Smart vs. Intelligence and Combatless Roleplaying Sessions

[DonTadow]

HA! I never made it to my main point, which was that puzzles don't touch on roleplaying. I know I had a great segue in there somewhere, but by now I've forgotten it. Ah well.

Or, finding a solution doesn't do this. If you're playing the Int 7 Ugh and are met with a puzzle, then a roleplayer specifically won't try and solve the problem, he will think what Ugh would do, and react accordingly. This is why I say puzzles are anti-thetical to roleplaying, the resolution can't be roleplayed.

Some might say that just because a character isn't good at something doesn't preclude roleplaying. I might as well be complaining about a low Charisma character dealing with NPCs, right? But, there is a difference. Failing to influence an NPC still gets you somewhere. The NPC has a reaction to you, and things develop. They might go well or they might go badly, but something will happen. Ugh might try to bribe a guard, and whether his Diplomacy check (or whatever) is successful or not, something will result from it.

A puzzle, on the other hand, has no roleplaying value. If you roleplay it out, most likely nothing will happen. You'll just be back to where you started. The orbs that go into the slots marked by elven letters (barbarians are illiterate by the way, so Ugh can't do anything). If you don't put the orbs into the slots, you stay there until you do. You can't roleplay out your character, because the game will sit if you do. Ugh will do nothing for eternity unless the Player decides he's had enough and uses his own ability to solve the puzzle or leaves. Personally, I would leave the dungeon before meta-gaming my character.

This is one of my main problems with puzzles.


>_>
[size=-1]Psssst, DamionW. That was me, not KM, though he was the one who made the analogies.[/size]
<_<

You bring up an interesting point, though. What if a Player wants to have a puzzle solving PC as his idea. The PC is a riddler and logical thinking who can easily solve and create puzzles. Maybe he's a detective along the lines of Holmes, and he wants to play a brilliant guy like this. Should a person be disallowed playing such a character just because they arn't, themselves, a genius?

I've read this twice, and I still don't see how puzzles equates to lack of role playing. First its very prejudice of you to assume Ugh is a barbarian because of his name . But lets say he is. Yes Ugh can not get further in the dungeon because he can not read. They weaken barbarians by making them illiterate for this reason. So if Ugh is going to go off solo adventurning, he better put a rank in speak language or make sure he's in a party. If he's in a party and its good role playing someone in the party will explain the orbs to ugh.

And how does nothing happen. It seem the major obstacle with roleplaying with puzzles is "why is there a puzzle there". Well the same reason there is a monster or trap there. And just like those if your character isn't skilled enough to deal with it then YES they will have to turn around and go home.

Do you handwave monsters that are too difficult for your opponent. What if they did not prepare the right spell or weapon? In my campaign, they will have to turn around and go back home. Perhaps it should be said here that dms whom have puzzles SHOULD have ready made clues available as well. Puzzles should be on equal footing as monsters. If they dont roll well to receive the clues or fail to put the clues together after obvious hints then they should turn around and go home. Again, if a rather nasty vampire is there and they have no means of destroying the body, nor fighting undead and you've given every hint that there was a vampire in the layer, do you just wisk it away? Successful victory everytime? That doesnt sound very challenging.

Why is puzzles treated like ared headed step child.

I've never observed puzzle solving like it is described by some. The way i"m reading it, it sounds like the dm breaks out a puzzle, all players stop role playing and the dm allows it. In my campaign, for 4 hours you're in character. Puzzles are treated as if the characters had them in their midst. The same role playing banter that normally goes on goes on while the puzzles is being solved. My players don't even break their accents. The thing I like about puzzles is that there is no skill or attribute directly assoicated with them. Even the dumb half orc can get an idea. it may be the only idea of his life but its possible. the problem I see with dungeons and dragons sometimes is that characters (and us dms from time to time) get STUCK in sterotypes. Ugh has a 6 intelligence and he can never have a thoughtagain. Jimidy the wizard is 20 in intelligence he should be able to solve everything and get a rhode scholarship. It's not giving meat to the character to generalize like this and traps characters at times.

 

[DamionW]

I see where you're going, but my question to you is, what happens if they DO turn around and go home? Does this stop their character or the plot's development because the secret needed to further the action in the story or in the character's lives is beyond that puzzle? Then relying on the player's minds to piece together the clues is problematic if the players don't want to. Because if the character do turn around and go home and start up a bakery because they just happen to not have a player smart enough to work out the clues is different than them retreating from a combat they are outmatched in. The plot can move forward even in a combat defeat. If the plot can't move forward without the keystone puzzle, that is forcing the player's actions (piecing together clues) to dictate the characters progression (bypassing the puzzle). Like I said, I'm personally not against a good puzzle. But if I was stuck at one with four other players that couldn't get it and the DM kept insisting the situation required a solution or no further plot development, I'd be discouraged from gaming with that DM.

