This is how the Gumshoe system handles investigations. Players always receive the clue they need to move to the next scene for free, but can spend resources for additional information that helps them to piece together the mystery.
This is something I wanted to point out. I like D&D but it is not the best tool for every job. There are so many different iterations of the Gumshoe system all that are great and handle mystery adventures so much better than D&D can...so if thats the kind of adventure you want to do different systems are sometimes the answer.
Last time I ran a mystery, I created two paths of clues. One pointed to the actual villain, and the other was planted to frame the villain's enemy. The party decided to trust the villain, and ignore the real clues. At the end, when they went to confront the framed character, the true villain sprung his trap, to wipe them all out. It was amazing to see them pice the real clues together, and realize what actually happened.
I ran an entire detective campaign, and so I've written a lot of mystery adventures. That being said, I ran it in a system other than D&D, but I feel my methods may still be helpful to anyone reading this. Here are some tips for mystery design that Masterpiece left out, including a few bits were I disagree with him: 1. Start with the crime and work from there. The FIRST things you should figure out are: what is the crime, who did it, who is the victim, what is the motive, and how did they do it? Note: while murder is a very popular crime to go with, there ARE other crimes to choose from. Do NOT come up with some twist first and then try to write around that. It will not turn out well. 2. Not required, but helpful: make the victim a jerk. If not a jerk, have some other reason that they would have multiple enemies. If there is only one obvious suspect and you just look for the evidence that they did it, that's not particularly interesting, that's just a transparently straight line. Ideally, you want at least 3 suspects who would have motive and opportunity to commit the crime. 3. Figure out what clues were left behind that will allow the players to solve the crime. Make a list of clues that are the bare minimum to solve the crime if the players are particularly clever, then come up with extra clues of gradually increasing obviousness to optionally drop in depending on how much your players seem to be struggling. 4. False-leads and red herrings: I somewhat disagree with Masterpiece saying not to use red herrings, however the advice to have them lead to real clues is not bad. Red herrings help prevent a straight line from crime scene to perpetrator, and straight lines are boring. For example, say you are investigating the murder of nobleman, and the valet tells you that noblewife had argued frequently with nobleman, including an hour before the murder, and the murder weapon is a distinctive dagger belonging to noblewife. Investigating this, you discover beyond a doubt that noblewife could NOT have committed the murder because, unbeknownst to valet, she had sneaked out to be with nobleman2 all evening and left her fancy dagger at home, and according to the stableboy her horse was taken 2 hours before the murder. So, that was a red herring, but NOW you know that the valet has been lying to you, which is in itself a clue. 5. Basically at this point it is just a matter of dropping clues and red herrings to help players or divert them, as desired. Keep in mind that this isn't a novel, and you HAVE to be flexible. Occasionally, it may help to encourage the players to discuss what they have figured out so far with each other. This not only helps them, but it also helps YOU gauge their progress, and decide if you need to subtly help them out more (without them realizing you are doing so).
@@heretic5579 I’d have to piece them back together from an old laptop. As I said though, it wasn’t D&D, it was a system of my own design and the campaign was set in an alternate 1940’s Los Angeles where Magic and other supernatural elements were very real. I called it Noircana. If you look up Noircana here on RUclips you can see a short video that a friend of mine voiced for the campaign.
I agree somewhat on the red herring point. I feel like a red herring that still leads to further information or helps piece the story together isn’t really a red herring as much as it is an indirect clue. 9 times out of 10 you won’t need to include any red herrings of your own design to divert the party anyway lol. Players are their own red herrings and will find or create them on their own multiple times throughout the investigation, but sometimes they’re interesting enough that you decide to make them part of/lead back into the mystery anyway (this is a gm fiat thing that not all gms may be able to do well tho)
Don't assume your players will question witnesses or ask for info from the right NPC. I just had a session where the group went to do research at a library and asked their friend that works there about something that he is literally the only NPC that wouldn't know the info. I told them he has no idea what they're talking about and they just moved on rather than asking literally any other NPC. I should have had the NPC remind the players he's new to the area and suggest they talk to someone else that has been around.
@@mawdeeps7691 You show a remarkable lack of insight for someone trying to sound smart. The rogue can do further investigation gaining additional clues which help reinforce the three clues. If you don't use the three clue rule you're just priming the party to fail if the rogue flubs a critical skill check and the adventure comes screeching to a holt.
@@Gibbons3457 when did i say not to use 3 clue rule? thats a poor strawman .The point I made was having no clues rely on skill as stated in the video would just make those with skills or feats there feel cheated. the 3 clue rule as in the alexendrian is better and what I myself use. like whats the point in taking observant or experitise in perception as your 8 wis fighter just found the clue. so by holding up a stawman you haven't done anything to counter that point. seems your the one trying to sound smart and lacking insight you cant seem to manage to argue the point being made.
@@Gibbons3457 ''The rogue can do further investigation gaining additional clues which help reinforce the three clues.'' based on its unique skills fantastic so you agree with the point I was making yet felt the need to throw up a strawman to argue against.
@@mawdeeps7691 To be fair, your first comment argued against a straw man by acting like the advice was "give players three clues completely for free without effort". But instead it was "include at least three clues", meaning there are at least that many clues to be found somewhere in the game world.
I'd love to re-write Strahd with this in mind and make it more of a horror mystery. I think that's how I sort of tried to do it at first, and then did it badly, and then it became a standard dungeon crawler. Speaking of - I'd love to see a video on horror next!
I run mysteries like the Clue movie. I identify the motives each suspect has for the crime without assigning the crime to anyone. As the players proceed through the game and gather evidence or alibis I eliminate them from possibility. After a certain number of beats, I lock it in and unlock clues that clear the other suspects.
A way to unlock clues naturally, without committing too soon, would be to "time" the revelation of a clue. For example, if you get DNA evidence it takes a few days to send it to the lab an receive a report. In that time, the characters collect more clues and you can use the analysis to confirm/redirect the players as needed. Of course, can't really do DNA in D&D, so maybe have magic visions be delayed or require the players to hire a medium. Takes a day for the medium to arrive or for them to interpret results etc.
