Screw you, you pompous wannabe Territory Lord. You know what I mean.
Just re-word it!
Repeat this in Red.
āThe Detective is not the Culprit.ā
Of the murders?
I refuse
Finally, a murder mystery. Our little shark is growing up hehehehe. :3
Even though the detective was the first to walk in after their deaths, that doesnāt mean that the killer wasnāt in the room then! Just because there were no signs of struggle doesnāt mean they were not murdered! Simply put, one of them basically euthanized the other two and them killed himself!
Two killed themselves by hanging and electrocution respectively. The last one was shot by someone else who then left. No struggle required.
1 Like
Iām asking you this out of courtesy for your Fragments, Voyager.
I believe, or at least want to believe, you are not so much of an amateur that youād write a mystery where the Detective themselves are the culprit of the tale youāve woven.
Perhaps Iāve been mistaken to hold you to such a high standard.
1 Like
Do not blame him, he is only an apprentice witch after all. Maybe he will be good someday, but he has to learn from his mistakes.
Hey, there are some decent mysteries with the ādetectiveā as the culprit. Likeā¦ wait, I canāt name them without spoiling them now. Damn it. 
Not like itās likely to be impressive in something short like this.
Perhaps you were~
The gun was in very poor condition, and would need to be pressed up against someoneās head in order for the bullet to pierce someoneās skull.
Rewording blue:
One of the three KOed the other two, and then killed themselves. Then the killer came in and killed the other two with little hassle
Is that me interpreting it correct, @Wonderlander? Once you confirm this, Iāll counter it.
Yeah, letās go with that.
Well, I donāt really see an issue.
If they surprised him they could have pressed the gun up against his head no problem.
āThe three menā never harmed each other.
Wouldnāt the killer have to enter the room after the deaths of the first two for your theory to work?
Need I remind you of this tidbit from the narrative:
the detective that is the first to walk in through the door after their deaths.
Well, you never specified, so I went with that only going into effect after all three of them are dead.
Sorry for being unclear then. I hope you continue to enjoy the game after this brief setback.
The detective was the first to enter the room through the door after the first of āthe three menā died.
If the three men never harmed each other, does this include themselves?
Iāll assume it doesnāt. Also everything in the narrative is basically in red, none of it is deceptive, right?
Also does walking in through the door count walking back out of it? Iād guess not, but I want to make sure.
I need to revise this week so I might not post as much as I did last time.
Was going to post a blue about āThe detective was not surprised when he entered the crime sceneā but I realised blues have to counter greens so nevermind
Welcome to the game brother, are you having fun living the high life of a child adopted into royalty?
It does not, they still could have harmed themselves, without harming each other.
No, it does not.
If you click on the part in the first post that says āThe Full Rulesā with an arrow, it will show you the full rules of our game.
@pictoshark There was a fourth man who was inside the building with them before any of the three murders occurred, he either sedated or otherwise waited for the men to be vulnerable, and killed one of the men through one of the specified means. He then left by the main door, as this is permitted as the detective is only the first one to enter the scene after the deaths began.
He killed all three of them without any signs of a struggle? Is that what you are asserting?