Metapuzzle

Revision as of 07:21, 15 March 2022 by Leveloneknob (talk | contribs) (Created page with "'''Metapuzzles''' are a unique type of puzzle, in that they cannot be solved as standalone puzzles. Metapuzzles require the use of information from other puzzles to be solved. This information is usually in the form of those puzzles' answers (usually called feeders), but can also extend to knowing how the puzzles were solved. It's rare for a hunt to not have any metapuzzles as they act as a good way to wrap up individual rounds; as long as a hunt has puzzles that can be...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Metapuzzles are a unique type of puzzle, in that they cannot be solved as standalone puzzles. Metapuzzles require the use of information from other puzzles to be solved. This information is usually in the form of those puzzles' answers (usually called feeders), but can also extend to knowing how the puzzles were solved. It's rare for a hunt to not have any metapuzzles as they act as a good way to wrap up individual rounds; as long as a hunt has puzzles that can be organized into at least one round (or round-like set), a metapuzzle can provide a conclusion to both the puzzle content and whatever story elements are in play.

Metapuzzles can come in a few distinctive forms, ranging from minimalist to positively crowded.

Pure Metas

A "pure" meta is one end of the meta spectrum, following the principal of "less is more". Pure metas provide little to no information for solvers to use when approaching it. Usually, the maximum allowable information is a title (something most puzzles will have anyway), and flavortext. Whether the flavortext is actually helpful is up to the metapuzzle writer. In some cases, a pure meta may contain a list of what puzzles go to it, but this is usually reserved for hunts that utilize meta-matching.

Pure metas can often work quite well with meta-matching as a mechanic; assuming that there's only one complete configuration of answer-to-meta assignment, having pure metas can remove a lot of work from the writer (if they're good at writing pure metas, that is). However, it does still require a lot of foresight from the author, as they have to be sure that it's clear either while or after solving a particular pure meta which of the metas solvers should submit for.

Shell Metas

The antithesis to pure metas, shell metas take up the rest of the aforementioned meta spectrum. A shell meta has very little constraint in what information can be presented, as long as there is some way to input feeders. This can range from series of blanks to fill in with the answers to a system for transforming them to an amount of content that could easily be confused with a regular feeder puzzle, if not for being unsolvable without the feeder answers.

Shell metas are a lot more common than pure metas, as finding sets of words or phrases that can be extracted from with minimal extra involvement is a very difficult process. Having an extra step to funnel the answers through can alleviate some degree of weight placed on the answer selection itself.

Mini-Metas

While not a type of meta that falls anywhere in particular on the minimum/maximum scale, mini-metas are still worth bringing up. Unlike regular metas, mini-metas are actually a type of feeder puzzle. Instead of requiring other feeder puzzle answers to be solved, they are usually accompanied by a series of mini-puzzles. These mini-puzzles individually take less time to solve than other full puzzles in the hunt, and each contribute an answer to the mini-meta. Then, the mini-meta results in a new feeder answer for whatever that round's meta is. It's meta-ception!

Notable examples of Mini-metas in hunts include: