Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Explain to me how that has in-world rationale for existing :p
Explain to me how 90% of what is in D&D has in-world rationale for existing, beyond "a wizard did it"? In this case "the gods did it" is functionally the same as "a wizard did it". Why did the gods/wizard do it? How did all the weird monsters come to exist, especially since they are extremely unlikely to have all come from evolution and definitely do not form a functioning ecosystem. Why does so much of what exists, or does not exist, in the game and the published worlds for the game ignore the implications of what is presented in the game? What is the in-world rationale for giant spiders/insects which would be unable to support their own weight and unable to breathe? Physics and physiology argue against them. If the physics and physiology of the game world allow for them, why is the influence of this new physics and physiology so curiously absent from everything else in the game world? How are centaurs and Pegasi physiologically and anatomically possible? Show me exactly how the winds on a pegasus articulate with the rest of the body, and how they allow for flight...
In-world rationale is not a path you want to go down with me if you are using it as an argument against a game element on the basis of any kind of "realism".
So ... because some of the basic premises of the setting - including the laws of physics and biophysics ( that'd be the magic and giant spiders ) - cannot be completely explained under our laws of nature, that we should just abandon all pretense of logic, plausibility, and rationality?
In essence, you're arguing because you can't explain everything under "realism", you are not responsible for explaining anything even under "plausibility" or "consistency"? All or nothing; black or white; perfectly explainable, or the worst indulgences of childish irrationality? As you say, you really don't need any rationale other than "a wizard/god did it!"
OK...
Personally ( and this is a matter or personal taste ), I much prefer to take some of the basic fantastical elements ( creatures, existence of magic, existence/involvement of Gods in the world ) and try and extrapolate out a setting that would exist logically with those changes to the basic axioms of the world, whenever possible. It's an approach which absorbs the fantastical, without it descending into the arbitrary and absurd - like Howard Hughes wizards building Skinner Boxes for no other reason than the hope that at some point, some random group of adventures wanders into it some centuries hence ...
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
It's an approach which absorbs the fantastical, without it descending into the arbitrary and absurd - like Howard Hughes wizards building Skinner Boxes for no other reason than the hope that at some point, some random group of adventures wanders into it some centuries hence ...
Right, but classic dungeons like Tomb of Horrors, Halaster's Undermountain, and even the Tomb of Annihilation, are all basically just that. They were massive Skinner Boxes created for the express intent to murder thrill-seeking treasure hunters by insane wizards/liches/etc. They aren't built with the vague hope that at some point, some random group of adventures will wander in. They are built to tantalize and foster a legend that draws in the foolish for whatever mad designs of their creator.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
There's illogical, arbitrary, and inconsistent material published officially, as well as rolled out unofficially in peoples' home settings - no arguments there. With 40 years and upteen dozens of authors ( of various levels of skill ), how could it be otherwise?
I try and exercise some editorial control over my world setting, even with "official" material.
Again, that's my personal preference.
You can do what you want, but I'm curious are you really trying to roll all the published material into your world setting canon, regardless of it's plausibility (Tomb of Horrors)? If so, I'm curious as to what happened the to the ray guns, and robots from Expedition to the Barrier Peaks in your world? Is there a Paladin of Tyr ( or whomever ) stomping around in power armor somewhere? Or is that module not included in your canon, as it doesn't fit your vision of the world; do those items seem implausible in the setting to you?
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
There's illogical, arbitrary, and inconsistent material published officially, as well as rolled out unofficially in peoples' home settings - no arguments there. With 40 years and upteen dozens of authors ( of various levels of skill ), how could it be otherwise?
I try and exercise some editorial control over my world setting, even with "official" material.
Again, that's my personal preference.
You can do what you want, but I'm curious are you really trying to roll all the published material into your world setting canon, regardless of it's plausibility (Tomb of Horrors)? If so, I'm curious as to what happened the to the ray guns, and robots from Expedition to the Barrier Peaks in your world? Is there a Paladin of Tyr ( or whomever ) stomping around in power armor somewhere? Or is that module not included in your canon, as it doesn't fit your vision of the world; do those items seem implausible in the setting to you?
well that was salty, but expedition to the barrier peaks was greyhawk, which nobody uses anymore. Also, don't insult power armor.
There's illogical, arbitrary, and inconsistent material published officially, as well as rolled out unofficially in peoples' home settings - no arguments there. With 40 years and upteen dozens of authors ( of various levels of skill ), how could it be otherwise?
I try and exercise some editorial control over my world setting, even with "official" material.
