Shoot Your Gun by 22-20s
<<===== CASE FILE =====>>
.
VICTIM PROFILE
Name: Maria Todd
Age: 21
Personality & Background: The victim comes from old money up-state. Her family is rich and conservative, regularly attends church. According to the statement of Lisa Daniels (so called ex-best friend), the church’s pastor is devout and Maria might be part of a group. She also may have attended few religious healings (Ms. Daniels states that the religious healings were more like an indoctrination event). During the time the victim and Ms. Daniels were close, presumably in high school, she was described as your average teenager, gets good grades and parties occasionally. Ms. Daniels describe her as responsible and a social butterfly. After their falling out, which was due to the victim trying to convert Ms. Daniels (Ms. Daniels also stated that Maria might have been brainwashed by the pastor), negative rumors started circulating regarding the victim. According to the statement of Lilith Adams (believe to be a regular in the Universities party scene), Maria was a party animal which bare a stark contrast to Ms. Daniels statement. One can say that responsible doesn’t describe Maria.
Note: The victim was taking up a bachelor’s degree in Communication Arts.
.
CRIME SCENE REPORT
The body was found in an alley between two campus buildings by a janitor named Herman Reese. According to the statement of Herman Reese, he seen or heard nothing prior to the discovery (requires further elaboration). The responding officers were Richard Harmsworth, badge #22205 – unit #6, and Sam Peters, badge #60465 – unit #6. They followed standard procedure when securing the scene (requires further elaboration). The alley way was wide enough for a vehicle to pass through but tight enough for a driver to prefer the longer way around. The body was found at the center of the alley way, near where the dumpster were located. No personal items were found within the vicinity of the body. There was a small pool of blood under the victim. The Universities staff were kind enough to identify the body as Maria Todd. The body was transported to Pathology before I arrived.
Forensics’ preliminary report states that the crime scene was relatively clean despite its location. No trace evidences and only the finger prints of the janitor and responding officers were found. There were however few noteworthy aspects. 1) The victim’s hair showed signs of bleaching and dying. The dying process seems to halt mid-way. 2) The victim was found clothed but stain and fold patterns suggest the murderer either change or clothed the victim post mortem. 3) Liver mortis suggests that the victim died within two days from the body was found (see Autopsy & Lab Report for further details). 4) There were no noteworthy marks in the victim’s body asides from a stab wound on her abdomen, just above the naval. According to the pathologies at the scene, the wound was deep enough to severe the spin nerves of the victim, causing paralyses and in addition, she would have bled more profusely than what the scene entails (see Autopsy & Lab Report for further details). This led me to concluded that the victim was murdered elsewhere and was ‘dumped’ in the alley way.
After examining the crime scene, I began canvasing the area. My partner, Tomias van der Westhuizen was running late and the area was too large for me to canvas alone so I requested assistance from the available officers at hand, Richard Harmsworth and Sam Peters. We gathered statements from multiple individuals and listed down possible persons of interest.
.
AUTOPSY & LAB REPORT
Cause of Death: Asphyxiation due to a tear on the diaphragm. Notes: No other visible injuries found on the victim’s body. Base on wound analyses, the victim was stab twice, first with a smaller blade and then a longer blade. The initial stab tear her diaphragm and severed the nerves on her spine, causing paralyses. She was then stab again post mortem on the same location.
Time of Death: Inconclusive, somewhere between 48 hours to when the body was found. State of the body Indicates that she was held in a hot and humid location prior to discovery.
Toxicology: Various Street and Prescription Drugs.
Other Observations: 1) The victim’s hair shows signs of bleaching and dying. The dying process is incomplete and only half of her hair was done. 2) No DNA evidence gathered under the victim’s finger nails or anywhere else on her body.
1. Mr Allen J
2. TheRider
3. Konica
4. PureThoughts
5. Liriia
6. Boboclown89
7. Silent Observer
8. Polyphemus
9. BlackCat
<<===== CHARACTERS =====>>
<<===== SETTING, THEME & TWISTS =====>>Liar, Liar is a Murder/Mystery themed RP. There is no predefined setting asides that it’s taking place within a University. The players have creative freedom, they are free to define their surroundings.
Unlike other RPs, this one has a few twist on how things will play out:
- The murderer is one of the players but none of them nor the GM will chose or be chosen for the role. The murderer will be chosen In-Character. For the sake of fair play, a player should treat their character(s) as innocent and suspect others, until otherwise specified by the GM, who will provide unbiased judgment regarding scenarios questioning a characters guilt.
- Each character is an unreliable narrator. The credibility of an unreliable narrator is in question hence one should always assume they’re not being completely honest. For the sake of consistency, a players should treat their character(s) as truthful (reliable) narrator and the others not, until otherwise specified by the GM, who will provide unbiased judgment regarding scenarios questioning a characters reliability.
- Characters won’t have backgrounds. Instead they’ll have statements pertaining to their relationship with the victim, their alibi and motive. For example: 1) I’m the best friend, 2) I was asleep, and 3) She was always nice to me. Two out of the three statements are lies. The players nor the GM know which statements are lies and like the identity of the murderer, it will be decided In-Character.
