# Hint: Search for the Lost Ark

Any hints on how to climb the steeple? . I have three numbers already. The only other possible puzzle I can see is swimming down the pond.

There are some clue down in the pond. Furthermore you need to go up to the steeple

Yes, exactly! Can you give me a hint on how to go up there? The ladder alone does not workâ€¦

1 Like

The game changed after my testing, I know that for sure as I talked about this with the autor. I think that the ladder still are under the priest bed

1 Like

It is, but it is not tall enough for the steeple, only for the vicarageâ€™s roof. When you played you could climb the steeple with it?

1 Like
Spoiler

Can you use a key to find stairs?

Wowâ€¦ I completely missed the door to the north of the nave of the church. Thanks! By the way I saw your previous reply, it changed in real time in front of my eyes. That was cool!

2 Likes

A nice thing/hint about the game which might not have been intended:

You donâ€™t have to solve all puzzles to solve the game. I didnâ€™t (at first)

More specifically (serious spoiler):

You donâ€™t need all clues to guess the combination. I was at first lacking one clue which meant I knew 4 out of 5 digits in the combination including the order. So all I had to do was to try 9 different digits (less actually) until I managed to open the chest. Actually, I thought that was an ingenious puzzle because the author had me searching everywhere for the last clue and then I â€śrealizedâ€ť I just had to guess the last digit. Of course, theoretically, the player could guess all 5 digits but that does not seem realistic. If you are missing 2 digits you have to go through 9*9=81 combinations which most players would probably not do, as it would take a lot of time and because the author might prevent the chest to open if the player does that. But trying a max of 9 different combinations seems feasible. Perhaps a post comp version could put in a time delay if the player tries more than ten timesâ€¦

1 Like

I also did this way first time I completed the game. In a second playthrough I got the full code.

1 Like

May I ask you which of the puzzles you left behind? I found the game to be extremely straightforward and clear on all its puzzles; sometimes maybe even too much (my mistake was to play it on a rush and not read the room description carefully). Iâ€™d go so far as to recommend it as a beginner/introductory parser game.

4 Likes

If you can tell me which of the Bible passages youâ€™ve discovered in a spoiler, I can give you a hint to the one youâ€™re missing.

1 Like

I climb the steeple and found some written on the roof As I couldnâ€™t reach the roof, I entered the code trying 10 times untill I got the right combination in the chest

1 Like

I remember not noticing the engraving. If somebody misses a clue and think they have â€śclearedâ€ť a room by thinking they examined everything, it is nice that the game can still be completed while missing 1 clue. Missing 2 clues is very tedious (81 combinations) so that should probably be avoided in a post comp version in some way.

You may have skipped over the room description that says, â€śThe steeple itself is made from local stone and warrants a closer inspection.â€ť You canâ€™t get much more explicit than that. (You can also type HINT.)

2 Likes

Oh, that is the question.

The game is definitely fair but there is always the risk that a human player overlooks something in plain sight.

I found an object up there and could see something on a roof which somehow made me forget to examine stuff like the steeple.

1 Like

Also want to clarify this:

I donâ€™t think anything is wrong with the puzzles. I just think that it would be good to prevent too much brute force to guess the combination. It is just my personal preference that missing one clue could be allowed but no more than that.

It reminds me of Zozzled where you could leave one puzzle unsolved and still complete the game.

1 Like

Iâ€™m open to suggestions. The only thing that springs to mind is preventing the player entering any combination at all if they havenâ€™t discovered all the clues. Would that be too harsh?

1 Like

Actually quite interesting to hear what people think of such â€śpreventionsâ€ť.

You could count the number of clues found (I think you already do?) and if it is e.g. three or less you say something like â€śYou donâ€™t feel you have enough information to guess the combination.â€ť and if you have 4 out of 5 you could say e.g. â€śYou have a feeling that you must have missed a clue somewhere but it might be possible to guess the combination anyway so you give it a try.â€ť - something like that.

But I donâ€™t think it is a big deal. If someone insist guessing 81 different combinations, I guess it is their choice. I just think it was a quality that you could avoid finding all clues. In real life, I think anyone would brute force the combination if they only were missing one digit, rather than spending time on searching for a clue that may or may not exist. E.g. unlocking a bike in 9 tries instead of trying to find a piece of paper that may be hidden somewhere in my paper archives.

1 Like

Iâ€™d say itâ€™s not a big deal and looks good as it is. If someone is tempted to try 81 combinations to brute force, they might as well reconsider why theyâ€™re playing in the first place. Personally even missing one clue for me means I havenâ€™t finished the game, because I consider the game is the solving (after all you donâ€™t get any super amazing prize or cutscene at the end anyway).

In case this was something like one part of the game, and not solving it would keep me from proceeding, and I was stuck for a few days, I might brute force instead of taking a hint just so I could still have the chance to come back and solve it later. In that case I also appreciate having one or two optional puzzles!

1 Like