I hate mysteries

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I don't have much to add except that I see that I had similar problems in running or playing mystery adventures, and also seen example where it worked well.

There is already a lot of good advice here and I will have to incorporate it in my adventures. (I really need to start a new homebrew, but I want to run the H-P-E series of WotC, too!)

 

[S'mon]

I agree. I hate mysteries too, at least in D&D, Star Wars and other action-adventure genres. Mysteries in Call of Cthulu can be cool, or at least slimy.

 

[avin]

Merric, what you're describing isn't a problem with mysteries.

It's a problem with badly designed or badly run mysteries.

(...)

There is, IMO, almost nothing more fun, either to run or play, than a well-done mystery game.

This.

I will never run a game without some mystery... dungeon crawling and straight missions doesn't appeal to me.

 

[Storminator]

Once PCs start investigating anything, the DM should be ready to have someone with a sword kick in the door as soon as the players get stumped. And that person should be clearly connected to the mystery, so that when you whip his behind you have a solid lead to follow.

There's a reason that's a staple of detective fiction.

PS

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I like running mysteries, and my players seem to like playing them. I do have a problem with them sometimes, and I can't tell if it's related to what Merric experiences, or if the exact opposite problem.

Specifically, my players have a very hard time sitting still and letting time pass during a mystery. And for many mysteries -- "Murder in Oakbridge," an excellent adventure, being one of them; Nick Logue's first and second "St. Demain" adventures being two others -- you just can't get all the clues you need until they're left by the bad guys in future events.

So we've spent two full sessions before, with the players alternately discussing, "Well, what now?" and running around to speak to every NPC they've ever encountered. I finally said, after one such session, "Have y'all ever watched or read a mystery? The bad guy keeps doing stuff, and usually the heroes can't stop him immediately."

It's gotten better, but it's still an issue. (The need to fill every single minute of every single in-game day with "doing important hero stuff" is actually a little bit of an issue with my group in general. It's just worse in mystery adventures.)

 

[roguerouge]

Second, get rid of skill challenges that reveal clues. Instead, identify all the major clues, and give 'em to the PCs. They don't require skill checks, or set the DC so low that it'd be nearly mathematically impossible to fail (and if PCs do fail, make sure they get the clue anyways, a bit later). Skill checks can be used to give bonus clues, and they should come from players actively using them - using Heal to do some forensics on the body, using Arcana to detect magic and learn about the latent necromantic energy in the air, or using Religion to find out that Deep Mummies exist.

I couldn't agree less with this statement. Mysteries are the spotlight time for skill monkey characters. Giving all the main clues essentially eliminates their main strength from the game.

It's the same as anything. Set your DCs appropriate to your party's level. Multiple paths to the solution allows you to have failures without ruining the adventure. Aiding another helps. If the PCs can acquire circumstance bonuses that will help. But coming back to a scene or a suspect and realizing that the clue was there all along? Yummy. Having the murderer get away only to become a reoccurring villain that you helped create? Priceless.

To use an analogy: if every module gives the party another way to follow their quarry other than tracks, why bother to take the Track feat? If you're going to get all the necessary clues anyway, why take social interaction skills? Heck, why RP at all? Just skip to the end scene where you cross swords with the murderer.

 

[Jhaelen]

There's already been some excellent suggestions which I cannot hope to match, so I'll just emphasize one point I find particularly important:

My rule of thumb for mystery-style adventures is:
'For every clue the pcs are supposed to find there need to be ten ways to get it.'

Now, 'ten' is somewhat arbitrary but it seems to be a number that works well with my players. And the important thing about it is:

The number should be really high, otherwise the clue is going to get missed and then they're stumped.

I'd also avoid placing many red herrings. Additionally, if the pcs get fixated on a certain red herring, I'll often turn it into a real clue. Obviously, if the pcs think there's something worth investigating further, it should be! This may take a good bit of improvisation but it's definitely worth it.

 

[CharlesRyan]

Hi, Merric--

I'll pipe in with agreement on the the "it's not a bad genre--it's bad adventures" perspective.

The very first adventure writing I ever did, lo those many years ago, was in the investigations genre, and I learned a lot really quickly. The first mistake many mystery adventure writers make (myself included, in some of my early stuff) is to take a simulationist approach: A real investigation involves many potential clues and leads, only a very few of which actually lead anywhere. Hence, if the adventure features, say, 20 potential clues and leads, the writer is tempted to think that, logically, only 2 or 3 actually lead anywhere--the other 17 or 18, by default, are dead ends and red herrings.

