Proposed House Rule: Scrolls for Everybody

File this one under "completely untested".

One notion I quite like is the idea that spell scrolls could be usable by all characters, not just those of the appropriate classes. So if the party has no Druid but finds a scroll of barkskin, it's not totally useless to them.

The idea here is therefore that any character who does not have the appropriate spell on their class list would be able to use the scroll to cast the spell. I should note that they are only able to use it to cast the spell, and not for other uses - the Wizard couldn't use a scroll to add Cleric spells to his spellbook.

As per the rules in the DMG for using a spell scroll, a character who is not normally be able to use a scroll would still need to make an ability check to do so. The DC would be 10 + the spell's level. The ability required for the check depends on the class that would use the spell, as shown in the table below; if the spell appears on multiple spell lists, the player may choose which ability to check.

Class	Ability
Bard, Paladin, Sorcerer, Warlock	Cha
Cleric, Druid, Ranger	Wis
Wizard	Int

On a success, the spell is cast normally. On a failure, the spell scroll is erased, but has no other effect. On a roll of a natural 1, a mishap may optionally occur (at the DM's discretion).

Additionally, because the character using the spell scroll is not proficient in the spells being used, the spell uses a lower save DC and attack roll modifier, as shown in the table below:

Spell Level	Spell DC	Attack Bonus
Cantrip, 1st, 2nd	11	+3
3rd, 4th	12	+4
5th, 6th	13	+5
7th, 8th	14	+6
9th	15	+7

How To: A Murder Mystery

For the past couple of weeks I have been noodling around a how-to process for creating a murder mystery adventure for D&D. I'm not going to bother with any great intro here: you want to create a murder mystery adventure, so here's a step by step guide:

Step One: Review PC Abilities

The very first thing to do is to review the PC abilities, or potential abilities. Ideally, you're going to want these to be useful but not immediately conclusive - if the PCs cast detect thoughts then they need to get something from it, but you don't really want it to immediately shine a "He Did It!" light on the villain.

This step is obviously easier when dealing with a specific set of PCs than a general set, but the process is much the same: go read up on the various spells and powers that might be accessed at the appropriate level, with particular focus on divination and enchantment spells and powers. This should be done first, as it will inform the various decisions made later.

Step Two: Start at the End

Now that you've grounded yourself in what the PCs are likely to do, you can build the mystery proper. And like with any good riddle, the thing to do is decide on the solution first and work backwards. So, who was your victim, who was your villain, and what happened when the latter killed the former?

There are three basic parts to this: means, motive, and opportunity:

The means are the way the villain killed his victim: how did he do it?

The motive is the reason: why did he do it? (Poirot is always sceptical of motive, and it is true that there's always something. However, when designing the adventure you probably need to know why.)

The opportunity is about timing: what allowed the villain to do it now? Or, when did he do it?

Once you've got those three, you can now work backwards through your investigation to get to the point where the PCs come in.

Step Three: Consider the "Dungeon"

Imagine for a moment a dungeon adventure: the PCs come into the entrance room, they then proceed from that room to the next, until they reach the BBEG and the adventure's end. A good dungeon will have multiple paths through, with options to shift from one path to another. A better dungeon will include various loops and twists. Ultimately, once you straighten out the map, you're likely to end up with something like this:

Now, instead of a dungeon, imagine that each room is a segment of the investigation (the PCs examne the body, the PCs question the doctor, etc), and each link between rooms is a clue pointing to another room.

And so you now have a "dungeon" where the PCs come in and they have various options for the investigation. Each of these then points to other avenues of investigation, and so on and so on, until the trail leads to the BBEG. And, ideally, you have multiple paths through the investigation, loops and twists, and so on.

The big difference here is that the PCs are considerably less constrained than in a dungeon, and may easily jump from one "room" to a completely unconnected one. But that's fine - the map here is used to verify that they can solve the thing, not to force a particular way of doing it.

Step Four: Build the Links

Now that you have a map, the next step is to determine which clues go where, and thus build the all-important links between the rooms. What is the clinching piece of information that identifes the ultimate killer, what points to where, and so on?

Here I advise bearing in mind the "three clue rule": for each conclusion you want the PCs to reach you'll need three clue - they'll miss one, misinterpret the second, and "get it" on the third. That's not an absolute rule, but extremely useful as a guideline.

Step Five: Populate the Challenges

The other thing to consider is that in most adventures the rooms have something in them to impede progress: monsters to fight, a trap to evade, and so on. The mystery should be no different - each time there should be something to do so that the whole thing remains engaging. There will be a mix here, including social challenges, sub-mysteries, and indeed combat, but they definitely need to be there!

And that, essentially, is that.

There is of course, more to consider when building the adventure:

• Don't make it too difficult! While Poirot and Holmes are able to put the whole thing together based on a couple of tiny details, they are only able to do so because the writer has control over exactly what information they have and how they interpret it. Your PCs don't have this advantage, so they'll need more. Pitching the difficulty is tricky, especially at first, but the players will enjoy a too-easy mystery a lot more than a too-difficult one.
• Include sub-mysteries. A classic blunder in D&D mysteries is to have a cast of helpful good-aligned characters and then one evil-aligned villain. This makes it really easy to find the bad guy: even if detect evil doesn't do it, all the players have to do is look for the one guy with something to hide. But in a good mystery everyone has something to hide, and many of these sub-mysteries will come out as a result.
• Don't forget the action. It is easy to build a mystery with a lovely intricate set of clues for the PCs to follow, let them go, and watch them puzzle it all out... and to forget to include any combat and so miss out on arguably the most important pillar of the game. Be sure to include some exciting action scenes: combat, chases, and the like, for the PCs to enjoy!
• Remember that you're trying to build a solvable crime, not a perfect one! When looking at how the murderer did the deed, consider also what went wrong: what did he forget to consider? What clues did he leave? What did the maid overhear? And how does the villain respond when some of this starts to come out? (This latter is especially useful, as it may well generate more clues for the PCs to follow up on - the hasty improvisations are never are carefully calculated!)

