[T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ★

Find and discuss trials made by other members and showcase your own trials.

Moderators: EN - Forum Moderators, EN - Trial Reviewers

User avatar
Enthalpy
Community Manager
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:40 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, limited Spanish

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by Enthalpy »

Two things I want to point out about your responses.
Spoiler : :
1. True, the "Trucy made Jane happy" logic needs improvement, but I really think that just giving a clue to that will be enough. I want to give as light a touch to the trial as possible. If we were still early in the design phase, I'd rethink your use of the Mood Matrix. In DD and SoJ, the Mood Matrix usually sends the defense in an elaborate sideplot with little relevance to the big picture story. Psyche-locks sometimes do this as well, but those are an investigation mechanic, and I'd argue that makes a huge difference both in terms of how the narrative strikes the player, and the player's ability to organize the case. This is something I'm thinking about because I want to write an Athena case after I finish my entry from last year's case competition, and I'm trying to figure out how (if at all) I should have Mood Matrix segments.

...The alternative is that rather than rethink one of the core structures of your trial, we go with just cluing it a bit better.

2. I still prefer reordering the buzzsaw reveal and the smudge reveal, but if you think it's not worth the trouble, then we can hold off on that, go through the other changes, and see if it's still needed. I do think Franziska still needs to play up the building list of "suspicious things Trucy about this particular trick" to rationalize Lamiroir hiding this and make Franziska's case clear.
Okay, now for the new sections of the trial. I had to think hard about some of these, so I wasn't able to get through the whole case tonight. However, I do think I need your opinion on a point of characterization before I go into endgame.
Spoiler : :
Castor testifies on Jane's defense. His main contribution is to remind the court about the photograph while testifying that Jane's smudging the lines was nothing unusual. He also testifies to things on the stage after Trucy left, saying nothing unusual happened. Among the things he mentions, he says Phoenix got out of the box. Apollo points out a problem: if Jane had the key, how could he do that?

Your own script has Apollo say "Trucy left immediately after the rehearsal ended" even though by this point, we already know Trucy redrew the chalk lines first. The point is that even though Jane left "immediately," there's time for her to do something small before leaving to seek the choker. Something like letting Phoenix out of the box. I assumed she had let him out, because surely that would have happened in the actual show, and surely Trucy would want to get Phoenix out.

What makes this contradiction tricky to fix is that if Castor is more specific about how Phoenix got out, there is no contradiction. You just want to force Castor to be specific about something (that the box was unlocked) that he would rather avoid.

As such, my recommendation is instead you that add a new statement where Castor describes Jane's movements. When pressing the new statement, there's a prompt for the player to ask "Jane should've done something else" before leaving. Pressing that allows the player to present the locked box: surely she unlocked it? You can keep the other way to present this, but I think you need the new way for the point to be solid.


Castor explains that the box was unlocked, and Apollo reasons that it's because the keys to unlock them were the same keys that Apollo thought belonged to Brushel... on the witness's choker. Brushel elaborates that he needed them to let Thalassa in, and Apollo explains how he got the keys: Castor gave them to him. Castor says he told Brushel to keep quiet about this, but admits he gave Brushel the keys. Apollo demands an exxplanation for how he even got the keys, but Castor just says he found them misplaced somewhere and was too busy to tell Jane about it.

Apollo forces another testimony on the matter. Castor observes that it's strange to keep your keys on a choker necklace, but doesn't add much. Apollo attempts a perceive, but can't find any sort of tell. Following an idea from Athena, Apollo tricks Castor into mentioning Thalassa's bracelet. Apollo uses this to argue he does know Thalassa - those bracelets weren't known.
There's another potential logic hole here. Maybe the bracelets were shown in some other photograph. I think the easy way to check this is to call on Brushel. He has to know everything there is about Troupe Gramarye.

Franziska pushes Apollo to come up with something concrete, and Apollo points out that this gives Castor a potential motive. Franziska points out that is still not evidence of guilt. Just as Apollo is about to give in to despair, Thalassa comes to the stand to testify to the relationship between her and Castor. Franziska objects, furiously, but the judge overrules it.
I'd re-consider how Franziska objects here. There' no connection between "able to testify" and Thalassa's history with her children. In the same way, she despises Larry, but she doesn't shout him down with "Lecher!" whenever she sees him. Her displeasure is direct, but isn't that emotionally aware or willing to engage in non sequitur.

Thalassa explains that Castor was her first husband. Castor then angrily explains that the Gramaryes conspired to steal his magic tricks and staged his murder, which took his memories from him. Thalassa says that she wasn't a willing participant, so much as passive before Magnifi's obsession with the Troupe. Patrick is enraged and gloats about the imminent decimation of her children and the Troupe's future, saying it's all Thalassa's fault. The audience sympathizes with him.
This is going to be another major change, but this one isn't case logic, but with Castor's characterization in this scene. Apollo's goal for the entire next rebuttal is about Castor being an expert manipulator. Throughout the confrontation, the point is made that this was nearly a perfect crime. He's able to hide his tells from Apollo. But this speech has Castor going on an emotional tirade. This contradicts your image of him as the manipulator.

