Week 6 Studio: Clue architecture

Tagging your scene map against two clue taxonomies side by side, and finding the nodes with no redundant path.

29 March 2027

This studio applies two different ways of categorising the same clue web — by what it does for the player (guiding them to the next scene, or revealing what the truth actually means) and how it’s delivered (literature, a conversation, or physical trace), alongside a second lens built around redundancy (core, supporting, and advantage clues). Neither model is “more correct” — this week is about using both on your own draft and seeing what each one catches that the other doesn’t.

Before the session#

Bring your scene map from week 5. You’ll be marking it up directly, so leave room on the page (or a column, if it’s a spreadsheet).

In the session#

Tag every clue in every scene against both taxonomies, then check delivery against three practical rules:

• Literature clues (documents, records, a diary page) are close to guaranteed finds — a character with a phone or a library card will get them eventually. Put your broadest, most load-bearing information here, not your most interesting reveal.
• Social clues should never be hard-locked to one NPC. Write down which characters could plausibly give a piece of information, not “only Professor X knows this” — players who never talk to Professor X shouldn’t lose the clue entirely.
• Trace clues (a footprint, a smell, a scratch mark) are your best tool for making a Mythos threat felt without staging a direct encounter — useful anywhere you want dread without a fight scene.

Then check redundancy specifically: for each node that’s load-bearing (removing it would break the whole chain), is there a second way to reach the same information? If not, that’s this week’s homework.

Afterwards#

Fix any node that has exactly one path to a critical piece of information. Weeks 7 and 8 build puzzles and checks on top of this map, so a gap here becomes a real stuck point at the table later.