Again, that's my personal preference.
You can do what you want, but I'm curious are you really trying to roll all the published material into your world setting canon, regardless of it's plausibility (Tomb of Horrors)? If so, I'm curious as to what happened the to the ray guns, and robots from Expedition to the Barrier Peaks in your world? Is there a Paladin of Tyr ( or whomever ) stomping around in power armor somewhere? Or is that module not included in your canon, as it doesn't fit your vision of the world; do those items seem implausible in the setting to you?
well that was salty, but expedition to the barrier peaks was greyhawk, which nobody uses anymore. Also, don't insult power armor.
The Lost Laboratory of Kwalish adventure isn't that much different and is set in the Forgotten Realms.
That being said, to answer Vedexent, ray guns and power armor doesn't seem that implausible to me on a conceptual level. But then again, I'm the product of 90's era cartoons where fantasy and technology were mished and mashed in every which way possible. Depending on my players, that sort of thing might be tonally appropriate for the game we are playing. currently, it is not the sort of thing I would introduce to my play-group.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
Expedition to the Barrier Peaks was in fact Greyhawk, but Tomb of Horrors is also AD&D, which was mentioned, so you can't cherry pick your examples. Also, there are absolutely people who still use Greyhawk - although it's not a very popular setting I admit.
As for the Lost Laboratory of Kwalish - I refer back to my original statement "There's illogical, arbitrary, and inconsistent material published officially, as well as rolled out unofficially in peoples' home settings". I find it very unlikely that I'll ever be using it.
All this is a - perhaps a futile - attempt to explain why I dislike Puzzle Rooms and find them pointless and implausible. Any of you - obviously - will build the kind of game/session/world that suits you. I'm not try to convert anyone here. As Metamongoose points out, for some games power armor and ray guns fit right in. For some of you the Archmage Howard Hughes will be building his Skinner Boxes into Dungeons.
For me, I'm with Gwen below ( well, minus the wishing death on authors )
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I'm just trying to help you understand that these sorts of places and things aren't so out of the realm of plausibility. Building trap rooms to deter grave-robbers was a serious design feature of many ancient tombs and crypts. Building in almost pointless puzzle rooms to stymie and delay trespassers long enough for defenders to arrive and apprehend them was a real thing that was really done. Now, thousands of years later, there are no guards to come round up the tomb robbers so those sorts of traps just seem pointless and arbitrary but they were not when the buildings were made. That's the sort of thing a D&D party stumbles into. A strange room that has a seemingly pointless puzzle that keeps them busy for a while to get through to the next room, or some old trap that's original purpose has long since become mostly irrelevant and has been re-purposed by the area's new monster inhabitants.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
I agree that traps built into installations to "deter" grave robbers are real, plausible, and historical thing. However I do not believe they are "puzzle rooms". They are simple, straight forward alarms and/or lethal. No one futzed around with complex combination puzzles locks. They didn't carve intricate puzzles into stonework. They trapped/imprisoned/outright killed intruders. In Egyptian tomb design, blocks of stone fell, and if that didn't kill intruders, they certainly blocked them off in dead end corridors to die of thirst.
I would be interested to see if there are any historical documented puzzle traps of the kind you're describing. I doubt it - but I'm often wrong, and would be interested to see if such actually exist.
If you want to put in mechanisms that can be defended historically, or realistically, then do that. Don't put in singing statues, or complex potion riddles, or self-playing chess boards ( thank you J.K. Rowling ), try and kill the Party outright. That has it's own problems, and I probably wouldn't do that, but it at least has the legitimacy of history.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I would be interested to see if there are any historical documented puzzle traps of the kind you're describing. I doubt it - but I'm often wrong, and would be interested to see if such actually exist.
Here you go. I'm sure deeper time investments would yield even more, but 5-seconds of Googling is all I have time for right now.
If you want to put in mechanisms that can be defended historically, or realistically, then do that. Don't put in singing statues, or complex potion riddles, or self-playing chess boards ( thank you J.K. Rowling ), try and kill the Party outright. That has it's own problems, and I probably wouldn't do that, but it at least has the legitimacy of history.
I guess, but what's the point of playing in a world with magic and potions and weird mystical stuff and not also extrapolate how people would use those things to spice up their security?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
The tomb of Amenhotep III: "a false floor concealing a deadly pit trap! A 6 meter (20 foot) drop down a featureless shaft was basically a death sentence for anyone unlucky enough to get fall in"
Baphuon in the Khmer: "But the stones removed were not as ornamental as they seemed: they held back a massive wall of sand, which flooded out, destroying the reclining Buddha and the entire western side of the pyramid."
