I think it’s valuable to point out, too, that if the players decide not to pursue clues or mysteries for that matter, the GM is then put in the position of deciding whether to pursue what the players want, or somehow bring them back to the adventure currently planned. I think some GMs follow the players on to new storylines and let the consequences (if any) fall where they will, and others prefer to guide the players back to the mystery storyline (either with a soft touch or a heavy hand).

I think the decision, of course, depends on the GM and the circumstances both in-game and out-of-game here. No one solution will work for everyone. I can say, though, that knowing your players in those regards should make the decision easier. For example, if your players don’t like to be railroaded, guiding with a heavy hand is out. Or, if your players are floundering with no direction of their own, perhaps they need a bit more obvious direction.

There are a lot of interesting ramifications that could come from this topic. I’m looking forward to seeing what comes up here.

With Regards,
Flynn

The best GM’s are flexible and thrive on improvisation. Period. Not only should we have those skills avaialble, we should count on using them. Malky’s opening comment shows a perfect example of this (he’ll go far).

On stage, one of the first pieces of training an actor gets is to act like whatever happens was meant that way. The audience does not know any better, and if you move smoothly, they’ll never know there was a deviation from the script.

I will mention, on the subject of mysteries and clues, that sometimes a GM needs to have a little patience. If the players start to hear the steam wistle and trip over the railroad tracks, they don’t feel too wonderful about solving a mystery.
Especially in a sandbox game, let them pursue a different direction and resist the urge to throw more and more clues at them.

I run long sandbox games, and one of my groups finally figured out something I thought they were going to get to back in in the middle of 2007. But I refused to whack them in the head with clues again and again. It gives the setting more versimilitude when the players see logic actually working.

Some things are still a bit rusty, but I’ve definitely unlearned some bad habits in the interim. More later…

I personally prefer to write my adventures as frameworks and scenarios, and half the time, things never go as I’ve written them out. However, knowing the overall scenario helps me to improv the adventure and present what I hope is an entertaining evening of gaming. The fact that they keep coming back to the gaming table each week lets me know I do a reasonable job of it.

I’m very interested in reading your next series of articles as you are now GMing again after a break. It should be fun!

With Regards,
Flynn

This article is the result of one of those Zen moments that we all get. I was commenting on an email about planting clues, and I mentioned that an active GM is a great asset in a mystery game, because he (or she) can keep a hand on the ‘clue throttle’.

And then I had two realizations: 1) This applies to all aspects of an adventure, not just the clues. 2) I’m as guilty of it as anyone, since my unconscious template comes from published adventures.

This is one of the things I love about GMing: There is always another lesson to learn.

If you’re more comfortable with improvising, as BryanB and Rafe are, you can invent new clues/interactions as the session goes on. It sounds like trusting your instincts really worked out for you Malky!

I used to try and do it the other way around. The school of hard knocks taught me that you can’t lay the whole thing out in concrete.

No matter how obvious you think finding a clue will be, there is at least a one in four chance that no one will think of the solution. Does that mean the adventure grinds to a halt. No! You have to figure out a way to impart the information when the entire session hinges upon it. I also try to avoid the entire session hinging on one clue, but there are times where it can’t be helped.

Furthermore, when you were sitting down and you wrote out the whole adventure in advance, taking into account five different outcomes for every scene? NOPE! When presented with five different options, the players will choose option six at least fifty percent of the time (or so it seems)!

Have the theme of the game down. Create your NPCs and give them motivations and goals. Write the opening scene down with a degree of specificity, but at some point, you are going to be modifying some of those expected scenes on the fly, in order to have smooth sailing as the game gets played.

A Game is a Work in Progress — Why waste all of that time handwringing over every little detail and possible outcome?

My adventuring party was looking for a serial killer, and there was only one witness to any of the deaths. However, they couldn’t find the witness anywhere They got him to reveal himself (because, frankly, he wasn’t very smart) by putting an ad in the paper saying that he won a contest.

Now, in my original conception of this adventure, he was dead. Murdered by the allies of the serial killer. But I LOVED this idea. In the context of the plot elements I established so far, I thought it was fascinating and brilliant. So the witness was alive, and answered the ad in the paper. They found out who the murderer was, and got a super-expensive magic item that I hadn’t even intended to be in the game.

I thought it worked great. It wasn’t a matter of them needing more clues, or a better challenge, it’s just that my players came up with an idea that I thought was better than my ideas. It ended up being simpler than I imagined, but the willingness to stray from my original plot ended up working out.

This time. In the future, I expect I won’t be so lucky.