Designing A Compact Mystery

[Palanan]

I could use some advice on how to structure the plot of a scenario I’ve been working on. This will be based at a country estate, and it’s intended as a one- or two-session adventure for starting characters, with an emphasis on amateur sleuthing.

The essence is that Something Important has been stolen, and the estate is in an uproar trying to find it. The thief, who is a member of the estate’s household, has hidden the SI in such a way as to implicate another member of the household.

I have the basic scenario, but I’m not sure how to translate this into a working outline to run a session. The PCs will be employees of the estate, but they won’t have any resources other than their own ingenuity.

Where do I take it from here?

.

[Doctor Awkward]

So everything that goes into structuring a mystery for a table-top session ultimately revolves around resolving a single problem facing your villain. That problem is, "they want something and are having difficulty getting it."

To resolve this problem you pose a series of questions. Since we are working with a theft, the first question you need to answer is, "Why was the object stolen?" The motivation appears to be to frame someone else in the house for having stolen it, which is fine, but why are they framing that person? Do they want them arrested because they don't like them and want to see them suffer? Or is the motivation secretly altruistic? Maybe the person being framed did something else that's terrible, but the thief cannot prove it, so they make them the focus of another investigation by framing them for the theft. Or maybe the reverse is true and the the person being framed discovered something awful about the thief and the thief is now trying to get rid of them before the truth comes out.

Regardless, once you answer that question you move on to the next question: "What must be done to get the object, and why must it be done in that fashion?" The answer to the why is arrived at by consider who the thief and their position in the house, and thinking about the steps that they must go through to acquire the stolen object in the first place. Remember to tailor your answers to the specific circumstances of the object being stolen and the motivations of the thief.

So once you understand what must be done to get it, you then need to answer, "How was the crime committed?" A whole list of other questions will spring out of this one. For example is the object stolen a piece of jewelry belonging to the head of the house? If so, and the thief a member of the immediate family they might have a difficult time retrieving it from the bedroom where it is kept. What evidence would they leave behind when they do so? Or is the thief a butler? They would probably not look out of place going in and out of the master bedroom. Or maybe they would? Would they have to vary their routine to be in the master bedroom when the piece of jewelry isn't being worn by the head of the household so that they might get it. These will give you the fine details around the moment of the crime that the players will uncover. Do you want it to be a clue gathering type of mystery or has this occurred in the midst of a large gathering in which case it becomes more of a socially-focused interrogation type of mystery?

The single most important question that springs out of the how from above is, "Why must the theft have occurred then and not at any other time?" This is really the crucial question to answer that creates the focal point of the mystery. And your answer must be bound by logical progression of time. The reason is because following the timeline and chronology of events surrounding the mystery is most likely going to be how the players will solve the mystery. "If person X said they were here at this time but person Y also said they were here but didn't see person X then one of them is lying," or some similar revelation. The players need to be able to acquire clues that have time stamps on them.

A crucial element to consider in answering the prior question is that you, as the GM, want the thief to be caught. You want the players to solve the mystery so the villain has to make mistakes. So if you arrive at the conclusion that the thief would have been better off waiting if they were smart because on X day they might have had a better chance of succeeding, that's fine to ignore for the purposes of this mystery. That's the next most important question you must ask, "When the thief committed their crime, what went wrong?" In the case of a theft, this could be any number of things. If they took the item off of a person, what did they have to do to get it. Continuing the assumption that the object stolen is a piece of jewelry, maybe they attacked the person from behind, snatched the item, and ran off before the person could recover. If they took it from a bedroom, perhaps the jewelry box was locked when it is normally left open and so the thief had to force it. In doing so maybe they cut themselves on a sharp edge and so they have an injury. Or maybe the planting of the object went wrong, by, say, having it discovered in the person's room but at a point in time before the person in question could have possibly stowed it there, thus indicating they were framed. How complex these elements are usually depend on how long you want the mystery to last. Obvious mistakes will usually lead to a short mystery while more complex ones can stretch it out.

The above element holds true for any clues that you scatter around for the players to find. For each of the above questions you should have at least three (3) good, time-stamped, obvious clues that indicate who the thief is, and why they would want to commit the theft. You should also consider whether or not you want to include any red herrings-- things that might seem related to the theft but actually aren't. As a rule of thumb I would never include more than three of those in total. The players are assembling a puzzle, and giving them any more than three extra pieces that don't fit will be immensely frustrating.

Once you answer all of the above questions you can construct a complete timeline of the crime, including any potential events that may have lead up to it and ending with the object being planted in the frame-up. When you have that you can look at the events and decide where you want to sprinkle in clues for the players to uncover. Always keep in mind the skills the player's have and can use to uncover them. If someone has Knowledge: architecture and engineering maybe they can automatically notice the jewelry box was forced open. Or if someone has ranks in Heal they might work out that the person they talked to lied about how they got that cut on their hand. Because you want the players to solve the mystery the clues should be tailored to the strengths of the party.

So constructing a mystery can be easy if you simply look at the events sequentially and each step make sure to leave clues for the players to find. At first you will probably think, "oh but that makes it too easy," but always keep in mind that your players are looking at the mystery from a completely different perspective than you because you already know the answer before you started.

[Palanan]

That's some detailed advice, thanks.

I've already got some of your points covered, but there's plenty else to consider here.

[Doctor Awkward]

My pleasure.

I love mysteries and enjoy putting them together for players.

I've found that my best ones involve carefully considering all of those elements because in answering each question creates an opportunity for another potential clue.

Another minor note about the red herrings if you decide to include them: just because they don't have anything to do with your current mystery doesn't mean they can't be a springboard to another later session.

For instance.... ahhh.... if someone is attacked over the course of the theft of the significant object, and one of the people interviewed blames someone not involved in the theft OR the frame-up...

"Oh I'll bet you it was Sir Oswald. Mhm! No question. You know he was furious at <other person> for having his share in the will reduced. I overheard him talking about the most dastardly things. But I couldn't see who he was speaking with."

So it turns out Oswald was innocent of this particular crime, but that testimony is ultimately true. He was speaking with someone on the other end of a sending spell and whatever revenge they were talking about comes to fruition later in your campaign.

This can be done even with something you made up on the spot as a red herring. And your players will think you are a brilliant mastermind who has set planned out everything years in advance.

[Cygnia]

Do you know what your PCs playing will be?