Quote from: Krugus on November 03, 2021, 02:34:56 PM
Puzzles.

I discovered long ago that if you put a puzzle in with a solution the players will more often than not dance around the solution and never figure it out.  So I put puzzles in that have NO solution but when one of the players come up with an idea that sounds like it would work, ta da! They figured out the puzzle.   Saves a lot of time and frustration and it makes the players feel smart, which most of them are because their solutions are usually better thought out than what mine would have been LOL

Greetings!

YEAH! Krugus! I admit, the occasions I do use puzzles, I also tend to keep it simple and as you described--fix it so the solution is flexible. Any good ideas the players come up with, YAY! You solved it!

Sounds good to me, too.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK on November 03, 2021, 05:44:17 PM

Quote from: Krugus on November 03, 2021, 02:34:56 PM
Puzzles.

I discovered long ago that if you put a puzzle in with a solution the players will more often than not dance around the solution and never figure it out.  So I put puzzles in that have NO solution but when one of the players come up with an idea that sounds like it would work, ta da! They figured out the puzzle.   Saves a lot of time and frustration and it makes the players feel smart, which most of them are because their solutions are usually better thought out than what mine would have been LOL

Greetings!

YEAH! Krugus! I admit, the occasions I do use puzzles, I also tend to keep it simple and as you described--fix it so the solution is flexible. Any good ideas the players come up with, YAY! You solved it!

Sounds good to me, too.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Every so often,  give them a puzzle with no solution...other than smashing through it.

Quote from: Krugus on November 03, 2021, 02:34:56 PM
Puzzles.

I discovered long ago that if you put a puzzle in with a solution the players will more often than not dance around the solution and never figure it out.  So I put puzzles in that have NO solution but when one of the players come up with an idea that sounds like it would work, ta da! They figured out the puzzle.   Saves a lot of time and frustration and it makes the players feel smart, which most of them are because their solutions are usually better thought out than what mine would have been LOL

Heh. This is sort of how I run the big political scenarios/puzzles that some of my players like to engage with. They figure out the factions, they develop a plan, and they run with it. If there is a solution, it's whatever works. Nothing preset.

As for dungeon puzzles, they're usually pretty easy, if my players are paying attention. Which isn't always...

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 03, 2021, 05:54:28 PM

Quote from: SHARK on November 03, 2021, 05:44:17 PM

Quote from: Krugus on November 03, 2021, 02:34:56 PM
Puzzles.

I discovered long ago that if you put a puzzle in with a solution the players will more often than not dance around the solution and never figure it out.  So I put puzzles in that have NO solution but when one of the players come up with an idea that sounds like it would work, ta da! They figured out the puzzle.   Saves a lot of time and frustration and it makes the players feel smart, which most of them are because their solutions are usually better thought out than what mine would have been LOL

Greetings!

YEAH! Krugus! I admit, the occasions I do use puzzles, I also tend to keep it simple and as you described--fix it so the solution is flexible. Any good ideas the players come up with, YAY! You solved it!

Sounds good to me, too.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Every so often,  give them a puzzle with no solution...other than smashing through it.

Depending on the group, that can be 100% of all puzzles, sometimes more.

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 03, 2021, 05:54:28 PM

Quote from: SHARK on November 03, 2021, 05:44:17 PM

Quote from: Krugus on November 03, 2021, 02:34:56 PM
Puzzles.

I discovered long ago that if you put a puzzle in with a solution the players will more often than not dance around the solution and never figure it out.  So I put puzzles in that have NO solution but when one of the players come up with an idea that sounds like it would work, ta da! They figured out the puzzle.   Saves a lot of time and frustration and it makes the players feel smart, which most of them are because their solutions are usually better thought out than what mine would have been LOL

Greetings!

YEAH! Krugus! I admit, the occasions I do use puzzles, I also tend to keep it simple and as you described--fix it so the solution is flexible. Any good ideas the players come up with, YAY! You solved it!

Sounds good to me, too.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Every so often,  give them a puzzle with no solution...other than smashing through it.

If I need to buy myself some time I just through them P = NP and sit back to watch the fun.

I find the key to good puzzles is that they have a failure condition. If they only have an "unsolved" condition, then the puzzle -- along with game play -- just sits there idly when the players are unable to figure it out.

However, a wrong solution that triggers action is just as much fun as a correct solution furthering action.

Even better if the consequence of a wrong solution is also a clue as to how to get it right next time. For example, a riddle that ends with "Guess what I am, or face me in my might!" gives the players action if they fail, and a better chance to get the correct answer the second time around.

