[eX_ploit]

Originally Posted by haguruma

Please show us where it says that

Right here.

You can create whatever sort of tale you like to satisfy your grudge. I am not interested.

Featherine doesn't care about what kind of story she gets to read, but she still wants the answers, the questions Why, Who and How are always central to a mystery and changing those is like changing an equation. What you are basically saying is that EP7 is a lie and therefore unnecessary to the mystery story.
Van Dine 16. Nothing should be depicted in a story that exceeds the necessary. (EP8 Manga Vol.4)

Umineko was always a mix of mystery and fantasy. The gameboards themselves are mysteries and meta-world is fantasy. Yasu's confession happens in the meta-world witch theater, and not on the gameboard, therefore this red is ineffective here. Reds never apply to the meta-world.

You are moving the goalposts here. An accomplice is an assistant who helps the culprit orchestrate certain scenes, convince non-accomplices of something. An accomplice is NOT an independent murderer. As soon as you say that 3 people committed individual murders, with their individual goals in mind, then you cannot say that there is one true culprit.

Where are you taking these definitions from? Things like culprit and accomplice have never been explicitly defined in Umineko except for purple minigame in Ep.8, which doesn't influence other gameboards. An accomplice may be someone who doesn't kill, but it could also be someone who kills.

Eva's and Hideyoshi's murder in EP1:
Rosa is dead (Concerning the unidentified corpses, all their identities are hereby guaranteed. (Regarding EP1, mentioned by Bern in EP4 ???) and George and Jessica are watched over by Natsuhi and Battler in the parlour.
Kanon's murder in EP1:
Rosa is dead (Concerning the unidentified corpses, all their identities are hereby guaranteed. (Regarding EP1, mentioned by Bern in EP4 ???) and George and Jessica are together with Battler and Natsuhi after checking the crime scene.
Genji, Kumasawa, and Nanjo's murder in EP1:
Rosa is dead (Concerning the unidentified corpses, all their identities are hereby guaranteed. (Regarding EP1, mentioned by Bern in EP4 ???) and George and Jessica are together with Battler and Natsuhi in the study.
Natsuhi's murder in EP1:
Rosa is dead (Concerning the unidentified corpses, all their identities are hereby guaranteed. (Regarding EP1, mentioned by Bern in EP4 ???) and George and Jessica are together with Battler in the parlour.

Rosa is not dead
The red which you presented does not confirm death status. It only confirms identities of those who are known to be dead, not the other way around.
Battler didn't investigate Rosa's body, he doesn't even mention if she has any wounds.

Nanjo's murder in EP3:
Kinzo, Krauss, Natsuhi, Hideyoshi, Rudolph, Kyrie, Rosa, Maria, George, Gohda, Kumasawa, Genji, Shannon, Kanon are dead before Nanjo was killed!
Neither Jessica, nor Battler, nor Eva were the culprit who murdered Nanjo!
Nanjo was murdered!

I didn't yet figure this out, but I want to hear you opinion on this.
Considering how Shkannontrice solution doesn't respect red death proclamations, what exactly prevents me from declaring that someone of those people, for example George, was not dead as human, but rather dead as a personality, and it was his other personality that killed Nanjo?

It is not mentioned otherwise, therefore there is no reason to doubt its applicability.

There is a reason to doubt it if that can solve some mystery.

Even more, it would be breaking the game if her status was changed without mentioning that it would be.

Why exactly?

What you mean would be "He was together with Jessica in Jessica's room when he died", but the sentence reads "He died together with Jessica in Jessica's room". It is と共に死んだ not　と共にいて、死んだ.

No, what I mean is something like
"The old man died with his family".
It can be interpreted both ways, that he died and his family died at the same time, or that he died while his family was near him.

So, when it is convenient for you then body and name can be seperated?

When real death is involved then it's nothing unusual.
Let's recall our solutions. They are actually very similar, and only differ in one detail.
In both of them Kanon comes into the room in some body, switches with Battler in the closet, and then somehow dissappears from the guestroom, while the body in which he came remains in the closet. In your variant that happens because Yasu turns off his Kanon personality, while in my variant it happens because he is shot with a gun through the closet's door after Erika deduces that the only place where Battler can hide is the closet. But notice how my variant answers both how and why it happened, while your variant only answers how. Why exactly did Yasu turn off Kanon at that exact time?

