#17 - Incorporating Puzzles

One of the elements I think of in role-playing games are the activities that go on outside of a role-playing game. Obviously there is a social aspect, and it’s often key to have the players talking with each other. To keep the game running smoothly you also don't want it to go too long, and you find ways to draw the attention of people who are getting bored.

Another trick I can interrupt normal game play with, is by handing over a puzzle to the players. Such a toy breaks up normal game-play by adding a new dimension. It takes the action from a land entirely of make believe, and adds a real world element. The focus shifting to a puzzle means it is no longer on something we are imaginings, but now on something we see.

Even better if it is something you can hold in your hand!

Puzzles like this, Anagrams, riddles, or even jigsaw puzzle are often not necessary for a game. But, its richness comes in the reminder that a role-playing games has more than 1 dimension. We don’t merely pretend, we interact, we exchange.

Here are 3 quick suggestions for incorporating a puzzle seamlessly!

#1 Make it physical!

An anagram can be a great way to produce a password. Suppose the heroes need a secret phrase to open a door. They may know what letters go into that password, but not which specific word / words. That will surely make opening a locked door more exciting. But even better than giving them a slip of paper with the letters jumbled on it is giving them a stack of post it notes. This allows everyone around to have a look at the letters individually, they can quickly rearrange them and puzzle it out together. For an anagrams specifically, post its also help to ensure their final answer uses all letters.

There is no possibility of forgetting an E somewhere, if you are still holding it in your hand.

#2 Make it nonessential!

If solving a puzzle is required to continue the plot it is instead a roadblock. That would be fine, if they can find the solution… It will not feel as good however if they solve it immediately. that would make the test mundane. It would feel even worse if they cannot solve the puzzle, that would highlight their helplessness. Set puzzles aside for bonuses. If they have to assemble a map that was cut up with a jigsaw have the map show them something special. Reward them for solving it, for going above the call of duty. Never punish them for not seeing an "obvious" answer.

#3 Have a backup

With my last note in mind, it is possible the heroes will solve your puzzle right away. Some players may have heard a riddle before, or it may only take 30 seconds to complete the Rubik's cube. In that case whip out another one! If they needed a password to get thru a door, and they already have it on hand, ask for a 2nd or a third. A three part challenge isn't much more difficult than a single obstacle. It will take more time obviously, and getting the hat trick will feel great! Anyone who has scored a critical hit can appreciate the lucky roll, but to get it 3 times in a row is remarkable.

The reward of a puzzle can be the solution itself. Solving more than one can be double / triple the glory!

That said, I wouldn't ask the heroes to solve 4 or 5 riddles in a row... Don’t make the puzzle a chore.

#9 - What Attracts you to Role-playing

I recently attended a meeting of fellow role-players. We had met to organize and share ideas for new role-playing games. A fair amount of old ideas were also given; our favorite games. At the meeting I interrupted business as usual, with an important question? What attracts us to role-playing?

This may sound similar to my earlier comments, but it is important enough a question to repeat. There are numerous adventure games out there that allow you to become a powerful hero. Acting as someone else isn't unique to role-playing, nor is taking command of life and death decisions.

I mentioned before, how powerful players are when they make decisions. But this isn't so unique. We could play monopoly and have just as many important decisions. We don't need to change our mannerisms and adopt a character to become real-estate tycoons. Buying and selling is party of Monopoly, but we don't need to be other people. Why would it be so different to act otherwise?

Lets talk about acting for a minute, actors know empathy and emoting is essential to portraying a character. Successful actors are those that make us, the audience, feel what they want us to feel. Some actors are world famous for doing this job. Famous for making us believe they are someone they are not. They are pretending, adopting roles for a performance. I don't pretend to be a good actor on stage, but I always try to role-play in even the most basic of games I play. Whether I pretend to be a businessman or an action hero, I enjoy creating a character. I enjoy this acting, convincing others the story isn't "my" story, but of the character. It adds to the game, and makes it something that Monopoly can never be. A role-playing game isn't just a game because it is also shared fiction.

So I asked around. I went to this meeting and posed the question. What attracts you to role-playing. Why do more than just play a game, and convince others you are in the story.

The people had decided to come out on a Tuesday to spread their ideas. Clearly, they want more than a simple handshake deal over boardwalk and Marvin Gardens. They could have played a game without out acting, and they could have tried acting on stage without a game.

