# A Carnivore Did It! - PBF recruitment and discussion **URL:** \ **Category:** Play by Post\ **Tags:** pbf\ **Created:** [21 June 2026 12:03 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794 "2026-06-21T12:03:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/phil/32/1508_2.png) [@Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Phil)\ **Post date:** [21 June 2026 12:03 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/1 "2026-06-21T12:03:45Z")
See [Last game you bought? - #6137 by Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/last-game-you-bought/621/6137) for more info. > [@Last game you bought?](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/last-game-you-bought/621/6138): > > Ooh! Could I persuade you to run this as a PBF? Sure :). The game can be played as a co-op discussion, but it’d be prone to quarter-backing by whoever is best at processing the puzzle, and I don’t think it’ll work well via forum, so my initial thought is that each player solves it on their own and provides their solution as hidden text (with or without including their reasoning). I guess I’d just provide the set-up for each case, and once everyone has submitted an answer I can score them and move to the next case. I already have a house rule related to the time taken to find the solution. Officially you get 3, 2, or 1 stars depending on how quickly you solve the case; but solving it correctly-but-too-slowly gets you the same outcome (zero stars) as _getting the wrong answer_, which I _immediately_ rejected. I say that correctly figuring out the solution is _categorically better_ than getting the answer wrong. If we included timing, then it would be up to each player to time themselves. I think I’d provide the three thresholds, and folks can give _either_ their time _or_ the time bracket they fall into. I think I’d make that an optional inclusion as well, so folks can provide some timing info if they wish to, or leave it out if they don’t. * * * [The English rulebook is available on BGG](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/451594/a-carnivore-did-it/files). Here’s the important bit: ![How to be a detective](https://discussion.tekeli.li/uploads/default/original/3X/d/e/de083cd4655c74a21ddcf617c5d97f609b76077c.jpeg) Note that each suspect is either a **herbivore** or a **carnivore** , as denoted by the circular icon at the top-left of their card. Other characteristics of each suspect are their _name_, their _height_, and their numeric _position_ in the circular(!) “line-up”. Whenever relative positions are important, two suspects are only “next to” one another if they have consecutive numbers _or_ if they have the highest and lowest numbers. ---
**Author:** ![Whistle\_Pig](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/whistle_pig/32/1052_2.png) [@Whistle\_Pig](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Whistle_Pig)\ **Post date:** [21 June 2026 12:57 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/2 "2026-06-21T12:57:59Z")
I’d like to join, if I may 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/phil/32/1508_2.png) [@Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Phil)\ **Post date:** [21 June 2026 13:07 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/3 "2026-06-21T13:07:52Z")
Come one, come all :). If I run it the way I’m thinking above, then there’s no player limit. ---
**Author:** ![RossM](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/rossm/32/1021_2.png) [@RossM](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/RossM)\ **Post date:** [21 June 2026 13:28 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/4 "2026-06-21T13:28:46Z")
No player limit? Then yes! ---
**Author:** ![Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/phil/32/1508_2.png) [@Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Phil)\ **Post date:** [21 June 2026 14:10 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/5 "2026-06-21T14:10:08Z")
I’ve added a page from the rulebook to the initial post. ---
**Author:** ![dscheidt](https://discussion.tekeli.li/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/e480ec/32.png) [@dscheidt](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/dscheidt)\ **Post date:** [21 June 2026 15:06 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/6 "2026-06-21T15:06:07Z")
> [@Phil](#): > > I already have a house rule related to the time taken to find the solution. Officially you get 3, 2, or 1 stars depending on how quickly you solve the case; but solving it correctly-but-too-slowly gets you the same outcome (zero stars) as _getting the wrong answer_, which I _immediately_ rejected. I say that correctly figuring out the solution is _categorically better_ than getting the answer wrong I don’t know this game, and I am on my phone, so I can’t easily read the rules you posted. But there are all sorts of scenarios where being too slow is the same as being wrong, from defusing a time bomb to simple buzzer style trivia games, so I disagree with the categorical rejection. There certainly are other places where the time is an entirely unimportant artificial limit, but as I said I don’t know this game ---