 

[Tarangil]

The going home part reminded me of some stubborn players I had. Sometimes the simplest puzzle will wrack your brain even when you're sitting on the answer.

These guys had to go to the Elemental plane of earth, and had found the gate on the summit of a mountain. They had enough hints through aguries and such to know the key is within a hands reach. These guys tried everything in the book to get this gate functioning (lets say about 4-5 real game hours), until around 4:00am out of frustration, they find out the key was a rock...yes just a rock.

You know, they probably could've rolled for the answer, but it's worth seeing the players faces when they find something out on their own...especially when it's a simple answer and they spent most of their gaming time trying to figger it out. Yes the faces and sounds accompanying them were worth the wait.

 

[ThirdWizard]

First of all, I have nothing against occassional puzzles if the other players enjoy them. Just like I hope a hack and slasher will put up with my roleplaying, I will enjoy myself if we encounter a puzzle if the others are because that's the kind of guy I am. I might not enjoy the puzzle, but I will enjoy playing with people who are enjoying themselves. It is only when the puzzles start to show up too often or taking too long individually to figure out that I'll start to get annoyed.

And how does nothing happen. It seem the major obstacle with roleplaying with puzzles is "why is there a puzzle there". Well the same reason there is a monster or trap there.

To answer, "why is the puzzle there," one must answer, "who put the puzzle there," then you must answer, "why am I being tested?" Mosnters are there to kill you, as are traps. Puzzles are there to let you through. If they really wanted to stop you, then they wouldn't give you clues on how to continue on (which is what a puzzle is).

They also have to know someone will be coming through, and expect certain individuals to make it through. Plan on it, in fact. The riddle in Monty Python and the Holy Grail is the first one that pops into my head (and yes, I realize that it is parody, real ones arn't like this). They are supposed to make it to the Grail and the puzzle is to prove thier worth. Running across a puzzle in an ancient lich's lair, or whatnot, makes no sense. Suspension of belief goes bye bye.

Do you handwave monsters that are too difficult for your opponent. What if they did not prepare the right spell or weapon? In my campaign, they will have to turn around and go back home.

One of my gripes with puzzles is that there is one solution, the DM knows it, and the Players must discover what that solution is to progress. With a monster, you can sneak around, subdue it with spells, talk to it, or kill it outright in combat. To name a few ways of dealing with them. At least, that's how it works in my games. The Players can find solutions to problems that the DM didn't even anticipate. This is another reason I prefer intrigue oriented campaigns, because this opens up even more possibilities for the Players to explore. I rarely have site based adventures in my games, and even more rarely have dungeons.

Puzzles, as opposed to this, have one solution. There is little room for the Players to wiggle around in when a puzzle is involved. Alternate methods would go far with me. Perhaps the puzzle merely helps bypass a danger. Or solving it gives clues to a secret cache located somewhere. Or not solving it in three rounds inflicts some kind of damage on the PCs much like a trap. That's fine. Heck, that's even fun because we know we don't have to do the puzzle or leave.

The penalty for not solving a puzzle is generally singular. You try to solve it again. Fix that, and you're good.

Again, if a rather nasty vampire is there and they have no means of destroying the body, nor fighting undead and you've given every hint that there was a vampire in the layer, do you just wisk it away? Successful victory everytime? That doesnt sound very challenging.

If you escape from a vampire, you can go back and prepare to face the vampire again, more prepared than before. The PCs can attain silver weapons, stakes, spells that harm undead, etc. When they return, they are now better prepared to fight the vampire, though he will probably be ready for you. The situation has changed, and the PCs can now try and adapt to the situation as best they can.

Puzzles, generally, are static and unchanging. The PCs can leave and come back no more prepared than they were before. If you allow the PCs to research something about the puzzle, consult sages, pay others for information or possible solutions, and whatnot to help solve the puzzle, then I will agree that these are the same thing. I would say, however, that you are in the minority, at least in my experience.

 

[EdL]

The going home part reminded me of some stubborn players I had. Sometimes the simplest puzzle will wrack your brain even when you're sitting on the answer.

