$18.00
The Hotness
Games|People|Company
The Hotness has gone cold...
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 120.86

7,273 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
45.8% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
34 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Mansions of Madness: Second Edition» Forums » Rules

Subject: Cooperation during puzzles rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Daryl Falco
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mb
The 1st edition of the game had the following rule:

"When an investigator attempts to solve a puzzle, other players
may not help him solve it. They may not offer suggestions or
otherwise give him hints as to how to solve it."

I didn't see any mention one way or another for the 2nd edition. Sure, the rules use the phrase "the investigator" which might imply puzzle-solving is a single-player activity. However, I'm a bit surprised that no mention was made in either the Learn to Play or Rules Reference.

How are people playing this? Or, did I miss something in the rules?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Bowles
United States
Depauw
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmb
Don't remember reading it specifically, but I would play it as the one that discovered it, works it. Thematically, it's hard for two people to "pick" a lock at the same time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Enon Sci
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
All we know for certain is that the rules, as shipped, do not include a prohibition against multiple people working a puzzle, despite the 1st edition making that prohibition clear. We've intuited this as a conscious change, though it may have been an oversight as well.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Rindfleisch
msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Always house ruled that one for my group as "The player who likes doing puzzles gets to solve, with the restrictions of the investigator who discovered it". I always played keeper, so never really got a chance to do them, so I'm more than happy to do puzzles in this one.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
ParisianDreams
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The game is fully cooperative so we all participate in the puzzle solving. Unlike 1e, 2e rules do not say it's not allowed.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christina Crouch
United Kingdom
Tadley
Hampshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
There is nothing in the rules to say that players may not co-operate.

Personally, I have house-ruled that they may not help you with a puzzle, because I think its anti-thematic. If the rest of your investigators are on the other side of the house, they wouldn't be able to 'see' the puzzle you are working on to help you. YMMV.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
NoFunAtAll
Belgium
Antwerp
flag msg tools
John Coltrane: My Favorite Things // Jackie Mclean: Swing Swang Swingin' // Clifford Jordan: Cliff Craft // Sam Rivers: Fuchsia Swing Song
mbmbmbmbmb
I get the part where when they are in another room other players can't help out, but honestly if there are multiple players in the same room they are gonna help out...

Imagine finding yourself in a haunted mansion being berated by freaky shit on all sides, someone finds a puzzle you are gonna haul ass and get that sucker solved just so you can get out of the mess you're in.

There's theme for ya.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
soak man
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
My group plays it that you can only help if you are in the same room. This is so that the person completing the puzzle genuinely feels like they get that "moment" to be the guy who got things done.

It also prevents Alpha-gaming, which can be a big turn-off in coops. You know, that guys who is like, "Hey, on your turn attack the cultist and then move to my space so you can give me X thing. And then next turn you will be able to investigate here and explore that room." That guy, if you have one, will also likely be all "LET ME SOLVE THE PUZZLE FOR YOU. JUST MOVE THAT PIECE. JUST DO IT!"

Everyone likes to have a bit of a story about their character and choices after a game of MoM 2E, and I find making your own choices with consequences can enhance that aspect.

But as per instructions, I didn't really see a rule saying anything about it, so I imagine in the spirit of a coop, you are able to help always.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daryl Falco
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mb
Thanks for all the comments everyone. There doesn't seem to be a real consensus, so I sent the question to FFG. If/when they respond, I'll post the answer here.

IMO, I'd probably let other investigators in the same space (maybe room) assist the puzzle-solving investigator. My only concern game-wise would be the downtime for the other players.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
Overtext pending moderation...
mbmbmbmbmb
Anarchosyn wrote:
All we know for certain is that the rules, as shipped, do not include a prohibition against multiple people working a puzzle, despite the 1st edition making that prohibition clear. We've intuited this as a conscious change, though it may have been an oversight as well.



The intention is that players can help each other with puzzles (there is no rule that prohibits it).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Logan
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
My words literally betray me.
mbmbmbmbmb
malibu_babe_28 wrote:
There is nothing in the rules to say that players may not co-operate.

Personally, I have house-ruled that they may not help you with a puzzle, because I think its anti-thematic. If the rest of your investigators are on the other side of the house, they wouldn't be able to 'see' the puzzle you are working on to help you. YMMV.


out of curiosity. do you ban table talk and discussion when investigators are on the other side of the house?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Flavio Santos
Brazil
Brasilia
Distrito Federal
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
bleached_lizard wrote:
Anarchosyn wrote:
All we know for certain is that the rules, as shipped, do not include a prohibition against multiple people working a puzzle, despite the 1st edition making that prohibition clear. We've intuited this as a conscious change, though it may have been an oversight as well.



The intention is that players can help each other with puzzles (there is no rule that prohibits it).


That is exactly what he said.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Logan
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
My words literally betray me.
mbmbmbmbmb
bleached_lizard wrote:
Anarchosyn wrote:
All we know for certain is that the rules, as shipped, do not include a prohibition against multiple people working a puzzle, despite the 1st edition making that prohibition clear. We've intuited this as a conscious change, though it may have been an oversight as well.



The intention is that players can help each other with puzzles (there is no rule that prohibits it).


Too often rules don't reveal intent. But I agree that the rules as written make it look like cooperation is intended.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anthony Harlan

Oregon
msg tools
mb
We play that other players can help, but the help has been "I see a 4 solution"
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Old Forge
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I would say they can only help if they are in the same room and if they use an action. The app purposly closes the puzzle when incomplete and saves progress until someone else attempts it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BT Carpenter
United States
Reston
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
All rules references in the various "Puzzle" sections refer to the investigator in the singular.

