kitsune9
Adventurer
The Alexandrian Blog Archive Three Clue Rule will help you on the clue side.
I second this blog. This is a really good blog for an in-depth analysis on gaming and campaign structure.
The Alexandrian Blog Archive Three Clue Rule will help you on the clue side.
These can be more effective if you give your players a secondary set of characters - some of the main villain's trusted men, perhaps, or some other kind of person who can get an inside look at what is happening. It can allow the players a unique way to interact with the Big Bad directly.1. Use a cut scene, just like they do in the movies. Personally I've not found these to be very effective.
This is, I think, the biggest non-mechanical problem I have with writing adventures. I've tried watching movies and reading novels, but they're no help when it comes to villains - they show the villain "off-screen" where the players aren't likely to see them in-game.
Anyone else have this problem? How have you introduced villains?
The advice I've gotten for introducing clues generally involves "keep it obvious".
Yeah, in a mystery, never EVER have the most important clues be ones that the PCs can miss through bad rolls. ALL the info must get to them, somehow. If this means giving it automatically, providing three or more ways to GET the clue, and reminding players of the clues they have found when they consistently overlook one or more, then do it.
There's nothing more frustrating to a PC to be told "you had all the clues to this mystery an hour ago, but since you forgot the main one, you can't solve it!" or "no you couldn't solve the mystery, ever, because when you interviewed suspect X, you never noticed clue Y".
An idea about Clues that I liked from [MENTION=2]Piratecat[/MENTION]'s GUMSHOE thread was to automatically give the clue if the PC looks for it.
So instead of giving a medical clue if the PC succeeds his Medical skill at DC 20, just give the player the clue if the PC says "I examine the body, my medical background may help me determine cause of death"
That's my interpretation of the GUMSHOE mechanic in D&D. I'm not sure how one might incorporate PC skill level, except perhaps by modifying the quality of the clue based on skill level. A higher skilled PC gets a better, more detailed clue.
This in turn, should clarify that a Clue is not an Answer. Giving the players a clue shouldn't literally tell them who the murderer is. A clue should act as a pointer or reference to a suspect, which thus rules out other suspects.
This would be why in Gumshoe, it is okay to give away the clues, because the players still have to think about them and how they relate and how they qualify or disqualify a suspect.
I think allowing for failure is important in a mystery though. If the players are assured the clues, that can take away some of the excitement. I think the trick is to remember that the adventure doesn't stop just because players failed to find clue Y. They can still make educated guesses and go on instinct (even with all the clues they often never know for sure if they are right). Npcs still act and keep things moving to a degree.
I see mystery adventures fail at a higher rate that other kinds of adventures. My default assumption is the format as applied to the standard rules causes additional problems.
An adventure can fail because the PCs failed to find the clues, and it can fail because they failed to apply the clues correctly. I'd rather it fail for the latter, which is mostly the players fault, than the former, which could easily be the dice's fault.
I also wouldn't interpret "give them the clue" too literally. If a PC simply walks into a room, you don't give them a clue. If they examine the body, you give them a clue about the body. If they don't think to examine the body, they don't get the clue about the body. Once again, failure is back in the player's court.
Dice randomness is eliminated as a source of problem when done this way. Incorporating a skill check to give a minimal layman's clue for failure, or better, more detailed clues for margin of success may work fine as well.
Concepts like the rule of 3 clues may help, but logically, what that idea is trying to do is give 3 dice roll chances instead of one, to reduce the impact of a bad roll on a clue-check.
It's also important to remember, a Clue is not the Solution. I think DMs resist giving away clues, because they think it gives away the solution. DMs always think the mystery is too easy. Possession of all the clues does not mean posession of all the information or ability to interpret them to qualify or disqualify suspects.