Romans Puzzle! I have the solution! (The Puzzle that killed a campaign)

[Psion]

No one noticed the significance of Circles = Prime, Arrows = Even, Triangles = Odd even though the pattern was seen.

I noticed the basic fact that the sets were prime, even, and odd, but that didn't mean I knew how that was supposed to solve the puzzle.

 

[Abraxas]

Oh, I know, I'm not saying that it tells us which blanks need which symbols to continue that pattern, but but did anyone propose filling in the rest of the blanks to continue that pattern regardless of placement?

In hindsight I find that funny.

 

[Tuzenbach]

The colored version posted by Mark is not the same as the original version posted by Roman.
Mark added 1 circle in the 4th space from the left, 3rd space down - it should be a <->.

Now for the really funny part this was posted just before the colored version posted by Mark



No one noticed the significance of Circles = Prime, Arrows = Even, Triangles = Odd even though the pattern was seen.

'Doh! So basically, we're all a bunch of losers for not having solved this? Worse still, about 37 of us SWORE it was a case of "really bad DM".

 

[Tuzenbach]

Here's a link to the original thread. Yes, there is indeed a mistake in the colored version. Oh well........

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=130290

 

[Roman]

'Doh! So basically, we're all a bunch of losers for not having solved this?

Well, given that our party did not solve it either I don't think you are a bunch if losers at all.

Worse still, about 37 of us SWORE it was a case of "really bad DM".

I must admit that I felt guilty about posting the puzzle in the first place, when the thread started turning into a judgement on my DM whom I know to be good, but I am happy that all is well now that he posted the solution. The fact that you now changed your judgement on him shows your good character, for in many ways it is more 'noble' (sorry I am not a native English speaker and lack a better word) to be wrong and change your mind than being right all along. Thanks for that!

 

[Algolei]

Aiiiaaiiaiaiiiaiii!

I was just working on a solution involving diagonal sums and probabilities that had suddenly shown signs of making sense--and I just had to come here and post about it. Now that I know the real solution, I doubt my method would have worked, so I can quit poking away at it.

Oh well. Back to sleep for me!

 

[PaulGreystoke]

The colored version posted by Mark is not the same as the original version posted by Roman.
Mark added 1 circle in the 4th space from the left, 3rd space down - it should be a <->.

Ah! I never checked back against the original posted by Roman. Mark's colored version was just so much better - except for not being accurate.

No one noticed the significance of Circles = Prime, Arrows = Even, Triangles = Odd even though the pattern was seen.

Sadly that post got ignored once Mark's version got posted. I did the same legwork on Mark's version, but of course couldn't find a pattern because of the circle/arrow switch. Too bad I didn't go back to the original. But as Psion noted, simply recognizing the pattern in the counts didn't necessarily point to the solution. But if Mark's version hadn't obscured the truth I'm sure at least one of us on the boards would have suggested the solution. But then I expect that the rest of us would have said it was a lousy solution.

 

[Hellefire]

All I will say is...


groovy, I can go back to thinking about more mundane problems in my mind while I am trying to sleep. And kudos to the DM for posting info about the situation in general.

Aaron

 

[Mark]

Whoops! (Sorry bout that.) I guess I ended the campaign! At the least, it illustrates how tough it is for a small d20 publisher to get someone to edit his work.

Anyway, as I said, it wasn't something that could have been solved by us given the limited information Roman had given (not that he could have known). Obviously, ruishlight and Algolei were on the right track before I ever chimed in but without Roman actually knowing the answer, and how little he actually knew about what it would take from that stage to get to the answer, there was no way for him to do what the DM would have done and given an additional clue at that stage to get them over the hump. If he had had the answer, or been the DM, that thread would likely have ended a few posts after rushlight hit on the prime, odds, and even thing.

Still sounds like there some dispute between Roman and his DM regarding clues or bypasses in a treasure that Roman is saying was an illusion and the DM is saying wasn't? What's that all about?

I tell you what, though. Next time someone posts a puzzle, I'm going to first ask if they, themself, know the answer. If they say, "No" then I'll be leaving that thread further untouched. It's simply too frustrating when you don't know if something can even be solved, or if you do solve something and not having someone who can say that it is so.

 

[Abraxas]

Sadly that post got ignored once Mark's version got posted. I did the same legwork on Mark's version, but of course couldn't find a pattern because of the circle/arrow switch. Too bad I didn't go back to the original. But as Psion noted, simply recognizing the pattern in the counts didn't necessarily point to the solution. But if Mark's version hadn't obscured the truth I'm sure at least one of us on the boards would have suggested the solution. But then I expect that the rest of us would have said it was a lousy solution.

Well, as was mentioned - noticing the pattern in the symbol count doesn't give any clue to placement, unless you assume placement is irrelevant and only count matters. Given what the DM said in the other thread, I'm not sure placement didn't matter.