El Club de los Martes
El Club de los Martes Rulebook
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Game Mechanics
The Enigma
Once the meeting has been set up, everyone has created their dramatic character and has their field notebook ready, the host takes the floor and briefly and concisely sets out an enigma to which, obviously, he knows the solution (otherwise we are in trouble).
To "set out" means to explain briefly. It must be clear that this is only a first presentation of information and ideas about the case. Its primary function is not to tell a whole story or recount an event or enigma in full; it is simply to explain what the case consists of: a first approach.
The account must therefore be terse and must only set out the case without giving excessive data or clues. The usual practice is to reveal at least the what and the how; after various inquiries (and deductions) the players must find the why, the where and the when, so as to arrive at the who. This simple formula is a rule that tends to work quite well. Every presentation of a case must be unitary and self-contained; that is, it must make complete sense and include all the elements necessary for a first understanding. The players must know and understand immediately what the case consists of or, failing that, have enough starting points to begin the investigation.
It is also important to stress to the players that it may happen, without any irregularity, that some of the data set out in the statement are not true, or are simply mistaken. Many cases may start from false premises or erroneous earlier investigations, so part of the dramatic characters' work is also to uncover and validate them over the course of the meeting; this is known as verifying the truth of the premises. (The word detective comes from English detective, from Latin detectus, from the verb detegere, composed of de (remove) and tegere (cover): to remove the cover. Imagine an onion. The solution of the case lies inside it, at the centre. To expose it, the players must peel layers off the onion until they reach the centre. To do so they must sift the false or mistaken information from the true.)
Once the host has set out the enigma in an orderly way to the armchair detectives who have come to the meeting, he boastfully bets fifteen pounds (all his capital) that none of those present is capable of solving it. Fifteen pounds is more than a fair price for a bet, since showing off or boasting of greater wealth is frowned upon in complex Victorian society.
First Detective
To decide who is the starting detective, also called the first detective, you may choose the youngest player, or the oldest, or simply leave it to the goddess Fortune. We suggest that the host of the meeting decide the method used. In any case, the starting first detective must always sit to the host's left, and the remaining players follow around the table from him.
The first detective has a marker showing at all times who he is. It is passed from player to player clockwise during the game each time the first detective passes (as an action), or directly to a particular player if an interruption occurs. You can use a paperweight or a Sherlock Holmes figure, or anything related to detective stories.
Rounds
A meeting consists of several rounds. The number of rounds is limited by the amount of pounds the armchair detectives have, since without pounds one cannot ask questions or make deductions. So there is no fixed number of rounds a priori; it can vary from meeting to meeting depending on how it goes.
A round begins with the first detective and, clockwise, the turn to speak rotates around the table from player to player until absolutely all players have had their turn to speak at least once.
Finally, after the last armchair detective of the round has acted, the turn passes to the host, at which moment he may add some clue or comment to the enigma, upon request or plea from the other players (see the section on clues).
Turn to Speak
When a player takes the floor, he may perform one of the following two actions: ask a question or pass. If he wants to ask the host a question, the player must spend one pound of his capital, which becomes part of the pot or reserve (added to the fifteen the host originally bet plus those bet during the meeting).
Asking a Question
"Imagination is a very dangerous thing, and we lawyers know it all too well. Being able to examine the evidence impartially and to consider facts only as factors seems to me the only logical method of arriving at the truth. And I must add that, from experience, I know it is the only one that works." (Mr. Petherick)
The Evidence, or How to Ask a Question
If a player wants to ask a question, he must ask the host a single question about the case, playing his dramatic character (armchair detective) as well as he can and trying at all times to make it as concise as possible and leave no room for doubt. He may phrase it however he likes, since he is bound by no rule except those governing comme il faut. It is also recommended, though not strictly necessary, that it relate to one of the five fundamental elements, since it is precisely those we seek to discover.
