I didn't want to threadjack another thread with this off-topic discussion, so I started a new thread here...spoilers used for length control.
Descended from this thread: How Important is Combat in your Game?
35% puzzles/challenges
25% combat
20% roleplaying
15% exploration
5% explaining prototypes and suggestion
While combat is still important, it's never the most important. Maybe it's because we have a lot of fans of the Zelda and Soul Reaver, but they really like short puzzles that can be bypassed when they're too hard. It could also be that we have an alternative social system that works similar to combat (mechanically). Players still defeat their foes, but having ongoing rivals and foiling each others schemes (the foes vs players that is) seems to have a better effect them a dead forgotten body.
I'm not saying the other way is wrong, I've had some fun times hack-and-slashing. I know of many games that have long term playability with mostly combat. I know there are other systems that may be better for this, but we're all really fond of using Pathfinder.
If social interaction had mechanics similar to combat, perhaps there would be more games with people participating instead of a lone "face-man". It'd also be great if the people releasing puzzle books focused more on teaching how to create good puzzles and less on "here's a puzzle, if your players bypass it, get furious because it's wasted".
I love combat and having players battle through foes... we just like the other stuff a little more. :p
Interesting. Haven't seen quite that emphasis on puzzles from many groups. I like them, too, and was a big fan of the old Dungeon magazine Challenge of Champions series as an occasional break from the usual dungeon crawls and deadly combats. As a group, however, puzzles sometimes lead to trouble, as the riddles and puzzles I or my fellow GMs design that seemed blindingly obvious to us when we designed them, frequently stump the players completely. To forestall the obvious question, we have several really bright people in my group, some with lots of fancy initials after their names. Puzzles are just tricky that way. How do you deal with it when a plot-crucial puzzle or riddle has the group completely flummoxed?
Our initial approach to puzzles is to want the players to solve them while occupying them with critical thinking. Usually when writing the puzzle I make sure to include at least three clues that can only be gained via the characters using their in-game talents (skills, combat, spells, etc).
The puzzle can be solved without all three clues by guessing or trial and error, but it becomes easily solved with all three clues. If the Lever #3 is last, and neither the Lever #1 or #4 is first, then Lever #2 is first. Since Lever #1 is pulled after #4, Lever #4 must be second. Leaving Lever #1 third and Lever #3 last.
If you're writing your own puzzles, I'd recommend starting with the solution and reverse engineering it. Choose a puzzle structure (the way the information is presented) and start setting up how much information all the final clues assembled will give. Remove a piece of information or obscure a part of the puzzle to make it a clue. Keep doing this until you have at least three. Choose the rewards for the puzzle.
If the puzzle is mandatory to the storyline, the players will need to have ways to keep simplifying it until it is solvable. If it's not mandatory (a prize for collection the clues throughout the quest to be solved at the end), then don't allow it to be simplified to the extent listed above. It'll cheapen the experience if the players know it'll always be cracked, but it's important to allow story points to be passed.
I recommend buying a few puzzle books for starting. I go to the used book store here and find em all the time. Adapting just takes a little time and they're usually marked for how hard they are. Avoid anything that takes you (the GM) more than half an hour to solve without hints.