Investigative Mysteries

And Why Less Is More

2025-04-13

Previously on Dozens and Dragons
Less Prep More Collaboration
Turning Failure Into Success
Games Are Not Simulations
Conclusion
Further Reading

Previously on Dozens and Dragons

The implied values of “How Different Games Do Investigative Mysteries And Clues From Worst To Best” are that less prep is good, and fail states are bad.

Less Prep More Collaboration

Prepping an Adventure

Create a couple NPCs. Give them desires and mannerisms.
Prep a couple locations, maybe some encounter tables per

Prepping a Mystery

Create a couple NPCs. Give them desires and mannerisms.
Prep a couple locations, maybe some encounter tables per
Concoct a CRIME, a WRONG, or an INJUSTICE
Create a REASON, a MOTIVATION for the injustice
Create a VICTIM for it to happen to
Conceal a part of the story from the players: the WHY, the HOW, the WHO, etc (This is what makes it a Mystery!)
Conventional wisdom is to concoct THREE CLUES for every Conclusion the players should arrive at (because players can be relied upon to miss the first two)

Prepping a mystery like this is somewhere between “a little more” and “much more” work than prepping a “normal” adventure.

Executing a mystery game prepped this way feels railroady to me. One of my north stars of ttrpg is “Put the characters in an interesting situation and see what they do.” Not “Put the characters in a situation with one and only one correct solution.” That’s not the kind of game I like to play.

This is why I lean into investigative mysteries that require less prep. Not just because it’s less work and I’m lazy. But also because ttrpg is intrinsically and inseparably collaborative. I’m not in it to tell

Turning Failure Into Success

Take another look at the final item from the list above.

Conventional wisdom is to concoct THREE CLUES for every Conclusion the players should arrive at (because players can be relied upon to miss the first two)

This happens first of all because players are not themselves master detectives. (More on that in a bit.) They can be relied upon to blow past clues and overlook them.

Secondly, if players must roll for finding a clue then there is always a chance that they will fail. Obviously it feels bad as a player to miss a clue because you failed an investigation roll, and for forward progress to falter or halt.

So why do we even do this? Just give the clues out for free!

It is important to note, however, that it can create a lot of really fun tension to have the story advance despite your best efforts: the killer strikes again, or takes special interest in the investigators and makes it personal. That makes for a good story with high stakes!

There’s a quotable little section of guidelines in Jared Sinclair’s What’s so cool about outer space¹ that goes something like, “Something is always happening! Nothing never happens!”

Fail forward, what not.

Give the clues out for free. Shift the effort from finding the clues to interpreting them correctly. That’s there the potential fail state is. That’s the game.

You tell me: what’s more fun? Investigating a mystery and failing because you come up empty handed, or getting a bunch of clues and failing because you pinned it on the wrong suspect thus making a new enemy and also letting the real criminal slip away?

Games Are Not Simulations

This line of discussion raises the issue of solving a mystery versus playing a game about solving a mystery.

Some players want to be Sherlock Holmes in the game, not play a game about Sherlock Holmes. The problem is, nobody is capable of being Sherlock Holmes. That’s why we have procedures and mechanics to simulate detection and deduction. No player is a master detective.

Think about the difference between playing a game about the behind-the-scenes drama at a chess tournament, and playing a game of chess. Preferring the latter to the former is totally valid. But if that’s the case, then go play chess.

If all you want out of D&D, for example, is precise tactical combat and strategic thinking, then maybe you don’t want to be playing D&D. Maybe you just want some kind of modern historic wargame.

The point is that no ttrpg is a perfect simulation. Or if it is, then I don’t want to play it.

I play ttrpg for two reasons. To feel things deeply, and to tell awesome stories with my friends. If I run an investigative mystery, it’s going to involve tricky predicaments, hard choices, and high stakes. Not devilish puzzles solvable only by a fictional genius.

Conclusion

You ain’t Sherlock babe. This is first and foremost a game, and it’s a game about investigating a mystery. To make up for the fact that you ain’t Sherlock.