Neverending "Yes ... And" Feedback Loops in Mysteries

[Committed Hero]

This is one of those common instances where a sentence of out of character talk is worth an hour of play:

"Given your character's expertise, they are satisfied that they have found what's relevant."

"You quickly conclude that [the side information] is not relevant to the question at hand. It may, however, become important at a later point."

 

[payn]

I'm not including deliberate red herrings. I am answering questions they give, but they're not relevant.
For example, the artifact was stolen from the museum - and they know who took it.
Them: "What is the history of the artifact? Where was it found before going to the museum? Can you tell us about the long-dead empire that the artifact belonged to? Can we get this high level NPC to help us - wait, they're 'too busy' to do the quest for us ... they must be in on it? Let's start investigating that NPC and her church."
Me: "Or you know that the villain has contacts in a neighborhood in the city. You think there are agents of his cult there. You could try to go there and find him before he skips town. They found his crashed carriage in the neighborhood and saw him walk into that building right there. That's probably a good place to look."
Them: "We should go to the library and see if we can find out what this artifact does."
Me: "Uh ... okay. If you want to spend the day doing that while he boards the next lightning rail out of town."

Part of this is the nature of RPGs and the players not wanting to be caught with their pants down. They want to go in armed with all the answers so they dont get gotcha'd. Your intentions are for them to proceed with the adventure, but they dont feel ready yet. It cant be that simple they must be thinking.

Wanting to know about the artifact gives them a leg up. Where is the bad guy potentially going with it? Is there something we can proactively prevent from happening because of it? They want to know the motives of the suspect and hope to get ahead of him and trap him. Meanwhile, you just want them to go get the thief. Im not sure what you need to push them in the right direction. Alleviate their concerns, answer their curiosity, put pressure on them to get going. I understand you dont want to lead them by the nose, but you gotta be stern too about not letting them drown in possibilities.

 

[Committed Hero]

A clue must always =

• Tell the character where to go get a clue next, or...
• Tell the character which suspect is exonerated, or...
• Tell the character a truth about what the goals of the mystery is, or...
• Tell the character a weakness on how to defeat the mystery, or...
• Tell the character what the mystery is going to try next.

I would add a few bullets if the game is a multi-mystery campaign, but otherwise this is a great list.

Incidentally, the first point is the design sensibility behind Gumshoe games.

 

[TiQuinn]

I'm not including deliberate red herrings. I am answering questions they give, but they're not relevant.
For example, the artifact was stolen from the museum - and they know who took it.
Them: "What is the history of the artifact? Where was it found before going to the museum? Can you tell us about the long-dead empire that the artifact belonged to? Can we get this high level NPC to help us - wait, they're 'too busy' to do the quest for us ... they must be in on it? Let's start investigating that NPC and her church."
Me: "Or you know that the villain has contacts in a neighborhood in the city. You think there are agents of his cult there. You could try to go there and find him before he skips town. They found his crashed carriage in the neighborhood and saw him walk into that building right there. That's probably a good place to look."
Them: "We should go to the library and see if we can find out what this artifact does."
Me: "Uh ... okay. If you want to spend the day doing that while he boards the next lightning rail out of town."

Do you know the answers to their questions about the artifact, or is it simply not important?

If it's not important, what would they say if you were to tell them, "The artifact is inlaid with gold and lapis lazuli with several gems, and is believed to have been part of the royal treasury of the Kingdom of Frobozz. It's not magical, but definitely valuable given its historic significance and age."

Does that not tell them: This is just a really valuable artifact, and that in and of itself, is reason enough for someone to want to steal it?

 

[DEFCON 1]

Fair enough for you, but to me that is just lying to your players in order to pander to their ideas and renders those ideas meaningless, because they didn't exist in the setting until the players unknowingly changed reality. I don't like that under any circumstances, but particularly in an investigation I feel it completely negates the point of doing it at all.

That's fine for you but doesn't help @Retreater that much, does it? He did it the way you suggest to begin with and now finds himself stuck in the situation he's in. So it's not me you need to convince.

 

[BookTenTiger]

This is why I often just write down a series of truths I want the characters to discover instead of coming up with exact clues. Then no matter which direction they go in I can place those truths.

Let's say the characters are investigating the death of a powerful merchant lord. I might write a list of truths like this:

• The merchant lord was killed by a werewolf.
• The werewolf is Baron Wolfson.
• Baron Wolfson was cursed by a witch.
• The merchant lord was exploring magic from a faerie glen.
• The witch cursed the Baron to kill the Merchant Lord in order to protect the glen.

