What type are Mazes or Magic boxes...

[+JPreto]

I have found already some caches that are tricky to open and require some extra geocaching skills...

 

Caches protected with Padlocks or that require a special coding are usually the Mystery Type but what about something like this?

 

 

Traditional Geocache

This is the original type of geocache and the most straightforward. These geocaches will be a container at the given coordinates. The size may vary, but at minimum, all of these geocaches will have a logbook. Larger containers may contain items for trade and trackables.

 

Mystery or Puzzle Caches

The "catch-all" of geocache types, this type may involve complicated puzzles that you will first need to solve to determine the correct coordinates. Mystery/Puzzle Caches often become the staging ground for new and unique geocaches that do not fit in another category.

 

Should it be labeled as a Mystery or as a Traditional?

Edited August 21, 2014 by JPreto

[+Team Microdot]

Depends on what you had to do to get there I suppose.

 

If it's at the given coordinates and you were able to simply go there without any extra stages or puzzling then I would say it should be listed as a Traditional with a Field Puzzle attribute.

[+J Grouchy]

Depends on what you had to do to get there I suppose.

 

If it's at the given coordinates and you were able to simply go there without any extra stages or puzzling then I would say it should be listed as a Traditional with a Field Puzzle attribute.

 

I would say traditional with the field puzzle attribute as well...but one that is several miles from my home is listed as a 'mystery' even though it's at the posted coordinates (http://coord.info/GC440B4).

[+GeoLog81]

If something is on the coordinates, it's a traditional. It shouldn't be listet as other type, with exception of hybrid caches (stamp) and challenges.

 

If it's difficult to open, than it should have proper D-ranking. Listing them as mysteries because they are hard to open makes as much sense as listing climb caches as mysteries because they are hard to reach.

 

And no, I disagree that they are usually mysteries. I've found a lot of them and none was listed as mystery. All were listed correctly as traditional.s

[+Calypso62]

This is an interesting question. I recently spoke to a reviewer about this exact topic. It appears the guidelines have changed (not sure how recently) in that if a cache is at the published coordinates and the logbook can be accessed simply by opening the container, then it is a traditional cache.

 

If the cache is at the published coordinates but you are required to figure out how to open the container (perhaps it has a special unlocking mechanism, a combination lock, a puzzle box, etc) in other words, you have to solve a field puzzle, then it is classed as a Mystery/Puzzle cache.

 

anyway, that's what I was told.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Calypso62

[+narcissa]

It should be a Mystery/Unknown, if only to prevent bad cachers from busting the container open.

 

When you are placing a traditional cache, you must assume that the typical finder will *not* read the cache page in advance.

[+Team Microdot]

It should be a Mystery/Unknown, if only to prevent bad cachers from busting the container open.

 

When you are placing a traditional cache, you must assume that the typical finder will *not* read the cache page in advance.

 

That does make a lot of sense - for the reasons given. In retrospect - I would go along with that.

[+narcissa]

It should be a Mystery/Unknown, if only to prevent bad cachers from busting the container open.

 

When you are placing a traditional cache, you must assume that the typical finder will *not* read the cache page in advance.

 

That does make a lot of sense - for the reasons given. In retrospect - I would go along with that.

 

I've seen enough of these sorts of things in the field to know that it doesn't take long for them to be in pieces.

[+Team Microdot]

It should be a Mystery/Unknown, if only to prevent bad cachers from busting the container open.

 

When you are placing a traditional cache, you must assume that the typical finder will *not* read the cache page in advance.

 

That does make a lot of sense - for the reasons given. In retrospect - I would go along with that.

 

I've seen enough of these sorts of things in the field to know that it doesn't take long for them to be in pieces.

 

I think I've solved three or four of these in the field - and I have to admit, they drive me nuts - especially when you don't know you'll be up against one until you see it at GZ

 

I dislike them so much I would never, ever use one

[+J Grouchy]

It should be a Mystery/Unknown, if only to prevent bad cachers from busting the container open.

 

When you are placing a traditional cache, you must assume that the typical finder will *not* read the cache page in advance.

 

That does make a lot of sense - for the reasons given. In retrospect - I would go along with that.

 

I've seen enough of these sorts of things in the field to know that it doesn't take long for them to be in pieces.

 

I think I've solved three or four of these in the field - and I have to admit, they drive me nuts - especially when you don't know you'll be up against one until you see it at GZ

 

I dislike them so much I would never, ever use one

 

Even worse is out in the woods in the middle of summer in Atlanta with mosquitoes swarming around you. I was ready to dash the stupid thing against a tree when I finally got it open. On the one I found, I think I just snapped the lid closed and put it back into the cache without shaking it up for the next person to "enjoy". I was just ready to get the heck outta there!