The question put to the host must be made in such a way that the answer can only be yes or no. The host must not answer questions that do not conform to this, as improper; one must be extremely rigorous. And those that have a useless answer for the case must be answered with "it is of no importance".
The Host's Answer
Yes or No: Once the due payment has been made, the host must answer, being truthful at all times and abiding by the code of honour that governs conduct in Victorian society. He is not permitted to lie, and therefore the answer he gives must fit completely what was asked; which means he must try at all times to avoid beating around the bush, digressions, or misleading the armchair detectives with irrelevant or overly confusing data. In other words, he must be fair and sincere and go straight to the point. This implies that, if the question contains something that is true and something that is not, the answer will be "no". This is precisely one of the reasons why it is best to ask questions about very specific or concise things and not to be greedy with the opportunity to speak. This is based on the logic of Aristotle, and above all that later developed by George Boole with his principle of non-contradiction; in other words, nothing can both belong and not belong to a given class at the same time. Nothing can be white and black at once, or tall and short, or fat and thin. Reduce all the available information to its simplest or most basic form and from there begin weaving the chart of the case, adding new information little by little.
It is of no importance: If the question asked is of no importance for the investigation or has nothing to do with the case, the host must let the player know. However, bear in mind that a "it is of no importance" answer is not necessarily harmful or negative for the investigation: in some cases it can even provide much more information than a flat "no", by clearly indicating or letting it be intuited that the investigation is not going down those paths at all, thereby eliminating one of the lines of inquiry.
Confusing answers: In addition, the host must stress that it is possible, in some particular case, that an answer of his could be wrongly interpreted by the armchair detectives. If the host honestly considers this to be so, he must say so explicitly, clarifying that it is a conditioned answer so that the armchair detectives take it very much into account in their investigation, and so note it in their field notebook with a question mark (?). In this way there will be no malicious manoeuvre by the host, thus making his clarity and honesty in the case evident.
This normally happens because the basis on which the question rests is confusing, or simply does not fit reality very well. It generally appears when the question asked by the armchair detective is ambiguous enough that at least two of the five fundamental elements are involved in it. Therefore the ideal is to ask about each element separately. Each element must be reduced to its simplest form.
For example, imagine that in the enigma set by the host a serial killer kills a prostitute with a scalpel in Whitechapel. The questioner does not know that it took place in Whitechapel and with a scalpel. When asking this kind of question, the host should answer as follows:
- Did the serial killer kill the prostitute with a scalpel at the Surrey Docks? No, but conditioned (?).
- Did the serial killer kill the prostitute with a scalpel? Yes.
- Did the serial killer kill the prostitute in Whitechapel? Yes.
As we can see in the first question, no concrete and exact conclusion can be drawn from the answer, so the host's answer must be "No, but conditioned". This happens because either one of the two fundamental elements (the how: with a scalpel, and the where: in Whitechapel), or both, are wrong. To solve this dilemma (or conditioned answer) the ideal would have been to ask about each fundamental element separately, as was done in the next two questions, where the answer was clearly and categorically "yes".
Passing
If a dramatic character does not want to ask a question (because no clever one occurs to him, it would not help him clarify anything, he does not feel like it, he wants to save his capital for the future, or it is part of some dark game strategy) he may pass the turn to the next armchair detective without paying the corresponding pound. This action is reflected in the rules of the meeting and he is perfectly within his rights to use it.
Loss of first-detective status: When the first detective is the one who passes, his first-detective marker passes to the player on his left, thereby losing his relative advantage of being the first player of each round.
Passive play: To avoid precisely passive play, if all the dramatic characters pass consecutively in the same round, the meeting ends at once and the case remains unsolved. The concept of passive play has been introduced in El Club de los Martes as a means of instigating or obliging the dramatic characters to ask as many questions as possible with the sole aim of getting as many correct deductions as possible as quickly as possible. Time is not exactly on their side, so this kind of ploy is often not well received.
