Does anyone actually ENJOY having a dungeon stop dead because you have to solve a riddle, and any means of circumventing it fail by GM fiat?
>What's green and has wheels?
>A green car?
>The door does not react.
>(6 real-time hours later)
>Okay, fine, the answer is grass.
>Grass doesn't have wheels!
>It's a metaphor. It makes sense in my head.
I don't think dungeons should just be about mayhem and violence, but yeah, like investigation/detective scenarios and dream sequences riddles just don't work in RPGs.
>>45596657
In that scenario I'd probably rule that a character could take 20 on an int check to figure out the answer, or let them dig/smash/blow up the door.
>>45596716
>investigation/detective scenarios just don't work in RPGs.
OP has a good point about how idiots run riddles but you're retarded
I use riddles and puzzles for extra stuff or when the game offers ways to by pass enigmas and riddle along with the group agreeing they want brain teasers in the game.
Stuffing them into all games is like having a moral quandary in every game. Fuck that.
![stock-photo-three-old-wooden-wheels-on-the-grass-285888803[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/7U46LvS.jpg "stock-photo-three-old-wooden-wheels-on-the-grass-285888803[1].jpg")
>>45596657
>>Grass doesn't have wheels!
This grass does.
>>45596657
>what's green and has wheels
>your DMs railroaded campaign.
>>45597669
Investigation is hard to make work in RPGs. In older games, it is a real issue. If someone has to succeed a check for the story to progress, and nobody does? The game just sorta broke.
GUMSHOE is a game which solves this. It's build around the idea of investigative stuff, particularly detective stories, and amongst the other clever mechanics is the idea that you receive vital clues just for selecting the right skill to use in a scenario. There are countermeasures to just stop you suggesting every possible skill at every moment, so there's still a measure of deduction and logic in figuring out what to apply, but it makes the whole process significantly smoother.
>>45596657
>TOMATOES AREN'T HILLS, HORSES AREN'T TEETH, RIDDLERS GET OUT, REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
What plausible reason would there be for someone to put a cryptic riddle in a dungeon?
>>45597669
They don't in a medium where people don't have ALL DAY to chew on shit and a medium where people probably didn't decide to play so they can play "who dun it". Especially in a game where dungeon crawling is a thing and most of the rules probably exist for combat.
I'm not saying it has no place, but it shouldn't be a progress gate unless you enjoy ass pulls or shit grinding to a halt.
>>45596657
To prevent this my DM would create puzzles and riddles, but not answers or solutions to them.
He'd let us try them and if we came up with something, and I quote, "That sounds like it might work" he'd accept that. But it did have to sound plausible.
>>45596657
Why would a person design a door that anyone who's clever can open? Riddle doors are stupid
>>45596657
If you solve the riddle yourselves in under five minutes, you earn some roleplaying exp. If you have to fall back on a check, you don't get that. Simple.
Circumventing metaknowledge checks with use of IC knowledge that the player does not have should always be an option, but players should be rewarded for engaging with the scenario.
>>45598679
It is part of a religious mystic tradition and inscribed somewhere. No door, no treasure, no magic, just religious significance. Or a madmen scribble a verse somewhere.
>>45596657
Oh hey, riddle autist. Long time no see man.
>>45598679
So that the riddle acts like the "lock" for the dungeon, and that the "key" to solve it is only in the hands of those that know the background story or got an extra clue from someone else.
I dunno
>>45598761
Don't metaknowledge checks about something defeat some of the point of roleplaying.
>>45598761
This wouldn't work in my old group. The GM kept track of EX, but really we just all level at the same time. After about a dungeon and a half was average.
>>45598809
Sorry, this was a little misleading. The GM didn't really keep track. But it was 4E, so he knew what monsters and types would give us a challenge, and about how many encounters = a level up.
It was all very formulaic, 4E. Made running things easier.
>>45598679
There are a lot of cryptic riddles in La-Mulana, and strange, perverse death traps and/or obstacles.
>>45596657
>does anyone enjoy having a bad DM that can't write a decent dungeon
No. Shocking.
>>45598607
I remember those threads, holy shit that was funny
The only good puzzles are elaborate puzzle rooms with statues and a mural or mosaic withe lots of arm sized holes in it but all you have to do to open the door is pass a strength check and lift from the bottom.
Everything in the room is just a horrible trap.
>>45598703
You should try games other than D&D.
>>45598807
In that case, it'd be easier just to use a password, wouldn't it? Then you wouldn't have to worry about a clever rando taking your stuff.
>>45596657
>Waaah my DM stopped the campaign to challenge us mentally
>All I want to do is kill things
>This is so unfair!
I agree, your DM should have known better by how mentally deficient you and your group are and taken pity
>>45599249
The problem with passwords is that they have to be communicated. Yes, if the people you want to let in are all with you when you build the place, a password works, sure. But let's say you're building the place and leaving, and both people you want and people you don't want to enter will be arriving after you, in some order. You can't afford to actually provide the password anywhere, because the people you want to keep out might find it.
So instead, you find some piece of knowledge you're certain the people you want in have and the people who you don't want in don't, and create a riddle that clearly points to this piece of information to those in the know and means nothing to those not in the know.
In fact, this general method also covers tests of character, just substitute knowledge that the people you know you want to be able to get in for personality features. A variation of this explains why you might find riddles anyone can solve as a key: you just wanted to keep the imbeciles out so they wouldn't ruin your stuff.
>>45596657
Two ways to address this off the top of my head...