So I asked them. Some people admired the social aspects of role-playing. They feel connected to their friends when they are making decisions together. Role-playing has an unfinished script, and working through problems together is a big draw. Bigger still if you work through the issues from another perspective! An actor in a movie will present the best form of a character whose decisions were already made. Role-playing goes beyond this, because we are not merely displaying the decisions of another; we are also creating those decisions. Creating them as we discover who it is we are being. The woman I spoke to said she felt much more connected to her friends when they had to both decide who they were, and how best to proceed. This kind of debate was her favorite way of socializing.

Another latched onto the idea of creativity. Some of those present enjoyed making conventional fiction and wanted to test their ideas. Share them not only on page but in a role-playing group. They felt particularly creative when exploring the rules of a game. Unlike a Monopoly, Role-playing games have no clear goal. Whatever Goals there are, are created by the characters in the game. These characters are interpreted and portrayed by the players. This experimentation pushes the limits of what could be imagined. Adds endless variety to fiction, when the ending is always over the horizon.

These were Interesting and important answers all around. Now, I want to put that back on you. I have already explained why I think Role-playing is important for everyone to do at least some of. It is an exercise in empathy, creativity, and decisiveness. An exercise in considering the best course of action, and realizing what your purposes are. These are essentials skills for everyone, whether they enjoy playing games or not. To build up our skills, to create interest in your own desire to go the distance I ask you to consider, “What attracts you to this? Why should you role-play?”

Sadly, there isn't much advice I can give. I cannot / would not answer this for you. Rather, this article ends with homework. Feel free to respond back, let us all know!

#8 - The Trouble with Sherlock

Mystery in role-playing games is almost impossible to pull off. Every time I've included a murder mystery or a puzzle with a single answer, the players always get stuck. This may seem odd to any fan of detective fiction. After all, If deduction is such a simple skill, why do intelligent players make bad conclusions? Sherlock Holmes' famous logic, is to remove the impossible answers until only one remains. That "last answer standing" is the truth. But, that has never worked for a role-playing game. Because, deduction requires a clue and previous knowledge.

The trouble with Sherlock, is that his deductions are short, easy to explain, and save the day. This arises when we realize that a deduction requires a known connection. I once read a story where Sherlock identified someone's line of work by looking at their right hand. The right hand was larger than their left, and so Sherlock said the man earned his money through labor. Sherlock concluded this because a man who works in labor would have a larger right hand. The man before Sherlock had a larger hand, and thus could be (and was) a laborer.

This is fine and all, for a story where the author can tell me something and have me believe it. But, as a person in the real world (and as a role-player) I don't know that. It isn't an established fact in my life that laborers have larger hands. I could believe it if I read it in a book, but it isn't something that I knew. I never learned before. That clue given to me in a role-playing game, would have led me to a different conclusion. I'd have gotten there, logically, because I have different previous knowledge. Players can't be expected to make a single deduction from the fact that a man has a larger right hand. It could / would mean that he is a laborer, but only if the player already knew that before. A larger could also mean that he has diabetes. A larger hand could mean he plays basketball. A larger hand could mean he types in a chair for a living.

We don't know everything, we can't. What we do know, is different from one player to the next. As players in a role-playing game we have as much influence in creating the world of fiction as the narrator. In a role-playing game with 4 players, that clue of the larger hand could lead to 4, or more, conclusions. Each player could have a guess on what it means. Each will believe that they have correctly deduced what the clue meant. They all applied the same logic, and all made a justified conclusion.

The bizarre part of that result, is that each of them will be right. The role-playing game exists only in shared imagination. Whatever the player is thinking IS the “real” answer. Telling them otherwise is unhelpful. To have a better mystery in your role-playing game, match your in game clues, with in game knowledge.

A player might suspect that detective smoke cigarettes, and that the cigarettes they found may be a clue for their slice of personal knowledge. But, it is much better if the heroes had already seen that detective smoke a cigarette. Do not think that this is heavy handed or obvious. We are carefully matching known in game facts with in game clues. If there is to be only one correct answer we need proof positive from the game itself. Relying on common sense, tropes, or guesswork will point the finger at the butler when it should have been the Gardner.

Also, say that it is proof positive. If the players make a good conclusion. They think they've identified the right suspect, please reward them with that certainty. Players have been confused before by a wild goose chase. Once I had cornered the right suspect who then tried to lay blame on another. This is believable, that the guilty party would throw off guilt, but it led the rest of us to spend 3 more hours on the case, when we had already solved it. Realistic perhaps, but not rewarding. It was punishing and frustrating.

