Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Koro76 04-13-07, 02:08 AM	The party has been at a puzzle for a long time (lets say an hour or so) finally, the PC with the highest intelligence says "i might not be sart enough to figure this out, but my character has (somewhere in the 20s) intelligence, so he should be able to." BUT all the hints for the puzzle were already given. I didnt let him make a check of any sort for that puzzle, but incase something they cant figure out comes up again, what should i tell him? Technically, his character WOULD be able to figure it out if he cant (hes playing as his character after all, not himself).....but theres really no skill or rule ive seen for it. I would also like to avoid makin up a new skill in the middle of a campaign, though they probably wouldnt mind a new rule as long it didnt hinder them. :rolleyes: What's a DM to do? Or should i just re-stress the hints?
TheDarkLord 04-13-07, 02:14 AM	1. Yes, the character should be able to figure it out. You could have him roll an Intelligence check (D20+Int modifier) and give the player a freebie or, 2. Have him roll an Intelligence check and maybe write down on a slip of paper a hint, and hand it to the Player. Don't give him the puzzle, but give him some hints. Also don't let him roll for an Intelligence check for at lealst 10 minute intervals in real time.
Elemental_Elf 04-13-07, 02:15 AM	Don't use puzzles that your players wouldn't/won't necessarily catch onto. Its easy to say his character would understand and solve it, but that's a slippery slope. Next you'll have the Barbarians saying he strong enough top lift a statue or the Bard saying his character would be suave enough to seduce the queen and know just what to say to the king to let them do the naughty, etc. Its better to make puzzles that involve skill checks. Make puzzles that utilize knowledge checks, decipher script checks, spellcraft checks, etc. if that doesn't fit the bill then perhaps make a skill, simmilar to Common Knowledge that the brainy characters can roll to see if they can remember or deduce some relevant piece of information that will aid them with the puzzle. Don't just give them the answer, but provide a key clue that will help the player realize the answer.
stitchy1503 04-13-07, 02:16 AM	just dont make any hour long diversions again and it probably wont matter >.> (the answer to his "puzzle" was to walk back out the door we came in having nothing to do with the other door that changed color when you stepped on a differnt tile on the floor)
Droma 04-13-07, 02:17 AM	This sounds exactly like the save my game article that was just posted. Basically instead of letting the characters use their abilities your forcing your players to play as themselves using their own knowledge. If they wanted to play the role of themselves they would be on a date instead of playing D&D. Basically read the article and have them make an appropriate skill check to see if his CHARACTER can figure the problem out.
Someone 04-13-07, 02:20 AM	The best way to handle this is to try to figure out how to tell the players the answer, without really telling them the answer, so that the players can still have that feeling of accomplishment when they "solve" it. Possible ways would be start combining clues: "you know, clue A looks like it has something to do with clue B". Its sometimes like a crossword puzzle- you need the across clue solved before you have any guesses at the down clues. Or maybe start leading them down the steps (if there's more than one) to solve it one at a time, until they figure out what is needed to finish the rest.
Koro76 04-13-07, 02:26 AM	i believe stitchy is in fact byest, as he is one of the players and they believe just because the solution was coming back through the door they came in, that the room wasnt a puzzle at all. the puzzle, in actuality, was a number of different colored triangles painted on the floor, each with its own set of footprint impressions in it with a door at the other end of the room. All of the triangles and the footprints in them were pointed at the door they had just come through. when they stepped into the footprints, the door at the other end of the room when they came in (now behind them if they were standing in the foot holes) would glow a color or blend of colors when the corresponding triangle or triangles were pressed, and if another PC went through the door while the triangles were lit, they would reappear back in the room in front of the correct door after a time delay corresponding to the color of the triangles lit. rather than going with the obvious clue, they chose to take the time to try every combination of triangles. I believe it was just them over-thinking the situation. That said, i still think that there should have been a way for the character with the higher intelligence to figure out that the process they chose obviously wasnt working. Ill likely create an intelligence check DC of some sort at time intervals to help fix the possibility that they might not be able to solve the puzzle very quickly. Thanks for the help.