1. Failing forward. Even if you fail, you still get to proceed. But failing should still be the less desirable option. Fighting the sphinx might be difficult, but it remains an alternative to answering the riddle. Picking the lock failed, so you bash it down, but it took time and made a lot of noise. You ignore the intricate treasure box, but don't get its contents. Or you smash it, and get some but not all of the treasure. You can't be bothered to disable the array of traps, but now you start making saving throws and taking damage. And so on.
2. Play horseshoes and allow close responses to succeed. An unexpected answer to a riddle that sounds right could convince the sphinx that the solution was sufficiently clever. The completely wrong solution to a geometric puzzle produces an interesting pattern that looks intentional.. good enough. Collecting the wrong plant with a similar appearance is also good enough for the potion, because it's magic and only really needed a yellow plant of roughly that size and shape, not the same chemical properties.
>>45599433
>what is public-key cryptography
Riddles are insecure and inefficient compared to incorporating your friends' public keys into the locking mechanism, senpai.
>>45599205
I have and I didn't like the.
But if we're speaking in the context of a game focused on fucking dungeon crawling, complain that you can't play gumshoe for a bit is fucking retarded. Most RPGs aren't going to have satisfying social rules and investigation rules, without other aspects of the game suffering for it and vice versa. Dungeon Crawlers are focused on combat.
>>45596657
The party once spent almost a full session trying to solve a riddle. In the end the DM took pitty and allowed a Knowledge(Dungeoneering) roll to solve it.
>>45599615
Except what I just described IS public key cryptography, kouhai. You're signing the door with the public key of the group you want in (the riddle only answerable by those who possess specific cultural/magical/etc knowledge), who in turn use their private key (said knowledge) to unlock it.
>>45596657
You need to have legitimately good riddles. Stuff like:
>I always Run but never Walk.
>I often Murmur, but never Talk
>I have a Bed but never Sleep
>I have a Mouth but never Eat
It's awfully specific so long as you aren't a retard
>>45599704
Except a riddle can, by the nature of riddles, be solved by clever intruders. Proper encryption can't be efficiently broken by anyone without the intended private key.
>>45599704
I think the term for a cultural signifier used for group selection like that is a shibboleth, senpai.
Riddles, in general, violate one of my principles of DMing: No solutions.
By that I mean, I don't design problems that have fixed, finite "solutions." It's unnatural and it doesn't play well with the player urge to look for clever answers (or "clever" as the case may be). I stick in obstacles, and let what happens, happens. If there's no way to solve the obstacle without invoking some specific string of words (whether that's "I say the Elvish word for friend" or "I swing with my vorpal sword"), I go back and design something else.
So, e.g., I wouldn't make a werewolf that's literally unstoppable without a silver weapon, but I would design a werewolf as an incredibly dangerous, corrupt predator, and the attendant weaknesses to symbols of purity (silver among them, but also holy water, etc.), and let the PCs find their own way.
>>45599744
Since when is there a filter that turns fa[m into senpai?
>I want to roll an int check to solve the riddle
You can roll an int check to gfto of my table
>>45599799
That niggertalk was banned by Our Lord and Savior Hiroshimoot almost immediately.
>>45599723
>>I always Run but never Walk.
Software
>>I have a Bed but never Sleep
A river
>>I have a Mouth but never Eat
A river again
These weren't the answers you wanted but they fit, riddles are shit.
>>45599880
Actually river is the correct answer.
>>45599880
Also, why would your fantasy setting character think software? He doesn't know what software is.
>>45599841
Praise be.
What if someone was sealing away whatever is in the dungeon, and placed the riddle there for those who attempted to delve deeper?
Or like a password on a wizard's door?
>>45598807
I like an idea of a puzzle that only makes sense for someone with background.
Reminds me of Warehouse 13 episode where everyone was trying to solve unsolvable chess puzzle. The correct answer was to know its creator personally and know that he didn't care about rules, and start making illegal moves.
>>45599841
Well, that's kinda...lame. Like, I can't really get worked up about it, it just seems like a lame thing to do.
Oh, and go back to /pol/, et cetera, you know the drill by now.
>>45599903
For all of them?
...Does a river murmur?
Well at least having 4 questions for the same thing limits the possible answers.
I think riddles only really work for me if there's an NPC giving the riddle that you can argue with, or there's a component to it that limits the answers
>>45599880
One time someone did that in a Dark Heresy game and my Guardsman's answer was lasgun. Granted all my other answers were the Emperor
>>45599954
>mfw a comic I read has the same thing.
It's a game of chess set up on a real magnet board linked to a computer, and people are trying to figure out how to beat it, going as far as inviting champions of chess, or people having champion chess AIs.The guy who set that up was a drunk who hated losing and would send the board and all the pieces flying before he lost his king, the correct answer is to sweep all the pieces off the magnetic board at the same time.
>>45599949
>Words made of flame materialize in thin air:
>What is the name of your childhood familiar?
>>45599323
What kind of fucked up world are you living in where grass has wheels
Let's be 100% serious:
You don't like puzzles, traps, riddles, or scenarios where you can't win by rolling a high number on the dice, not because they "slow down" the game or they're "unfair".
You don't like them because you don't like thinking. You don't like the idea that you have to stop and examine a problem from multiple angles, discuss possible options, consult previous game knowledge, etc.
You don't want to think, you want to win. And that's why you have a problem with challenges that aren't solved by throwing your character sheet at them.