Less is more when it comes to good mysteries in role-playing games. Try creating a handful of potential suspects and just a few clues. Center these few clues, around a larger clue. Make sure the clues are consistent with each other. For example: We have witnessed the Private Eye smoke, there are cigarettes left behind at the scene of the crime, and tobacco smell was left on the victim. These clues circle the correct suspect, even if we don't gather all of them, we have a good place to ask the right questions. If all three are found, the players should be able to cut out all the wrong answers. If the players get stuck, introduce new action, have shots ring out, to bring their attention back to clues they ignored.

With a few clue found, let the players think of creative ways to test their hypothesis. Then give them clear proof that their theory was right or wrong. Agree with your players after they've argued it among themselves, and chosen the right answer. In the end, if your mystery has only one answer, everybody should agree on the order of events.

#7 - Sticking the Landing

Recently my GM and I held a postmortem of a game that left us dissatisfied. At the adventure's and all the players discussed what we would do next. No person was eager to continue the story line. The GM and I agreed it wasn't the best play through, the was ending sub-par. The game had become cartoonish; Players glossed over the the more interesting elements for conflict and exploration. In the end, we all decided to pick something else for the next season. Maybe next year, we shall revisit the “cartoon.” Shortly thereafter, that old story line was forgotten.

What we had played in the “cartoon,” was a revamp of something the GM had enjoyed some years ago. It was successful in the past, but not appreciated by veteran role-players. Our team bravely pushed back against the struggles set in our path. We had teamwork down a science and found several ways to solve every possible problem. Those solutions however, became cliche. We muscled past every conflict, and that was all we did. We rushed to the ending. When we arrived at the final scenes, encountering the ancient evil, we attempted to brush it aside. We were not able to overcome in the same vein as our earlier enemies. Our repetitive behavior did not succeed at game's end.

We were not destined to out muscle everything. A different resolution was supposed to take place. Yet, we did not gravitate to alternatives, and one by one we failed to fight our way out. By then, we were conformable in our routine choices. Comfortable as well, with the consequences that had favored us before. We pressed forward hard, to no effect.

Thus a disconnect ensued. Abruptly, all our plans failed, it was not the ending we were expecting. Equally unexpected were are actions to the GM. Soon, The heroes were knocked out, some with fear, others by having their bone's shattered. In the final moments my hero's destiny arrived. In that moment of glory I asked, “What did we even want again?”

The Game was off the rails. A quick decision had to be made and it all felt hollow. I committed suicide to save the party, not as a heroic deed, but because I couldn't think of anything better to do. Then I sat back and watched my teammates run away, as the GM gave a final eulogy about sacrifice for the greater good. Destiny gave safety to the heroes, but they did not deserve it. This happy ending was misplaced. It wasn't the real ending, or the real destiny, the game was over because it had no where to go.

Recall the necessity of player's choice. That is their special power in a role-playing game. The GM's unique power is to administer the consequences for the choices players make to the GM's setup. This back and forth is a tennis game of shared storytelling. Events leads to decisions, that lead to consequences, that provide for choices, that lead to events. This is the normal dialogue of Choice - Consequence.

Things destined, break this cause and effect. Destiny is independent of the choice – consequence dialogue. If something is part of Destiny, it will occur regardless of choices made. Regardless of what transpired beforehand. Independent of all the players wishes and intents. It is a great interruption to normal game play, and is easy to abuse.
This does not mean that a RPG cannot have a destiny. Players can certainly elect to give heroes destinies. GMs also can prepare events in a game to be “scripted,” and happen independent of the players' say so. Remember, that destinies are not part of the normal dialogue. These destined events are purposefully predetermined. Meant to be another dimension atop the deterministic tennis match, of choices and consequences. Destiny will always be a separate layer of events, and cannot fulfill the needs of cause and effect.

When my moment of destiny arrived, the end was near. No one else could act. This was not only because I destined to interrupt the regular game, but also because they were near death. Yet, the opportunity, that was my destiny, was not clear. All the foreshadowing of our bravado led us into doom. A happy ending was not foreseeable. At that time I had convinced myself that the heroes were to all die.

The destiny felt hollow, as it overturned the choice – consequence dialogue. This ending did not compliment the heroes, it merely side-stepped their doom. Doom fell on us because of our poor choices.
I want to stress, that the ending was not dissatisfying because of the destiny. Nor because of the interruption. It was because the Destiny arrived, as a last chance for choice. When no choice should have had the consequence of saving us. It was an ending roughly stuffed in. Everything we had done before gave us failure.

Perhaps the destiny should have been that I led the heroes to their end, bitterly fighting to the last in a vain attempt.

