IMO the best RPG rules for playing mysteries is the Brindlewood Bay system from The Gauntlet. The idea behind Brindlewood Bay is that the story of an RPG is written by both the GM and the players. With that in mind, the GM doesn't know the result of the mystery, they provide clues and it's up to the players to interpret the clues and provide a plausible solution that uses the clues given. As a result, the GM doesn't have to figure out a complex mystery in advance, by just providing clues the players find the mystery, it's up to the GM to decide if their solution is actually plausible.
There's a bit here that should be considered- a DM/GM should consider this: If everything is streamlined and there are no empty rooms, it's going to break suspension of disbelief for your heavy roleplayers. It's FINE to have irrelevant rooms in an abandoned mansion. Mysteries don't need to be so efficient you lose exploration and cut lulls in pacing. Those lulls help characters get their thoughts in order and allow for them to examine the history, lore, or hidden knick knacks that they wouldn't see if you just cut them out.
Or you could just say, "You pass through a series of large wood-panelled chambers with peeling wallpaper and warped floors. Then you turn the handle to reveal the music room to see....." Poe and Lovecraft write like this. "Cask of Amontillado" and Rats in the Walls" have tons of empty rooms, but they're described in a sentence or two.
Very true, that method sounds like a nice compromise. I don't know how many aspiring DMs read the comments but hopefully they find this. Keep up the good content!
I'm actually going to create an entire episode about describing stuff. Poe will be referenced, along with F. Scott Fitzgerald. Look for it late in the year or early next.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 Why not work the fallen plaster into that description? "Fallen plaster and water stains on a few ceilings suggest greater signs of neglect above." You never know where you'll hear a clue, or how it might help you later. It helps to pay attention, players…
For the Chekhov's gun rule maybe you don't have the owl statue part of your description, and rather just say that there are fancy decorations in the room. You emphasize what is important, but you should still have other stuff in there. You are going for the feel of a real place where someone actually lived, there is going to be non pertinent information that the players can uncover.
This will lead to the classic DM mistake of being too vague. Tell them the owl is in the room, and they *still* might not check it out. Be obvious, don't be vague and your players just might get it. DMs have an issue of "hiding" critical information because they feel like the players aren't "working hard enough" for it.
@@SeanLaMontagne I know this pain all to well with players focusing on random crap instead of listening to hints all but handed to them on a silver platter. ;-;
@@SeanLaMontagne I think @TheAres1999 's point was that if the owl statue is not a clue but you want this room to feel like it's sumptuously decorated etc then don't be so specific. Only be specific about the parts that contain clues.
Chekhov's gun is tricky in an rpg because the environment is enteractable. You can make a red herring by excluding an item you did not want to put in there: ie, there is no bathroom or outhouse in the property... he must be an android! Chekhov's gun is more about fulfilling promises than leaving clues; he wrote dramas more than mysteries. If a gun is in the scene, someone is getting shot, which is a foreshadowing technique. Ie, do not have a wizard in the scene if he is not going to do something magical because it disappoints the audience. This does not really work that well, in practice, in an rpg because you do not know what players will do versus a character in a play you do. Ie, you put a giant catfish in the adventure and show npcs racing them to show this is possible for a future chase scene down the river, but the party thinks giant cat fish are gross so they avoid interacting with them as the mermaids get away.
I like the “don’t make them roll, just let them find it.” Attitude. Usually for things like this I’ll have them roll, and the one with the highest roll gets to discover the clue or whatever it is. No DC, just highest wins.
How do you compensate the PC who has put all his skill points into investigation skills that do no good whatsoever? The other PCs who have put all theirs in to driving, fighting, and other such skills get to use their skills to their advantage.
Precisely. "Invesitgate", "Insight", and "Perception" become largely pointless skills with this approach. Of course you don't want things to come to a screeching halt based on a single die-roll, but failing an investigate roll should no more prevent finding a clue than missing an attack roll means you don't (ultimately) kill the monster. Just ask if they want to spend yet more time, and let them roll again... imply the clock is ticking... and require ever-increasing time for each successive investigate roll (10 minutes, 1 hour, 4 hours, 1 day, 2 days, a week...). Too many failures might also destroy evidence. If the players fail investigation checks, give up, and miss the "critical" clue, have consequences and another way to advance the plot. Example: they failed investigation checks to discover the loose floorboard under which the bloody dagger was hidden. Oops. Well next day (or next week or whenever), they come back to see the floorboards pulled up, and the now-empty space beneath... but this itself is a new clue that can bring the plot back on track... it is also a consequence that shows that the failed investigation checks mattered AND that their decision to give up the search after X amount of time also mattered. Even if they never decide to go back and thus discover the removed floorboards, you can have an NPC discover it and tell the PC's later.... finally, the removed floorboards & now exposed compartment give the PC's something new to investigate (successful roll this time and "aha! what is this bit of fabric that snagged on an exposed nail?")
@@GreylanderTV I think combining both his and your idea might work well. Give the players a investigate/perception/insight roll, and a better score means that the player finds the clue faster than if he scored lower. The lower the score, the more the real suspect does to cover up other tracks, move on with their plans, form an alibi, or run away.
@@GreylanderTV I think he has a point. It also applies to non-investigative scenarioes. Beware of choke points where - if the pc's do not find the secret door, they really can't proceed or make head or tail of it. However I agree with you that he is invalidating the skills of the players. To fix this you might do a number of things: - let's say some mystic runes require an arcana check. A succes might reveal a complete sentence, but a failed means the wizard can only make out some of the words but still enough for it to work as a clue. - A search roll might, even if failed, reveal a secret door. But had he succeeded it would also had revealed a bit of treasure. -You can also highlight a players skill without a roll. None of the other players can understand it but the rogue knows that these symbols are thief markings. That helps define the players role and shine a little spot on it. - In som cases a wizard might know how to do stuff no one else would, but it is also easy for him, so it requires no roll. I also happen to think that a lot of players like to roll dice... so let's not take that away from them :-)
He does not use skill, so you cannot make a character that specializes or prioritizes any build because you do not get to choose. This is very much a scenario that tests the player, not the character, if you are giving them the clues. It is a very old school approach, not for everyone. If you like solving puzzles, it can be fun. Generally, if you leave clues up to a dice roll you risk missing everything with a run of bad luck.
Well, you can do it like in Gumshoe, where this idea comes from. You find the "core" clues automatically - that is, the ones you absolutely need to continue. A roll (or whatever mechanic) can give you extra information that might speed things up or just add color.
I've always felt that Chekhov's Gun was more about setting things up for payoff later. I'll certainly get that you don't want to include too many extraneous details if you're running a mystery, but excluding those details also makes it more difficult to include a hallmark of mysteries - the red herring, the clues that lead the detective astray. Let's go with the example room you provided. While I get not including the owl statue if it's just a statue, maybe the key hidden inside/underneath it doesn't have any connection to the victim; maybe it belongs to the son, and it unlocks the small house at the edge of town where goes to take drugs or something. So the owl statue isn't pointless, but it doesn't necessarily help lead to solving the mystery (except maybe for establishing that the son couldn't have killed his father - he was at the house the night of the murder, and there's no way he could have gotten from one location to the other).
No doubt! First, thanks for watching this video. I was just watching it this morning thinking, "This is one of the better ones--why the f*@! doesn't it have more views?" Second, you are absolutely correct. However, we're talking about the same concept--NOTHING--from the weather, to the surroundings, to the NPCs is there by accident.
Went to a private library on one occasion. Prior to my visit the Librarian sent a bunch of probing questions in email. Being a little guarded, I just sent the list of resources I was seeking. When I arrived, I was greeted by the Head Librarian and introduced to my Research Librarian for the day. I wasn't allowed to touch anything, walk through the stacks unescorted, or search on their computer without "my" Librarian present. At first it was a bit daunting, and then it was amazing. I knocked out research for several projects rather than just the one I was there to complete. Since then I've learned during consulting projects that this is not uncommon for such private libraries. While at the National Aquarium the Librarians explained that most of their "customers" just sent requests for resources and the mailroom delivered them. So anytime someone physically came in was a treat. They had the best views of the Inner Harbor from their library, so personally I can't imagine why no one wanted to visit.
Great video and a bunch of good advice. For myself, I am less likely to just strike spells from the game but have them give ineffectual answers ("it came from behind" etc.) As someone who has run Saltmarsh several times, I have had most parties clue in almost immediately to 'plaster on the floor -> lack of plaster on the ceiling -> weak/dangerous floor' and one who took a few minutes. After the rotting floor at the top of the stairs, everyone realized the general state of decay in the house and dangerous footing.
Fantastic common sense observations here, my favorite video so far, I think. I have a mystery/haunted house adventure I wrote and ran twice pretty successfully but the advice given here helps me understand how to run it even better with the next group, particularly eliminating empty/unnecessary rooms.
They're a "Knights of the Dinner Table" strip called "Behind the Green Door." The players chance across a door that happens to be green and spend all night examining it while the DM sits frustrated, knowing that the green color is a fact he just tossed out to make it seem different than every other door. Hilarious.
"I cast detect magic on the brick!" The brick not magical. "I check for traps!" There's no traps on the brick. "I cast detect evil on the brick!" The brick is neither good nor evil. It is a brick. "I roll to intimidate the-" GUYS! THE ONLY THING STRANGE ABOUT THIS BRICK IS THAT IT'S LOOSE! "......I bet it's a mimic. I cast fireball!"