Automatic pass: In any case, to speed up the meeting, it is good to agree before the game starts that if the armchair detective pauses for more than ten seconds he is understood to pass. The same applies if he starts to ramble, or talks about nonsense, or tries to introduce a conversation that has nothing to do with the case, or that directly contradicts the rules agreed at the meeting. The aim of these rules is to prevent players from wasting time, and thereby ensure the dynamism of the game. Time is money. They have only 1 hour.
Deductions
"If you describe a series of events to most people, they will tell you what the result would be... But there are few people who, if you tell them a result, are able to work out by their own reasoning what were the steps that led to that result." (Sherlock Holmes)
Holmes once described the process of inventing deductions as something to be treated (or understood) as reasoning in reverse, or backwards.
Once a player has asked his question, provided it was a successful one (the answer was "yes") and if he so wishes, he may make a deduction. A player may make as many deductions as he wishes during a meeting, being limited only by his capital.
The Deduction
The deduction must be as complete and detailed as possible. This part is important because, from all the deductions made during the meeting (which we advise be noted in the field notebook to make things easier), one must try to guess, by a process of elimination (with any of the detective methods described), exactly what the five fundamental elements are (and in particular, the who). To do so the player pushes three pounds of his capital toward the host, which is known as the stake (envite), and after emptying his glass of brandy in one gulp says "My dear friend, but is it not true that...?" followed by the appropriate deduction.
The hypothesis put forward must be as complete as possible, describing in the greatest detail all the events, intricacies and unknowns surrounding the enigma, placing special emphasis on revealing the five fundamental elements.
Although the players are presumed to act in good faith at all times, a rule recommended for El Club de los Martes is that a deduction identical to one formulated earlier by another player is not allowed; that is, at least one of the five fundamental elements must differ, otherwise players could abuse it by creating a vicious circle that would end with the pounds of the reserve being exhausted. If this happens, you can apply the passive play rules.
Case Solved
As soon as a character makes a deduction, the host must announce publicly whether he has hit upon the solution of the case. That is, if the deduction made is valid in its entirety (he has completely deciphered the five fundamental elements of the enigma) and unravels the fundamental part of the intrigue, leaving no important data forgotten, it is declared valid and it is announced that his hypothesis was correct and the case has been solved. Answers about the place of the crime, the culprit or criminal, and the motive are indispensable to successfully solve a case.
The Refutation
If the case has not been solved, those fellow players who wish (it is not compulsory) may refute the deduction. In turn order, starting with the player to the left of the current detective, if a player thinks that the deduction is false, he must bet one pound of his capital (which becomes part of the reserve), clearly stating the number of true fundamental elements (the number, not which ones) that he believes the deduction got right.
Important: Once 4 fundamental elements have been guessed correctly, and therefore only one remains to be discovered, refuting deductions is not allowed, for obvious reasons.
The host is responsible for confirming and checking the result. If the five fundamental elements argued, as well as the detailed description of the resolution of the case, are correct, the game ends immediately and the case is declared solved. Conversely, if any of the five fundamental elements argued in the current detective's hypothesis is not true, the deduction made is false. It is enough for one to fail for the deduction to be incorrect. Depending on the host's rigour and flexibility, in some cases he may consider the deduction incorrect because, even though the five fundamental elements have been given, some important piece of data is missing. No loose ends must be left and the hypothesis put forward must faithfully represent the events that occurred in every detail.
Those players (one or several) who guess the number of fundamental elements actually got right by the current detective take two pounds from the reserve (their own bet and an additional one). The rest lose their bet pound, which becomes part of the reserve.
If none of the players guesses the number of fundamental elements (that is, nobody has hit the correct number of elements guessed correctly), all the pounds bet (the whole amount) go to swell the pot (the reserve) and the host may stroke his beard as a sign of satisfaction.
