SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE CASE OF THE DEAD DUKE

This is the Matrix Game scenario that I have run the most. I first ran it in 1997 and I officially wrote it up in 2000. I’ve had other people run it at Gen Con so I know it works without my presence (and with minimal GM training).

Anyway – I trotted the old war horse out again this weekend. The “Hated Rival of the Surry Shore” group came down to the White Elephant (Terri’s name for our old farm house) for a game. We had seven players, three men and four women. About half of the players had played a Matrix Game before. Here is a run down of the players.

Terri/Floozy the Barmaid: My wife, who has played Engle Matrix Games since the 1980’s. She is a puppeteer and is very good at thinking off the cuff.

Rose/Madam Pokipsie: One of Terri’s friends who has played before but not to many times.

Myself/Jenny the Maid: The author – so naturally I don’t do well in my games. I feel it is a mark of a good game that knowledge of the rules does not automatically lead to victory.

Nate/Bob the Butcher: My brother. He has seen Matrix Games but not really played. He has pretty bad arthritis so pain interferes with him enjoying prolonged games.

Kathy/Constable Smith: Nate’s significant other. She has seen Matrix Games played before but not played herself.

Bill/Sherlock Holmes: A published Game author (Cthulhu Gaslight, So you want to be a Rock’n Roll Star?) who played once before.

Bill’s Wife/Regina the Barmaid: Who I don’t think does much gaming.

The Hated Rivals group is a Sherlock Holmes society so everyone was up on the genre.

OVERVIEW

We played The Case of the Dead Duke. This game opens with a description of Duke Richard being killed by poison. Sherlock Holmes is called in. The players chose a character to champion in the game from a list of twenty characters. In this case the players opted for the lower class folks. Players place their characters on a map of London (with key location names printed on the map.) Most people started near Hitch’s Pub (which is where I – acting as referee – said it was at the start of the game.)

Down one side of the map is a “plot track” that describes what sequence of events needs to happen for a mystery story to be told. That being – A body it found – Find clues – Clues show who had means motive and opportunity to do the crime – Arrest a suspect or do a man hunt – Reconsider if you are right – Hold a trial – and Epilog.

This was played with Standard Engle Matrix Game rules so we went around the room having each player say what they want to have happen next in the game. The referee (me) rules on how likely it is to happen (how plausible it sounds) which sets what the player has to roll for it to happen. Players roll and it either happens or it doesn’t. The referee can add in a few additional bits as needed to add drama (allowing counter-arguments, conflict arguments, trouble arguments, and trials). When I made arguments I picked another player to be my referee. This trains players to run their own game in the future.

THE FLOW OF PLAY AND PLAYER REACTIONS

Holmes started us off by saying where the Duke’s body was in the pub (as it turned out, a bedroom). The constable argued to find a vile of poison in the fire place of the room. I made Jenny the Maid way over react when she heard of the death. When play came to Bill’s wife, she passed. This kind of game just didn’t appeal to her. That happens. Madam Pokipsie had a vision. Terri had Floozy come and black mail her sister (Jenny) to keep a secret buried. Finally Nate made the Butcher get up and start drinking.

I won’t write a blow by blow account of play. Instead I will look at how players played and what their motives seemed to be.

Holmes and the Constable went after straight forward clues. They followed up on leads and did most of the work of building the case. I think the game for them was about solving the case.

I made clues that immediately implicated Regina the Barmaid. I did this in part to include Bill’s wife in the game and also because I think games are most fun when suspicion falls on one of the players. This is a dangerous way to play because often suspicion swings back to your character – so you can end up on trial yourself!

Regina professed her innocence. I think all her arguments did this. In the long haul, this worked out – but not before I managed to get her arrested by Inspector Le Strad.

Madam Pokipsie imposed herself into the investigation with her psychic visions. She started the ball to wrecking my framing of Regina.