Relationship Statements are limited to members of the school (classmate, teacher, headmaster, etc.), family (mother, father, sister, brother, cousin, etc.), and friends/enemy (best friend, friend, worst enemy, enemy, rival, acquaintance, stranger (I don’t know her statements), etc.). Overlapping relationships are allowed (i.e. teacher and father) but will only be considered as one statement.
- The detective(s) role is reserved by the GM. The detective(s) are Non-Playable Character(s) (NPC). They can be referred and characterized by other players but they’re not allowed to partake in scenarios.
- A player is allowed to create up to three characters. Ideally, a player should only have one character. If a player decided to drop one or more of their characters, they’re required to inform the other players and the GM in the OOC. The GM will then deem these characters are irrelevant to the plot. The remaining character(s) of the player will incur plot penalties.
<<===== GAME FLOW =====>>The initial IC post will establish the setting. This is done by the GM. The RP is then divided into phases. Phase 1 is where the players introduce their characters, no turn order, one post per player until every player has introduce their character(s).
The following phases begins with a scenario created by a player. A scenario can range from re-enforcing their character’s innocence, question another character’s credibility, developing the plot, etc. Other players will then conform or oppose the scenario. A scenario will continue until it has matured (base on the judgment of the GM) and/or concluded (base on the activity of the players).
Scenarios should be considered non-canon until otherwise specified by the GM, who will provide unbiased judgment regarding the plausibility of the scenario. If deemed plausible, the scenario is canonized. Scenarios are judge by three criteria: Plot Development (Does the scenario progress the storyline?), Plausibility (Does the scenario make sense?), and Interconnections (Does the scenario conform to canon?).
The players take turns in creating a scenario, one scenario per phase, turn order is determined by the GM. Phases continue until the murderer is caught.
Initial IC - Establishes the setting, posted by the GM.
Phase 1 - Introduction of characters, concludes once every character is introduced.
Phase 2-X - Solving the murder mystery, concludes once the murderer is caught.
Phase X, 1st Post - A player introduces a scenario.
Phase X, 2nd-Xth Post - Development Stage. No post order, continues until maturity and/or conclusion.
Player-1 posted: Chara-1 attended the party. (Scenario)
Player-2 posted: Chara-2 attended the party and saw Chara-1. (Conform)
Player-3 posted: Chara-3 attended the party and didn’t saw Chara-1 (Oppose)
Player-4 posted: Chara-4 didn’t attended the party. (Neutral)
Player-5 posted: Chara-5 didn’t attended the party but saw Chara-1 in the library. (Oppose)
Player-6 posted: Chara-6 didn’t attended the party but saw Chara-1 in the library but not Chara-5. (Oppose (Chara-1); Oppose (Chara-2))
Player-7 posted: Chara-7 attended the party but arrived late, saw Chara-1 leave early. (Semi-Conform).
Player-8 posted: Chara-8 didn’t attend the party. (Neutral)
Player-9 posted: Chara-9 didn’t attended the party but didn’t saw Chara-1 in the library, saw Chara-5 in the library, didn’t saw Chara-6. (Neutral (Chara-1), Conform (Chara-5), Oppose (Chara-6))
GM canonized: Chara-1 attended the party but left early.
Note: Library statement wasn’t canonized due to it being unclear and still open for development.
To determining the identity of the murderer, a character must have amass enough suspicion with corresponding evidences. Suspicion is generated by scenarios questioning a characters credibility and were deemed canon. Determining a lie/liar requires far less. Scenarios that conflicts with a characters statement and/or their previous scenarios which were deemed canon are enough and will generates suspicion.
Hint: If you’ve notice, it’s easier to create scenarios during the early stages of the RP but as it goes on, it’s harder to create new storylines. If your character is considered the prime suspect, it’ll be harder for you to shift the suspicion on someone else.
Game Flow Aids:Mysteries - Mysteries are important plot points that require answers else a plot loophole occurs. They may be answered by the players. The GM will naturally fill in plot loopholes.
Suspicion and Plot Penalties – Suspicion is an abstract concept within the RPverse hence it can’t be track. If character generates suspicion they incur a plot penalty. Plot Penalties shouldn’t be considered as suspicion points since one can incur them multiple ways (conflicting scenarios). They function more like credibility trackers. If a character incurs more and more plot penalties, the least credible they become.
Plot Penalties will never prevent a player from posting. They can however force truths, change or add statements, provide character traits (such as boy/girlfriend of the victim, having an affair with the victim’s boy/girlfriend, hospitalized, etc.). Plot Penalties highly depend on the scenario from which it was generated/incur.
<<===== RULES & REGULATIONS =====>>1.
Fundamental Rules of the Guild will be observed and enforced.
2. Posting Standard: Casual – Proper grammar and structure is observe. Please keep your minimum post length between 1-2 paragraphs. More is encourage.
3. Content Standard: High Casual – For the RP to progress one or more must be present in a players post, characterization, plot-pushers, and/or plot-points. Idle conversation/interaction is discourage but won’t be moderated strictly (that’s for Advance RPs).
4. Fair Play and Observe Standards: No godmodding, no speedposting, avoid literally flaws such as Mary Sue/Gary Stu, incomplete characters a.k.a. “Dumb Jane/Joe”, Omnipotence, Meta-Gaming and the like. It’s unpleasant for other players and unbearable for most.