Ever since seven-year-old me read about Gollum and Bilbo's riddle contest, I've loved the idea of incorporating riddles into dungeons. The problem is that getting stumped can bar progress. Riddles run the risk of becoming an exercise in frustration rather than an interesting mental challenge, and I don't want to bring game night to a premature end just because no one can come up with the answer.
So then to my question: What makes a good "riddle encounter?" How do you go about incorporating them without enraging your players?
My #1 advice as someone who usually loathes riddles in RPGs is to make sure they exist within the world of the game as much as possible. Preferably, it should incorporate elements of the game world, provide some greater context about the world, or the players should be able to find clues through exploration of the world.
The reason I generally don't like riddles is because poorly implemented, they are a challenge that takes place entirely outside of the game; something the players figure out the answer to independent of their characters. I can think of few things that bring me out of the experience of an RPG more than a plainly implemented riddle.
|
From my perspective, I always feel like if a Riddle is something you want in the game then it is important to leave clues in the environment that can help at least point in the direction of the solution instead of just leaving it up to the players to scratch/bang their heads until either they get it or the GM gives up/punishes the group.
Even if the clues are simply charred corpses that help indicate what the WRONG answer is or a hint in regards to "It's a pun" or "The answer is some Animal" it's better than nothing.
It's cool when they solve it but in my experience, it's VERY hard to create a Riddle that is 1) Not stupid easy & also 2) Reasonably difficult to figure out. In other words, be careful, and give yourself a good lever to pull in case the crack-team cannot piece it together to give them a clue or way to "Fail-Forward" instead of just letting the game grind to a halt.
One of the biggest problem with puzzles it that they are all metagaming. The 5 Int barbarian can be the one to solve the intricate word game because the barbarian's player is the one who is good with puzzles.
Expose yourself to more riddles to get a better feel for good and bad riddles, and to see if you can steal a particularly good riddle. I listen to the podcast Hey Riddle Riddle! and while it is a far cry away from a podcast about how to make a riddle the cast does routinely complain about riddles and go into detail about what bothers them. Stuff like what makes the hint for the riddle unhelpful or how the answer relies on knowledge they would not and do not have.
Also, provide the riddle in written form for the players. Write it manually, print it out, share a google doc, whatever. Let them look at it and dissect the bits they find interesting manually without having to read it out loud over and over again.
Getting the riddle wrong should end the riddle encounter, and result in some kind of negative consequence, but it not stop the adventure from moving forward. The last riddle I threw at the players was the old knight and knave riddle. The result of failure was not you had to fight the knight and knave (they were demons), and you did not get to know which was the death trapped door, and which was the door out of the room. But, despite all of the peril, the players can continue the adventure, and might even (50% chance), choose the non-death trapped door first.
One of the biggest problem with puzzles it that they are all metagaming. The 5 Int barbarian can be the one to solve the intricate word game because the barbarian's player is the one who is good with puzzles.
Well yes and no. First of all no player should be limited by his personal physical or mental abilities, but be limited by his characters abilities.
As much as you would not expect or attempt to kick in a door with your STR8 wizard, even if in real life you are a bodybuilder type physical guy, you should not expect to be able to or attempt to solve complex riddles with your INT8 barbarian, even if you have a PhD in rocket sciences.
Note that this if of course not absolute, i.e. even a generally less gifted character can have a brilliant idea once in a while, however one of the main roleplay challenges of an INT8 Barbarian is to play him as an INT8 Barbarian!
As a GM it is your duty to ensure that player choices do matter and all players are treated equally. So if a character is very strong there usually is not much you will need to do about it, simply because being strong and being able to bend, break, lift or hit stuff is in most cases already a solid part of the given rules. If however a character may be very smart and this ability is not very well represented by the given rules or player ability, it is up to you to make his in-game intelligence work.
Of course I will not exclude any low intelligence characters from a riddle (as much as a STR8 and no athletics wizard is not barred from any attempts to kick down a door) however as a GM I will try to see to it that the most intelligent characters will receive the most clues, the best clues and will also be the first ones to receive these clues, in order to provide an opportunity to let those players shine in an area where they chose their character is strong in.
From my perspective, I always feel like if a Riddle is something you want in the game then it is important to leave clues in the environment that can help at least point in the direction of the solution instead of just leaving it up to the players to scratch/bang their heads until either they get it or the GM gives up/punishes the group.
Where do you come down on "I make and Int check to solve the riddle?" Should that be possible, or does that somehow cheapen the experience?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Where do you come down on "I make and Int check to solve the riddle?" Should that be possible, or does that somehow cheapen the experience?
Counter-question: What do you do when the introvert bard player tells you that he will just make a Diplomacy check to solve the social encounter instead of roleplaying the situation as planned?
So yes, it does indeed cheapen the gaming experience most of the time, and should therefore not be used on a regular basis, however it is also a most fair solution. You usually don't question the Barbarian player's physical prowess or the Rogue player's manual dexterity. If the Barbarian wants to break things he will roll strength/athletics and if the Rogue wants to perform some slight of hand he will roll dexterity/thievery.
Why differ for mental attributes?
|
DRD1812,
Are you okay with not giving your PCs the Actual Riddle, and instead, giving them, say, a list of Topics which the in-game Riddle pertains to, and running it like a Skill Challenge which multiple characters can contribute to?