I think the idea was that he can garner sympathy by telling a story that casts him as the victim getting justice against his oppressor. There are two problems here. First, Trucy and Apollo are not his oppressors. Second, it isn't clear that these events are a result of anything Lamiroir did. Third, he starts and ends by screaming at her. Ferdielance suggested a possible rewrite

Ferdielance wrote: "Son... this breaks my heart. I loved her, I really did... in spite of what she did to us."
"But she's going to watch her own daughter convicted..."
"...and her own son suffer for it."
"And I... I've failed you too, my boy."
"I'm so... so sorry I wasn't there for you."
"If I'd been more open with Truce... maybe I could have stopped her..."
"But it's too late now. It's too late. "
Audience: "Oh no! It's so tragic."
Audience: "He lost his family as soon as he found it again..."
Apollo: "What is his heart saying, Athena."
Athena: (to Apollo) "It's laughing. He's laughing, Apollo."
Athena: "Nobody out there can hear it, but he's enjoying this."
Apollo: "...you monster."


I like the idea of using Athena to expose the charade, but Ferdie's version lacks the justice throughline that is so key to this case. (Oddly enough, Castor doesn't use the word "justice" until the very end.) For that, I'd change Castor's lines to something like:

"Thalassa, it's far too late to ask for forgiveness."
"Let's say I believe you, that you didn't want to be rid of me."
"You still choose to go along with Magnifi's murder plan. Did you know what that meant?"
"That meant you took my work. My memories. My family."
"And you didn't choose family with Trucy, either. You hid yourself from her."
"Did you know what that meant? Did you think she'd take it well?"
"When she found out the truth, she was angry. It should have never come to that."
"And now justice can't stop these consequences from coming due."
"I'm sorry. I truly am. But it's too late to stop the cruel irony."

Does that seem reasonable to you? If not, I need to learn what I've gotten wrong about Castor before finishing the rest of the Castor confrontation.
[D]isordered speech is not so much injury to the lips that give it forth, as to the disproportion and incoherence of things in themselves, so negligently expressed. ~ Ben Jonson
User avatar
drvonkitty
Posts: 567
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:25 am
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by drvonkitty »

Responses green as per usual!
Enthalpy wrote: Sat Apr 03, 2021 5:08 am Two things I want to point out about your responses.
Spoiler : :
1. True, the "Trucy made Jane happy" logic needs improvement, but I really think that just giving a clue to that will be enough. I want to give as light a touch to the trial as possible. If we were still early in the design phase, I'd rethink your use of the Mood Matrix. In DD and SoJ, the Mood Matrix usually sends the defense in an elaborate sideplot with little relevance to the big picture story. Psyche-locks sometimes do this as well, but those are an investigation mechanic, and I'd argue that makes a huge difference both in terms of how the narrative strikes the player, and the player's ability to organize the case. This is something I'm thinking about because I want to write an Athena case after I finish my entry from last year's case competition, and I'm trying to figure out how (if at all) I should have Mood Matrix segments.

...The alternative is that rather than rethink one of the core structures of your trial, we go with just cluing it a bit better.
Yeah, Ferdie pointed this out in his beta review. I think we got so caught up in the novelty of using the Mood Matrix for cross-examinations that we didn't really consider the consequences for gameplay (it lends itself to confusing, murky threads of logic). I think Mood Matrix is better used sparingly--in me and Zekrom's comp entry, I think it has much better implementation. It's better used as a supplement to get new information out of a witness as opposed to a constant mechanic on par with evidence-based contradictions.
2. I still prefer reordering the buzzsaw reveal and the smudge reveal, but if you think it's not worth the trouble, then we can hold off on that, go through the other changes, and see if it's still needed. I do think Franziska still needs to play up the building list of "suspicious things Trucy about this particular trick" to rationalize Lamiroir hiding this and make Franziska's case clear.
Yeah, I'm actually fairly caught up on making the changes (thanks to some procrastination), and I think it has helped make Franziska's case a bit more clear. While I agree the change would be better, I just don't think it's worth the effort.
Okay, now for the new sections of the trial. I had to think hard about some of these, so I wasn't able to get through the whole case tonight. However, I do think I need your opinion on a point of characterization before I go into endgame.
Spoiler : :
Castor testifies on Jane's defense. His main contribution is to remind the court about the photograph while testifying that Jane's smudging the lines was nothing unusual. He also testifies to things on the stage after Trucy left, saying nothing unusual happened. Among the things he mentions, he says Phoenix got out of the box. Apollo points out a problem: if Jane had the key, how could he do that?

Your own script has Apollo say "Trucy left immediately after the rehearsal ended" even though by this point, we already know Trucy redrew the chalk lines first. The point is that even though Jane left "immediately," there's time for her to do something small before leaving to seek the choker. Something like letting Phoenix out of the box. I assumed she had let him out, because surely that would have happened in the actual show, and surely Trucy would want to get Phoenix out.

What makes this contradiction tricky to fix is that if Castor is more specific about how Phoenix got out, there is no contradiction. You just want to force Castor to be specific about something (that the box was unlocked) that he would rather avoid.

As such, my recommendation is instead you that add a new statement where Castor describes Jane's movements. When pressing the new statement, there's a prompt for the player to ask "Jane should've done something else" before leaving. Pressing that allows the player to present the locked box: surely she unlocked it? You can keep the other way to present this, but I think you need the new way for the point to be solid.

