This is the Den Design Challenge. Twice every month there will be a theme laid out for you to make new mechanics around. This month's theme is:
An Investigation Mini-Game
From Murder by Death to American Gangster it's an established fact that proper protagonists need to, when called on, figure shit out. Write up a system that will let parties in your game figure out whodunit.
Feel free to chatter about ideas, we'll conclude this design segment at the end of August. When you post a final system create a "Foundation" section that talks about what one needs to know, if anything, before reading your rules. If your rules are based around Shadowrun's core system then say that, if it uses a deck of cards say that too.
As for myself I'm thinking of some sort of d20 based system where mysteries have certain DC's. Evidence provides big boosts to the roll and false evidence (red herrings) provide negatives. So the PC's say what pieces of evidence they've gathered they think are legit based on what they think the crime was, and which ones they're including in their Solve roll. Then the DM secretly adds and subtracts as necessary. The result will put you into a few broad categories of failure and success based on how much you meet or fail to meet the DC by. Like-
Failure: You fucked up, your gut knows it and when enough evidence comes in the world will know it too.
Partial Failure: You just couldn't make this case make sense. Still, you know the number you found on that kids jacket was important. You just know it. Ahhhh you're gettin too old for this shit.
Partial Success: You put the right man away, you know it. Still you just don't understand why he kept visiting that old storage unit. Wasn't a damn thing there. You know you got the right guy......you just can't make all the pieces fit.
Success: Have a drink Sherlock. They thought they were clever hiding the body in that old junk boat. Lord knows it was bound to sink the moment it touched water and who'd retrieve a clunker like that from the harbor floor. They woulda got away with it too if it hadn't been for you and those snooping kids.
Den Design Challenge 1: Whodunit
Moderator: Moderators
Den Design Challenge 1: Whodunit
DSMatticus wrote:Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, fuck you. I am filled with an unfathomable hatred.
Vebyast wrote:Is this serious, or have we decided to produce an entire series of DEN NEXT games?
No, I'm serious. Having been inspired by our NEXT project I wanted to create a place where people could ACTUALLY work on design problems one at a time and see if we can produce some valuable material. There's more information on the original thread here
http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=53596
But yeah, see if you can concept and write up an interesting way to do Mysteries in a ttrpg. Go!
DSMatticus wrote:Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, fuck you. I am filled with an unfathomable hatred.
-
OgreBattle
- King
- Posts: 6820
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am
Mysteries are usually time sensitive. So I'd approach it as trying to get as many successes as you can with a limitation on how many actions you can take.
Investigating the crime scene (perception skills)
Getting into the criminal's motivation (insight skills)
Questining people in the know (social skills)
Running after the darting shadow to get a lead (athletics/speedster skills)
Beating up dudes, because we like the fighting (combat skills yo)
Different routs have different hazards, some are more optimal than others. A 'failure' in this segment isn't so much the whole investigation is blown, but complications come up, it's a waste of effort, or it will take more party resources to get that 'success point'.
Success/failure is more about getting all the pieces together by X amount of rounds than it is rolling a die and seeing if you whiff.
ex: Jack the Ripper is rippin up ladies! Can you solve this caper?
INTRO PHASE: Right when the badstuff begins, the things you do to make it better.
athletics: you hear a scream, bolt towards that direction and maybe you can spot the ripper, or tear off his scarf or something. A crucial clue is gained, either you can figure it out or find an expert to help you.
MAIN PHASE: The caper is about, things you decide to do after some thought, or rashly jump into without thinking.
athletics: start punchng cops, because fuck the cops.
social: the whores are suspicious of outsiders, but maybe you can open them up
perception: that bootprint being washed out in the rain, you know it was size 6... tiny feet!
etc.
solve in 1 'round'= you found his house and give him a whoopin', the whores are safe once more! You gain their trust!
solve in 2 rounds= You hear a scream in the distance, Jack is pouncing on a foxy lady, fight him off!
You take 3+ rounds= X amount of whores die along the way, maybe you catch him eventually. The whores are devastated, and the smart whore who knew stuff about your real father's whereabouts be dead.
Bonus stuff:
- Some of the things you did made the police mad
-Some of the things you did made the police happy
Do you risk current relationships for the sake of the whores, or do you follow protocal because you don't want to get hammered down? So the results of this mystery affect the campaign as a whole.
