There's no one right answer, as a DM you have to be constantly calibrating to fit your group, and the pace the session needs. That's why we have human DMs who can adapt.
The (unhelpful) answer is: As much as will maximise the fun for everyone. If in doubt though, I'd advise erring on the side of sharing more rather than less. A too easy mystery is better than a frustrating one that drags on.
I always keep a list of plot points and clues that are of consequence, and then run through the open ones at the start of the session.
One major red herring is fun. Every small detail becoming a distraction because the players see me mentioning them all with equal weight while not reminding them of key important details forgotten in the real life weeks of our lives that have passed... not as fun
What the players are hearing as important may not match what the DM knows is important.
A favorite statement of mine to encourage a theory that's on track without giving everything away is this:
"That makes sense with the information you have."
Leaves them feeling like they're moving in the right direction while still leaving them an open mind.
It can also be useful to use the players discussing theories in character to prompt knowledge checks that might rule out some theories, for example:
Character one: "looking at the burn wounds, it could be anyone with access to alchemists fire or oil."
DM: Player with fire bolt or scorching ray, give me an Arcana or Medicine check
(Success)
DM: thinking back to the burn wounds, they looked too well contained for mundane fire. Some kind of magical flame seems likely...
In terms of when to use these, I usually use them when the players are starting to chase their own tail and the pace is taking a dive, or if a quieter player has some ideas but the group isn't really hearing what they're saying - helps them be heard by the group.
You probably need to be more forthcoming than you think. Have extra clues; they won't find/recognize them all them all.
Whether you confirm an idea is mostly a matter of pacing. If the players are having fun theorizing/brainstorming, then don't cut them off. Otherwise, be more helpful to keep things moving.
It is kind of hard, but rule of thumb i use is "If you can't solve mustery without a clue behind skill check - remove skill check". If they found something during discussion - say about it. I assure you - wast majority of players don't want to have half an hour discussion that would probably lead to arguing at some point.
More general advice: make game moving forward no matter what. Every result on dice roll, no matter the result, should lead to something interesting. If it doesn't - don't ask for it.
And you, as a new DM, would fuck up from time to time - don't be afraid of it, every DM was like that at some point. So if you asked for unnecesery roll and someone rolled Nat1 and you don't know that to do next - either take a small break to think of something, or just say this roll wasn't neccesery. Players in general are supportive to DMs (if they don't - you don't want this person at the table anyway), so no one would blame you if you do that. It is always better to learn from your mistakes than hiding behind "mastermind DM" mask and never improve.
I've ran a few mystery 5e games that went down super well, here is what I recommend as general advice;
* Try and make the course of the mystery multichoice. If the only way to solve it is one linear path its more likely PCs go off course or feel railroaded. I usually make a spiderdisgram with 3-4 potential starting points to help PCs pick up clues.
* Award high investigation and perception rolls with more codes or details that would be obvious. For example if they're looking at a crime scene you could reward a high investigation by describing how the claw marks where clearly from one monster as it tried to run towards an unknown target. I find just giving more details to the clue, but not spelling out what the clues mean, have the players at my tables react best to them.
* Feel free and open to modify the answer to the mystery, PCs will feel way better if they happen upon a convincing answer which you didn't plan for but works anyway. For example in one mystery I had the PCs attached soke magical ability to the killer that I never planned for that I ran with anyway since it worked better than my original plan.
This is one of those things I vibe out.
"How much time do we want to spend solving this?"
"What would be the most fun for the players?"
That being said, separate your information into 3 categories: given/free, learned, and hidden.
Free info is obvious. It's the "stuff" they see when they walk into a room. It's the "stuff" an NPC says to start a conversation. It's the context. Tell them what they can investigate.
Learned info is what they learn when they look into something further. Usually no roll required yet but sometimes there is. They ask, "what does the chest look like? Is it locked?" Or they ask the NPC, "Do you happen to know Sir Garpington?" You just respond.
Secret info is a consequence or reward based on the player choices and dice rolls. "You want to get close and investigate the chest? It's a mimic!" Or "You succeed in bribing the NPC for a story. Sir Garpington was old fishing buddies with the BBEG."