In this setting she was a servant until she found the gold and succeeded Kinzo, she simply upheld the facade of nothing having changed. Going by your logic, the Queen of England would stop being the Queen of England if she pretended to be a commoner.

Servant and head are not exclusive titles. Being one doesn't prevent you from being the other. If she works for Natsuhi and Krauss, she is their servant.

EP1 contains, conversations about the fact that Shannon is not her true name and that Kanon's name is also false.

And it also mentions that all other servants from fukuin house use fake names too.
There is some evidence in the game that supports Shannon=Kanon, but there is no evidence that a 3rd personality exists.

It is mentioned that Beatrice is "the ruler of Rokkenjima during the night". Natsuhi and others mention the rumor of Kinzo having a secret lovechild with his mistress. Natsuhi's last words to the culprit are "I would have never imagined that something like you truly existed..."

But there is no link which connects this secret child to Yasu.

Well, apart from Ryukishi officially revealing the solution to that one way back in 2011 already:

That's the exact solution I was talking about. It contradicts both Knox's 8th and Will's solution.

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

It's still an idiosyncrasy of Maria's worldview, and the fact that no one asks Maria 'who did the Beatrice who gave you the letter look like?' is still a valid point.

And yet Maria understood what they wanted and told them that Beatrice looks just like on portrait.

You're cherrypicking. Right before the line you bolded, she says, "I didn't know anyone who spoke that way."

This doesn't contradict my point.
She first tried to identify the speech but after failing to do that, she looked at her, and that's when she realized that she can't recognize her at all.

Maria concluded that this was a new person based on the way they were speaking; she never even mentions their appearance or visual attributes or anything.

There is no reason to believe that Maria had that habit before she met with Beatrice.

It's pretty much for the same reasons she pursues love with Jessica and George, plus a little extra stuff. Maria never challenges her on everything, indulges her, and together they can create a safe pretend land where no one hurts the other one. Their friendship is a coping mechanism for the both of them for their issues (which also sort of aggravates their problems and causes a bit of a folie a deux).

How does your version explain this strange deal between them:

......As long as you keep my little promise, I will greet you the next time you come to this island."

"Uu-! I'll keep it. What's the promise?!"

"Well, to start... When you get home, wash your hands. Then, rinse out your mouth. You must not complain about this, for it is an important part of a witch apprentice's training."

"I'll do it! Every day, when I come home, I'll wash my hands! I'll rinse out my mouth! If I do that, will I see you again?!"

"I promise it. If you keep your end of the promise, your body will be cleansed, and I will regain even more of my magical power. ......If that happens, then I will show you magic that is even more incredible the next time you come."

"Uu-! I'll keep my promise! No matter what!! I'll do it! I'll become your friend and a witch apprentice!"

Please explain why Rosa would get completely irate, abusive, upset, angry, or unreasonable just about every time Maria brings up Beatrice. Please explain why Rosa considers all her witch-talk 'creepy' and doesn't understand why she's still indulging in magic fantasy-play at her age. Please explain how Rosa, who is utterly traumatized at the mere mention of Beatrice due to her childhood incident, would pretend to be Beatrice for extended periods of time.

You can't, because this is stupid, and completely ignores Rosa's characterization. That Beatrice functions as a 'good mother' to Maria is part of why Rosa feels threatened by her, in addition to other things.

I can. You throw this word "characterization" around like it means something. But according to your own Shkannontrist views Shannon's and Kanon's characterization doesn't mean anything, because that's only an illusion that Yasu acts out. The only thing we know about the characters is how they act in front of others. Rosa is embarassed that her daughter is mentally impaired, and gets angry when she can't hide it from others.

'was keeping everyone in the fucking parlor at gunpoint'. Also, pfft, yea, like Natsuhi is letting Jessica out of her line of sight for anything.

