D&D General IS the 5 min work day a feature or a bug?

[James Gasik]

Ah, that explains a lot. My suspicion is that had it been the player of the wizard it may not have been the same issue...



Agreed.



I presume this was a 5e reprint of the adventure?


Yes. Puzzles like this are very much about challenging the players, not the characters. The way I'd usually handle them would be to have the party as a group work through the problem, and then assume that the answer came from the most appropriate character, regardless of which player provided it. (Ideally, I'd persuade the players to report their answer through the player of that character, but such things are never perfect...)

That said, my preference for "challenge the players" type puzzles is to avoid outright puzzles, and instead build the puzzles into the dungeon - perhaps there are repeated motifs they can observe and work out, perhaps there's a gap in the map that points to the existence of a secret door, or whatever.

(But, by and large, I do take the view that "challenge the player" puzzles are a valid form of challenge in the game. YMMV, of course - some people prefer all challenges to be character-based.)

No, this was literally S2, way back in my first few years of playing the game.

 

[delericho]

The problem with your separation of player and character is "it's what my character would do ..." Is the battle cry of the jerk player.

If a player introduces a disruptive character to the game, a character that actively disrupts the fun of the other players? It's the player that's the jerk, not the character.

True. There's a fine line between the entertaining jerk (Wolverine) and the pain in the backside jerk.

 

[delericho]

No, this was literally S2, way back in my first few years of playing the game.

Sorry, I was thrown by your reference to "setting a DC".

 

[Minigiant]

You'd have to ask my DM at the time. He seemed pretty irritated when the player of the character with the lowest mental stats blurted out the answer. Either way, since puzzles like this have no set way to ensure you are using your character's mental faculties or knowledge to solve, it seems the intent is for the player to do it for their character.

Well ok, you could assign an ability check DC, but the adventure doesn't do that. I had a post about metagaming from months back where I think I called stuff like this a "necessary evil"- it's metagaming, but it's metagaming that's needed to move the plot forward, and it's why I've never liked riddles or puzzles in my D&D. The only way to ensure the character is the one engaging with the puzzle would be die rolls, which wouldn't be fun for anyone. So you challenge the player. Of course, if the player is a 20 Int Wizard or a 18 Wis Cleric, and they don't get it, that's not exactly fun for them either...

It's a Catch-22.

One thing I do is when a player puzzle, I roll to see who in the party gets the credit with the smartest PCs getting the higher chance of getting the credit.

Another thing I want to try is having mutliple puzzle options of different difficulties. Then you use the harder puzzle the lower the highest INT in the party. Easy puzzle if you have that INT 18 wizard or INT 20 hireling sage in the group.

 

[James Gasik]

Sorry, I was thrown by your reference to "setting a DC".

Oh yeah uh, it's been awhile, it would be "roll an Intelligence check at a -2 penalty".

 

[James Gasik]

One thing I do is when a player puzzle, I roll to see who in the party gets the credit with the smartest PCs getting the higher chance of getting the credit.

Another thing I want to try is having mutliple puzzle options of different difficulties. Then you use the harder puzzle the lower the highest INT in the party. Easy puzzle if you have that INT 18 wizard or INT 20 hireling sage in the group.

You must be good at puzzles to make several options! I'm terrible at solving and making the things- if I think it's hard, people laugh and go "oh, it's a variation of [classic puzzle]". If I think it's easy, the players complain that it's too obscure, or that whatever answer they come up with meets the requirements as the one I chose.

I'm like Gandalf, staring at the door to Moria going "huh. speak friend, then enter...I could really use a hint here..."

 

[Minigiant]

You must be good at puzzles to make several options! I'm terrible at solving and making the things- if I think it's hard, people laugh and go "oh, it's a variation of [classic puzzle]". If I think it's easy, the players complain that it's too obscure, or that whatever answer they come up with meets the requirements as the one I chose.

I'm like Gandalf, staring at the door to Moria going "huh. speak friend, then enter...I could really use a hint here..."

My easy puzzles are baby puzzles. My hard puzzles are reverse engineered from my grandfather's puzzle book or DC Riddler riddles.

I suck at making puzzles wholesale because mine are too hard.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Is knowledge of prime numbers really something we'll consider OOC knowledge? In the real world we've known about them for millennia, and if D&D is tech-equivalent to the Roman Empire, the middle ages, or the Renaissance then society must surely know roughly comparable math. (Just after a fall of empire or apocalypse might make for an exception, depending on just how much was lost.)

So shouldn't any reasonably knowledgeable character be aware of what prime numbers are and what they mean?

yes it is out of game knowledge because a 3 int barbarian who's player knows them can figure out the puzzle before a 20int wizard trained in mathematics if that player doesn't know them. if the prereq to figuring something out is 'if you know in real life' then it is metagame knowledge.

now someone is going to come in and give an excuse why a 3 int barbarian might know it.... but the truth is the excuse is there becuse out of game the player figured it out.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

D&D is a cooperative game. If one person is ruining the fun of others there are only two choices available.
1) Kick out the problematic (a few ways, none really satisfying.)
2) Discuss and make the player change his/her ways.

and yet your suggested method was to punish the player until they changed play styles... not "talk to them like an adult"

#2 Means that the DM must take the lead and actually talk with the person about to be kicked out. But there might be problems. Maybe that one is a friend and it could mean an end to a friendship. If talking succeeds, no problem. This was the goal all along. If the talking fails, and kicking out the person is out of the question what does that leave us?

so after saying about how talking like an adult is the answer you fall back on bullying useing the game cause talking like an adult could be hard?

The softer method of treasure punishing. Yes it might be seen as adversarial.

because it is

But at the same time, souring the play for the one not caring and sweetening the play of the others might slowly make the uncaring one change his/her play or simply make the uncaring one leave on his/her own.

aka use your power as the DM to adversarial force YOUR way of playing on a player that dares to enjoy the game different than you... and you above said you are doing it to avoid talking it out like adults...

maybe you are not getting your point across, but so far it IS coming off as adversarial.

This might preserve friendship IRL. It is not the best solution, but it might be the best of the worst outcomes.

how can this possible be better than meeting in the middle?

As for the bolded part.
You got confused. This is not a veto where one person can change an outcome because he has veto.
It is a vote. Democratic vote. One player (or DM) can not force the others to do as he/she likes. The majority is always applied.

then that isn't a veto... it is a vote.

My group has VETO power... aka we can stop something.

 

[Mort]

yes it is out of game knowledge because a 3 int barbarian who's player knows them can figure out the puzzle before a 20int wizard trained in mathematics if that player doesn't know them. if the prereq to figuring something out is 'if you know in real life' then it is metagame knowledge.

now someone is going to come in and give an excuse why a 3 int barbarian might know it.... but the truth is the excuse is there becuse out of game the player figured it out.

IMO, if you throw in a puzzle for the PLAYERS to figure out (a math puzzle, a clearly modern riddle etc.) Don't be upset when and given PLAYER figures it out.

No point in being upset at metagame behavior if you throw in a metagame puzzle.