I'd reason the best way to handle riddle doors is to have them serve as alternate safer routes through a dungeon. This way they would reward the players for getting the right answer (or at least coming up with a sufficiently clever one), without grinding the campaign to a halt. Alternately I would potentially leave a deceased adventurer by the door with a journal containing clues to the answer in a vein similar to Professor Layton puzzle clues.
It's always a bit weird to see stock puzzles that apparently in-universe take expert knowledge to solve.
>>45600060
Let's be 100% serious:
You like puzzles, traps, riddles, or scenarios where you can't win by rolling a high number on the dice, not because they're "immersive" or "demanding".
You don't like them because you prefer to metagame. You don't like the idea of actually being beholden to the numbers you put on your sheet, and working with your character as more than an avatar for your personal knowledge, etc.
You don't want to think, you want to win. And that's why you love challenges that can be solved by any 8-year-old who read the same book the DM did, instead of knowing anything about the system.
>>45600133
I don't think you edited this post properly, and it came out like an incomprehensible mess.
Puzzles and Riddles seem like they might be good fantasy material, but it's actually just shitty design.
I like riddles, but working them in is really silly 90% of the time. Why the fuck would part of the security system be a riddle, unless part of the point was to allow someone totally outside of your organization to pierce the security?
When I design dungeons and feel like doing a puzzle or something, I always take a step back and make it actually sensible, and unfortunately that rules out riddles most of the time. And most puzzles too, because why would you take the effort of having three keys, all separately defended that must be inserted into an apparatus just so or you get charbroiled, if you just fucking put the instructions somewhere. That's like having your computer password on a stickynote attached to the monitor. Only your elite should know how to use the keys and it shouldn't be written or hinted at anywhere.
Excellent for crushing murderhobo dreams when you watch them fruitlessly prod a puzzle only to remark "maybe one of the guards knew how to use it" when you know damn well they just killed them all.
Magic items on the other hand, are great for riddles. Activation words, hints at powers, uses or interactions, riddles come into their own. The problem now is the internet has spoiled all existing riddles, so you have to make your own based on in-setting stuff. Tough work. A lot of the time I end up canning a riddle idea in favor of some in-setting symbolism or iconography they can figure out if they research.
>>45600060
Actually I hate riddles because there's usually multiple good answers if they don't have some means of narrowing down correct answers, but GMs VERY often forget to do that. You just have your head up your ass
>>45596910
My friend did a homebrew space hulk rpg with a lift door that wouldny open. After many hours of sessions exploring the accessible areas we could and leveled / geared up sufficiently, I told him I was going to use the servos harness I acquired to brute force it open.
He seemed bothered that we couldn't figure out how puzzle to get the lift door working, but begrudgingly agreed that with enough high strength tests I could pry the doo open.
We could see he was frustrated, but accepted we had tried to solve it for a very long time.
It lead to the finale event for that segment of the rpg and we were mostly sufficiently geared to take it on, so it worked out and we moved planet side after that.
>>45600133
>knowing anything about the system
So your argument is that all challenge, all obstacle in any game, should only be designed to be overcome by strict mechanical mastery? By you knowing how to build a character properly and taking the right skill choices?
Because that's the most shallow and infantile understanding of pen and paper games I've ever seen.
>>45600060
Let's be 100% serious:
You only pretend to like women, and you go through such a huge effort to pretend to your friends and family that you like women.
Your family keeps asking you why you don't have a girlfriend, and you aren't sure yourself. Maybe you're not even particularly ugly or anti-social.
The truth is that deep inside, you crave to a dick deep inside your ass, as much as you crave to make baseless projections about other people on annonymous imageboards
>>45600167
If we're arguing extremes, then I'd take "only what's on your character sheet can help you" over "metagaming is fine and expected," yes.
>>45600034
>>45599831
This holy fuck stop being so god damn lazy and use your brain for five seconds
>>45600147
When I get to run a game I will put a magic door that asks shit like "What is the colour of the night" and the answer would be "Z1xfF09t" because ancient evil follows good security practices and also likes to fuck with wannabe hackers.
>>45599985
You've never heard of that expression before?
>>45600181
What metagaming? Your character is a person with a functioning brain, theoretically you're a functioning human being, you can use those two factors to have your character discuss what he knows about the game world to piece together the answer to a simple puzzle.
But no, "I roll for a hint" is how you prefer things. Because fuck effort.
>>45600211
I've heard of rivers babbling, but never murmuring.
>>45600211
Might be because i'm not a native english speaker
Riddles are good in books, where you can just put down the book for a minute, stop reading and think on it on your own.
They're terrible in games.
>monster way out of the party's league offers them a chance to solve a riddle for their lives, party agrees
>riddle is "Is the statement 'This sentence is a lie' true or false?"
>>45600242
The correct answer is "Not a boolean value"?
>>45600194
I'm not smart but I am playing a character who is.
>>45596657
I remember running a Mutants & Masterminds campaign ages ago where the group woke up on an alien ship, in a laboratory and had to find some way out.
They came across a very heavy, sealed door blocking their way. After poking it and sitting on their ass for five minutes, someone finally had the idea to splice the wires in the very definitely electronic key pad I had mentioned very clearly in the description of said door.
That disengaged the lock so the team brick could actually pry it open.But I had notes for a keycard in a side room that they could've found if they went exploring. As an alternative if either the tech guy or brick changed their minds on what they wanted to play at the last minute.
>>45600215
>What metagaming? Your character is a person with a functioning brain,
With a wildly different cultural background from me. He'd have just as much reason to have never heard the expressions and puns a given riddle is founded on, despite me knowing the answer, as to know it, even when I personally don't.