She wasn't keeping anyone at gunpoint. Gun was for defence from external enemies. She didn't suspect anyone at that point in time. And Battler got from parlor to kitchen alone just fine.

It does according to Ryukishi's interviews and the mangas. If they are a [red]corpse[/red], they are a dead body. If their identities are guaranteed, the corpse is that person, for sure. Therefore, by seeing Rosa's corpse with no unidentifiable face, the red is saying that Rosa is 100% confirmed dead by the red. That's how this particular red is meant to be interpretted according to the author.

You got it completely wrong. I answered it already for haguruma above.

Sure it is, and yes he does. Moved corpses don't leave blood trails, for example, or do anything else that would leave an actual clue. He only describes blood for the sake of the grotesque imagery, not for realism. (Lol, Ryukishi describing gore realistically)

And where is your proof of that?

Genji is depicted with having an exceptionally large skillset of tasks he can perform in both normal scenes and fantasy ones, especially ones that seem to derive from his time as a war refugee.

Also, you know, if someone can use knowledge of cake decorating to disguse themselves as foliage to hide from troops, like what happened IRL in Vietnam...

Okay. Let's look at it from a different angle. Even if he can disguise bodies, our point of discussion was if Eva was thinking that it was a game or not. For her to think that it as a game she needed to be there in the shed and observe how her relatives gather there, lie down and then Genji disguises them.

Even if we concede that Shkannontrice doesn't make sense, that could just as easily because of Ryukishi's shortcomings as a reader rather than HURR HURR DOUBLE-TRICKED YOU.

I don't deny that as a posiibility, but I won't accept that before I thoroughly explore other posiibilities.

Erm...no. That's now how Golden Truth is defined at all; it's much more personal, and stands regardless of what other people seem to think: See, Ange's golden truth in EP8 (It's not typed out in the font color but the prose describes it as such, explicitly).

Golden Truth seems to effectively be 'headcanon'.

Golden truth is not even defined. It's one of the puzzles to figure out what it actually is.
I have a theory about it.
The three witches are all tied to colored text.
Lambdadelta is the witch of certainty, and she is red. Red truth represents certainty. Something that is known to be true.
Bernkastel is the witch of possibility, and she is blue. Blue truth represents possibility. Something that may be true, but not neccesarily.
Beatrice is the golden witch, and so the golden truth must represent the same thing that Beatrice herself represents.
And what is it that Beatrice represents? I think it is illusion or deception.

Now you're just being difficult and contrarian. There is a difference between something covered up by cloth and something layered in blood and you know it. No matter how bloody Jessica's face is, her eyes mightv'e been left open, or the shape of the face might match, etc. etc.

All of that might be or might not be. As long as there is nothing that explicitly contradicts my theory, it is possible. I remember that detectives authority allows one to confirm death status when investigating, but does it say anything about the identity of the body? Battler has observed both Shannon's and Kanon's faces but couldn't figure out that it's the same face.

But Shannon's breasts follow all proper visual cues, apparently, and demonstrating their falseness requires touching them, according to the prose.

According to what prose? Did I miss something?

It's in the text. When Erika gives up her Detective's Authority, she loses her ability to tell if a body is 100% dead, and the TIPS even change to reflect that. The detective cannot misjudge the living or dead status of a corpse, it's how their rights are defined in Beato's game. And EP5 confirms that in every other episode, Battler was the detective and all that implied.

Yes. But it was never about observation, but about investigation. Simple glance at something from distance won't confirm anything.

He still checked, by his own narration; especially since he actually entertained the idea that Jessica might've held a conversation with that wound for like a half-minute.

Okay. But just because he checked wound doesn't change anything. It's not like I'm arguing that wound is fake.

You're the one arguing that he definitely didn't, and Haguruma demonstrated that isn't the case.

I'm not arguing that he definitely didn't. Possibility is not enough to deny something, but its more than enough to propose something.

Except Jessica likes Kanon

Except she doesn't like him anymore after he rejected her and trampled her brooch.

and Rosa isn't on the island when most of Beatrice's nightly pranks occur.

Do you have information on when exactly all of Beatrice's pranks occur, and when exactly Rosa is on the island to make such assertion?

