Presenting mysteries like Uketsu

I recently read Strange Buildings by Uketsu. I'm used to mystery stories that writers try to embed in a realistic setting. They'll add some drama around the mystery - a family traumatised by loss, an investigator losing everything because of their single-mindedness, mismatched partners struggling to work together. Uketsu instead seems to say, "If you're here for mystery, I'll give you 11 case files, each with multiple questions, and with overarching connections." The heightened reality where all of these questions exist is game-like. How could all these weird things be going on? Well, we're here to solve mysteries so we have a stack of them.

As a GM, I'm wondering what I can take away from this book. This is what I'm come up with.

1. The GM can also be a note taker.

2. List the unanswered questions. 

3. NPCs have their own theories. 

4. Have multiple mysteries. 

5. Leave room for a second interpretation.

The GM can also be a note taker

Uketsu includes diagrams in his mysteries. He repeats them and highlights different aspects. When the investigator is trying to work out the order of events, he often uses little boxes with flow diagrams like this:

At first glance this may seem like spoon feeding information to the reader, but I think of it more as an invitation to try to solve the puzzle. The mystery is tough enough without scattering the key elements across multiple paragraphs.

In an RPG, the facts are spread across conversation. Details are easily missed. Many players make notes and share them. Here I'm suggesting the GM writes or draws simple snippets at the table. For my group, I think that would quickly become a shared note, with the GM and players all adding to it.

The important information is shared in conversation, but so is a lot of flavour and chit chat. Writing a quick shared note highlights the importance of information. Character names. Where they were at certain times. Known grievances between them.

Solving the mystery isn't just collecting puzzle pieces. That's just step one and, crucially, if investigators don't get that right it's hard to progress. So why not make it collaborative?

List the unanswered questions

This is pretty basic, but - what is the mystery?

Uketsu states the questions clearly. If there's any ambiguity about it that will be a big stumbling block. I usually play RPGs where players choose their own goals. Stating the central questions of a mystery is more about saying "This is what is unknown here" rather than "This is your objective here".

NPCs have their own theories

Uketsu's supporting characters frequently have their own explanations for events, even as they ask an investigator for help. That seems very natural. If they're invested in the solution they should already be trying to work it out. It's also a secondary source of information: What biases and grudges are exposed by their theories?

Have multiple mysteries

Consider a party of PCs trying to cross a river and finding the ferryman murdered. If they're inclined to investigate, the obvious question is "Who killed the ferryman?" Taking a lesson from Uketsu, I'd try to add further questions:

"Why is there a sign next to the crossing STRICTLY NO CATS ON BOARD?"

"Who painted the exquisite portrait of the ferryman hanging in his cabin?"

"Why did he choose this place for the crossing, when there is a narrower section of the river nearby?"

These individual mysteries may be related to the murder or they may be independent. If related, they help break the challenge up into increments. If unrelated, they still may have some reward, or may just be red herrings. Misdirection may sound like a frustration in an RPG, but for investigative play the decision making is focused on which leads to pursue in what order. As long as the cul-de-sacs aren't too time-consuming, they allow for variation in outcomes. If all leads are successes, where are the meaningful choices?

The other benefit of adding additional questions is that there is no guarantee that the players will solve everything. If they solve part of a mystery, it gives them some sense of achievement.

Leave room for a second interpretation

This might be the trickiest lesson to pull into a game. I'm thinking here about investigations that are closed, the solution seeming to fit all the evidence, and then a small doubt is raised - Is there something more?

A classic version of this is where the killer is identified, but then it is revealed that the accused is covering for someone else, taking the fall on their behalf. It is sometimes a darker twist to the events, something even worse than was initially revealed. This extra element can be the icing on the cake of a mystery.

Running RPG mysteries, we tend to worry "Will the players be able to solve this?" Building a mystery with (at least) two valid solutions and expecting them to find both seems like a stretch. But I think a better question is not "Will they solve it?" but rather "Will this be a good experience in play?" which may be closely linked to "Will this feel fair?" It feels fair if you had all the required pieces, and you understand now how they fit together in a logical way. It feels unfair if clues were never revealed, or if the solution is overly elaborate such that you would never have arrived at it.

I think there's probably more RPG tips to glean from Strange Buildings than I have done here. (I haven't even discussed the maps, of which there are many.) But with Uketsu's work it seems fitting to leave some loose ends to follow.