If the answer is "yes" you can consider using the GM Guide's Library Subsystem, for starters.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Where do you come down on "I make and Int check to solve the riddle?" Should that be possible, or does that somehow cheapen the experience?Counter-question: What do you do when the introvert bard player tells you that he will just make a Diplomacy check to solve the social encounter instead of roleplaying the situation as planned?
So yes, it does indeed cheapen the gaming experience most of the time, and should therefore not be used on a regular basis, however it is also a most fair solution. You usually don't question the Barbarian player's physical prowess or the Rogue player's manual dexterity. If the Barbarian wants to break things he will roll strength/athletics and if the Rogue wants to perform some slight of hand he will roll dexterity/thievery.
Why differ for mental attributes?
This is an interesting topic.
You are always going to engage the players' minds. Choices are theirs to make: how to deal with this situation? Are you going to fight or negotiate with that enemy? Are you going left or right?And choices like these are often also informed by clues that the adventure has given, by picking up elements of the description the GM gave about the environment, by past knowledge (even meta-knowledge!), all things that different characters may notice or not, know or not, interpret correctly or not.
Could a character with low mental stats be the one who has the right idea to save the party from a dire situation? Should the same character have a say about where to go next, or should it be a prerogative of the smart character who most probably picked up all the clues about it? Or the wisest one? Or the most charismatic, after all they may be wrong but surely they can convince the others better!
Having players make choices instead of their characters may make little sense in-game, but it's the only way we have to play a cooperative game instead of being mere dice-rolling spectators.
There aren't wrong or right ways to do it, where to draw the line is totally up to your group preferences. If you force the introvert player to roleplay and to speak in-character, they are probably not going to have fun; likewise, you should let Grunt the Barbarian's player join the discussion if they want to, even if their character is an illiterate brute.
On the other hand, the GM can have the group make a roll keyed to some appropriate stat when they are stuck, which will probably make the 'smart' character shine with a new (suggested) idea.
...likewise, you should let Grunt the Barbarian's player join the discussion if they want to, even if their character is an illiterate brute...
Of course he is invited to join, however he is also encouraged to do so in character if possible.
Else I have seen may fair share of "I usually play the bard" car salesman like, fast talking and silver tongued players that for unknown reasons ended up playing surprisingly educated, polite and very talkative barbarians.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The difference between rolling to solve a social encounter and rolling to solve a riddle is there is still roleplay and choices involved in the former.
The introverted bard player may not want to roleplay out the scene in character, but they would still have to describe what they are saying and how they are saying it - for example, "I will attempt to lull the baron into a false sense of security" or "I threaten the man, reminding him of the dire consequences that would have befallen the kingdom of not for our group".
A riddle circumvented with a check offers no such opportunity for choices as part of making the check.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...likewise, you should let Grunt the Barbarian's player join the discussion if they want to, even if their character is an illiterate brute...Of course he is invited to join, however he is also encouraged to do so in character if possible.
Else I have seen may fair share of "I usually play the bard" car salesman like, fast talking and silver tongued players that for unknown reasons ended up playing surprisingly educated, polite and very talkative barbarians.
Yes, and that boils down to how good the player is at playing the role they chose (or how much they actually like that role).
The introverted bard player may not want to roleplay out the scene in character, but they would still have to describe what they are saying and how they are saying it - for example, "I will attempt to lull the baron into a false sense of security" or "I threaten the man, reminding him of the dire consequences that would have befallen the kingdom of not for our group".
That's exactly what I do when I don't feel like talking in-character, or I can't find the right words to.
I guess it is pretty normal at most tables, but again, how deeply people will want to impersonate their characters will vary on a scale that goes from (almost) complete simulation to wearing costumes and gesticulating and uttering magic formulas when casting a spell.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The best experience I have with riddles in table tops is when figuring out the answer is useful, but not needed.
For instance if you had an obviously odd coin in a room with 3 baskets each in front of a statue and a riddle inscribed above them. Placing the coin in the correct basket (based on the riddle) causes the way to open, putting it in the wrong one causes the statue to animate, forcing a fight. However, winning the fight still leaves a clear passage through the now destroyed statue. If the players pass by the area a lot you can have it reform, giving them another guess. Worst case they eventually brute force the solution anyway.
If your players solve the riddle they'll get to feel clever, if they fail, an animated statue blocking the parties path is a perfectly reasonable encounter too.
I don't run them super often, but my general principle when I do is that if the players can't figure it out they always have some alternative. That alternative can be a fight, or it can be a skill challenge too.
An example of the latter, the party comes upon a riddle locked door in a castle. They can solve the riddle themselves, or they can gather information to learn from a member of the castle staff they overheard so-and-so talking alone and gives the answer, or they can befriend the court wizard who will tell them how to get in.
The best experience I have with riddles in table tops is when figuring out the answer is useful, but not needed.
There's also the "know thyself" riddle. It's less of a traditional riddle, but more of an introspective question that the PC gets to solve according to their character.
As an example, I'm thinking of the Critical Role ep. where the group's big dumb guy has to answer, "What have you learned?" during a duel with a martial arts master. The answer in that case was basically "my friends are important," but you could substitute anything character- appropriate.
It may be a bit of a cheat in terms of riddling, but it does offer the sense of riddle-play without the pitfalls.