So I've been playing a lot of Sleuth lately; to help myself keep track of everything, I tend to draw a directed graph for every game, with one vertex for each suspect, and an arrow from one vertex to another if the first suspect tells me the motive of the second. In this setup, a very simple proposition follows immediately...
Prop'n: In any game of Sleuth, the corresponding (connected) directed graph contains at least one cycle, and therefore the graph has nontrivial homology.
pf: Someone must supply your client's motive. QED.
Posted by aloysius at May 13, 2004 04:40 PM | TrackBack |I do this:
The Terrifying Case of the Obsessive-Compulsive Moor!
---------------------underline-----------------
(victim's name)(age)
occupation (first suspect) build/hair/handedness
etc.
Then I get everyone's motive, go to back them up, and then tie the physical evidence to all the suspects (by drawing lines between the suspects and the evidence list), get some witness evidence and BAM! three hours later I win.
Posted by: nick on May 13, 2004 04:55 PMWhenever one of my suspects gives evidence against another, I think to myself, 'Aha! X has pegged Y...' and then I start to think of Dan Savage, according to whom 'pegging' is the act of a woman anally violating a man with some kind of dildo. And then I am sorry.
Posted by: aloysius on May 13, 2004 06:44 PMHere are what some of my Sleuth notes look like, after I did weird, weird things to the photo:
http://www.koschei.net/blog/archives/funkynotes.jpg
It's still a pretty darn accurate representation of the way I work. You should see my math notes sometime. (Yesterday, for some reason, while I was taking notes in one of my classes, I wrote: 'Prop: Your mother eats ass in Hell.' I cannot explain why.)
Posted by: aloysius on May 13, 2004 07:21 PM