Why Aren't Designers Using The GUMSHOE System?

I was re-reading Night’s Black Agents by Kenneth Hite and Pelgrane Press for a review for this site, when I was stopped in my reading by what I thought was an important question (which I ask in the headline). Why aren’t more designers making games around the Gumshoe system created by Robin Laws? Robin Laws is a very smart man who thinks a lot about role-playing games. Now, I don’t always agree with where his lines of reasoning take him, as a designer, but that doesn’t take away from the man’s brilliance. I will admit that I wasn’t as impressed with the Gumshoe system at first blush, but as I have put more experience with the system under my belt, that has changed and my appreciation for what Laws did in the rules has grown.

I was re-reading Night’s Black Agents by Kenneth Hite and Pelgrane Press for a review for this site, when I was stopped in my reading by what I thought was an important question (which I ask in the headline). Why aren’t more designers making games around the Gumshoe system created by Robin Laws? Robin Laws is a very smart man who thinks a lot about role-playing games. Now, I don’t always agree with where his lines of reasoning take him, as a designer, but that doesn’t take away from the man’s brilliance. I will admit that I wasn’t as impressed with the Gumshoe system at first blush, but as I have put more experience with the system under my belt, that has changed and my appreciation for what Laws did in the rules has grown.

The concept at the heart of Gumshoe is one that has bothered me in a lot of fantasy games that I have run or played over my many years of gaming. That simple phrase: “I search the room.” Forgive my French, but the one thing that I dislike most about RPGs is the tendency towards “pixelbitching.” For those who may not be familiar with this term, it basically applies to having to state that you’re searching every inch of a room and looking out for cracks, crevices and any weirdly discolored patches that you may encounter in the flickering torchlight. It also refers to those “locks” that are pointless mini-puzzle games that require you to figure out the right combination of up-down-up that will unlock a door, or activate device. I hate those things.

One of the central concepts of a Gumshoe game is to get rid of that idea, and let you get to the meat of the scenario at hand. In game design in the 90s, we saw a rise of role-playing games with highly detailed skill systems. Pages and pages and pages of skills, with specialties and sub-skills all detailed. One of the high points of this style of game design would probably be GURPS from Steve Jackson Games. Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t bashing that style of design. I played the heck out of games like GURPS in the 90s. Just about everything that I wanted to play was ported into GURPS via the multitude of supplements that the system had. The problem arose with this school of design in that, while you were still assumed to be creating highly competent characters (at the higher point totals for GURPS characters, at least), the way that the skill systems worked your “highly competent” characters always had a non-trivial chance of failure when a player attempted to do anything.


As games touting their “realism” became more and more prevalent in the 80s and 90s, this trend for designing skills followed. All of those years of characters trying to do something cool, and instead doing something disappointing. You see this idea made fun of in various D&D memes around the internet, and I think that game design is finally getting around to fixing this idea. Gumshoe isn’t the only one doing this, not by far, but it is one of the only systems that is putting “fixing” investigation in RPGs in the center of the design.

But Gumshoe doesn’t catch the imagination of game designers in the same that Fate or Apocalypse World seems to be doing. I’m not saying that Gumshoe is better than either of those systems, in fact I’m supposed to by playing my first Powered By The Apocalypse game next month. There are always going to be game systems that catch on with designers, and those that get left behind. Gumshoe seems to have a devoted following, and a number of successful games, including the earlier mentioned Night’s Black Agents and Trail of Cthulhu among them. Pelgrane Press has a growing number of Gumshoe powered games, but for a system that has been released under both the OGL and a Creative Commons license it just surprises me that we don’t see more designers chewing on this system for their own worlds, like we do with D20, Fate or Apocalypse World (or any other number of free-to-use game systems out there).
Maybe Pelgrane Press is doing such a good job with their games that designers don’t need to remake the wheel. I know that there was talk of a Ars Magica/Gumshoe mashup at Atlas Games at one point, but I haven’t seen anything about that in a while.

At this point, you’re probably wondering one of two things, maybe even both. First, why does it matter what systems people use? Second, why is Gumshoe so cool?