@@colinsanders9397 I just ran across your comment and reminded me of an another bygone Era where we had a Thief with handyman background. You thought this Thief would look for traps and detect secrets of the adventure but instead would repair the loose brick, reset sprung traps, etc.
Gygax punished this by having monsters attack. The monsters had little of value and gave little exp. Taking out wandering monsters breaks the game a bit. You’d have to have some time based consequence in other systems to replicate it. It punishes players for wasting time and raises tensions. Gets players to look for important things.
a suggestion seth skorkowsky gave for call of cthulu regarding giving players critical clues was that if they fail their roll instead of not giving them the info have some sort of negative consequence like drawing the attention of the police
Thank you for the tips and ideas! It's my turn to DM for our next campaign. I am planning to incorporate mystery and/or horror encounters to our standard adventure. Anyway just a suggestion for us dummies: people will find the resources you mentioned more easily if you include the names in your video description. I've been preaching to my friends your channel. Keep them coming!
Excellent advice for veteran and novice gamemasters. Another good source of information is in Mercenaries Spies and Private Eyes by Blade/Flying Buffalo.
really late to the party here, but... I always do my rolls as you suggested... with failures just meaning the action takes more time. I do this when the PCs have to question a lot of people as well (like if a murder happened in an apartment complex). The roll just dictates how long it took, how many jerks, weirdos, and know-nothings the investigators had to deal with before finding someone with relevant information. I usually handle all of it with a little montage of agonizingly slow and frustrating research, talking to odd balls, etc. and then get to what they were looking for. I also handle supernatural powers... if any exist in the setting I'm running the game in... by incorporating them into the plot and making them the ONLY way some clues can be obtained. I ran a modern day supernatural game called The Ghastly Eye where PCs could be sorcerers, psychics, and so on. I would always make sure to include some clues that could only be found by the use of some of their powers. This made their powers relevant to the story, useful, and gave each character some of the spotlight. I try to do the same with some clues in general, especially if the game is in a more modern setting. Find a clue? Maybe it's significates can only be solved by the scientists or the occultist? Need to talk to someone famous? Maybe the rich dilettante can do it, he has a ton of money and is a member of the same country club the famous person is. Hell, maybe they have golfed together a few times? I think by doing that it makes the players feel their characters are valuable to the team and are important to solving the problem. No one feels like a fifth wheel. Handout are also great. really got turned on to those from Call of Cthulhu. Ran a short game once where I created a wallet the PCs could find on the victim. Bought an old wallet from Goodwill and filled it with fake cash, some fake credit cards (the kind that come with those offers from banks for a line of credit), an ID, business cards, pictures, and a few numbers. The game was short, so clues in the wallet were all they needed to pursue. Worked great and was a fun game. Players really liked it.
I can agree with your idea of "They just find the clue, don't have it hinge on a die roll" But one of the concepts that I heard about in a completely unrelated game [a review of Warhammer 40,000 Wrath and Glory] is that you can use a die roll, but if the character fails the die roll, they still do the thing but perhaps it takes longer than they expected, they got lost and it takes longer for them to arrive, perhaps they're exhausted from a climb or bad weather. The story still progresses even if the characters didn't initially succeed.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 ok...here goes...I would love to hear your opinion on magic items...I run an ultra-low magic game. In my game there are no such thing as run-of-the-mill +1 weapons and that kind of thing. Magic items are difficult to make and therefore all have names, histories and wondrous enchantments. Potions can be awful smelling concoctions, or powders that must be smoked rather than drank. Magic spells could be found written in chalk on a slate, or woven into a tapestry...the possibilities are endless... How do you present magic items in your games?
Pretty much the way you do. Swords will have names and unique powers: a sword called "Eviscerator" that disembowels opponents on a natural 20. A dagger called "Backbiter" that is +2, but only from behind. A shield that looks like the moon, glows in the dark, and is +2 only at night. Wizards snort a stimulant called Moonsnow and smoke Weirdweed to improve their casting abilities. Clerics will have a embalmed saint's head that gives +2 protection to everyone in a 20 for radius. Every magic item should be totally unique and weird.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 Would love to see a video on the subject. I think most DM's would benefit from these types of ideas rather than just "generic" magic items from the books...
I watched this video and read the resources you cited, took notes, drew flow charts and forced myself to write a murder mystery adventure. It will be in next months Bexim’s Bazaar. Hopefully, it doesn’t end my budding career as a writer, lol.
The campaign I just began started off with a caper where the players uncovered the plot to kill a famous actor who was performing that night. They found out about the plot and met the actor at an autograph signing and told her to go through with the play and they'd guard her...the stage was trapped with a glyph that blew her up. The characters (all RP-heavy lawful or neutral good) were all traumatized that they inadvertantly caused her death, but now they're more determined than ever to find the killer without letting anyone else die. They were all really good sports about it and they're definitely hooked on the plot. I joked and said "I didn't fridge her, you did," but I told them I definitely learned from it and if I could do it again I would've made it easier to find out that the stage was trapped
I’m running a Warhammer Fantasy Role Play 2nd edition game and am strongly considering running Noblese Oblige this next session. It needs some rework to get into shape to have automatically found clues and to follow the three clue rule, but I think my RP heavy gaming group will like it. I’ll post the results!
Great point. It's super-tough to estimate how long the players will take. Sometimes they take forever to figure stuff out. Sometimes they look at a riddle and say "The answer is a platypus" in 3 seconds.
Thank you so much for this video! I have been criticized by a lot of my friends because I use what we refer to as storybook dming where I make a lot of the things happen in order to allow the story to progress without too many dice rolls. They're more of the academic type and they want the game played with all of the dice rolls all of the skill rolls and it really does slow things down if you ask me. It might be more technically correct but I think it takes a lot of the fun away from the game. Your video here made me feel better about the way I run games :-) Thanks
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 thanks for the support :-) side question do you think I've taken on too much by allowing a chaotic evil druid in an eternal champion campaign? I've come up with what I think is a decent storyline as to the reasons why but not positive exactly how to play it out. I assume a lot of the campaign will have to be done storybook Style
My take on the "players always find the clue" I still use checks to find clues but the amount revealed depends on the role. So they always find a clue but it may not help as much as a higher roll would
Cool video, thanks. I'll check out noblesse Oblige. I'm running a game that's event based rather than location based so all the tips on clues and NPCs are really useful. I agree about WFRP they have such a strong world it would be great to see more content for it.
"The plaster shouldn't be there." Wrong. Your players will respond in the way you describe precisely because they are meta-gaming your approach, which is (a) to only tell them "important" things; and (b) [apparently] to allow them to waste huge amounts of in-game time and resources on absurdly pointless activities without any consequences. Is the clock not ticking? If they spend all this time investigating the plaster, what other clues will go stale, what else might the murderer do in the meantime? An underlying issue here is the degree to which the mystery plot is "on rails" or the extent to which there are pre-determined encounters waiting for the characters to follow the trail and arrive (personally I hate such encounters). I think worst-case with the plaster is this: If you see your players putting far too much emphasis on the plaster, you let them make an insight check or just plain say "maybe the plaster is important, so remember it, but it is probably a waste of time to investigate it further"... if they INSIST on burning in-world time, start making things happen... another victim is discovered... there's a rainstorm and you can not-so-subtly point out how it washes away their own tracks on the path up to the house... (i.e. hint hint, wasting time means the trail may go cold...) On a successful insight (or maybe invesitgate) check, or is some PC has "architecutral knowledge" for some reason, then explictly point out that the excess of fallen plaster indicates the floor above is weak and sagging. Worst-worst case, you can just say "guys, don't over think (don't metagame) the fallen plaster... it's just fallen plaster in an old decaying house. If you were walking through this room, you'd go 'hmm... a lot of plaster fell from the ceiling here' and give it little more thought than that. Make note of it and move on."
I disagree. Outright telling the players which details they should worry about is much more railroading than not putting in the details in the first place, because it essentially takes away player agency and drives up metagaming much more. Players can't know which details to focus on and which ones to ignore, and this filtering is really difficult to do other than just saying "play how the GM is telling you to, and ignore this". Also, having other things happen doesn't guarantee that the players won't leave the plaster alone, because they don't see the whole mystery, only bits and pieces. I see it as a point of bad design (and a mystery game is a designed story) to essentially punish players for focusing on a red herring without giving them the means to know that it's a red herring (again, other than just telling them). Letting clues go cold is I think terrible advice. It's already difficult enough for the GM to come up with a good trail of clues, so this is essentially throwing away ideas and preparation, and making the mystery, which was evidently already too difficult, even more difficult and unsatisfying.
Yeah. Don't scare your players by killing more victims therefore making them play by emotion. Let them think logically and build the puzzle that the GM had created logically. That is the design of it after all.
If they must find the clue, still let them use their skill checks and whatnot, but make it so they fail forward. Example: A good investigation check finds the secret chamber. A failed one leads to its discovery a day later because the blood of a new victim is leaking through the seams.
I fell into the high level mystery faux pas in my first campaign. Had a murder mystery and the players literally just used their diamond from earlier in the campaign and had the cleric resurrect the victim. She just told them who killed her and they fought the guy. A whole session of mystery circumventing in a half hour. Never again.