Nate/Butcher continued his drinking until he seized on the wine bottle from the Duke’s room. As it turned out it was the source of the poison. This self destruction made for a wonderful scene that was important in the story that then allowed Nate to go lie down.

Terri/Floozy made very independent arguments which established that there was a sexual intrigue going on with the Gentlemen Characters. Though it didn’t immediately tie into the story in the long run it established what the motive for the crime was. She gleefully pointed suspicion my way. Thank you dear wife! Of course this was playing the way I was so it risked suspicion coming back on her.

As it turned out it was easier for me to establish a good alibi than for Floozy so indeed suspicion did zero in on Floozy. Regina was freed and Floozy put on trial.

THE TRIAL

When a player argued for the trial to begin we had to decide who would be the prosecutor, and who would defend. All the other players would be the jury. Bill/Holmes became the DA. Terri could have been her own lawyer but said she thought the jury was fixed. Since I would be on the jury (and was obviously partisan – she tried to frame me after all) she was probably right. I step up and offered to represent her. She accepted and we went into the kitchen to discuss strategy. We looked over the evidence that existed. They had to show means motive and opportunity. They had all of those things covered. I had to create reasonable doubt. They showed that she had means – she was the one in charge of the rat poison. I countered – it was behind the bar, anyone could have gotten to it. They showed how her motive was jealousy (part of the Gentlemen’s intrigue) I countered that Madam Pokipsie had motive – the Duke hated foreigners. (Weak I know but it was the best I could come up with.) They showed that Floozy was at the bar when the crime occurred. I fabricated an alibi in the form of a certain Gentleman. I also pointed out that the Duke was found dead in Regina’s room, that the person taking the wine up was Regina, that in fact the police had arrested Regina for the crime. The jury retired to the kitchen to deliberate. They decided that the strength of the argument “She’s guilty!” was average. Bill rolled a six-sided die. He needed to roll four to six. He rolled a five so Floozy was convicted.

The jury later said they were unconvinced by most of my case, but that the poison being so easily available to all was what made the case only average.

The game lasted around three hours.

ANALYSIS

On the surface we were all playing the same game – find the murderer. Below the surface we were playing very different games. Bill and Kathy were on the surface – following leads. Nate was playing a short game – make a splash and take a rest. Terri and I were playing below the surface. We were trying to control who would be convicted – and trying to direct it at player characters (like one another) rather than allowing it to be an NPC. Rose straddled the gap between the surface and us below.

On the surface the game was about solving a simple problem. Following the plot track would lead to a conclusion and a solid story.

Below the surface the game was about controlling the fate of other players. We were active intriguers willing to risk all to gain the upper hand and “win” by dominating the game. I find this play more fun because I WILL be in the middle of the action even if it means I go down in the process.

Nate’s play was the wild card. He basically self destructed his character. I think he was playing a shorter game because he knew that he was not up for a full game. His arguments were impulsive and fun and got him out of the game while still accomplishing something.

Bill’s wife’s game was to not make arguments. When trapped she made the “I’m innocent” argument. Since she was the first suspect, and the plot track specifically asks the players to question if they are right, she was likely to escape. I put her in this situation but I would also have helped her out of it as the game progressed. I wanted to engage her in the game but not force her to play. I think it worked. She did not look bored and was a good jury member.

The game started off slow. The players were getting used to making arguments. As the clues pointed toward Regina the energy picked up. When Floozy’s intrigue first pointed at me and then swung back on her, the energy moved towards a climax. The trial was that climax. Following the conviction we mutually decided that Floozy would likely be spirited out of the country by certain Gentlemen.

EPILOG

The game did what I have come to rely on. It delivered a solid game, concluded in one session that told a whole story. It did not come out as previous games had – and I’ve played this scenario a lot so that is saying something. I enjoyed how it allowed different creative agendas to exist in the same game. Even player self destruction and non-participation did not harm it.

It is a robust little game but as with all Matrix Games before it, at first people don’t know what to do. Even now players don’t know what to do with too much freedom.

Chris Engle