Sure, should be easy enough.
Castor explains that the box was unlocked, and Apollo reasons that it's because the keys to unlock them were the same keys that Apollo thought belonged to Brushel... on the witness's choker. Brushel elaborates that he needed them to let Thalassa in, and Apollo explains how he got the keys: Castor gave them to him. Castor says he told Brushel to keep quiet about this, but admits he gave Brushel the keys. Apollo demands an exxplanation for how he even got the keys, but Castor just says he found them misplaced somewhere and was too busy to tell Jane about it.

Apollo forces another testimony on the matter. Castor observes that it's strange to keep your keys on a choker necklace, but doesn't add much. Apollo attempts a perceive, but can't find any sort of tell. Following an idea from Athena, Apollo tricks Castor into mentioning Thalassa's bracelet. Apollo uses this to argue he does know Thalassa - those bracelets weren't known.
There's another potential logic hole here. Maybe the bracelets were shown in some other photograph. I think the easy way to check this is to call on Brushel. He has to know everything there is about Troupe Gramarye.
Yeah, can just add a line to Brushel's testimony that specifies the photo with her with her bracelets is a rare antique. He implies it currently, so I'll just make it more explicit.
Franziska pushes Apollo to come up with something concrete, and Apollo points out that this gives Castor a potential motive. Franziska points out that is still not evidence of guilt. Just as Apollo is about to give in to despair, Thalassa comes to the stand to testify to the relationship between her and Castor. Franziska objects, furiously, but the judge overrules it.
I'd re-consider how Franziska objects here. There' no connection between "able to testify" and Thalassa's history with her children. In the same way, she despises Larry, but she doesn't shout him down with "Lecher!" whenever she sees him. Her displeasure is direct, but isn't that emotionally aware or willing to engage in non sequitur.
I'm not sure here. On the one hand, Franziska does go a bit overboard, especially given the context. But she's also seriously projecting her issues onto Thalassa. Again, she sees herself in Trucy, and she sees her own abandonment in Trucy's abandonment. Ironically, her hatred of Thalassa is almost defensive of Trucy, even as she takes out her anger on Trucy through her aggressive prosecution. The similarity here to Castor is striking (and Franziska points it out explicitly at the end of the trial). Both Franziska and Castor express pure hatred for Thalassa, but they both ultimately make different choices about what to do with that anger.
Thalassa explains that Castor was her first husband. Castor then angrily explains that the Gramaryes conspired to steal his magic tricks and staged his murder, which took his memories from him. Thalassa says that she wasn't a willing participant, so much as passive before Magnifi's obsession with the Troupe. Patrick is enraged and gloats about the imminent decimation of her children and the Troupe's future, saying it's all Thalassa's fault. The audience sympathizes with him.
This is going to be another major change, but this one isn't case logic, but with Castor's characterization in this scene. Apollo's goal for the entire next rebuttal is about Castor being an expert manipulator. Throughout the confrontation, the point is made that this was nearly a perfect crime. He's able to hide his tells from Apollo. But this speech has Castor going on an emotional tirade. This contradicts your image of him as the manipulator.

I think the idea was that he can garner sympathy by telling a story that casts him as the victim getting justice against his oppressor. There are two problems here. First, Trucy and Apollo are not his oppressors. Second, it isn't clear that these events are a result of anything Lamiroir did. Third, he starts and ends by screaming at her. Ferdielance suggested a possible rewrite

Ferdielance wrote: "Son... this breaks my heart. I loved her, I really did... in spite of what she did to us."
"But she's going to watch her own daughter convicted..."
"...and her own son suffer for it."
"And I... I've failed you too, my boy."
"I'm so... so sorry I wasn't there for you."
"If I'd been more open with Truce... maybe I could have stopped her..."
"But it's too late now. It's too late. "
Audience: "Oh no! It's so tragic."
Audience: "He lost his family as soon as he found it again..."
Apollo: "What is his heart saying, Athena."
Athena: (to Apollo) "It's laughing. He's laughing, Apollo."
Athena: "Nobody out there can hear it, but he's enjoying this."
Apollo: "...you monster."


I like the idea of using Athena to expose the charade, but Ferdie's version lacks the justice throughline that is so key to this case. (Oddly enough, Castor doesn't use the word "justice" until the very end.) For that, I'd change Castor's lines to something like:

"Thalassa, it's far too late to ask for forgiveness."
"Let's say I believe you, that you didn't want to be rid of me."
"You still choose to go along with Magnifi's murder plan. Did you know what that meant?"
"That meant you took my work. My memories. My family."
"And you didn't choose family with Trucy, either. You hid yourself from her."
"Did you know what that meant? Did you think she'd take it well?"
"When she found out the truth, she was angry. It should have never come to that."
"And now justice can't stop these consequences from coming due."
"I'm sorry. I truly am. But it's too late to stop the cruel irony."

Does that seem reasonable to you? If not, I need to learn what I've gotten wrong about Castor before finishing the rest of the Castor confrontation.


Castor's character is complex, and I really enjoyed writing for him! I actually disagree with your and Ferdie's take on the way Castor is a "master manipulator." He manipulates the justice system, not people. In fact, he's anything BUT subtle when it comes to people!