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Depends on what you had to do to get there I suppose.

 

If it's at the given coordinates and you were able to simply go there without any extra stages or puzzling then I would say it should be listed as a Traditional with a Field Puzzle attribute.

 

I would say traditional with the field puzzle attribute as well...but one that is several miles from my home is listed as a 'mystery' even though it's at the posted coordinates (http://coord.info/GC440B4).

 

We've got a couple of similar caches, listed as puzzles, that use one of those maze boxes. Both of include "Right at the posted coordinates" in the name of the cache. I got FTF on one of them, after at least one person had attempted the maze and eventually gave up. When I got there It only took a couple of twists before it open. Apparently the previous attempt got close but didn't quite get it.

 

 

[+NYPaddleCacher]

If the cache is at the published coordinates but you are required to figure out how to open the container (perhaps it has a special unlocking mechanism, a combination lock, a puzzle box, etc) in other words, you have to solve a field puzzle, then it is classed as a Mystery/Puzzle cache.

 

I've seen another slight variation. The cache was located at the published coordinates, and it was easy to locate once at GZ, but then you had to figure out how to retrieve the container (and it didn't involve climbing or a significant terrain change). Once you had the cache in hand it was easy to open and sign. I don't recall if was listed as a puzzle (I didn't actually search for it) or a traditional but I remember that it had a D4 rating.

 

 

[+JPreto]

Hmmm... I had the same problem in my head, that´s why I asked the Forum for your opinion.

 

In one hand:

 

"If it is in the posted coordinates and it is not a Challenge cache with ALR, nor a Hybrid it should be a Traditional."

 

In the other hand:

 

"You have to solve a riddle, in a form of a maze, to get to the logbook which could classify it as a Mystery"

 

The Field Puzzle Attribute is for sure a must but still I think, even among reviewers that wouldn´t be a consensus on this one, right?

[+DanOCan]

I personally think it should be a Traditional with an appropriate Difficulty rating and the Field Puzzle attribute. I have seen them listed both ways -- Traditional and Mystery/Unknown.

[+narcissa]

I personally think that "field puzzle" should negate "traditional" and should only be used to indicate that a mystery/unknown is meant to be done in the field, not at the computer. The way that attribute is currently used is stupid. A traditional cache should be at the posted coordinates, and finding it should be the only barrier to logging it.

[cezanne]

I personally think that "field puzzle" should negate "traditional" and should only be used to indicate that a mystery/unknown is meant to be done in the field, not at the computer. The way that attribute is currently used is stupid.

 

It is not as simple as that.

There are multi caches as well where one needs to solve puzzles on the way and moreover there are puzzle caches where one needs to solve puzzles at home and in the field.

[+Team Microdot]

I personally think that "field puzzle" should negate "traditional" and should only be used to indicate that a mystery/unknown is meant to be done in the field, not at the computer. The way that attribute is currently used is stupid. A traditional cache should be at the posted coordinates, and finding it should be the only barrier to logging it.

 

The way the attribute is currently used isn't stupid at all - it works perfectly - unless finders haven't read the cache page

 

Remember - good cache owners strive to do more than pander to the lowest common denominator

[+narcissa]

I personally think that "field puzzle" should negate "traditional" and should only be used to indicate that a mystery/unknown is meant to be done in the field, not at the computer. The way that attribute is currently used is stupid. A traditional cache should be at the posted coordinates, and finding it should be the only barrier to logging it.

 

The way the attribute is currently used isn't stupid at all - it works perfectly - unless finders haven't read the cache page

 

Remember - good cache owners strive to do more than pander to the lowest common denominator

 

It has nothing to do with reading the cache page, and everything to do with the way caches are defined. If there is a puzzle involved, the cache should be a mystery/unknown.

 

This silly attribute has no point, except that it allows bad cache owners to call things "traditionals" so they can get the hordes of bad cachers who would normally be repelled by another cache type. Then the bad cachers destroy the puzzle, or log it without actually finding it, and the bad cache owners whine and cry, even though they know darn well that the typical cache finder does not read cache pages.

 

It's one of the more egregious forms of pandering there is.

[+JPreto]

A traditional cache should be at the posted coordinates, and finding it should be the only barrier to logging it.

That was also my idea of a Traditional...

 

But then I found a Traditional like the one I show in the picture. Than I found a Mystery like the one I show in the picture... So it made me think what was the correct way to label it. Kept trying to understand the guidelines and didn´t reach a conclusion so I asked the Forum in this post.

 

Still don´t have a conclusion on how it should be labeled!