Investigating the crime scene (perception skills)
Getting into the criminal's motivation (insight skills)
Questining people in the know (social skills)
Running after the darting shadow to get a lead (athletics/speedster skills)
Beating up dudes, because we like the fighting (combat skills yo)
Different routs have different hazards, some are more optimal than others. A 'failure' in this segment isn't so much the whole investigation is blown, but complications come up, it's a waste of effort, or it will take more party resources to get that 'success point'.
Success/failure is more about getting all the pieces together by X amount of rounds than it is rolling a die and seeing if you whiff.
ex: Jack the Ripper is rippin up ladies! Can you solve this caper?
INTRO PHASE: Right when the badstuff begins, the things you do to make it better.
athletics: you hear a scream, bolt towards that direction and maybe you can spot the ripper, or tear off his scarf or something. A crucial clue is gained, either you can figure it out or find an expert to help you.
MAIN PHASE: The caper is about, things you decide to do after some thought, or rashly jump into without thinking.
athletics: start punchng cops, because fuck the cops.
social: the whores are suspicious of outsiders, but maybe you can open them up
perception: that bootprint being washed out in the rain, you know it was size 6... tiny feet!
etc.
solve in 1 'round'= you found his house and give him a whoopin', the whores are safe once more! You gain their trust!
solve in 2 rounds= You hear a scream in the distance, Jack is pouncing on a foxy lady, fight him off!
You take 3+ rounds= X amount of whores die along the way, maybe you catch him eventually. The whores are devastated, and the smart whore who knew stuff about your real father's whereabouts be dead.
Bonus stuff:
- Some of the things you did made the police mad
-Some of the things you did made the police happy
Do you risk current relationships for the sake of the whores, or do you follow protocal because you don't want to get hammered down? So the results of this mystery affect the campaign as a whole.
Last edited by OgreBattle on Sun Aug 19, 2012 4:41 am, edited 3 times in total.
I definitely think you're right in that mystery missions are time sensitive. I don't know if it's time sensitive to the tune of 1 or 2 rounds. But generally it is time sensitive. I think that giving people options for how they do their research (Questioning, Forensics, Profiling) and then making those research techniques take preset and different amounts of time might do the trick.
I think 3.5's tracking rules might be an inspiration for this. Making the mystery harder to solve as time progresses. You'd do this by making the various pieces of evidence dry up at various pre-set points. This way people are constantly under a time pressure and thus are always making the decision of what kind of research they need to spend their time on as time is now your primary resource.
I think 3.5's tracking rules might be an inspiration for this. Making the mystery harder to solve as time progresses. You'd do this by making the various pieces of evidence dry up at various pre-set points. This way people are constantly under a time pressure and thus are always making the decision of what kind of research they need to spend their time on as time is now your primary resource.
DSMatticus wrote:Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, fuck you. I am filled with an unfathomable hatred.
-
OgreBattle
- King
- Posts: 6820
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am
Ah I mean rounds not like '6 seconds' but it's more like the first half of a TV show before commercial breaks where occult guy goes to library, bounty hunter heads to the bar, etc.deanruel87 wrote:I definitely think you're right in that mystery missions are time sensitive.
I think 3.5's tracking rules might be an inspiration for this. Making the mystery harder to solve as time progresses. You'd do this by making the various pieces of evidence dry up at various pre-set points. This way people are constantly under a time pressure and thus are always making the decision of what kind of research they need to spend their time on as time is now your primary resource.
One style of PC can be the hound, he smells blood and follows it. For him the faster the better, lest the trail vanishes.
Another is the Researcher. he picks the clues together, gives it some thought, the more time he has to piece it together the better, lest the crucial detail be overlooked.
Last edited by OgreBattle on Mon Aug 20, 2012 11:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
A mystery tour is just like a railroad written in backwards-time format.
On a railroad, you find a clue that points you to a future event you need to be at to get your next clue, and so on, until you find where the BBEG is and kill his ass. Branches all fold you back onto that main plot line.
On a mystery tour (CSI: Greyhawk), clues indicate past events for the players to consider, rather than future places for their PCs to be. Each past event discovered points you at more past events to look into (via survivors, misplaced objects, psychic resonance, or charred remains) until you figure out who the BBEG is and go kill his ass. Branches still fold you back into line.