Easiest way to deal with detect alignment spells would be just have several ranges of alignments or have the spell also detect when people have intent outside their normal alignment. "Despite most of them being good or neutral, you're detecting some evil intents in all of them..." But then I gues the way I perceive alignment is different so they way I would treat Detect Alignment, to begin with, would be that, instead of giving the players a clean landscape with auras of each alignment present, I hit them with a dissociative mess of telegraphed thoughts and intentions reduced to their colors on the alignment spectrum... And if this is their first time casting the spell... Boy are they in for a trip. Basically even what is good and pure will be a sight of cosmic horror to the uninitiated... And the last thing a first time caster of the spell is going to get is anything resembling any useful information... And if they ask me, "What's this even supposed to mean...." And my response would be, "And how the f#&; are *you* supposed to know? This is your first time casting this shit." So they'll take an insanity point of 6 if I'm using that mechanic and spend 1d4 hours in a fever dream the likes of what gave us the Divine Comedy. In other words, just because a spell fits into a firsr level spell slot does not mean a first level caster has any business casting it. And when the player casts a seemingly innocuous spell and it results in me reaching into my storage compartments and pulling out an auxiliary module... They will know, they indeed dun fugged up!
Yeah, Chekhov's Gun and meta gaming PCs are why some DMs (who have earned a very special place in Hell) invented things like "The Head of Vecna". As for the whole 'plaster dust' thing, you're a DM, not a machine, you don't have to use the description as written. You could have the party make a group INT check and then just tell them "the ceiling of this room is rotted, it's probably not safe to walk on the floor of the room above", full stop.
You have to run the mystery early in the campaign and make notes of magic protections to prevent magic being the solution. It has to be a mundane crime without the aid of magic (and with limited player access to spells) or the mystery fails.
Apply your advice to focusing on the critical things not just to the initial description but also the responses to character actions. If they investigate the plaster, tell them it came from the sagging ceiling. Don't say it's white with asbestos when that's irrelevant. Don't be afraid to simply say, "there's nothing of interest here". Or "you spend precious minutes and find nothing".
OK - as someone who has run the sort of adventures you talk about here, no - your Chekov's Gun reference doesn't mean there's something in the owl. It does mean that SPECIFIC references in a scene have a reason for being mentioned. Let's talk about that Owl statue, as an example: 1. It COULD be a reference to Athena... for instance, it's there because the person who owns the manor is a worshiper of Athena. Now, if that's what it means, then their WORSHIP of Athena, for instance, should be an element of the story. OR... it could be a red herring. See below. 2. It COULD be a representation of an actual pet the owner once had. If this is the case, it can be a reference to that pet being important to the story. OR, it can be a red herring. See below. 3. It COULD be an indication that the owner belonged to a secret society with the Owl as a symbol. OR, it could be a red herring to indicate they're a member... but, they're not. Red herrings are great for leading the party down an incorrect path - and no, you should NOT automatically give them the answer. That makes them feel like they didn't solve the problem. Nothing sucks like "I search the room." - "OK, you find this, and this, and this, and you know it means this, and that, and this..." That's DULL. In 40+ years of GMing, I have discovered that players come in different forms, and one of them is the PUZZLE SOLVER. When you have one of these in the party, the LAST THING you wanna do is just hand them the info. It's deeply dissatisfying. Now, before someone thinks I'm a negative poster (and, I hope you know, by now, I respect you as a DM...) - MYSTERIES are great adventure options. Sure, in a Call of Cthulu game, it's expected, but it's equally effective in a D&D or Pathfinder 2 game. It's even useful in a Sci Fi like Starfinder or SWRPG game. Professor DM - do you watch Law & Order and try to solve the crime before they tell us the answer? I do. BTW - WHFRP is SO MUCH better than D&D 5e, and Noblesse Oblige was a great freakin' adventure!
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 thanks - hey, I just realized this is a very old video for you. Do you find that you get a lot of comments on videos years later, like this, often?
You said to not have players make rolls to find clues. I disagree. Skill checks should not be black and white. Success or failure. Skill checks can be to see who found it. The character with the best roll finds the clue. Or based on the level of success, it should determine how they found it. A poor roll, they dropped the owl and broke it and found the key. A great roll, and the player picks up the owl and finds the key under it. Players like to make rolls to some degree. At the same time, don't overdo the rolling. Characters should not be rolling all the time. I agree about "read mind" spell. I love your videos.
I am not sure if I should be happy, or angry, because this is the first time I heard of Chekovs Gun AND have it understood backwards. "Include things that are important" rather than "Oh you included X, it better be useful", and I somehow feel both dumb for not understanding it with hindsight, but almost even angrier with other GM youtubers who do not use that language.
So I am going to kill a whole village and leave a few clues, but this wont be resolved for many games. an evil wizards does it. Gasp. or even a focus. How would you drop clues through other games or unrelated ones?
just this saturday my players had a roleplay heavy session where they needed to figure out what machinations were going on behind the scenes. I wrote up info for each of the main npc's 8 fighters for the tournament and two who didn't make it in but were plot important. The players then went about uncovering this info asking questions getting info and then I asked them who they thought was up to what. I noted it all down, and that was the end of the session. The truth is that I didn't decide what was going to be coming up I just made some people have some suspect stuff in the info given, and let the players draw their conclusions. Now the players have decided that my local big bad evil guy Engin Rass the unseated king, is in fact dead and his Wife is the one setting up the rebellion to reclaim the power she had when her husband was on the throne. One of her sons is in league with her, while three of them are out for their own success, a fourth is of unknown alliance. Finally she is allied with a druid from the north who is competing and is using one of her husbands bastards to imitate him. It is going to be exciting and I put in an hours work righting up descriptions and motives/rumors about these fighters. I hadn't even thought of using the mother in this way. Of course this entire campaign has been an experiment of letting the players choose where the rails lead each week, keeping them on the rails and allowing me time to plan.
I don't run mysteries usually precisely because they are difficult. The reason to run a mystery is to allow the players those moments where they have successfully figured out a clue or motive. Those moments where they feel like detectives. Your video, however just says that we should work to remove the mystery from a mystery. Only have things that matter so the players can assume that if it's available, then it's important, is meta-gaming and spoon-feeding. Similar to video game mysteries. This might be fun, but it isn't in the spirit of roleplaying and it isn't really a mystery. It boils down to, "There's a thing! Try all the stuff we know how to do to the thing until it shows us the next step." I just discovered your channel and really like it. This video, however, seems to be off a bit.
I think the point here is the difference between finding the clues and interpreting the clues. Finding the clues (or knowing that something is a clue) shouldn't be the thing to get stuck on, because that part is not interesting. But interpreting the clue and figuring out how it connects to the mystery is the interesting part. Sure, the portrait above the fireplace is of some ancestor, and the PCs immediately find it. But what the heck does that have to do with the mystery? That's where the players need to be creative and try out various things to see where it leads them. And I think this step is already difficult enough for normal average people sitting around a table in the evening after work.
It sounds dangerously close to railroading. You are giving players all the information they need and ONLY the information they need. This could be good for a murder mystery game but in DnD you need to be flexible. What if the players ignore the owl statue but focus on the plaster you don’t care about? Well, let them find some new clue (or even the key) hidden in the plaster. Don’t tell the players that “these are the only important items”…let them choose their own path and as the DM you should find a way to make their path lead them to what they are looking for. The DM doesn’t write the story, the DM writes the synopsis on the back of the book…it is the players that write all the pages within the book itself.
What i do for items in a room, etc, if asked about it, I say it is ACME item and they know it is there, an of no importance. It works most of the time.
I just found your channel and I am learning a lot of good ideas. I was original D&D and chainmail player. I am getting back and I like the quick playing style.
The one funny part on a ACME sword found on a dead Orc. I told one player it was an ACME sword, he say I read Orc, answer it is an ACME sword, he answered I read Elf, answer it is an ACME sword then he said I read Dwarf and the group answered IT’S an ACME sword and their is nothing written on it. His answer, oh there is nothing written on it?
The Sinister Secret of Salt Marsh has empty rooms because it is still a dungeon: a room takes 10 minutes to search and you get a random encounter every 20 minutes. You also had empty rooms so you can use them as fall back locations, resting, or places to run/hide. The module is not really a mystery so much as a bait and switch: characters are hired to clean out monsters from the mansion only to find the mansion has a secret... which you find just by walking into each room till you find it. Just another dungeon, really.
@J S spoiler for a year old show ? Welcome to the internet Spoiler alert TD season 1 12/10 just greatness TD season 2 8/10 a downer but good TD season 3 3/10 dourif tries to save it but cant..just awful TD season 4 dont do it. It it die
”The room is empty, except for piles of plaster on the floor which is greater than other rooms. It looks safe and nothing else is of interest here.” To the player with the character most likely to make the connection. ”As your character looks up, they can tell that the ceiling is buckling a bit and sagging and not structurally sound, can't tell how bad it is with current lighting conditions.” If you teach your players they can't trust you, they'll ask and probe endlessly. Dungeon Masters should assume the character will act a certain way, because the players would expect their architect or very perceptive character to notice those things. The moment you punish a player for not being stupidly detailed and not making reasonable assumptions, you'll get very annoying, hyper detailed, paranoid players who take hours to get through the simplest of tasks.
Holyshit the number of times I've heard a story about a DM running a mystery that they deemed to have an obvious solution that their players could not grasp. Why do DM's have such a tendency to be so vague with their Mysteries yet expect the players to solve this so easily. Here's my rule, make the solution so easy you think a kindergartener could figure it out, and then give it to your players. It's really easy to think you've crafted an easily solved mystery when you are the one who created all the puzzle pieces.