Quote from: Zalman on November 04, 2021, 10:02:20 AM
I find the key to good puzzles is that they have a failure condition. If they only have an "unsolved" condition, then the puzzle -- along with game play -- just sits there idly when the players are unable to figure it out.

I'm fine with that in a sandbox, it can just sit there adding to the mystery of the world. Until the player who can actually do puzzles turns up.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on November 03, 2021, 03:05:29 PM

Quote from: Opaopajr on November 03, 2021, 06:10:16 AM
I would use the words Proclivities & Capacities. The former is a predisposition to certain behaviors, and the latter is the fullest extent one can pursue a certain direction.  This way we spare fee-fees as we reduce another down to type and weaknesses... er, I mean ennoble their choices as we give designation to their desires and strengths.

Strongest and Fastest Way: Make the Setting Have Teeth & Weight, Leave OOC Channels Open for GM Setting Clarity.

What that does is make loopholes patched and hardasses loosen because power is not in the game mechanics per se but in the fluid societal institutions... and only to a point. Because management is hard due to the nature of seeking consensus in scale, power projection from ramrods & sneaks is continually contested by the manifold of NPC others (including other fellow ramrods and sneaks). It may seem like a devious slight of hand, mirroring, diffusing, and diversifying power, but it emulates our regular mundane experiences well. Sure, you get a moment in time that gets swept up by the crazy of one direction, but it soon levels off then decays, and next another dog has its day. 

Can you break this down? What do you mean by having OOC channels open for GM setting clarity?

And about the rest?

Open Out-of-Character channels means players feel more comfortable in talking to the GM to clarify setting societal expectations and PC-known (even if not player-known) appropriate social conduct.

The rest is how the best way to counter intelligent, tool-using, social creatures is more intelligent, tool-using, social creatures. Hence mirroring. It is the scale of the greater world that dwarfs the PCs and mutes their disruptive impact.

And in trying to navigate and negotiate that greater scale to your PC advantage you would naturally have NPC competitors doing the same for themselves. That means how the players push the game In-Character will have the setting respond in a living, breathing (not static or artificially hampered) way. Life fights to live and often will attempt to exploit, so providing that pushback will challenge each of these player personality types.

Through scale as a buffer and a breathing diversity of fictional actors 'trying to survive' as a diffuser the players playing closer to themselves will be challenged because their powers are a) not equal to or greater than the fictional world's numbers, b) not unique to the world's methods of survival. A known finite is far more manageable. In this structure (Setting Über Alles) you have rendered any challenging players' PCs as manageable knowns and miniscule powers. So without setting cooperation they cannot power project beyond their size and predictability.

Quote from: Opaopajr on November 04, 2021, 08:31:55 PM

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on November 03, 2021, 03:05:29 PM

Quote from: Opaopajr on November 03, 2021, 06:10:16 AM
I would use the words Proclivities & Capacities. The former is a predisposition to certain behaviors, and the latter is the fullest extent one can pursue a certain direction.  This way we spare fee-fees as we reduce another down to type and weaknesses... er, I mean ennoble their choices as we give designation to their desires and strengths.

Strongest and Fastest Way: Make the Setting Have Teeth & Weight, Leave OOC Channels Open for GM Setting Clarity.

What that does is make loopholes patched and hardasses loosen because power is not in the game mechanics per se but in the fluid societal institutions... and only to a point. Because management is hard due to the nature of seeking consensus in scale, power projection from ramrods & sneaks is continually contested by the manifold of NPC others (including other fellow ramrods and sneaks). It may seem like a devious slight of hand, mirroring, diffusing, and diversifying power, but it emulates our regular mundane experiences well. Sure, you get a moment in time that gets swept up by the crazy of one direction, but it soon levels off then decays, and next another dog has its day. 

Can you break this down? What do you mean by having OOC channels open for GM setting clarity?

And about the rest?

Open Out-of-Character channels means players feel more comfortable in talking to the GM to clarify setting societal expectations and PC-known (even if not player-known) appropriate social conduct.

The rest is how the best way to counter intelligent, tool-using, social creatures is more intelligent, tool-using, social creatures. Hence mirroring. It is the scale of the greater world that dwarfs the PCs and mutes their disruptive impact.

And in trying to navigate and negotiate that greater scale to your PC advantage you would naturally have NPC competitors doing the same for themselves. That means how the players push the game In-Character will have the setting respond in a living, breathing (not static or artificially hampered) way. Life fights to live and often will attempt to exploit, so providing that pushback will challenge each of these player personality types.

