A little nugget of anti-mystery [GAME 4] [SOLVED]

Gameboards
#141

Once the cruise finishes, A, B, C, D, E and F all still have their jobs at the company and their employment status did not change at any point during the cruise.

Ah, I believe I owe all of you a rope. Hmmmm…

There is a very simple red I could give you that would stop all of you from wasting your time right now and get back to the point.

How’s that?

With that I believe that all of you can make the progress I desire. I will post the actual red I’m talking about some time later if that one doesn’t prompt the level of progress I expect it to.

#142

I want to be technical and say that this only counters their blue if the culprit is an employee, which isn’t specified.
Of course, no matter who else is specified as the culprit, you’d run into problems, so…

#143

The fact that a red to guide us to the right path exists is no surprise - one could say that about any mystery where the readers aren’t closing in on the truth yet. What seems more relevant about that red is the claim that all of us are wasting our time, and none of us are dealing with “the point”.

Disregarding my merry escapades with Mystery Assassin X, the focus of our theorycrafting seems to have been trying to find a way for A, B, C, D, E or F to circle around the reds that have been given in order to reach the leg of the victim with a knife. The victory condition of this game is to answer the leaf questions, so at the surface it’d seem like we’re moving towards that goal. However, it could be that our approach is completely wrong. @pictoshark explained that this game is anti-mystery - we begin with no information and we’re meant to dig for it by engaging with the gamemaster. Depending on how we play our cards, we might never find the information that we require to find the truth.

So, perhaps this is the purpose of @pictoshark’s red. We should not be trying to weave our way around the reds that already exist - we should be trying to get more information about the case. Presenting new theories involving the previous reds does technically give us new information, but its scope is limited by where we focus our theories. If we’re unaware of some critical fact that completely changes everything, we’re bound to run around in circles, never finding anything to latch onto.

…I’ll leave figuring out exactly how to accomplish broadening our horizons to the rest of you. It’s almost 1:00 in here, and it’s time for me to retire for the day. Perhaps tomorrow will bring a fresh outlook into this gameboard.

#144

The Victim (lets call him Z for ease, I suppose) boarded the ship with fellow employees A, B, C, D, E and F on the first day of the cruise.

At some point during the day, Z was either intentionally or accidentally responsible for a incident which critically injured one of the other six, potentially even to the point of a coma. The narrative and truth to this point would not conflict the idea that one of the six of A-F were unable to act during this entire story thus far.

It was after this incident that Z lost his job and was no longer part of the company. However, obviously, he can’t just up and leave the boat.

Someone among the remaining five believed that Z had not paid enough of a punishment, this person maybe being very attached to the injured employee. They decided to enact the events of Pictoshark’s given scenario.

Z of course knew immediately that he was stabbed, however he either realized on his own or was told by the culprit of the intent behind the attack, and believed he needed to pay his dues. This is why he neglected to call for first aid until the morning.

I present this scenario as an answer for Why did the victim not alert anyone of the wound till the morning?

At present I am not attempting to answer how the attack was carried out and therefore have no need to explain how the culprit entered the room.

#145

Okay, but who?

#146

¯_(ツ)_/¯

who knows, that’s just the Why

#147

Great work.

I’ll make a blue of my own, a little blue about your blue if you don’'t mind.

Here’s my navy theory:

That theory suggests one of the employees is the one who stabbed him. I believe that no matter who you pick from that set of people, you won’t be able to make your theory work.

By my authority as the gamemaster I demand you answer this question.

Are you saying that one of the 6 other employees is the culprit?

#148

You have all but denied that the stabbing was self-harm.

As the victim is confirmed to be of a single personality, this truth can be used definitively as proof of that.

You have also denied the staff angle;

And it can not be an outsider, because;

Therefore, only the other six employees remain as potential suspects for the position of the culprit.

#149

Hell, you even flat out said

to definitively remove the self-harm theory.

#150

Kuhuhuhuhuhuhu… How…

Narrow-minded

I was going to have Rest dance this dance but he’s not available. I guess I can tango with you.

The human side itself has all but admitted defeat on attempting to push things onto the six employees[quote=“midsummer, post:128, topic:1102”]
It has been stated that A never went in the victim’s room, the victim was stabbed in his room, and the victim was stabbed by someone in the same room as him.

B has never possessed even temporarily the kind of knife that the victim was stabbed with, and the person who stabbed the victim was holding the knife.

C went to sleep before the stabbing happened and only woke up after it had occurred. He did not sleepwalk.

D has the same reds protecting him as A.

E has the same reds protecting him as C.

F has the same reds protecting him as B.
[/quote]

Yet still you fight. Still you argue along these lines. Why? Do you have anything but bravado to back you?

Give me an idea as to how. How could any of these six have committed the crime?

If you can’t do that then perhaps you should look elsewhere for the truth.

#151

Can you please confirm in Red that Z is sound of mind and that the written scenario is a real event that occurred.

#152

Hehe. Sure!

The Victim (Z) is sound of mind and that the written scenario is a real event that occurred. Everything within it is how he knows things, he cannot lie in it, although he can be tricked.

And he is completely correct with every single detail directly related to the incident.

Is that cool?

That means he’s right about being stabbed in the night, and about when he alerted first aid and he’s right about him surviving.

#153

One of the Boat Staff was fired before the incident, and is the culprit. This fulfills all conditions that the culprit was not part of the staff but can be counted among the people who boarded the ship on the first day, as he is not an extra person but someone already accounted for.

#154

I don’t even need to tackle this myself! Past me will do it instead.

The culprit has never been employed as a member of staff on the ship.

#155

Once again.
No Dine.

In other words it is starvation.

#Starve for your “fairness”, and then curl up and die.

@Restkastel! Bring out the full rope they were promised. You can still use a rescue rope to hang someone after all.

#156

#The six employees are not the culprit.

#157

Holy fuck what the grammar. This kind of kills my cool moment but I seriously need to rewrite this.

In this entire gameboard, no-one has set foot on the boat who was not on the boat as it set off from the harbor on the first day of this cruise.

#158

Okay so

and

Keyword is at. Picto has tried to account for the entire population of the ship as “the staff” and “the seven employees”, but you can maybe get around this with this idea:

There is an eight unknown person on the cruise ship, known as Person X! They were on the boat when it set sail for this cruise. The problem with midsummer’s theory was trying to place them onboard the ship at a different time either before or after the ship left port. However, this is the truth!

Person X boarded the ship with the seven employees, A-F and Victim Z, and the Boat Staff on the first day of this cruise. For reasons unknown, he was not present onboard the ship at 24:00 on the first day, and therefore Picto has been able to conceal his existence behind only ever counting the boat’s population at exactly this time. Afterwards, he returned to the ship and committed the crime. Person X is the culprit!

#159

Hoho… a return to @midsummer’s “assassin” theory…?

And you even called him Person X. How… ANTI-MYSTERY!

I like it.

Very well then Crimson.

You may have explained how he supposedly evaded my count so I’ll tackle this one point at a time. It would be best to give you false hope before the tide rolls in and destroys this pathetic sandcastle of a theory you’ve put together.

How did this “X” get on the ship?

#160

This is a company cruise, so I assume you have an issue with a “random outsider” being on the ship at the same time.

Simple.

X is not an employee, of course, because he is the CEO of the Design Company, come to relax with his best men.

There’s surely no issue with their boss being able to come with them, so it’s easy for him to board the ship at the start of the journey.