I love speak with dead it clearly says cripict and reparative answer one time they asked where he came from I answered my mother everyone laughed and then realized they wasted a question
It's not easy to write a mystery that is both interesting and solvable. The way I do it is always backwards. Start with the solution. Who commited the murder, why, where and how. Dramatic mysteries are not like real life, as mentioned in the video most real detectives either solve the "Mystery" in a day due to dumbass criminal behaviour, or spend weeks talking to people who don't know a damned thing. For the whole thing to be a successful entertaining event, the players will need to figure out, or at least be presented with a solution that satisfies all the questions they will have. You will be rarely (if ever) able to follow the Agatha Christie model of having all the suspects in one room and an expository "Process of elimination" sequence. When you have come up with the full solution, including the motive... you can work backwards. You know what the players will need to learn to be able to solve it, and can break that information down into individual clues. One resource that you might find useful is those "How To Host a Murder" type party games. They can show you how to feed clues out that people who don't have a degree in Sherlockology should be able to patch together into something resembling a solution. Another useful source, though harder to write for yourself, are the "Logic Puzzle" games where you have a grid and a list of statements, and you connect those statements to complete the grid. "So... if the guy with the brown beard doesn't like coffee, and the guy who likes coffee also has a limp... then the guy with the brown beard CAN'T have a limp!" sort of things... There are two basic types of Mystery adventure for RPGs. They kind of follow the Sandbox vs Linear model. The more open mystery is where clues can be found in any order and need to be pieced together to get to the solution. The other is where the clues follow a set order and each clue leads to the next. The first type requires an accumulation of evidence and the ability of the detectives to contextualise it, and put it all together in a pattern. (This is not as easy as it might first appear, particularly if your players are murder hobos living out a power fantasy. )These are the classic "Agatha Christie" or Sherlock Holmes situations. These are hard to do unless your characters have some means of knowing the temperature at which butter melts, or know the potential poisoning capability of house plants and cat turds. If you are going to use Deduction type skill checks to impart this information, you will probably need to scatter it in with a lot of unrelated data or the solution will feel like its being handed to them. Sifting through and sorting the relevant from the irrelevant is part of the Mystery... A very basic version of this is the "Process of Elimination" mystery. For example: There may be a Murderer who has a magic item that means that anyone who sees him can only remember one thing about his identity... Hair colour, eye colour, beard, ear size, scar on his left cheek, WHATEVER.... From there the party needs to find and talk to witnesses, and the adventure plays out like a glorified version of "Who's Who?" Have one of the players act like a "Police Sketch Artist" and construct the image as they learn the clues. (I've run this concept a few times, for kids - where each of them makes up their own "sketch" and they compare them at the end, and it always goes down well. I don't advise using it on experienced adult players, unless it's clearly set up as a one off "Just for Fun" session.) If you haven't tried a Mystery/Investigation before I'd suggest starting out with a basic "Chain of Clues" mystery. Where each clue is found separately and leads directly to the next, each bringing them closer to the solution. These are both easier to write, and easier to solve. But they don't tend to require a great deal of deductive thinking.
I can't stress this enough, you can not trick the players. It's impossible. This is dealing with the trust between the Dungeon Master and the Players. The Dungeon Master is every form of perception for the players, and there is absolutely no way you can trick the players. None. They will go and do everything you directly or indirectly tell them to. If they walk down a hall and fall into a trap, you did not trick them because they failed to roll for trap detection. Now the players will roll perception on every square foot of every surface because you indirectly told them to do so. The plaster is a perfect check to see if the characters trust you. If a stupid player is playing a character that's supposed to be like Sherlock, then you tell that player things that the character knows, and what are good options to do with that information. Do not roll perception checks. Give the player with the highest perception the information to relay. If they are all blind, then they stumble on the clue. If they don't know what to do with the clue, randomly give a player a hunch that their character heard about some kind of secret hiding place or something and they randomly test that idea just for fun... and it works! The players walking into an empty room with bits of plaster on the ground, beyond that the usual is seen with the walls giving way from age and rot is a common theme here. You then tell the players that is all the characters find in here. The plaster is from the ceiling which looks like it's slowly caving in. This creates a hazard for the room above as the center of the room should be weakened and it's something they can feel clever with in a combat encounter upstairs by pushing an enemy there, or using that as an escape option. Each character should be valuable to the game in some way and losing anyone should be a clear and obvious setback. Runes can't be understood, the inability to have a sneaky person means you can't plan a trap against an ambush or gang, losing a front line fighter means combat is going to be far riskier. I love the 3 clue rule here and it is probably the best way to get the players to try and think about what the meaning behind the clues are. The lipstick, key to the hotel and love letter are perfect examples. The secret compartment means he knows the information must be kept from others or it will ruin him. The lipstick is quickly figured out by asking the wife if she has that shade or make of lipstick, and the key leads to other people who should know more, since someone at the hotel should know something. I would add that the key is somehow labeled for the hotel. This was a great video, thank you.
@@FrederickMathieu "Masks" is a classic. The first of it's kind and a challenge to prep and run. THAT might be a good episode of DC (although sadly, I'm not sure too many people would want to see it).
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 I'll buy that for a dollar. I ran it and total party kill in NYC on the first encounter with cultists. I stopped running CoC after a while because my hackNslash friends never could finish a single adventure let alone a campaign. lol
Chekov's Gun shouldn't be applied to a mystery game, in my opinion. They are here to play a game, not watch a movie or read a book. If you only include what is essential, there is no game, just a following of the DM's path. There should be useless items, but they should have less value than the important items. Discerning between the items IS THE GAME. It would be unfair if you did not include context that allowed a clever player to ignore bad evidence, but if you have that context, you have a game. In a game, there is a chance of failure. In combat, there is a chance of failure. If the plaster gets investigated after you tell them that the room is old and crumbling, well, they just failed for a bit. This makes their victories THEIRS, rather than something that the DM handed them. No victory without failure. Some people want to be spoon fed a fun story, others like to actually earn their bragging rights. My table moved past the "give me training wheels" phase a long time ago. Chekov's gun is a great concept, and should be applied in most games, but not in mysteries. I love your content, and we generally agree on most things, but I think you're wrong on this one. Also, make them roll skills to find things. Why the hell is anyone going to make a character that's good at finding clues if the DM always hands them out? Failure should be an option, or it's not a game. Failure doesn't mean the adventure ends, but it does mean that the bad guy gets away or the wrong person is punished. Next campaign, you'll have a person that says "goddamit, we should have had an investigator, that poor lady got hanged because of us." Maybe they'll hire an investigator to help them. Having a plan for success, failure, and something in the middle may be a bit more work, but it's absolutely worth it. It creates TRUE suspense, invested players, and a real world where they truly own their victories. As long as your plan for failure doesn't end your campaign (not hard to make a less favorable path forward) you'll be fine. This idea that the players always have to succeed is silly as hell. Chokepoint clues are only necessary to keep the game going, they don't have to confer success.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 My DM has ran several mysteries for us at levels 6 and 10, in a campaign going on 3 years now. Each time was amazing. So.. Speak for yourself.
IMO the best RPG rules for playing mysteries is the Brindlewood Bay system from The Gauntlet.
The idea behind Brindlewood Bay is that the story of an RPG is written by both the GM and the players. With that in mind, the GM doesn't know the result of the mystery, they provide clues and it's up to the players to interpret the clues and provide a plausible solution that uses the clues given. As a result, the GM doesn't have to figure out a complex mystery in advance, by just providing clues the players find the mystery, it's up to the GM to decide if their solution is actually plausible.
I have to find that one check it out.
There's a bit here that should be considered- a DM/GM should consider this: If everything is streamlined and there are no empty rooms, it's going to break suspension of disbelief for your heavy roleplayers.
It's FINE to have irrelevant rooms in an abandoned mansion. Mysteries don't need to be so efficient you lose exploration and cut lulls in pacing. Those lulls help characters get their thoughts in order and allow for them to examine the history, lore, or hidden knick knacks that they wouldn't see if you just cut them out.
Or you could just say, "You pass through a series of large wood-panelled chambers with peeling wallpaper and warped floors. Then you turn the handle to reveal the music room to see....." Poe and Lovecraft write like this. "Cask of Amontillado" and Rats in the Walls" have tons of empty rooms, but they're described in a sentence or two.
Very true, that method sounds like a nice compromise. I don't know how many aspiring DMs read the comments but hopefully they find this. Keep up the good content!
I'm actually going to create an entire episode about describing stuff. Poe will be referenced, along with F. Scott Fitzgerald. Look for it late in the year or early next.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 Why not work the fallen plaster into that description? "Fallen plaster and water stains on a few ceilings suggest greater signs of neglect above." You never know where you'll hear a clue, or how it might help you later. It helps to pay attention, players…
For the Chekhov's gun rule maybe you don't have the owl statue part of your description, and rather just say that there are fancy decorations in the room. You emphasize what is important, but you should still have other stuff in there. You are going for the feel of a real place where someone actually lived, there is going to be non pertinent information that the players can uncover.
You found junk: rock that looks kinda like a dog.
Player: I bet this is plot crucial.
This will lead to the classic DM mistake of being too vague.
Tell them the owl is in the room, and they *still* might not check it out.
Be obvious, don't be vague and your players just might get it.
DMs have an issue of "hiding" critical information because they feel like the players aren't "working hard enough" for it.
@@SeanLaMontagne I know this pain all to well with players focusing on random crap instead of listening to hints all but handed to them on a silver platter. ;-;
@@SeanLaMontagne I think @TheAres1999 's point was that if the owl statue is not a clue but you want this room to feel like it's sumptuously decorated etc then don't be so specific. Only be specific about the parts that contain clues.