[+narcissa]

I personally think that "field puzzle" should negate "traditional" and should only be used to indicate that a mystery/unknown is meant to be done in the field, not at the computer. The way that attribute is currently used is stupid.

 

It is not as simple as that.

There are multi caches as well where one needs to solve puzzles on the way and moreover there are puzzle caches where one needs to solve puzzles at home and in the field.

 

Indeed.

 

But they aren't traditionals, are they?

[+The A-Team]

I personally think that "field puzzle" should negate "traditional" and should only be used to indicate that a mystery/unknown is meant to be done in the field, not at the computer. The way that attribute is currently used is stupid. A traditional cache should be at the posted coordinates, and finding it should be the only barrier to logging it.

^This I completely agree with. This is how I use the field puzzle attribute.

 

...and for the record, I consider myself to be a good cache owner...

[+NeverSummer]

Let's just put this to bed:

-Mystery/Puzzle caches can be at the listed coordinates.

 

-Puzzles can be Mystery/Puzzle caches, but not all Mystery/Puzzle caches are puzzles.

 

Calling Mystery/Puzzle caches "Puzzles" only confuses people. Call them "caches with a puzzle", or "Mystery/Puzzle". At minimum, use a lower-case "p", because the name for the cache type is actually "Mystery/Puzzle".

 

I agree with cezanne, above. "Field Puzzle" should really only apply to Multi and Mystery/Puzzle caches. Traditionals are containers at the coordinates where all you do is open the container, sign the log, and log it online. If you have to "solve" for something, it is a puzzle, rendering it either a Multi or a Mystery/Puzzle. (The designation will depend on the Reviewer, and the properties of creation of the "field puzzle" to find the cache. Some will call them a Multi for a "field puzzle", and others can {rightfully} call it a Mystery/Puzzle cache.)

[+narcissa]

Let's just put this to bed:

-Mystery/Puzzle caches can be at the listed coordinates.

 

-Puzzles can be Mystery/Puzzle caches, but not all Mystery/Puzzle caches are puzzles.

 

Calling Mystery/Puzzle caches "Puzzles" only confuses people. Call them "caches with a puzzle", or "Mystery/Puzzle". At minimum, use a lower-case "p", because the name for the cache type is actually "Mystery/Puzzle".

 

I agree with cezanne, above. "Field Puzzle" should really only apply to Multi and Mystery/Puzzle caches. Traditionals are containers at the coordinates where all you do is open the container, sign the log, and log it online. If you have to "solve" for something, it is a puzzle, rendering it either a Multi or a Mystery/Puzzle. (The designation will depend on the Reviewer, and the properties of creation of the "field puzzle" to find the cache. Some will call them a Multi for a "field puzzle", and others can {rightfully} call it a Mystery/Puzzle cache.)

 

Puzzles should never be traditionals.

 

Sometimes, a puzzle is a multi.

 

Sometimes, a puzzle is a mystery/unknown.

 

The aversion other regions have to other cache types never ceases to astonish me.

[+Team Microdot]

I personally think that "field puzzle" should negate "traditional" and should only be used to indicate that a mystery/unknown is meant to be done in the field, not at the computer. The way that attribute is currently used is stupid. A traditional cache should be at the posted coordinates, and finding it should be the only barrier to logging it.

 

The way the attribute is currently used isn't stupid at all - it works perfectly - unless finders haven't read the cache page

 

Remember - good cache owners strive to do more than pander to the lowest common denominator

 

It has nothing to do with reading the cache page, and everything to do with the way caches are defined. If there is a puzzle involved, the cache should be a mystery/unknown.

 

There's no reason why a trad with a field puzzle should be listed as a mystery cache - as it's location isn't a mystery - it is known.

 

The field puzzle attribute tells you that even though you know where the cache is, you need to complete some form of puzzle at GZ to be able to get to the logbook.

 

This silly attribute has no point, except that it allows bad cache owners to call things "traditionals" so they can get the hordes of bad cachers who would normally be repelled by another cache type. Then the bad cachers destroy the puzzle, or log it without actually finding it, and the bad cache owners whine and cry, even though they know darn well that the typical cache finder does not read cache pages.

 

It's one of the more egregious forms of pandering there is.

 

Seems like an emotional response to me

Edited August 21, 2014 by Team Microdot

[cezanne]

I personally think that "field puzzle" should negate "traditional" and should only be used to indicate that a mystery/unknown is meant to be done in the field, not at the computer. The way that attribute is currently used is stupid.

 

It is not as simple as that.

There are multi caches as well where one needs to solve puzzles on the way and moreover there are puzzle caches where one needs to solve puzzles at home and in the field.

 

Indeed.