The first question has a simple answer for me, and it lies in why I started writing for this site. Diversity in games is always a good thing. I like the idea of having a toolbox of different games, so that I can use the game, or system, that works best with what I want to do. Yes, I can just get a high level of system mastery with one game and use it for everything that I want, but that isn’t really how I roll. You get a different feel for a fantasy world when playing D&D, or when playing Stormbringer, and I like that. I want a game to reflect a world, and I want a world to be a good fit for how the mechanics of a game works. When I play a pulp game with Fate, and one with Troll Lord Games’ wonderful Amazing Adventures, the characters have different feels to them, and how they can interact with their worlds are different. Sometimes those differences are what I am looking for when I run, or play, a game.

Now, why do I like Gumshoe is a more complicated question to answer.

First off, it gets rid of the idea that a competent character has a non-zero chance of failure. That’s a HUGE idea, when you look at the stream of design that hit its height in the 90s (and still shows up at times in more contemporary game designs). If you look at role-playing games from the idea that they are supposed to simulate what you see in the stories/movies/comics that we all read, this brings what happens in a game much closer to what we see in the fictions that we are trying to emulate.

One thing, the “zero to hero” games, which cover a lot of the level-based games out there, most of which draw upon some strain of D&D as their influence, are not a counter argument to why there should be a “whiff” factor in RPG design. You can argue many things about the “heroic journey” of these games, but mostly the idea of them is that your character is on the journey to get to be that competent character. Using a first level D&D character to refute Sherlock Holmes or Tony Stark (sometimes they’re even the same person) isn’t proof that competent characters shouldn’t be doing competent things. It just means that different characters should be able to do different things.

I think that our recent Classic Traveller game would have been more interesting for the players if the game had been designed like Gumshoe. Too many times the momentum of our game was interrupted because a character who should have been able to do some sort of action couldn’t. Definitely not a slam on old school game designs. In most other aspects, the design of Classic Traveller is a hallmark of how simple and elegant older school game mechanics can be. If your idea of fun is overcoming adversity through fumbled dice rolls, then the task resolution of Classic Traveller will be your thing. I just think that, in the case of our group, this held us back in some ways.

So, again, what makes Gumshoe so great? I keep talking about where other games fall down. In a Gumshoe game, characters have what are called Investigative Abilities. But, what does this mean? At the core, the Investigative Abilities in a Gumshoe game let you get to the heart of the matter, because getting a piece of necessary information shouldn’t be dependent on a dice roll. Now, there are still contingencies for getting this information: your character has to be one the scene, they have to have a relevant ability and they have to tell the GM of the game that they are using it. In Night’s Black Agents an example of this is “I use Chemistry to test the blood for silver.” Obviously the character has an important reason to ask this question (perhaps it is a way for people to protect themselves from vampiric attacks, by dousing themselves with silver), and the next step of the characters (and the story) probably hinges on the results. In a game where there are non-zero chances of success, time can be wasted in a game session in rolling the results of this over and over to figure out if the answer given to a character is correct or not. What Gumshoe posits is that, if a character is a chemist, and demonstrates competency in their Chemistry ability, time shouldn’t be wasted in rolling until you get a high enough of a result to be able to tell if the GM is telling the truth or not.

This idea also assumes something important: a role-playing game isn’t a competition between the GM and the players. If the information is important to the story, and the characters have the relevant knowledge, don’t waste time in the reveal. While I’m sure that some gamers have fun with those hours spent in a chemistry lab testing, and retesting blood samples, others would have much more fun getting past the blood tests and getting to the point where they get to fight vampires. I know that I would.