Let's say the characters go to talk with Bob the Commoner. I'll look at my list of truths and either choose one to reveal, or Bob will point them in the right direction. Or better yet, both!

DM: Bob shakes his head, hearing of the grizzly details of the murder scene. "Whenever something goes wrong around here, we usually blame the Witch of the Woods. She's always causing mayhem to anyone who goes near her Secret Glen... I have no idea what's in there, and I'm too scared to find out!"

Now the characters have learned that there's a witch who protects her secret glen, and they have a new place to explore and learn more!

But maybe they take a left turn.

Players: Secret glen? That reminds me, I wanted to ask around at the tavern.

DM: You ask the regulars at the tavern, but they're all as lost as you. However, you notice that a bard is singing a melancholy melody about a Witch's Curse... A woodsman in the song is cursed by the witch to take on the form of a wolf and attack his fellow woodsmen."

Now the characters can talk to the bard, or go find the witch, or look for wolf tracks... And the adventure goes on!

I'm also not afraid to connect the dots for the players once they've uncovered enough clues.

DM: Reading over the journal of the Captain of the Guard, you find out that he saw the Baron walking out of the keep under the full moon... The captain went to find a lantern, and when he looked back the Baron was gone. He heard a bone-chilling howl. You realize that, of course, the Baron was the werewolf who attacked the Merchant Lord! And that the witch must have cursed him in order to protect her secret glen.

 

[Committed Hero]

I'm not including deliberate red herrings. I am answering questions they give, but they're not relevant.
For example, the artifact was stolen from the museum - and they know who took it.
Them: "What is the history of the artifact? Where was it found before going to the museum? Can you tell us about the long-dead empire that the artifact belonged to? Can we get this high level NPC to help us - wait, they're 'too busy' to do the quest for us ... they must be in on it? Let's start investigating that NPC and her church."
Me: "Or you know that the villain has contacts in a neighborhood in the city. You think there are agents of his cult there. You could try to go there and find him before he skips town. They found his crashed carriage in the neighborhood and saw him walk into that building right there. That's probably a good place to look."
Them: "We should go to the library and see if we can find out what this artifact does."
Me: "Uh ... okay. If you want to spend the day doing that while he boards the next lightning rail out of town."

Apologies for attacking the hypothetical, but from the way this unfolds, the DM has offered the players two mysteries to solve in that succinct setup. Mystery is a bad name, but certainly two possible objectives: find out about the artifact (a loaded word in D&D), and get it from the thief. And unless the party has a clear remit to be undertaking jobs like the latter, it's certainly understandable that they would want more information about the former. In fact, if that artifact has an offensive power they should assume it's gonna be used against them! And if it's not strictly the party's job to retrieve artifacts, and you are preserving their freedom of activity, this is a chance to acquire an artifact.

This is just a long winded way of saying that some information is better served as exposition ("it's a Dhakaani cult statue with no magical powers. But priceless to the right owner"), while other information is better served as a scenario objective.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

What do you do in this situation? Just tell them "no, stop looking for clues and do the obvious thing that you need to do."

In my games, NPCs only know what they know. At a certain point, they either want to get back to NPCing or simply stare at the PCs dumbfounded: "you know I'm just a goatherd, right? I don't know anything about ancient sorcerer-kings."

That said, if I were in your shoes, I'd probably end up pivoting to a comedy of errors campaign and see how nuts things can get. By level five, they're all going to be naked in Asmodeous' bed trying to explain to an angry solar how they got there.

 

[Retreater]

Do you know the answers to their questions about the artifact, or is it simply not important?

I know the answers. The theft was intended to kick off the adventure and get the party involved with tracking down the group that stole it. And what the artifact is provides some information about the cult involved.
And I guess the stuff about the artifact is interesting, but I think they're spending way too much time researching the artifact and trying to find allies than doing the exciting stuff and getting the artifact back while they have the chance.
And the only reason I'm being critical about how they're handling it is because they're getting bored. They're "optimizing their way out of the fun."

 

[BookTenTiger]

I know the answers. The theft was intended to kick off the adventure and get the party involved with tracking down the group that stole it. And what the artifact is provides some information about the cult involved.
And I guess the stuff about the artifact is interesting, but I think they're spending way too much time researching the artifact and trying to find allies than doing the exciting stuff and getting the artifact back while they have the chance.
And the only reason I'm being critical about how they're handling it is because they're getting bored. They're "optimizing their way out of the fun."

Is there any reason why you can't just give them the info on the artifact and move on?