On the one hand, Castor is a performer. He plays up drama and knows how to sway an audience. He uses this to his advantage to get the audience on his side on a few occasions, but that's never really that important to him. At the end of the day, the audience is anti-Trucy and anti-Thalassa not because Castor manipulates them into doing so, but because both of them look really bad, regardless of Castor's involvement! To an impartial observer, Trucy looks really guilty (given the photograph) and the defense looks slimy for defending her, and the audience expresses this opinion. After we find out about the plot to murder Castor, Thalassa and the Gramaryes look REALLY bad. Which, well, they should! A major point here is that the Gramaryes were evil people doing an evil thing, and Castor really was a victim. (Again, another parallel to Franziska here--she was a victim of Manfred's evil behavior.)

Castor is a master manipulator in that he takes advantage of the justice system. One core aspect of the justice system in the AA world is that only direct evidence matters. It doesn't really matter how a witness behaves if the evidence says otherwise. A witness can walk in and act as evil as they want, and make their guilt as clear as day... but as long as there's no evidence against them, it doesn't matter. This is the crux of Castor's plan. He plans out the entire crime and enacts it so that he would leave behind no obvious evidence to incriminate himself. This is what we learn during the Franziska rebuttal. He knows that he's left behind no incriminating evidence, and he goes into court knowing he's protected.

Because of this, he acts incredibly evil once the trial proceeds to the reveal of his relationship to Thalassa. He knows he's protected, and he makes full use of that fact. He's not trying to be sympathetic. He WANTS to be cruel. He flaunts his hatred of Thalassa and his goal of humiliating her by forcing her to watch Trucy convicted, because he genuinely believes he's doing the right thing. He revels in it, and he knows no matter what he says, there's nothing that can be done to stop him. The audience takes his side because they see what he's doing as justice. They think Trucy murdered her dad, and they hear that Thalassa was an unwitting participant in the Gramarye plot. They see Trucy's conviction as justice for the Gramarye crimes. Castor doesn't have to manipulate them into believing that. It really does seem, from an uncritical view, that Castor was wronged and he's doing the right thing!

This is the core of Castor's behavior. He loathes Thalassa. As in, really really really really hates her. Hates her so much that it makes the Mood Matrix explode when she confronts him! He's spent years building up resentment against her for ruining his life. He's spent years imagining exactly what he could do to take revenge on her. It's ultimately an act of fate that brings Trucy to his theater and sets the plan in motion, but it's heavily implied he's spent a lot of time thinking about how to abuse the justice system. His entire plot to frame Trucy is just to get revenge against Thalassa. He wants Thalassa to know what he's done. He wants Thalassa to know that he's the one responsible, and he wants her to be as powerless as possible. He doesn't really care about Trucy or Apollo. He sees them as extensions of Thalassa, and he uses them as weapons against her. Everything he does is solely motivated by his hatred. He doesn't care how evil he looks, or how many people he hurts in the crossfire. He feels fully justified in his actions, as his breakdown emphasizes--he really thinks this is justice!.

As the trial explores, both Castor and Franziska take this distorted view. They both get so caught up in their anger and resentment, that they abuse the justice system to take revenge. For Castor, this is direct revenge against Thalassa; for Franziska, this is indirect re-enactment of her trauma with Manfred. The difference is that Franziska realizes this, and she changes her behavior at the very end. She realizes that abusing the justice system to hurt Trucy is exactly what Manfred used to do. She realizes that just because she was wronged, that doesn't give her the right to wrong others. That's her arc.

Castor comes to no such conclusion. He never relents in his belief that what he's doing is right. He fully believes it's okay to wrong Trucy and Apollo and anyone else as long as Thalassa suffers because of it. It's ultimately his own arrogance in believing that what he's doing is "justice" that takes him down in the end, where he reveals his knowledge of the locket solely to further pin blame on Trucy, even though there's no reason for him to do so.

The tragic part of his character is that Castor probably does deserve some kind of justice! What the Gramaryes did to him was evil. But the theme of the case is that justice can't be cruel, or a weapon to enact revenge. In other words, two wrongs don't make a right.

So yeah, that's my basic read on Castor's character. He may have manipulated events at the theater and manipulated the justice system, but that doesn't mean he's subtle at any point. Instead, he grows more unhinged as the trial goes on. He flaunts his evil behavior because he thinks what he's doing is just. He wants to be brazen about it, and he wants Thalassa to suffer as much as possible. It doesn't really matter to him what the audience thinks... they take his side because he seems justified to them, even though he's not. I think, in contrast with 6-2, the opinion of the audience isn't really that important here. It comes up a handful of times to raise the tension, but I don't see manipulating their opinion as a major part of the case, nor Castor's plan.
Image

Image
User avatar
Enthalpy
Community Manager
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:40 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, limited Spanish

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by Enthalpy »

I see! In that case, different suggestion about that particular speech
Spoiler : :
Yeah, Ferdie's changes are out, but that part of Castor didn't come clearly through. Julius, Franziska, and Phoenix have not been subtle about talking "justice", but again, Castor doesn't use the word "justice" until the very end. I'd recommend having Castor make explicit how this verdict for Trucy's murder is a verdict for the crimes of Gramarye. They chose the path of magic. The path of magic is what's going to end their legacy. Thalassa chose not to be part of her daughter's life, and she can't be part of it now to save her. The Gramarye way is one of attempted murder, and that ends here and now.

