You'll have to give us some info. Is the lich a PC or just an NPC party member? How long have they been with the party? Where/when did the party meet them? How are they encountering the riddle (is the lich telling it to them, are they reading it somewhere, etc.)? Can you give us a description of the lich?
So, you probably wont like it but I'll tell you right now this is bad.
First, I'm assuming you mean there wont be rolls, not roles. In that event, it means you're putting all the pressure on your players instead of their characters. If you have a player with a wizard character with 20+ int, they're a very intelligent person who is probably good at riddles. But the person playing them might very well not be. You're robbing the player of meaningful character decisions by instead putting all of the solving on outside knowledge. This is terrible. It takes people out of the game, instead of engaging them more deeply in the game. That's opposite of the purpose of role playing games.
In general, riddles are a bad idea unless you're going to allow the players to roll to solve it with applicable skills or intelligence. But if you're going to do that, then it becomes an issue of "if no one makes the check then the game doesn't advance". This is why GMs should always follow the "rule of 3". When you're trying to supply information to the party there should generally be 3 different ways for them to acquire the information.
The only way riddles are acceptable in my opinion is if they're super obvious. And I mean super obvious, like the Skyrim door lock puzzle. The answer to the puzzle was usually written on little stone tablets right above the posts, or in the same room. Worst case scenario was generally that the tablets were in the previous room.
To follow up, here is a thread that discusses many of the pitfalls of employing riddles.
A riddle should be difficult, but always provide clues to the answer; some may be obvious, some not so.
Here's an example for you:
My power is fabled and sought by many, but only achieved by few.
I become eternal as the sun, yet we share no similar interests.
Though many of my objects are coveted, I cherish one more than my own existence.
Unlike most, the inevitable comes for me multiple times.
For those who wish to become as me, they must pay the ultimate price.
I am...
From the above description, you can quite reasonably reach the conclusion of "the Lich," but it can very easily be taken as something else; if you accomplish that, then congratulations; you've made a riddle.
i will let them roll if none of them can figure it out. if you choose not to help then do so but please do not comment if you dont want to help or want to point out if this is a bad idea thank you and goodbye
I'm trying to give you advice from one GM to another, I understand it's not the advice you want but I think it is advice you should consider.
It's a bit like having a man ask you for a fish, and teaching him to fish instead.
Can you provide some context for a riddle to even make sense? Why is there a riddle to figure out that the PC is a lich? Is the lich PC just telling players a riddle because he wants to be found out? If not, where are they finding this riddle and why?
This is important information to actually have a riddle that makes sense within the story at all.
Among you I dwell, something fell,
My life entwined with death,
Controlling the damned, by will and spell,
And all without a breath.
First line indicates it's amongst them.
Second line that their life is entwined with something dead. In this case a phylactery.
Third indicates controlling the dead.
Fourth indicates that they too might not be breathing.
That seems bad for the party unless the players have agreed to it outside of the game. PVP like that usually ends up with hurt feelings.
But that aside, if he wants to prove to the barbarian that he isn't to be taken lightly why doesn't he just directly challenge him to a fight? That sounds like what he wants. Why the riddle?
if this is a bad idea thank you
Yes, it's a bad idea.
Do look above to one of my responces if you have nothing to say.if this is a bad idea thank youYes, it's a bad idea.
I'm sorry that you misunderstood that I have nothing to say. I apologize for the misunderstanding and will take this opportunity to elaborate at length, then. I'm glad to see you are interested.
There's basically no good outcome that will happen as the result of introducing a riddle into your game. It breaks the immersion, because all of a sudden the players are playing themselves instead of playing the characters. You don't expect Legolas' player to be a master archer, or the Grey Mouser's player to be an expert on picking locks, but it's equally unfair to expect Gandalf's player to be a master of lore. The effect is that the most creative and educated player is the one who is mostly likely to solve it, and we're focusing on player attributes instead of character attributes.
It's also a specialized skill that is not necessarily common among gaming groups, and so a lot of players will immediately check out once a riddle rears its ugly head, and start playing games on their phone, head to the bathroom for a quick break, or maybe go downstairs and raid the fridge. Once you've done this, it's very hard to get players re-immersed in the game (and in my extensive experience, you might as well call the session a loss, go home, and pick up next week).
James Jacobs has expressed similar sentiments:
I mean... we don't require every player at the table who plays the mighty barbarian to perform feats of strength each time she wants to smash down a door or swing an axe. Why would we require the player at the table who's playing the Intelligence 20 bard who's got skill focus in all the Knowledges to rely on the player's likely less-impressive knowledge in order to solve a riddle? Makes no sense to me.
They also scream for meta-knowledge, which again shatters immersion and causes players to check out.
Basically, they're boring, frustrating, and all too often a diabolical combination of the two.
thank you
You're very welcome.
|
I'm also on the "Not too big of fan of PC-involved riddles" train, but I'd like to proffer an alternative solution?
Gradual clues that lead to a lich, but are able to be identified using knowledge skills.
Things like K(arcana) to identify the explosion patterns as the remnants of a fireball. Perception or survival could both determine its unnatural origins.
Heal to identify a victim that was permanently paralyzed by the lich's touch, with knowledge skills (including religion, for sure) to identify monster that can permanently paralyze.
Plus, an additional knowledge and/or heal check to identify the damage done by the negative energy touch the lich has, as well.
Plus, if the party manages to fail a bunch of these checks, they could always go to a larger city and use a library to augment their checks. I'm rather fond of the research rules in ultimate intrigue for things like this. Forensics on a corpse is a lot like making research checks in a library, save for different useful skills and a more abbreviated timeline.
Let the party come to find for themselves (and the players learning as the PCs do) that a lich is involved.
And if you can leave any hints as to the identity of the involved party member, all the better.
"This body has been dead for no more than an hour. Guys, has anyone seen Dave, our evocation wizard? These corpses look a lot like the ones he leaves behind on our adventures."
Obviously nothing so blatant as that, but IMO, a mystery-solving adventure is a more elegant solution than a riddle that the players either solve immediately, or immediately overcome with a single knowledge check.
I'm also on the "Not too big of fan of PC-involved riddles" train, but I'd like to proffer an alternative solution?
Gradual clues that lead to a lich, but are able to be identified using knowledge skills.
Yeah, this sounds like a classic mystery to me. "Who or what killed Lord Bertram Fortescue-Dawlish?" Finding a body completely drained of life but "without a mark on him" is one clue that would point that way, and then Lord Sherlock Poirot Wimsey Marples can sit down with Sam Diamond and Inspector Cluedo and figure it out from there.
As far as mysteries go, I'm a big fan of the Three Clue Rule, which gives multiple ways for both the players and the characters to get the necessary pieces and make the necessary deductions. And doesn't stop the game dead as someone trying (and failing) to re-anagram I AM LORD VOLDEMORT to figure out who the actual bad guy is.