Courtrooms & Contradictions
A Courtroom Drama Role-Playing Game
Please note that this page is very work-in-progress. I need to flesh these out into a more detailed set of rules, including rules for beginning the game and rules detailing courtroom procedure. I also plan to include some examples.
In this game, players will take on the positions of detectives and lawyers vying to determine if the defendant is guilty or not guilty. This game is about telling stories and pointing out contradictions, and trying to create a courtroom drama with twists and turns as everyone searches for the truth.
Roles
The game may be played with as few as 3 players and as many as 6. Each game must have:
- A Defense Attorney
- A Prosecutor
- A Judge
If there are more players, then the additional players will play as:
- The Defense's Detective (otherwise played by the defense attorney)
- The Prosecutor's Detective (otherwise played by the prosecutor)
- The Witnesses (otherwise played by the judge)
The Prosecuting Attorney will call witnesses and present evidence to prove the defendant is guilty. The Prosecuting Attorney also has the opportunity to look for contradictions in the Defense Attorney's conjectures.
The Defense Attorney will cross examine these witnesses and look for contradictions, also presenting some amount of evidence.
The witnesses are brought in by the two lawyers, and give their descriptions of the cases. The prosecution player gives the witness player a few facts that they want the witness to include, and then the witness player acts out their testimony, incorporating these details.
The detectives act as the leads during the investigation sections, and act as counsel to their teammate during the trial segments.
Investigation
Optionally, these games may include investigation scene interludes where each party gathers clues from the crime scene and other areas related to the crime. The judge arbitrates the proceedings, deciding whether to accept evidence and witnesses, and rendering a final verdict.
Procedures
Each trial must be resolved within 3 days. At the end of one day, if there's still room for reasonable doubt, the game will continue by allowing more investigation to occur. At the end of the third day, the judge must render a final verdict.
In all cases, the new witnesses and pieces of evidence will be largely made up by the players.
Players have a limited ability to introduce these new factors, including details that contradict with the case as established, in order to sway the judge to their view of how the crime occurred. They can get an edge on their opponents by calling out real contradictions in their opponents' logic, or by explaining how the events could have occurred or not occurred even with the opponents' new evidence.