Interruptions
Interruption Round
That is not all, friends. It is not all plain sailing in El Club de los Martes. Any dramatic character may, if he considers himself learned in the matter, spoil or meddle in the marvellous, pondered and elaborate question of the current detective. British phlegm is like that. Therefore, when someone asks a question, he must take special care not to be insolent or presumptuous, because it may happen that another player is drawn into it because the background or aim of the question has to do directly (or indirectly) with one of his clichés.
If this is the case, that player may decide to spend one pound of his capital to cut in on the turn, beginning an interruption round, being himself the one who actually asks a question, and cancelling all the previous ones.
"Sir, I regret to inform you that you are being insolent. As one learned in the matter, since I have knowledge of (here introduce the affected cliché), I consider that I must ask that question myself in this case..."
Finite Interruption Rounds
Other players may in turn interrupt the new question if they in turn have a cliché that is directly affected, and so on. So that there is no infinite loop of interruptions, each player may interrupt only once per round, until finally someone is able to definitively ask the question.
If two people interrupt at the same time, in case of doubt it is understood that the one who is currently closer to the first-detective marker did so first.
Another important thing to bear in mind is that you may only interrupt once for a given reason, even if your cliché would allow it. For example, if a player has interrupted another because the victim had gone to India two weeks before dying, and he is a man of the world (his cliché), each time Hindu or India is mentioned he may not interrupt again. However, if an Australian aborigine later appears in the story, he may use that man-of-the-world cliché again because it is a different reason (it refers to a different place). As this is a point that is usually a source of arguments, the host is responsible for deciding and clarifying whether he is allowed to interrupt or not. He is judge and executioner. To make things easier it is also recommended to note all interruptions in the field notebook so they can be reviewed in case of doubt.
The Reward
Many will ask: what benefit can there be in interrupting another player apart from earning his total distrust and deep hatred? And especially considering this is a cooperative game. Well, the player who finally asks the question obtains, adding to his own capital, all the pounds bet earlier in that same interruption round, except his last one, which is the one finally used to ask the question. In short, it is a way of asking for free, or even recovering pounds and increasing capital.
And not only that: the player who wins the interruption also obtains the first-detective marker and becomes the new first detective, thereby acquiring a relative advantage by being the first player of each round, being able to try to solve the enigma before his companions.
The Turn Continues Normally
After the interruption is resolved the turn continues in the usual order, that is, from the current detective who was originally going to ask the question and not from the player who finally asked it after the interruption. In this way we ensure that each of the players asks at least one question in the same round.
End of Round
Once all the armchair detectives have had their turn to speak at least once in the same round, the turn comes to the host.
The first thing he does is collect (recover) one pound from the reserve. If you decide to remove the passive play condition, in case there is no pot, all the armchair detectives without exception must add one pound to the pot to continue the meeting. If someone cannot add it because he simply has none, he is eliminated from the game immediately.
After this, and lastly, the dramatic characters in order, starting from the first detective (who, remember, may have changed during the last round), may demand from the host new hints, indications or signs intended to lead them properly to the discovery of the enigma.
Clues, Hints or Signs
Each armchair detective, starting with the current first detective, may demand a clue about the enigma from the host, provided it relates exclusively to one of his clichés. Using this benefit costs the dramatic character one pound, which goes directly to the host's capital, not to the reserve.
The host may then (though it is recommended) introduce new elements into the enigma, or clarify some that he considers confusing, so as to substantially help the armchair detectives gradually unveil the mystery. They may be relevant data about a situation or character, or the revelation of information about anything he considers relevant or of interest to the case. At this point the host must be reminded that the aim of the game is to solve a case, so the necessary facilities must be given for that. The fun is in solving it.
It is important to stress that each player may use each cliché only once per meeting to ask for a clue. Therefore, each player may ask for at most six clues per meeting. To make things easier it is also recommended to note all clue requests in the field notebook so as to keep good account of them.
Once all the players have had their opportunity to ask the host for a clue, the turn continues with the starting detective (who may have changed in the last round), saying:
"Gentlemen, I regret to inform you that the enigma remains unsolved..."