But all of this brings me back to my initial point of this piece. Why aren’t more designers using the Gumshoe rules for their games? Maybe they just aren’t as familiar with the rules, which is entirely possible. But becoming more familiar with these rules is why I wrote over a thousand words for this piece. It does mean that I will, hopefully, have to explain less in my review for Night’s Black Agents, but that is really only secondary. What we see often in gaming writing is people writing what they know, talking about the games that they know and figuring out how to make them fit into other situations. Sometimes, instead of talking about how a screwdriver can be used in different situations, we should talk about why a pair of pliers are also useful.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Connorsrpg

Adventurer
Did someone say Cypher System is the other end of the spectrum to 4E for ease of DMing? Are you sure? I have found it far and away the easiest, esp as you don't roll and NPCs are even simpler than D&D stat blocks. Not only that, it is the first sustem (other than probably Savage Worlds) where I feel comfortable creating creature/NPC stats on the spot. Basically, choose a level. If they are good at something treat them as a level higher for that. If the have a weakness. 1 level lower for that. Normally, I feel the need to write stats out, but with Cypher, I haven't bothered for many and it worked fine.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Did someone say Cypher System is the other end of the spectrum to 4E for ease of DMing? Are you sure? I have found it far and away the easiest, esp as you don't roll and NPCs are even simpler than D&D stat blocks. Not only that, it is the first sustem (other than probably Savage Worlds) where I feel comfortable creating creature/NPC stats on the spot. Basically, choose a level. If they are good at something treat them as a level higher for that. If the have a weakness. 1 level lower for that. Normally, I feel the need to write stats out, but with Cypher, I haven't bothered for many and it worked fine.

Rules-light systems have their place, sure. And ease of use is certainly one of their selling points. It's not a measure of quality, though; it's a taste thing.
 

Connorsrpg

Adventurer
Oh, totally agree with that Morrus. I read upthread about it being the polar opposite to 4E for DM prep. Anyway, I am glad there is a lot of talk about other games. I for one too would have ignored other systems in days gone by, but I have looked into several in recent years and have liked what I saw. Unfortunately, I am also guilty of not knowing the GUMSHOE system, so I just commented on another system I recently discovered and thought there would be a lot more material for.
 

Von Ether

Legend
Did someone say Cypher System is the other end of the spectrum to 4E for ease of DMing? Are you sure? I have found it far and away the easiest, esp as you don't roll and NPCs are even simpler than D&D stat blocks. Not only that, it is the first sustem (other than probably Savage Worlds) where I feel comfortable creating creature/NPC stats on the spot. Basically, choose a level. If they are good at something treat them as a level higher for that. If the have a weakness. 1 level lower for that. Normally, I feel the need to write stats out, but with Cypher, I haven't bothered for many and it worked fine.

My apologies, I wasn't implying that Cypher was harder. I was just saying that they took two completely different tracks to provide asymmetrical play. Wasn't passing any judgement on those tracks.
 

Connorsrpg

Adventurer
[MENTION=15582]Von Ether[/MENTION]. Oh cheers, now worries. Misunderstanding now understood. ;) I certainly was not flaming either. I thought you meant 4E had easy creature stats and Cypher did not. I haven't seen an easier system, especially on the fly. But thanks for clarification. Yes, the 2 have taken some very different approaches.
 

And just like gumeshoe the Cypher system has gained very little following despite being well supported with gorgeous products and well-known writers. Numenera made a minor splash when it arrived but the Strange went into the water like a professional diver: without a ripple...

I think that for many gamers (like myself) the overly generalized and abstract spend mechanic is a massive turn-off. I LOVE the Numenera setting, but unfortunately I would need to scrap the system entirely and make something new from scratch before I could enjoy the game.

Seems like it is more than a minor splash to me. I am hearing from lots of people who play cypher and still see plenty of threads on it online. It didn't dethrone D&D or pathfinder but that was never what anyone expected (D&D and pathfinder are long and a ad&D type system has always dominated the hobby----in the 90s WW came close to being a serious contender for that spot, but for the most part the success of new games isn't measure by whether they reach D&D level success).
 

Jabborwacky

First Post
Gumshoe is one of my newest favorites in terms of RPG systems. One thing crime dramas and horror have in common is that creating them is a fairly cerebral task, whereas most other types of RPG adventures are designed almost by algorithm. It requires a lot less originality to create a fun dungeon delve than a fun horror or investigative game. The simplicity of the Gumshoe system helps the GM focus on his horror/investigation story, but it is still a very unique challenge.