Chekhov's gun is tricky in an rpg because the environment is enteractable. You can make a red herring by excluding an item you did not want to put in there: ie, there is no bathroom or outhouse in the property... he must be an android!
Chekhov's gun is more about fulfilling promises than leaving clues; he wrote dramas more than mysteries. If a gun is in the scene, someone is getting shot, which is a foreshadowing technique. Ie, do not have a wizard in the scene if he is not going to do something magical because it disappoints the audience. This does not really work that well, in practice, in an rpg because you do not know what players will do versus a character in a play you do. Ie, you put a giant catfish in the adventure and show npcs racing them to show this is possible for a future chase scene down the river, but the party thinks giant cat fish are gross so they avoid interacting with them as the mermaids get away.
I like the “don’t make them roll, just let them find it.” Attitude. Usually for things like this I’ll have them roll, and the one with the highest roll gets to discover the clue or whatever it is. No DC, just highest wins.
How do you compensate the PC who has put all his skill points into investigation skills that do no good whatsoever? The other PCs who have put all theirs in to driving, fighting, and other such skills get to use their skills to their advantage.
Precisely. "Invesitgate", "Insight", and "Perception" become largely pointless skills with this approach. Of course you don't want things to come to a screeching halt based on a single die-roll, but failing an investigate roll should no more prevent finding a clue than missing an attack roll means you don't (ultimately) kill the monster.
Just ask if they want to spend yet more time, and let them roll again... imply the clock is ticking... and require ever-increasing time for each successive investigate roll (10 minutes, 1 hour, 4 hours, 1 day, 2 days, a week...). Too many failures might also destroy evidence.
If the players fail investigation checks, give up, and miss the "critical" clue, have consequences and another way to advance the plot.
Example: they failed investigation checks to discover the loose floorboard under which the bloody dagger was hidden. Oops. Well next day (or next week or whenever), they come back to see the floorboards pulled up, and the now-empty space beneath... but this itself is a new clue that can bring the plot back on track... it is also a consequence that shows that the failed investigation checks mattered AND that their decision to give up the search after X amount of time also mattered. Even if they never decide to go back and thus discover the removed floorboards, you can have an NPC discover it and tell the PC's later.... finally, the removed floorboards & now exposed compartment give the PC's something new to investigate (successful roll this time and "aha! what is this bit of fabric that snagged on an exposed nail?")
@@GreylanderTV I think combining both his and your idea might work well. Give the players a investigate/perception/insight roll, and a better score means that the player finds the clue faster than if he scored lower. The lower the score, the more the real suspect does to cover up other tracks, move on with their plans, form an alibi, or run away.
@@GreylanderTV I think he has a point. It also applies to non-investigative scenarioes. Beware of choke points where - if the pc's do not find the secret door, they really can't proceed or make head or tail of it.
However I agree with you that he is invalidating the skills of the players.
To fix this you might do a number of things:
- let's say some mystic runes require an arcana check. A succes might reveal a complete sentence, but a failed means the wizard can only make out some of the words but still enough for it to work as a clue.
- A search roll might, even if failed, reveal a secret door. But had he succeeded it would also had revealed a bit of treasure.
-You can also highlight a players skill without a roll. None of the other players can understand it but the rogue knows that these symbols are thief markings. That helps define the players role and shine a little spot on it.
- In som cases a wizard might know how to do stuff no one else would, but it is also easy for him, so it requires no roll.
I also happen to think that a lot of players like to roll dice... so let's not take that away from them :-)
He does not use skill, so you cannot make a character that specializes or prioritizes any build because you do not get to choose.
This is very much a scenario that tests the player, not the character, if you are giving them the clues. It is a very old school approach, not for everyone. If you like solving puzzles, it can be fun.
Generally, if you leave clues up to a dice roll you risk missing everything with a run of bad luck.
Well, you can do it like in Gumshoe, where this idea comes from. You find the "core" clues automatically - that is, the ones you absolutely need to continue. A roll (or whatever mechanic) can give you extra information that might speed things up or just add color.
I've always felt that Chekhov's Gun was more about setting things up for payoff later. I'll certainly get that you don't want to include too many extraneous details if you're running a mystery, but excluding those details also makes it more difficult to include a hallmark of mysteries - the red herring, the clues that lead the detective astray.
Let's go with the example room you provided. While I get not including the owl statue if it's just a statue, maybe the key hidden inside/underneath it doesn't have any connection to the victim; maybe it belongs to the son, and it unlocks the small house at the edge of town where goes to take drugs or something. So the owl statue isn't pointless, but it doesn't necessarily help lead to solving the mystery (except maybe for establishing that the son couldn't have killed his father - he was at the house the night of the murder, and there's no way he could have gotten from one location to the other).
No doubt! First, thanks for watching this video. I was just watching it this morning thinking, "This is one of the better ones--why the f*@! doesn't it have more views?" Second, you are absolutely correct. However, we're talking about the same concept--NOTHING--from the weather, to the surroundings, to the NPCs is there by accident.
Good advice. Running a mystery on my next campaign
Went to a private library on one occasion. Prior to my visit the Librarian sent a bunch of probing questions in email. Being a little guarded, I just sent the list of resources I was seeking. When I arrived, I was greeted by the Head Librarian and introduced to my Research Librarian for the day. I wasn't allowed to touch anything, walk through the stacks unescorted, or search on their computer without "my" Librarian present. At first it was a bit daunting, and then it was amazing. I knocked out research for several projects rather than just the one I was there to complete.
Since then I've learned during consulting projects that this is not uncommon for such private libraries. While at the National Aquarium the Librarians explained that most of their "customers" just sent requests for resources and the mailroom delivered them. So anytime someone physically came in was a treat. They had the best views of the Inner Harbor from their library, so personally I can't imagine why no one wanted to visit.
I find myself once again pouring through all of your older videos for insights that I will apply to the Eldritch Hack scenarios I’ve come up with lol
Great video and a bunch of good advice. For myself, I am less likely to just strike spells from the game but have them give ineffectual answers ("it came from behind" etc.)
As someone who has run Saltmarsh several times, I have had most parties clue in almost immediately to 'plaster on the floor -> lack of plaster on the ceiling -> weak/dangerous floor' and one who took a few minutes. After the rotting floor at the top of the stairs, everyone realized the general state of decay in the house and dangerous footing.
Fantastic common sense observations here, my favorite video so far, I think. I have a mystery/haunted house adventure I wrote and ran twice pretty successfully but the advice given here helps me understand how to run it even better with the next group, particularly eliminating empty/unnecessary rooms.
The plaster seemed like a perfectly fine clue to me
"They'll detect evil the plaster." Hey! My players did that too -- except they did it to a loose brick in the fireplace.
They're a "Knights of the Dinner Table" strip called "Behind the Green Door." The players chance across a door that happens to be green and spend all night examining it while the DM sits frustrated, knowing that the green color is a fact he just tossed out to make it seem different than every other door. Hilarious.
"I cast detect magic on the brick!"
The brick not magical.
"I check for traps!"
There's no traps on the brick.
"I cast detect evil on the brick!"
The brick is neither good nor evil. It is a brick.
"I roll to intimidate the-"
GUYS! THE ONLY THING STRANGE ABOUT THIS BRICK IS THAT IT'S LOOSE!
"......I bet it's a mimic. I cast fireball!"
@@colinsanders9397 I just ran across your comment and reminded me of an another bygone Era where we had a Thief with handyman background. You thought this Thief would look for traps and detect secrets of the adventure but instead would repair the loose brick, reset sprung traps, etc.
Gygax punished this by having monsters attack. The monsters had little of value and gave little exp.
Taking out wandering monsters breaks the game a bit. You’d have to have some time based consequence in other systems to replicate it.
It punishes players for wasting time and raises tensions. Gets players to look for important things.
a suggestion seth skorkowsky gave for call of cthulu regarding giving players critical clues was that if they fail their roll instead of not giving them the info have some sort of negative consequence like drawing the attention of the police
Always love your advise and perspectives! You are always a pleasure to listen to Professor!
Preparing to play a modern Spy Game. Clearly the Prof is the first place to check for the best tips. Kudos.
Glad you enjoyed it!
So I am now running around UA-cam looking for information on this. I need a lazy way to do this. So, this that you presented was great.
Thanks! I think this is one of my most useful videos.
Thank you for the tips and ideas! It's my turn to DM for our next campaign. I am planning to incorporate mystery and/or horror encounters to our standard adventure.
Anyway just a suggestion for us dummies: people will find the resources you mentioned more easily if you include the names in your video description. I've been preaching to my friends your channel. Keep them coming!
Excellent advice for veteran and novice gamemasters. Another good source of information is in Mercenaries Spies and Private Eyes by Blade/Flying Buffalo.
Going to have to find a copy.
really late to the party here, but...
I always do my rolls as you suggested... with failures just meaning the action takes more time. I do this when the PCs have to question a lot of people as well (like if a murder happened in an apartment complex). The roll just dictates how long it took, how many jerks, weirdos, and know-nothings the investigators had to deal with before finding someone with relevant information. I usually handle all of it with a little montage of agonizingly slow and frustrating research, talking to odd balls, etc. and then get to what they were looking for.
