Why do you play games other than D&D?

But the PCs in BB aren't finding out who did anything. They're coming up with their best educated guess and then using a game mechanic including a randomizing element that determines if they are right. It's literally Schrodinger's Mystery.
Neither are the players in your game! They think they are, and they make dice rolls, but you never tell them if they were right or not.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

You're telling me that you create mysteries that cannot be solved, and then when the players incorrectly think they have solved them, and go to the authorities about an actually innocent person, you say 'sure thing'?
Nah, I don't run mysteries as a specific thing. But if I did, and the PCs fingered an innocent, I wouldn't stop the game to correct them.
 

Neither are the players in your game! They think they are, and they make dice rolls, but you never tell them if they were right or not.
But there is an answer, so they're either right or they aren't. And in practice, I bet most people who come to a conclusion end up with the right answer.

See, you're looking at this from the perspective of the players, while I'm seeing it as what happens in the setting. Again, satisfying narrative is not my highest priority.
 


How does that work? You're playing a traditional sort of investigative game, the players analyse the clues and think they've found a solution, then what? They apprehend the person they believe to be the murderer and they say nothing? No further evidence is found? How do the players know they solved it?
It would probably depend entirely on the context of the specific situation, what means the PCs have access to to validate their conclusions and how they go about employing those means.
 

See, you're looking at this from the perspective of the players, while I'm seeing it as what happens in the setting.

I've been stating all along that I'm talking about the subjective experience of the players. I don't know what you mean by 'what happens in the setting' outside the experience of the participants.

Again, satisfying narrative is not my highest priority.

I don't know what this means or what it is in response to. I haven't mentioned the N word once.
 


I wouldn't say that "authored" is synonymous with "intended to be solvable". Authored just means created by someone. Your statement assumes a primacy of narrative that mine does not.
You wouldn't? You probably should since it seems both true and factual. I'd be interested to read some examples of authored mysteries that aren't intended to be solvable though, maybe I'm just missing the boat and there's a whole other genre out there.
 

I also think, as a real life investigator, that 'putting together a half-cocked theory that matches most of the available data, and seeing if it sticks' is very close to How Things Actually Work. Much closer than 'putting all the pieces together perfectly and getting external confirmation that you were right'.
Did we do the thing correctly? I don't know, ask the pipe.
 

Most things in a Brindlewood Bay mystery are "authored." There's a victim who has definitely been murdered by one of the set suspects who has motive and means. It is a solvable mystery by the investigators who find clues, some of which point to the killer. One of my players told me an advantage of this style is the characters will only be looking at the facts before them. There will be no second guessing the GM. No leaning toward a "satisfactory" solution or kinda knowing how I, as a GM, operate. So no, they aren't finding clues to figure out the dastardly plan I created via a NPC, but they are still untangling a murderous plot.
 

Enchanted Trinkets Complete

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top