Another option is to go round-robin, where you can only bring up 1 Trait/Skill per “round”, and you can’t close during the first round or two, but then again, if you’re the first person on the third round, and you close after bringing up an issue, you’re ahead by one.

Perhaps add some mechanic which makes it cost you to close a scene.

But eventually, someone has to close it, which can bring a reverse-competition. Perchance the 21 matches game, where the one who takes the last HAS to close it.

Thanks for the review. I agree that I ended up using Jake’s image set more as loose inspiration than anything else. So a low rating there is definitely deserved, even though without the image set I don’t think I ever would have had the idea to base a game on the same subject.

I almost included the rules for making your own characters, but ended up not having time to. I would definitely include them at the end of a revised version, since they’re relatively straightforward.

I also did not have the time to include as many examples as I would have liked. I envision that you could use negative personal traits to subtly or indirectly enhance chances of success despite their bad effect in a scene – like being paranoid could help you sneak into a morgue or convince a patron of the urgent necessity of your researches.

Sounds like the text needs some reordering. Thanks for pointing that out.

Including names on the game board is a great idea. I’ll definitely add them.

The role-playing is a bit loose right now. I’ve been considering adding a trun order or something where each player in turn gets to narrate something using a skiil or trait. If you don’t want to, then pass. But imposing a structure like this removes the competitive aspects of closing a scene off early before everyone gets a chance to narrate all they like. Thoughts on how to resolve this issue?

Thanks again for the review, Guy. It’s good to know there’s things to tinker with, but that the overall skeleton is firmly in place to outside readers.