I admit that if I hadn't played 1st edition I wouldn't know the 'no collaboration' rule from that version, but it has affected how I perceive how puzzles should be handled in 2nd ed.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
Overtext pending moderation...
mbmbmbmbmb
All references to player actions also use the singular. Does that mean other players can't help you when you're deciding your actions?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Enon Sci
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
byronczimmer wrote:
All rules references in the various "Puzzle" sections refer to the investigator in the singular.

I admit that if I hadn't played 1st edition I wouldn't know the 'no collaboration' rule from that version, but it has affected how I perceive how puzzles should be handled in 2nd ed.


That is a very dangerous precedent for viewing rules in games. It's just as likely a conscious change, especially given the fact the contents of the original rules weren't unknown to these designers. I suspect they parsed them closely, across many development meetings.

It's speculative, but one reason for the change may be they felt the flow of the game might be negatively impacted by imposing such a prohibition universally. From a design standpoint, it's an unpredictably lengthly period of downtime for the other players. That's a design no-no 101.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Enon Sci
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
bleached_lizard wrote:
Anarchosyn wrote:
All we know for certain is that the rules, as shipped, do not include a prohibition against multiple people working a puzzle, despite the 1st edition making that prohibition clear. We've intuited this as a conscious change, though it may have been an oversight as well.



The intention is that players can help each other with puzzles (there is no rule that prohibits it).


I respect you greatly, Chris, but you really have no clue what the intentions of the developers were unless they told you explicitly (which I presume they didn't, otherwise you'd have said).

Similarly, to assume rules exist which are not explicitly stated is fool hearty, and transgresses the same error. All we know is what is written. Oversight or not, there is no prohibition in the rules today. The fact that this also makes the game flow better in a social environment leads me to conclude it wasn't an oversight, but I'll readily admit that conclusion is speculation.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
Overtext pending moderation...
mbmbmbmbmb
Anarchosyn wrote:
bleached_lizard wrote:
Anarchosyn wrote:
All we know for certain is that the rules, as shipped, do not include a prohibition against multiple people working a puzzle, despite the 1st edition making that prohibition clear. We've intuited this as a conscious change, though it may have been an oversight as well.



The intention is that players can help each other with puzzles (there is no rule that prohibits it).


I respect you greatly, Chris, but you really have no clue what the intentions of the developers were unless they told you explicitly (which I presume they didn't, otherwise you'd have said).

Similarly, to assume rules exist which are not explicitly stated is fool hearty, and transgresses the same error. All we know is what is written. Oversight or not, there is no prohibition in the rules today. The fact that this also makes the game flow better in a social environment leads me to conclude it wasn't an oversight, but I'll readily admit that conclusion is speculation.



Okay: they told me explicitly.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dean Love
United Kingdom
Coventry
West Midlands
flag msg tools
Anarchosyn wrote:
bleached_lizard wrote:
Anarchosyn wrote:
All we know for certain is that the rules, as shipped, do not include a prohibition against multiple people working a puzzle, despite the 1st edition making that prohibition clear. We've intuited this as a conscious change, though it may have been an oversight as well.



The intention is that players can help each other with puzzles (there is no rule that prohibits it).


I respect you greatly, Chris, but you really have no clue what the intentions of the developers were unless they told you explicitly (which I presume they didn't, otherwise you'd have said).


I think Chirs was a play tester, so it's actually perfectly possible he was told explicitly and also can't say. That too is just speculation though
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Enon Sci
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Deano2099 wrote:

I think Chirs was a play tester, so it's actually perfectly possible he was told explicitly and also can't say. That too is just speculation though


Oh, I know. I just found it odd that he wouldn't relay the source, as not all playtesters have a direct line to the names on the box (I've playtested for FFG in the past as well, during the Runebound 2E days).

That said, he confirmed right above you that his source was from FFG, which I can respect. You might want to lead with that next time, Chris.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris J Davis
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
designer
Overtext pending moderation...
mbmbmbmbmb
Anarchosyn wrote:
Deano2099 wrote:

I think Chirs was a play tester, so it's actually perfectly possible he was told explicitly and also can't say. That too is just speculation though


Oh, I know. I just found it odd that he wouldn't relay the source, as not all playtesters have a direct line to the names on the box (I've playtested for FFG in the past as well, during the Runebound 2E days).

That said, he confirmed right above you that his source was from FFG, which I can respect. You might want to lead with that next time, Chris.


I kinda presumed it was a given.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daryl Falco
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mb
bleached_lizard wrote:
Anarchosyn wrote:
Deano2099 wrote:

I think Chirs was a play tester, so it's actually perfectly possible he was told explicitly and also can't say. That too is just speculation though


Oh, I know. I just found it odd that he wouldn't relay the source, as not all playtesters have a direct line to the names on the box (I've playtested for FFG in the past as well, during the Runebound 2E days).

That said, he confirmed right above you that his source was from FFG, which I can respect. You might want to lead with that next time, Chris.


I kinda presumed it was a given.


Oh, then this is solved. Thanks Chris!

And yes, please lead with that next time. If I had known you had gotten the info from FFG, then I wouldn't have sent them a rules question about it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aaron Velox
United States
California
flag msg tools
mb
I'm gonna assume that, since not stated otherwise in the rules, everyone can help. I get that, thematically, if investigators are on the other side of the house they can't see the puzzle... But what does that mean for the actual player? Am I just going to ask them all to look away when a puzzle arrives? They're not going to do that; it's logical they're going to look at the puzzle and try to figure it out for themselves, even if not allowed to speak. If that already breaks any thematic rule that may exist, everyone might as well help each other.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.