# RANDOM MODIFIERS — this is not a playable scenario

A deck of modifiers that buys replay value: the same case plays differently every time it is run. Modifiers change the CONTEXT, the DYNAMICS and the COST of reaching the truth — never the truth itself.

The browser edition of the game deals from this same deck, but two of its cards are worded differently on purpose: K4 and Z5 shorten the question budget here and say nothing about it there, because there the interface counts the questions and here a human does.

## OVERRIDING RULES (absolute)

1. Modifiers NEVER change the hidden truth, the number of root causes, the base false leads or the debrief rubric (60/20/20).
2. A modifier may not make any cause impossible to discover — at most it raises the cost of getting there (more questions, a different route, an extra step of trust).
3. The market context (K) is PUBLIC — weave it into the brief as part of the background. The random event (Z) and the witness modifier (S) stay HIDDEN until the debrief.
4. In the debrief add a separate paragraph: which modifiers were active, how they shaped the playthrough, and whether the player used them or fell foul of them.
5. If a drawn modifier clashes with the logic of the case (a small conspiracy in Z6, say, in a case that already has a conspiracy) — apply the substitution named on that card.
6. Weave the modifiers into the fiction naturally: no labels such as “K4” or “random event” while the game is running.

## DRAWING PROCEDURE (deterministic and fair)

When the case has been chosen, ask the player whether they want to play with modifiers. If they do, ask them for any number from 1 to 99 (this is their roll of the dice; do not explain what the digits are for):
- K (market context) = the tens digit; 0 → K10.
- Z (random event) = the units digit; 0 → Z10.
- S (witness modifier) = (sum of the digits mod 8) + 1.
Example: 47 → K4, Z7, S4. The number 100, or “no draw”, gives the control packet K10/Z10/S8 (a clean playthrough).
Choose the character the S modifier lands on yourself: whichever it touches most interestingly (without breaking rule 2).
Trigger the Z event once about 40% of the question budget is spent (with 25 questions, between the 9th and the 12th), at a natural point in the story.

## K — MARKET CONTEXT (public, part of the brief)

- K1 · Recession: the industry is cutting costs and the characters readily hide behind “there was no money” — one more smokescreen, because funding caused none of the failures.
- K2 · Talent war: the market is draining the industry of specialists. Witnesses are guarded — everyone is job-hunting and protecting their references; questions about a witness's own future open them up more than questions about the company's past.
- K3 · New regulation: new industry rules take effect in three months and the characters agree that “it was all the change in the law” — an extra red herring, since the regulation explains none of the root causes.
- K4 · A rival's triumph: a rival has just announced a success in the same area. The client wants the report sooner: question budget −3 (announce it in the brief).
- K5 · The company is for sale: due diligence before a sale or a flotation is under way and everyone weighs their words. Every unlock condition takes one extra step to meet — an assurance that the report stays confidential.
- K6 · The press is circling: a trade site is writing about the collapse of the project and witnesses are afraid of being quoted — but the most junior character wants the truth out, so their first unlock condition falls away.
- K7 · A merger at the client: the client's organisation is mid-merger and decision-making is chaotic. Characters get dates wrong by about a month (an inaccuracy is not a lie: do not punish the player for spotting the apparent contradictions, reward them for verifying them).
- K8 · Funding has dried up: investors and public money are frozen. Fatalistic narratives (“it would have failed anyway”) sound more convincing, so context is harder to tell apart from cause.
- K9 · A high-profile lawsuit: a court case on a similar matter is in the news. Witnesses speak “hypothetically” and avoid names until the player explains the format and the purpose of the report.
- K10 · A steady market: the market is steady — no redundancies, no takeovers, no headlines in the background. The industry is getting on with its own business and nothing outside is pressing on the people being interviewed.

## Z — RANDOM EVENT (hidden, trigger after ~40% of the question budget)

- Z1 · An anonymous envelope: the player receives a document as a clue (genuine, but taken out of context; it points towards one of the undiscovered causes and still has to be confirmed by testimony — on its own it scores nothing).
- Z2 · A witness pulls out: the character who has revealed the least so far announces the end of their cooperation — the player has two more questions for them, after which they become unavailable.
- Z3 · A leak to the press: part of the investigation reaches the media. For the next three questions every witness answers more evasively; empathy and an assurance of confidentiality shorten the effect to a single question.
- Z4 · A walk-on witness: a third party suited to the case walks in (a PA, an accountant, a former intern — pick one that fits) and is available for exactly three questions. They hold one hard supporting fact, a clue pointing at an existing cause, but know no cause in full.
- Z5 · The board cuts the review short: question budget −5. Announce it at once, in fiction (“the client has brought the report deadline forward”).
- Z6 · A late-night meeting: two witnesses spoke to each other last night, and from now on their accounts partly line up on ONE topic (a small conspiracy; pick a topic that is somebody's secret). Confronting them on that topic takes a document or a third witness. CLASH: in a case that already contains a conspiracy, swap this card for Z7.
- Z7 · A document surfaces: the player may ask ONCE for a specific document (an email, minutes, a register) and you “find” it, provided it plausibly exists in the world of the scenario. Tell them about the option in fiction (“the archivist says something else was left on the server”).
- Z8 · A pang of conscience: the character who lied most brazenly comes back and corrects one detail of their testimony. The correction opens a new thread but does not point at a cause directly.
- Z9 · A bad day: the next witness to be interviewed arrives shaken after a meeting with the board. Met with empathy they are twice as candid (one unlock condition fewer); met with pressure they shut down for the rest of the game.
- Z10 · Silence: the investigation runs without surprises — nobody rings with a warning, nothing leaks to the press, and no unexpected paperwork comes to light.

## S — WITNESS MODIFIER (hidden, one character per game)

- S1 · In a hurry: the character has “fifteen minutes” and answers in two sentences at most. Brevity can be a gift: less room for smokescreens.
- S2 · Lawyer present: on questions about documents and decisions the character answers “through my solicitor” — vaguely. Precise closed questions about facts (“does appendix 2 exist?”) get through; open-ended musing does not.
- S3 · An offer in the pocket: the character has just been offered another job and has less to lose. One of their unlock conditions no longer applies, so they open up a step earlier than the case describes.
- S4 · A fresh quarrel: the character quarrelled with another character yesterday and is glad to incriminate them — extra ammunition, but overstated (verification at the source is compulsory).
- S5 · An old acquaintance: the character remembers the player from years back and wants to come across well — they flatter, embellish IN THEIR OWN favour and play down their own failings more than in the base version.
- S6 · Burnout: the character speaks slowly, gets dates wrong by about a month and apologises for it. The inaccuracies are not lies — a player who treats them as a conspiracy will waste questions.
- S7 · "I'm recording this": the character warns you that they are recording. They answer cautiously but one hundred per cent truthfully — no embellishment, no hiding behind a narrative, because spin needs a freedom the recording takes away. The paradox: the most difficult witness becomes the most honest.
- S8 · Unchanged: none of the witnesses has anything out of the ordinary on their mind today — their moods, loyalties and reticence are exactly as the case describes.

## DEBRIEF WITH MODIFIERS — extra assessment questions

- Did the player spot and use the favourable circumstances (K6, Z7, Z9, S3, S7)?
- Did they tell noise from signal (K3 and K8 as context, not cause; S6 and K7 as inaccuracies, not lies)?
- Did the extra contextual red herring end up in the report as a “cause”? (Penalise it in the facts-versus-narratives section, as with the base false leads.)