This system puts some creative pressure on the DM to narrate details into those results, but I am trying to keep it simple enough that a DM could potentially remember the whole rule off the top of his head, or note it in the margins of a DM screen. I may still not hit that mark, I suppose. PCs expecting an investigation will typically carry supplies around with them, for just such emergencies. It's tricky to come up with what some of these investigative supplies might be in a traditional D&D setting, but I'd suggest that superstition-based hedge magic items put an interesting spin on a game. I do think the story is more interesting with details inserted, rather than a pure handwave response, though I'm also the first to admit that as it gets late, my off-the-cuff creativity dissipates. Also, draining some of the spellcasters' slots is almost
as good as cash out of pocket, if there's likely to be more encounters before the next long rest, so letting the spellcasters solve this problem sometimes is fine.
If you're thinking, "Didn't he talk about this a long while back?" the answer is yes
. That implementation had its rocky parts
. The main thing I want to reiterate from those earlier posts is that any encounter that doesn't have a physically-present antagonist needs a trigger for the DM to increase the threat or raise the stakes. Without a clearer cognate of Dungeon World's 6- results, I've added a DM Turn after all players have acted, in which Bad Stuff is 50% likely to kick in. I haven't playtested this yet, but it's certainly possible that 50% of the time is too often or not often enough.
The system has a number of usable hooks to make Investigator Rogues better at dealing with it, though I haven't designed the archetype yet and I don't know how it might force me to change these rules. We'll see!