Où étiez-vous?
Où étiez-vous? Rulebook
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Goal of the Game
Two players are suspected of having committed a crime. To avoid conviction, they invent an alibi that should be watertight despite intensive questioning by the investigators.
The investigators must disprove the alibi and secure a conviction of the suspects.
Components
- 36 double-sided cards with "Alibis"
- 5 cards with "Special Alibis"
- 3 blank cards for your own ideas
- 16 cards with "Crimes"
- 1 rulebook
The Game
Appoint a game leader. This player should know the rules well and from then on is called the Chief Justice.
The game is divided into 5 phases, which are carried out in the order given here.
1. Accusation
The Chief Justice selects two suspect players (at will, at random, or in turn). All other players are investigators.
The Chief Justice invents a crime with which the suspects are charged. It may be quite unusual, but it should at least be fixed in time and place. Alternatively, a crime can be selected from the enclosed cards or drawn at random. The Chief Justice then asks the suspects where they were at the time of the crime.
The suspects each draw a card with an alibi, which they must now present credibly. This alibi, like the crime, is announced to all other players.
Although the crime plays no real role during the course of the game, experience has shown that a concrete, perhaps even somewhat unusual, crime contributes to the atmosphere of the game.
2. Isolation
The two suspects withdraw and now have 3 minutes to agree on their alibi and prepare for the investigators' questions.
Example: The suspects are charged with having broken into a pet shop (specialising in scorpions). According to their card, they state that they were at the cinema at the time of the crime. They should then expect questions such as: "Which cinema?", "Which film?", "Did you eat popcorn?", "If so, who paid for it?", "Who chose the film?", and so on.
The suspects must foresee the questions to be expected AND agree on matching answers.
During this time the investigators prepare the interrogation. They settle on the questions they will put to the suspects in order to test the alibi. The questions MUST relate DIRECTLY to the alibi and be reasonably SHORT to answer (see, for example, the questions in the example above). The Chief Justice may help them and should in particular make sure that the questions comply with the rules.
We recommend writing the questions down. Although there is no maximum, one should limit oneself to 8 to 10 questions.
3. First Interrogation
After the 3 minutes have elapsed, the Chief Justice brings the first suspect in for interrogation. The investigators now ask their prepared questions. They may also add something or follow up once. The suspect MUST answer; they may not excuse themselves by claiming to have forgotten or not to know. The second suspect must of course hear nothing of this; they remain ISOLATED.
4. Second Interrogation
Now the Chief Justice brings the second suspect in for interrogation. The investigators put the same questions to them. The first suspect may listen during this, but of course may not show any reaction or give any hints.
5. Verdict
The Chief Justice now has the difficult task of passing judgement. All answers must be checked for agreements and contradictions. If more than half of the answers agree, the defendants are acquitted and they win the game. If the contradictions outweigh the agreements, the alibi is considered disproved, the suspects are convicted, and the investigators win the game.
Notes for the Chief Justice
The Chief Justice has a very IMPORTANT role in this game. They must skilfully moderate the round (especially the first one) and must also ensure that both sides abide by the rules.
The Chief Justice may forbid investigators from asking questions that seem to them inappropriate or unsuitable for any reason.
In particular:
- Questions that have nothing to do with the alibi, including general questions, for example about the suspects' clothing (unless, of course, the alibi requires special clothing).
- Questions that refer to the crime. The suspects claim to have had nothing to do with the crime, so they CANNOT know anything about it.
- Questions that only one of the suspects can answer. Whether the popcorn was paid for with exact change or with a banknote can usually only be answered by the person who bought the popcorn; their partner probably did not notice this.
The Chief Justice also forbids the suspects from giving series answers, for example answering every question about a number with "two", or repeatedly giving negative answers, e.g. "What did you eat during the break?" – "Nothing." "How many other people were there in the cinema?" – "None." and so on.
Detailed and amusing stories by the suspects are precisely what makes the game enjoyable. Therefore it must be prevented that they make things too easy for themselves, for example by having been alone in the cinema and being able to report nothing except the film title (and its content). Such an alibi will undoubtedly be judged implausible and will lead to a conviction …
Finally, the Chief Justice decides on victory or defeat on the basis of the answers. In doing so, they should weigh the inconsistencies that arose during the interrogations like a judge and also give reasons for their decision. Minor inconsistencies about details, such as differing statements about the ice cream flavours sold by the ice cream seller in the cinema, which could also occur with a truly innocent defendant, may of course be let pass.
Optional Role: The Jurors
In larger groups, from about 14 players, an ODD number of players (at least 3) may be appointed as jurors. They do not take part in the interrogations, but pass the verdict in phase 5 instead of the Chief Justice.
Optional Closing Statements (between phases 4 and 5)
After the interrogations are over, the investigators and the defendants may each appoint a spokesperson (prosecutor or defence counsel) who gives a short closing statement. The defence counsel is best played by the suspect interrogated first, since they also know how the second defendant's interrogation went.
The Chief Justice should set a short time for the closing statements (e.g. 2 minutes) and make sure it is kept. The prosecutor begins and tries once more to make the weaknesses of the alibi clear. Afterwards, the defence counsel has the chance to respond to the prosecutor's remarks.
The closing statement is intended only as atmospheric rounding-off; it should not influence the result.
Special Cards
The game contains 5 special cards with very unusual alibis. These are recommended for advanced players.