“A New Hope” ends on a happy note. Luke had the destiny to destroy the death star, and he agrees to this destiny. Despite the tie-fighters, turbo lasers, and Darth Vader, he accepts his 1 in a Million shot at firing proton torpedoes. His choice doesn't guarantee the happy ending. The story could have gone otherwise. Star Wars could have been the tale of a valiant defeat, and not a decisive strike at evil. Luke's choice doesn't mean he will win. Destiny guarantees that ending. We are most excited for Luke not when the Death Star Blows up, but we he decides to go for it. The actual explosion is “scripted,” as the event, the effect, that follows the most important element in the story, the choice.

What a dumb movie it would be, if he decided not to take his chances, not to choose trusting in the force and the Death Star explodes anyway?

Thus I stress to you, Players and GMs, to compliment the choice – consequence dialogue. Provide destiny where it matches the proper choices of role-players. Feel free to cheat, ignore die-rolls, and write over whatever you had planned. The resolution is not the climax, or the final destination. The real ending, occurs a few minutes before a heroes eulogy, or the award ceremony.

#6 - World-Building 101

Why do Orcs want to fight heroes? Have you considered this before? Anyone who is familiar with lord of the rings would have noticed that Orcs are both bloodthirsty but also cowardly. What is that all about? Now there is an answer to this, Tolkien did talk about the nature of Orcs and described their wicked motivations. But as for you, the creator of your own fictional world, you must tell us! Characters will encounter a lot of holes and questions if you make details baseless. Don't overlook two essentials, consistency and connectivity. I offer those up as the hallmarks of good world-building. If you make any fictional setting, I implore to consider how does one aspect of the world effect another? Also please keep those aspects the same throughout time.

Now lets jump to another example of those “holes” I mentioned in world-building. People drive themselves nuts trying to figure out how different super-powers interact with others kinds of super-powers. Sure the Hulk has super-strength so long as he is angry, but couldn't someone with telepathic powers take away his anger? If such a psychic stole this anger would they become the Hulk? Is the nature of the Hulk's anger such that it cannot be transferred? Like the Hulk's physical power, is his emotional state an unstoppable force? I don't know the answer to these questions. Still, these questions are fair game in shared fiction. Linking anger to strength, means that everybody who lives with the Hulk is able to experiment with that aspect of reality. Giving different answers is a great way to infuriate everybody who have so far gone along with the agreed upon world.

If we disagree whether a thermometer rises when we put it in a fire, we are going to have problems with any meaningful conversation. Such is our shared world, consistency and connectivity is the name of the game here on earth! It is also in Marvel comics. Gravity has to be universal for us to derive meaning from it, and the same goes for wizards and wands in Harry Potter. We all know that the wand chooses the wizard, and if ever Rowling changed her mind on this, people would take to the streets.

My advice for you on this subject is to think of a few small details that explain many different aspects of the world. The fact that summers and winters are long in Westeros impacts all kinds of business in Game of thrones. For extended periods of time people can reply upon a large supply of food. They can predict the weather more easily, they wear the same clothes from one week to the next. Years pass, and people get older without having to worry about where to hold up and stop fighting when it gets cold in Game of Thrones. Our heroes can wander around without heavy fur coats, because last year and the next year will be summer. In this same way, they all know they had better get ready for an extra long winter. They know it will be cold and dark for an even longer period of time.

If explaining everything away gets out of hand, the second best choice is not the explain. By not giving solid answers to the foundations of your universe, you allow others to hypothesize for themselves. It is no secret that fan theories are all the rage these days. They are a dime and dozen. They come about because the nature of the world, to which they belong, is not known.

The dumbest moment in Star Wars history was when Qui-Gon Jinn told us where the force comes from. It should have been left alone. Leave the fans wondering all sorts of questions, like mine above! Are some Jedi born stronger than others? Can midi-chlorians be grown? Did Anakin Skywalker loose some midi-chlorians when he turned into Darth Vader? Is there a genetic link for midi-chlorian quantity?

These questions distract us from what should have been a fun space adventure movie.

Things are no longer magical when they are explained. In high School I played around with ideas like these. I didn't get very far in explaining much, and that is for the best. Midi-chlorians are best forgotten.

I will finish today with one of my own answer to that question from before. "Why do Orcs always fight the heroes?" It is because they cannot eat vegetables. Living as a species of exclusive carnivores has led Orcs to fight in search of food. They will strike at anyone who appears weak out of rabid hunger. They will also retreat as soon as they realize there meals will kill them. I will stop myself there before I explain too much and break open that consistency I mentioned. This detail does not match what Tolkien wrote, but it doesn't need to, this is how I explain it in my world. Every fictional world belongs to the people who create its shared existence. Good luck making, and sharing the details in your own!