Good luck!

Group Backgrounds

Although the PHB has detailed rules on how to create a character, it pays very little attention to the need to build a party. This would take the form of advice on selecting different and complementary character classes, making sure all required skill sets are covered, and so on. Additionally, though, there could possibly be the concept of a "group background", which talks about how the party came together, the ties that bind them, and so on.

And, of course, the Inspiration system (or my side-dishes) make that fairly straightforward: just define the group background as an additional trait, and when the party works together especially well to reflect that grant all relevant members Inspiration. (It might also be worth introducing a Group Inspiration pool, allowing the group to bank a few Inspirations that any PC can then draw upon as needed.)

Way back in the  mists of time Dragon magazine published an article entitled "Keeping the Party Going" (issue 177). This gave several examples that might be useful as a starting point, although I do tend to think brewing up the relevant trait on a per-campaign basis may be better. Anyway, the examples were as follows:

• The deocentric party - all the characters follow a common deity.
• The town party - all the characters come from the same town, which is now threatened.
• The familial party - the characters are all related.
• The mercenary party - the characters are mercenaries who have been hired to do a job.
• The guild party - the characters are all members of the same guild (whether thieves or otherwise).
• The quest party - for whatever reason, the characters have all sworn to complete a common quest.
• The clan party - like the familial party, but a wider group.
• The chance-meeting party - because why not risk your life with random strangers?

An example of the trait associated with the party might be "You are all sworn to quest to recover the Holy Grail. When you work together and successfully uncover a clue to its location, you each gain Inspiration."

Loss of Momentum

Due to my holiday, I haven't worked on the new campaign for a little over a week. And, suddenly, I've lost all enthusiasm for the project. The momentum that had carried me this far has just gone.

Aaargh!

Still, not to worry - I'm reasonably sure that this is a blip and that things will improve shortly. If nothing else, I'll take a step away from the section I've been writing recently, and skip instead to Part Three. A whole new topic may well get things going again.

A Minor, but nice, Innovation

One of the things that I've done a couple of times, but that I see Critical Role do rather more often, is that when a PC strikes a "killing blow" the DM invites the player to describe how it is done. That doesn't have any rules impact, but it's a nice way to involve the players just a little bit more in the narrative of the game.

My inclination is to mostly limit this to the final opponent in a combat and/or the special 'boss' monster(s) (which may or may not be the same thing), but it's still a nice idea.

Putting Meat on the Bones

For both "The Mists of Lamordia" and "Quest for Memory", I started the campaign with the good intention of writing up what I wanted to do in a master document. This was supposed to be structured in several parts, with the crucibles neatly described, and so on and so forth. In both cases, I managed a handful of pages and then ran out of time, and once the campaign was actually going I never really got back to it.

With "Isles of Dread", I have now written more than I did for those two campaigns combined. I have part one fully fleshed out, and am proceeding rapidly into part two. (That said, I do need an editing pass on both - but hopefully not until I have at least completed part two.) The key thing that is missing, which I will add when time permits, is a map of the islands. And then some smaller maps of the key adventuring locales - I count four needed for the first two parts.

Given that I intend to run the campaign starting in September, and given that I'm well aware that I won't have time to work on it much after I start, the required rate is already quite punishing. But I'm feeling more confident of this campaign than either of the previous two, so that's a really good sign.

Fighting the 15-minute Adventuring Day: How the Rules Can Help

There's a perennial problem with D&D (especially since 3e) that the game rules tacitly encourage a particular style of play - go into an encounter at full strength, unload all your most powerful spells and powers, have the Cleric heal everyone, and then rest to regain full strength. The short form of this is the "15-minute Adventuring Day" (hereafter 15mAD).

There are a few problems with this style, from the point of view of realism, of characters behaving as they 'should', and so on. But for me the big one is balance, on two fronts:

• Some characters have a small number of very powerful limited-use powers, while others have a lot of weaker on-demand powers. The 15mAD strongly favours the former, who get to use all their big guns, and then impose the rest on the others, while the latter get to play second-fiddle and then serve as glorified bodyguards while the spellcasters rest.
• The game is designed assuming that characters will face multiple encounters between rests. The 15mAD removes this, meaning that encounters need to be rebalanced in a way that the game doesn't really support... and leaves DMs trying to do this all on their own.

Now, to a large extent this is a cultural issue - if the group agrees not to use the 15mAD, the problem goes away. But the problem with that is that it is quite clearly an optimal way to play, and so the PCs are agreeing to hinder themselves if they do this. And, of course, any agreement is liable to go out the window the moment things get really tough.

But there are things that the game could do to help this. A few suggestions:

• The first option is to have the 'adventuring clock' have stronger effects than at present - each time the PCs take a long rest, the enemy get some of the treasure away so that it can't be recovered, and they draft in more reinforcements. So taking the rest isn't as optimal as at present.
• Another is to make sure all characters have a mix of powers of the various types. Unfortunately, this was tried in 4e and found to be wanting, but at least part of that was presentational.
• But the major thing would be to build in some rules whereby there is strong incentive to go on for "one more encounter". That might take the form of increasing XP awards for each encounter after the first, or perhaps the use of an "escalation die" so that PCs become ever-more awesome as they go on. Or, indeed, characters could have some powers and abilities that only unlock after a certain number of encounters.

The basic principle there is that characters should face a dilemma: they can stop for a rest and regain X, or they can carry on and instead gain Y. And as long as both X and Y are desirable, that creates an interesting decision to be made. Which is very much a good thing.