I probably run more adventure/investigation plots than anything else in gaming. Two things I’ve figured out, one of which addresses what you brought up with skill checks: 1.) I don’t generally write hard and fast answers to the mystery. My notes usually read something like, “one possible solution to this is X.” If X is the direction the players move towards, then great. If they float out Y, and Y is a cooler answer than X, then it was Y all along; aren’t I a clever DM for coming up with such a cool plot? Or if Y meshes well with X, then it’s both X and Y. I do something similar with puzzles, where I’ll write a possible solution, so I have *something* in mind, but I’m certainly open to other suggestions. 2.) I steal partial success mechanics from other games. Generally my skill check DCs are based on a range. If there’s absolute must have information, then they get that. Anything else gets gated behind skill checks. I’ll usually write down multiple pieces of information, give them, maybe 3 for hitting whatever DC I set, then subtract one for every couple of points they fail by, add one for every couple of points by which they beat the DC. So if I’m looking for a 15, hitting a 15 gets you 3 things. Hitting a 13 gets you 2; hitting a 17 gets you 4, and so on. D&D’s hard pass/fail system is pretty poor game design in a modern RPG (at least for investigation), so if I’m running D&D, I’ll happily steal from games that handle investigation better than D&D to make the best experience I can deliver.
I do a partial success mechanic too. The party get more clues the better they roll. They'll always get something but they get more the better they roll. I like having tables and for the extra clues so what they get other than the basics are random too. I also like to run certain events happening at kind of set times to both move the story forward and give clues that don't need skill checks or divination spells.
@I Has Pinecone I would recommend shorter still. Start with one session in an existing campaign to see how it goes with the players and see what you like and what you would change as a DM. Then try a 3-5 session mini campaign to hone it further. For longer campaigns I would also suggest mini mysteries that give clues to or develop a wider mystery. That way the players feel like they're solving and achieving things all the time whilst growing interest in the end goal/mystery.
Very well thought out video. And very timely too! I am preparing to run "Terror in the Streets", a serial killer mystery set in Paris 1630. No spoilers (you really should read it!), but there is a Red Herring written into the adventure. It is a trope of the mystery genre. It is sort of a dead end (though it *is* another crime to stop). But inspired by your suggestions, I am thinking that by catching this other criminal, the party will score a major clue that will make up for being side tracked. Not sure what that will be yet. As for Speak with Dead, I plan on giving the party a scroll! I figure they will use it on a murder victim, and each victim only knows the narrow slice of their own part of the puzzle.
the ultimate mystery campaign: present a mystery. put random clues in random places. you don't know what happened. whatever the player's conclude happened is the correct answer. boom. now you don't have to worry about how/when/where they're going to solve the mystery.
Since I'm currently devising a mystery adventure, I'm actually grouping my locations into levels, where the player begin with clues leading to first level locations, which have scattered clues to second level locations where they begin to get a knowledge of suspects as well as 3rd level locations. There they can start ruling out suspects and hints where to find the place of the final showdown with the baddie to rescue the town.
on the subject of Red herrings. heck to them. the whole adding a clue and then taking it through and making the players feel stupid, get in the sea. cant stand them. HOWEVER. a similar but distinct gambit i love is the secret parallel investigation. the murder victim was robbed by a thieves guild backed robber completely independant of the murderer on the same night, thus there were two crimes easily mistaken for one. but gathering all the clues and pursuing all the avenues available they find a more direct link to the thief first (because its a smaller trail to follow by a couple of steps, or they panicked and messed up their escape. so while tracking down the killer, certain it was this padfoot, the players instead find a valuable witness who can be threatened, bribed or cajoled into giving a vital clue or description they need to put together with the remaining clues and reevaluate them. usually i exonerate the actual murderer pretty early, and have the witness not see the murder itself, but place the killer at a place their alibi could not also be true with. "no i couldnt have killed him, i was across the city at confession" but the thief saw them in the shop near the murder instead. that sort of thing.
I like the mystery system in Bridlewood Bay. The concept is that the story is created by both the DM and the players, so the DM doesn't write the mystery upfront, they write it together. The DM doesn't need to make a fully fleshed-out and logical mystery. They simply introduce suspects and reveal clues to the players as they investigate - a half-burnt letter in a fireplace, blood-soaked handkerchief, etc... At a certain point, the players decide they have collected enough clues and present a solution that includes all of the clues they've discovered (or that a clue is a red herring), then role an ability check to see if the solution is correct. Because there's no correct solution, any solution can work and the story is different every time. This could easily fit into D&D where the DC of the solution could start at 30 and go down one point each time they find a clue and the appropriate ability check would be the oft-unused intelligence check.
One thing the video didn't contain, I feel is helpful, is the fact that a mystery adventure is a zebra puzzle (also called Einstein's Riddle). You get your suspects, each of them has their motives, alibies, and of course there are various clues. But in the end, it's no different then having them have their favourite drink, color of house and pet. If the players collect all the evidence, the criminal will pop out, just like the dude who owns a zebra. Then again, it is true that the bigger issue is figuring out how to give the information to the players, which the video soes help out with.
I love your videos and love your advice in this one as well. One thing I would add is you can factor divination magic into the solving of a mystery. This makes the players feel powerful and if you are prepared won’t give the whole game away
first off...the retro video games and MtG images felt like a gift, just for me ;) truthfully i also didnt watch this video because i have an aversion to mystery adventures...and now that i watched it, i am really excited to run one, thanks to you. This might be my fave video now.
Fantastic, thank you. Reviewing this for a Top Secret or Spy Game 5e adventure Im going to run. I like that it seems to fit multiple genres, not just fantasy.
Murder on The Primewater Pleasure by Liam Murray is a great mystery adventure on DMs Guild that does all what you’ve mentioned. Really loving prepping for it and can't wait for my party to finish what they're currently doing to tackle it! Highly recommend it even if you're not running Ghosts of Saltmarsh.
Without a doubt, the worst thing a DM can do is hide the only clues to a mystery behind rolls and think "well, at least _one_ of them will roll high enough to get things started" because that is the one time everyone rolls low and fails _every_ single investigation, perception and insight check imaginable. The first CR expanded universe thingy started that way, for an hour characters failed every check and just ended up wandering around town getting breakfast and talking to random people because they literally had no idea what was going on. It was like pulling teeth to watch, I can't even imagine how bad it was to play.
It's hard to write a satisfying mystery shot story. It's harder to write a mystery adventure for a modern era nonfantasy TTRPG, due to players being an unpredictable factor. It's even harder to write a mystery adventure for a fantasy/paranormal/powers TTRPG, where unpredictable players have unrealistic abilities you may be familiar with superficially, but don't intuitively understand as part of the world, all implications and use cases revealed. It's *really hard* when the system or edition gives them lots of cheaply deployed, broadly useful powers of detection early on.