It also needs to be clear that as far as the court is concerned, Trucy is very probably guilty of this crime. The other changes might suffice for this? I won't know until I go back and re-read.
[D]isordered speech is not so much injury to the lips that give it forth, as to the disproportion and incoherence of things in themselves, so negligently expressed. ~ Ben Jonson
User avatar
drvonkitty
Posts: 567
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:25 am
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by drvonkitty »

Spoiler : :
Yeah, while I love the writing of Ferdie’s suggestion, that’s the reason I decided not to go with it after his original beta review. Part of this is that I wanted to distinguish Castor from Kristoph, too.

I think you’re right that Castor should be more explicit in that first speech about this being “justice”, (since the other characters are quite heavy-handed about it) and the audience could use a line or two about why they think Trucy is guilty. It is there—the scene with the reporters in the lobby, for example—but it could do with a bit more set-up.
Image

Image
User avatar
Enthalpy
Community Manager
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:40 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, limited Spanish

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by Enthalpy »

Well,
Spoiler : :
The scene with the reporters in the lobby has them hound Trucy, but none of them assume her guilt. The closest they get is one reporter who asks if she thinks the loss of Phoenix is some divine punishment. That doesn't make sense if Trucy attempted to murder him.
But okay, let's move on.
Spoiler : :
Franzika outlines the case against Trucy, and Apollo... does something to it in a rebuttal. As for what that something is...
The rebuttal is framed in two inconsistent ways. Just look at these lines from the script

Apollo: Patrick Castor tried to kill Mr. Wright, and he framed Trucy for it. And I have every intention of proving that fact!
Franziska: I have no time for foolish postulating. Patrick Castor is the killer, you say? Fine then. Prove it.
Judge: Either prove something now... or your case is finished.
Franziska: But there is still no evidence that he [Castor] tampered with the lines.
Apollo: But barring any new evidence, I must accept her arguments.

Athena: This is our one chance to show that Castor could've done it!
Apollo: (So I have to find any potential alternatives to her theory!)
Apollo: (...but maybe there's a chance that I could present something to cast suspicion on Castor!)

You spend several frames making "prove something" the central issue before the testimony, only to walk back and make the co-counsel conversation about how we actually can't, but we can make Castor look suspicious. This confuses the message, but given that the things we need to present aren't contradictions, clarity is of the utmost importance.

Here's my recommendation: Frame this part of the case as a way to provide an alternate explanation for Franziska's evidence. Her argument doesn't just have her citing established facts, but interpreting them. Frame this as Apollo's chance to provide an alternate interpretation where Castor is guilty. If he can do that, that makes Franziska's argument shakier.

Here's my outline of how I'd do it: Have Franziska say that she has her argument, but she's not convinced the defense has one. They're just calling random witnesses to the stand and accusing anybody who looks suspicious. If the defense cannot put together something coherent, she's going to ask for a verdict now. Apollo asks Franziska to go with her argument first, to establish what he needs to explain. She begrudgingly complies. At this point, Apollo tries a bluff. If those are the facts, he'll show the court that they can just as well support a theory where Castor is the culprit. Athena is confused, and then Apollo explains his rationale: Franziska's argument may reference a lot of things that are proven, but the way they fit into her story is open to interpretation. If he can reinterpret them, her story doesn't look nearly so strong.


Franziska brings out the photograph again, but Apollo points out that it is incredibly suspicious, given that Castor was the source of it. Apollo then strings together his counter-theory, but Franziska asks for proof. Castor takes the opportunity to gloat. This is enough to make Franziska turn, and she prompts Apollo to ask for the completed investigation report.

They learn that blood had pooled to Phoenix's head, suggesting he had been upside down in the box. Franziska objects that Phoenix was found right-side up in the box, which was indeed how the trick was supposed to work. When asked to explain whether he was right-side up or not, Apollo asks "Why not both?" But before they can get any tacos, Apollo explains that this might work if Phoenix was upside down around 6. After a Thought Route, Apollo concludes Castor must have had Phoenix do this to knock him out, which would also explain why he didn't scream. As for why Castor might do that, all he can think of is that the plan was to kill Phoenix then, presumably by asphyxiation. Phoenix may have left a clue with his locket.

We then run through a loose end: why kill Phoenix early? The theory Apollo devises was that he couldn't move the chalk lines any further because Trucy might notice, so he couldn't count on the saw going deep enough.

This last point is very difficult to get, because it relies on a detailed sense of how serious the injuries would be if the saw went down at a certain spot, versus how much Castor could move the saw around. I'd change how this one is presented so that Apollo shows where the saw would have to be for the saw to be a reliable cause of death, and then you call on the player to present Trucy's profile or the chalk lines (condensing two presents down into one) to show Trucy might have caught that.


