Hold on…
Suppose the lock were removed from the door. Would the house be considered “locked”? And would the lock be considered “unlocked”?
**The lock was removed from the door.**
You’re beating a dead horse here, I think…
I am being 100% serious here, Sapphire. I just had an argument with my brother over this so he is too.
Okay. Let’s regroup.
Sapphire was right, their question on the narrator being an accomplice was one of the only ones that has gotten a green truth response at this point. Are current green truths on the board are the beginning “How?” The “How did the killer enter the locked house with it’s sole key destroyed?” And the response to the theory that the narrator was the accomplice, where the question posed was a response to him helping the killer get into the house. “How did he do such a thing?”
All of these questions are surrounding how this mystery was done, not who or what, but how the killer got into the house. We know that Yerian’s theory is valid, that of the female serial killer and the wordplay within the narration so we can stick to something similiar to that for our current explanation of the killer herself, even though the gamemaster has stated that’s not the exact truth, because we have no questions on the board about the killer themself or how these people were killed. We just gotta figure out how they got into the house, because those are the only questions we need answering right now: they are the only questions on the board.
Maybe this is really obvious, I just needed to remember our current goal right now and that’s answering the green questions.
2 Likes
Well, okay. Let’s see how it will turn out…
“That he is.”
“For the purposes of this game such an action would count as entering while the house was locked. Either that or it would count as unlocking the door.”
Good idea. I guess I got excited to answer the whole mystery at once.
The narrator let the serial killer in before the house was locked and before the key was destroyed.
Alternatively, the door was not locked. The serial killer entered the house. Then the narrator locked the door.
Maybe, but why did he destroy the key? I think we need to focus on this one, too… The narrator had tears in his eyes after he destroyed the key, so maybe the narrator let the killer in by some way I’ve yet to explain, and the thing he knocked off the table was the key to his sister’s room, important to her because with it she could lock the door to her room and be safe from the killer. He has tears in his eyes because he has locked the house, destroyed the key and his sister has no way of escaping from the killer now.
I believe someone proposed something along these lines earlier and it was never countered. So I’m just making certain.
The killer was in a room of the house that the narrator did not consider a room, like a basement or an indoor porch, and was able to enter the house through these means.
As @thesorceress has pointed out, I think the best way to go about this is to answer the Sorcerer’s lime questions one at a time, not focusing on other aspects until he brings them up.
“Both of these theories require the doors to be locked or unlocked during the narrative.”
“I’ll respond to this once you make it a little more complete, as by your own admission it doesn’t quite cover everything yet.”
“So what, the killer entered the house while it was locked?”
Can we quickly define “during the narrative”? Because both of my blue assertions took place before the narrator tosses the newspaper in the recycling bin.
1 Like
“Alright, I’ll respond in a different way. After the narrator lashed out he says:”
“There are only two people in this house. Myself and my sister.”
“Here’s a lime, just for you! How does your theory explain this?”
Dead people aren’t counted.
2 Likes
he said “just for you”, vyse, way to be rude and butt in
1 Like
Hmm, the only way to access the house is through doors, yet a door is never locked or unlocked during the whole narrative… Once, in the beginning, the narrator said that a red light gathered at his lips and while this may be just the way of our Game Master to describe the Red Truth, what if it was the red light of a sniper? Thus, the killer doesn’t enter the house and kills both siblings from somewhere else, far from the house…
Ugh, I think this is too wild…
A sniper rifle that fires swords, you say?
“Could you tie this together a bit neater please? Expand on it just a little?”
“And as for the sister being killed by someone in the same room as them?”
It is never stated that the sister is killed by a bladed weapon, just that the killer wields one.
The serial killer dies in the house before the narrator says that “there are only two people in this house, myself and my sister.” If dead people are not counted in this red truth, then the killer could have been in the house at one point but not at the point of the red truth.
The internet is dead, long live the internet.
The serial killer gave both siblings fatal wounds and left the building before the start of the narrative. The sister does not count as being murdered until later because the narrator had the opportunity to still save her.
2 Likes