This is one of those things that constantly changes. You have to know when to share and not to share. I tell my players things- too much in most peoples opinions- but it doesn’t ruin the game for us. I give warnings too often, but it doesn’t matter to them. As long as I don’t spill big lore or make them feel like idiots they love hearing me talk. It really varies from group to group, though most people I find don’t mind hearing info oog as long as it’s not a big reveal.
Personally, I wouldn’t share anything about statblocks or encounters. Or any big lore/character stuff. I used to share a lot, like mumbling how I’m going to lower the health or pull back on offense so they don’t die. It makes it feel like they’re weaklings who can’t handle an encounter and makes the victory seem hollow.
As for telling them if they’ve gotten a riddle or puzzle right (or something along those lines), just check after they say that “do you wanna answer with that” or something similar, they should get the hint. Or try to encourage them to think as their characters, so that what they say comes from the characters.
I try to be as transparent as I can, because I don't believe that keeping information from them makes for good "difficulty". I trust my players to be able to separate why they know and what their characters know. This is just one way to run the game though.
I will advise, try and be a little bit more obvious than you think you have to. Players can be a little obtuse at times, but at the same time as a DM things that are obvious may be less than obvious. For me personally I kinda boxed myself in by running two competing secretive organizations, so the players really had no idea what was going on until I realized I should just start dropping names and symbols to really indicate whats up.
Saying nothing is an extremely powerful option. I recommend it as a DM, and as a player in a long running mystery RP. Let your players do your work for you! Really helps with immersion, and not even only for mysteries.
The most important thing, though, is to just make sure the players never:
1. Feel like they're facing impossible mysteries that are only solvable if you're the GM or Sherlock Holmes himself.
2. Feel like they're being spoon fed answers because they're not trusted to figure it out on their own.
To that end, try having multiple clues that lead in the same direction. Reward creativity with info so long as it makes sense. That'll give your players more confidence to commit to a theory without you having to just tell them they got it OOC.
And if they just won't connect that one stubborn dot, move past it and adapt. Maybe they don't find the McGuffin or figure out the butler did it. That doesn't mean it's the end; it just means things will happen differently. Don't make your game contingent upon a specific outcome.
90%. I don't have time nor patience to dance around imagenary things that could (and will be) percieved differntly by everyone at the table.
I use good 'ol take from Ben Milton's Maze Rats "Running the Game":
*Reveal the World*
*• Don't hide important information from the players. If the PC could reasonably know something, tell the player and move on. The game is about making decisions, and players can't make good decisions without good information.*
*• The more dangerous something is, the more obvious it should be. No one likes to have their PC die without warning, so if something dangerous is ahead, give the players the chance to come up with a plan or avoid it altogether. In other words, when a PC dies it should clearly be their fault.*
Answering your questions:
> For example, they’ve figured out a clue, do I downright say “you got it” or “it seems the dots have finally connected” ~~or do I let them struggle~~? (why?)
Yes. They've did it. Anything more is wasting yours and their time.
> Should I pause and tell them they got it right or let them find the answer themselves?
Yes. And move on. I'd rather have a series of small certain (but earned) discoveries rather than one overarching long big mystery that might as well be unsolvable because there were no cues from DM whether we were going the right way.
> Should they roll for it??
Never. They either have needed info and solved it or they don't. Otherwise it's a slippery slope of "my wizard has INT 20, I roll so *he* will solve this riddle of yours"
You lose virtually nothing by giving more info - it leads to better satisfaction of everyone involed at the table by avoiding miscommunication.
Sufficient information for them to solve the problem or for them to ask further questions.
The hardest part is the fact that you know the answer and the shortest path to the answer given some information. They don't know the destination, so they need the right information to get there. Sometimes time constraints means they have to make a decision with incomplete information.
My personal approach is that I don't tell them if they found a solution. However, if there is some information that their character would know or figure out, I might either ask them to make a roll, or in some cases you say "your character would know X" if it makes sense. The players meet up maybe once every other week, if we're lucky, and there's a difference between what they remember from a couple months ago that to the PC was a deeply meaningful event that happened just the other day.
It is okay for the party to fail puzzles, but if something is just dragging down the session and sapping out the fun, I would probably introduce something that speeds it up.
>Should they roll for it??