KismetRose 04-13-07, 03:31 AM	You could do a couple things for puzzle-solving. The Intelligence check could work well, and it's sufficed for my group. If a character is skilled at figuring out puzzles, riddles, and such you could also make a Knowledge (enigmas) skill.
wizarddog 04-13-07, 06:48 AM	I would have intelligence checks done for them when they start to come up with really "off the path solutions" and if they succeed give them some hints: "You notice.." "You remember hearing..." "There is something familiar..." "You originally thought this, but now..." It leaves them still needing to figure it out BUT their skills including Knowledge, spot, search, listen etc. can allow clues to appear and they will get a balance of what their characters can do and as players they can do.
daggeroflath 04-13-07, 07:02 AM	Allow me to translate for your player, I speak a little bit of playerese. It translates in two ways, it could be either or both. "This is a really stupid puzzle and while maybe we were having fun forty minutes ago, this just isn't why we're at the session today. Can we get on to something a bit more fun than your power trip?" "It challenges my suspension of disbelief that Azagrat wizard of the third circle whose mind is advanced enough to violate the laws of physics at will, can't figure out this puzzle."
Dan Hemmens 04-13-07, 07:36 AM	The key to this question lies in another question. That other question is: why did you give the players a puzzle in the first place? Generally speaking, a "puzzle" is going to be an out-of-character problem. Elements like this are common in D&D (moreso in CRPGs, perhaps - if I see another Neverwinter Nights module with a Towers of Hanoi variant I'll scream) the idea is that the puzzle constitutes a "challenge" in and of itself, you are asking the players to solve a problem using their out of character knowledge and resources. This being the case, you shouldn't give them a skill check, you should just tell them the answer. It's an out of character challenge at which they have, essentially, failed. The alternative is to think of puzzles in character. These make no sense to me: what self respecting mad wizard would actually pose a math puzzle to his enemies? If you do do it, however, resolve it purely with stat rolls. It's an IC challenge not an OOC one.
daggeroflath 04-13-07, 08:14 AM	The alternative is to think of puzzles in character. These make no sense to me: what self respecting mad wizard would actually pose a math puzzle to his enemies? First thought that pops into my head is a stargate episode where the advanced aliens put a puzzle lock on the door of their weapons vault when they leave the planet, so that the weapons are only used when the culture is advanced enough to understand the puzzle (and thus use the weapons wisely). Plenty of similar circumstances could occur in a fantasy game. How many books and films have a character undergoing trials and ordeals to prove they're worthy to receive the Magical Dingus of Dingusmore +3 with which they can defeat Villanious mcVillain.
Madfox11 04-13-07, 08:55 AM	The last time I used a puzzle (and it was both a test of the intellect of the PCs as well as the NPC who loved devicing puzzles and seeing how others dealt with them) I started by letting the players trying to solve the puzzle for a short time. I also designed a table with various clues the players would get with a specific DC check. I also gave PCs a bonus if they had applicable skills - e.g. if it is a math based puzzle I would give PCs with 5 ranks in Knowledge (arcane), Knowledge (architecture) or Knowledge (geography - I include navigation under this skill) a +2 synergy bonus if they have 5 ranks and +4 if they have 10 ranks. Mind you, in this particular case my players liked to be personally challenged, otherwise I probably would have given the clues automatically (e.g. a character with Intelligence 10 automatically knows everything of DC 10 and below). One thing is for sure, under no circumstances would I have allowed the puzzling to last 1.5 hours. Nothing would frustrate most players more, and if they really wanted to puzzle for 1.5 hours they would be doing so from a puzzle book ;)
alecthemad 04-13-07, 10:19 AM	It is because of these results that I dislike puzzles in D&D (or most any RPG). Players will always over think puzzles because they do not have the whole picture of the situation like the DM. Knowledge arcana is perfectly suited to puzzle and should be used liberally enough so that the players feel they "solved" the puzzle without being given the answer. It is obvious this was holding up the game. Make some rolls and give some clues until they get it.
_SIN_ 04-13-07, 10:35 AM	I try to leave puzzles as side-trek's. This way the game can continue and if any of the players get a little bored, or during down time, or if something else is going on - like the wizard creating an item, the rest of the group has something to mull over. Tangible puzzles are best - a rubics cube gadget, a page of gibberish that need translating, etc, etc. Riddles are ok, but that usually means travelling back to who set you the riddle, which can slow things, or de-rail them completely!
_Jayne_Cobb_ 04-13-07, 10:39 AM	The party has been at a puzzle for a long time (lets say an hour or so) finally, the PC with the highest intelligence says "i might not be sart enough to figure this out, but my character has (somewhere in the 20s) intelligence, so he should be able to." BUT all the hints for the puzzle were already given. I didnt let him make a check of any sort for that puzzle, but incase something they cant figure out comes up again, what should i tell him? The PCs been at it for over an hour the players? The the former, then let them keep going. If the latter then say "You're right. Make a check vs. DC (whatever)." A puzzle is only a useful part of the game so long as it adds to the enjoyment. Once your players start getting frustrated the puzzle becomes a detriment to the game. Once they become annoyed it should be dispensed with as quickly as possible.