Through scale as a buffer and a breathing diversity of fictional actors 'trying to survive' as a diffuser the players playing closer to themselves will be challenged because their powers are a) not equal to or greater than the fictional world's numbers, b) not unique to the world's methods of survival. A known finite is far more manageable. In this structure (Setting Über Alles) you have rendered any challenging players' PCs as manageable knowns and miniscule powers. So without setting cooperation they cannot power project beyond their size and predictability.

Is that to mean, this reduces the impact of the player abilities on the game?

By challenging them with social and other indirect means through the setting?

I have a similar range of players. The way I handle it is to provide material (over time) that covers that range. So there are adventure threads where "killing the lawful owners and taking their property" works, while others require investigation, negotiation, and not-killing.

My players also have different levels of engagement . Some only think about the game in when in a session. Others are plotting and scheming between sessions. I don't penalize the low engagement players, but I do give perks to the high-engagement players. For example, one PC has been trying to figure out the CISO (City State of the Invincible Overlord) bureaucracy. Given the effort (some successful, some not) he has put in, he now has proficiency in dealing with the CISO bureaucracy. It is nothing specifically defined, rather, it is just a reminder that the PC has some skill in that regard which I need to consider, either as ruling that is is automatically successful (e.g., able to "work" a lowly clerk) or in setting DC checks.

Having a dumb player can be frustrating.  Especially when that player wants to play a complex type of character, like a wizard, or something that requires a lot of information to process in order to play effectively.

I am pretty sure that the sorcerer class was designed so dumb people could play mages too. Limited spells to choose from, but they can cast them more offen. 

Then you get the people who can only see what you are playing as a mere "game", vs. the people who like to immerse themselves in an imaginarty world.  Both can be intelligent, but the former can be a juggernaught, casually dismantling and walking through the most complex adventures, leaving a wake of ruin behind him, while the latter is a lot of fun to play with.

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on November 07, 2021, 06:23:07 PM
Having a dumb player can be frustrating.  Especially when that player wants to play a complex type of character, like a wizard, or something that reauires a lot of information to process in order to play effectively.

I am pretty sure that the sorcerer class was designed so dumb people could play mages too. Limited spells to choose from, but they can cast them more offen. 

Then you get the people who can only see what you are playing as a mere "game", vs. the people who like to immerse themselves in an imaginarty world.  Both can be intelligent, but the former can be a juggernaught, casually dismantling and walking through the most complex adventures, leaving a wake of ruin behind him, while the latter is a lot of fun to play with.

I'd rather have a dumb player take Wizard for a spin than a lazy player. Effort can count for a lot more than natural ability when that natural ability isn't being fully utilized.

I never had problems with varying levels of intelligence at the table, only with varying levels of engagement.

Quote from: Zalman on November 08, 2021, 10:06:45 AM
I never had problems with varying levels of intelligence at the table, only with varying levels of engagement.

That can sometimes be obscured based on personality.  Extroverted players can appear more engaged than they really are, while introverted players might seem less engaged than is true. The perception can be damaging, especially if your group has too many of one type or the other.

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on November 07, 2021, 06:23:07 PM
Having a dumb player can be frustrating.  Especially when that player wants to play a complex type of character, like a wizard, or something that requires a lot of information to process in order to play effectively.

I am pretty sure that the sorcerer class was designed so dumb people could play mages too. Limited spells to choose from, but they can cast them more offen. 

Then you get the people who can only see what you are playing as a mere "game", vs. the people who like to immerse themselves in an imaginarty world.  Both can be intelligent, but the former can be a juggernaught, casually dismantling and walking through the most complex adventures, leaving a wake of ruin behind him, while the latter is a lot of fun to play with.

Greetings!

Yeah, I know that's right! All classes can benefit from being played intelligently by players, but having said that, yeah, your Wizards and Clerics really need someone on the ball and a bit more fluent with the rules. Fighters and Barbarians ae better for the dumb players, simply because the classes themselves are more stupid-proof, or have better spongy guard rails on them to protect them from dumb players. *Laughing* I mean, in the sense that, Fighters and Barbarians as classes, are more forgiving of dumb players. Players don't have to be especially clever or thoughtful in order to contribute decently and adequately to the group's success. No deep rules knowledge to master, no spell lists to worry about, no carefully-timed strategies to pursue or be conscious of--just charge the enemy, and swing that sword. When in doubt, ATTACK. I suppose it is one of the main reasons that new players have been encouraged to start with Fighters or Barbarians. They are fun, reliable, and don't require lots of fiddling.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK