So I have been trying to design a puzzle, a deep-cut quarter turning hexagonal (or maybe decagonal, extended to look like a hexagon) prism. Would it be feasible/acceptable to use something similar to use something similar to Oskar's polaroid cube? Or would it be better to use a sliding rail system, possibly closer to the slidey 2x2? My final question is if this puzzle has been made before or not.

The picture is just a hexagonal extrusion with edges to show where it would turn.

This looks complex and beyond the scope of Blender. Really the only thing you could do is the shells mech.

But you can do better! Put a single layer cheese inside a rotated single layer cheese and use square one style rails to make it two layers thick, just fix one sliding piece to the core. This is probably your best bet.

Thanks for such a quick response! I'm impressed that you recognized it was Blender, (I was downloading freecad as I created that post) but as I am new to the designing portion, and just got back into this hobby, but I don't quite understand what you mean by "put inside." I also don't really want to use square-1 rails, because then I would be restricted to half turns.

Take a look at Luke's Hexoid. You can get some inspiration from there.

By "put inside" I mean use one as the core for the next.

But you want 90 degree turns? You are looking at a very complex puzzle. I'm working on something similar but can't give you much help because it has never been done before. You could try the shells method but it would have internal blocking issues.

Internal blocking.... like the V-Cube 6? And the only way to avoid that is a piece attached to the core, but this puzzle wouldn't work with that, as not all axes cross a single specific piece, and more than one piece that way causes bandaging.

But since turning quality isn't really a factor for this puzzle, I think my best bet is sadly, the knucklehead mech.

I built a "Fully Functional" Square-2 using the shells mech. I had a solution to the internal blocking. The reason I haven't revealed it is because the mechanism gets jammed very, very easily. I would not advise using shells for this one. A Masterball-style rail mechanism would be a much better solution.

Call me a horrible person but I think you should base it on a 2x2x2 and have the prism pieces sliding on the 2x2x2. That way you have all the functionality of a regular deep cut dodecagonal prism (and the quarter turns on the side faces) but no need for an overly complex mechanism. It would actually be an unbandaged square1 xp.

A slightly more symmetrical variation:

If anyone is interested in printing the puzzle feel free to message me.

Just FYI using a 2x2x2 still blocks potential rotations. Imagine a 2x2x2 corner is rotated 60 degrees about the corner. This would then block the top circle from rotating to allow other movements.

@Luke
Looks good!

@PM6262: This isn't more complex to allow 90° turns. You just have to use the sq-1 extensions you proposed and you will have 90° allowed.