Bedevere 04-13-07, 10:48 AM	what self respecting mad wizard would actually pose a math puzzle to his enemies? Er.... A mad one? :D I agree with the sentiment of this. If you are a powerful wizard leaving cunning traps, you dont want a big sign saying "If you are smart enough to be a threat to me, then you can come through". Traps should misdirect by their nature. However, the players should have a fair chance of working out the way to bypass or solve the problem. Of course, completely turning things around is funny. Big levers that are the activation of ANOTHER nasty trap, when they think it disarms the stuff they are already dealing with.... :evillaugh
Kensan_Oni 04-13-07, 10:57 AM	I just have a stupid question. Did the Barbarian/Fighter type ever think about taking out a battering ram and start trying to batten open the doors? Someone should have thought of using a brute force method after half a hour....
Thought 04-13-07, 11:28 AM	It is a false assumption that a character should be "smart enough" to solve any given puzzle. For example, the smarter a person is, the more difficult a "puzzle" like Petals Around the Rose (http://www.freeworldgroup.com/games/roses/) generally tends to be. Now if it was a logic problem, sure intelligence would help, but wisdom might be more relevant. A stat check should generally provide a hint, a clue, or some way of looking at the puzzle to make things easier. Heck, even a "you're getting hotter/you're cold/" would be valid. In the same way that you don't let a lvl 20 fighter automatically hit his opponent (or automatically deflect that blow, even though he should have learned how to avoid getting hit after 20 friggen levels!), just because he has a lot of str, you shouldn't let a stat solve a problem. Yet, just as a fighter at least gets to roll, there should be benefits to help simulate the intelligence of a character. However, the best option would be to create better puzzles. Run them by a few people to make sure that they are actually solvable, and be willing to change the trigger that solves it. Punishing players for not thinking exactly like you is nonsensical. And for the love of all the is holy (or unholy, for you evil people out there), NEVER let the players muck about for an hour like that. You've failed your DMing 101 midterm, better work extra hard to pass the rest of the class (as it were).
Cromulent 04-13-07, 11:31 AM	I agree with the sentiment of this. If you are a powerful wizard leaving cunning traps, you dont want a big sign saying "If you are smart enough to be a threat to me, then you can come through". Well the idea is, the Wizard doesn't want to take time out of his busy world-domination schedule to deal with every commoner and 1st level Rogue that comes to his tower in search of free loots. So he sets up some traps to take care of the weak, and some puzzles to thwart the stupid. If a group of cunning adventurers circumvent his static defenses, he goes to take care of them himself. Really, world domination takes careful planning. You just can't afford to be interrupted every ten minutes by some Johnny-Level-One who wants to slay you for your magic items.
Quoriil 04-13-07, 11:46 AM	That a full hour was spent on a 'puzzle' that was effectively a dead end hallway doesn't seem a good time. Funny, but horrible. Shame shame shame. ;P
Edymnion 04-13-07, 01:03 PM	It is a false assumption that a character should be "smart enough" to solve any given puzzle. For example, the smarter a person is, the more difficult a "puzzle" like Petals Around the Rose (http://www.freeworldgroup.com/games/roses/) generally tends to be. Now if it was a logic problem, sure intelligence would help, but wisdom might be more relevant.Now see, I consider myself quite intelligent (score high on IQ tests, blew things like the ACT/SAT out of the water, etc), and I figured out the answer to that one after getting it wrong only twice. Seriously, it took me less than a minute. Oh well, I guess thats why the language of "generally tends to be" is in there.
kelvinaw273 04-13-07, 01:33 PM	I would always include Intelligence checks for hints, or wisdom checks to see the obvious. The problem with puzzle is this: when you already know the answer they are really obvious. But that does not mean they are when you don't.