I was actually contemplating running a historical mystery game set during and before the Albigensian crusade. The secretive nature of the Cathars there’s all sorts of sleuthing and investigation to be done
But for real this is pretty good stuff. I’ve always been stumped on how to make a detective style game or encounter and this really touches on pretty much everything. At the end of the day though, it seems the GM will have to write up the whole campaign before hand though.
FWIW, no matter how good the advice is (and this is some good advice), you still need to have players who want that type of game (or at least are cool with it for a session or two), because you can lay out everything perfectly and if they just want to kill monsters and get loot, they won't care and likely won't solve even the simplest mystery. ;)
In regards to the perception check to find XYZ in the fireplace: in those situations usually multiple people throw perception. Just let the PC with the best result find the XYZ. The necessary thing has been found and dice luck+Skillpoints are being rewarded.
Really good video, I had this mistakes you point out about clues when making "mysteries" If I may suggest, a video about how Magic Items would impact a world, economy and how to place them on adventures would be great.
Regarding skill checks for necessary clues. I like the idea of still having the skill checks, but instead of failing to find the clue on a failed roll, some other consequence happens. Maybe the PC alert the bad guy to their presence, or they take to long allowing more time for the bad guy to plan their escape.
If you want the players skills and abilities to matter use passive checks. You already know what your player's passive perception and passive investigation scores are just set the DC to no greater than the passive score of the player with the highest score in that skill at session. Then they feel awesome like they earned it with their bad ass character and you ensure that players never miss a vital clue.
When I dm, I draw pictures and treat it like a point and click. I describe as little as possible so I don’t sound like I’m highlighting anything. One time I had my players crack a cipher and solve a riddle to solve a puzzle
Shout out for Gaston Leroux!!! Man, my characters are like, "A red string in the corner? It's obvious that the baron is a secret vampire who has been leaving red herring clues implicating the head of the cooper's guild." while at the same time, "So, we have a blacksmith's hammer as a murder weapon, a blacksmith's apron hidden in a corner, and the blacksmith's fingerprints in charcoal on the wall of the missing princess' bedchamber. I don't know where to go next."
I try writing murder mysteries in the domains of dread. “Van Ricthen’s Guide to Ravenloft” helps me write mysteries in Ghost Stories and other genres of horror.
Thinking about running a blood bank conspiracy theory adventure for my Vampire game that they kidnapped Kindred to harvest blood from them and sell to other Vamps to boast their powers and heighten Gehenna.
Just had a thought: what about writing a whodunnit type of mystery, where literally any one of 4 NPCs could be the culprit… and anytime the party comes to the conclusion of which target they suspect the most, THAT’S when some evidence proving them wrong is triggered. Who the real culprit is is determined by the party’s actions, because it’s literally the last person they suspect.
You need a Sherlock NPC to show up here and there. Detectives in books are characters that will always get their man but the Fun for the PCs is the "Ah ha" moment wheb the reveal will take place. Like the game guess who you give info without giving the name
If the murderer knows about magical detectives they might try to murder is such a way to make the divination useless. If the target doesn't know who killed them but does know how they died a speak with dead would provide clues that don't reveal the entire mystery.
This week's Mystery: Why is the top of Baron's head missing in a significant portion of the Mystery Video, and does it have anything to do with the prominence of Filbert's (Don't Ask) Feet in the top right of the frame?
Always beware a necromancer if you commit a murder. They are going to find you. If you're lucky by asking the victim, if you're not with the victim's Animated corpse strangling you.
Yeah, right, and then the players piece together a couple of clues and come up with a whole different story that throws them off what they were supposed to do to solve the mystery. Then they are stuck by not being able to advance, lost, and you as a Game Master have to decide whether to manipulate the story to place forced conveniences that take them by the hand to the right path. In the end, the players and the Game Master alike are frustrated because they did not know how to solve the mystery themselves and because perhaps they believe that the story they imagined is better than the one that the Game Master had actually implemented. I was in campaigns where the Game Master put mysteries to solve, or something like puzzles... and we had to spend 3 hours or more wasting time trying to guess, to put ourselves in the head of the GM, because sometimes even if the clues are there it doesn't work if you don't know how they are put together to solve the puzzle. This, along with putting puzzles in the middle of action or adventure video games (like Skyrim), have taught me that putting puzzles and things like that cuts into the narrative and the fun, as well as all the frustration because you want to keep playing, it's like you father comes to interrupt you from time to time while you are playing a video game to force you to solve crossword puzzles... then you certainly enjoy the puzzle, of course 😒
usually love your content but feel this one is not great. 1. giving the all the clues outright no rolls required just makes the player that picked those feats like observant or put expertise in invistigation feel like they should have just taken sharpshooter for eg. rather have the same information available through other means ie canvassing for witnesses using the 3 clue rule. 2. totally negating divination spells again makes said wizard think should have picked other things. 3. red herrings are fine as long as it becomes quickly apparant its a false lead and can add to the tension if thier is a time crunch.
I have a sincere question: why the suit? I don’t know anyone who plays D&D in a suit! Did I miss something? I want to like your content by the suit makes it hard to follow you as it’s distracting. I do not mean to be mean at all… just asking an honest question!!
Love the video, however I do disagree on the skillcheck to find clues. You want to value you the PCs build and effort. IE, there is a player in my game who is a former police investigator. She has built great investigative skills . Whereas I hate needless rolls too, I do want to acknowledge that this character is likely to find the clue because they are more adapt at it. I use Cypher RPG now, but even in 5e, i would ask the players who has ranks or is competent in a perception or investigative (without the needless roll), that person finds it . It acknowledges the characters build and intuitiion to check an area, However, in this situation, you need a mechanicsm, as stated to note that the players have found all the clues. The players would easily find most of the clues but as the gm, i'd say something like , there is no murder weapon . so they know they are looking for a weapon.
