Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Should I write about how the character solved some riddle or let the reader solve it himself

+0
−0

"Reaching an end to his path, Eric found a locked door, the lock was a combination of 4 numbers, and above the doorknob a script explaining the lock : 'finishing four circles, a lost day is found' "

This is an imaginary script, I want to know if I should solve the riddle for the reader, or just say that the character discovered the solution and got past it and move on ?

One last thing, A game is under-development based on this story, And I don't care if it will affect gameplay or not, because if he read the book he already knows the end of the game :p

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/7503. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

0 comment threads

1 answer

+2
−0

As always in a good story, I'd say it depends.

Is the riddle itself relevant to the story? Or, is the method of solving it relevant to the story? If so, I think it's fair to show the reader how the protagonist solves the riddle, even if it ends up boiling down only to something like he thought about it for a moment before it dawned on him that these astronomically centered people probably meant circles around the sun, making it obvious that they were somehow referring to leap years.

If the riddle or method of solution isn't relevant to the story, then I'd leave it out altogether. The protagonist encounters some undecipherable (by him/her) symbols, which there is no need to explain further, next to a lock, and he starts thinking through what he knows of the people who left it or even just tries combinations at random. Exactly what works then would depend on the established backstory - obviously it can't be completely indecipherable if he is the established expert on the people or culture, for example.

Bottom line, the reader is probably reading the story for entertainment, not to be quizzed at puzzles. So whether you decide to outline the process of solving the riddle in excruciating detail, or just do a little bit of hand-waving, don't simply dismiss the obstacle you introduced for your character. There are few things more jarring (and breaking suspension of disbelief) than bits of story which are introduced and then left completely unexplained to the reader. If you aren't willing to explain it (the lock in this case), don't introduce it at all (leave the door unlocked).

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

Sign up to answer this question »