That's what Int rolls are for: determining what your character knows that you might not, or determining what he DOESN'T know that you do.
>theoretically you're a functioning human being,
And me using my knowledge is metagaming.
>you can use those two factors to have your character discuss what he knows about the game world to piece together the answer to a simple puzzle.
Yes, with an Int roll.
>But no, "I roll for a hint" is how you prefer things. Because fuck effort.
The guy who gets to pretend the Int score on his sheet doesn't exist (and probably the Cha score too, since I've never seen someone advocating for pure-roleplaying riddles that didn't also advocate for pure-roleplaying social systems) seems more "fuck effort" than the guy who isn't throwing 2/3rds of the character sheet out because it might get in the way of his metagaming.
>>45600316
>With a wildly different cultural background from me
Well if you're going to just make excuses for why you shouldn't have to roleplay, why are you even playing?
Sorry, this isn't a discussion. You are completely anti-roleplay.
>>45600423
>actually play characters that aren't just me in pointy ears
>"Hurr you're anti-roleplay"
Yes, clearly you're a master of the art.
>>45598529
>If someone has to succeed a check for the story to progress, and nobody does? The game just sorta broke.
I think i heard somewhere that these can be group checks that represent time spent investigating as opposed to success/fail. seems like it solves the problem fairly well
>>45600182
too soon, dude
too soon
>>45600291
I think the correct answer is just "no".
No, it's not true or false.
>>45600451
You're literally saying you want to replace roleplaying with a skill roll, so you don't have to make the effort to play your character based on his own stat expression, background, and in-game knowledge.
You are telling me that your preference is to have no roleplay, but to be able to solve game problems by rolling a skill check, rather then engaging as that character.
That is anti-roleplay. This is not a position people who actually want to play the game take, because those people actually want to roleplay and make the effort. Unlike you. You throw tantrums.
1. Rolling poorly should not always result in total failure. It can instead be success at a cost of some kind, such as time or resources. GMs can easily come up with two negative consequences and let the player choose which one they'd prefer to have, or they can just ad hoc if their players trust them and they're competent enough.
2. Failing a single roll should never grind an adventure to a halt. There should always be other directions to explore, other leads to pursue, or other tactics to employ. To do otherwise is to remove player agency from the equation.
3. Player creativity and intelligence should be rewarded but not required. You don't need to do twenty push-ups to have your character lift an iron gate, so you shouldn't necessarily force players to solve a riddle in real life in order for their character to do so.
All good GMs should understand, and put into practice, the above statements. To do otherwise is to do a disservice to your players.
>>45600622
>1.
I personally like "the monsters heard you bickering and banging on the locked door, so they got into ambush positions" penalty for failure.
>>45596657
If you are lazy or dont like to use your brain, consult with your GM so that you can just endlessly fight goblins
>>45598679
for laughs
>>45598703
You need an entire day to solve a riddle ?
>>45600495
>You're literally saying you want to replace roleplaying with a skill roll, so you don't have to make the effort to play your character based on his own stat expression, background, and in-game knowledge.
No, I want to use a skill roll to determine what IS his in-game knowledge. Just like I would use a skill roll to determine how strong he is. Or how convincing he is.
>You are telling me that your preference is to have no roleplay, but to be able to solve game problems by rolling a skill check, rather then engaging as that character.
I engage as that character BY rolling a skill check. To not roll a skill check, to use my personal knowledge as a human being here on earth, is as disingenuous as trying to have a character invent something just because I as a player know how it's made.
>That is anti-roleplay. This is not a position people who actually want to play the game take, because those people actually want to roleplay and make the effort. Unlike you. You throw tantrums.
You're the one who wants to boil as much of his character down to "me in funny ears" as possible. That's anti-roleplay from where I'm sitting.
>>45596657
>not having the riddle carved into an unlocked door that zaps anyone answering it with lightning no matter what the answer they come up with is
>>45599673
>almost a full session trying to solve a riddle
If players enjoy this,why not ?
>>45599841
Notice me fa]m
>>45600147
>And most puzzles too, because why would you take the effort of having three keys, all separately defended that must be inserted into an apparatus just so or you get charbroiled, if you just fucking put the instructions somewhere
Some people just like designing challenges for others
Man, I'm glad I can talk to my DM like a human being and say things like "I enjoy the challenge of having riddles in quests" or "hey man, I put 18 into INT so I could cast ALL the spells, what the Fuck do you mean riddles are a WIS roll? Let's see how this door likes Disintegration rays. Fuck your knock spell." And shit like that instead of being a fucking autistic about the "right" way to make believe with a couple of faggots.
Not to mention all the optional riddle shit people have suggested where there are alternate pathways and options if your players don't guess it.
How are you shits still arguing about this?
>>45600676
That's a good consequence for failing to pick a lock / bust down a door. Other good ones might include:
>You pull a muscle, take a -X penalty to strength checks and/or damage until you rest and get medical attention.
>Your lockpick snaps off in the lock. You'll need to get your thieves' tools fixed back in town, until then you can't use them again.
>It takes you fifteen minutes to pick the lock instead of one minute, so that buff spell runs out.
>You trigger an alarm system. There's nobody here yet but in a few rounds that might change.
>>45600787
I agree with you.
>>45600826
Nothing, so long as all the players enjoy it. If the players aren't enjoying the puzzle then the GM either needs to resolve it quickly or move onto something the players will actually enjoy. There's a reason why The Fellowship of the Ring doesn't spend an hour of the film at the doors or Moria.
>>45599841
smá Žh tbá Žh faá Žm
>>45599841
senpai
>>45596657
Grass is dumb.