These guys had to go to the Elemental plane of earth, and had found the gate on the summit of a mountain. They had enough hints through aguries and such to know the key is within a hands reach. These guys tried everything in the book to get this gate functioning (lets say about 4-5 real game hours), until around 4:00am out of frustration, they find out the key was a rock...yes just a rock.

You know, they probably could've rolled for the answer, but it's worth seeing the players faces when they find something out on their own...especially when it's a simple answer and they spent most of their gaming time trying to figger it out. Yes the faces and sounds accompanying them were worth the wait.

You, sir, are a Rat Bastard GM. Having been on the recieving end of a very similar experience, if it ever happens again I (not my character, me) will get up and leave. You can sit there and chuckle all you want, for me it's just hours of wasted game time and utter frustration. In other words, I'm not having fun! (Which is supposed to be the whole point of gaming in the first place.)

 

[ThirdWizard]

You, sir, are a Rat Bastard GM. Having been on the recieving end of a very similar experience, if it ever happens again I (not my character, me) will get up and leave. You can sit there and chuckle all you want, for me it's just hours of wasted game time and utter frustration. In other words, I'm not having fun! (Which is supposed to be the whole point of gaming in the first place.)

I agree. That is almost the embodiment of why Puzzles Are Bad.

But, you might not want to use the term RBDM, as that is almost a defined term here that is different than this example.

 

[DonTadow]

First of all, I have nothing against occassional puzzles if the other players enjoy them. Just like I hope a hack and slasher will put up with my roleplaying, I will enjoy myself if we encounter a puzzle if the others are because that's the kind of guy I am. I might not enjoy the puzzle, but I will enjoy playing with people who are enjoying themselves. It is only when the puzzles start to show up too often or taking too long individually to figure out that I'll start to get annoyed.

To answer, "why is the puzzle there," one must answer, "who put the puzzle there," then you must answer, "why am I being tested?" Mosnters are there to kill you, as are traps. Puzzles are there to let you through. If they really wanted to stop you, then they wouldn't give you clues on how to continue on (which is what a puzzle is).

You love stereotyping. Puzzles can be there as keys, in which it's purpose of being solvable is only there for people whom are suppose to be there. In most of these cases hints may be written or "clued" in previous rooms to remind forgetful henchmen. Puzzles and riddles can be there to trap people as well, and clues or hints are there to prevent accidentally being trapped. Clues also make sense if the pcs pick them up well before the riddle or puzzle. For instance, during research, interviewing releatives of someone whom went through the dungeon or failed dungeoneers on their way out may have left clues so they may return. There are also other more creative ways to explain why clues are there other than "they are just there." Again, for the same reason monsters are there. And i'm sorry monsters are not just there to kill. Monsters can be there to guard, to protect or because they are lost themselves. They can be there because they are hungry or sick or they are serving some higher meaning.

They also have to know someone will be coming through, and expect certain individuals to make it through. Plan on it, in fact. The riddle in Monty Python and the Holy Grail is the first one that pops into my head (and yes, I realize that it is parody, real ones arn't like this). They are supposed to make it to the Grail and the puzzle is to prove thier worth. Running across a puzzle in an ancient lich's lair, or whatnot, makes no sense. Suspension of belief goes bye bye.



One of my gripes with puzzles is that there is one solution, the DM knows it, and the Players must discover what that solution is to progress. With a monster, you can sneak around, subdue it with spells, talk to it, or kill it outright in combat. To name a few ways of dealing with them. At least, that's how it works in my games. The Players can find solutions to problems that the DM didn't even anticipate. This is another reason I prefer intrigue oriented campaigns, because this opens up even more possibilities for the Players to explore. I rarely have site based adventures in my games, and even more rarely have dungeons.

Actually what you mean to say is that there are many ways to deal with monsters, but in the end you have to deal with him somehow. There's only one way you can move on in the dungeon, to deal with hte monster. There are many ways you can deal with a puzzle, but in the end you have to deal with the puzzle to move on. I don't see the seperation in difference with the two as far as that aspect. You have a variety in of ways you can go about solving a puzzle and obtaining clues from it research, gathering info, divination, knowledge ect.

Maybe I'm in the minority but maybe thats why puzzles aren't as popular. Maybe i should write an article and post it.

 

[DonTadow]

You, sir, are a Rat Bastard GM. Having been on the recieving end of a very similar experience, if it ever happens again I (not my character, me) will get up and leave. You can sit there and chuckle all you want, for me it's just hours of wasted game time and utter frustration. In other words, I'm not having fun! (Which is supposed to be the whole point of gaming in the first place.)

