Early Twentieth Century
Murder Mysteries
Inspired by historical figures from Bellingham’s past — though the story, events, and dialogue are purely fictional.
Beneath the veneer of prosperity, tensions simmered. Business partnerships dissolved in bitter rivalries, secret deals were struck in smoke-filled backrooms, and more than one prominent citizen harbored dark secrets that could destroy reputations – or lives. It was in this atmosphere of ambition and dangerous secrets that tragedy would strike…
This immersive murder mystery experience takes place in the historic setting of early 1900s Bellingham at the Roeder residence. Guests will investigate clues, question suspects, and work to solve the mystery before the evening concludes.
A passionate heir to a pioneer farming family whose ancestral lands are threatened by industrial expansion. This character fights fiercely to preserve family legacy and agricultural values against the encroachment of corporate interests, representing the tension between old settlers and new money.
Arrive in character, but feel free to ask any questions about the game to the host. Here are some character attributes to help you get into character:
During the introductions phase, give this introduction about yourself. Feel free to paraphrase, but don't stray from the core concepts:
Split into small groups and spread this gossip about the other character that are not in earshot:
I've heard the Banker has been quietly buying up waterfront properties under false names, possibly to corner the market before some big announcement.
Workers at the cannery whisper that the Cannery Executive has been cutting corners on safety to boost profits — there was an accident last month they tried to cover up.
People say the Lumberman has been illegally cutting timber on disputed land, and there's a federal investigation brewing that could ruin them.
The Magnate's copper mine investments are failing — I heard they've been borrowing heavily to cover losses and might be facing bankruptcy.
The Partner seems unusually worried lately — I've seen them arguing with their spouse about business matters, saying some dealings have 'gone too far.'
The Poet has been writing scathing articles about local business corruption for eastern newspapers — someone's secrets are about to be exposed nationally.
The Railroad Baron has been spotted meeting with out-of-town investors — word is they're planning to bypass Fairhaven entirely and build a competing rail line.
Ask each person a question about where they were on the night of the murder:
I've heard you've been financing some questionable land deals. Is that true?
Your fishing operations run right through our watershed. Are you polluting our water?
You've been cutting timber on disputed land. What gives you the right?
Your mining operations could destroy our agricultural soil. How do you justify that?
You talk about conservation, but your spouse's business is destroying the environment. Explain that.
Your articles about land preservation — are you specifically targeting certain industrialists?
Your train routes cut right through family farmland. Did you compensate people fairly?
Answers to give:
Innocent: My family has owned this land for generations. We don't get involved in banking schemes or speculation.
Guilty: The Magnate was going to seize our family land through fraudulent foreclosure. I couldn't let that happen.
Innocent: Agricultural families built this county. We have nothing against honest fishermen who respect the land.
Guilty: They threatened to dam the river and flood our ancestral farm. I had to defend my family's legacy.
Innocent: Sustainable timber harvesting and farming can coexist. I don't oppose reasonable logging practices.
Guilty: The Magnate was going to let them clear-cut our heritage forest. Someone had to stop this destruction.
Innocent: I respect industrial progress, but not at the expense of agricultural families who built this region.
Guilty: You were planning to destroy our family cemetery to expand your mine. That was unforgivable.
Innocent: I appreciate your charitable work and share your concerns about preserving our community's character.
Guilty: Your spouse was going to bulldoze our family homestead for a new railroad spur. I had to protect it.
Innocent: Art and agriculture both celebrate the beauty of this land. I support cultural preservation efforts.
Guilty: The Magnate was going to expose how I've been sabotaging industrial equipment to protect our land.
Innocent: Transportation development and farming can work together when done thoughtfully and fairly.
Guilty: They planned to run a rail line right through our family graveyard. I couldn't allow such desecration.
Questions to ask:
I've heard you've been financing some questionable land deals. Is that true?
Your fishing operations run right through our watershed. Are you polluting our water?
You've been cutting timber on disputed land. What gives you the right?
Your mining operations could destroy our agricultural soil. How do you justify that?
You talk about conservation, but your spouse's business is destroying the environment. Explain that.
Your articles about land preservation — are you specifically targeting certain industrialists?
Your train routes cut right through family farmland. Did you compensate people fairly?
Answers to give:
Innocent: My family has owned this land for generations. We don't get involved in banking schemes or speculation.
Guilty: The Magnate was going to seize our family land through fraudulent foreclosure. I couldn't let that happen.
Innocent: Agricultural families built this county. We have nothing against honest fishermen who respect the land.
Guilty: They threatened to dam the river and flood our ancestral farm. I had to defend my family's legacy.
Innocent: Sustainable timber harvesting and farming can coexist. I don't oppose reasonable logging practices.
Guilty: The Magnate was going to let them clear-cut our heritage forest. Someone had to stop this destruction.
Innocent: I respect industrial progress, but not at the expense of agricultural families who built this region.
Guilty: You were planning to destroy our family cemetery to expand your mine. That was unforgivable.
Innocent: I appreciate your charitable work and share your concerns about preserving our community's character.
Guilty: Your spouse was going to bulldoze our family homestead for a new railroad spur. I had to protect it.
Innocent: Art and agriculture both celebrate the beauty of this land. I support cultural preservation efforts.
Guilty: The Magnate was going to expose how I've been sabotaging industrial equipment to protect our land.
Innocent: Transportation development and farming can work together when done thoughtfully and fairly.
Guilty: They planned to run a rail line right through our family graveyard. I couldn't allow such desecration.
Talk amongst yourselves to try and gather theories. This is unstructured time.
Once you have your theory, vote.
If called upon, give your final statement:
Innocent: My family has farmed this land for generations with honor and integrity. We've never resorted to violence to solve our problems. The Magnate's death is a tragedy, but I had nothing to do with it. I fight with words and law, not poison.
Guilty: Yes, I killed them! The Magnate was going to destroy everything my family built — our land, our heritage, our very graves. When industry threatens to bulldoze your ancestors' resting place, sometimes you have to take desperate measures to protect what's sacred.