

If this were intended to be a tactical, statistically accurate simulation that might matter.

For me, it makes a basic kind of sense and is an easy rule to apply on the fly at the table. Works for me.

I've got no problem with that either--it hasn't really come up too much in my games so I'm not sure how I'd do it exactly.