Lucas Piccoli
Argentina
Santa Fe
Santa Fe
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Hi everyone!

A couple of weeks ago I played the last case of the base box (Ystari version): "The Pilfered Paintings". I spent hours investigating this case, and even though I got 60 points and most of the things right, there was a whole portion of the case that left me puzzled. Also Holmes seems to cheat (he wouldn't know certain things visiting only the places he says he did. Not even guessing).

So I would like to know if my issues with this particular case were fixed in the newer Space Cowboys version. Could anyone pm me a photo of the resolution page? Questions, answers and Sherlock's steps.

Also if anyone has played it recently and wants to discuss aspects of it, also pm me!

Thanks in advance!

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Timothy Adamson
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
What I concluded from playing the base game is that Holmes can only answer the questions using the leads listed. He may say additional information not found in those leads. I also have Ystari version. I doubt this changed.

In at least one West End case he does actually cheat (can not answer questions from the leads given).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lucas Piccoli
Argentina
Santa Fe
Santa Fe
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
timonkey wrote:
What I concluded from playing the base game is that Holmes can only answer the questions using the leads listed. He may say additional information not found in those leads. I also have Ystari version. I doubt this changed.

In at least one West End case he does actually cheat (can not answer questions from the leads given).


For most previous cases I agree. But in this one in particular, the motive of the crime is pretty obscure if you only follow Holmes' leads. I followed all of those, then like 10 more and still wasn't able to deduce that part. In this specific case, the leap of logic to get to that answer is pretty big. Also, the explanation behind the motive doesn't completely add up. Everything else about the case really made sense and was enjoyable...

Except a "bug" in one of the extra questions. The answer doesn't make sense. I looked it up online, and my answer was the same as the one from the old videogame, based in the first edition of the game. So it's another occurrence of inconsistent changes made to the cases by later editions, leaving clue traces of the first versions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Timothy Adamson
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Can you clarify your issue, and also the party two bug?

I looked up my notes, and I didn't see any discrepancies there. We didn't answer all the part two questions, or realize the extent of the answer in question four, but otherwise the answers made sense as far as I remember.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lucas Piccoli
Argentina
Santa Fe
Santa Fe
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
timonkey wrote:
Can you clarify your issue, and also the party two bug?

I looked up my notes, and I didn't see any discrepancies there. We didn't answer all the part two questions, or realize the extent of the answer in question four, but otherwise the answers made sense as far as I remember.


I'll answer inside spoiler tags:

Regarding part 2,
Spoiler (click to reveal)
There's a question about the role of Herbert Cofman. In the Ystari version, the answer was that he was the driver in the getaway coach for Norris after he killed Matthew Cole in the Dover Hotel. But, even though I answered that probably Cofman was an accomplice in that murder, his main role in the story was to drive up the price of the paintings in the auction. Why? Because they needed to outbid Agnes Smedley (which they knew she would bail once the stakes were high), but also they knew how much money the Museum was allowed to spend. So Cofman bid high enough to leave Agnes out, but low enough for the Museum to outbid him. (Remember that Norris wanted the museum to buy the fake paintings and Cofman was his accomplice)
When looking for answers online, I found the solutions for the PC old game. The solution was that Cofman was raising the bids in the auction. So the Ystari version changed the solution but left traces and clues of the old one. I'll tell you more: Hypsilanti was probably the one to be suspected to have a gettaway coach driver because he left the party early that night, with his assistant on a coach.


About my main issue with the core mystery:
Spoiler (click to reveal)
I got the following right:
- The artist was made up. It was Pierre Donet, a frustrated artist publishing his work as "found" paintings of De Kuyper.
- Cole was the robber, he entered the museum inside a big crate that was sent to Norris. Norris left him locked up in the storage room and gave him a key.
- Norris killed Cole and burned him and the paintings.

Here's what I wasn't sure about: what was the MOTIVE behind it all?
What I thought:
- Norris came to know about the existence of these paintings while in Belgium and made an arrangement with someone there to make the Museum buy the paintings and split the money half/half. Then, get the paintings stolen and profit from insurance, somehow. Then, get the paintings and sell them to a private non-ethical collector. Cole didn't want to give him the paintings so he killed him, also to cover his connection to the crime.

Actual Answer (From what I can recall, pardon me if mistaken):
- Norris and Donet became friends in Belgium. Norris knew Donet had new De Kuyper paintings (which he thought were fake) and they plotted to sell Donet's paintings to the museum. Apparently, everything was going according to plan until the Director of the museum decided to make a De Kuyper exhibition with all his works gathered in the same place at once. Norris feared that the experts could discover that the new paintings were fake after comparing them side by side with the others. He became worried he could be exposed, so he decided to steal the paintings before the exhibition. Then Cole (probably thinking they were the real deal and that Norris was trying to tell him they were fake to pay him less money), refused to destroy them. So Norris killed him and torched him and the paintings to erase his involvement.


To me, what doesn't make sense (by going to the same places as Holmes, and like 8 others which I felt were relevant) is:
Spoiler (click to reveal)

I knew Norris was in Belgium in a vacation, and that he cooked up the plan there. But how was I supposed to know that Donet (the authenticator) was a direct accomplice of Norris? Nowhere it is implied that they were such good pals.

Also, if the paintings were authenticated by Donet, the best De Kuyper's expert out there, why would Norris fear that they would get to him if the paintings were discovered to be fake? Donet would have been the one to blame there (he issued the certificate). Norris could have said: "I made sure they were certified and they were".

If they paintings passed Donet's certification, why would he be afraid that they could be exposed as fake by comparison with the others? Wouldn't the same risk be present if De Kuyper's followers visited the museum to see the paintings some other day? To me, the idea that a fake could only be discovered when physically side by side with an original is ludicrous.


Anyway, that's what I can remember from the case .
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.