Direct answer: Check the customer’s ID or supplied record, compare their answers and visible details, then use the database or scanner available in that encounter. Do not rely on a fixed Night 1–12 name list: current reports show that many customer identities can vary between runs.
Evidence-first identification sequence
- Start with the presented identity. Read the customer’s name and inspect the supplied ID, passport or other record instead of deciding from appearance alone.
- Check the record itself. Use the computer or database when the encounter provides one, and look for invalid documentation or a mismatch with the person at the counter.
- Question the customer. Compare answers about age, occupation or appearance with the available record.
- Inspect visible details. Re-check features such as a scar, complexion or another identifying detail; treat one strange trait as a clue, not an automatic verdict.
- Combine the evidence before the transaction finishes. A record mismatch plus a confirming answer or physical sign is stronger than one ambiguous observation.
- Act only after the check. The core risk is killing a human or allowing a threat to complete the purchase and return later.
Is there a complete Night 1–12 Doppelganger list?
There are published night-by-night lists, but they conflict with newer player reports and with a current guide that describes randomized shifts. Some scripted encounters may stay fixed, while many returning customers can change identity between runs. A static name table can therefore turn into a false-positive tool after an update or on a different playthrough.
Use a list only as a research lead. The current ID, answers and visible evidence in your shift must decide the result.
What not to use as a sole test
Do not reduce the encounter to one memorized visual tell or one copied customer order unless the current game itself provides confirming evidence in the shift. Randomized presentation and version changes can make a screenshot, name list or isolated feature misleading.
Norbert is also a poor classification shortcut. Current guides agree that harming him creates later problems, but they disagree on whether he should be labeled a Doppelganger at all. See the entity database for the shared safe action and the unresolved label.
Why this answer is community-documented
The official store explains the investigation loop and the need to distinguish humans from shapeshifting monsters. The exact step-by-step inspection workflow is synthesized from two independent community threat guides. It is written as a cautious decision process rather than an exhaustive list of guaranteed tells.
If the evidence is inconclusive
Pause and re-check the available record before acting. This guide does not publish a fabricated certainty rule for an encounter where the visible evidence remains ambiguous.
Return to the entity database or review other source tiers.