This question on if a DM can hide their rolls is a very old question that was closed as opinion-based due to the answers that were coming in.

The question itself seems to just be asking if hiding rolls is "standard". However, "standard" is pretty subjective and OP has asked about multiple systems in the body of their question.

It very much seems like this question was closed for a few different reasons and now has been reopened with a potential absentee querent unable to confirm or make changes.

Should this question remain open?


2 Answers 2


Remove the and tags and leave it open.

Reviewing the existing answers, none of them actually address the question from the perspective of D&D 5e. So the simple solution to the "multiple systems" problem is to just remove and . This would not invalidate any of the answers. Further, we can direct OP to this question for how it is handled in 5e: What rolls should players get to see?. If we do this, answers to everything they asked for are still accessible to them, but we have a properly scoped question.

As for the concern about the question being opinion based, it anticipates the issue by phrasing the question accordingly (emphasis mine):

Obviously this is largely opinion-based, and I don't know if you treat that like Stack Overflow does, so I'll leave an objective question here: is hiding DM dice rolls from the players a standard practice according to game rules?

Whether or not the rules address this problem is not opinion based.

Some of the answers do have quality concerns.

Several very poor answers were given for this question, which probably contributed to its closure as opinion based. These answers probably need some attention, warranting either deletion for providing a terse opinion statement with no helpful discussion, or a post notice where insufficient support is provided for whatever potentially helpful claim is offered.

  • \$\begingroup\$ It looks like that it may have been closed earlier because no one was answering that specific question and instead were providing opinion based answers. Is there something that you think will change if we reopen now? \$\endgroup\$
    – NotArch
    Sep 27, 2023 at 12:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ I also really don’t know where the line is in terms of editing out parts of a question without a clearance approval. If they wanted to notice, is it our place to take it out so that we can answer it? It very well maybe, I’m just not comfortable with that. \$\endgroup\$
    – NotArch
    Sep 27, 2023 at 12:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NotArch We do it that all the time with “needs more focus” questions: “I’ve removed X question from your post because it should be asked as a separate question. We prefer to keep question posts focused on a single problem.” Why does the question being old mean we shouldn’t do that? \$\endgroup\$ Sep 27, 2023 at 12:33
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It’s not that it being old is the problem is that there is no more original poster to confirm that the change is what they want. That’s more of my concern. But if we’re good with that, then honestly, it might be better to just re-ask the question and then re-open this one with all of those answers that don’t answer it appropriately. And it can be asked for the edition that someone cares about. \$\endgroup\$
    – NotArch
    Sep 27, 2023 at 12:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NotArch They got answers for 3.5, and there is already another question about 5e. Everything they asked for is already on the site, so this is just a matter of tidying things up. \$\endgroup\$ Sep 27, 2023 at 12:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm sorry, but I'm feeling fully convinced. Take my updoot. \$\endgroup\$
    – NotArch
    Sep 27, 2023 at 16:31

It should be closed

Multiple systems

The querent is currently asking if hiding GM rolls is standard practice in both 3.5e and 5e. These are two different systems with two different rulesets. The inclusion of both systems makes this too broad in my opinion. Answers need to be focused on one system.

Opinion-based question

The question is also currently opinion-based asking about if it's standard practice. If OP was interested in knowing if there was a rule for this, this might be able to be reopened, but as it stands, that isn't what they are asking for and unless they become active again we don't know what their intent was.

The answers that came in were also heavily opinion-based, which seems to have been a partial cause for initial closure.

Between the above two,it very much seems this question should be closed again.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .