A killer puzzle that makes me want to pull my hair out.

[atom crash]

I'd be tempted to bring that wizard six fish, and if he looks confused, say, "Sure, six fish! Cuz if we brought you two more, then they'd all be ate!"

Probably not the answer he was looking for, but that answer would score extra points with me! Too funny.

Riddles are touchy to pull off, as has been said, since what seems apparent to the one who knows the answer is obviously not apparent to the one solving the puzzle or riddle.

I can't believe so many people are so quick to judge this particular DM as "stupid" or worse; have you ever tried using puzzles or riddles in a game? I have, so I'm more forgiving. However, I agree that the PC shouldn't be presented with a life-or-death situation dependent on solving the puzzle.

In my main D&D campaign, I once used some riddles like these on my players, and the three of them were stumped for a good while trying to guess the right answers.

In a Grimm game with some of the same players, when I faced them with a door labelled "Woke to potent chicken odor," it took them perhaps ten minutes of discussion to figure out it was an anagram for "Knock twice to open the door." And the "killer puzzle" of that session, a door sealed with a strange unfinished glyph -- which was merely a sudoku puzzle with symbols substituted for numbers -- took them just a few minutes to solve.

 

[Elric]

I'm reminded of a riddle our DM once posted us that four players two hours to finish.

The NPC (a very obvious Eliminster) gave us this riddle to tell us how many fish he wanted for us to continue onward in the quest.

"In letters only three / add two more / and fewer i will be."

My immediate guess was (spoiler):

Spoiler

this is referring to Roman numerals, and it wants to know what number is three letters in Roman numerals, but when you add two to it you get a number with fewer letters. So the answer is 3 (III) because when you add two to it you get 5 (V).

 

[Agback]

Apparently, I had to look up either "Wrath" or "Justice" in the index of the bible, look to the section of the index "on prisoners" since I was imprisoned, and turn the clock face of the appropriate clock to that time, which would have opened the door. Or I could have turned to "Patience" or "Hope" in the Book of Mormon and done the same.

That was the only way to survive. She thought the puzzle was childishly simple and was stunned it killed my character.

Personally, I call that a puzzle that was just insane, and way over the top, but I'd like to hear some second opinions.

I'm with you. It would never occur to me that a Bible would have an index in it. And I don't know what time would be "appropriate" even when I did find those words in a Bible.

Why would anyone build such a trap? What is the point of kidnapping someone to see if they could solve such a puzzle? Why murder them if they can't?

 

[Agback]

"In letters only three / add two more / and fewer i will be."

FEW.

 

[Agback]

3. Not planning for the possibility that the player would not solve the puzzle.

Dead right. A basic principle of adventure design is that if two outcomes of an encounter are possible, you have to be able to cope with both. And if three, all three, etc.

An experienced GM might be able to rely on simply not making things to drastic in the first place and winging it if anything unexpected happens. But for a novice, it pays to have contingency plans.

 

[Agback]

Concerning riddles:

If the player doesn't get the riddle eventually on his own, it is a bad riddle.
If the player gets it right away because it is too obvious, it is a bad riddle.
If the player feels smart when he gets it, it is a good riddle.

This was a bad riddle.

Corollary: riddles are hard. Leave them until you are an expert.

 

[Nightchilde-2]

Hm. In a case like that (and I have a LOT of experience running WoD, both old and new), I probably would've handled it something like this.

1. Give you the puzzle clues.
2. Let you puzzle over it for a few minutes, let you try a couple of things.
3. Called for an Intelligence + Academics roll.
3a. 1 Success: You get a clue. A better clue than "the answer's in the books"
3b. 5 Succeses: You figure it out.
3c. Failure: Roll again.
3d. Dramatic Failure: Time for me to come up with some other way for you to get out.

Considering this was the initial adventure/prelude, there's no way I would have let your character die. Yeah, I might've let you THINK your character was gonna die, but no way I'd let your character come to such a terrible end in such a manner.

I wouldn't even have made trying to figure it out all that difficult..extended roll, 5 successes. It was too important, IMHO, that your character live to punish the PLAYER.

Oh, and....

4. I wouldn't have said anything to berate you, the player, for not figuring it out.

 

[Agback]

Incedentally, I'm the kind of player who puts 5 points into wealth, then spends it all in explosives.

Sadly, when people kidnap you in your sleep to put you into an idiotic death-trap, they usually search your socks for explosives.

 

[trancejeremy]

I can't believe so many people are so quick to judge this particular DM as "stupid" or worse; have you ever tried using puzzles or riddles in a game? I have, so I'm more forgiving. However, I agree that the PC shouldn't be presented with a life-or-death situation dependent on solving the puzzle.

Well, starting off a campaign with a life or death riddle is generally not a smart move.

 

[Elric]

FEW.

Hmm... given that the DM in question described the puzzle as "insanely obvious to any child", that answer looks a lot better than my answer. Too bad for me that the puzzle didn't say "In letters only three / add two more / and two fewer i will be."