We present the Gemini scratch and catch Castor on knowing the contents of the locket, and that's game. Hooray!
Okay, that finishes the trial. Let me know if you have any reservations about that proposals. Otherwise, let me know when you're done, and I'll go through the case again to see how it looks now. Though I may need a bit of a break before getting back to this... This required a lot more attention than I was expecting.
[D]isordered speech is not so much injury to the lips that give it forth, as to the disproportion and incoherence of things in themselves, so negligently expressed. ~ Ben Jonson
User avatar
drvonkitty
Posts: 567
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:25 am
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by drvonkitty »

Enthalpy wrote: Sat Apr 03, 2021 8:26 pm
Spoiler : :
The scene with the reporters in the lobby has them hound Trucy, but none of them assume her guilt. The closest they get is one reporter who asks if she thinks the loss of Phoenix is some divine punishment. That doesn't make sense if Trucy attempted to murder him.
This is fair! I'll definitely beef it up a bit.
Spoiler : :
Franzika outlines the case against Trucy, and Apollo... does something to it in a rebuttal. As for what that something is...
The rebuttal is framed in two inconsistent ways. Just look at these lines from the script

Apollo: Patrick Castor tried to kill Mr. Wright, and he framed Trucy for it. And I have every intention of proving that fact!
Franziska: I have no time for foolish postulating. Patrick Castor is the killer, you say? Fine then. Prove it.
Judge: Either prove something now... or your case is finished.
Franziska: But there is still no evidence that he [Castor] tampered with the lines.
Apollo: But barring any new evidence, I must accept her arguments.

Athena: This is our one chance to show that Castor could've done it!
Apollo: (So I have to find any potential alternatives to her theory!)
Apollo: (...but maybe there's a chance that I could present something to cast suspicion on Castor!)

You spend several frames making "prove something" the central issue before the testimony, only to walk back and make the co-counsel conversation about how we actually can't, but we can make Castor look suspicious. This confuses the message, but given that the things we need to present aren't contradictions, clarity is of the utmost importance.

Here's my recommendation: Frame this part of the case as a way to provide an alternate explanation for Franziska's evidence. Her argument doesn't just have her citing established facts, but interpreting them. Frame this as Apollo's chance to provide an alternate interpretation where Castor is guilty. If he can do that, that makes Franziska's argument shakier.

Here's my outline of how I'd do it: Have Franziska say that she has her argument, but she's not convinced the defense has one. They're just calling random witnesses to the stand and accusing anybody who looks suspicious. If the defense cannot put together something coherent, she's going to ask for a verdict now. Apollo asks Franziska to go with her argument first, to establish what he needs to explain. She begrudgingly complies. At this point, Apollo tries a bluff. If those are the facts, he'll show the court that they can just as well support a theory where Castor is the culprit. Athena is confused, and then Apollo explains his rationale: Franziska's argument may reference a lot of things that are proven, but the way they fit into her story is open to interpretation. If he can reinterpret them, her story doesn't look nearly so strong.

I'd be fine with this reframing! Should be easy enough.
Franziska brings out the photograph again, but Apollo points out that it is incredibly suspicious, given that Castor was the source of it. Apollo then strings together his counter-theory, but Franziska asks for proof. Castor takes the opportunity to gloat. This is enough to make Franziska turn, and she prompts Apollo to ask for the completed investigation report.

They learn that blood had pooled to Phoenix's head, suggesting he had been upside down in the box. Franziska objects that Phoenix was found right-side up in the box, which was indeed how the trick was supposed to work. When asked to explain whether he was right-side up or not, Apollo asks "Why not both?" But before they can get any tacos, Apollo explains that this might work if Phoenix was upside down around 6. After a Thought Route, Apollo concludes Castor must have had Phoenix do this to knock him out, which would also explain why he didn't scream. As for why Castor might do that, all he can think of is that the plan was to kill Phoenix then, presumably by asphyxiation. Phoenix may have left a clue with his locket.

We then run through a loose end: why kill Phoenix early? The theory Apollo devises was that he couldn't move the chalk lines any further because Trucy might notice, so he couldn't count on the saw going deep enough.

This last point is very difficult to get, because it relies on a detailed sense of how serious the injuries would be if the saw went down at a certain spot, versus how much Castor could move the saw around. I'd change how this one is presented so that Apollo shows where the saw would have to be for the saw to be a reliable cause of death, and then you call on the player to present Trucy's profile or the chalk lines (condensing two presents down into one) to show Trucy might have caught that.

I think this could be more easily adjusted with a few added lines for clarification. Something like:

Apollo: (Mr. Wright lived. That couldn't have been part of the plan.)
Apollo: (If the saw had struck his torso, rather than his legs, he would have died during the show!)
Apollo: (But Castor only moved the chalk lines a foot. Why...?)
Apollo: (Castor could have easily ensured Mr. Wright was dead in the show by moving them further!)
Apollo: (It doesn't make any sense...)
Apollo: (Is there a reason he'd only move the chalk lines a small amount?)
Apollo: (Maybe...)
Apollo: (There was something, or someone, who might have ruined his plan!)

Then, I could just cut the chalk lines present altogether.