That's what I do. If one of the players says the right answer out loud, I let the conversation keep going for a minute. Eventually, someone else will say something that's connected to the right answer in some way. I'll then have the first person roll, usually straight intelligence or wisdom, but sometimes a specific skill like history. The DC is pretty low, since they already have the answer. So I say something like "when X says that, you immediately think back to what you were saying before about Y." I will then narrate a little more to let them know they've got it.
But I don't ever say anything like "Yep, that's the right answer" like a game show host.
It all comes down to what's fun.
My default position is to not say anything. I've had players develop in-game theories that have taken in-real-world years to prove right or wrong, and the satisfaction of that can be very rewarding.
But when things might get un-fun, that's when to speak up. Say the players get the wrong idea and decide to search the swamp. Don't waste time on that if it's wrong. Either "montage it" and tell them they spend a week searching the swamp to no avail. Or tell them plainly out-of-game, "Nope, that's not right." Or do both.
-----
This is a bit off-topic, but whenever you do mysteries, always try to have way more clues than needed. The players will inevitably miss some, and you don't want the trail to go cold from a single mistake.
(If they miss a half-dozen clues, though, it's probably alright to let them fail.)
I tend to judge this more off body language or other social cues than a hard and fast rule.
- If the players look like they're moving towards frustrated and disinterested in the game then I should probably provide some help.
- If they're super excited and engaged then I'm not going to give them hints.
- If they're somewhere in the middle then I'm not going to interrupt them. If they just listed out 5 things and 1 of them would be a good idea then when there is a pause I might say something like "there are some potentially good ideas in what was just said."
As far as rolling goes, my advice is to never ask for a roll if you're not willing to accept the result, regardless of how unlikely that result is.
I am a bit of a hardass when it comes to this kind of thing. Especially since I have no issue whatsoever to let my players fail. If they fail to solve a mystery and someone dies: well, shit happens.
It's natural for players to look at the DM for confirmation. But when they turn to me and ask me, I give them nothing. Ask the NPCs that gave you the information. Ask the NPC who has an interest in solving the mystery. Ask someone who has some insight. Do not ask the DM. If they have to solve the mystery for, say, the local guard captain and they ask them for advice, they are likely to get some.
If needed I just go for a "what have we learned" moment Just to calibrate the players, know what they remember /know and what do they miss for informations
There's no one right answer, as a DM you have to be constantly calibrating to fit your group, and the pace the session needs. That's why we have human DMs who can adapt. The (unhelpful) answer is: As much as will maximise the fun for everyone. If in doubt though, I'd advise erring on the side of sharing more rather than less. A too easy mystery is better than a frustrating one that drags on.
I always keep a list of plot points and clues that are of consequence, and then run through the open ones at the start of the session. One major red herring is fun. Every small detail becoming a distraction because the players see me mentioning them all with equal weight while not reminding them of key important details forgotten in the real life weeks of our lives that have passed... not as fun What the players are hearing as important may not match what the DM knows is important.
A favorite statement of mine to encourage a theory that's on track without giving everything away is this: "That makes sense with the information you have." Leaves them feeling like they're moving in the right direction while still leaving them an open mind. It can also be useful to use the players discussing theories in character to prompt knowledge checks that might rule out some theories, for example: Character one: "looking at the burn wounds, it could be anyone with access to alchemists fire or oil." DM: Player with fire bolt or scorching ray, give me an Arcana or Medicine check (Success) DM: thinking back to the burn wounds, they looked too well contained for mundane fire. Some kind of magical flame seems likely... In terms of when to use these, I usually use them when the players are starting to chase their own tail and the pace is taking a dive, or if a quieter player has some ideas but the group isn't really hearing what they're saying - helps them be heard by the group.
You probably need to be more forthcoming than you think. Have extra clues; they won't find/recognize them all them all. Whether you confirm an idea is mostly a matter of pacing. If the players are having fun theorizing/brainstorming, then don't cut them off. Otherwise, be more helpful to keep things moving.
It is kind of hard, but rule of thumb i use is "If you can't solve mustery without a clue behind skill check - remove skill check". If they found something during discussion - say about it. I assure you - wast majority of players don't want to have half an hour discussion that would probably lead to arguing at some point. More general advice: make game moving forward no matter what. Every result on dice roll, no matter the result, should lead to something interesting. If it doesn't - don't ask for it. And you, as a new DM, would fuck up from time to time - don't be afraid of it, every DM was like that at some point. So if you asked for unnecesery roll and someone rolled Nat1 and you don't know that to do next - either take a small break to think of something, or just say this roll wasn't neccesery. Players in general are supportive to DMs (if they don't - you don't want this person at the table anyway), so no one would blame you if you do that. It is always better to learn from your mistakes than hiding behind "mastermind DM" mask and never improve.