Edit: I will say this, though. "Fear Itself" at the very least didn't age well, if not being outright contradictory on its intended design goals. The introduction of the book says its about putting ordinary people into horrific situations, but then goes on to define movie cliches like the "sexy girl" and "brains" characters as starting points for people to build their characters around. That kind of defeats the purpose because those aren't ordinary people. There are other issues I have with the book as well, but most can thankfully be ignored. The sample adventure is definitely not a selling point. So I'm seeing decent products and then ones like Fear Itself that barely pull average at best. That could also play into the lack of popularity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Okay, you're way off the mark on what "procedural" means, in terms of genre. Genre name comes from TV cop shows, and the cops tend to follow a predictable procedure to get through a case.

Ah, no. The pitch made was that the problem GUMSHOE solves is that of detective fiction. This I feel is a slight bait and switch from "GUMSHOE does detective stories" to "GUMSHOE does procedural stories". And my answer to that is "the new definition of what GUMSHOE does is that it lays naked a method of storytelling that makes me turn my TV off when the story shows its skeleton too regularly."

And frankly adding a structure as clear as GUMSHOE to a procedural story would be like adding a clock to an episode of HOUSE and a known number of pointless tests.

as I noted before, laying out the mystery really isn't all that different from laying out a dungeon - the GM places stuff, and the characters interact with it.

And this is what makes dungeons like Keep on the Shadowfell so terrible. That you are meant to solve them procedurally rather than logistically and via short-circuiting or finding the loot. Part of the point of good dungeons like Caverns of Thracia is that you can jump from level to level and explore or not as you choose.

Yes, it is assumed that the players *will* approach the scenario. But that's not the GM playing the role of a vain, autocratic god - the GM has the player's buy in on the general premise before play begins.

But the GM needs in many ways more buy-in for GUMSHOE than other games. It's not just the genre, it's the methodology.

Well, if you have an issue with the mystery genre as a whole, that's not a critique of the game - that's a critique of the genre.

I don't. What I have a problem with is filler stories - it's a great way to pad episodes out to reach the old Syndication Threshold for a US TV show (100 Episodes) but frankly I'd rather my RPGs not concentrate on filler episodes. And even the filler not show its structure so nakedly.

Not an issue. This isn't old-school D&D, where in searching a room, the player is expected to tell the GM explicitly every single thing they look at, and the GM only gives information to very specific questions. It is more like 3e - "I search the room" - and the player then gets *everything* they might get, without asking targeted questions.

And that this is a bad expectation is my point. In order for the GM to give everything the players might all think of we need to artificially circumscribe player knowledge (both IC and OOC) and creativity to cut them down to the level of the GM in that field. We're at that point working in a universe that might as well be as silly as that of NCIS where two people typing at the same keyboard makes it easier to deal with a hacker just because that's what the GM thinks works. We're cutting the conversation out of RPGs.

And almost as bad, we're running classic silly logic puzzles here. That the crime should be soluble based on the GM's thought processes. Again the game doesn't fit the premise.

This is very Holmesian, really. Holmes doesn't speculate about what he might find, and search for specific pieces of information. He takes in the entire space, and happens to notice some bits that are clearly relevant, and everything else is dross he may discard. He doesn't continue probing because he expects some thing *should* be there - he finds what he finds, and is so good that he knows he didn't miss anything useful.

I'd argue that a true Holmesian RPG would be almost pure illusionism. That Holmes inductive methods mean that you present Holmes the clues, he tells you who the murderer was, and that turns out to be it. But that's a sidenote.

And Holmes absolutely does probe because he expects things should be there. After all, possibly the classic clue is "Why didn't the dog bark".
 

The easiest way to reconcile these is to just say that spell slots are exactly as quantifiable within the game as they are outside of it, and HP is just a measure of beaten-up-ed-ness. In spite of weasel words suggesting that you could abstract them, the game has never suggested or required that you should.

This is completely 100% wrong.

