I am working on a story arc that involves an investigation and as I am sure many of you have found, searching for clues can be problematic.

What happens if they miss all the clues? The story dead ends and that is frustrating for LM and players.

So I had an idea... make it a social encounter... sort of!

The investigation begins in the Chamber of Mazarbul of the Lonely Mountain.

I will skip the bit where they negotiate with King Dain to gain access, as that is a standard social encounter.

Tolerance for the encounter is obviously Wisdom, a bragging warrior is not going to impress a librarian... not even a dwarf one.

So, on arrival at the archives they make a Courtesy check to introduce themselves, only those wanting to search the archives of course!

It's a big place, so they need somewhere to start and that sounds like a Lore check.

Having found the relevant section, they have to Search for the relevant book or books.

Finally, they need to make sense of what is in the book as it uses archaic terms and that sounds like Riddle.

Failures of the above skill work against the Tolerance of the encounter and they are asked to leave if they exceed it, or can do so when they have made the rolls.

The number of successes is compared to a list like those used in Tales For Wilderland regarding encounters.

Using this method, you can give the players at least the basic information to get them following the plot, which is the important bit.

Additional successes might provide warning about traps, additional clues and the like.

So... sorry about long post, but I needed to explain my reasoning.

Opinions?

You've hit the nail on the head, here. If the players need a piece of information in order to move the plot forward, they should get that regardless. Failures can provide only enough information to get by, false information that still puts them on the right track, or setbacks that must be overcome before they can use their information. Successes provide advantages in the form of allies, more information, easier TNs for future tasks, etc.

The key is that the sting of failure still needs to be felt even though the plot isn't stalled, otherwise what's the point of rolling? Get creative with your consequences; they could range from more enemies that need to be faced, risky side quests, higher TNs, or narrative consequences like the death of a beloved NPC, the destruction of a safe , etc.

Ok, if I understand what you are trying to do I would say that you are on the right track.

Speaking as somone who really enjoys a good mystery I would say that you have put too much emphasis on mechanics, here. Most of the work should be, IMO, RP'd out; let the PCs stumble about for a while, throw in some Red Herrings, and the like. If they do go completely off script and can't get back on track, then yes you could use a mechanic like you have set up as a last ditch effort to move the story forward. In my group when this happens we (the GM) usually use an NPC to find the clue that gets the party back on track.

I too enjoy a good mystery and agree that RP should be involved... and it will.

What I'm trying to do is work out some mechanics for the purely research aspects of the story.

I'm sure you have experienced that situation in a game like Call of Cthulhu when everyone fails their Library Research check and the Keeper is left with nothing to guide his players, so has to give them a clue anyway!

You should take a look at implementing the Three Clue Rule. Otherwise, key clues should be given out for free, with rolls allowing the companions to get extra information to make their lives slightly easier or to uncover the full scope of the issue rather than just the core (as in the Gumshoe system).

alien237 discusses this issue in his blog concerning passive perception checks. If you ask a player to make a perception check -- in a room, on a trail -- they know something is up. When they roll and fail, they know they've missed something etc.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, when a GM calls on a player to make a passive skill check such as Library Research and they fail that roll -- but then the GM turns right around and hand them clues, it cheapens the moment and there's no feeling of accomplishment.

Using 'secret' rolls for passive skills gives the GM the choice of fudging the roll if need be. Purists may frown on this but if they're going to hand them the clues for free anyway, what difference does it make?

Another alternative is to structure your plot so that it isn't so linear, ie A leads to B. Success at B leads to C and so on. If the players fails at B, the plot deadends.

Instead you want to designed it so that A leads to B, C, and D. Then B, C and D leads the players to E, the pivotal clue. If B fails, there is always C and D.

edit: I see Ovid linked a better example

I run and play a LOT of Call of Cthulhu and I understand your concern. One of the things that my group has taken away from games like Burning Wheel (which had some really great ideas but just didn't work for my group), was the idea that failure didn't always mean that you didn't succeed, it just meant that success was complicated.

If you are searching a library for a clue, you always get the basic clue, but failure means that there is a complication. For example, the character accidentally spills candle wax or lamp oil on a rare volume and they are ejected from the library. Maybe you sprinkle in a red herring that leads them to assume some one powerful and not related at all to the real mystery is involved. Or it simply takes a REALLY long time to find the information (days, weeks, months). I'm sure you can come up with a lot of good ideas, sometimes my players have the best suggestions on how to hamper their own or other characters.

I like your ideas as well and think you are on the right track.

Ok, I've been seriously distracted this week, and I'm tired, so the following might not be fully coherent.


I would suggest running this as both a Social Encounter with the Librarian and a modified type of Prolonged Action to review information resources.

The start is gaining the assistance of the Librarian. A good librarian can make any research effort substantially easier. So the Social Encounter is needed to determine whether or not the character(s) can gain the Librarian's assistance. However, make a note of all G's & E's rolled, totaling them once the Social Encounter finally ends due to hitting the Tolerance Limit.

All G's and E's are added together. This is the Librarian's Bias and can be positive, neutral, or negative.

The character(s) start looking through the various information sources, trying to find leads. To determine if they find a lead, the character performs a Prolonged Action skill check. However, this check's TN is adjusted based on the Librarian's Bias. Reflecting the Librarian's attempts to help or hinder the investigation or the character(s).

Otherwise the Prolonged Action proceeds basically as normal. Each skill check required takes up a certain amount of time. The time scale is also adjusted by the Librarian's Bias. Establish a chunk of time for each general success, something with multiple time units (ie, 5 minutes, 4 hours, or one week per check) so that you can adjust the check's length by the Bias amount.

This shifts the focus from if the characters find the clue to when they will discover it.

I would imagine that Bias could be used in other forms of NPC assisted/hindered Prolonged Actions. Dealing with government bureaucracy comes immediately to mind.