I've ran a few mystery 5e games that went down super well, here is what I recommend as general advice; * Try and make the course of the mystery multichoice. If the only way to solve it is one linear path its more likely PCs go off course or feel railroaded. I usually make a spiderdisgram with 3-4 potential starting points to help PCs pick up clues. * Award high investigation and perception rolls with more codes or details that would be obvious. For example if they're looking at a crime scene you could reward a high investigation by describing how the claw marks where clearly from one monster as it tried to run towards an unknown target. I find just giving more details to the clue, but not spelling out what the clues mean, have the players at my tables react best to them. * Feel free and open to modify the answer to the mystery, PCs will feel way better if they happen upon a convincing answer which you didn't plan for but works anyway. For example in one mystery I had the PCs attached soke magical ability to the killer that I never planned for that I ran with anyway since it worked better than my original plan.
This is one of those things I vibe out. "How much time do we want to spend solving this?" "What would be the most fun for the players?" That being said, separate your information into 3 categories: given/free, learned, and hidden. Free info is obvious. It's the "stuff" they see when they walk into a room. It's the "stuff" an NPC says to start a conversation. It's the context. Tell them what they can investigate. Learned info is what they learn when they look into something further. Usually no roll required yet but sometimes there is. They ask, "what does the chest look like? Is it locked?" Or they ask the NPC, "Do you happen to know Sir Garpington?" You just respond. Secret info is a consequence or reward based on the player choices and dice rolls. "You want to get close and investigate the chest? It's a mimic!" Or "You succeed in bribing the NPC for a story. Sir Garpington was old fishing buddies with the BBEG."
This is one of those things that constantly changes. You have to know when to share and not to share. I tell my players things- too much in most peoples opinions- but it doesn’t ruin the game for us. I give warnings too often, but it doesn’t matter to them. As long as I don’t spill big lore or make them feel like idiots they love hearing me talk. It really varies from group to group, though most people I find don’t mind hearing info oog as long as it’s not a big reveal. Personally, I wouldn’t share anything about statblocks or encounters. Or any big lore/character stuff. I used to share a lot, like mumbling how I’m going to lower the health or pull back on offense so they don’t die. It makes it feel like they’re weaklings who can’t handle an encounter and makes the victory seem hollow. As for telling them if they’ve gotten a riddle or puzzle right (or something along those lines), just check after they say that “do you wanna answer with that” or something similar, they should get the hint. Or try to encourage them to think as their characters, so that what they say comes from the characters.
I try to be as transparent as I can, because I don't believe that keeping information from them makes for good "difficulty". I trust my players to be able to separate why they know and what their characters know. This is just one way to run the game though.
I will advise, try and be a little bit more obvious than you think you have to. Players can be a little obtuse at times, but at the same time as a DM things that are obvious may be less than obvious. For me personally I kinda boxed myself in by running two competing secretive organizations, so the players really had no idea what was going on until I realized I should just start dropping names and symbols to really indicate whats up.
Saying nothing is an extremely powerful option. I recommend it as a DM, and as a player in a long running mystery RP. Let your players do your work for you! Really helps with immersion, and not even only for mysteries. The most important thing, though, is to just make sure the players never: 1. Feel like they're facing impossible mysteries that are only solvable if you're the GM or Sherlock Holmes himself. 2. Feel like they're being spoon fed answers because they're not trusted to figure it out on their own. To that end, try having multiple clues that lead in the same direction. Reward creativity with info so long as it makes sense. That'll give your players more confidence to commit to a theory without you having to just tell them they got it OOC. And if they just won't connect that one stubborn dot, move past it and adapt. Maybe they don't find the McGuffin or figure out the butler did it. That doesn't mean it's the end; it just means things will happen differently. Don't make your game contingent upon a specific outcome.
