A Riddle: Feedback Wanted
- Thread starter Kafkonia
- Start date
Shieldhaven
Explorer
Not only do I like it, but I think that bending expectations and playing with language is a linchpin of a well-written riddle.
Haven
Haven
Kafkonia
First Post
I'm glad to see there's a bit of a mix of reactions here, although I am definitely making note that the majority of people seem to favour stabbing me with a fork. That is why, if I run with the riddle, I'll be certain not to make it the only way to get through the story. I can certainly see it getting very frustrating.
Nobody I game with is an English major, but they're all incredibly smart and well-rounded individuals, so it's certainly possible that between them they might be able to piece it together. Thankfully, it won't come up for a few weeks at least, so I'll have the chance to gather more feedback and (if I decide to use it) fine tune it.
I will readily admit that there is a BA in English hanging on my wall.
Nobody I game with is an English major, but they're all incredibly smart and well-rounded individuals, so it's certainly possible that between them they might be able to piece it together. Thankfully, it won't come up for a few weeks at least, so I'll have the chance to gather more feedback and (if I decide to use it) fine tune it.
I will readily admit that there is a BA in English hanging on my wall.
Crothian
First Post
Kafkonia said:
It is also a solution they can blunder into. They can interact with the illusion and send it away. And seeing two halves of a stone block they just might in the process of trial and error place put it together. When I read the description of the room before reading the riddle I thought of putting the stone together. So, the solution is one that the players can get to by luck and just have no idea how the riddle was a hint for what they did.
SiderisAnon
First Post
Merkuri said:Ah, existentialists, are they?
No, not exactly. Several of them are old school, they hate riddles, and they tend to become either smart-alec or just plain uncooperative when they face a puzzle they can't solve in 30 seconds. Of course, that just means that the younger, less cynical players end up getting all the experience for stuff like that, so it all balances out.
In my new campaign, the house rule is that each puzzle will have a time limit on it. You must try for X amount of time. At that point, you can default to making rolls to have your character solve it. If the party wants more time because they're enjoying the puzzle, they can have it. In the end, if you solve it, your character gets the experience. If your dice solve the puzzle, you only get experience if you either worked hard at the riddle or happened to get close.
I did actually mean to say in my original post that they "would have" gotten the disbelieve, not they "wouldn't have". *sigh* I have to pay more attention to what I type.
Piratecat
Sesquipedalian
I gave this some thought last night. It's worth pointing out that if you give the right set-up -- say, the dungeons of a wizard known for word-play and long complicated speeches and puns -- then this riddle is perfect. Drop it into a barbarian warlord's fortress, though, and it's a disaster. Part of making it work is making it feel natural for the place in which it appears.
the shmoopie
First Post
I liked it, although I would have the door go to a treasure room of some sort, and magically seal it so that the players at their level cannot get into it too easily. Then if they don't get it fine, they can move on, if they do they are rewarded. If they get in by some means other than the riddles way then they are denied the blessing, which would be to deactivate some horribly cursed item or trap in the room.
But that is how we play. My PC's know that people smart enough to design a riddle are not going to leave the majority of their wealth on the nightstand or on their person.
But that is how we play. My PC's know that people smart enough to design a riddle are not going to leave the majority of their wealth on the nightstand or on their person.
PapersAndPaychecks
First Post
If the players have to solve this riddle to progress through the adventure, then it's too hard imo.
If all it guards is a room containing some nice treasure, but the players could just skip the treasure room and finish the adventure without solving the riddle, then I think it's fine.
If all it guards is a room containing some nice treasure, but the players could just skip the treasure room and finish the adventure without solving the riddle, then I think it's fine.
Simplicity
Explorer
I, for one, am against the "cleave" portion of the riddle.
Usually, that version of cleave is used like "X cleaved to Y".
One of the stones you must cleave... Well, the sentence would have to be syncopating a "to" somewhere... which really comes out as "To one of the stones YOU must cleave". And that sounds painful and not what you were going for.
The first half could be interesting... How about just a door that says "DON'T OPEN".
The door is an illusionary door that cannot be opened (only disbelieved and walked right through). Of course, your rogue might wind up disbelieving it by simply trying to pick the lock... So you should not have a lock on the door.
Usually, that version of cleave is used like "X cleaved to Y".
One of the stones you must cleave... Well, the sentence would have to be syncopating a "to" somewhere... which really comes out as "To one of the stones YOU must cleave". And that sounds painful and not what you were going for.
The first half could be interesting... How about just a door that says "DON'T OPEN".
The door is an illusionary door that cannot be opened (only disbelieved and walked right through). Of course, your rogue might wind up disbelieving it by simply trying to pick the lock... So you should not have a lock on the door.
Similar Threads