I think this would resolve your issue with this part, no? The last line is already in there, and I think it provides a pretty major clue. Does the addition of the further explanation about the chalk lines help resolve your issue?
Spoiler : :
I appreciate all the hard work you've put into this. Thank you! I've already made good progress toward the updates already, so hopefully sometime soon I'll have them all done. Thankfully, none of the changes are too great in scope. I am curious about your opinion on other QA topics, like narrative/dialogue/characters/presentation, but there's no obligation to write up anything more than you already have. If you could send me your Check 2 feedback on things like typos, though, that would be great--that way I can go ahead and make those adjustments while doing these rewrites.
Image

Image
User avatar
Enthalpy
Community Manager
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:40 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, limited Spanish

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by Enthalpy »

I'll give a standard review when that set of changes are done, because I'll want to re-play the trial anyways, and I'm a completionist. Here are the Check 2 notes I had, after stripping everything we've already gone over. They're stream of consciousness style, and I can tell me attentiveness was slipping by halfway through the trial. If you can't figure out what frame I'm talking about at any point, just ignore it.
Spoiler : :
Investigation:
F1686: Missing commas.
I just want to say that I appreciate Apollo's remark about Trucy using the Magic Panties a lot in the last few months. Dual Destinies was not kind to Trucy.
F100: future, I'll
F286: Apparently, I'm
F532: wood, and
F784: ago, we
F902: right, Athena?
I'm puzzled why neither Brushel nor Castor react when I present the other to them. Didn't Brushel say there was some collaboration between them?
Also, shouldn't Castor react to Trucy?
F1057: reporter, he
Wow, New Year's Turnabout reference.
When Athena and Apollo get kicked out, the hint is to talk to everyone. I... don't think that's quite right.
I'm confused why Lamiroir doesn't recognize Zak's photo. Lamiroir's blindness was caused by the shooting accident, right? She saw Zak's face.
Lamiroir should react to Trucy.
I really shouldn't need to go from Lamiroir to the theatre for Lamiroir to go away, and Trucy to leave questioning.
F1276: Missing word.
I... don't know if I quite get this officer Fell. Why does somebody with a backstory like that go police officer?
I can get "chalk lines added to Court Record" twice.
Double-check the condition to unlock going to the Wright Anything Agency to meet Franziska. I think I had done everything, but needed to go to a specific location first to unlock it.

Trial
F71: The second line spacing is a touch off.
F6: something, or
F44: De-capitalize the second "Hey"
F1090: I understand that you're trying to make these reporters sound insensitive, but "Do you think this is God's way of punishing you?" is not a question a realistic reporter in Japanifornia would ask. The AA setting is big-city enough to have Sunshine Coliseum, and big-city reporters don't introduce religion into a story. There's too much risk of alienating the audience/interviewee, and reporter culture leans secular. Might I suggest "Why did you feel comfortable using your father for such a dangerous trick, since you lost a father before?" That still puts blame on Trucy without saying she was a murderess.
F4645: "biscuits with butter" isn't quite a Judge-ism. Compare the judge's reaction to knowing Phoenix is the defendant in Turnabout Trump. You've already made the point that this is all very sad, so I would have the judge's reaction be a touch more subdued.
F2294: intensive
F2295: Between this and "biscuits with butter", since when has the judge had so many colorful expressions?
I'd suggest cutting the first sentence of second paragraph of preliminary findings.
F134: Capitalize.
F1518: German
For the record, I don't see much of a difference between Athena's dress length and Franziska's skirt length.
F279: Don't hyphenate.
F1427: a with -> with a
Got the contradiction. Nice.
There's a recurring problem with the health flash not being turned off.
F590: scaling, and
Note to self: see if I can speed up the save system. It takes a good 15-20 seconds to create a save.
F780: speak, or
F7381: was -> were
F806: you, Bailiff
It took a lot of fumbling for me to find the out-of-place emotion for Trucy's testimony. There are a few places (which I didn't write down, alas) where an emotion seems a little off. I think part of this is because I didn't understand the point of the testimony.
F1598: part of the
In the Mood Matrix, I don't get Thalassa's sorrow at watching Trucy perform.
F1758: witness's
F2193: Missing space after the comma.
In the timeline, is 4:27 after or before that 20-minute talk Brushel had with Thalassa?
When I go the path Accident Show -> Exam -> Sees Saw Trick, it won't let me present evidence for some reason.
F2761: Missing timer?
F3875: witness's
F7435: is, indeed
F4104: theater, and
F4113: witness's
F4360: witness's
F4398: witness's
F4534: witness's
F4544: Remove first comma.
Now for the rebuttal!
F4908 (and associated statement) do -> doing
You should give a different press convo at statements we've broken.
F5375: that, and
[D]isordered speech is not so much injury to the lips that give it forth, as to the disproportion and incoherence of things in themselves, so negligently expressed. ~ Ben Jonson
User avatar
drvonkitty
Posts: 567
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:25 am
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by drvonkitty »

Spoiler : :
Okay, all the major rewrites we've discussed are done. I've also polished a few areas and generally tried to emphasize Franziska's argument about the photograph/chalk lines. There's a couple things in Check 2 left to do, but whenever you're ready to replay it, all the substantive changes for the QA should be there. Do you want me to replay the full thing sometime this week to make sure there's no errors? Obviously, it'll take me a bit to get through it all (even with speed clicking!), but if you'd rather me make sure everything's functioning properly so that you don't run into any hiccups, I can. Otherwise, you'll have to let me know if there's anything broken in the new sections.