Kapre 04-13-07, 04:12 PM	The difficulty is when puzzels and traps start to blend. Traps don't always have to be fatal, somtimes they just need to stop those who don't know how to get by, is this a puzzle or a trap? For example: Low level adventure, Abandoned Wizard's Tower (been sealed away in a demi-plane for 1000 years or so... long story) The knob/handel on the front door shocks for a few points of damage when touched initially. Barbarian attacks the door, animated objects come off the building in defence. While the side may be scale-able, the second floor has a balcony that rings the place that cannot be climbed past without rope + decent climb, which none have. Solution: use a hat or leather glove to insulate your hand when you open the door. (You'll notice in the PHB that the only armor with gloves is mail/plate. The party didn't get it so after several minutes, and the brief combat, I had them roll INT, and told the highest (wizard) how he recalled how lightning won't travel through some materials... I asked a player about it later and he said the solution was out of context from the fantacy setting. /shrug
Previn 04-13-07, 06:28 PM	Now see, I consider myself quite intelligent (score high on IQ tests, blew things like the ACT/SAT out of the water, etc), and I figured out the answer to that one after getting it wrong only twice. Seriously, it took me less than a minute. Oh well, I guess thats why the language of "generally tends to be" is in there. I went and looked it up after 5 tries, and wouldn't have gotten the answer anytime soon otherwise. It really isn't a test of IQ in anyway. If you don't "get the trick" no amount of smarts will give you the answer. It's like the stick portrait game. If you don't know the trick, no amount of looking at the sticks will give you the answer no matter how smart you are. Again, a perfect example of why puzzles need to be used cautiously. I would call a puzzle something that can be solved without having to know something extra, be it some hidden rule or assumption. I'd call both of the above examples riddles. Tried adding them all up first. Next tried just the first and last since that would have given the first answer. Next try added up and divied by 3 since that would have given the previous 2 answers. Next tried adding combinations of dice 3 times since the data indicated that it could simply be a sub-set of dice. Next went back and checked for combintions of even and odd. Noted that all answers were even and lacked anything to immediatly point out why. So I went and looked it up. I wouldn't have discarded the proper data without many more times of trial and error at that point. Did I do anything wrong? Nope. All of my attempts were logically sound on the presented data I had. But because I didn't make the assumption that I could discard dice and pips, just dice I wouldn't get the answer. There's also something to be said for the combintions I got contributing to additional appempts.
Quoriil 04-14-07, 10:14 AM	This is a test of wisdom rather than intelligence? I guess all of those test that told me I was unwise were actually true... :( ...oh well, off to play with matches in the firework factory.
TimelordSimone 04-14-07, 05:03 PM	Now see, I consider myself quite intelligent (score high on IQ tests, blew things like the ACT/SAT out of the water, etc), and I figured out the answer to that one after getting it wrong only twice. Seriously, it took me less than a minute. Oh well, I guess thats why the language of "generally tends to be" is in there. It's clearly a test of wisdom. The point is, someone with high int would probably over think it. Whereas someone with high wis would merely go with their gut instinct. That is what he meant. Now, if you have high wisdom as well... (As a side point, I got it right first time.) But anyway, back to the point. I have only occasionally put puzzles in, and when I have done, they've been fairly simple. No offence to my group, but they're not that bright. But yeah, you let the puzzle run on waaay too long. If something is boring the players, you should speed it up.
Edymnion 04-15-07, 09:46 PM	I went and looked it up after 5 tries, and wouldn't have gotten the answer anytime soon otherwise. It really isn't a test of IQ in anyway. If you don't "get the trick" no amount of smarts will give you the answer.Not true, pure intelligence would give you the answer eventually. You would simply have to exhaust the other possibilities and get down to looking at exactly what changed between each itteration.As soon as it told you that the answer was 0, you would have your point of comparison. Just look at what the other sets with non-zero answers have, and what the 0 set does not, and you could logically deduct that the key must be the center pip. From there, its simply a matter of comparing the answer number to the dice available to figure it out.Its not a matter of no amount of intelligence can solve the problem, its just that high intelligence makes you over think the problem by expecting it to be tougher than it really is, leading you down false paths. You can still logically solve the puzzle without any leaps of intuition, it just takes longer.
The Jake 04-16-07, 02:13 AM	If a character is able to do something the player isn't, I let that character roll for it. This is the only way to handle these situations. Period.
Ack 04-16-07, 03:21 AM	I, personally, like to try to solve puzzles in character. Speaking modestly (or even immodestly) I like to think I solve more than a few. (Incidentally, I didn't get PatR until I looked it up. I had ideas, but I wasn't close enough.) If I pose a puzzle, I will posit an XP bonus for the group if it gets solved, and an additional bonus for the person who does the solving. Once I figure they aren't getting anywhere (or are going in circles) then I will either tell them or give them each a different hint, and reduce the XP bonus accordingly. If they get it, well and good. If they fail, they don't get the XP.
daggeroflath 04-16-07, 08:53 AM	I've been roleplaying for a long time (like most people here). In that time I've seen an awful lot of puzzles. A lot more than you'd logically expect to find within the world... I don't like them. Give me a Sudoko puzzle in real life and I'll be entertained, but give me a door with a riddle in a roleplaying game and my wizard will cast knock, my rogue will pick the lock, my barbarian will bash the door down and my cleric will commune for the answer. Make it some stupid magic door that can't be opened without the riddle and I won't be annoyed. I'll just take out the ten feet of stone around it and sell the door on the black market. A lot of people have uses for indestructible bits of wood.