The tomb of the Red Queen of Palenque:"Their bones had been painted red with cinnabar – a deadly neurotoxin. The deadly paint covered not just their bones, which it had seeped into, but also all of the jade, pearls, and other treasures in there with her. "
Oak Island Money Pit: "layer upon layer of flood-inducing booby traps"
The Tomb of Qin Shi Huang: "is actual, for real, automatic crossbows", "liquid mercury lakes and rivers"
There is no mention of complex riddles. No puzzle rooms. No complex combination locks by which the tomb robber can evade their doom. No musical puzzles. No conundrum puzzles to "delay trespassers long enough for defenders to arrive and apprehend them". These are meant to kill.
I agree that you can - and should - "extrapolate how people would use those things to spice up their security". This is why Glyphs of Warding, and such make sense to me. They are application of new capabilities into old - and lethal - purposes. I see no reason why the existence of magic would change the intent of guardians and designers toward trespassers.
Traps, alarms, and - as Matthias von Schwarzwald pointed out - security devices which are tests of quality ( allowing people that possess a certain quality to bypass a security barrier, even if they lack pre-knowledge of a bypass or key ) - make a kind of sense, from a historical/realistic perspective.
Singing statue puzzles rooms, do not.
As I've said repeatedly - do what you want for your table. I'm not trying to convert you. But I see no reason to incorporate what I perceive as - and have yetto see a solid historical counter argument for - silly and unrealistic game elements into my world.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Some of the treasure caches were even marked in a secret code, intended only to be read by the cache placer or their descendants, which details how to pass through safely.
...and while no actual treasure has been found, layer upon layer of flood-inducing booby traps, seemingly man made, along with what appear to be coded messages, has given generation after generation of treasure seekers hope.
I mean, that sure sounds like rooms with riddles and codes that would safely allow people who knew the right answers to pass undeterred to me....
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
The first one seems a semi-valid counter-example - although I'm still skeptical based on "intended only to be read by the cache placer or their descendants, which details how to pass through safely". It make sense to me to not want to kill off your work force while their building your tomb. I take the "their descendants" part with a huge grain of salt. I'm designing a tomb and I'm going to give a family access to my treasure in perpetuity? I think not. If historical precedence is any indicator, I'm more likely to kill off the "cache placer" once their done.
As for the Oak Island coded messages - I refer you to the Stone with alleged markings section here. A single stone, with alleged markings, which was used to gain publicity, personal fame, and was used to try and drum up investor interest in the 1893 Oak Island Treasure Company ( that's not suspicious at all there; no motivation at all for a forgery ), was never translated except - according to hearsay - by an "an unnamed expert" whose work was never corroborated, all before the stone mysteriously vanished? Parchment fragments with a few characters? ( sure it wasn't a pirate losing a snickers wrapper down the hole? ). I'm not sure these classify as "riddles and codes" - more like publicity stunts and forgeries.
Wild ass blue sky speculation by sensationalist journalism, and/or suspect - at best - conveniently disappearing "evidence" isn't convincing.
Whatever.
It's clear you think this is a historical thing. Run with it. Reality doesn't care what we believe, but I see no harm to anyone here if you're right or wrong.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Well, if you don't like blatant puzzle rooms, you can always just use naturally arising sticky situations that require out of the box thinking to overcome.
The whole reason i'm not a simulationist is because I think in a GAME it's important to not be afraid to sacrifice realism for fun.
Also, a major strength of dungeons is that they encourage you to look at an adventure as an adventure and not as a "story" which is a mistake i see new DMs make all the time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I did NOT eat those hikers.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Not sure this even breaks the top 10 :)
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
[screaming] the AI has learned how to use smileys! RUN!
I did NOT eat those hikers.
well that devolved quickly
I did NOT eat those hikers.
Explain to me how 90% of what is in D&D has in-world rationale for existing, beyond "a wizard did it"? In this case "the gods did it" is functionally the same as "a wizard did it". Why did the gods/wizard do it? How did all the weird monsters come to exist, especially since they are extremely unlikely to have all come from evolution and definitely do not form a functioning ecosystem. Why does so much of what exists, or does not exist, in the game and the published worlds for the game ignore the implications of what is presented in the game? What is the in-world rationale for giant spiders/insects which would be unable to support their own weight and unable to breathe? Physics and physiology argue against them. If the physics and physiology of the game world allow for them, why is the influence of this new physics and physiology so curiously absent from everything else in the game world? How are centaurs and Pegasi physiologically and anatomically possible? Show me exactly how the winds on a pegasus articulate with the rest of the body, and how they allow for flight...
