Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
I've been talking about the different uses of Take the Case within a story. There seems to be a need for some foreshadowing throughout to have it make sense. Some encounters won't be linked to the case at all.
Using Book 1 of Rise of the Runelords as an example of the Cases:
Spoiler:
The attack on Sandpoint presumably happens too fast to take 1 minute to open a case.
The goblin under the bed - A case is made, with the lone commando as the subject
The case of the missing bartender - A case is made for the glassworks, with Tsuto as the subject.
The case of the ancient ruins - A case is made for the catacombs of wrath, with the Quasit being the likely subject. The fight against the 3 armed goblin while interesting and fills in holes from the story Shalelu told them, doesn't interact with this case.
Thistletop is where it gets complicated. Is it "the case of the rogue goblin king" or "the case of spiteful daughter"? Does the Investigator need to separate the cases and prioritize the order--expecting to face off against the goblin tribe before finding Nualia. Nualia's henchmen while some check off stray details, others are just window dressing.
In the aftermath, the case of the fifty foot goblin becomes the case of the beast below. The shadows and giant crab have nothing to do with the case.
Can the investigator drop a case, start a new case, and then go back to the first case by taking 1 minute which each new case?
How does the investigator know that a subject is valid for the use of the Free Action of Study Suspect? If the investigator gets confused or falls for the red herring, doesn't the knowledge that it took an action instead of a free action tell the investigator something. Effectively, the investigator tries to put the pieces together and instead of everything clicking, is there "something not quite right" which distracts their mind taking the additional seconds between 1 Action and a Free Action?
Is that working as intended, that the character can rule a person out as the primary suspect based on how long it takes to Study them?
Edit: On a really extreme example, if a murder occurred, the investigator could have everyone from town come into a single room in Town Hall and 10 minutes later have spent an action to Study Suspect on everyone. The person it took a Free Action on is guilty, even if they don't have the rest of the details.
I've thought the same thing about the free action giving away who your subject is. I think that study should say something like, "If you know the target is the subject of your case, studying them is a free action."
You could also add, "You know if this person is the subject of your case" on a critical success to study.