No Capital
If at any time during the meeting a player runs out of capital (exhausts his initial fifteen pounds) he automatically leaves the game. He may remain present, but has neither voice nor vote and must keep a strict and respectful silence.
Loan: However, the host is free to lend money to the player, provided he returns it religiously at the end of the meeting. In any case, and as a penalty, this dramatic character can no longer make deductions during the meeting, and therefore can no longer win the game. He may, however, continue playing to try to refute (or throw overboard) his companions' deductions if he believes them false, and so recover part of the money staked in the meeting.
Sudden Death
Throughout the meeting the host, as a courtesy rule, is free to indicate the time left in the game. However, when only 10 minutes of play remain, this indication becomes mandatory, and he must warn the other players that they are in the final stretch of the meeting and that only 10 minutes remain until its end. Thus it is presumed that they will act accordingly, being quicker, briefer and more concise in their questions, if they want to reveal the enigma, of course.
Case Solved
To solve the case, and win the game, the current detective must make public, concrete and precise all the intricacies and unknowns surrounding the enigma, and in particular must locate the five fundamental elements of the plot: the what, the how, the why, the where and when, and the who. This means the host must be punctilious to the extreme. For example, if the victim died poisoned, the armchair detective has to state with which poison; and if it was a robbery, what was stolen must be known; otherwise it would only be a partially correct deduction, and vital and significant information would be missing to solve the case. The resolution must be perfect, without ambiguity of any kind and without flaws.
When this happens he pockets all the pounds of the pot in play at that moment, and is named honorary detective of that case, becoming part of the book of honour and glory of El Club de los Martes, with the other illustrious and esteemed honorary detectives of previous enigmas, and also becomes the next host of El Club de los Martes at the following meeting. Also note in the book the time he took to solve the enigma and the pounds he obtained as a reward.
Experience: I am not in favour of distributing experience or rewarding winners in some way in this kind of game, but if you wish you can, for example, let a detective who has favourably solved every 3 cases (or whatever you consider appropriate) add a new cliché to his field notebook. The last word is always yours.
Case Not Solved
The case remains unsolved if at least one of these three things happens:
- None of the characters has made a correct deduction within the time limit of one hour.
- All players have exhausted their initial capital of fifteen pounds.
- All the dramatic characters pass consecutively in the same round.
If any of these happens, the host is the winner, also pocketing all the pounds of the pot in play at that moment.
Appendices
Creation of Dramatic Characters: The Clichés
Dramatic characters in El Club de los Martes are defined by six descriptors, also called clichés. They are six stereotyped representations of parcels or aspects of the period, and a way of describing simply six relevant characteristics or aspects of the character.
In this chapter we have selected some of the most common, illustrating them with representative images or archetypes drawn from the way of life of that time. The frequent use of these images or icons in literature, film and television shows the persistence of such stereotypes, shaping the collective imagination and at the same time helping keep it current.
Take film as an example: think of that bank teller who confesses "this is my first day" just when a hooded man shouts "this is a robbery", that villain who suddenly leaps on a hero even though he has been killed several times, or the wise old Oriental man full of advice that also draws on famous sayings, or something closer to our subject, that private detective or policeman who must solve one last case before retirement.
First, the players must write in capital letters the (1) full name of their dramatic character, with the prefix of the noble title that corresponds, if any. Under the name they must add the (2) place of birth or usual residence, since it is always important for the British Empire to establish a link. Therefore anything to do with family, place of birth or residence is covered.
Then, in order, they must describe in three words (or short phrases) everything worth mentioning (or that occurs to them) about their dramatic character that relates to (or describes) their (3) profession, and (4) their academic and/or military curriculum.
In addition, to give the character greater depth, they must write one word (or short phrase) describing one important piece of data about their (5) properties, travels, decorations, clubs, friends, lovers or family, or whatever they consider worth highlighting in their record.