**Author:** ![Assussanni](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/assussanni/32/11057_2.png) [@Assussanni](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Assussanni)\ **Post date:** [21 June 2026 15:12 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/7 "2026-06-21T15:12:32Z")
Definitely interested. Hopefully all the time I’ve spent on _Blue Prince_’s Parlo(u)r puzzles will be good preparation! ---
**Author:** ![RogerBW](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/rogerbw/32/3_2.png) [@RogerBW](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/RogerBW)\ **Post date:** [21 June 2026 15:20 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/8 "2026-06-21T15:20:35Z")
I’m certainly in! ---
**Author:** ![InkyBloc](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/inkybloc/32/1522_2.png) [@InkyBloc](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/InkyBloc)\ **Post date:** [21 June 2026 15:28 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/9 "2026-06-21T15:28:23Z")
I’ll play this into the ground! ---
**Author:** ![COMaestro](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/comaestro/32/1030_2.png) [@COMaestro](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/COMaestro)\ **Post date:** [21 June 2026 15:32 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/10 "2026-06-21T15:32:52Z")
Sounds fun! I’m in, too! ---
**Author:** ![Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/phil/32/1508_2.png) [@Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Phil)\ **Post date:** [22 June 2026 13:58 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/11 "2026-06-22T13:58:07Z")
I’ll probably start posting puzzles from tomorrow evening. I’ll maintain some kind of running score for the initial group of participants, and move to the next puzzle once those players have either submitted a solution or decided to pass (or have run out of time, if holding themselves to a time limit), but any latecomers and lurkers are welcome to play along at home as well. The puzzles start out easy, so the early rounds won’t take much of your time, but they’ll get trickier. ---
**Author:** ![Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/phil/32/1508_2.png) [@Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Phil)\ **Post date:** [23 June 2026 09:27 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/12 "2026-06-23T09:27:26Z")
[The game is afoot!](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-game-1/6797) For game 1 I’ve skipped the first couple of dossiers (which feature only three suspects), and we’ll probably reach a little over half way through the dossiers (difficulty levels). Depending on player interest, I was thinking I’d run two more games (always 8 cases each), and increasing the difficulty each time. I think game 1 will be almost entirely single-culprit cases; game 2 will be split between one and two culprits; and game three will start with two and include at least a couple of three-culprit cases from the final pair of dossiers. I might mix it up a little, but broadly that’s what I have in mind. ---
**Author:** ![Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/phil/32/1508_2.png) [@Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Phil)\ **Post date:** [24 June 2026 09:50 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/13 "2026-06-24T09:50:55Z")
FYI, a correct answer is a correct answer – I shan’t be deducting points for any logical mis-steps along the way (not least because I don’t wish to commit to analysing all the solutions to the more complicated cases :). ---
**Author:** ![Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/phil/32/1508_2.png) [@Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Phil)\ **Post date:** [1 July 2026 13:09 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/14 "2026-07-01T13:09:51Z")
> **If anyone wants ideas for notation...** > > I found the following simple system works well as the cases become more complex, such that working through chains of possibilities and consequences becomes necessary. > > Just draw columns in a lined notebook and treat each column as a possible scenario. Put the suspect numbers vertically in the left-most column, and then choose a theory (e.g. Peacock is lying) to consider in the current column, and follow the logical threads of that. If those threads lead you to some new information (e.g. Peacock cannot be lying), then that gives you a new and improved starting point for the _next_ column. Mark any starting points you know for certain (you might circle or shade them to indicate certain knowledge as opposed to mere possibility), and then rinse and repeat with a new theory in the next column. > > E.g.: noting **T** ruth / **L** ie, and **N** ot / **G** uilty: > > | Suspect | Theory 1 | Theory 2 | … | > | --- | --- | --- | --- | > | 1 | T N | L N | | > | 2 | L | L | | > | 3 | T | L | | > | 4 | L G | | | > | 5 | T N | G | | > > This way you can chase a lot of theories using a small amount of space (and obviously you don’t actually need column headings), so I found this quite effective. > > (n.b. It might take _multiple_ columns to reach a conclusion about a given theory, if there are multiple sub-branches of the initial theory to follow.) (Another suggestion would be to review Roger’s solutions for puzzles you’ve already completed, as he’s taken a very comprehensive approach.) ---