"All clues to solve a mystery should be given" - No. I do not agree. What is the point of building a investigative character if all clues should just be given? It should be automatically given to the Inquisitive Rogue. But a Barbarian that dumped his Int and got a -1 in investigation and is blind as a bat shouldn't just be as good in getting the clues. It send the wrong message to the players. It means the player get no incentive to not go into combat stats. Why get more Int or Wis when it comes at the expense of Dex. Why not take that Sharpshooter feat because you just get the clues anyway. No. Only the most basic clues should be given. However they should not lead to the best outcome. Maybe you only get the clue that point towards the pawn or the scapegoat. Maybe just following the basics just waste your time so another murder takes place because you failed to find the clues that allowed you to save time. I want to point towards two other games to prove a point here. Its from The Witcher 3 and Kingdom Come: Deliverance (KCD). - In the Witcher 3 a famous bard and lover to one of your friends has been attacked by a religious zealot for blasphemy and heresy. You investigate three different sites and join in on the autopsy of the latest fatal victim. You find several clues. The biggest of them is the religious symbolism but also odd clues such as tracks that end just at a very tall wall, so tall no human can climb it. You eventually get on the track of the killer but lose him. However the clues point towards a high ranking priest that is famous for torturing ladies of the night. While you barge in on such a session, if you go in guns blazing the quest ends here. However he wasn't the killer. He was just a scapegoat. A disturbed scapegoat, but a scapegoat nonetheless. If you continue to ask the priest he fills in that it must be the diener, the guy from the morgue. It turns out he is a Vampire and is the religious zealot. If you are just given the clues here (which to an extent you are) there is absolutely no thinking involved in this quest. You are just being railroaded and forced to say X and do Y. - In KCD you are given the quest to investigate why the church rebuilding the monastery has failed to pay for stones the stone quarry has mined for them. You are sent to investigate this as it is a lot of money involved, and the noble in charge of the stone quarry do not want to look bad when it comes to supplying the house of God. When you get to the church you find out that the stone is of poor quality, it has been cut up into pieces when it was shipped in a big block and a skull of a devil has been found. So far a worker has been killed by having a piece of rock breaking off and hitting his head, and the church isn't willing to pay for subpar stone. You find the stone that killed the worker and the devil skull. It might be some kind of curse placed on the worksite by someone that wishes evil to the church. If you take the stone back to the stone quarry the quarrymaster will right away spot that the stone is not from his quarry. You can see it in the grain, and he has worked there for a long time. If you find the devil skull and take it to the graveyard keeper, he will figure out that it is just a pair of deer antlers glued on a human skull. However it is some good craftsmanship due to how well the antlers stick on there. You can confront the foreman of the construction and he will say that you need to meet him at midnight. If you do someone will try to murder you. If you confront him he will say that it was the foreman told him to do it while he snuck away. At this point the foreman will have used the time you wasted to kill off witnesses. The reason he does that is because he is behind stealing the stone so he can sell it while replacing the stone the church use with lesser quality stones. Depending on who you ask and what you do. You can allow the foreman get away with everything, find him in the act of carrying away the body or saving the witness before the foreman kills him and blow the whole case open. No matter how you do it. The situation is resolved and the church starts to pay again. I simply do not agree it is good advice to just give all clues to the players. You should reward players for being smart and having character that are not focused on combat. If a play is only focused on combat.... well they have no right to complain about being bad outside of combat. That was their choice.
@@SanJacintoArtGuild You are trying to dodge the problem. Why should you not build a combat build if you just get all clues, all information anyway? You are trying to dodge that question. There is absolutely no point in rolling to understand the clues. If you do that you just roll to solve the problem.
@@SanJacintoArtGuild If you are in a mystery quest ALL scenarios are about mysteries. Sorry but that was the absolute dumbest thing you can have said. Also. Any modern Mystery writer will also not include a bunch of dumb dumb soldiers that only know how to drive a tank. They actually have competent people in investigations and not people who has no idea about them.
Disagree with red herrings. You should 100% have dead end red herrings in your mystery adventure. Players will instinctively go back to the scene, or otherwise retrace their steps. I have and my players have. They don't just reach a dead end and give up. Unless their dm has inadvertently trained them too. The story keeps moving naturally. You can also have location-less clues that can appear anywhere. Like a symbol. If the party really does start to flounder, then they can see that symbol/word on someone or something... And you can get them back on the trail. A witness can come forward, having been to afraid to talk during the initial questioning, there are limitless tropes you can use from novels that don't have to be plotted out in advance. Just used tactfully and where they make sense. The idea that every lead is good and always progresses toward the correct answer... Isn't a mystery at all. Its just a normal quest on rails. The only counter to intentional red herrings is that players often create and chase after their own red herrings all the time. But, those usually don't have the same story building potential as a deliberate one does. Unless your a grand master of flowers level dm at improv. Final point can be somewhat similar to your idea. The conclusion of the red herring can shine light on other suspects. After the long investigation into the baron it is discovered he couldn't have done it. So who then? Only the baron was in the building that night. How do you know? The very cooperative butler told you. ... The BUTLER! You can ask those leading questions if your group is totally at a loss. Dont TELL them anything, just ask them what they already know. Players have watched movies and television. And it could still not be the butler, but if he lied about that then he is now the prime suspect. All this, because you let the party investigate a guilty seeming red herring and get nowhere with the lead. But that wrong answer can help lead them to the correct one. This is a core concept of mystery.
This is how the Gumshoe system handles investigations. Players always receive the clue they need to move to the next scene for free, but can spend resources for additional information that helps them to piece together the mystery.
Pretty clever system, DM's should keep this in mind when trying to create skill checks for more information.
This is something I wanted to point out. I like D&D but it is not the best tool for every job. There are so many different iterations of the Gumshoe system all that are great and handle mystery adventures so much better than D&D can...so if thats the kind of adventure you want to do different systems are sometimes the answer.
Last time I ran a mystery, I created two paths of clues. One pointed to the actual villain, and the other was planted to frame the villain's enemy. The party decided to trust the villain, and ignore the real clues. At the end, when they went to confront the framed character, the true villain sprung his trap, to wipe them all out. It was amazing to see them pice the real clues together, and realize what actually happened.
I ran an entire detective campaign, and so I've written a lot of mystery adventures. That being said, I ran it in a system other than D&D, but I feel my methods may still be helpful to anyone reading this.
Here are some tips for mystery design that Masterpiece left out, including a few bits were I disagree with him:
1. Start with the crime and work from there. The FIRST things you should figure out are: what is the crime, who did it, who is the victim, what is the motive, and how did they do it? Note: while murder is a very popular crime to go with, there ARE other crimes to choose from. Do NOT come up with some twist first and then try to write around that. It will not turn out well.
