Defeated by puzzle - campaign over

[TheAuldGrump]

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?

Yep, those are fine too! Though without the commercial referrence please!

Interesting tactical and strategic problems are always fun. At low levels even fighting in waiste deep water can provide a challenge. (Flooded tunnel with Gnarled Eels from Seas of Blood... If I remember properly DnDChick here on the boards created them.)

The Auld Grump,

 

[Wycen]

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

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

I agree 100 percent. It wasn't until 2 years ago when I joined a new group while unemployed that "metagaming" became an evil word. I used to hear it at least once a game.

During one scene in a dungeon crawl when we are at a table wearing helmets that allow us to operate/explore a golem in a magic painting, one of the characters "dies". Well gee. Let me think. We are in an evil dungeon that we also know is being searched by a mind flayer, night hag and their hirelings. These helmets move our minds into the painting removing our senses from the room. We didn't leave anybody to watch our bodies, everyone is using a helmet. Gee, I bet they found us! "I remove my helmet".

DM: "Sure that's not metagaming..."

Friggin ridiculous.

 

[Carpe DM]

In response to the original post:

Start another game. A GM that inexperienced has no business using puzzles. Puzzles can be great fun if properly incorporated into the game -- but this isn't well done.

best,

Carpe

 

[Roman]

I appreciate the large number of responses - thanks for the sympathies guys & gals. Nonetheless, I do feel that I need to defend the DM somewhat. The style of the campaign he runs is "challenge oriented" (for lack of a better term), so it is heavy on puzzles, hack & slash and tactical situations. The plot is extensive, convoluted and with many lose ends. Roleplaying does take place but the above-mentioned are the focus of this particular game. The puzzle is therefore in keeping with the spirit of the campaign - it is just that it sucks that the campaign might end in this non-glorious manner. As to the negative effects on clerics in the dark temple - we knew of those effects before we ventured into the evil temple - we did do relatively extensive research including divinations on the temple before going in. There are also some mitigating effects - I already mentioned the artifacts and there are others, but that is not really relevant to the topic at hand. The puzzles in the campaign do tend to be unsurpassable by other means apart from solving the puzzle (and if you simply guess incorrectly, something nasty always happens), but usually there are other ways to go or other things to do and if we by any chance solve it later we can return to where we left off last time.

Things are different this time, because the evil temple (which is in fact found on the bottom of a lake where it sank when the lake was created long ago and has remained hidden for centuries as a result) consists of 13 rooms (or so we think from our prior research) arranged in a linear fashion connected by long corridors and there is some extradimensionality at work too. We know that at the end of the temple there is a powerful lich that we have to confront if we get there. Each room is filled with evil creatures which often have some interesting tactical advantages and sometimes also traps. Each room also has at least one (usually two and sometimes more) portals that can summon in more and more creatures indefinitely always after a certain period of time (different for each room, but never more than a minute so far). We knew of these portals before going in and managed to obtain 'potions' that can destroy the portals once thrown in. Of course, we only managed to obtain 5 such potions and the last 3 were used up destroying the portals in this room, since we are spending so much time there working on the puzzle. The corridors are faced with mists that do ability damage. In any case, we are currently in room 10 and cannot proceed any further due to the puzzle. Somebody mentioned that this may simply be the DMs way to end the campaign - it is possible, but it would be more satisfactory to end the campaign after the evil temple adventure, since the temple is definitely one of the climaxes of the campaign and we are not far away from the end (as far as we know anyway). It is just a pity that the campaign might end in such an anti-climatic way - I guess there is still hope we solve the puzzle next session, but it seems unlikely, since we have not made any progress on it at all in the last session.

 

[Kunimatyu]

One of the best things to do with D&D puzzles, IMO, is to give the characters/players about 15 minutres, real-time, to figure it out; if not, give them handouts detailing the important puzzle information and move on to something else. Then they can either solve the puzzle on their own time after the session or during, say, a long combat where they've been paralyzed. Once somebody's solved the puzzle, THEN allow the characters to return to the Ancient Vault O' Neat Stuff. Don't waste everyone's game time with a puzzle, even if it's a geniunely cool one.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Or in other words having the entire game end because he felt the need to put in a puzzle that really does not belong is silly. If his campaign often hinges on such things, and it sounds like it does, then I would put the campaign to rest if you can't solve this puzzle. This is what makes 'metagaming' a bad word.

You may call it 'challenge oriented', but to me it sounds 'realism challenged'.

The Auld Grump

 

[ColonelHardisson]

While agree and have no "But that's metagaming" hangups, if you are going to do that, you may as well just turn the puzzle into an Int check.

"You come to a room with a lever puzzle. Make Int checks. Anyone beat DC 25?"

I'm advocating the players do some research, which is much, much different than an INT check. My point being that most people don't have the equivalent of 15+ INT in real life, so additional research by the player helps simulate knowledge the character has. A good DM would take that into account, and either encourage such research, or parcel out info according to how smart the characters are, and how hard the players are working to find solutions. A simple roll of the die is not what I'm talking about here; a roll might be called for, but it should be used by the DM to judge the quality of info or hints he gives the players. Yes, I realize that there are two sides of the argument - player vs. character info and its implementation - but in the end, it's about fun. If the players are not having fun, and are stumped, their characters' abilities should be taken into account in order to expedite enjoyable play.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

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.

No, it is the player playing the character that is the game. Not, hey let's pretend this is Jeopardy!

And depending on the situation, I might let her know that she needs to think things through a bit more. Generally I pull out a figure of Charon and his boat, setting it where the player can see it.

The Auld Grump

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I'm advocating the players do some research, which is much, much different than an INT check. My point being that most people don't have the equivalent of 15+ INT in real life, so additional research by the player helps simulate knowledge the character has. A good DM would take that into account, and either encourage such research, or parcel out info according to how smart the characters are, and how hard the players are working to find solutions. A simple roll of the die is not what I'm talking about here; a roll might be called for, but it should be used by the DM to judge the quality of info or hints he gives the players. Yes, I realize that there are two sides of the argument - player vs. character info and its implementation - but in the end, it's about fun. If the players are not having fun, and are stumped, their characters' abilities should be taken into account in order to expedite enjoyable play.

As I keep saying, a compromise.

The Auld Grump, who started typing his last response, answered the phone, talked, and then found that another reply had crept in...

 

[ColonelHardisson]

As I keep saying, a compromise.

Yes, but I thought I'd say it, too.