In-world rationale is not a path you want to go down with me if you are using it as an argument against a game element on the basis of any kind of "realism".
So ... because some of the basic premises of the setting - including the laws of physics and biophysics ( that'd be the magic and giant spiders ) - cannot be completely explained under our laws of nature, that we should just abandon all pretense of logic, plausibility, and rationality?
In essence, you're arguing because you can't explain everything under "realism", you are not responsible for explaining anything even under "plausibility" or "consistency"? All or nothing; black or white; perfectly explainable, or the worst indulgences of childish irrationality? As you say, you really don't need any rationale other than "a wizard/god did it!"
OK...
Personally ( and this is a matter or personal taste ), I much prefer to take some of the basic fantastical elements ( creatures, existence of magic, existence/involvement of Gods in the world ) and try and extrapolate out a setting that would exist logically with those changes to the basic axioms of the world, whenever possible. It's an approach which absorbs the fantastical, without it descending into the arbitrary and absurd - like Howard Hughes wizards building Skinner Boxes for no other reason than the hope that at some point, some random group of adventures wanders into it some centuries hence ...
But you do you.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Right, but classic dungeons like Tomb of Horrors, Halaster's Undermountain, and even the Tomb of Annihilation, are all basically just that. They were massive Skinner Boxes created for the express intent to murder thrill-seeking treasure hunters by insane wizards/liches/etc. They aren't built with the vague hope that at some point, some random group of adventures will wander in. They are built to tantalize and foster a legend that draws in the foolish for whatever mad designs of their creator.
There's illogical, arbitrary, and inconsistent material published officially, as well as rolled out unofficially in peoples' home settings - no arguments there. With 40 years and upteen dozens of authors ( of various levels of skill ), how could it be otherwise?
I try and exercise some editorial control over my world setting, even with "official" material.
Again, that's my personal preference.
You can do what you want, but I'm curious are you really trying to roll all the published material into your world setting canon, regardless of it's plausibility (Tomb of Horrors)? If so, I'm curious as to what happened the to the ray guns, and robots from Expedition to the Barrier Peaks in your world? Is there a Paladin of Tyr ( or whomever ) stomping around in power armor somewhere? Or is that module not included in your canon, as it doesn't fit your vision of the world; do those items seem implausible in the setting to you?
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
well that was salty, but expedition to the barrier peaks was greyhawk, which nobody uses anymore. Also, don't insult power armor.
I did NOT eat those hikers.
The Lost Laboratory of Kwalish adventure isn't that much different and is set in the Forgotten Realms.
That being said, to answer Vedexent, ray guns and power armor doesn't seem that implausible to me on a conceptual level. But then again, I'm the product of 90's era cartoons where fantasy and technology were mished and mashed in every which way possible. Depending on my players, that sort of thing might be tonally appropriate for the game we are playing. currently, it is not the sort of thing I would introduce to my play-group.
Expedition to the Barrier Peaks was in fact Greyhawk, but Tomb of Horrors is also AD&D, which was mentioned, so you can't cherry pick your examples. Also, there are absolutely people who still use Greyhawk - although it's not a very popular setting I admit.
As for the Lost Laboratory of Kwalish - I refer back to my original statement "There's illogical, arbitrary, and inconsistent material published officially, as well as rolled out unofficially in peoples' home settings". I find it very unlikely that I'll ever be using it.
All this is a - perhaps a futile - attempt to explain why I dislike Puzzle Rooms and find them pointless and implausible. Any of you - obviously - will build the kind of game/session/world that suits you. I'm not try to convert anyone here. As Metamongoose points out, for some games power armor and ray guns fit right in. For some of you the Archmage Howard Hughes will be building his Skinner Boxes into Dungeons.
For me, I'm with Gwen below ( well, minus the wishing death on authors )
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I'm just trying to help you understand that these sorts of places and things aren't so out of the realm of plausibility. Building trap rooms to deter grave-robbers was a serious design feature of many ancient tombs and crypts. Building in almost pointless puzzle rooms to stymie and delay trespassers long enough for defenders to arrive and apprehend them was a real thing that was really done. Now, thousands of years later, there are no guards to come round up the tomb robbers so those sorts of traps just seem pointless and arbitrary but they were not when the buildings were made. That's the sort of thing a D&D party stumbles into. A strange room that has a seemingly pointless puzzle that keeps them busy for a while to get through to the next room, or some old trap that's original purpose has long since become mostly irrelevant and has been re-purposed by the area's new monster inhabitants.