2. Not required, but helpful: make the victim a jerk. If not a jerk, have some other reason that they would have multiple enemies. If there is only one obvious suspect and you just look for the evidence that they did it, that's not particularly interesting, that's just a transparently straight line. Ideally, you want at least 3 suspects who would have motive and opportunity to commit the crime.
3. Figure out what clues were left behind that will allow the players to solve the crime. Make a list of clues that are the bare minimum to solve the crime if the players are particularly clever, then come up with extra clues of gradually increasing obviousness to optionally drop in depending on how much your players seem to be struggling.
4. False-leads and red herrings: I somewhat disagree with Masterpiece saying not to use red herrings, however the advice to have them lead to real clues is not bad. Red herrings help prevent a straight line from crime scene to perpetrator, and straight lines are boring. For example, say you are investigating the murder of nobleman, and the valet tells you that noblewife had argued frequently with nobleman, including an hour before the murder, and the murder weapon is a distinctive dagger belonging to noblewife. Investigating this, you discover beyond a doubt that noblewife could NOT have committed the murder because, unbeknownst to valet, she had sneaked out to be with nobleman2 all evening and left her fancy dagger at home, and according to the stableboy her horse was taken 2 hours before the murder. So, that was a red herring, but NOW you know that the valet has been lying to you, which is in itself a clue.
5. Basically at this point it is just a matter of dropping clues and red herrings to help players or divert them, as desired. Keep in mind that this isn't a novel, and you HAVE to be flexible. Occasionally, it may help to encourage the players to discuss what they have figured out so far with each other. This not only helps them, but it also helps YOU gauge their progress, and decide if you need to subtly help them out more (without them realizing you are doing so).
I’d love to see your notes from that campaign bro
@@heretic5579 I’d have to piece them back together from an old laptop. As I said though, it wasn’t D&D, it was a system of my own design and the campaign was set in an alternate 1940’s Los Angeles where Magic and other supernatural elements were very real. I called it Noircana. If you look up Noircana here on RUclips you can see a short video that a friend of mine voiced for the campaign.
@@MichaelHaneline got it. Thank you.
Commenting so I can come back to this later lol
I agree somewhat on the red herring point. I feel like a red herring that still leads to further information or helps piece the story together isn’t really a red herring as much as it is an indirect clue. 9 times out of 10 you won’t need to include any red herrings of your own design to divert the party anyway lol. Players are their own red herrings and will find or create them on their own multiple times throughout the investigation, but sometimes they’re interesting enough that you decide to make them part of/lead back into the mystery anyway (this is a gm fiat thing that not all gms may be able to do well tho)
Did anyone else immediately think of Scooby Doo (even though the picture was Hardy Boys) when he mentioned the stilts and animal calls?
Don't assume your players will question witnesses or ask for info from the right NPC.
I just had a session where the group went to do research at a library and asked their friend that works there about something that he is literally the only NPC that wouldn't know the info. I told them he has no idea what they're talking about and they just moved on rather than asking literally any other NPC. I should have had the NPC remind the players he's new to the area and suggest they talk to someone else that has been around.
I hate it when I have that realization two days after the game.
In regards to mysteries, I follow the Alexandrian's Three Clue Rule:
"For each conclusion you want the players to make, include at least three clues"
yeah him just giving the clues out is gonna make that player playing the inquisitive rogue feel really special
@@mawdeeps7691 You show a remarkable lack of insight for someone trying to sound smart.
The rogue can do further investigation gaining additional clues which help reinforce the three clues.
If you don't use the three clue rule you're just priming the party to fail if the rogue flubs a critical skill check and the adventure comes screeching to a holt.
@@Gibbons3457 when did i say not to use 3 clue rule? thats a poor strawman .The point I made was having no clues rely on skill as stated in the video would just make those with skills or feats there feel cheated. the 3 clue rule as in the alexendrian is better and what I myself use. like whats the point in taking observant or experitise in perception as your 8 wis fighter just found the clue.
so by holding up a stawman you haven't done anything to counter that point.
seems your the one trying to sound smart and lacking insight you cant seem to manage to argue the point being made.
@@Gibbons3457 ''The rogue can do further investigation gaining additional clues which help reinforce the three clues.'' based on its unique skills fantastic so you agree with the point I was making yet felt the need to throw up a strawman to argue against.
@@mawdeeps7691 To be fair, your first comment argued against a straw man by acting like the advice was "give players three clues completely for free without effort". But instead it was "include at least three clues", meaning there are at least that many clues to be found somewhere in the game world.
I'd love to re-write Strahd with this in mind and make it more of a horror mystery. I think that's how I sort of tried to do it at first, and then did it badly, and then it became a standard dungeon crawler.
Speaking of - I'd love to see a video on horror next!
I run mysteries like the Clue movie. I identify the motives each suspect has for the crime without assigning the crime to anyone. As the players proceed through the game and gather evidence or alibis I eliminate them from possibility. After a certain number of beats, I lock it in and unlock clues that clear the other suspects.
A way to unlock clues naturally, without committing too soon, would be to "time" the revelation of a clue. For example, if you get DNA evidence it takes a few days to send it to the lab an receive a report. In that time, the characters collect more clues and you can use the analysis to confirm/redirect the players as needed.
Of course, can't really do DNA in D&D, so maybe have magic visions be delayed or require the players to hire a medium. Takes a day for the medium to arrive or for them to interpret results etc.
I probably run more adventure/investigation plots than anything else in gaming. Two things I’ve figured out, one of which addresses what you brought up with skill checks:
1.) I don’t generally write hard and fast answers to the mystery. My notes usually read something like, “one possible solution to this is X.” If X is the direction the players move towards, then great. If they float out Y, and Y is a cooler answer than X, then it was Y all along; aren’t I a clever DM for coming up with such a cool plot? Or if Y meshes well with X, then it’s both X and Y. I do something similar with puzzles, where I’ll write a possible solution, so I have *something* in mind, but I’m certainly open to other suggestions.
2.) I steal partial success mechanics from other games. Generally my skill check DCs are based on a range. If there’s absolute must have information, then they get that. Anything else gets gated behind skill checks. I’ll usually write down multiple pieces of information, give them, maybe 3 for hitting whatever DC I set, then subtract one for every couple of points they fail by, add one for every couple of points by which they beat the DC. So if I’m looking for a 15, hitting a 15 gets you 3 things. Hitting a 13 gets you 2; hitting a 17 gets you 4, and so on. D&D’s hard pass/fail system is pretty poor game design in a modern RPG (at least for investigation), so if I’m running D&D, I’ll happily steal from games that handle investigation better than D&D to make the best experience I can deliver.