Less railroady designs look more like a web of criss-crossing clues that all provide multiple branches that let you skip back and forward on the path(s) to the BBEG. A proper sandbox design basically says there are multiple mysteries to resolve and nefarious plots to interrupt, but you can go about them in any old order and they often point to each other.
I wouldn't abstract any of that with mechanics, but various clues can be hidden behind skill checks or spell use, or guarded by monsters and traps, especially if you've got more than you need (which you should have).
On a railroad, you find a clue that points you to a future event you need to be at to get your next clue, and so on, until you find where the BBEG is and kill his ass. Branches all fold you back onto that main plot line.
On a mystery tour (CSI: Greyhawk), clues indicate past events for the players to consider, rather than future places for their PCs to be. Each past event discovered points you at more past events to look into (via survivors, misplaced objects, psychic resonance, or charred remains) until you figure out who the BBEG is and go kill his ass. Branches still fold you back into line.
Less railroady designs look more like a web of criss-crossing clues that all provide multiple branches that let you skip back and forward on the path(s) to the BBEG. A proper sandbox design basically says there are multiple mysteries to resolve and nefarious plots to interrupt, but you can go about them in any old order and they often point to each other.
I wouldn't abstract any of that with mechanics, but various clues can be hidden behind skill checks or spell use, or guarded by monsters and traps, especially if you've got more than you need (which you should have).
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
-
...You Lost Me
- Duke
- Posts: 1854
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:21 am
OH JESUS CHRIST FIX YOUR TAGS.
DSMatticus wrote:Again, look at this fucking map you moron. Take your finger and trace each country's coast, then trace its claim line. Even you - and I say that as someone who could not think less of your intelligence - should be able to tell that one of these things is not like the other.
Kaelik wrote:I invented saying mean things about Tussock.
What a glorious disaster. Can I get this as my normal board theme? http://i.imgur.com/Oqyd3.png
Step 1) Make a search check to find clues
Step 2) Make a diplomacy check to interrogate witnesses (Bluff and Sense Motive can also work)
Step 3)The Players decide who did it and how they did it then make a bluff roll.
-Reduce DC by 5 if the character they pick as the killer never appeared in the game before, and was never mentioned, nor even hinted at.
-Reduce DC by 1 for every clue that points to someone else.
-Reduce DC by 3 if their explanation of the crime relies on "commonly known facts" that are neither commonly known nor true.
-Reduce DC by 10 is their explanation of the crime is so absurdly convoluted that it defies all belief.
And that's how you simulate detective fiction in a D20 game.
Step 2) Make a diplomacy check to interrogate witnesses (Bluff and Sense Motive can also work)
Step 3)The Players decide who did it and how they did it then make a bluff roll.
-Reduce DC by 5 if the character they pick as the killer never appeared in the game before, and was never mentioned, nor even hinted at.
-Reduce DC by 1 for every clue that points to someone else.
-Reduce DC by 3 if their explanation of the crime relies on "commonly known facts" that are neither commonly known nor true.
-Reduce DC by 10 is their explanation of the crime is so absurdly convoluted that it defies all belief.
And that's how you simulate detective fiction in a D20 game.
Last edited by hyzmarca on Mon Aug 20, 2012 4:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.
The Encyclopedia Brown approach.
I was in a pretty cool steampunk-fantasy game that was based off of Sherlock Holmes, once, and thus had improvised detectiving. Perception checks were used to detect clues, but the players were left to follow the trail on their own, so puzzling things out was a major part of the game. I had a lot of fun just doing things that way, although having fully half of your gameplay be "figure out what to do next based on these clues" did slow things down to a crawl.
I was in a pretty cool steampunk-fantasy game that was based off of Sherlock Holmes, once, and thus had improvised detectiving. Perception checks were used to detect clues, but the players were left to follow the trail on their own, so puzzling things out was a major part of the game. I had a lot of fun just doing things that way, although having fully half of your gameplay be "figure out what to do next based on these clues" did slow things down to a crawl.