Rolling hills would have been acceptable.
>>45600787
>You're the one who wants to boil as much of his character down to "me in funny ears" as possible. That's anti-roleplay from where I'm sitting.
>Roleplay is rolling
Is this a joke?
>>45599880
That whole thing is one riddle, you mouthbreather. And the answer IS a river.
>>45598529
3 clue rule.
Which actually works very nicely with Gumshoe, since you can let them be bad at deduction that way.
>>45601874
that's one extreme, "Only the stats matter"
The other extreme is "The stats don't matter"
Would you allow a Genius playing a idiot to solve a riddle but not a idiot that's playing a genius?
The genius might find the solution but his character is an idiot so he should not be able to use it.
The idiot might not be able to solve the riddle but his character is a genius and probably could so he should be allowed to roll to see whether his character solves it or not
>>45599651
The comment was that mysteries don't work in roleplaying games. Which is pants-on-head retarded given the history of great mystery games since the early 80s.
>>45600147
Riddles and puzzles are good when they aren't thrown at you out of the blue. Random magic door with a riddle on it needed to proceed. If the party can retreat, do research and return, it's not a bad point. It should be a goal to achieve, not just a boring temp barrier to progress.
Problem is that most GMs try to ape tolkien too hard, and stick riddles on doors or have monsters try to get into riddle fights with the party. That's shit, and some riddles are legit unsolvable due to moon logic. Give the players a fun investigative puzzle which lets them figure out the right words/patterns through clever research or skill use and it's fine.
>>45603751
>but not a idiot that's playing a genius?
If you can't, or won't, roleplay your character, you do not get to play.
No, you do not get special treatment or exemption because you are stupid and want to play a smart character. If you refuse to put in the effort, and make excuses, you can fuck off.
>>45603933
so you are saying people can only play characters similar to themselves?
>>45603978
No, I'm saying you either get your shit together and play the character you created, or you don't play. I don't accept excuses for why people should have standards lowered for them, or why they should get special treatment or why they shouldn't have to do the work.
You either try, and you stop crying, or you find a group that will baby you like you want.
>>45598455
Underrated post.
>>45603933
>>45604242
By your logic all strong characters must be played by weightlifters, and all dextrous ones must be played by accomplished acrobats.
Escapism is about being something other than yourself for a time, and often times these characters are more capable than the player is in real life. If you limit the capabilities of a character to the player then you basically gut the hobby like a fish.
>>45598679
Wizards
>>45599880
>Bitches about riddles
>Solves the riddle on accident
Oh I'm laffin
>>45596910
>rule that a character could take 20 on an int check to figure out the answer
Why stop there?
"I can't be bothered to solve the murder, just lemme roll INT"
"I'm not wasting time learning how to play the combat game well, I'll just roll INT and then the DM will make the best move for me"
"I roll INT to figure out the flaw in the BBEG's plan"
>>45598748
That's not a puzzle, then, it's a test of the DM's patience. It's one thing if you know what the answer is and you let 'close enough' through, another if you just say, 'whatever, that'll do, let's move on.'
>>45599792
An interesting theory, but I don't agree with it in practise here. As >>45599552 points out, a riddle is just an obstacle like any other, and can be dealt with or worked around as the players interpret. If they can solve it, great, if not find another way into the dungeon. Similarly, the challenge with silver is "how do we find a bunch of silver and get it into a weaponized form". The PCs still get to think around a problem, they just have tangible resources to work with instead of hoping that you'll buy whatever they're selling.
>>45606570
Sure thing, just let me apply the modifiers like how much Information you have gathered, how many clues you already found and other things that influence how easily you would figure it out.
If you had a lot of data and your INT was high enough I at least would let you roll whether or not you would get a clue/connect some of the dots.
>>45603978
>roll stats with friends, select characters based on stats
>you're a monk, Jerry's a wizard, Steve's a cleric, Joey's a Ranger
>vow to return to this gaming table in five years when your bodies and minds are ready.
>Pack your bags for the trip to Shaolin. Steve's becoming a priest, Joey enrolled with the national park service, Jerry's joining a cult
>>45600044
It could be a grass with properties that transport (wheels are a form of transport) your state of mind to a different place.
>>45607716
>rolling stats
>not a rigorous course of physical, mental, and social exams that accurate assess your current values, and you must petition to retest when you have enough XP to spend on leveling up your character and prove you've earned that +1 Strength>not having everyone play fighters, or whatever class doesn't have any stat requirements because in reality we're all nothing special, certainly not adventurer tier
>>45608021
My dex is respectable enough to try rogue, maybe, buy charisma's my dump stat so I'm probably missing out on a lot of secondary utility
>riddle gates
>>45608135
>pick a series of pockets and demonstrate a 30% success rate, then open a series of locks at a 25% success rate
>you must then showcase an ability to move silently across a squeaky wooden floor, and speak Thieves' Cant passably
>>45608021
>bard exam
>you must seduce your instructor
>>45608289
Okay, maybe not that dextrous. I earned a black belt a few years back, is that good enough for a single level of monk?
>>45608358
>that pic
What the entire fuck?
>>45608976
Pressure pots are fucking dangerous
>>45607716
>I attack the Orc with my dagger.
>Alright. Steve, go find us a hobo. Jeff, get your knife. We need to see how much damage your attack does.
>>45598679
It's not riddles that are a problem it's you can't bash down/magic/lockpick the door
Some extra warding is fine but not more then would make sense for the dungeon.