First, any game where an orc can pound on you with an axe for a full minute and get as lucky as it's possible to get in no way has physical hit points. You can not have hit points work at all other than as abstract results. Second, although people may have ignored the rules as written according to Gygax' DMG (p61), hit points are abstractions of endurance, luck, and magical protection.
“Damage scored to characters or certain monsters is actually not substantially physical–a mere nick or scratch until the last handful of hit points are considered–it is a matter of wearing away the endurance, the luck, the magical protections.”

 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
Ah, no. The pitch made was that the problem GUMSHOE solves is that of detective fiction. This I feel is a slight bait and switch from "GUMSHOE does detective stories" to "GUMSHOE does procedural stories".

In this thread, post #6, I said, "To answer the question, we should note that GUMSHOE is really designed to handle mystery/investigation/procedural style games." So, I'm pretty sure the issue here isn't a bait-and-switch, since all this has been present in the thread since the first page.

And my answer to that is "the new definition of what GUMSHOE does is that it lays naked a method of storytelling that makes me turn my TV off when the story shows its skeleton too regularly."

And, again, in that same post, I noted, "All in all, it is a system that does what it does pretty well (I'm about to use Ashen Stars for a campaign for my group), but what it does isn't necessarily what everyone wants to do. And that's okay."

So, you know, we have already recognized it isn't for everyone. Again, on the first page. If you're going to be a constructive part of the conversation, and you want to be critical, it would help a lot if you got up to speed on the points we've already covered, rather than making us retread stuff from just a few pages back.

That you are meant to solve them procedurally rather than logistically and via short-circuiting or finding the loot. Part of the point of good dungeons like Caverns of Thracia is that you can jump from level to level and explore or not as you choose.

GUMSHOE games aren't typically about exploration or gathering loot, either. It seems like a poor fit for you.

Oh, and most "procedure" is logistics, summed up and standardized for maximum effectiveness and efficiency. "Police procedure" is a real thing for good reasons.

But the GM needs in many ways more buy-in for GUMSHOE than other games. It's not just the genre, it's the methodology.

How difficult that is to get is less about the game, and more about the players. Getting you to buy looks like it'd be like pulling teeth without anesthetic. Meanwhile, I'm doing character generation with a table of players tonight who, when offered five different games to choose from (including D&D) dove right at Ashen Stars.

And that this is a bad expectation is my point. In order for the GM to give everything the players might all think of we need to artificially circumscribe player knowledge (both IC and OOC) and creativity to cut them down to the level of the GM in that field.

Well, here we need to note a few things. We are talking about a game of mystery fiction, not mystery real-life. In real life, detectives and people solving problems do this as their full-time jobs. They have days and weeks to consider and probe. And the real world is largely parallelized, such that one person working through some ideas doesn't stop other people on their team. Much of real-life detective work is intensely tedious and time consuming.

Meanwhile, we are at a table for only a few hours a week, maybe, and all resolution of actions is serialized through one GM, who is expected to help keep up some level of dramatic tension to the whole thing.

So, yes, we take some shortcuts in order to make it come out as a reasonable play experience. We really don't have time for players (who are *not*, in the real world, typically experts on the things their characters are experts in) to go through the full thought process of real-world investigation.

We're at that point working in a universe that might as well be as silly as that of NCIS where two people typing at the same keyboard makes it easier to deal with a hacker just because that's what the GM thinks works.

What, never heard of pair programming? It's a pretty common practice today... :p

(Just in case you missed it, that's a joke. A truth, but a joke, regardless.)

We're cutting the conversation out of RPGs.

No. We are *moving* it. And the game is pretty clear about this - the game takes as its basis that the act of interpreting information is more interesting to the players than he act of finding data. If you're not on board with that, the game isn't for you. Have fun playing something else, instead.

And almost as bad, we're running classic silly logic puzzles here.

Who is the "we"? Maybe that's what is going on when you work with the system (you have worked with it, right, and aren't criticizing it on theory alone), but that's not what's going on at my table. Maybe you ought to stop passing judgments on things you're not experiencing, hm?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top