This is off topic, so spoilered, but why do you have a google search open on "how to tie your shoes" ?Zaranthan wrote:What a glorious disaster. Can I get this as my normal board theme? http://i.imgur.com/Oqyd3.png
Gary Gygax wrote:The player’s path to role-playing mastery begins with a thorough understanding of the rules of the game
Bigode wrote:I wouldn't normally make that blanket of a suggestion, but you seem to deserve it: scroll through the entire forum, read anything that looks interesting in term of design experience, then come back.
-
Stubbazubba
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 737
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 6:01 pm
- Contact:
This is from a homebrew I'm making based on The One Ring and things I've seen here. It's a variation on a generic Skill Challenge system, adapted for Investigations specifically.
There are three variables to the setup of the Investigation:
So if you investigate for just a brief moment (1 round of Tolerance) a fresh crime scene (low Difficulty) to discover something basic like which way the killer ran off (low Threshold), you would roll Search or Perception and have a Threshold of 1 or 2, and you'd be very likely to succeed. The DM would just tell you. If, however, you were investigating the death of a peasant girl ten years ago to determine if any black magic was used (very obscure, high Threshold), but her village was completely washed away by a flood 4 years ago (super high Difficulty), and you were going to take months or even years to investigate thoroughly (high Tolerance), your job would likely be harder.
A low Tolerance indicates a more difficult task, but a lower Difficulty and Threshold indicate an easier task. Conversely, a higher Tolerance makes things easier, while a higher Difficulty and Threshold make it harder.
For example, using d20 numbers;
A thief has stolen the Artifact Sword which belongs to the elderly king, an heirloom of his royal line. The party of 4 investigators is tasked with retrieving it. They investigate to find out who took it, how they took it, etc. They spend 1 day investigating, which we'll say is a Tolerance of 3. The group is given access to talk to anyone they need to, etc., and since the crime scene is largely unaltered, the difficulty will be fairly low, a DC 14. The thief, however, was quite exceptional, so the Threshold is 10.
Party Member 1 is the social guy, he's gonna interrogate the guards on duty that night. He rolls [insert appropriate social skill] with a +6 bonus, and totals 15, a success. Party Member 2 has high Perception, so he rolls that with a +5 bonus and totals 23, another success. PM3 is a loremaster, he researches similar crimes and who would want the sword, who would have access, etc., and has a +5 on the roll, so he totals a 23 as well. PM4 is built for combat and not very good at this stuff. He decides to look for additional clues and uses a +1 bonus and a natural 20 to get a 21. Four successes in the first round. Next round, we'll assume they do the same things. PM1 gets barely 14, a success. PM2 gets a 10, no success, PM3 gets a 6, no success, and PM4 gets a 3, no success. So with one round left, they're at 5 successes. They know they can't figure it out, but hopefully they can get a solid clue. Last round, PM1 totals 19, a success, PM2 totals 18, a success, PM3 totals 20, a success, and PM4 totals 7, no success. So the final count is 8 successes, when they needed 10.
The party is able to gather from a fabric discovered in the window that the Queen's family, lords of a nearby kingdom, had stolen it. However, the loremaster guy correctly realizes that there's something wrong with the fabric; it was clearly dyed locally, as that shade of blue only comes from a dye made in this kingdom. Thus they know that someone was trying to frame the Queen's family, possibly trying to disrupt an upcoming conference between the sovereigns. That gives them more leads to follow, but still leaves it open.
Had they met the Threshold, the DM would have told them that by finding and following the testimony of a string of beggars and invalids in the street that night, that a gruff-looking stranger had walked from the King's treasury to the keep of Count von Villainy, an esteemed member of the royal court who objected to the King taking the Queen as a bride early on. Had they exceeded the threshold, the loremaster would have deduced from one of the beggars' observations that the thief was trained in a certain shadow art rumored to be taught by a legendary gang of bandits from a certain far-off land. Had they failed to get 5 successes, they would have believed it was, in fact, a foul deed on the part of the Queen's home kingdom.
There are three variables to the setup of the Investigation:
- Tolerance: The number of 'rounds' you investigate for
- Difficulty: The DC of each skill check involved, which is dependent on the resources available to you and may thus vary depending on skill used
- Threshold: The number of successful checks needed to piece together the puzzle. This must be kept secret from the players.
