this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
720 points (97.1% liked)

RPGMemes

14129 readers
1079 users here now

Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] Kolanaki@pawb.social 3 points 6 days ago

Do you think it would suck to be one of the bottom heads? ๐Ÿค”

[โ€“] wowwoweowza@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

One question per group. Also now you die because murder.

[โ€“] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 days ago

Barbarian just ripped the head off of one of the guards, you think the other guard is going to be able to arrest them?

"Answer our questions or you're next."

[โ€“] er_car@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[โ€“] krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

JAJAJAJAJAJJAJAJAJAJJAJAJAJAJAJAJJAJAJAJJAJAJJAJAJJAJAJAJAJJ almighty

[โ€“] Red_October@piefed.world 196 points 1 week ago (6 children)

I mean, the Barbarian asked the one question and didn't gain anything from it. Knowing which one is the liar doesn't... help anymore.

[โ€“] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 104 points 1 week ago

That's why this is a brilliantly played barbarian. They think they are clever but will still have to do things the hard way.

[โ€“] FerretyFever0@fedia.io 47 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Ah. Normally I see this with no limit on questions. You're right. It'd only work with at least two questions.

[โ€“] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 89 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I've only heard it with one question, that's the whole point. Otherwise you just ask a guard some trivial question (e.g. What color is the sky?) to determine which is the liar, then just ask which is the safe door.

The whole point is to get the information you need from a single question.

[โ€“] Xylight@lemdro.id 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

~~"What would the result be of combining the following terms with "and": the direction of the correct door, and the color of the sky?"~~

edit: im stupid

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[โ€“] Triumph@fedia.io 118 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Ask either guard: "If I asked the other guard which door led to the castle, what would they say?" The answer is always the door that leads to instant death; enter the other door.

[โ€“] fartographer@lemmy.world 37 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Then, rip both of them in half and knock down the safe door so that everyone after you immediately knows the safe route

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[โ€“] cannedtuna@lemmy.world 106 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)
[โ€“] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

How can they both explain it when one only tells lies?

[โ€“] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is there an actual plot to Mimi, or is she just a complete chaos goblin?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[โ€“] svc@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 73 points 1 week ago (6 children)

But they gained no information on which door to choose ='(

[โ€“] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Yes, but they did establish that one of the guards is no longer living and that giving barbarians riddles is dangerous for everyone involved.

load more comments (5 replies)
[โ€“] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 69 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

For years, I had my own headcanon for the Labyrinth movie. In the scene, the young Sarah correctly solves the riddle, passes through the correct door, says "This is a piece of cake!" and then she immediately falls down a pit of doom. This confused me, because she got the answer right. So I reasoned that the guards were both liars, and because they both participated in explaining the rules, they were lying about the rules.

It was only a few years ago that I read in an interview that the Labyrinth (or Jareth) dropped her down the hole because she said it was a piece of cake. It was her arrogance that set her back, not that she got the riddle wrong.

But now it still bothers me that the liar, whichever one he is, helps explain the rules of the scenario. If he always lies, then she can't trust that either of them ever tells the truth. The rules have to be described separately, like on a sign or by a disinterested third party. Or you could phrase it differently, like "One of us will answer your question truthfully, and one of us will answer your question dishonestly." That way you avoid saying that they always lie, and specify that the lie will only be in response to the one question.

Fuck, I've had too much coffee. How the fuck did I get up on this soapbox? Why are you still reading? Go do something productive.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: โ€น prev next โ€บ