**Author:** ![RogerBW](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/rogerbw/32/3_2.png) [@RogerBW](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/RogerBW)\ **Post date:** [1 July 2026 14:17 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/15 "2026-07-01T14:17:48Z")
I was going to use proper Boolean symbols but typing them takes effort. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/phil/32/1508_2.png) [@Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Phil)\ **Post date:** [25 July 2026 08:42 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/16 "2026-07-25T08:42:22Z")
A bonus case during the intermission! This was one I rejected from dossier 12. It’s the quirkiest thing I’ve seen from the game, and I decided not to use it because… well… you’ll see. I thought you’d get a laugh out of it :). **7 suspects, 1 culprit, 3-4 lies** ![bonus_dossier12quirky](https://discussion.tekeli.li/uploads/default/original/3X/6/4/64e80301101618a58f6652c11667da9c8442a295.jpeg) ---
**Author:** ![InkyBloc](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/inkybloc/32/1522_2.png) [@InkyBloc](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/InkyBloc)\ **Post date:** [25 July 2026 13:21 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/17 "2026-07-25T13:21:51Z")
> **Untimed** > > Iguana did it. Panther, Bear, and Dog are lying. > > ~~Ok it is pretty funny that when they say 3-4 lies, they mean there are 3-4 lies in the solution, given that Iguana’s tautological claim could go either way.~~ > > Nevermind, I forgot Horse means Iguana is telling the truth. What’s funny about this one? ---
**Author:** ![RogerBW](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/rogerbw/32/3_2.png) [@RogerBW](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/RogerBW)\ **Post date:** [25 July 2026 13:49 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/18 "2026-07-25T13:49:34Z")
> **untimed** > > ↓ witness \ culprit → > > | | PA | PE | SH | IG | DO | HO | BE | > | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | > | PA | n | n | n | n | n | n | y | > | PE | y | n | y | y | n | y | y | > | SH | n | y | n | y | n | n | n | > | IG | | | | | | | | > | DO | y | n | y | n | n | y | y | > | HO | | | | | | | | > | BE | n | n | n | n | n | n | y | > > Looking at the 5 pure culprit statements: we need between 1 and 4 truths from them. That eliminates DO (there could be only 2 truths total) > > Looking down the diagonal, IG’s statement can be true if and only if IG, HO, or BE is true and the culprit. If BE is the culprit, that would make 5 truths, so BE is eliminated. > > What about IG as the culprit? We have 2 truths from the pure culprit statements so we need 1-2 more. If IG is true, and HO requires SH and IG true so is true, that works. If IG is false, HO is false and it doesn’t work because there aren’t enough truths. > > **Iguana is the culprit.** Panther, Dog and Bear are lying. ---
**Author:** ![Assussanni](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/assussanni/32/11057_2.png) [@Assussanni](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Assussanni)\ **Post date:** [25 July 2026 14:01 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/19 "2026-07-25T14:01:36Z")
> **I'm not sure I see what's quirky?** > > **Iguana** is the culprit, _Panther_, _Dog_ and _Bear_ are lying. > > Start by assuming bear is the culprit. This gives bear, panther, peacock, iguana and dog true, so not enough lies. > > So bear is not the culprit and panther and bear are lying. If peacock is false then dog and iguana would have to be false, which is too many lies. Therefore peacock is true and neither peacock nor dog are the suspect. > > Try shark true, which makes iguana the culprit and dog false. There can only be zero or one more lie: iguana and horse true fits this constraint and is logically consistent. ---
**Author:** ![Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/user_avatar/discussion.tekeli.li/phil/32/1508_2.png) [@Phil](https://discussion.tekeli.li/u/Phil)\ **Post date:** [25 July 2026 15:56 UTC](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794/20 "2026-07-25T15:56:56Z")
The weird part is Iguana’s statement being about Iguana. Iguana’s claim is that “I am telling the truth”, which would be all well and good if they had made any _other_ statement to apply that assertion to; but of course there isn’t one. So their statement provides no information at all; and although there’s a “correct” truth-or-lie value to make the solution work, it’s otherwise arbitrary/meaningless (with Horse’s agreement being equally meaningless, but forcing which value is needed for the solution). (That said, I don’t disagree with it being in the game, as it would gift too much information if suspects making statements about the truth of the culprit’s statement could not be the culprit.) It did also make me laugh that it’s not Bear :). [Next page](https://discussion.tekeli.li/t/a-carnivore-did-it-pbf-recruitment-and-discussion/6794.md?page=2)