If you don't even bother to set dcs you have definitely fucked up.
My party encountered a sphinx that asked the following riddle:
"What's yellow and blue?"
It took them a good 10 minutes to come up with the answergreen
>>45600034
Kotick
>>45600143
>I don't think you edited this post properly, and it came out like an incomprehensible mess.
You should work on your reading comprehension. I didn't write it, but I understood it perfectly the first time I read it. I even read it again after seeing your post to make sure I didn't misread it.
I didn't misread it.
>>45599433
>you just wanted to keep the imbeciles out so they wouldn't ruin your stuff.
I like this
>>45599799
Halloween last year.
>>45600060
But always spend time planing before I go in to battle
>>45599738
>Implying brute attack wouldn't eventually yield the answer
Also, what if instead of a small group (Of six or so people) you have an army of 2 or 3 hundred. If you five the key (Presumably a completely random phrase) it's plausible that one of your soldiers reveals the key while drinking, or an officer betrays you and gives it to the enemy.
With a riddle, these aren't concerns, because the soldiers/officers won't be expecting the door to be sealed.
>>45600147
>Magic items on the other hand, are great for riddles.
Oh I like this.
>>45600981
The fuck kind of thief doesent carry around 2 dozen lockpicks.
>>45597869
That's some wheelie good grass.
>>45600226
>>45600235
Rivers only murmur when they're brooks. It's a dialect term that's quite out of fashion nowadays, but was more widely used when Tolkien created the puzzle in the 1920's.
>>45609812
>brute force
Yeah sure, after 15 trillion years reciting possibilities nonstop an intruder can gain access. What a glaring security flaw.
>large group of people
If your riddle is based off sufficiently common information for an entire army of people to know it, it's common enough for the adversary to know about. Or at least common enough for the adversary to see the riddle, leave, ferret the information out of any one of hundreds of people who don't even know the information's supposed to be secret, go back, and gain access.
>>45598748
Pretty much this. I don't really have a solution in mind when I throw puzzles at my PCs, I just go with whatever solution they come up with to make them feel like smart cookies.
>>45599723
Its a river.
>>45603933
get off it dude
>>45600177
underrated post
also checked
>>45608021
I'm not sure I could handle a great sword well enough to be a fighter.
>>45599433
A little late, but that's really similar to the "speak friend and enter" door in LotR.
To beat the riddle, you needed to know elvish and be a little clever. Big dumb orcs, goblins, and the vast majority of humans and even other dwarves couldn't beat that test.
>>45611051
That wasn't even a riddle, just a mistranslation ("speak, friend, and enter" vs "say 'friend' and enter").
>>45600147
>That's like having your computer password on a stickynote attached to the monitor.
You'd be surprised how many offices I've broken into have done that.
>>45611112
Even though it wasn't intended as a riddle, it ended up one to the party.
Could that work more often? Riddles that weren't originally meant to be them, but ended up as riddles anyway
>>45611112
>>45611051
In any case, you had to be able to read and speak sindarin, which would keep out the people the door intended to keep out.
>>45599985
>...Does a river murmur?
Yes. They also babble, but usually that's saved for brooks.
It's not a hard riddle, you guessed what it was even while you were trying to be thick about it.
>>45611039
Unless you've got muscle degeneration or boneitis or something it's not that bad. 2h swords in reality, even zweihanders, were 3kg at most
>>45601874
I beleive anon is trying to say that role-playing as yourself in game is not really role-play.
By putting yourself into the role of a completely different person, sometimes the discrepancies between your knowledge IRL, and your character's knowledge, in character must be bridged by making rolls (i.e.: knowledge or psyniscience).
These rolls account for things that your character might have reasonably known, given their experiences, that you, IRL, might not have been able to know.
The best way to use a riddle in a dungeon or similar is to do it like Calibos.
That is, make it a riddle alluding to a specific thing. Calibos' riddle was "In my mind’s eye, I see three circles joined in priceless harmony. Two, full as the moon; one, hollow as a crown. Two from the sea, five fathoms down. One from the Earth, deep under the ground..."
The answer was Calibos' ring, gold with two pearls. If I was to put this in a dungeon, I would put the ring elsewhere either as treasure or as a noted possession of an NPC or whatever suits the game at hand.
Then to open the door you might have to place the ring on a nearby statue or simply be wearing it when you try the door.
It lets your riddle be nice and in-world, too. Even tied to the dungeon at hand. Just shouting answers at the wall is lame.
>>45596657
>any means of circumvention fail by GM fiat
The puzzle isn't your problem. This is your problem. Your GM sucks. Get a new one. Hell, volunteer to replace him.
>>45606570
I said "in that scenario" which was a riddle door with no apparent consequence for failure (the ideal application for a take 20) and a party of PCs who are clearly frustrated with their inability to progress.
>>45599433
>you find some piece of knowledge you're certain the people you want in have and the people who you don't want in don't, and create a riddle that clearly points to this piece of information to those in the know and means nothing to those not in the know.
So,Dixit. Now I'm thinking it might be good to use the cards or a dungeon riddle. You could use something the party enountered previously as a clue,or maybe something from a character's backstory.
I'm thinking this could work, if every player is in agreement about using it.
>>45596657
Yes, riddles are fun. As for GM fiat, it is very reasonable to have a riddle scenario that can't reasonably be "circumvented".
>The wall slams shut behind you; you're trapped. A sphinx offers to open the door to the next level of the dungeon, if you answer her riddle.
Sure, you can kill her, but then you're still stuck. You can Dimension Door back to base, but then you're essentially giving up and starting over. You can sit there, but that accomplishes nothing.