I also handle supernatural powers... if any exist in the setting I'm running the game in... by incorporating them into the plot and making them the ONLY way some clues can be obtained. I ran a modern day supernatural game called The Ghastly Eye where PCs could be sorcerers, psychics, and so on. I would always make sure to include some clues that could only be found by the use of some of their powers. This made their powers relevant to the story, useful, and gave each character some of the spotlight. I try to do the same with some clues in general, especially if the game is in a more modern setting. Find a clue? Maybe it's significates can only be solved by the scientists or the occultist? Need to talk to someone famous? Maybe the rich dilettante can do it, he has a ton of money and is a member of the same country club the famous person is. Hell, maybe they have golfed together a few times? I think by doing that it makes the players feel their characters are valuable to the team and are important to solving the problem. No one feels like a fifth wheel.
Handout are also great. really got turned on to those from Call of Cthulhu. Ran a short game once where I created a wallet the PCs could find on the victim. Bought an old wallet from Goodwill and filled it with fake cash, some fake credit cards (the kind that come with those offers from banks for a line of credit), an ID, business cards, pictures, and a few numbers. The game was short, so clues in the wallet were all they needed to pursue. Worked great and was a fun game. Players really liked it.
Thanks for sharing! Better late than never! New video today at noon Eastern.
Wow! Almost 5 years, and you've gone from 1K subs to nearly 120K. Good going!
Thanks! 😃
Just found out about Winds of Chaos the other day. It's awesome!
Yeah. It's a pretty good site. The contest entries were very good.
Love the portraits of Poe over the fire and the Raven over the bed.
You noticed! Glad you watched this video. It's actually one of my favorites. I don't get why it doesn't have more views.
I can agree with your idea of "They just find the clue, don't have it hinge on a die roll" But one of the concepts that I heard about in a completely unrelated game [a review of Warhammer 40,000 Wrath and Glory] is that you can use a die roll, but if the character fails the die roll, they still do the thing but perhaps it takes longer than they expected, they got lost and it takes longer for them to arrive, perhaps they're exhausted from a climb or bad weather. The story still progresses even if the characters didn't initially succeed.
Love your DM advice videos....more more...
Thanks. I work as fast as I can.
And Iforgot the most important part! Tell me what you want advice about. It will probably end up as an episode.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 ok...here goes...I would love to hear your opinion on magic items...I run an ultra-low magic game. In my game there are no such thing as run-of-the-mill +1 weapons and that kind of thing. Magic items are difficult to make and therefore all have names, histories and wondrous enchantments. Potions can be awful smelling concoctions, or powders that must be smoked rather than drank. Magic spells could be found written in chalk on a slate, or woven into a tapestry...the possibilities are endless...
How do you present magic items in your games?
Pretty much the way you do. Swords will have names and unique powers: a sword called "Eviscerator" that disembowels opponents on a natural 20. A dagger called "Backbiter" that is +2, but only from behind. A shield that looks like the moon, glows in the dark, and is +2 only at night. Wizards snort a stimulant called Moonsnow and smoke Weirdweed to improve their casting abilities. Clerics will have a embalmed saint's head that gives +2 protection to everyone in a 20 for radius. Every magic item should be totally unique and weird.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 Would love to see a video on the subject. I think most DM's would benefit from these types of ideas rather than just "generic" magic items from the books...
I watched this video and read the resources you cited, took notes, drew flow charts and forced myself to write a murder mystery adventure. It will be in next months Bexim’s Bazaar. Hopefully, it doesn’t end my budding career as a writer, lol.
That plaster bit was awesome.
I actually found the statue of the sorceror as a pdf on some website in some slavic language. Thanks for the tip, i will enjoy reading it.
The campaign I just began started off with a caper where the players uncovered the plot to kill a famous actor who was performing that night. They found out about the plot and met the actor at an autograph signing and told her to go through with the play and they'd guard her...the stage was trapped with a glyph that blew her up. The characters (all RP-heavy lawful or neutral good) were all traumatized that they inadvertantly caused her death, but now they're more determined than ever to find the killer without letting anyone else die. They were all really good sports about it and they're definitely hooked on the plot.
I joked and said "I didn't fridge her, you did," but I told them I definitely learned from it and if I could do it again I would've made it easier to find out that the stage was trapped
I’m running a Warhammer Fantasy Role Play 2nd edition game and am strongly considering running Noblese Oblige this next session. It needs some rework to get into shape to have automatically found clues and to follow the three clue rule, but I think my RP heavy gaming group will like it. I’ll post the results!
Amazing videos , keep doing them professor!
Professor DungeonMaster, You might be my favorite D&D series. Great work!
Loving the series thus far!
Another important thing, make sure that the investigation doesn't take so long that there is no time for the climax!
Great point. It's super-tough to estimate how long the players will take. Sometimes they take forever to figure stuff out. Sometimes they look at a riddle and say "The answer is a platypus" in 3 seconds.
Thank you so much for this video! I have been criticized by a lot of my friends because I use what we refer to as storybook dming where I make a lot of the things happen in order to allow the story to progress without too many dice rolls. They're more of the academic type and they want the game played with all of the dice rolls all of the skill rolls and it really does slow things down if you ask me. It might be more technically correct but I think it takes a lot of the fun away from the game. Your video here made me feel better about the way I run games :-) Thanks
I roll only when necessary. Stay strong!
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 thanks for the support :-) side question do you think I've taken on too much by allowing a chaotic evil druid in an eternal champion campaign? I've come up with what I think is a decent storyline as to the reasons why but not positive exactly how to play it out. I assume a lot of the campaign will have to be done storybook Style
My take on the "players always find the clue" I still use checks to find clues but the amount revealed depends on the role. So they always find a clue but it may not help as much as a higher roll would
Holy poop, amazing job. Thank you for all the great ideas.
Thanks for that Statue of the Sorcerer recommendation!
Let me know how it goes if you run. Brilliant, brilliant scenario!
Detect Evil on the plaster. Yes. and a quick alchemical assessment.
I like your old Xena style disclaimer.
plaster: exists
players 3 sessions later; "who rules DND town"
GM: masterplaster
I think your channel is going to blow up in the near future, keep making videos, I just found you and its been good content
I really enjoy your videos.
Thanks, Jay. That means a lot.
Cool video, thanks. I'll check out noblesse Oblige. I'm running a game that's event based rather than location based so all the tips on clues and NPCs are really useful. I agree about WFRP they have such a strong world it would be great to see more content for it.
www.windsofchaos.com/?page_id=259
Ancestor is Poe! 🧐 Well done!
I love your “plaster” diatribe.
You should really link the Alexandrian in your video ... good that you gave credit but providing the link would be nice as well.
Always good stuff.. thanks
"The plaster shouldn't be there." Wrong.
Your players will respond in the way you describe precisely because they are meta-gaming your approach, which is (a) to only tell them "important" things; and (b) [apparently] to allow them to waste huge amounts of in-game time and resources on absurdly pointless activities without any consequences.
Is the clock not ticking? If they spend all this time investigating the plaster, what other clues will go stale, what else might the murderer do in the meantime?
An underlying issue here is the degree to which the mystery plot is "on rails" or the extent to which there are pre-determined encounters waiting for the characters to follow the trail and arrive (personally I hate such encounters).
I think worst-case with the plaster is this: If you see your players putting far too much emphasis on the plaster, you let them make an insight check or just plain say "maybe the plaster is important, so remember it, but it is probably a waste of time to investigate it further"... if they INSIST on burning in-world time, start making things happen... another victim is discovered... there's a rainstorm and you can not-so-subtly point out how it washes away their own tracks on the path up to the house... (i.e. hint hint, wasting time means the trail may go cold...)
On a successful insight (or maybe invesitgate) check, or is some PC has "architecutral knowledge" for some reason, then explictly point out that the excess of fallen plaster indicates the floor above is weak and sagging.
Worst-worst case, you can just say "guys, don't over think (don't metagame) the fallen plaster... it's just fallen plaster in an old decaying house. If you were walking through this room, you'd go 'hmm... a lot of plaster fell from the ceiling here' and give it little more thought than that. Make note of it and move on."
Agree. His party is overly anal-retentive. He, as DM, needs to give a quick kick in the ass and tell them to move on. Problem solved.
I disagree. Outright telling the players which details they should worry about is much more railroading than not putting in the details in the first place, because it essentially takes away player agency and drives up metagaming much more. Players can't know which details to focus on and which ones to ignore, and this filtering is really difficult to do other than just saying "play how the GM is telling you to, and ignore this".
Also, having other things happen doesn't guarantee that the players won't leave the plaster alone, because they don't see the whole mystery, only bits and pieces. I see it as a point of bad design (and a mystery game is a designed story) to essentially punish players for focusing on a red herring without giving them the means to know that it's a red herring (again, other than just telling them).
Letting clues go cold is I think terrible advice. It's already difficult enough for the GM to come up with a good trail of clues, so this is essentially throwing away ideas and preparation, and making the mystery, which was evidently already too difficult, even more difficult and unsatisfying.
Yeah. Don't scare your players by killing more victims therefore making them play by emotion. Let them think logically and build the puzzle that the GM had created logically. That is the design of it after all.
If they must find the clue, still let them use their skill checks and whatnot, but make it so they fail forward.
Example: A good investigation check finds the secret chamber. A failed one leads to its discovery a day later because the blood of a new victim is leaking through the seams.
Mysteries are always tough. I always feel like you need to railroad/lead-by-the-nose the players through mysteries.
Great stuff
We need more Information about that plaster.
I fell into the high level mystery faux pas in my first campaign. Had a murder mystery and the players literally just used their diamond from earlier in the campaign and had the cleric resurrect the victim. She just told them who killed her and they fought the guy.
A whole session of mystery circumventing in a half hour. Never again.
