Making a mystery scenario

[Quickleaf]

I've got this scenario I'm putting together based on a mystery, and I'm trying to find a good way to represent that in 4e.

It's a "find the vampire killer" scenario with five suspects, and I have tons of info written up a out each suspect, how they fit the classic vampire tropes (abhor sunlight, no reflection/shadow, longevity), potential motives, alibis, etc.

How have you handled investigation scenarios in your game?

My approach is leaning toward a logic puzzle & 3-part skill challenge combination. The logic puze has clues strewn through various encounters (automatically gained by completing the encounter), that allow PCs to use process of elimination with the suspects. The skill challenge is more freeform, letting the PCs pursue the various parts at their own pace; successes point toward hints about the murder, while failures provide red herrings. Regardless of whether each part is successful or a failure overall, the PCs learn what they need to progress to the next part of the investigative skill challenge.

 

[Eremis77]

Hey, that sounds pretty cool! The logic part would be "Alucard can't do it because he hates sunlight, and there were open curtains in the room" type of stuff? With the graph to check off when you eliminate suspects?

 

[mneme]

There's are actually a sequence of LFR adventures that handle this kind of thing reasonably well (though from experience, they're tricky to GM, particularly since they have very little combat). Pain, Agony, and Despair, I think.

I'd do a freeform complex skill challenge structure, with overall sucess determined by actually getting the clues needed to figure out the mystery (rather than by numerical success) whereas failure should be based on a certain number of failures in the overall skill challenge. If the PCs figure out who the villain is before they fail the overall skill challenge, they get to frame the resulting fight, and may have the advantage of terrain, surprise, etc. If they fail, they end up in conflict with the villain by accident (or the villain finds out they are on their trail and acts to put a stop to their meddling) and they should be at a disadvantage in the resulting combat.

Alternatively, there could be multiple "failure" points -- the first one could result in a secondary combat as a force of weaker vampires are primed to get rid of the annoying intruders; the second results in the death of an extra target (but success at this point results in the PCs learning who is targeted and given the opportunity to intercept, resulting in a "save the PC/defeat the bad guy" combat); a third failure could result in the villain escaping, the PCs getting captured before they can investigate further, a fight at disadvantage, or whatnot.

 

[AeroDm]

I would do it as you are suggesting (logic puzzle with different clues of the puzzle accrued throughout the adventure) but you need to develop a narrative device. Ideally, that narrative device would also add tension or enable the introduction of combat to various scenes to break up the session. So, for instance, if the party was investigating a series of crime scenes at different manors, they could collect some clue at each scene and possibly be attacked as they travel between residences. Clues could come from the residences and the attacks.

 

[Quickleaf]

Hey, that sounds pretty cool! The logic part would be "Alucard can't do it because he hates sunlight, and there were open curtains in the room" type of stuff? With the graph to check off when you eliminate suspects?

Exactly. Basically I've got 4 clues nested in 4 separate encounters which can be pursued in any order. I used the concept of interlinking nodes and the 3-clue rule.

There's are actually a sequence of LFR adventures that handle this kind of thing reasonably well (though from experience, they're tricky to GM, particularly since they have very little combat). Pain, Agony, and Despair, I think.

Thanks for pointing those out, digging through the LFR site now.

I'd do a freeform complex skill challenge structure, with overall sucess determined by actually getting the clues needed to figure out the mystery (rather than by numerical success) whereas failure should be based on a certain number of failures in the overall skill challenge.

Ah, forgot to mention I've got intention to run this at my FLGS (maybe by another DM) and probably publish. I totally agree with you about free-forming it, but not so much an option.

Well i'm aiming to equate numerical successes with hints.

Maybe dividing it into 3 lower complexity skill challenges would address some of the issues you raise?

If the PCs figure out who the villain is before they fail the overall skill challenge, they get to frame the resulting fight, and may have the advantage of terrain, surprise, etc. If they fail, they end up in conflict with the villain by accident (or the villain finds out they are on their trail and acts to put a stop to their meddling) and they should be at a disadvantage in the resulting combat.