Seriously, what kind of group has a problem with this sort of situation? It's like complaining that the big boss just attacks you after his rant: "AN ACTUALLY GOOD GM WOULD PROVIDE MULTIPLE AVENUES OF NON-VIOLENT RESOLUTION OF OUR DIFFERENCES!"
Sometimes, you just gotta fight. And sometimes, you really do have to solve that damned riddle.
>>45614625
That is a ridiculously stupid comparison. All characters in D&D are equipped for combat. No one is particularly well equipped to follow your moon logic and guess what you're thinking, which is the only way to solve a riddle. The fact that you are essentially forcing the group to do nothing for two hours while they guess at your mad ramblings before being reduced to "fuck it, I roll int to solve" is the problem, dumbass.
>>45598529
GHUMSHOE is shit. BRP works much better for investigative games provided the GM is not a brainless monkey.
>>45615007
BRP is exactly as good as D&D for investigative campaigns, which is to say not very.
>>45615037
BRP is actually very good for investigation since it's light as feathers and non-restrictive unlike many other systems.
>>45615050
I'll admit my experiences with BRP come through CoC but as far as I recall it has exactly as many rules releveant to investigation as D&D does - none, beyond "roll skills to do things." Which means it has the exact same problems that plague investigation campaigns in 99% of systems.
>>45615089
It's not systems that plague investigative games but rather incompetent GMs. In my opinion the lighter the rules the better and BRP/CoC is basically invisible while playing.
>>45600787
Mind walking me through a bog standard roleplay situation using your method? Because I don't think what I'm hearing is the same as what you're saying. It sounds to me like you're endorsing roleplaying via rollplaying, but that doesn't really make a lot of sense. So would you mind taking me through 'Convince the guard to let you by, even though your papers aren't in order', so I can get a clearer conception of where you're coming from?
>>45600959
Because the construction and deconstruction of arguments is an interesting passtime, even if it comes in the trappings of shitposting and deliberately obtuse man children.
So, the lulz, mostly.
>>45615454
That post is seventeen and a half hours old.
He's probably dead by now.
>>45615500
rip in peace
>>45596657
It's only fine if the riddle is not meant to be solved, but reward the players if they do.Here's a riddle /tg/: I have no taste but I am bitter, a little of me kills individuals and a lot of me kills nations, I am not a poison but I'm as deadly as one, what am I?
>>45600787
>No, I want to use a skill roll to determine what IS his in-game knowledge. Just like I would use a skill roll to determine how strong he is. Or how convincing he is.
Those are literally the things you don't determine with rolls because they're already there in the form of stats and skills.
You roll when a character attempts something that is, taking stats and skills into account, challenging and has a consequence when failed.
No offence but judging by the description you gave of your gameplay I wouldn't play with you in a game or in a game run by you. Seems like awful rollplayfest.
>>45615542
Defeat.
>>45615565
No, treason.
Roll vs mind spell.
>>45615500
My word. Well, to be honest, I'd ended up in his camp anyways when his opposing number starting talking about how people of average intelligence have no business playing smart people, or that people that mumble and stutter shouldn't play casanovas.
>>45605159
>By your logic all strong characters must be played by weightlifters, and all dextrous ones must be played by accomplished acrobats.
Different anon here but this is the worst argument ever. You use imagination to roleplay characters that aren't yourself. Also playing a role has nothing to do with rolling dice.
>>45615552
>Those are literally the things you don't determine with rolls because they're already there in the form of stats
But those stats are determined with rolls.
Rolled 19 (1d20)
>>45615594
Let's say I'm a first-level wizard because of all that /x/ shit I used to do.
>>45615679
Thanks for sharing this information, anon.
>>45615122
Oh really. Please, tell me what's your solution for situations where players are unable to deduce a new course of investigation from current clues that does not rob them of player agency?
>>45615636
Are you saying imagination is capable of compensating for personal inability? That if you imagine hard enough your 10 cha self will suddenly be as persuasive as your 20 cha bard with maxed persuasion skills? Or that a person of average or even above average intelligence can imagine himself to be as good at riddles as his elven wizard, who's spent more years reading than everyone sitting at the table has been alive, combined?
And given that this is obviously not the case, are you saying that those character archetypes should be forbidden to those players, since they're clearly beyond their ability to role play, which is quite obviously the point of the metaphor re:physical ability that you seem to be ignoring?
>>45615542
Disappointment.
>>45616586
>Oh really. Please, tell me what's your solution for situations where players are unable to deduce a new course of investigation from current clues that does not rob them of player agency?
If the situation deteriorates to that the only way to salvage it is to just straight up give a hint to the players. It's not the end of the world if done subtly.
The key is to not make too obscure and archaic clues and plots in the first place, i.e. don't be a bad GM. Investigations need to be pretty simple to begin with because players will always complicate the investigation no matter what. What works in a piece of detective fiction rarely works in a game environment.
>the guy who doesn't understand the concept of riddles is back
Oh man I missed these threads.
>>45607853
Psychoactive properties are not wheels. I've never heard a stoner say "try this grass, it has wheels" in real life.
Maybe the people in your fictional world use such a figure of speech often, but we, the players, lack the cultural context to make that connection.
>>45616744
So make a campaign with 'mysteries' that literally anyone paying any attention can solve (why is it even a mystery then?) which incidentally does a poor job of emulating the source genre? And in the case that the players fail to pick up your obvious clues, drop them on the railroad to your next plot point?