As always, no rush on this. I know you've already dumped lots of time here, and another replay will be several more hours, so please take your time.

Edit: To be clear, I'll run through the new parts that may cause game-breaking bugs, but I'm asking if you'd like me to do a full run-through to check for any glaring spelling errors/anything else like that.
Image

Image
User avatar
Enthalpy
Community Manager
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:40 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, limited Spanish

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by Enthalpy »

I have allergy-related insomnia tonight, so early response: just running through the new parts is fine.

As for what we've been discussing over PM, the bug I was fixing in May was in the save system, and it never even occurred to me that I was changing behavior on the reduce health actions. After thinking about it, you're right, and I'll restore the old behavior. Thankfully, it's only one line of code to do, and I'll need to ask Unas to update AAO soon anyways, because of an unrelated major bug in the trial save system.
[D]isordered speech is not so much injury to the lips that give it forth, as to the disproportion and incoherence of things in themselves, so negligently expressed. ~ Ben Jonson
User avatar
drvonkitty
Posts: 567
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:25 am
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by drvonkitty »

Enthalpy wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 8:31 am I have allergy-related insomnia tonight, so early response: just running through the new parts is fine.

As for what we've been discussing over PM, the bug I was fixing in May was in the save system, and it never even occurred to me that I was changing behavior on the reduce health actions. After thinking about it, you're right, and I'll restore the old behavior. Thankfully, it's only one line of code to do, and I'll need to ask Unas to update AAO soon anyways, because of an unrelated major bug in the trial save system.
I am also awake, though for no real valid reason.

I just went through and played through the two major sections that should have gameplay changes (the bit proving Lamiroir was in the theater as well as the new statement about Jane's movements on Castor's testimony). Both seem to be working fine. If you run into any other presentation errors, just let me know!
Image

Image
User avatar
drvonkitty
Posts: 567
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:25 am
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by drvonkitty »

Update: I've finally forced myself to suffer through gotten around to working on the variables to make the investigation run more smoothly in Part One. Everything was mostly behind the scenes, though I added one highly requested feature: asking Athena "What to do" should give a pretty clear hint about what the player has left to do to proceed. I've tested it pretty thoroughly, and tried to think of any and all contingencies, but always let me know if you find a bug or something else that doesn't make sense. I've also gone back and added a few new present conversations, mainly for fluff.

Also, looking back and seeing the way the variables and framing was done for this investigation was, well... it really was one of the first ever trials (and investigations) on AAO6, I guess. The amount of redundancies and bizarre/pointless choices is painful in retrospect. Hint for anyone making investigations nowadays: make a single variable called "Scene" that tracks the player's progress through the different phases of the investigation. It'll make your life SO much easier.

I know we're still mid-QA, but has anyone around here played through it? I'd love to hear some feedback, even if it's just "It's bad" or "It's good." I've really enjoyed reading people talking about it on the reddit post and on the discord. It really makes all the effort feel worth it to know that people are playing it (especially if they're enjoying it!)

Anyway, feel free to share your thoughts, or just to let me know if you've played it. Every piece of feedback makes me more likely to keep making things on AAO, y'know! :wink:
Image

Image
User avatar
Enthalpy
Community Manager
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:40 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, limited Spanish

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by Enthalpy »

Yeah, we're still mid-QA. Life has been hectic for me lately (read: apartment hunting is hard), so my AAO time has been sparse.
[D]isordered speech is not so much injury to the lips that give it forth, as to the disproportion and incoherence of things in themselves, so negligently expressed. ~ Ben Jonson
User avatar
drvonkitty
Posts: 567
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:25 am
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by drvonkitty »

No worries. Take your time! I'm also wrapping some things up personally (and getting ready to move, funnily enough!) so I completely understand. After 7 years of development, a few more weeks is nothing. :pearlhappy:
Image

Image
User avatar
Enthalpy
Community Manager
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:40 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, limited Spanish

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by Enthalpy »

Okay, my schedule has lightened up enough that I can get back to it. I finished skimming the investigation. It didn't seem like much changed, but not much needed to, so good here. Minor points:
Spoiler : :
I think that I went to talk to Lamiroir, didn't see an option to go to the detention center, left the Anything Agency, came back, and found Lamiroir was gone and I could certainly go to the Detention Center to talk with Trucy. Can you look into this? Maybe I missed the Detention Center the first time around, but this seems like a relatively straightforward fix with your variables.

In the last conversation with Trucy, Apollo should explicitly say why it's so important that this case goes to court. Is it their best chance to be able to convince Trucy that she's not the one responsible?

When Fell leaves, if there's still more to investigate, have Apollo say as much.
[D]isordered speech is not so much injury to the lips that give it forth, as to the disproportion and incoherence of things in themselves, so negligently expressed. ~ Ben Jonson
User avatar
drvonkitty
Posts: 567
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:25 am
Spoken languages: English

Re: [T][CE] A Turnabout Called Justice ☆ (Finally released)

Post by drvonkitty »

Glad to hear you've got the chance to play it! Should be easy fixes for everything you mentioned.
Image

Image
Post Reply