In-game riddles: Player shrewdness or Character intelligence check?

[Sebastian Francis]

Here's an interesting question that came up in our thread on Take 10/Take 20. Rather than threadjack, I thought I'd start a new thread here.

The example we were discussing was Gandalf standing outside the door/gate/whaddever to Moria and not knowing how to open the door. Frodo figures out the riddle. The door opens.

In D&D terms, we could say (as we discussed in the thread) that Gandalf fails a Knowledge (arcana) check, but Frodo succeeds at a straight Intelligence check, thus giving him the answer to the riddle.

Here's the question: would you DMs allow your players to solve riddles by a simple intelligence check? Or do you actually make your *players* (as opposed to their characters) solve the riddle?

OPTION 1: CHARACTERS ROLL TO SOLVE THE RIDDLE
Pro: High IQ characters are rewarded, low IQ players aren't punished.
Con: Reduces problem solving, supposedly an integral part of RPGs, to a simple roll of the dice.

OPTION 2: PLAYERS MUST FIGURE OUT RIDDLE ON THEIR OWN
Pro: Doesn't reflect ability of *character*--brilliant player whose character is a dumb-ass half-orc barbarian can easily solve the riddle.
Con: Emphasizes *player* problem solving, makes game more than mere die-rolling.

Discuss.

(By the way, I always go with Option 2. Both have pros and cons, but I'd rather have my players thinking than rolling).

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

A combination. If a player with a smart PC couldn't figure it out, I might give him a Knowledge or straight Int check for a hint. I'd be more inclined to do so if it was over an important plot element, less so if it was just to unlock a chest with some loot.

OTOH, if it was a smart player with a dumb character, I *might* tell him he couldn't say anything. But it would have to be a really dumb character, as you never know where someone might have heard a riddle or have some odd piece of knowledge.

I will almost always let a bard make a lore check for the answer, though.

I kind of look at it the same way as when I'd write tests. I wouldn't grade on a curve, but I'd throw out any question that everybody got right (because it was too easy) and any question everyone got wrong (because it was too hard, or I wrote it poorly). I don't want to penalize players because I wrote a riddle that seemed obvious to me but was poorly executed.

 

[MerakSpielman]

My opinion is that you shouldn't include riddles and puzzles unless your players have fun figuring them out themselves. Otherwise, they're really adding nothing of any fun-value to the game.

 

[Lamoni]

I agree with Merak. How much fun is this?

DM gives riddle.
Player can't think of answer immediately.
Player rolls knowledge/Intelligence check.
DM gives the answer.

That sounds about as much fun as reading a dictionary. I am sure that there are words I don't know in any dictionary and the dictionary gives the meaning for me. As fun as this might be when I am otherwise completely bored, I'd much rather not include them in RPG's. I like riddles, but I would never try to roll an intelligence check for it. Riddles are for player's brains, not their dice. If I didn't like solving riddles, I would ask the DM not to include any in the campaign.

 

[Laurel]

I like thought of the int. or knowledge check for added hints or help, but not he answer. A riddle is more fun if you get to solve it from a player stand point.

In current my campaign our top stratigist (OOC) has an int. of a 6 (IC) I believe... so IC he's not much help.
So when faced with problems we try for IC, but sometimes end up OOC thinking it through. If the low int. creature solves it/gives great advise the DM finds crafty ways of explaining how he could have said or gotten to that point- or lead us on to the next part as happened. Satisfies the RP part while letting everyone take part

Doesn't work for everyone, but works for us.

 

[dcollins]

Obviously Option #2 (Player Shrewdness) is what has historically been used in D&D. It's a huge source of joy and excitement when the players get to figure a puzzle out on their own. I would truly, truly hate to see this source of excitement excised from the D&D game. It would hurt.

Now, there is a sidebar on this topic in Unearthed Arcana (p. 207) which I'll call Option #1.5 (Hints to Puzzles). The PC gets to make an appropriate Knowledge check. If successful, the player doesn't get handed the solution -- instead, he gets handed a hint, or clue, from the DM towards the right solution. He still needs to figure it on his own from that.

Option #1 (Pass/Fail Knowedge Check) is clearly the worst. Why even bother detailing the puzzle in the first place, at that? May as well just set a puzzle DC and entirely abstract it, than have a lead-by-the-nose piece of narrative like that.

 

[Sebastian Francis]

Now, there is a sidebar on this topic in Unearthed Arcana (p. 207) which I'll call Option #1.5 (Hints to Puzzles). The PC gets to make an appropriate Knowledge check. If successful, the player doesn't get handed the solution -- instead, he gets handed a hint, or clue, from the DM towards the right solution. He still needs to figure it on his own from that.

Excellent. This is probably the best way to handle it, but I agree with Merak (I think it was Merak who said this) that puzzles as a whole only work if the players want them in the game.

Hmmm...to use a video game analogy, it's kind of like the difference between the Resident Evil/Silent Hill game and the Final Fantasy XXXXXIIIIII game.

One is about puzzles (many of which are strangely arbitrary ) the other about combat, tactics, exploration, etc.

 

[Voadam]

Puzzles, strategies, plots, and riddles are to be experienced and figured out by players IMC. It is part of a roleplaying game.

The best way to run puzzles IMO is how it was set up in the adventure Doom of Odin: a bunch of rune puzzles, if you figure them out you can get past the obstacles no problem. If you don't you can still keep going but traps go off and you may get hurt as you go.

This way it is not a gamestopper if the PCs don't figure things out and there is a reward for doing it well.

Note that DoO suggests a riddle skill for figuring these things out which seems a poor idea to me.

 

[Fenris]

I
That sounds about as much fun as reading a dictionary

Hey hey now, some of us LIKE reading the dictionary! (no really I do!, especially the OED)

 

[Hypersmurf]

I've always preferred Smart Player with Dumb Character figures out riddle, tells Dumb Player with Smart Character OOC, and the Dumb Player has the Smart Character reveal the solution.

The Smart Character's intelligence is represented by the gestalt.

-Hyp.