FIELD NOTES / KEEP YOUR SOURCES
The reading room / Detective skills
How to solve a murder mystery: a notebook, a timeline and fewer wild accusations
You do not need a photographic memory. You need a way to separate the evidence from the magnificent theory you invented before reading page two.
First, find out what you are trying to establish
Read the starting brief and final questions. Does the game ask only who committed the crime, or also how, why and when? Does it contain separate puzzles that must be completed before the accusation? Know the task before collecting a small mountain of notes.
This is guidance for fictional games, not real criminal investigations. Follow the game’s supplied rules and use its evidence. Do not assume it requires specialist knowledge or outside research unless the instructions say so.
Give your notebook three columns
| What the material says | Where it appears | What it establishes |
|---|---|---|
| A door was locked at 9. | A caretaker’s statement. | The caretaker claims it was locked; confirmation still needed. |
| A card was used at 9:04. | An access log. | The card was used; who held it may be uncertain. |
A statement is evidence that someone made a claim. It is not automatically proof that the claim is true. Equally, a machine record can need interpretation: a clock could be wrong, a card could be borrowed or the relevant door could be different.
Build a timeline with room for doubt
Record events in chronological order, including their sources. Use ranges when the evidence gives ranges. “Between nine and ten” should not quietly become “9:30” because your spreadsheet likes tidy cells.
Mark whether a time is directly recorded, estimated or reported by a character. Look for clock offsets and travel times only when the game supplies them. Leave gaps visible rather than filling them with guesses.
Keep the maths attached to its source
If a clock is stated to be five minutes fast, a displayed 21:20 corresponds to 21:15. Write both times and the correction. Future you will appreciate it. Future you is already suspicious of present you.
Try a small deduction
Fictional practice / The missing ledger
A locked archive’s access log records a card opening the door at 19:12. A note says the access clock is four minutes fast. Mara says nobody entered between 19:05 and 19:10. The camera is out of order.
What can we safely conclude?
The recorded opening corresponds to 19:08, so the log conflicts with Mara’s claim. It does not establish who used the card or who removed the ledger. Mara may be mistaken or lying; the supplied facts do not settle which.
The discipline is stopping at the strongest supported conclusion. A contradiction is a lead. It is not permission to declare victory and order a commemorative mug.
Try to disprove your favourite theory
Write the best case against your suspect, then look for a clue that would make it impossible. Does the method fit the physical evidence? Could the person reach the location? Does the timing depend on an assumption you never checked?
Means, motive and opportunity can help organise a theory, but they are not a substitute for the game’s decisive evidence. Someone can dislike a victim, own a similar object and still be innocent. Stories often make a suspicious detail easy to notice.
Ask another player to defend a different explanation. Agreeing loudly is enjoyable; checking each other’s reasoning is more useful.
Make your final answer an explanation
Before opening the solution, write a short account of what happened and cite the clues supporting it. Separate the established sequence from details that remain uncertain. If the instructions require a code, location or object, include it explicitly.
When you read the reveal, compare the reasoning rather than just the suspect’s name. Finding a clue you misunderstood is part of learning the game’s language. If you are stuck before that point, use our reset method instead of rereading everything in mounting irritation.
For the practical side of playing with another person, see two-player investigation. A good notebook should help both of you, not become one person’s private government department.
A few useful answers
Should I research real forensics?
Usually start with the evidence and rules provided by the game. Outside research is appropriate only when the game explicitly asks for it.
Does a contradiction prove someone is guilty?
No. It may show that a claim is wrong or incomplete. The remaining evidence must connect the person to the fictional crime.