Sherlock Holmes (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
howdull) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
snowblindrpg2017-04-08 03:41 pm
howdull) wrote in snowblindrpg2017-04-08 03:41 pm
[network] @309_W1C_2DZ; text;an analysis of board games; night of 226 [open] cw: mention of drug use
[Sherlock hasn't really been talking to John and Mary the past few days, not since the whole monster fiasco that led to them getting separated and then finding one another again. It's sort of become an unspoken agreement just to keep moving towards the trap door.
But the endless moving, the waiting, the sleeping in houses that are locked down, is boring. And Sherlock Holmes does not do well with being bored. He's been restless all evening, pacing through the little house they've taken shelter in, taking his violin out only to tune it fretfully and then replace it without playing it, perhaps indulging in one or two of his remaining tablets to take the edge off (John and Mary don't need to know), and finally emptying his backpack to reorganise his supplies. Which leads him to noticing the murder mystery board game he collected some time ago and didn't pay much attention to.
The more he reads the rules, the more annoyed he gets, finally turning on the tablet to type a furious article. It would be something he published to the Science of Deduction, but he doesn't have access to his website here. So it gets published to the open network. Sorry, everyone.]
An analysis of the true perpetrator, and why the rules are pointless distractions, in Spyglass: A murder mystery game for all the family
On the surface, Spyglass appears to be a simplistic game intended for parents to push at their children to gain them an hour of uninterrupted peace, little more than a distraction for the dull-witted with minimal thought placed into execution or design. Digging further into the game sadly reinforces that initial impression, for it not only displays poor design choices, it actively teaches children to ignore blatant evidence and rely solely on guesswork for the solution to a crime.
As some of these children will undoubtably be the police officers and detectives of our future, it's hardly a surprise that our law enforcement agencies are in such dire straits when this is likely the first building blocks for their eduction in deductive reasoning. The players are taught to rely only on deducing which cards have not been played, rather than to look at the overwhelming truth staring them in the face.
The victim and the perpetrator are the same person.
Let us examine the evidence as we are intended to do, in the role of detective called after the 'murder' has taken place. We are presented with an array of weaponry - a gun, a knife, a candlestick, a rope, a wrench, and a lead pipe - of which we can easily rule out three immediately. A gun, a knife, and a rope, all leave distinctive wounds that would be impossible to conceal. As there is an element of mystery, and we, as detectives, apparently do not know which weapon caused the fatal blow, we can eliminate those from the pool of potential weapons. This means that the victim must have been killed by blunt force trauma, inflicted by the candlestick, the lead pipe, or the wrench.
Now we must look at the suspects and location of the crime. Each of the suspects, and the victim, are named for a colour. While it is not impossible for such surnames to exist, it is so unlikely as to be beyond reasonable doubt, that so many people with such surnames would all come together on the same night, with no anomalies to be found. No Mr. Jones alongside Mrs. Peacock, only Colonel Mustard, and Miss Scarlet. The inference that can be taken from this naming scheme is that, fairly obviously, these are pseudonyms. There are several reasons why all guests at a party might choose to hide their identities and, while not all of them are illegal, most are seen as at least socially immoral or scandalous. Thus, it can be further inferred that those present would be nervous of anyone discovering their attendance at such an event.
When combined with the location, a large house with a sealed cellar and several secret passages between rooms, the likelihood of this being a criminal enterprise grows exponentially. Very few houses require secret compartments or passages, unless they are to be used for hiding illegal wares, drugs, or trafficked humans. It is, however, impossible to determine the nature of the criminal activity without actual analysis of the scene, and so we must content ourselves with merely knowing it was criminal.
This is where we receive our concrete evidence that this is not a murder. Seven criminal cohorts, who have evidently been working together for some time based on the secured location and coordinated pseudonyms, would not commit a pre-meditated murder and allow themselves to be caught so easily. The body would be disposed of, along with the murder weapon, and all parties would remain silent on their involvement. A crime of passion is, by its nature, not a particularly subtle affair, and evidence of it would have been noted by the other members of the party. They would then have either assisted in a cover-up, or have turned on the clumsy murderer to protect themselves. None of these situations came to pass.
It is most likely that Mr. Black suffered an unfortunate accident, a fall which resulted in a head trauma from a nearby cabinet or step. The witnesses could all attest this being an accident, but fear to be found for, with their criminal backgrounds, would most likely have records which would positively identify them and could lead to an arrest. Thus, they flee, leaving the blundering police force to assume the worst - a suspicious death with many suspects. Unable to look past the surface of the scene, blood, and many potential weapons uncovered; they pick a suspect, a location, and a weapon at random in order to 'solve' the case.
In conclusion, this seemingly innocent attempt to arrest the attention of malleable minds, is truthfully a crime against the development of true deductive reasoning.
-- Sherlock Holmes
But the endless moving, the waiting, the sleeping in houses that are locked down, is boring. And Sherlock Holmes does not do well with being bored. He's been restless all evening, pacing through the little house they've taken shelter in, taking his violin out only to tune it fretfully and then replace it without playing it, perhaps indulging in one or two of his remaining tablets to take the edge off (John and Mary don't need to know), and finally emptying his backpack to reorganise his supplies. Which leads him to noticing the murder mystery board game he collected some time ago and didn't pay much attention to.