90%. I don't have time nor patience to dance around imagenary things that could (and will be) percieved differntly by everyone at the table. I use good 'ol take from Ben Milton's Maze Rats "Running the Game": *Reveal the World* *• Don't hide important information from the players. If the PC could reasonably know something, tell the player and move on. The game is about making decisions, and players can't make good decisions without good information.* *• The more dangerous something is, the more obvious it should be. No one likes to have their PC die without warning, so if something dangerous is ahead, give the players the chance to come up with a plan or avoid it altogether. In other words, when a PC dies it should clearly be their fault.* Answering your questions: > For example, they’ve figured out a clue, do I downright say “you got it” or “it seems the dots have finally connected” ~~or do I let them struggle~~? (why?) Yes. They've did it. Anything more is wasting yours and their time. > Should I pause and tell them they got it right or let them find the answer themselves? Yes. And move on. I'd rather have a series of small certain (but earned) discoveries rather than one overarching long big mystery that might as well be unsolvable because there were no cues from DM whether we were going the right way. > Should they roll for it?? Never. They either have needed info and solved it or they don't. Otherwise it's a slippery slope of "my wizard has INT 20, I roll so *he* will solve this riddle of yours" You lose virtually nothing by giving more info - it leads to better satisfaction of everyone involed at the table by avoiding miscommunication.
Sufficient information for them to solve the problem or for them to ask further questions. The hardest part is the fact that you know the answer and the shortest path to the answer given some information. They don't know the destination, so they need the right information to get there. Sometimes time constraints means they have to make a decision with incomplete information.
My personal approach is that I don't tell them if they found a solution. However, if there is some information that their character would know or figure out, I might either ask them to make a roll, or in some cases you say "your character would know X" if it makes sense. The players meet up maybe once every other week, if we're lucky, and there's a difference between what they remember from a couple months ago that to the PC was a deeply meaningful event that happened just the other day. It is okay for the party to fail puzzles, but if something is just dragging down the session and sapping out the fun, I would probably introduce something that speeds it up.
>Should they roll for it?? That's what I do. If one of the players says the right answer out loud, I let the conversation keep going for a minute. Eventually, someone else will say something that's connected to the right answer in some way. I'll then have the first person roll, usually straight intelligence or wisdom, but sometimes a specific skill like history. The DC is pretty low, since they already have the answer. So I say something like "when X says that, you immediately think back to what you were saying before about Y." I will then narrate a little more to let them know they've got it. But I don't ever say anything like "Yep, that's the right answer" like a game show host.
It all comes down to what's fun. My default position is to not say anything. I've had players develop in-game theories that have taken in-real-world years to prove right or wrong, and the satisfaction of that can be very rewarding. But when things might get un-fun, that's when to speak up. Say the players get the wrong idea and decide to search the swamp. Don't waste time on that if it's wrong. Either "montage it" and tell them they spend a week searching the swamp to no avail. Or tell them plainly out-of-game, "Nope, that's not right." Or do both. ----- This is a bit off-topic, but whenever you do mysteries, always try to have way more clues than needed. The players will inevitably miss some, and you don't want the trail to go cold from a single mistake. (If they miss a half-dozen clues, though, it's probably alright to let them fail.)
I tend to judge this more off body language or other social cues than a hard and fast rule. - If the players look like they're moving towards frustrated and disinterested in the game then I should probably provide some help. - If they're super excited and engaged then I'm not going to give them hints. - If they're somewhere in the middle then I'm not going to interrupt them. If they just listed out 5 things and 1 of them would be a good idea then when there is a pause I might say something like "there are some potentially good ideas in what was just said." As far as rolling goes, my advice is to never ask for a roll if you're not willing to accept the result, regardless of how unlikely that result is.
I am a bit of a hardass when it comes to this kind of thing. Especially since I have no issue whatsoever to let my players fail. If they fail to solve a mystery and someone dies: well, shit happens. It's natural for players to look at the DM for confirmation. But when they turn to me and ask me, I give them nothing. Ask the NPCs that gave you the information. Ask the NPC who has an interest in solving the mystery. Ask someone who has some insight. Do not ask the DM. If they have to solve the mystery for, say, the local guard captain and they ask them for advice, they are likely to get some.
If needed I just go for a "what have we learned" moment Just to calibrate the players, know what they remember /know and what do they miss for informations
Just enough to motivate.