And finally, a (6) trait describing a peculiarity, property or distinctive note of the dramatic character that makes him special or different from his companions at the table. Phobias and philias also have a place.
The rest of the field notebook must be left blank, to note down over the course of the meeting (this one or later ones) those details (clues, deductions and hypotheses) of the case that you consider important or relevant for solving it.
In summary, the six clichés that define a dramatic character are:
- Full name of the dramatic character, with the prefix of the noble title that corresponds.
- Place of birth or usual residence.
- Profession.
- Academic and/or military curriculum.
- Properties, travels, decorations, clubs, friends, lovers or family, or whatever he considers worth highlighting in his record.
- Trait.
Restrictions (or Recommendations)
Variety or Diversity: It is recommended, though not compulsory, that the dramatic characters involved in the same meeting be described with different clichés. Besides giving the group of dramatic characters greater deductive potential, it would avoid problems (and possibly future headaches) at interruption time, since if several dramatic characters had the same cliché and wanted to interrupt simultaneously, it would be quite complicated to work out the order in which they would take place; in any case, they would always be resolved in the order the host dictates, though following turn order starting from the starting detective is recommended.
Reality: The clichés used must objectively fit the period we are dealing with. Under no circumstances should absurd, illogical or overly outlandish descriptors be accepted, at least without a convincing story behind them or the addition of fantastic elements to the game at the express wish of all the players; I am referring to things like Astronaut or Formula 1 Driver. El Club de los Martes is a serious game, at least in concept, so avoid this kind of game if you do not want to quickly come to loathe it or end up with post-traumatic stress after a session.
Normality: Likewise, one must be very restrictive and consistent when accepting the clichés chosen by the players. There is always the typical smart-aleck who wants to stand out above the other players from the creation of the dramatic character. So avoid their choosing descriptors that are too general, inflated, exaggerated or powerful. Powergaming must be prevented at all times; that is, the mistaken path some players follow of optimising their characters to the maximum, even if sometimes they lose all flavour. To be clear, it is what those do who investigate combinations of multi-purpose or wildcard clichés, always seeking descriptors that make them more and more powerful or intelligent. For example, obviously everyone will want to be (or play) famous fictional characters such as Sherlock Holmes, possibly the best private detective in the world, or Phineas Fogg, the most famous traveller and man of the world of the era, but being extremely realistic the probability of this happening is barely one in many millions. This is a game for playing normal people within certain canons or parameters (aristocrats), not heroes, or much worse, superheroes.
Examples
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (1) Physician, novelist and English writer (3). Born on 22 May 1859 in Edinburgh (2). He was a surgeon on the Greenland whaler Hope and later served as an army doctor in South Africa during the Boer War (4). He definitively established the formula of the detective novel, anticipated thirty years earlier by Edgar Allan Poe. His best-known character, Sherlock Holmes (5), enjoyed great popularity from his first works and serials. However, he wrote some books of a markedly historical character and, at the end of his life, also cultivated the science fiction genre and published a writing on spiritualism (6), strongly influenced in the first instance by the death of his son and by his experience as a private soldier in the First World War.
Hercule Poirot (1) Renowned investigator (3), of Belgian origin (2), known above all for solving mysteries the police were unable to elucidate. Former member of the Belgian police. He arrived in England as a refugee during the First World War and never left the country, where he established himself as a highly successful private detective (4). He is a little man who at first sight goes unnoticed and for many is even funny. His outstanding intelligence and his capacity for logic and reasoning have led him to one of the top positions in world investigation; he is meticulous, neat and excessively tidy (6). He wears a thick, pointed moustache that characterizes him. Physically he is plump, but his movements are agile and show a high degree of self-control. Among his friendships stand out Captain Arthur Hastings, Poirot's companion in several of his adventures and his own personal Watson, his butler George, his secretary Felicity Lemon, Inspector Japp of Scotland Yard and the writer Ariadne Oliver (5).