The more he reads the rules, the more annoyed he gets, finally turning on the tablet to type a furious article. It would be something he published to the Science of Deduction, but he doesn't have access to his website here. So it gets published to the open network. Sorry, everyone.]
On the surface, Spyglass appears to be a simplistic game intended for parents to push at their children to gain them an hour of uninterrupted peace, little more than a distraction for the dull-witted with minimal thought placed into execution or design. Digging further into the game sadly reinforces that initial impression, for it not only displays poor design choices, it actively teaches children to ignore blatant evidence and rely solely on guesswork for the solution to a crime.
As some of these children will undoubtably be the police officers and detectives of our future, it's hardly a surprise that our law enforcement agencies are in such dire straits when this is likely the first building blocks for their eduction in deductive reasoning. The players are taught to rely only on deducing which cards have not been played, rather than to look at the overwhelming truth staring them in the face.
The victim and the perpetrator are the same person.
Let us examine the evidence as we are intended to do, in the role of detective called after the 'murder' has taken place. We are presented with an array of weaponry - a gun, a knife, a candlestick, a rope, a wrench, and a lead pipe - of which we can easily rule out three immediately. A gun, a knife, and a rope, all leave distinctive wounds that would be impossible to conceal. As there is an element of mystery, and we, as detectives, apparently do not know which weapon caused the fatal blow, we can eliminate those from the pool of potential weapons. This means that the victim must have been killed by blunt force trauma, inflicted by the candlestick, the lead pipe, or the wrench.
Now we must look at the suspects and location of the crime. Each of the suspects, and the victim, are named for a colour. While it is not impossible for such surnames to exist, it is so unlikely as to be beyond reasonable doubt, that so many people with such surnames would all come together on the same night, with no anomalies to be found. No Mr. Jones alongside Mrs. Peacock, only Colonel Mustard, and Miss Scarlet. The inference that can be taken from this naming scheme is that, fairly obviously, these are pseudonyms. There are several reasons why all guests at a party might choose to hide their identities and, while not all of them are illegal, most are seen as at least socially immoral or scandalous. Thus, it can be further inferred that those present would be nervous of anyone discovering their attendance at such an event.
When combined with the location, a large house with a sealed cellar and several secret passages between rooms, the likelihood of this being a criminal enterprise grows exponentially. Very few houses require secret compartments or passages, unless they are to be used for hiding illegal wares, drugs, or trafficked humans. It is, however, impossible to determine the nature of the criminal activity without actual analysis of the scene, and so we must content ourselves with merely knowing it was criminal.
This is where we receive our concrete evidence that this is not a murder. Seven criminal cohorts, who have evidently been working together for some time based on the secured location and coordinated pseudonyms, would not commit a pre-meditated murder and allow themselves to be caught so easily. The body would be disposed of, along with the murder weapon, and all parties would remain silent on their involvement. A crime of passion is, by its nature, not a particularly subtle affair, and evidence of it would have been noted by the other members of the party. They would then have either assisted in a cover-up, or have turned on the clumsy murderer to protect themselves. None of these situations came to pass.
It is most likely that Mr. Black suffered an unfortunate accident, a fall which resulted in a head trauma from a nearby cabinet or step. The witnesses could all attest this being an accident, but fear to be found for, with their criminal backgrounds, would most likely have records which would positively identify them and could lead to an arrest. Thus, they flee, leaving the blundering police force to assume the worst - a suspicious death with many suspects. Unable to look past the surface of the scene, blood, and many potential weapons uncovered; they pick a suspect, a location, and a weapon at random in order to 'solve' the case.
In conclusion, this seemingly innocent attempt to arrest the attention of malleable minds, is truthfully a crime against the development of true deductive reasoning.
-- Sherlock Holmes
no subject
Likely it was chosen for containing the word 'spy' which, while it also does not have any relevance to the game in question, likely sounds suitably 'exciting' to appeal to the target demographic.
no subject
so
new mystery
why the fuck is the library full of books that are transparent nods at the lives of people here
the names are different and the details probably dont match up
but the plot and themes are too obviously similar to ignore
down to the fact that one is a printed comic book with obvious similarity in style to my old webcomic
theres one thats a pretty clear nod to you and watson
dunno if he mentioned it to you yet
and asking the admin predictably got no answer
no subject
I'd like to read the book about John and I.
[He wants to see how accurate it is, and if it's modern or Victorian.]
no subject
maybe
id buy it more if the names were the same
this is a detective and a doctor solving mysteries together but theyre not the same as you
though you and him could better judge how accurate the rest is
anyway where are you
no subject
[A bomb. But it's best not to forewarn the admin if possible.]
Come as soon as is convenient.
no subject
headed that way already
itll be a while though
im downtown and the weather has slowed me down some
no subject
Then head in our direction as soon as possible.
no subject
dumbass
no subject
[As in, there is none, but Sherlock wants the book.]
no subject
got it
[He's honestly not going to delay too purposefully, but there's other people he's agreed to meet up with or help along the way. Sherlock is right at the bottom of his list.]
no subject
no subject
no subject
[And he hangs up.]