So if you investigate for just a brief moment (1 round of Tolerance) a fresh crime scene (low Difficulty) to discover something basic like which way the killer ran off (low Threshold), you would roll Search or Perception and have a Threshold of 1 or 2, and you'd be very likely to succeed. The DM would just tell you. If, however, you were investigating the death of a peasant girl ten years ago to determine if any black magic was used (very obscure, high Threshold), but her village was completely washed away by a flood 4 years ago (super high Difficulty), and you were going to take months or even years to investigate thoroughly (high Tolerance), your job would likely be harder.
A low Tolerance indicates a more difficult task, but a lower Difficulty and Threshold indicate an easier task. Conversely, a higher Tolerance makes things easier, while a higher Difficulty and Threshold make it harder.
For example, using d20 numbers;
A thief has stolen the Artifact Sword which belongs to the elderly king, an heirloom of his royal line. The party of 4 investigators is tasked with retrieving it. They investigate to find out who took it, how they took it, etc. They spend 1 day investigating, which we'll say is a Tolerance of 3. The group is given access to talk to anyone they need to, etc., and since the crime scene is largely unaltered, the difficulty will be fairly low, a DC 14. The thief, however, was quite exceptional, so the Threshold is 10.
Party Member 1 is the social guy, he's gonna interrogate the guards on duty that night. He rolls [insert appropriate social skill] with a +6 bonus, and totals 15, a success. Party Member 2 has high Perception, so he rolls that with a +5 bonus and totals 23, another success. PM3 is a loremaster, he researches similar crimes and who would want the sword, who would have access, etc., and has a +5 on the roll, so he totals a 23 as well. PM4 is built for combat and not very good at this stuff. He decides to look for additional clues and uses a +1 bonus and a natural 20 to get a 21. Four successes in the first round. Next round, we'll assume they do the same things. PM1 gets barely 14, a success. PM2 gets a 10, no success, PM3 gets a 6, no success, and PM4 gets a 3, no success. So with one round left, they're at 5 successes. They know they can't figure it out, but hopefully they can get a solid clue. Last round, PM1 totals 19, a success, PM2 totals 18, a success, PM3 totals 20, a success, and PM4 totals 7, no success. So the final count is 8 successes, when they needed 10.
The party is able to gather from a fabric discovered in the window that the Queen's family, lords of a nearby kingdom, had stolen it. However, the loremaster guy correctly realizes that there's something wrong with the fabric; it was clearly dyed locally, as that shade of blue only comes from a dye made in this kingdom. Thus they know that someone was trying to frame the Queen's family, possibly trying to disrupt an upcoming conference between the sovereigns. That gives them more leads to follow, but still leaves it open.
Had they met the Threshold, the DM would have told them that by finding and following the testimony of a string of beggars and invalids in the street that night, that a gruff-looking stranger had walked from the King's treasury to the keep of Count von Villainy, an esteemed member of the royal court who objected to the King taking the Queen as a bride early on. Had they exceeded the threshold, the loremaster would have deduced from one of the beggars' observations that the thief was trained in a certain shadow art rumored to be taught by a legendary gang of bandits from a certain far-off land. Had they failed to get 5 successes, they would have believed it was, in fact, a foul deed on the part of the Queen's home kingdom.
*********
Matters of Critical Insignificance
Matters of Critical Insignificance
ishy wrote:
This is off topic, so spoilered, but why do you have a google search open on "how to tie your shoes" ?Zaranthan wrote:What a glorious disaster. Can I get this as my normal board theme? http://i.imgur.com/Oqyd3.png
It's traditional to deliberately open tabs with embarrassing titles when posting a screenshot of one's web browser, such as "how to take a screenshot," "anal fissures home treatment," or "justin bieber slash mpreg."
-
Avoraciopoctules
- Overlord
- Posts: 8624
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:48 pm
- Location: Oakland, CA
I thought Phoenix Wright was a pretty cool game of investigation, even if it did get a little moon-logicky at times.
I liked that fact that in games like that players get text highlighted or other visual aids that help them focus on the right clue. A system where you got a bunch of physical clue cards and then combined them to make new clues (like in Investigations I) might be pretty cool.
I liked that fact that in games like that players get text highlighted or other visual aids that help them focus on the right clue. A system where you got a bunch of physical clue cards and then combined them to make new clues (like in Investigations I) might be pretty cool.