I do a partial success mechanic too. The party get more clues the better they roll. They'll always get something but they get more the better they roll. I like having tables and for the extra clues so what they get other than the basics are random too.
I also like to run certain events happening at kind of set times to both move the story forward and give clues that don't need skill checks or divination spells.
@I Has Pinecone I would recommend shorter still. Start with one session in an existing campaign to see how it goes with the players and see what you like and what you would change as a DM.
Then try a 3-5 session mini campaign to hone it further.
For longer campaigns I would also suggest mini mysteries that give clues to or develop a wider mystery. That way the players feel like they're solving and achieving things all the time whilst growing interest in the end goal/mystery.
This is a great foundation for making a mystery module. Good stuff man!
Very well thought out video. And very timely too! I am preparing to run "Terror in the Streets", a serial killer mystery set in Paris 1630. No spoilers (you really should read it!), but there is a Red Herring written into the adventure. It is a trope of the mystery genre. It is sort of a dead end (though it *is* another crime to stop). But inspired by your suggestions, I am thinking that by catching this other criminal, the party will score a major clue that will make up for being side tracked. Not sure what that will be yet.
As for Speak with Dead, I plan on giving the party a scroll! I figure they will use it on a murder victim, and each victim only knows the narrow slice of their own part of the puzzle.
It's amazing to have questions and get the answer to them before you have even thought of asking.
the ultimate mystery campaign: present a mystery. put random clues in random places. you don't know what happened. whatever the player's conclude happened is the correct answer. boom. now you don't have to worry about how/when/where they're going to solve the mystery.
Since I'm currently devising a mystery adventure, I'm actually grouping my locations into levels, where the player begin with clues leading to first level locations, which have scattered clues to second level locations where they begin to get a knowledge of suspects as well as 3rd level locations. There they can start ruling out suspects and hints where to find the place of the final showdown with the baddie to rescue the town.
on the subject of Red herrings.
heck to them. the whole adding a clue and then taking it through and making the players feel stupid, get in the sea. cant stand them.
HOWEVER.
a similar but distinct gambit i love is the secret parallel investigation.
the murder victim was robbed by a thieves guild backed robber completely independant of the murderer on the same night, thus there were two crimes easily mistaken for one.
but gathering all the clues and pursuing all the avenues available they find a more direct link to the thief first (because its a smaller trail to follow by a couple of steps, or they panicked and messed up their escape.
so while tracking down the killer, certain it was this padfoot, the players instead find a valuable witness who can be threatened, bribed or cajoled into giving a vital clue or description they need to put together with the remaining clues and reevaluate them.
usually i exonerate the actual murderer pretty early, and have the witness not see the murder itself, but place the killer at a place their alibi could not also be true with. "no i couldnt have killed him, i was across the city at confession" but the thief saw them in the shop near the murder instead. that sort of thing.
Yes I’ve done this. Having the party track down clues along the campaign. Good information
I like the mystery system in Bridlewood Bay.
The concept is that the story is created by both the DM and the players, so the DM doesn't write the mystery upfront, they write it together.
The DM doesn't need to make a fully fleshed-out and logical mystery. They simply introduce suspects and reveal clues to the players as they investigate - a half-burnt letter in a fireplace, blood-soaked handkerchief, etc...
At a certain point, the players decide they have collected enough clues and present a solution that includes all of the clues they've discovered (or that a clue is a red herring), then role an ability check to see if the solution is correct.
Because there's no correct solution, any solution can work and the story is different every time.
This could easily fit into D&D where the DC of the solution could start at 30 and go down one point each time they find a clue and the appropriate ability check would be the oft-unused intelligence check.
One thing the video didn't contain, I feel is helpful, is the fact that a mystery adventure is a zebra puzzle (also called Einstein's Riddle).
You get your suspects, each of them has their motives, alibies, and of course there are various clues. But in the end, it's no different then having them have their favourite drink, color of house and pet. If the players collect all the evidence, the criminal will pop out, just like the dude who owns a zebra.
Then again, it is true that the bigger issue is figuring out how to give the information to the players, which the video soes help out with.
this is hands down best DM content on utube
I love your videos and love your advice in this one as well. One thing I would add is you can factor divination magic into the solving of a mystery. This makes the players feel powerful and if you are prepared won’t give the whole game away
That's what the video already said, btw.
I have been binging just about all of videos on this channel. I absolutely love this.
Thanks for this. Stumbled upon your channel a few days ago and I really like it. Good work, good voice - nice! :)
first off...the retro video games and MtG images felt like a gift, just for me ;)
truthfully i also didnt watch this video because i have an aversion to mystery adventures...and now that i watched it, i am really excited to run one, thanks to you. This might be my fave video now.
Fantastic, thank you. Reviewing this for a Top Secret or Spy Game 5e adventure Im going to run. I like that it seems to fit multiple genres, not just fantasy.
Murder on The Primewater Pleasure by Liam Murray is a great mystery adventure on DMs Guild that does all what you’ve mentioned. Really loving prepping for it and can't wait for my party to finish what they're currently doing to tackle it! Highly recommend it even if you're not running Ghosts of Saltmarsh.
Without a doubt, the worst thing a DM can do is hide the only clues to a mystery behind rolls and think "well, at least _one_ of them will roll high enough to get things started" because that is the one time everyone rolls low and fails _every_ single investigation, perception and insight check imaginable. The first CR expanded universe thingy started that way, for an hour characters failed every check and just ended up wandering around town getting breakfast and talking to random people because they literally had no idea what was going on. It was like pulling teeth to watch, I can't even imagine how bad it was to play.
It's hard to write a satisfying mystery shot story. It's harder to write a mystery adventure for a modern era nonfantasy TTRPG, due to players being an unpredictable factor. It's even harder to write a mystery adventure for a fantasy/paranormal/powers TTRPG, where unpredictable players have unrealistic abilities you may be familiar with superficially, but don't intuitively understand as part of the world, all implications and use cases revealed. It's *really hard* when the system or edition gives them lots of cheaply deployed, broadly useful powers of detection early on.
Love your content AND your use of magic cards in it! Just a flavor win for me!
GURPS Mysteries does this really well and at great depth, usable for all games.