I think he was saying his players didn't want it to end.

 

[Akrasia]

...
Or a riddle, like they had in the Hobbit. Let me just stab Gollum with my +2 orc bane elf dagger and take his loot.

My character is great with puzzles. Tell me what I need to roll to figure it out.

Wow. It's depressing to realise that there are people out there who think this way. How sad.

 

[ThirdWizard]

You love stereotyping. Puzzles can be there as keys, in which it's purpose of being solvable is only there for people whom are suppose to be there.

That is totally unrealistic, in my mind. It would be like the military telling their officers the secret code to get around in their base, but then having a little note on the keypad with a crossword that, once solved, reminded them the code to get through the doors. It. Makes. No. Sense.

I have a code to open the door to the garage here on a keypad. I do not put on the keypad a little reminder giving a hint as to the combonation that will unlock it. Do you know people that do this regularly? Organizations? Is this something that is seen anywhere in real life?

This isn't steriotyping, this is me wanting an internally believable world. A world in which liches go to the trouble of making a puzzle that involves putting orbs into marked recesses makes no sense to me. He should put a secret door there, arcane locked and trapped, if he doesn't want people to go through.

The Sphinx isn't asking riddles of people just to keep them from somewhere. If he wanted to keep them from somewhere he wouldn't let them pass when they got it right. Same with a puzzle. If it were really to keep people out, it wouldn't let them pass when they got it right. It would have no solution and keep adventurers out because they'd think they just can't solve the puzzle!

It is, as far as I can determine, a purely gamist construct.

And i'm sorry monsters are not just there to kill. Monsters can be there to guard, to protect or because they are lost themselves. They can be there because they are hungry or sick or they are serving some higher meaning.

Guard and protect by killing tresspassers, you mean? Lost themselves? They weren't placed there by the occupant, then. A puzzle is always placed by the occupant, so they don't relate to each other.

Actually what you mean to say is that there are many ways to deal with monsters, but in the end you have to deal with him somehow. There's only one way you can move on in the dungeon, to deal with hte monster. There are many ways you can deal with a puzzle, but in the end you have to deal with the puzzle to move on. I don't see the seperation in difference with the two as far as that aspect. You have a variety in of ways you can go about solving a puzzle and obtaining clues from it research, gathering info, divination, knowledge ect.

PCs have built in ways of dealing with monsters that vary from PC to PC. Some are stealthy. Some are mighty. Some are persuasive. Also, there are many many mechanics for overcoming monsters built into the game. The Players have options that are well defined and expressly given in the rules. When faced with a puzzle, it is totally up to the DM's whim how the Players can procede. A puzzle cannot be bypassed. It cannot be forced. It cannot be persuaded. It can only be solved.

[EDIT - rant on bad DMing puzzles]
And why can't it be forced anyway? I mean, a door with a complex puzzle associated with it where the Players wrack their brains over how to get through? Why can't they just bash the thing down? It seems like there are always some kind of magical wards preventing anything from happening to the door. Then when the PCs try to disintegrate the wall beside it, it suddenly has the same protections. Blech.

When the PCs try to do something unique, in these situations, it is almost always met with impossibility. Freedom of action is another reason I dislike puzzles.

If you write something be sure to put something like that in it. Saying "It's okay to dimension door past the puzzle. It is using up resources, and is completely a valid way of overcoming an obstacle" would be a great help to many Players who are suffering under heavy handed DMs.
[/EDIT - rant]

I've never actually witnessed PCs gaining much through research on puzzles. I would, of course, but I don't use puzzles very often. A DM who is pre-dispositioned to liking puzzles probably wouldn't think it necessary or see it as "cheating" as rolls have already been called on this thread. Likewise asking NPCs for help might be seen by many DMs as cheating by trying to get a hint from the DM. Of course, if your DM has that kind of attitude, it is likely that you have more problems than overly difficult puzzle solving.

Puzzles, in my experience, just lead to more frustration than anything else. All too often what the DM sees as the plainly obvious, the Players are totally lost on. "Easy" puzzles often turn out to be some of the most time consuming.

Maybe I'm in the minority but maybe thats why puzzles aren't as popular. Maybe i should write an article and post it.

You seem to handle puzzles better than most DMs. A commentary of some kind to give advice to the more heavy-handed or stingy DMs would probably be appreciated by the gaming populace. Unfortunately, the DMs who would most need to read such an article probably wouldn't.