Easiest way to deal with detect alignment spells would be just have several ranges of alignments or have the spell also detect when people have intent outside their normal alignment. "Despite most of them being good or neutral, you're detecting some evil intents in all of them..." But then I gues the way I perceive alignment is different so they way I would treat Detect Alignment, to begin with, would be that, instead of giving the players a clean landscape with auras of each alignment present, I hit them with a dissociative mess of telegraphed thoughts and intentions reduced to their colors on the alignment spectrum... And if this is their first time casting the spell... Boy are they in for a trip. Basically even what is good and pure will be a sight of cosmic horror to the uninitiated... And the last thing a first time caster of the spell is going to get is anything resembling any useful information... And if they ask me, "What's this even supposed to mean...." And my response would be, "And how the f#&; are *you* supposed to know? This is your first time casting this shit." So they'll take an insanity point of 6 if I'm using that mechanic and spend 1d4 hours in a fever dream the likes of what gave us the Divine Comedy. In other words, just because a spell fits into a firsr level spell slot does not mean a first level caster has any business casting it. And when the player casts a seemingly innocuous spell and it results in me reaching into my storage compartments and pulling out an auxiliary module... They will know, they indeed dun fugged up!
Lol good lord, I'm running The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh tomorrow. Lol
Yeah, Chekhov's Gun and meta gaming PCs are why some DMs (who have earned a very special place in Hell) invented things like "The Head of Vecna". As for the whole 'plaster dust' thing, you're a DM, not a machine, you don't have to use the description as written. You could have the party make a group INT check and then just tell them "the ceiling of this room is rotted, it's probably not safe to walk on the floor of the room above", full stop.
I played this module about a year ago. Fallen plaster in a room, immediately sent us to the room above. We just reasoned, why did it fall?
You have to run the mystery early in the campaign and make notes of magic protections to prevent magic being the solution. It has to be a mundane crime without the aid of magic (and with limited player access to spells) or the mystery fails.
No mystery that this is good advice.
Spent the last 30+ years thinking it was Stanislavsky with the gun. That's what I get for taking Theatre at a State school.
Well.. Was it imported plaster
?!?!
Ok, maybe next time I run a game it will go better with this advice. Last time my players mostly ignored any hints and clues...
Apply your advice to focusing on the critical things not just to the initial description but also the responses to character actions. If they investigate the plaster, tell them it came from the sagging ceiling. Don't say it's white with asbestos when that's irrelevant. Don't be afraid to simply say, "there's nothing of interest here". Or "you spend precious minutes and find nothing".
OK - as someone who has run the sort of adventures you talk about here, no - your Chekov's Gun reference doesn't mean there's something in the owl. It does mean that SPECIFIC references in a scene have a reason for being mentioned. Let's talk about that Owl statue, as an example:
1. It COULD be a reference to Athena... for instance, it's there because the person who owns the manor is a worshiper of Athena. Now, if that's what it means, then their WORSHIP of Athena, for instance, should be an element of the story. OR... it could be a red herring. See below.
2. It COULD be a representation of an actual pet the owner once had. If this is the case, it can be a reference to that pet being important to the story. OR, it can be a red herring. See below.
3. It COULD be an indication that the owner belonged to a secret society with the Owl as a symbol. OR, it could be a red herring to indicate they're a member... but, they're not.
Red herrings are great for leading the party down an incorrect path - and no, you should NOT automatically give them the answer. That makes them feel like they didn't solve the problem.
Nothing sucks like "I search the room." - "OK, you find this, and this, and this, and you know it means this, and that, and this..."
That's DULL.
In 40+ years of GMing, I have discovered that players come in different forms, and one of them is the PUZZLE SOLVER. When you have one of these in the party, the LAST THING you wanna do is just hand them the info. It's deeply dissatisfying.
Now, before someone thinks I'm a negative poster (and, I hope you know, by now, I respect you as a DM...) - MYSTERIES are great adventure options. Sure, in a Call of Cthulu game, it's expected, but it's equally effective in a D&D or Pathfinder 2 game. It's even useful in a Sci Fi like Starfinder or SWRPG game.
Professor DM - do you watch Law & Order and try to solve the crime before they tell us the answer?
I do.
BTW - WHFRP is SO MUCH better than D&D 5e, and Noblesse Oblige was a great freakin' adventure!
Good advice!
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 thanks - hey, I just realized this is a very old video for you. Do you find that you get a lot of comments on videos years later, like this, often?
You said to not have players make rolls to find clues. I disagree. Skill checks should not be black and white. Success or failure. Skill checks can be to see who found it. The character with the best roll finds the clue. Or based on the level of success, it should determine how they found it. A poor roll, they dropped the owl and broke it and found the key. A great roll, and the player picks up the owl and finds the key under it. Players like to make rolls to some degree. At the same time, don't overdo the rolling. Characters should not be rolling all the time. I agree about "read mind" spell. I love your videos.
1000 subs professor! Good old times
Those were the days...
I am not sure if I should be happy, or angry, because this is the first time I heard of Chekovs Gun AND have it understood backwards. "Include things that are important" rather than "Oh you included X, it better be useful", and I somehow feel both dumb for not understanding it with hindsight, but almost even angrier with other GM youtubers who do not use that language.
Really good advice there. Insta-sub.
So I am going to kill a whole village and leave a few clues, but this wont be resolved for many games. an evil wizards does it. Gasp. or even a focus.
How would you drop clues through other games or unrelated ones?
Box text for athmosphere objects for gameplay.
just this saturday my players had a roleplay heavy session where they needed to figure out what machinations were going on behind the scenes. I wrote up info for each of the main npc's 8 fighters for the tournament and two who didn't make it in but were plot important. The players then went about uncovering this info asking questions getting info and then I asked them who they thought was up to what.
I noted it all down, and that was the end of the session. The truth is that I didn't decide what was going to be coming up I just made some people have some suspect stuff in the info given, and let the players draw their conclusions.
Now the players have decided that my local big bad evil guy Engin Rass the unseated king, is in fact dead and his Wife is the one setting up the rebellion to reclaim the power she had when her husband was on the throne. One of her sons is in league with her, while three of them are out for their own success, a fourth is of unknown alliance. Finally she is allied with a druid from the north who is competing and is using one of her husbands bastards to imitate him.
It is going to be exciting and I put in an hours work righting up descriptions and motives/rumors about these fighters. I hadn't even thought of using the mother in this way.
Of course this entire campaign has been an experiment of letting the players choose where the rails lead each week, keeping them on the rails and allowing me time to plan.
Please tell me the comment about the H.P. Lovecraft story followed by "...go home and feed their cat" were purely coincidental.
I don't run mysteries usually precisely because they are difficult. The reason to run a mystery is to allow the players those moments where they have successfully figured out a clue or motive. Those moments where they feel like detectives. Your video, however just says that we should work to remove the mystery from a mystery. Only have things that matter so the players can assume that if it's available, then it's important, is meta-gaming and spoon-feeding. Similar to video game mysteries. This might be fun, but it isn't in the spirit of roleplaying and it isn't really a mystery. It boils down to, "There's a thing! Try all the stuff we know how to do to the thing until it shows us the next step."
I just discovered your channel and really like it. This video, however, seems to be off a bit.
I think the point here is the difference between finding the clues and interpreting the clues. Finding the clues (or knowing that something is a clue) shouldn't be the thing to get stuck on, because that part is not interesting. But interpreting the clue and figuring out how it connects to the mystery is the interesting part. Sure, the portrait above the fireplace is of some ancestor, and the PCs immediately find it. But what the heck does that have to do with the mystery? That's where the players need to be creative and try out various things to see where it leads them. And I think this step is already difficult enough for normal average people sitting around a table in the evening after work.
It sounds dangerously close to railroading. You are giving players all the information they need and ONLY the information they need. This could be good for a murder mystery game but in DnD you need to be flexible. What if the players ignore the owl statue but focus on the plaster you don’t care about? Well, let them find some new clue (or even the key) hidden in the plaster. Don’t tell the players that “these are the only important items”…let them choose their own path and as the DM you should find a way to make their path lead them to what they are looking for.
The DM doesn’t write the story, the DM writes the synopsis on the back of the book…it is the players that write all the pages within the book itself.
What i do for items in a room, etc, if asked about it, I say it is ACME item and they know it is there, an of no importance. It works most of the time.
Great tip! I'm glad you found this video. It's my all time favorite and doesn't have many views. Cheers!
I just found your channel and I am learning a lot of good ideas. I was original D&D and chainmail player. I am getting back and I like the quick playing style.
The one funny part on a ACME sword found on a dead Orc. I told one player it was an ACME sword, he say I read Orc, answer it is an ACME sword, he answered I read Elf, answer it is an ACME sword then he said I read Dwarf and the group answered IT’S an ACME sword and their is nothing written on it. His answer, oh there is nothing written on it?
@@therealwildwildwest I salute you! You are the revered generation that came before even me!
The Sinister Secret of Salt Marsh has empty rooms because it is still a dungeon: a room takes 10 minutes to search and you get a random encounter every 20 minutes. You also had empty rooms so you can use them as fall back locations, resting, or places to run/hide. The module is not really a mystery so much as a bait and switch: characters are hired to clean out monsters from the mansion only to find the mansion has a secret... which you find just by walking into each room till you find it. Just another dungeon, really.
Apply checkovs gunn to true detective season 3 and you have a 15.min show.
@J S spoiler for a year old show ?
