My favorite take on this:
That last question is ambiguous enough (in this specific scenario) that either answer would work. It’s both true that the other guard can’t tell her something happened (due to being dead), while the other guard would have said that something did happen if he had been able to. So it’s a meaningless question but the wife doesn’t know that since she doesn’t know the guard is dead.
Which just adds another layer to the joke lol.
Alternate solution:
Is there an actual plot to Mimi, or is she just a complete chaos goblin?
How can they both explain it when one only tells lies?
Is there more of this?
What’s this from?
Nhim is the artist. The character is Mimi. They’re all standalone comics, but there’s a bunch with Mimi. All have the same crazy goblin energy to them.
Ooh thanks and bookmarked!
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.
I got an unexpected laugh from Rick and Mortys take on this. His answer was “you ever fuck this guys wife?” And watched them fight to the death.
deleted by creator
And the surviving guard will most definitely answer a 2nd question despite the rules.
This doesn’t help the party decide which door to go through at all
So the traditional answer here is to ask them to point at the door the other guard will say is safe.
However, I’m curious, does anyone know of any other valid solutions?
“Is the guard that tells the truth standing in front of the safe door?” If they say yes, you go through their door, if they say no then you go to the other one
I did not think this was going to work. Som bitch it does. Crazy
That’s wild that this works. What.
If they say yes they can still be a liar.
Could probably do something clever with XOR.
Is exactly one of the following statements true? You are the liar. Your door is the safe door.
How is that a valid answer, they would both point at a different door
Now let’s make it a little harder. You have three guards: one tells the truth, one lies, one answers randomly. The guards understand you, but only answer either “da” or “ja”. One means yes, one means no, but you don’t know which is which. You get to ask each guard one question.
Give them a paradox by encoding the other two’s potential responses into the question (similarly to the two guard solution, but this time the random response is included). If they are able to answer, then you asked the random one, because the liar and truth teller have no idea what the random one would answer so can’t answer only yes or no without potentially violating their truthiness rule.
This isn’t to solve the puzzle but to see what the other two would do in that situation. If I figured out the random one with the first question, I’d use the 2nd to ask the same thing of one of the others. Then, if it’s still 2 doors, the two guard solution will work on the last one to figure it out.
But if the first guard asked explodes or something when asked, I think that there wouldn’t be enough questions left to find both the random guard (which I believe you have to do first) and the door. Though if you change the question to only ask about one other’s answer instead of both, you’ll be able to find both the random guard and the safe door.
Though hopefully the whole setup isn’t a lie and everyone present is a strategic liar that wants you dead. Imagine doing one of those riddles and when you step through the door you notice both doors lead into the same room whose walls now seem to be closing in and the last thing you hear is one of the guards asking another why riddles seem to get people to let their guard down anyways.
When I was a substitute teacher I would give the kids logic puzzles of varying difficulty. I would offer $100 if anyone could provide me with the answer to this one. If they looked it up on Wikipedia and could then explain it to me, I’d give them a king size candy bar.
I never had to pay out.
This puzzle is always presented as difficult, but why not just ask a known? If your eyes are brown just ask “Are my eyes brown?” You’d immediately know which one lies or tells the truth.
E: I missed the limit of one question.
Because there are two doors and only one question. If you ask a known question unrelated to the door you find out who the liar is but lose your opportunity to ask them which is the correct door.
Knowing who lies and who tells the truth doesn’t tell you which door leads to the prize and which to death.
One question per group. Also now you die because murder.
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.”
Jajaja no creo
JAJAJAJAJAJJAJAJAJAJJAJAJAJAJAJAJJAJAJAJJAJAJJAJAJJAJAJAJAJJ almighty
Jajaja