Wow, you sure convinced me. Why did anyone ever say this is hard???
>>45600722
>If you are lazy or dont like to use your brain
I don't know if you've heard, but grass normally doesn't have wheels.
You can put some wheels on top of a patch of grass, but they still aren't part of it, and the answer is "grass", not "this particular patch of grass under the wheels right here".
>>45616734
>Are you saying imagination is capable of compensating for personal inability?
Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying and that is my point. It's not rocket science to come up with dialogue and things your character says and does. The actual words and voice you use to express the character is not important at all; the quality of acting doesn't matter thus everyone who is not mentally handicapped can roleplay. Just making an effort is enough to create an enjoyable game for yourself and the other people around the table.
You can play ANY character with proper usage of imagination. Sure, if you're a professional actor or whatever it's even better but in no way is it needed. If you're a healthy human being, "personal inability" will never hinder your possibilities to roleplay a character of any kind.
>>45616973
>the quality of acting doesn't matter t
Except when it does, like when the DM says that you failed to convince the merchant because of your stuttering, despite having a PC who ostensibly doesn't have your speech impediment.
>>45616973
So how exactly am I supposed to roleplay a character who's smarter than me solving a riddle that I can't figure out the answer to (especially if it's a broken-ass riddle like OP's)?
>>45616858
You have to understand that games are not literary fiction. You have to tailor the game so that it is reasonably solvable and can move forward without many hiccups. It takes skill and experience. Investigations often are what you call "railroady" because there's a predefined mystery and a trail of clues but an experienced GM can make them compelling and fun. I don't even know why I'm typing this because it's all self explanatory.
>>45616759
What is a seven-legged cat that rides a bicycle underwater on Thursdays?
You should be able to solve this. It's a metaphor. It makes sense in my head.
>>45617047
>Except when it does, like when the DM says that you failed to convince the merchant because of your stuttering, despite having a PC who ostensibly doesn't have your speech impediment.
No. That just the GM being bad. It means you should find a group that actually knows how to have an enjoyable night of tabletop roleplaying.
>>45617060
>So how exactly am I supposed to roleplay a character who's smarter than me solving a riddle that I can't figure out the answer to (especially if it's a broken-ass riddle like OP's)?
You can't because a riddle like that is metagaming to begin with and has nothing to do with roleplaying. Other than riddles like that you roleplay by acting out your character in the setting that is being played.
>>45596657
>you have to solve a riddle, and any means of circumventing it fail by GM fiat?
This is a signal to leave the game because the game itself is just a way for GM to raise his self esteem by appearing smart
>>45596657
We've had a few dungeons with riddles, but they've all been solvable, I actually enjoy riddles in dungeons, makes a nice difference between being an actual hero and a murderhobo. Best solution is to stick with the classics.
>>45617163
So then you agree that DMs shouldn't make your ability to act or to speak publicly matter on charisma based skills and that they shouldn't force players to solve metagaming riddles with no alternative? Because that's all that this was about back in >>45600060
>>45600133
>>45598455
>>45617251
I do agree. What I don't agree with is rolling dice in place of roleplaying.
>>45617298
Well the only people who brought that up were >>45600181
and >>45603751
saying that it was moderately preferable to the other extreme, a dungeon of pure metagame riddles and acting skill tests. Which of the two ends of the spectrum sounds worse to you?
>>45617298
So instead of doing STR rolls you have to do pushups?
Having stats like INT, WIS and CHA as stats is fucking stupid in the first place
>>45617351
Doing pushups is not roleplaying.
>>45617454
If you wanna roleplay a strong boy you gotta be strong yourself, no? Like if you want to play a diplomat you have to have very good social skills
>>45617454
Neither is attempting to read the GM's mind.
Grass doesn't have wheels. You can come up with an ad-hoc explanation after knowing the answer, but then the question becomes "how does grass have wheels?" which is completely different from the question the GM asked.
>>45596657
>>It's a metaphor. It makes sense in my head.
This reminds me of an autistic guy who couldn't wrap his head around the riddle of 30 white horses on a red hill.
And he started throwing out complete nonsense as metaphors.
>>45617351
>>45617469
It didn't change anybody's mind when the last twenty people said it. Why did you think it was going to convince him when you say it?
Can we at least try to break the thread out of this loop? Please?
>>45617469
>If you wanna roleplay a strong boy you gotta be strong yourself, no? Like if you want to play a diplomat you have to have very good social skills
No, you don't. I think you need to read a few roleplaying books to educate yourself as to what the hobby is about.
>>45617498
Already mentioned, most obviously in >>45598607
But also here: >>45598774
>>45616759
>>45598455
lmao
>>45598455
>>45596657
>"guise riddles are so dumb yeh"
>gives example of a shitty riddle
If your point is that most DMs aren't skilled enough to handle such a thing, fine, I'd probably agree with you to some extent. But you're saying riddles are inherently bad because they can be done poorly, which doesn't make any sense.
>>45606570
Honestly, when I DM, if a player rolls a 20 on anything, I generally let them accomplish it. However, that's because I use a custom "dice rolling" program that is heavily weighted towards the center (10 & 11), so a nat 20 is extremely unlikely to the point that it in-game would be equivalent to a legendary feat sung about in songs for generations.
>>45615007
Hey! As a brainless monkey, I find that really offensive.
>>45616802
>Psychoactive properties are not wheels. I've never heard a stoner say "try this grass, it has wheels" in real life.
Though it does absolutely sound like something a stoner would say.
>>45617899
If you want a bell curve, why not just use a 3d6 system?