Welcome to the internet
Spoiler alert
TD season 1 12/10 just greatness
TD season 2 8/10 a downer but good
TD season 3 3/10 dourif tries to save it but cant..just awful
TD season 4 dont do it. It it die
The corpse is related to Edgar Allan Poe? Awesome!!!
*Don't use D&D , Pathfinder or Warhammer for for Horror or Mystery games .*
*Use Gumshoe or Call of Cthulhu instead .*
”The room is empty, except for piles of plaster on the floor which is greater than other rooms. It looks safe and nothing else is of interest here.”
To the player with the character most likely to make the connection. ”As your character looks up, they can tell that the ceiling is buckling a bit and sagging and not structurally sound, can't tell how bad it is with current lighting conditions.”
If you teach your players they can't trust you, they'll ask and probe endlessly. Dungeon Masters should assume the character will act a certain way, because the players would expect their architect or very perceptive character to notice those things.
The moment you punish a player for not being stupidly detailed and not making reasonable assumptions, you'll get very annoying, hyper detailed, paranoid players who take hours to get through the simplest of tasks.
Holyshit the number of times I've heard a story about a DM running a mystery that they deemed to have an obvious solution that their players could not grasp.
Why do DM's have such a tendency to be so vague with their Mysteries yet expect the players to solve this so easily.
Here's my rule, make the solution so easy you think a kindergartener could figure it out, and then give it to your players.
It's really easy to think you've crafted an easily solved mystery when you are the one who created all the puzzle pieces.
Just found The Statue of the Sorcerer for $3.99!
GREAT module. One of the best I’ve ever read. Enjoy!
*CHA'ALT*
I love speak with dead it clearly says cripict and reparative answer one time they asked where he came from I answered my mother everyone laughed and then realized they wasted a question
It's not easy to write a mystery that is both interesting and solvable.
The way I do it is always backwards.
Start with the solution. Who commited the murder, why, where and how. Dramatic mysteries are not like real life, as mentioned in the video most real detectives either solve the "Mystery" in a day due to dumbass criminal behaviour, or spend weeks talking to people who don't know a damned thing.
For the whole thing to be a successful entertaining event, the players will need to figure out, or at least be presented with a solution that satisfies all the questions they will have.
You will be rarely (if ever) able to follow the Agatha Christie model of having all the suspects in one room and an expository "Process of elimination" sequence.
When you have come up with the full solution, including the motive... you can work backwards. You know what the players will need to learn to be able to solve it, and can break that information down into individual clues.
One resource that you might find useful is those "How To Host a Murder" type party games. They can show you how to feed clues out that people who don't have a degree in Sherlockology should be able to patch together into something resembling a solution.
Another useful source, though harder to write for yourself, are the "Logic Puzzle" games where you have a grid and a list of statements, and you connect those statements to complete the grid. "So... if the guy with the brown beard doesn't like coffee, and the guy who likes coffee also has a limp... then the guy with the brown beard CAN'T have a limp!" sort of things...
There are two basic types of Mystery adventure for RPGs. They kind of follow the Sandbox vs Linear model. The more open mystery is where clues can be found in any order and need to be pieced together to get to the solution. The other is where the clues follow a set order and each clue leads to the next.
The first type requires an accumulation of evidence and the ability of the detectives to contextualise it, and put it all together in a pattern. (This is not as easy as it might first appear, particularly if your players are murder hobos living out a power fantasy. )These are the classic "Agatha Christie" or Sherlock Holmes situations. These are hard to do unless your characters have some means of knowing the temperature at which butter melts, or know the potential poisoning capability of house plants and cat turds.
If you are going to use Deduction type skill checks to impart this information, you will probably need to scatter it in with a lot of unrelated data or the solution will feel like its being handed to them. Sifting through and sorting the relevant from the irrelevant is part of the Mystery...
A very basic version of this is the "Process of Elimination" mystery.
For example: There may be a Murderer who has a magic item that means that anyone who sees him can only remember one thing about his identity... Hair colour, eye colour, beard, ear size, scar on his left cheek, WHATEVER.... From there the party needs to find and talk to witnesses, and the adventure plays out like a glorified version of "Who's Who?" Have one of the players act like a "Police Sketch Artist" and construct the image as they learn the clues. (I've run this concept a few times, for kids - where each of them makes up their own "sketch" and they compare them at the end, and it always goes down well. I don't advise using it on experienced adult players, unless it's clearly set up as a one off "Just for Fun" session.)
If you haven't tried a Mystery/Investigation before I'd suggest starting out with a basic "Chain of Clues" mystery. Where each clue is found separately and leads directly to the next, each bringing them closer to the solution. These are both easier to write, and easier to solve. But they don't tend to require a great deal of deductive thinking.
I can't stress this enough, you can not trick the players. It's impossible.
This is dealing with the trust between the Dungeon Master and the Players.
The Dungeon Master is every form of perception for the players, and there is absolutely no way you can trick the players. None. They will go and do everything you directly or indirectly tell them to. If they walk down a hall and fall into a trap, you did not trick them because they failed to roll for trap detection. Now the players will roll perception on every square foot of every surface because you indirectly told them to do so.
The plaster is a perfect check to see if the characters trust you. If a stupid player is playing a character that's supposed to be like Sherlock, then you tell that player things that the character knows, and what are good options to do with that information. Do not roll perception checks. Give the player with the highest perception the information to relay. If they are all blind, then they stumble on the clue. If they don't know what to do with the clue, randomly give a player a hunch that their character heard about some kind of secret hiding place or something and they randomly test that idea just for fun... and it works!
The players walking into an empty room with bits of plaster on the ground, beyond that the usual is seen with the walls giving way from age and rot is a common theme here. You then tell the players that is all the characters find in here. The plaster is from the ceiling which looks like it's slowly caving in. This creates a hazard for the room above as the center of the room should be weakened and it's something they can feel clever with in a combat encounter upstairs by pushing an enemy there, or using that as an escape option.
Each character should be valuable to the game in some way and losing anyone should be a clear and obvious setback. Runes can't be understood, the inability to have a sneaky person means you can't plan a trap against an ambush or gang, losing a front line fighter means combat is going to be far riskier.
I love the 3 clue rule here and it is probably the best way to get the players to try and think about what the meaning behind the clues are. The lipstick, key to the hotel and love letter are perfect examples. The secret compartment means he knows the information must be kept from others or it will ruin him. The lipstick is quickly figured out by asking the wife if she has that shade or make of lipstick, and the key leads to other people who should know more, since someone at the hotel should know something. I would add that the key is somehow labeled for the hotel.
This was a great video, thank you.
Glad to know my CoC stash is worth something lol
The old stuff? Most definitely.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 I wouldn't part with my boxed set of "Masks of N" for any price...gollum...my preciousss lol
@@FrederickMathieu "Masks" is a classic. The first of it's kind and a challenge to prep and run. THAT might be a good episode of DC (although sadly, I'm not sure too many people would want to see it).
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 I'll buy that for a dollar. I ran it and total party kill in NYC on the first encounter with cultists. I stopped running CoC after a while because my hackNslash friends never could finish a single adventure let alone a campaign. lol
@@FrederickMathieu LOL! That happened to a group when I tried to run Masks of Nyarlathtotep.
Then the Bard will try to seduce the plaster
Nah. It's Chekhov’s gun, not Chekhov’s fireplace. Every building had a fireplace.
Chekov's Gun shouldn't be applied to a mystery game, in my opinion. They are here to play a game, not watch a movie or read a book. If you only include what is essential, there is no game, just a following of the DM's path. There should be useless items, but they should have less value than the important items. Discerning between the items IS THE GAME. It would be unfair if you did not include context that allowed a clever player to ignore bad evidence, but if you have that context, you have a game. In a game, there is a chance of failure. In combat, there is a chance of failure. If the plaster gets investigated after you tell them that the room is old and crumbling, well, they just failed for a bit. This makes their victories THEIRS, rather than something that the DM handed them. No victory without failure. Some people want to be spoon fed a fun story, others like to actually earn their bragging rights. My table moved past the "give me training wheels" phase a long time ago. Chekov's gun is a great concept, and should be applied in most games, but not in mysteries. I love your content, and we generally agree on most things, but I think you're wrong on this one. Also, make them roll skills to find things. Why the hell is anyone going to make a character that's good at finding clues if the DM always hands them out? Failure should be an option, or it's not a game. Failure doesn't mean the adventure ends, but it does mean that the bad guy gets away or the wrong person is punished. Next campaign, you'll have a person that says "goddamit, we should have had an investigator, that poor lady got hanged because of us." Maybe they'll hire an investigator to help them. Having a plan for success, failure, and something in the middle may be a bit more work, but it's absolutely worth it. It creates TRUE suspense, invested players, and a real world where they truly own their victories. As long as your plan for failure doesn't end your campaign (not hard to make a less favorable path forward) you'll be fine. This idea that the players always have to succeed is silly as hell.
Chokepoint clues are only necessary to keep the game going, they don't have to confer success.
Only mention the things that contain clues and don't bring up anything else seems like a really bad advice
yeah these videos are never helpful, I keep trying them but,
"I just remove the spells"
totally works for a longstanding campaign.
*come*
*on*
I remove those spells before the campaign has ever begun. If you have a longstanding campaign with high-level PCS, mysteries don't work.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1
My DM has ran several mysteries for us at levels 6 and 10, in a campaign going on 3 years now. Each time was amazing.
So.. Speak for yourself.
@@roibenblitz6863 a mystery with "detect thoughts"? 🤔
@@throeawae2130Yes. I've done it. Its actually pretty good.