The Keyring Problem
This isn't my recap of the 2011 Hunt. I don't know that I'll have the energy to do a really good full-length one like I did for 2009. For what it's worth, it was definitely an A++ Would Do This Team's Hunts Again sort of Hunt, even more so than S.P.I.E.S. was.
My one major gripe with this Hunt was with two of Zelda's three metas. I may write a post ( Read more... )
My one major gripe with this Hunt was with two of Zelda's three metas. I may write a post ( Read more... )
Hunt puzzle writers need to be careful to avoid doing anything to cause their solvers to lose faith in them.
In an MIT hunt context, this normally happens if a team loses its momentum after the 48 hour mark or so, but it can happen even earlier if the team loses its momentum completely for between two to four hours with its full complement of solvers. It can also happen to individual solvers if they fail to gain traction on enough different puzzles in a row while their team's momentum is low, or if they solve enough puzzles successfully whose mechanisms seem arbitrary.
Accordingly, one of the most important things for a puzzle writer to have is solver empathy. The constructor ought to be able to ask himself/herself "how would I solve this puzzle if I had no knowledge of the puzzle's subject matter or how it worked?" Not only does asking this question help identify keyring problems, it also helps identify hunt puzzle problems where there are multiple intuitive leaps (clued or otherwise) which are too close together, or whether one of the intuitive leaps required is a leap around a blind corner. (Just as a puzzle with many visible possibilities can be a problem, a puzzle with no visible possibilities can also be a problem.)
I may yak more about some of these things more later, especially in the context of this year's hunt, but I'll stop here for now to allow me to make it to work on time. :-)
Reply
Leave a comment