Defeated by puzzle - campaign over

[TheAuldGrump]

I beg to differ. As a player, the encounters I look forward to MOST are the puzzles and riddles! It's a much needed break from all those tedious dice-rollings and silly-voice-athons.

That said, I think the main thing a DM has to consider is the extent of the puzzle's difficulty and what to do if the party is stumped for more than one and a half gaming sessions. Because honestly, that'd be a real crappy way to end a campaign.

I prefer mysteries to puzzles. Similar, but I do not like the 'solve this acrostic and win a prize!' situations in game. Solving who killed Bobbins the Butler I like. Heck, figuring out the ciphered clue that has the combination to the safe is fine, but having the cipher be the lock on the safe would annoy me.

The Auld Grump

 

[TheAuldGrump]

The term "metgaming" is used a bit too freely, methinks . . .

It is a GAME. It is the PLAYERS being challenged, not the characters.

There could be room for protest if insufficient clues were given before hand, BUT if they HAD been given and the PLAYERS did not attend to them at the time, then they deserve to be beaten by the puzzle.

Then why not just play a video game? You are playing characters. I do not expect 98 pound Jenny to wield a greatsword, why should I expect her to be a master of logic puzzles?

This is the reason the term metagaming exists.

The Auld Grump

 

[Gentlegamer]

The player doesn't have to cast a fireball when that is the answer to the challenge, the character does. The player doesn't have to use his nigh superhuman strength to wrest the black mace from the demon when that is the challenge, the character does.

Why is this different?

There are different aspects to RPGs. Combat, physical actions, and the like are handled under character statistics and game mechanics. Some mental things like number of spells known, number of languages known, difficulty of learning new skills and so on fall under game mechanics. Other mental things, such as judgment, planning, and deciphering riddles and puzzles ultimately fall to the PLAYER's skill and mental accumen to resolve. Some players have characters that are very intelligent, perhaps more intelligent than the player. In such cases, as I've said, the referee AT HIS DISCRETION could give extra hints or clues to help the PLAYERS solve the puzzle. Ultimate success depends on the PLAYERS using the available info.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Then why not just play a video game? You are playing characters. I do not expect 98 pound Jenny to wield a greatsword, why should I expect her to be a master of logic puzzles?

This is the reason the term metagaming exists.

Would you overrule Jenny from making a foolish mistake in-game? "Sorry my dear, but your character is too smart to take that action. Here is a list of Intelligence appropriate actions you may choose from."

Ultimately, it is the PLAYER that is PLAYING THE GAME. The character is merely a tool to this end.

 

[Greylock]

lets look at it another way... if the player were a smart fellow and the character and int 6 wisdom 6 barbarian bruiser, if the player saw thru the puzzle right away, should he tell everyone or should he decide that "in character" his barbie knows squat about "weighing no puny balls" and sit back and have his barbarian show lots of frustration, griping, and grumbling?

One of the players in my group is a highly educated fellow, with a lot of wit. He's also a top notch roleplayer. Subtle and silly sometimes, but always in character. He happens to be playing an INT 5 barbarian in one of our games. Poor guy often squirms when he the player sees right through something, but he knows his character doesn't. But he usually maintains the char, or finds clever ways to communicate an answer (the horse pawing twice type shuckster thing.)

 

[Mishihari Lord]

No, as I said the player is not there, the character is. Why bother having character stats if you are going to have the player be the one to solve the puzzle?

That said, I would give extra XP for the players solving it, but to have a really stupid puzzle end the campaign is, well... really stupid.

The Auld Grump

Ergh. Why roleplay if you have a charisma stat? After all, the character is the one the one talking, not the player. Just roll your D20 and move on. Same thing. But role-playing is the fun part of the game? So is puzzle-solving for some people.

The point is, some things the players do, and some things the characters do. Puzzles are a grey area that can go either way. I've always thought the right way to handle it is to find out before you start the campaign if your players like puzzles. If they do, the players get to solve the puzzles in-game. If not, let them take a "puzzle" skill and roll against that when they encounter one.

 

[tarchon]

The term "metgaming" is used a bit too freely, methinks . . .

It is a GAME. It is the PLAYERS being challenged, not the characters.

There could be room for protest if insufficient clues were given before hand, BUT if they HAD been given and the PLAYERS did not attend to them at the time, then they deserve to be beaten by the puzzle.

It's a metagame puzzle because it doesn't fit in the world. It's the absolute worst example of the genre, where the DM literally takes a page of out of a puzzle book and inscribes it into the floor of the dungeon, and the "characters" are supposed to write in the solution. The only thing that would be more ridiculous is if the PCs found 20-sided dice with character sheets and had to beat the NPCs in a game of D&D. OK, well maybe the Rubiks cube thing was more ridiculous too.

 

[Gentlegamer]

It's a metagame puzzle because it doesn't fit in the world. It's the absolute worst example of the genre, where the DM literally takes a page of out of a puzzle book and inscribes it into the floor of the dungeon, and the "characters" are supposed to write in the solution. The only thing that would be more ridiculous is if the PCs found 20-sided dice with character sheets and had to beat the NPCs in a game of D&D. OK, well maybe the Rubiks cube thing was more ridiculous too.

It seems you take the GAME far too seriously.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Ah, ah! I think we all are, including both you and me. After all, we spend hours of time not only running and playing games but talking about them to virtual strangers!

I agree with him as it happens, but let us not get personal.

As I said, I prefer a compromise, where if the players figure it out they have a better result, but players are a lot more educated than their characters are likely to be, while at the same time the characters are likely to have a lot more practical experience of their world than the players.

The Auld Grump

 

[Whimsical]

I prefer tactical and strategic puzzles. Such as: a single Improved Invisible wizard is flying 700 feet about you and Fireballing you each round. What do you do? What do you do?

Or: you are being ambushed by an assasin team who teleports to you buffed up while you are almost done taking off your heavy armor. You're kinda entangled right now. What do you do? What do you do?