The adaptation potential of The Case of the Speluncean Explorers lies in its presentation of the same facts through different judicial opinions, thereby keeping the determination of facts distinct from the evaluation of responsibility. A murder mystery game can translate this structure of multiple interpretations of the same case into a participatory process of judgment through multiple roles, asymmetric information, behavioral clues, and interactive mechanics. Zuixue uses character backstories, rules governing resource consumption and voting-based elimination, and character-specific skills to translate the original work’s jurisprudential debates into concrete interpersonal conflicts and contests of interest. Yet such an adaptation may also reduce the central question to a mystery-solving exercise focused on who inflicted the fatal injury. This article argues that The Case of the Speluncean Explorers is suitable for adaptation into a murder mystery game only if clues and post-game debriefings do not serve solely to identify the person responsible. The question of what happened must be treated separately from that of how the conduct should be evaluated.