The problem, of course, is that adventures model fiction, not reality (and should abstract the drudgery and focus on what's fun, just like action-oriented adventures do). Dead ends and red herrings should be important elements of a mystery story--not the default state. Thus, an adventure with 20 potential clues and leads should include (perhaps) 2 or 3 well thought out dead ends and red herrings--the other 17 or 18 should all propel the story forward, even if only a few of them represent real breakthroughs. (By "well thought out" I mean they should create plot twists or positively affect the pacing of the adventure.)

As many folk have already mentioned, multiple paths through the mystery are also key. That doesn't mean the heroes shouldn't have to work for their clues and plot points--just that the adventure doesn't presume a specific set of actions and require success at every key point.

Finally, an adventure can feel--indeed, be--very investigative without relying on super sluethiness. Most James Bond films are investigative in nature, but Bond is hardly Sherlock Holmes. His plotlines are generally pretty linear, and the clues are usually obtained through instinct and daring with just a dash of hardcore investigation. The Bond movie is a pretty good model for investigative adventuring in general--you start with a mystery, and end with the satisfaction of solving a mystery, but go through at a pace that's satisfying at the gaming table. (The clue-leads-to-action-leads-to-clue-leads-to-action-etc. format makes for good gaming as well.)

That's my experience in a nutshell. Hope it helps!

 

[Krensky]

Something else, from a structure perspective. I think I first saw this in the Gamma World d20 GMG, but I'm sure it's appeared elsewhere (although maybe not in gaming).

Simply phrased: If the the mystery does not have to have a specific answer the third one the players suggest is the correct one.

This simple phrasing, needs explanation, however.

In a murder whodunit, ala Christie, the actual murderer is generally interchangeable with the rest of the suspects for most of the story. A mystery needs to present multiple plausible suspects. So you structure the plot so that the clues point to, say, six possible people. Let the players assemble the clues as they wish. When they investigate the first person, the evidence doesn't hold up. They get a few more clues that lead them to a second conclusion. When they focus on the second suspect, everything looks good, but he the case falls apart when it's revealed he's covering up his affair with the victim, not his guilt in her murder. This drops some more clues, however. Then when they talk to the third person, it all works and they have their murderer (or mole, or theif, or whatever). This requires a little thought and some notes, but it's not particularly hard. Also, just because the target will appear later as a reoccuring villian or a rival or needs to lead them to the mastermind, doesn't prevent this structure from working. It only really falls apart when you need a specific person (player's mentor, sibling, girlfriend, etc) to be the villian.

The second thing is if it's ALWAYS the third thing they try it gets obvious fast. So change the number frequently, or pick the number randomly by rolling 1d4 or 1d6 or something. Depends on the patience of your group.

This structure works for a lot of things beyond a whodunit. Find the mole, find the location of the missing temple, etc. The key is that it works as long as the specific answer isn't as important to the plot as the search for it is.

Also, having someone kick in the door to try and kill or threaten the PCs works, as does the foil showing up and putting the moves on the detective or whatever. If the players are lost and confused, have the world give them direction. Again, don't limit yourself to having the killer try and take the PCs out because they're getting close. Maybe they kill someone else. Maybe they try and flee to country. Maybe the assassin makes an attempt on their target with the PCs in the room. The details depend on the plot and the mystery, but have a NPC act so the players can react and then follow the new leads and clues.

 

[Voadam]

D&D mysteries should not leave players frustrated wondering what do I do next. Player actions should not be constantly thwarted with red herrings and dead ends. Missing a clue, not doing the one right solution, should not lead to roadblocks that stall the adventure.

Skill challenges to gain a helpful piece of information are fine. Skill challenges to obtain the only way to proceed with the adventure are asking for trouble.

Its the same as puzzles and traps and even combat (where you can retreat). Failure should not shut everything down in the game.

A fun mystery one I ran was Demon God's Fane by Malhavoc Press. The murder mystery challenges are designed to be figured out by the powerful heroes and lead to the next part of the adventure, not to hide the adventure from them. The mysteries are steps along the way, not the end game themself, therefore they are not designed to stop the PCs but be a pacing element for the story narrative.