GM fiat - an illustration

[EzekielRaiden]

That answer existed before hand. People, due to personalities, opinions, etc. were going to react in the manner that they have in this thread, prior to the question being asked. This thread is just revealing that answer to you now.

I would also argue that that isn't even a "mystery" in the first place. It's simply a question, or rather, a speculation about a possible action. Mysteries necessarily center on an un-answered question, but that doesn't mean that all un-answered questions are mysteries. "What will I, Ezekiel, eat for lunch today, 2025/4/4?" is an un-answered question where I will be personally responsible for creating the answer (by choosing what to eat later today), but it isn't a mystery. At least, I would never call it one, and I would be extremely surprised if anyone did consider such a thing a "mystery".

 

[thefutilist]

And what of the Clue/Cluedo method? That is, a situation where nobody authored anything, and the GM does not have notes--but there is still a single, definitive answer that was always the answer, and which still permits revealing clues (mostly negative clues, at least the way Clue/Cluedo is traditionally played, but I suspect there are still ways to have positive clues nonetheless). By your logic, this cannot be discovering the GM's notes because, as noted, there aren't any. But it still does the thing I described, where there is a single specific answer that can be discovered by gathering evidence and reasoning on the basis of that evidence.

Ah my bad. I assumed you, the GM, knew the answer to the mystery. Like you had a specific person in mind before the investigation happened.

 

[Maxperson]

I would also argue that that isn't even a "mystery" in the first place. It's simply a question, or rather, a speculation about a possible action. Mysteries necessarily center on an un-answered question, but that doesn't mean that all un-answered questions are mysteries. "What will I eat for lunch today?" is an un-answered question where I will be personally responsible for creating the answer (by choosing what to eat), but it isn't a mystery.

Yeah. It wasn't a mystery. My point was just that the answer to the question existed prior to the asking, so it isn't even an example of the question generating the answer instead of discovering the answer. Even ignoring the context around the question you asked, it isn't an example in any case.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Ah my bad. I assumed you, the GM, knew the answer to the mystery. Like you had a specific person in mind before the investigation happened.

That was what I did with my previous, "Jinnistani eclipse-celebration masquerade ball" mystery. I had a specific person in mind and chose clues to place for the PCs to figure it out. A mixture of intentionally false clues and real ones. The killer (technically it could be classified as an assassination) did the killing specifically to cause unrest in the court of this particular Jinnistani city-state. Mt. Matahat. She wanted to try to frame at least one hot-headed visiting nobleman (The Right Honorable Afzal Hasan Anwar al-Aqil yatt-Mejjati, Baron of Cinders) in order to disrupt trade between Mt. Matahat and the City of Brass, probably with an eye toward setting up someone else for a better position in the never-ending squabbles over who gets to rule there.*

I have, however, resolved to do something like the Clue/Cluedo method for my game at some point in the future. Al-Rakkah Confidential, hah. I think my group would appreciate some good ol-fashioned sleuthing. By keepng the true solution secret even from myself, I can potentially do something very interesting!

Given the PCs got Baron Afzal off the hook back in Mt. Matahat, he might even intentionally hire them as private investigators, knowing they are trustworthy and willing to follow the truth, and (best of all) highly unlikely to accept bribes or other such interference. Could be a good idea, if the party ever decides to hit up the City of Brass...

*Unlike most Jinnistani city-states, the City of Brass has no single ruler, as the former Inferno Queen died, very unexpectedly since Jinnistani nobles are usually nigh-immortal, without having designated a specific heir amongst her many, many children...and they've never been able to completely settle behind a single ruler. The throne has lain vacant for over a thousand years because anytime someone gets close, it pisses off enough other pretenders to take them down. Sort of an "if I can't have it, no one can" situation.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Eh, that's so wrong it's not even funny.

"Whether or not the answer is created as the output of actual play, if there is no answer at all until the moment play generates one, how could you reason toward that answer prior to its generation?"

In the real world no one who wanted to know something unknown ever did that, because in all cases there was an answer prior to when they went looking. The answer wasn't generated when they found it.

I don't think that's certain! But regardless, when people set out to try and solve a mystery... I'm thinking of a scientific mystery, here... they do so knowing that no answer has yet been determined. They are setting out to discover the answer.

That's an irrelevant distinction. The clues are there to be put together. That the DM puts the clues together in the real fictional mystery doesn't negate that the process is the same in both cases.

It's not irrelevant at all. It's what makes it a puzzle. No one crafts a mystery in the real world. Mysteries in the real world are not something intended for an audience to solve. That's something unique to a mystery novel, movie, or RPG scenario.

This is why I think a constructed mystery scenario for an RPG has more in common with an RPG that produces an answer to a mystery scenario through play than either has in common with solving a real mystery.

People may feel that one is more like solving a mystery than the other is, but that's subjective.

That answer existed before hand. People, due to personalities, opinions, etc. were going to react in the manner that they have in this thread, prior to the question being asked. This thread is just revealing that answer to you now.

Yes, and I'm sure you would have predicted where this discussion would go right after reading the first post!

Stop it.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't think that's certain! But regardless, when people set out to try and solve a mystery... I'm thinking of a scientific mystery, here... they do so knowing that no answer has yet been determined. They are setting out to discover the answer.

Irrelevant. That answer was there before they ever set out to find it. Unknown to them =/= them generating an answer that never existed before, at the moment when they find it.

It's not irrelevant at all. It's what makes it a puzzle. No one crafts a mystery in the real world. Mysteries in the real world are not something intended for an audience to solve. That's something unique to a mystery novel, movie, or RPG scenario.

