TL;DR: How do I use "outside of the box" thinking well in puzzle making?
One of my friends came to school with a puzzle. It's a rather popular puzzle, but, us never having heard of it before, were unaware. This is sort of how the conversation went down.
Puzzle Friend: Hey guys! I have a puzzle I bet you can't solve.
Me: Lay it on us. (Friends agree)
Puzzle Friend: Okay, here it is. I have a hat. I give it to [friend 1]. Who has the hat?
Friend 1: I do.
Puzzle Friend: Correct! Now, if I take the hat from you, who has the hat?
Me: You do.
Puzzle Friend: No, you do.
Me: but... what?!
Puzzle Friend: Of course, now if I give the hat to [friend 2] who then gives it to [friend 1]. who has the hat? Me.
Friend 1: But...!
Now, our task was to find out the pattern. He said there was a simple pattern, and it was indeed simple, as I realized the solution was (solution below)
that the person to first talk after the question was asked had the hat (or something to that effect.)
Now, I realize that this puzzle is hard because it is unconventional and simply random, utilizing a "pattern" that was, as I believe, on a different level of thought, what can be described as "outside the box". I further believe that this "out of the box" aspect makes the puzzle hard. Is this a correct thought?
Furthermore, how can one use this "out of the box" perspective to make puzzles? I would qualify the aforementioned puzzle as mostly trolling, but can I use this sort of perspective to make a good puzzle? By good, I mean a puzzle that is engaging, interesting, and one that is not nigh impossible.