Changing the meaning of Passive Perception and Insight => Suscipion rather than Facts

[S'mon]

Man that sucks! And it breaks at least 2 of Quickleaf's Puzzle Rules, for which there really is no excuse - not even DM ignorance!

Did you try attacking the darkness?

I tried attacking pretty much everything! *sigh* And all I got was abuse from Upper_Krust (also playing) about how ineffective my PC was... Because clearly any decent INT 8 drunken Scottish Dwarf Barbarian should be a master at solving 5-step arcane puzzles...

 

[El Mahdi]

I don't completely understand this. Int 8 doesn't mean one has to play stupid, especially when simple fits the idea just as well. Even dumb guys have a good idea occasionally. Just don't present the good ideas like a smart guy would, do it more like "Ummhh, I know I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but wouldn't this work...?" It's all about roleplaying the character and not necessarily limiting the character.

Kind of like the story of the little girl and the truck that couldn't fit under an overpass:

Once upon a time, a truck was driving through a town centre, it went down a hill and under a railway bridge. On the bridge was a sign that said: “Warning, clearance 4.2 meters”. The driver thinks, “my truck will just fit under that.” and continues under the bridge. Suddenly, he hears the loud screeching of metal on metal as his truck comes to a halt. He steps out of the cab, looks up and sees that the top of his truck is tightly wedged in under the bridge. He tries backing up, but no luck. His truck is thoroughly stuck under the bridge.

He calls the police. They check things out and see it is a serious problem. So the police chief calls in a civil engineer to look at the stuck truck. He sees it's serious and will probably involve dismantling part of the bridge so the truck can be pulled out. The engineer then calls some of his assistants to come assist and to bring along the architectural plans for the bridge.
At the same time, a crowd is gathering to watch the event. A young girl who has been watching from the beginning calls out to the civil engineer, “excuse me, sir,” she says. “I think I know how you can get the truck out.”

The engineer dismisses the girl – after all what would a little girl know that a civil engineer doesn't – with a friendly, “thanks, young lady, but I'm very busy just now.”

The girl keeps nagging the engineer and finally he gives in thinking that he'll listen to the girl, explain why her idea is silly and hopefully that will cause her to stop pestering him. He says: “Okay, miss, how would you get the truck out from under the bridge?”

“Why, I'd let the air out of the tyres,” replies the little girl. And, of course, the engineer realises that he has been looking at the problem in the wrong way. He was trying to increase the clearance under the bridge. The easier approach would have been to look at how to reduce the height of the truck – as the little girl did. Impressed, the engineer thanks the girl and she becomes a town hero.

I don't have a problem at all with a DM making an occasional scenario or trap that can't be solved with Brute Strength. Seems to me that someone (within the gameworld) that's building a trap or such, would address Brute Force as one of the most obvious avenues of defeating it, and design accordingly...

 

[S'mon]

I don't completely understand this. Int 8 doesn't mean one has to play stupid, especially when simple fits the idea just as well.

I wasn't playing stupid. I was hitting - for lots of damage, considering I was first level - with a giant hammer - things that were integral to the trap and should logically have been damaged by my attacks, like the bas-relief runes that were generating energy monsters, the doors that were trapping us in the room, and the evil statue that was doing something-or-other re the trap. My tactics were simple, but not stupid.

But I really object to being told I should have played him like an INT 20 Wizard. If I wanted to play an INT 20 Wizard I would have created a bloody INT 20 Wizard. If I create an INT 8 Dwarf - with DM's approval - it is not so I can engage my grey cells in complex logic puzzles while having all INT 8-dwarf-barbarian-appropriate tactics shut down like in a bad CRPG.

 

[S'mon]

I don't have a problem at all with a DM making an occasional scenario or trap that can't be solved with Brute Strength. Seems to me that someone (within the gameworld) that's building a trap or such, would address Brute Force as one of the most obvious avenues of defeating it, and design accordingly...

This was more of a crossword style logic puzzle, not something real-world-based and amenable to common sense like your bridge/truck example.

Anyway it was just a one-shot for me, I can chalk it down to experience and remember not to do anything similar to my own players. Although I have one or two who actually seem to like puzzles(!) - they may be posting on some othe board right now about how their crappy DM never includes puzzles in his insufferably straightforward games...

 

[S'mon]

Chris Perkins discusses lying NPCS here - Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Lies My DM Told Me)

He seems much closer to my approach than to strict RAW. He has NPCs who the DM doesn't know if they're lying! And that seems very good practice to me - people themselves often don't know if they're really going to do what they say they'll do. When IMC The Great Ulfe (elite ogre from Forge of Fury) surrendered and promised the PCs he'd go away and leave the human lands in peace, he really meant it - at the time. That he then ran into some more Orcs who promised him a great time if he'd join their campaign against the humans, and changed his mind, well, these things happen...

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

A bit back to the OP, I agree that passive should give you a feeling that something is amiss, and a later post about beating the DC by 5 or more should give you the detail.

Stretching my memory back along time ago when 4e first came out there was a discussion on traps and how they should be used in a game. It boiled down to the fact that having traps noticed right off the bat is more entertaining. You don't have the traps hiding by themselves but as part of an encounter.

..and have them so they can be used by the PCs as well. I think the example was some 'Kissing Maidens' that slam into characters that enter a certain square. Now your controller push and shift powers can use the traps against the monsters as well.

I have a 23rd level Elf Seeker with a passive perception score of 41. I would be a bit annoyed if my DM told me I missed noticing something like a pending ambush in the bushes... at least tell me that something feels wrong! The resulting combat can be just as cool even if the bad guys don't get a jump on the group.