I like that idea of letting them frame the fight. I have the final encounter mapped out, but how the PCs might initiate it...hadn't thought that out. Thanks!

Alternatively, there could be multiple "failure" points -- the first one could result in a secondary combat as a force of weaker vampires are primed to get rid of the annoying intruders; the second results in the death of an extra target (but success at this point results in the PCs learning who is targeted and given the opportunity to intercept, resulting in a "save the PC/defeat the bad guy" combat); a third failure could result in the villain escaping, the PCs getting captured before they can investigate further, a fight at disadvantage, or whatnot.

Yeah that's the formula Ive been using. Great minds.

I would do it as you are suggesting (logic puzzle with different clues of the puzzle accrued throughout the adventure) but you need to develop a narrative device. Ideally, that narrative device would also add tension or enable the introduction of combat to various scenes to break up the session. So, for instance, if the party was investigating a series of crime scenes at different manors, they could collect some clue at each scene and possibly be attacked as they travel between residences. Clues could come from the residences and the attacks.

How's this... I have an opening encounter which propels them and a climax encounter that happens at the end (possibly triggered by the PCs), then there are 4 "clue" encounters which are combat oriented (though by no means the only solution), and a floating "kick the door in" type encounter with self-styled vampire hunters going after the wrong suspect. Independent of that are 3 mid-complexity sequential skill challenges comprising investigative footwork that the PCs can pursue at their "leisure" (more or less).

 

[mneme]

@QuickLeaf -- The form of "freeform skill challenge" I mean here isn't the unpublishable "just make it up as you go along" (though frankly, that isn't unpublishable either if you give the GM enough to make it easy to run), but that rather than framing possible actions by the PCs, you instead map out where the various clues are and how they lead into one or another, building a clue trail. Rather than proceeding towards a linear "success", PC successes instead push them further along the clue trail and make the mystery easier to solve (so a success on talking to the guard reveals that a victim visited an unusual clergyman a few days before his death; a success on talking to the clergyman gets him to talk about his other penitent who complained of similar symptoms, wheras a great success in conversation (or a success on searching the clergyman's house) reveals a book -- and the players can investigate the book, the other victim, or both, etc.

Rather than having a very linear set of clues, each one leading to another, you can have a much larger set of clues that the players choose to follow. This does result in some clues leading to the same place, but as long as the destination is still the real killer, they should be able to follow multiple paths while getting to the same destination eventually (or failing to do so before events close in around them).

 

[Quickleaf]

[MENTION=59248]mneme[/MENTION]
You're saying to focus on the source of information and how clues connect - rather than possible player strategies, but isn't there a lot of overlap?
If the PCs are searching the scene of the crime, well that's the same info that would be there if the scene was described without considering the PCs. Maybe it's a presentation issue?

How does setting up red herrings on failed skill challenge checks strike you? (they wouldnt know the DC of the skill checks) My only concern is confusing the players with contradicting leads.

 

[mneme]

[MENTION=20323]Quickleaf[/MENTION]: Particularly for publication, but even for your own notes, having the core be the sources of information and the clue chase makes it much easier to respond organically and appropriately to player improvisation. Obviously, it's useful to also have notes on how the nodes react to specific player actions (or on several obivious strategies the players can use to reveal that partiuclar clue or get all the information out of that node) but if the facts on the ground are central, it's much easier to figure out how to react to something you didn't expect.

I like the idea of having some failures lead to red herrings (as an alternative to other consequences for failure). Of course, eventually, investigation down the line of a red herring should either eliminate it or return back to the main thread by a secondary route (possibly with an extra combat or other challenge on the way).

 

[Wednesday Boy]

I used the concept of interlinking nodes and the 3-clue rule.

That's just what I was going to suggest!

 

[Quickleaf]

I like the idea of having some failures lead to red herrings (as an alternative to other consequences for failure). Of course, eventually, investigation down the line of a red herring should either eliminate it or return back to the main thread by a secondary route (possibly with an extra combat or other challenge on the way).

Ah, great comment about having an extra scene for going after the wrong suspect. Would XP ya but I need to spread the love first.

So here's the flowchart for the mystery adventure in all its glory...