Mysteries in RPGs are hard; after all the players aren't Sherlock Holmes. The problem with mysteries is that there are *many* single points of failure—chokepoints where if the players **miss a single clue**, they **cannot solve the mystery** and the adventure comes **screeching to a halt**. Some frequently given GM advice is to never let a **crucial clue** to the mystery **depend on a skill check**. Alexander proposes a better solution: redundancy. For any conclusion you want the PCs to make, have [[Alexandrian--Three-Clue-Rule|at least 3 clues]] that each individually point them to it. Note that each of these clues should point the PCs to the conclusion **on their own**. The Players shouldn't need more than 1 clue to figure the conclusion out, though having more clues can still make it easier. ## Final Tips - Be permissive of people finding clues - Default to giving them information when they look for it, even if you didn't *plan* for there to be a clue there - Have Proactive Clues - Bash your PCs over the head with clues - If your PCs don't find a clue, have a clue find them - Red Herrings are overrated - Use these only with extreme caution - Also, players will create their own Red Herrings ## Related - This video is based on [[Alexandrian--Three-Clue-Rule]] - [Gumshoe](https://pelgranepress.com/2018/02/14/gumshoe/)%% [[Systems--Gumshoe|Gumshoe]] %% referenced [2.5 minutes into the video](https://youtu.be/FgVM8-vbhZA?t=149) is a system built around never letting a crucial clue depend on a skill check. ## Random Notes - This was the first youtube video Justin Alexander created