Are you trying to convert me, then? ;)
I agree that traps built into installations to "deter" grave robbers are real, plausible, and historical thing. However I do not believe they are "puzzle rooms". They are simple, straight forward alarms and/or lethal. No one futzed around with complex combination puzzles locks. They didn't carve intricate puzzles into stonework. They trapped/imprisoned/outright killed intruders. In Egyptian tomb design, blocks of stone fell, and if that didn't kill intruders, they certainly blocked them off in dead end corridors to die of thirst.
I would be interested to see if there are any historical documented puzzle traps of the kind you're describing. I doubt it - but I'm often wrong, and would be interested to see if such actually exist.
If you want to put in mechanisms that can be defended historically, or realistically, then do that. Don't put in singing statues, or complex potion riddles, or self-playing chess boards ( thank you J.K. Rowling ), try and kill the Party outright. That has it's own problems, and I probably wouldn't do that, but it at least has the legitimacy of history.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Here you go. I'm sure deeper time investments would yield even more, but 5-seconds of Googling is all I have time for right now.
I guess, but what's the point of playing in a world with magic and potions and weird mystical stuff and not also extrapolate how people would use those things to spice up their security?
From the article you linked:
There is no mention of complex riddles. No puzzle rooms. No complex combination locks by which the tomb robber can evade their doom. No musical puzzles. No conundrum puzzles to "delay trespassers long enough for defenders to arrive and apprehend them". These are meant to kill.
I agree that you can - and should - "extrapolate how people would use those things to spice up their security". This is why Glyphs of Warding, and such make sense to me. They are application of new capabilities into old - and lethal - purposes. I see no reason why the existence of magic would change the intent of guardians and designers toward trespassers.
Traps, alarms, and - as Matthias von Schwarzwald pointed out - security devices which are tests of quality ( allowing people that possess a certain quality to bypass a security barrier, even if they lack pre-knowledge of a bypass or key ) - make a kind of sense, from a historical/realistic perspective.
Singing statue puzzles rooms, do not.
As I've said repeatedly - do what you want for your table. I'm not trying to convert you. But I see no reason to incorporate what I perceive as - and have yet to see a solid historical counter argument for - silly and unrealistic game elements into my world.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
From the same article that I linked:
I mean, that sure sounds like rooms with riddles and codes that would safely allow people who knew the right answers to pass undeterred to me....
The first one seems a semi-valid counter-example - although I'm still skeptical based on "intended only to be read by the cache placer or their descendants, which details how to pass through safely". It make sense to me to not want to kill off your work force while their building your tomb. I take the "their descendants" part with a huge grain of salt. I'm designing a tomb and I'm going to give a family access to my treasure in perpetuity? I think not. If historical precedence is any indicator, I'm more likely to kill off the "cache placer" once their done.
As for the Oak Island coded messages - I refer you to the Stone with alleged markings section here. A single stone, with alleged markings, which was used to gain publicity, personal fame, and was used to try and drum up investor interest in the 1893 Oak Island Treasure Company ( that's not suspicious at all there; no motivation at all for a forgery ), was never translated except - according to hearsay - by an "an unnamed expert" whose work was never corroborated, all before the stone mysteriously vanished? Parchment fragments with a few characters? ( sure it wasn't a pirate losing a snickers wrapper down the hole? ). I'm not sure these classify as "riddles and codes" - more like publicity stunts and forgeries.
Wild ass blue sky speculation by sensationalist journalism, and/or suspect - at best - conveniently disappearing "evidence" isn't convincing.
Whatever.
It's clear you think this is a historical thing. Run with it. Reality doesn't care what we believe, but I see no harm to anyone here if you're right or wrong.
Unsubscribing ......
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Well, if you don't like blatant puzzle rooms, you can always just use naturally arising sticky situations that require out of the box thinking to overcome.
I did NOT eat those hikers.
Dungeon crawls kick ass.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
In agreement!
I did NOT eat those hikers.
The whole reason i'm not a simulationist is because I think in a GAME it's important to not be afraid to sacrifice realism for fun.
Also, a major strength of dungeons is that they encourage you to look at an adventure as an adventure and not as a "story" which is a mistake i see new DMs make all the time.
I did NOT eat those hikers.