 

But they aren't traditionals, are they?

 

No, they aren't, but you wrote that the fields puzzle attribute schould be used only to indicate that a mystery is meant to be done in the field and not at the computer. That's why I brought up the other examples which contradict your statement.

[+The A-Team]

There's no reason why a trad with a field puzzle should be listed as a mystery cache - as it's location isn't a mystery - it is known.

That isn't what "mystery" indicates. There have already been examples given where this cache type is validly used for a cache hidden at the posted coordinates.

 

I think things would be more clear if we refer to the "?" cache type in a different way. Let's refer to it in this discussion as the "catch-all type", which is more correctly what it is anyway. Using terms like "puzzle" and "mystery" just confuse things. Once you consider that it's meant to capture caches that are outside the norm for the other cache types, caches like the ones under discussion here fit much better into it.

[+NeverSummer]

There's no reason why a trad with a field puzzle should be listed as a mystery cache - as it's location isn't a mystery - it is known.

That isn't what "mystery" indicates. There have already been examples given where this cache type is validly used for a cache hidden at the posted coordinates.

 

I think things would be more clear if we refer to the "?" cache type in a different way. Let's refer to it in this discussion as the "catch-all type", which is more correctly what it is anyway. Using terms like "puzzle" and "mystery" just confuse things. Once you consider that it's meant to capture caches that are outside the norm for the other cache types, caches like the ones under discussion here fit much better into it.

I miss "Unknown" caches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[+narcissa]

Seems like an emotional response to me

 

Yes, some cache owners do seem to get quite emotional when their caches get destroyed by people who don't read cache pages, but it shouldn't come as a surprise.

[+niraD]

The puzzle box caches I've found have all been listed as mystery/puzzle caches. And I've found a number of other puzzle caches that were at the posted coordinates. And of course, a lot of challenge caches are listed as mystery/puzzle caches, and are located at the posted coordinates.

 

Consider someone who is looking for traditional caches. What kind of caches are they looking for? What kind of geocaching experiences are they looking for?

 

And consider someone who is looking for mystery/puzzle caches. What kind of caches are they looking for? What kind of geocaching experiences are they looking for?

 

Finally, consider your puzzle box cache. Which group of geocachers will be more happy to find it? Which kind of geocaching experience does it match the best?

[+redsox_mark]

I've seen them both ways, and I don't think there is anything in the guidelines/knowledge book which says one is right and one is wrong. So we can all debate what we think makes most sense, but you can do it either way - unless your local reviewer takes a position one way or the other.

 

It is similar with multi-caches that have field puzzles. I've seen some of these as multis, others as puzzle/mystery.

 

The key question is what is how is the "field puzzle" attribute intended to be used. Is it:

 

1) Applicable to any cache type.

 

2) Only applicable to puzzle/mystery caches (to let you know that there is a field puzzle instead of/in addition to a solve at home puzzle). (Note this also need to be allowed on Letterbox Hybrids, and probably Wherigos, Virtuals, maybe Earth caches).

[+terrkan78]

Oooo. Hammer-caching. Reminds me of rubik's cubes - if you jam a letter opener in there and pry that sucker open, you can finally get it in the right order. I'm not sure a letter opener will work with the plastic puzzle shown in the picture - probably gotta move up the tool scale to hammers.

 

I'd list it as a puzzle. Just to keep the hammers away.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Here's the way I view how physical caches should be listed, your opinion may vary:

 

1- TraditionaL: go HERE, find container, sign log. If you have to do anything additional to these things, see #3.

2- Multi: go HERE, get new coordinates, go THERE, find container, sign log. If you have to do anything additional to these things, see #3.

3- Mystery/puzzle/unknown: Anything that isn't 1 or 2, except for 4 & 5.

4- Letterbox Hybrid: if your container contains a stamp for letterboxing you MAY list is as a LBH, otherwise see 1, 2 & 3.

5- Wherigo: if your cache requires the use of a WIG cartridge it MUST be listed as a WIG cache.

 

Yes, there are gray areas where things could go one way or the other, but these work for me.

 

To muddy things further- who else remembers when caches could be/were listed as 'mystery/puzzle/unknown' just because the container was out of the ordinary?

Edited August 22, 2014 by Corp Of Discovery

[+qtbluemoon]

Still don´t have a conclusion on how it should be labeled!

I don't think I've ever seen a conclusion come to in the forums.

[+narcissa]

If it has multiple waypoints but can be done in the field without advance puzzle solving, internet research, etc. then I classify it as a multi. When I am out caching, I expect a multi to be a cache that I can find without solving it in advance.

 

If it takes work beyond field work, I classify it as a mystery.