– “Abandon hope, all ye who enter here.”
This game is a sequel to the gameboard “IT IS IN OUR HOME”. Before playing this game, I ask you to read the first gameboard.
This game is open to everyone. You did not have to participate in the first gameboard, nor do you need to be familiar with the current standing theories regarding the first gameboard (although, they may help with this one).
This is, of course, a double-edged sword. Using theories from the first gameboard to justify any sort of reasoning here will not be allowed.
Welcome back. I apologize for the delay.
You are eager to get started, so I won’t waste time. The only thing I have to say is: my sincere apologies for any disastrous typos and general wonkiness of the narrative. I wrote this as quickly as I could. Any major issues I hope to fix along the way with the help of players.
The rules are the same as they’ve always been (with only a few noteworthy… well, notes, which have been placed in bold below.)
◈ The game will be played through a traditional red v blue, with a few minor adjustments.
◈ Firstly - I refuse any and all requests when it comes to repeating something in red. Meaning repetitions like ‘the culprit had to enter through X’ or anything of the sort is out of the question. I am more than happy to clarify things you might’ve found confusing within the narration and would like a clarification on. But the general rule of thumb is that you’re free to believe whatever you wish - as long as it’s believable and makes sense within the narrative.
◈ Secondly - I am not obligated to respond to all blues, should I find them to be insufficient or do not hit all the necessary points to formulate a complete explanation for what happened. Meaning shots in the dark like ‘the murder happened at X instead of Y’ or ‘the culprit used X to get into the room’, which don’t explain the entire thing and potentially run into problems when explaining other parts of the case aren’t sufficient enough. Simply put - no room for shots in the dark. A blue must be a solid theory. It doesn’t need to be perfect, just needs to answer the key mysteries of the case.
◈ Thirdly - when responding, I am not obligated to use red. I am also allowed to ask questions and use reasoning of my own to counter your theories. It’s generally more interesting to use what’s in the story against the players and save the red for the necessities. But we’ll see how this one plays out.
◈ The victory conditions are simple. Who is the culprit? (This, naturally, involves explaning how they did it, as well, given the circumstances.) I am fairly lenient when it comes to victories - as long as the basic concept is understood by the players, I will concede.
The gaurantees are exactly what you’ve come to expect:
◆ The culprit is the same person from the first gameboard.
◆ The culprit must be someone mentioned in the story.
◆ The culprit is the one who kills.
◆ There is only one culprit.
◆ The culprit is a human.
◆ There are no accomplices.
◆ An accomplice is someone who willingly and knowingly assists the culprit in the execution of their plans.
◆ The POV can be trusted. The perspective character, of course, can be decieved. But there are no deceptions such as glaring omissions like “the ceiling was secretly not there”. Given that this story features multiple perspectives, after recalling your approach on ‘Pact’, I will add further clarification. A reliable character can perform no secret actions during their narrative. Any and all passages of time will be noted, and should any key events have occurred during that time, they will be noted as well. Thus, the character can’t go off and perform a convenient murder between paragraphs. I won’t have it.
◆ For the purposes of the game, no master keys exist.
◆ No supernatural occurrences exist on the island, and no supernatural occurences were used to commit any of the murders.
Without further ado:
You can download the gameboard here [pdf]: IT WALKS IN OUR HOME
I’m sure we’ll have a lot of fun together.