I was actually contemplating running a historical mystery game set during and before the Albigensian crusade. The secretive nature of the Cathars there’s all sorts of sleuthing and investigation to be done
But for real this is pretty good stuff. I’ve always been stumped on how to make a detective style game or encounter and this really touches on pretty much everything. At the end of the day though, it seems the GM will have to write up the whole campaign before hand though.
FWIW, no matter how good the advice is (and this is some good advice), you still need to have players who want that type of game (or at least are cool with it for a session or two), because you can lay out everything perfectly and if they just want to kill monsters and get loot, they won't care and likely won't solve even the simplest mystery. ;)
This is some great advice! Thank you.
Since I love noire vibes and I want to inject them into my game, these tips will provide the perfect vessel to do so!
Well said. For a short video, you certainly fleshed the bones of the subject.
Would have liked to have a an example of "the locations stitching themselves together through clues."
In regards to the perception check to find XYZ in the fireplace: in those situations usually multiple people throw perception. Just let the PC with the best result find the XYZ.
The necessary thing has been found and dice luck+Skillpoints are being rewarded.
This was a great video!! Good insight
Really good video, I had this mistakes you point out about clues when making "mysteries"
If I may suggest, a video about how Magic Items would impact a world, economy and how to place them on adventures would be great.
Regarding skill checks for necessary clues. I like the idea of still having the skill checks, but instead of failing to find the clue on a failed roll, some other consequence happens. Maybe the PC alert the bad guy to their presence, or they take to long allowing more time for the bad guy to plan their escape.
If you want the players skills and abilities to matter use passive checks. You already know what your player's passive perception and passive investigation scores are just set the DC to no greater than the passive score of the player with the highest score in that skill at session.
Then they feel awesome like they earned it with their bad ass character and you ensure that players never miss a vital clue.
When I dm, I draw pictures and treat it like a point and click. I describe as little as possible so I don’t sound like I’m highlighting anything. One time I had my players crack a cipher and solve a riddle to solve a puzzle
Dungeon Master reference to the win. Great game. Hours of fun.
Perfect timing!
1:30
Are correct guesses impossible or is it certainty that should be impossible?
Certainty. Good question
Excellent video!
Shout out for Gaston Leroux!!!
Man, my characters are like, "A red string in the corner? It's obvious that the baron is a secret vampire who has been leaving red herring clues implicating the head of the cooper's guild." while at the same time, "So, we have a blacksmith's hammer as a murder weapon, a blacksmith's apron hidden in a corner, and the blacksmith's fingerprints in charcoal on the wall of the missing princess' bedchamber. I don't know where to go next."
I try writing murder mysteries in the domains of dread.
“Van Ricthen’s Guide to Ravenloft” helps me write mysteries in Ghost Stories and other genres of horror.
"Clue"; one of my favourite movies! "Are you trying to make me look like an idiot?"
"You don't need any help from me."
"That's right!"
Thinking about running a blood bank conspiracy theory adventure for my Vampire game that they kidnapped Kindred to harvest blood from them and sell to other Vamps to boast their powers and heighten Gehenna.
Never planned a mystery. I'll give it a go 😅
The suit always gets me xD
Just had a thought: what about writing a whodunnit type of mystery, where literally any one of 4 NPCs could be the culprit… and anytime the party comes to the conclusion of which target they suspect the most, THAT’S when some evidence proving them wrong is triggered. Who the real culprit is is determined by the party’s actions, because it’s literally the last person they suspect.
I would not do it with 4 NPCs, if it happens one time it is fun, if it happens 2 or more is frustrating.
You need a Sherlock NPC to show up here and there. Detectives in books are characters that will always get their man but the Fun for the PCs is the "Ah ha" moment wheb the reveal will take place. Like the game guess who you give info without giving the name
If the murderer knows about magical detectives they might try to murder is such a way to make the divination useless. If the target doesn't know who killed them but does know how they died a speak with dead would provide clues that don't reveal the entire mystery.
4:46 AMOGUS
Good video!
Love the mtg references
This week's Mystery: Why is the top of Baron's head missing in a significant portion of the Mystery Video, and does it have anything to do with the prominence of Filbert's (Don't Ask) Feet in the top right of the frame?
Always beware a necromancer if you commit a murder. They are going to find you. If you're lucky by asking the victim, if you're not with the victim's Animated corpse strangling you.
This is super well put together and very insightful, but how can I incorporate dice rolling into the dice rolling role playing game.
Have combat encounters where the slain enemies have clues on the corpses
I might just be too stupid to design and run this kind of adventure as well as I'd be satisfied with.
Bro where the fuck was this a month ago when I started my game?!
The problem is if you make the mysteries too hard you frustrate people they don't want to play.
Yeah, right, and then the players piece together a couple of clues and come up with a whole different story that throws them off what they were supposed to do to solve the mystery. Then they are stuck by not being able to advance, lost, and you as a Game Master have to decide whether to manipulate the story to place forced conveniences that take them by the hand to the right path. In the end, the players and the Game Master alike are frustrated because they did not know how to solve the mystery themselves and because perhaps they believe that the story they imagined is better than the one that the Game Master had actually implemented. I was in campaigns where the Game Master put mysteries to solve, or something like puzzles... and we had to spend 3 hours or more wasting time trying to guess, to put ourselves in the head of the GM, because sometimes even if the clues are there it doesn't work if you don't know how they are put together to solve the puzzle. This, along with putting puzzles in the middle of action or adventure video games (like Skyrim), have taught me that putting puzzles and things like that cuts into the narrative and the fun, as well as all the frustration because you want to keep playing, it's like you father comes to interrupt you from time to time while you are playing a video game to force you to solve crossword puzzles... then you certainly enjoy the puzzle, of course 😒
Didn't quite catch the Red Herring example...
Finally, Tinder for D&D
Am I crazy or did he switch between 3 thumbnails in the past 3 hours?
What's your degree of kinship to Alan tudyk?
usually love your content but feel this one is not great.
1. giving the all the clues outright no rolls required just makes the player that picked those feats like observant or put expertise in invistigation feel like they should have just taken sharpshooter for eg. rather have the same information available through other means ie canvassing for witnesses using the 3 clue rule.
2. totally negating divination spells again makes said wizard think should have picked other things.
3. red herrings are fine as long as it becomes quickly apparant its a false lead and can add to the tension if thier is a time crunch.
