What tests should the GM roll for the PC's? For example, if I told all the acolytes to roll for awarness and they all failed, they would get supicios because now they know there is something out there they just dont know that its there. Very confusing.

If you really want to keep a skill check a secret, then note down the relevant skills ahead of time for all the players, so you can roll them without telling them what you're rolling for.

But if it's not a super-large surprise, it's less hassle if you just let the players roll it their selves. An easy way to avoid them always being suspicious about rolling Awareness checks is to have a few false alarms - make them roll, and then declare that it's all clear, or that what they heard was just a cat, etc.

Thanks this really helped

An old problem and there are easy fixes for it. the one i use is as follows.

Before the sessoin starts, get each player to make 6 %dice rolls. Record what they roll.

You should already have a record of all their relevant stats to compare these against.

e.g. player 1 rolls;

1 - 36%

2 - 77%

3 - 52%

4 - 04%

5 - 31%

6 - 22%

Then when you need the player to make a test you don't want them to know about, simply roll 1d6 to find their result.

So you need each PC to make a Toughness test to resist the invisible radiation in an area. Roll 1d6 to get the result and compare it to their Toughness.

This way the players have made the tests, but they never know when these will be used.

Simple.

Throw out random tests at random times that don't mean anything.

Get into their heads. Pry it apart.

Imagine that mind. NOW FLAY IT.

Fideru said:

Then throw out tests that appear to be random but which are actually of considerable significance.

And roll dice behind the screen where the players can't see, for no good reason. Appropriate fake responses to these rolls are optional, but fun.

And sometimes, just ask the players to roll dice and tell you what they rolled.

Alternately, only have them roll wen something will happen if they succeed or if they fail. In oter words, with an awareness test, when you call for one, something should happen if they succeed (tey spot something) and something should happen if they fail (that which they failed to spot attacks them). If there's a chance that nothing will happen because of the results of the roll of the dice, then you shouldn't have the dice rolled.

Of course when something happens, it doesn't have to be related to the role that was just made. If the PC's are being shadowed and the shadowing figure will not engage them (thus meaning a failed awareness check equates to nothing happening) then on a failed check, a small street urchin could bump into the PC's picking their pockets of something not too valuable. They will probably catch on to what's going on and could (and probably should) apprehend the thief as te thief wasn't what they were noticing. Perhaps a blind man would have noticed the butterfingered kid or maybe the kid was never a match for the PC's eyes, but in the end, it's not important. It could be a fun diversion, and that's exactly what such would be, a diversion from what the test was really about.

In the end, if you call for a roll, something should happen if the PC's succeed and if they fail... even if the tings that happen aren't in any way related to the roll, just as long as the story moves on and the players think it's related.

well to be frank if you ask your party to roll perception and they all fail the players should carry on as normal, to go "oh we had to make a check, lets all be more careful" then thats meta gaming and they should be punished for it, i have a great set of players, if they fail they carry on as if they never made the check, even if other players passed. but remeber to many rolls make things dull, its better to wait until they ask to make a per check or unless theres somthing that might make the characters actually pause and look around for a minute

Luddite said:

But... as a player I certainly would want to spend a fate point to reroll versus some invisible radiation if it is to avert mutation.

I actually like to give all the PCs awereness tests, and smile if they fail. It heightens the paranoia. And really, what are they going to do? My players do not openly metagame anyway so it's not a problem.

But the few times it is essential that the players don't know they failed something, I roll in secret. Especially useful for Insght tests (or whatever they're called).

But... as a player I certainly would want to spend a fate point to reroll versus some invisible radiation if it is to avert mutation.

Yup, fate points and other systems of modifying the result of a die roll at a cost are a massive problem for hidden tests. I haven't found a "fair" way of dealing with that myself...

i never use hidden checks unless im rolling on creature/npc stats i think its just a case of punishing meta gaming

Cifer said:

It just feels so arbitrary if no own roll is involved in one's character's fate. It's those bad dice rolls and streaks players will remember and tell stories of for years.

To the OP... if they are metagaming - and that's what they are doing by not acting according to a failed perception or knowledge test - you might want to call for harmless tests just to throw them off. Though it makes for a poor game. It can be better to remind them to not react to something they didn't notice or you may need to throw encounters at them where you don't ask for tests anymore since they would fail anyway.

And... there's always something out there to get your PCs. That should be an automatic success

Chester said:

I would allow the FP to be spent (not burned) at a later time when any negative effect began to manifest...this retains the subterfuge.

I quite like making lots of secret rolls through out the game and occassionally asking for random skills, like tracking, awareness, random intelligene checks and so forth.

Every now and then look very concerned and flick through a random source book, preferably one they didn't even know you had.

Oh and pass secret notes to players about things they see.

Cifer said:

No problem. Just ask the player to roll the toughness test himself without telling him what it is. Chances are the player will accept failure, or if already paranoid reroll just in case. Be sure to do this at a later time, mutation doesen't happen instantly (without warp). If the GM feels charitable, he can advise the player to use a reroll to prevent mutation, contagion of a horrible disease etc.

It's a bit more complicated with tests made to detect creatures or lies - in which case asking for the roll might ruin it. If you think the player wants to reroll any awareness test or insight test, ask the player this beforehand and let him set aside 1 or more rerolls for such sitations, and then apply them as good as you can. The next time the player wants to spend a fate reroll tell him how many of the set aside points that are spent.

But most players accept not being able to use rerolls on those tests and prefer to keep them for dodge tests etc.