The Thief of Sinkwood Inn (it is good)

[Lana]

Kevork. he won't give me the key to all the rooms

I am blocked, I can not leave the hostel, I can not use the raft because of the weather.
Please help!!!

[LesbianBear]

Have you looked around outside the inn ? After going back inside he should give you the key

[Snowy Owl]

at the back of the back of the inn in the water are some papers read them, then you can progress
that worked for me at least

[Lana]

Thanks it is good :)

[Anton]

Thank you so much guys, I was stuck on this and now I can continue :)

[tmaddox]

That whole quest is kind of confusing. Lots of people to talk to and items to look at but I honestly still don't know how you determine the culprit.

[joridiculous]

Originally posted by tmaddox:

That whole quest is kind of confusing. Lots of people to talk to and items to look at but I honestly still don't know how you determine the culprit.

Its fairly obvious IF you pay attention to what you find and talk to. Someone needs the book more then any one else.

[tmaddox]

Originally posted by joridiculous:

Originally posted by tmaddox:

That whole quest is kind of confusing. Lots of people to talk to and items to look at but I honestly still don't know how you determine the culprit.

Its fairly obvious IF you pay attention to what you find and talk to. Someone needs the book more then any one else.

Eh, it was just before bed, maybe I was not paying enough attention by then.

[joridiculous]

I almost got it wrong, by overlooking the one important clue i found LoL

[MB]

I got alls the clues - from what I found, from the discussions, from outside the house and the visual clues as well. And still, I could not tell who is the thief. I mean - I did not find the book itself! The clues I found would give me some understanding of everybody's intentions, but even if some people might have use for the book this is not enough to call them guilty! Even when the case got solved by the inspector I could not figure out how I was supposed to have guessed this.
OK, I'm obviously a poor inspector and a much better painter. ;-)

[WardDragon]

Originally posted by MB:

Even when the case got solved by the inspector I could not figure out how I was supposed to have guessed this.

Yeah, I got it wrong too. I thought it was the guy who was trying to buy the ruins because there was plenty of evidence that he knew the ruins had relics and he wanted to get rid of the relics so that the university wouldn't get to take over the ruins. After the detective said it was Helena, I guess that kind of makes sense. The college girl did refer to "Aunt H." owning the ruins, being sick, and possibly selling, and there was the half-finished letter in Helena's room that implied the same thing. I guess that's why it's supposed to be her, although I have no idea why she would need the book because I figured she would already know how to get into the ruins? But apparently not. Anyhow, it was still fun questioning everyone and trying to figure it out :)

[Naideus]

See, I feel like there are parts of this quest that could've been implemented better. I actually overthunk all the clues quite a bit and ended up making things unnecessarily complicated when I could've concluded things much sooner. Let me outline below my convoluted train of thought:

-I fell off the deep end comparing the handwritings between the different letters. The one in Vadim's room is obviously supposed to be from Helena, talking about "getting me a few more glowstones" and all. But the handwriting is messy and completely different from the neat, unfinished letter found in Helena's room. This prompted me to think the letter is written by an impostor trying to fool Vadim into thinking it's from Helena.
-Who could the impostor be? Well we know there should only be one person who's been sneaking into the ruins and has access to the relic... Nikol! In fact this makes sense because Helena isn't keen on disturbing the ruins and so couldn't have been "digging around" for relics. Now why would Nikol be a part of this scheme? For one, she has to hide the fact that she's been trafficking priceless relics from her aunt to avoid angering her, but she's blackmailing Vadim on her aunt's behalf to extract more glowstones from the sale of the property to ensure her aunt will receive enough to afford her medical treatment! What a thoughtful niece!
-Nikol actually has a journal where we can compare the handwritings to firmly establish it was her blackmailing Vadim! Let's see... hm, no, the handwritings doesn't seem to be Nikol's either. No. There must be a third person! But, who could it be?
-Nikol's a student from the University. Who else is from the University? The historian, silly! The two must know each other! The handwriting on the letter to Vadim is messy, the historian has medicine for shaky hands... it checks out! And so the historian must've taken the relic from Nikol, who stole it from aunt Helena's property, and is using it to blackmail Vadim so he can... split the extra profit with Helena? Are they in this together?
-Well they must be! The historian has a shovel in his possession (where he stores his medicine), Helena has muddy boots in her room... they must've worked together to bury the book in the backyard! Helena obviously couldn't do it without someone's help, being sick and all. It's a conspiracy to rip off the filthy merchant, make him pay extra to obtain the land, before revealing that there are tons of relics at the site so the ownership defaults to the University anyways! Helena gets enough glowstones for medical treatment, the historian gets his position at the University back... it's a win-win!
-Except, there is no option to select more than 1 culprit, so really, it was all just in my delusional head.
I ended up picking the right answer, but you know that feeling of false closure near the end of a good detective story, where the culprit has been identified but something just doesn't feel quite right? Yeah, I feel like I'm left perpetually in that state by the end of this quest, and that the real answer's still lying somewhere out there, waiting to be unveiled.

[WardDragon]

Originally posted by nepenthe:

Naideus -

You are making this puzzle unnecessarily complicated. Historian Omiros laments the loss of his code of runes (RUNES). He needs this to explore the Tiffmoor Ruins. Our traveler (wannabe detective) discovers the code in Helena's room.

True, but if you ask about it she says it's a poem from her ancestors, or something to that effect. I wasn't 100% convinced by that, but it seemed plausible to me. In fact, I still don't understand why she wouldn't know the runes in the first place seeing as how she owns the ruins and has whatever her ancestors passed down to her. It made no sense to me that she would need the book to enter the ruins. That's why I figured it was Vadim trying to get in there first so that he could hide/destroy all the relics to prevent the professor from finding them. Then he'd legally be allowed to buy the ruins, and it would be easier to convince Helena to sell if he could "prove" that the ruins were empty. I really wanted to confirm with the professor if that rune code was what got stolen or not, but I didn't see that option. However, I also remember that he disappeared around that point and I didn't figure out where he went until after I spoke to the detective. Was it in fact possible to ask him about the rune code if you found him before talking to the detective? That's the missing piece that would make the mystery feel complete to me.

[Naideus]

Originally posted by WardDragon:

Was it in fact possible to ask him about the rune code if you found him before talking to the detective? That's the missing piece that would make the mystery feel complete to me.[/spoiler]

When the detective arrives, the historian will walk outside to stand by the dock. It is, in fact, possible to bring the topic of Helena's "Glyphs" up with him, but he just mumbles and says he can't translate the meaning without his book, so it doesn't lead anywhere.

[WardDragon]

Originally posted by Naideus:

Originally posted by WardDragon:

Was it in fact possible to ask him about the rune code if you found him before talking to the detective? That's the missing piece that would make the mystery feel complete to me.[/spoiler]

When the detective arrives, the historian will walk outside to stand by the dock. It is, in fact, possible to bring the topic of Helena's "Glyphs" up with him, but he just mumbles and says he can't translate the meaning without his book, so it doesn't lead anywhere.

Oh, cool! Thanks for the clarification :) I'm glad that they did include that option, although his answer wasn't as decisive as I was hoping it would be. I still would have been confused even if I had found him. I pretty much managed to talk myself into thinking each person could have done it :-P

[MB]

Originally posted by WardDragon:

I still don't understand why she wouldn't know the runes in the first place seeing as how she owns the ruins and has whatever her ancestors passed down to her.

Exactly what I was thinking too, so I saw no reason to call her guilty.