I've already shown someone who crafted a mystery in the real world.

Mysteries are no more puzzles because they are fiction than real world mysteries are. If one is merely a puzzle, then both are. If one is a mystery, both are. Both use the same methods of discovering pre-determined clues in order to find the pre-determined answer.

The reality, though, is that both are both. Both fictional and real life mysteries are mysteries AND puzzles.

People may feel that one is more like solving a mystery than the other is, but that's subjective.

No it's not. One is absolutely closer to a real life mystery than the other. And that one is the one that has pre-determined clues and a pre-determined answer.

Yes, and I'm sure you would have predicted where this discussion would go right after reading the first post!

Maybe. Maybe not. That's not relevant, either. The answer was pre-established by the personalities and beliefs of the posters.

Stop it.

No. You stop it. Stop trying to tell me what to do. Just because my answers are tearing apart your argument, doesn't make it okay for you to tell me to "stop it."

 

[hawkeyefan]

An example that is a mystery. We are talking about mysteries.

For goodness' sake, at least try to be engaging in good faith!

You wouldn't have predicted where this conversation would have gone based on the OP alone. It was an unknown and we only found out by the asking of it.

Don't accuse me of engaging in bad faith.

Sure. And hired mercenaries clearing out IRL ruins or fighting "invading hordes" etc. don't have a person on high placing dangerous opponents in interesting places, but TTRPGing does--even Dungeon World, Apocalypse World, and most other such games that aren't outright "no-myth".

I don't really see where this argument goes. We are necessarily talking about something constructed through the efforts of people.

I wouldn't claim to have defeated mercenaries if I win an RPG scenario facing mercenaries. I'm not really engaging in combat.

If I engage in a diplomatic discussion where the characters in the game are trying to persuade an NPC to help with some course of action... to a peace accord, let's say... I haven't negotiated a peace contract. I've pretended to do so by talking as my character and perhaps making the occasional role.

If I engage in a mystery scenario in an RPG... I have not solved a mystery. I have pretended to do so, however the solution is determined.

Certainly! But if you can give me an example of a mystery where there is no answer until that answer is generated by the people investigating it, I'd love to hear it. And, to be absolutely clear, since this seems to have been a point of unclarity:

Well, if you accept that a predetermined mystery scenario played out in an RPG is an example of solving an objective mystery, then I would say that you would also have to accept a mystery scenario played out in an RPG that determines the outcome during play to be what you're looking for.

Yes, the key thing is that an objective answer exist from the start. And that doesn't mean events in the session need to be planned out or anticipated. But the backstory being a concrete thing you can discover through play is the point that matters in terms of this distinction

So... the point of play is to discover that backstory? AKA the GM's notes?

 

[hawkeyefan]

Irrelevant. That answer was there before they ever set out to find it. Unknown to them =/= them generating an answer that never existed before, at the moment when they find it.

We don't know that.

I've already shown someone who crafted a mystery in the real world.

No, you showed an example of someone crafting a treasure hunt.

Mysteries are no more puzzles because they are fiction than real world mysteries are. If one is merely a puzzle, then both are. If one is a mystery, both are. Both use the same methods of discovering pre-determined clues in order to find the pre-determined answer.

The reality, though, is that both are both. Both fictional and real life mysteries are mysteries AND puzzles.

No, because one is crafted to be a puzzle to be solved. That's not the same as an actual mystery.

No it's not. One is absolutely closer to a real life mystery than the other. And that one is the one that has pre-determined clues and a pre-determined answer.

So you're saying that it's impossible for someone to think that playing through a scenario in Brindlewood Bay feels more like solving a mystery than playing through a scenario in Call of Cthulhu?

Maybe. Maybe not. That's not relevant, either. The answer was pre-established by the personalities and beliefs of the posters.

No. You stop it. Stop trying to tell me what to do. Just because my answers are tearing apart your argument, doesn't make it okay for you to tell me to "stop it."

This is a real stretch of "pre-established" as it's being used to describe a trad mystery scenario.

 

[Bedrockgames]

So... the point of play is to discover that backstory? AKA the GM's notes?

This is going to vary from group to group because we are covering a broad range of styles and systems. I am not talking so much about the priority of play. But merely about play where a mystery is in fact being solved (that could be in addition to a broader purpose of play). But the thing that is happening is the players are figuring out what the backstory is, the motives of those involved, etc. But that is not all of play. They may also be trying to arrest the person behind the crime and that is very much an aspect of play that goes beyond just what is in the notes. The point of having a mystery in this way, is so the players can solve it. The GMs notes are just a tool for helping establish the details of that (I do still think it is a mistake to fixate on the notes as the purpose of play)

 

[Maxperson]

We don't know that.

We don't know that we exist, either. We could just be a computer simulation.

At some point we just have to accept that 99.999999999999999999% likely is known. Those answers exist before we find them. You can play philosophical games if you like, but I'm not going to do that.

No, you showed an example of someone crafting a treasure hunt.

The locations are a mystery. It seems that you are unclear about what a mystery is.

So you're saying that it's impossible for someone to think that playing through a scenario in Brindlewood Bay feels more like solving a mystery than playing through a scenario in Call of Cthulhu?

No idea. Never played Brindlewood Bay and I haven't played Call of Cthulhu since the 1980s.

This is a real stretch of "pre-established" as it's being used to describe a trad mystery scenario.

It's a stretch when you meet the definition of a mystery?