Are you doing A and B thumbnail testing? I swear it keeps changing
Firsty Mc Firstface
I have a sincere question: why the suit? I don’t know anyone who plays D&D in a suit! Did I miss something? I want to like your content by the suit makes it hard to follow you as it’s distracting. I do not mean to be mean at all… just asking an honest question!!
Love the video, however I do disagree on the skillcheck to find clues. You want to value you the PCs build and effort. IE, there is a player in my game who is a former police investigator. She has built great investigative skills . Whereas I hate needless rolls too, I do want to acknowledge that this character is likely to find the clue because they are more adapt at it.
I use Cypher RPG now, but even in 5e, i would ask the players who has ranks or is competent in a perception or investigative (without the needless roll), that person finds it . It acknowledges the characters build and intuitiion to check an area, However, in this situation, you need a mechanicsm, as stated to note that the players have found all the clues.
The players would easily find most of the clues but as the gm, i'd say something like , there is no murder weapon . so they know they are looking for a weapon.
"All clues to solve a mystery should be given"
- No. I do not agree. What is the point of building a investigative character if all clues should just be given? It should be automatically given to the Inquisitive Rogue. But a Barbarian that dumped his Int and got a -1 in investigation and is blind as a bat shouldn't just be as good in getting the clues. It send the wrong message to the players. It means the player get no incentive to not go into combat stats. Why get more Int or Wis when it comes at the expense of Dex. Why not take that Sharpshooter feat because you just get the clues anyway.
No. Only the most basic clues should be given. However they should not lead to the best outcome. Maybe you only get the clue that point towards the pawn or the scapegoat. Maybe just following the basics just waste your time so another murder takes place because you failed to find the clues that allowed you to save time.
I want to point towards two other games to prove a point here. Its from The Witcher 3 and Kingdom Come: Deliverance (KCD).
- In the Witcher 3 a famous bard and lover to one of your friends has been attacked by a religious zealot for blasphemy and heresy. You investigate three different sites and join in on the autopsy of the latest fatal victim. You find several clues. The biggest of them is the religious symbolism but also odd clues such as tracks that end just at a very tall wall, so tall no human can climb it.
You eventually get on the track of the killer but lose him. However the clues point towards a high ranking priest that is famous for torturing ladies of the night. While you barge in on such a session, if you go in guns blazing the quest ends here. However he wasn't the killer. He was just a scapegoat. A disturbed scapegoat, but a scapegoat nonetheless. If you continue to ask the priest he fills in that it must be the diener, the guy from the morgue. It turns out he is a Vampire and is the religious zealot.
If you are just given the clues here (which to an extent you are) there is absolutely no thinking involved in this quest. You are just being railroaded and forced to say X and do Y.
- In KCD you are given the quest to investigate why the church rebuilding the monastery has failed to pay for stones the stone quarry has mined for them. You are sent to investigate this as it is a lot of money involved, and the noble in charge of the stone quarry do not want to look bad when it comes to supplying the house of God.
When you get to the church you find out that the stone is of poor quality, it has been cut up into pieces when it was shipped in a big block and a skull of a devil has been found. So far a worker has been killed by having a piece of rock breaking off and hitting his head, and the church isn't willing to pay for subpar stone.
You find the stone that killed the worker and the devil skull. It might be some kind of curse placed on the worksite by someone that wishes evil to the church.
If you take the stone back to the stone quarry the quarrymaster will right away spot that the stone is not from his quarry. You can see it in the grain, and he has worked there for a long time.
If you find the devil skull and take it to the graveyard keeper, he will figure out that it is just a pair of deer antlers glued on a human skull. However it is some good craftsmanship due to how well the antlers stick on there.
You can confront the foreman of the construction and he will say that you need to meet him at midnight. If you do someone will try to murder you. If you confront him he will say that it was the foreman told him to do it while he snuck away. At this point the foreman will have used the time you wasted to kill off witnesses. The reason he does that is because he is behind stealing the stone so he can sell it while replacing the stone the church use with lesser quality stones. Depending on who you ask and what you do. You can allow the foreman get away with everything, find him in the act of carrying away the body or saving the witness before the foreman kills him and blow the whole case open.
No matter how you do it. The situation is resolved and the church starts to pay again.
I simply do not agree it is good advice to just give all clues to the players. You should reward players for being smart and having character that are not focused on combat. If a play is only focused on combat.... well they have no right to complain about being bad outside of combat. That was their choice.
@@SanJacintoArtGuild You are trying to dodge the problem. Why should you not build a combat build if you just get all clues, all information anyway? You are trying to dodge that question.
There is absolutely no point in rolling to understand the clues. If you do that you just roll to solve the problem.
@@SanJacintoArtGuild If you are in a mystery quest ALL scenarios are about mysteries. Sorry but that was the absolute dumbest thing you can have said.
Also. Any modern Mystery writer will also not include a bunch of dumb dumb soldiers that only know how to drive a tank. They actually have competent people in investigations and not people who has no idea about them.
Disagree with red herrings. You should 100% have dead end red herrings in your mystery adventure. Players will instinctively go back to the scene, or otherwise retrace their steps. I have and my players have. They don't just reach a dead end and give up. Unless their dm has inadvertently trained them too. The story keeps moving naturally. You can also have location-less clues that can appear anywhere. Like a symbol. If the party really does start to flounder, then they can see that symbol/word on someone or something... And you can get them back on the trail. A witness can come forward, having been to afraid to talk during the initial questioning, there are limitless tropes you can use from novels that don't have to be plotted out in advance. Just used tactfully and where they make sense. The idea that every lead is good and always progresses toward the correct answer... Isn't a mystery at all. Its just a normal quest on rails.
The only counter to intentional red herrings is that players often create and chase after their own red herrings all the time. But, those usually don't have the same story building potential as a deliberate one does. Unless your a grand master of flowers level dm at improv.
Final point can be somewhat similar to your idea. The conclusion of the red herring can shine light on other suspects. After the long investigation into the baron it is discovered he couldn't have done it. So who then? Only the baron was in the building that night. How do you know? The very cooperative butler told you. ... The BUTLER! You can ask those leading questions if your group is totally at a loss. Dont TELL them anything, just ask them what they already know. Players have watched movies and television. And it could still not be the butler, but if he lied about that then he is now the prime suspect. All this, because you let the party investigate a guilty seeming red herring and get nowhere with the lead. But that wrong answer can help lead them to the correct one. This is a core concept of mystery.
Second…?