Why I hate puzzles

[LostSoul]

I have no problems being challenged as a player. (Whatever the challenge may be - tactical, strategic, acting in character, creative.)

I just don't feel like puzzles are role-playing. When I face a puzzle, I don't feel like I'm playing D&D, I feel like I've just opened a puzzle book and now I'm trying to solve it with my buddies.

 

[apoptosis]

I have no problems being challenged as a player. (Whatever the challenge may be - tactical, strategic, acting in character, creative.)

I just don't feel like puzzles are role-playing. When I face a puzzle, I don't feel like I'm playing D&D, I feel like I've just opened a puzzle book and now I'm trying to solve it with my buddies.

That is a very good point. While I kind of like puzzles sometimes, I do think that there can be a definite break of immersion when they happen.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

I just don't feel like puzzles are role-playing. When I face a puzzle, I don't feel like I'm playing D&D, I feel like I've just opened a puzzle book and now I'm trying to solve it with my buddies.

I also agree. I strongly prefer puzzles that make sense in-game. I don't really want to spend my D&D time solving a crossword when I could do that just as easily on my own time.

 

[Kheti sa-Menik]

I like puzzles as a plot point, a la the film National Treasure where the puzzle is related to the plot and solving it is the focus of part of the campaign.

But you're out for a dungeon crawl and happen upon a riddle/puzzle that controls a door lock with no earthly reason for being there? I'm not really down with it.

I think the answer to the puzzle should mean something, not just be as a way through a door.

I also think it should have context to the game world. If it's a puzzle about history/language, then it should be about the campaign world's history and language, not ours. The question and the answer should matter and be "of the world," so to speak.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Why do the villains bother? You'd think they would come up with better security than something a wizard could puzzle through (no pun intended).

I would hypothesize the existence of a God of Hidden Knowledge and Puzzles who choses to strengthen wards that are designed in a manner that is pleasing to him. Mechanically, such a puzzle would have a gp or xp value for creating the warding magical item.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

And what if one of the players is playing an 8 Int barbarian who's incapable of solving any puzzle?

It is common enough in heroic fiction for the not very bright member of the team to occasionally be the most insightful.

 

[sniffles]

Whether people admit it or not, they play D&D based off of their own skill level and talent in very many areas of the game. The only time they complain is when it's an area that they aren't good at or don't enjoy. Then they use the "I'm not my character" argument. I see nothing wrong with challenging a player to solve a puzzle as long as it's not a wall in the story that will bring the campaign to a halt if they can't overcome it. That's no different than making a bad adventure with a BBEG that you have no way of overcoming & continuing with the story.

It's certainly true that we can't really separate ourselves from our characters; I doubt that's even possible. And I'm not saying I'd want to resolve every event in the game by merely rolling dice. I'd find that pretty dull.

I just wanted to remind DMs and designers to think carefully when devising challenges like puzzles.

And I wanted to whine.

 

[Oryan77]

I just wanted to remind DMs and designers to think carefully when devising challenges like puzzles.

It's a good topic to bring up. DMs can certainly go about puzzles in a frustrating way, that's for sure. I can sympathize with players that have to sit there forever wracking their brains and being bored

I've just always wondered if the reason some people don't like puzzles in D&D is because they've always had DMs that handled them poorly. Cause I certainly enjoy a good puzzle now & then! It can be as fun as the time spent figuring out how to best go about sneaking into the hobgoblin infested stronghold without being captured! It's basically just another form of figuring out how to overcome a challenge (to me anyway).

 

[shilsen]

Was it your character that decided to flank rather than grapple? Do our PC's make the decision during combat to take the full attack rather than a move & standard action? Nope, we perform those actions ourselves based on the best decisions we can think of.

As I noted in my post above, that's not true of all players. I very often don't make the best decision that I can think of, simply because it doesn't fit my character's personality, tactical abilities, etc. And I'm not the only one. I play with a number of people who will have their characters take non-expedient actions because it makes a lot more sense for the character than to take the best decision. Just because I know better doesn't mean my character does, and I'm aware of the difference.

 

[FireLance]

Consistency is highly overrated. There are really good reasons to use in game mechanics for combat and spells while using player abilities for persuasion and puzzle solving. Real combat hurts and will get you thrown in jail. Spells don't work. Role-playing out persuading an NPC is fun. So is solving a puzzle yourself.

If you don't enjoy solving a puzzle, or role-playing intimidating an orc, by all means make an intimidation roll or a puzzle-solving roll. But cutting out parts of the game you like for consistency's sake is silly.

On the other hand, inconsistency can be a deal-breaker for some, because it messes with the player's immersion and/or suspension of disbelief.

I know it does for me, which is why I tend to play smart characters. It allows me to consistently solve puzzles and use good tactics in combat without worrying that it would be out of character for my PC. This is my way of not cutting out the parts of the game that I like, while still retaining enough consistency for me to enjoy the game.

However, even if the DM and players are happy to live with this inconsistency, a player who uses his ability instead of his character's ability to solve a puzzle is not normally an inconsistency that would sour a game. Few DMs would call out a player for metagaming or acting out of character if he did so. On the other hand, a player who has to use his ability to solve a puzzle instead of his character's is an inconsistency that could do so, especially if the character appears on paper to have an advantage over the player in this respect. What would be the problem with challenging the PC instead of the player in such situations?