You'd think people would notice that shenanigans only happen when Rosa comes over to spend the night; it stretches belief even worse than Shannon doing it. Atleast she's there all the time.

My point was that she was the one who started doing them long time ago when she lived on Rokkenjima, not the one who did all of them.

Nah. Case in point, Will and Ange themselves, who both symbolize sympathetic, intelligent readers who either A) Have an actual reason to be invested or B) are respectful enough not to treat it like a toy.

It's funny that you mentioned Will here, because he is not interested in this story at all, and admits that he wouldn't be solving it if not forced by Bern.

It was both; Battler's win condition was to demonstrate that he understood Beato's gameboard. Erika's win condition was to demonstrate otherwise. The Logic Error technically satisfies her win condition but with a few added benefits; however in either case, proving or disproving the Logic Error required exposing a part of Beato's heart, by Battler's own admission.

That's what it looked like. But it doesn't make any sense if you think about it. Why would Battler need to prove that he understands Beato's gameboard? He already proved that by becoming the territory lord. But on the other hand he wanted to revive Beatrice. And that's exactly why he accepted this game. And he knew from the beginning that there was no logic error, it was all a setup to revive Beatrice.

Then arguing with you is worthless. You don't care about what the author had to say in a narrative built around understanding the emotions and intentions of an author.

Lol. Didn't know that authors were such delicate creatures.

Well, yes, but it was Beatrice who actually did the dealing blow, by exploiting Shkananigans (TM).

Well, Shkananigans are not actually required to solve that logic error.

Well, that and he out and out said that a red/blue battle isn't what she (Clair, who represents Yasu's true will and final regrets) truly wants.

Except that Clair might be Bern's puppet, who creates an illusion of Yasu.

Genji's in on it, and he's the guy in charge of the servant roster and staff.

Genji is not their boss, nor is he the one who pays their salaries.

1) Beatrice has nothing to gain, this is stated in red. She's not AIMING to gain anything.

Factual error. Beatrice has nothing to gain from relatives solving epitaph.

2) Beatrice, both Meta-Beatrice ans Yasu-as-Beatrice, clearly want to be stopped. Either from Battler remembering, or from somebody killing them, or both.

They clearly want to be stopped....with astronomically low probability. That's not what I would call clearly wants to be stopped.

3) EP5 and EP6 both strongly imply that atleast the first twilight is faked, or that adult accomplices are lead to believe it's faked for gaining their cooperation. This is seconded by "Our Confession"

I don't understand your point here.

4) Yasu's defining character traits are that she hates herself and feels incapable of finding happiness on her own terms. It's not really ABOUT being stuck on the island; she stays there because she wants Battler to make good on her promise, because it would mean (in her mind) that someone values her as herself underneath all her masks, and that she can have happiness.

Isn't there a contradiction here? Battler gave his promise to Shannon, not to Yasu.
He doesn't even know who the fuck is Yasu.

Her issue isn't that she feels trapped as such, so much as she feels displaced. The life and family and even body she was meant to have are all denied for her, and so she feels that any life she can make for herself would be basically a lie. So she either wants to wipe everything away so she can close everything up and be remembered for a happy lie, or she wants someone to take her out of everything and make a life WITH her, which atleast would be 'true' for that other person.

Essentially, this is what the furniture complex means. She doesn't see herself as a 'true' human who is deserving or capable of creating a life for herself due to her emotional issues and her life circumstances, which Genji basically arranged for her to make her a prop in Kinzo's redemption arc. She is constantly forced to bottle up her own feelings and wants and desires to play parts for other people, either as Shannon, as Kanon, as Beatrice, whoever.

So she doesn't feel like the protagonist of her own life. And yes, this is in large part due to her own actions, but she sees everything having been effectively set in stone when Natsuhi threw her away, if not before then due to being an incest rape-baby. Yasu is disgusted with herself, her origins, this family, her life, and pretty much all her possible futures. In the manga, she even compares herself to Kinzo because all her romantic options are incestuous.

So, yea. Yasu basically snapped and wants someone to love her, validate her, and make a life with her, and she wants them to reach out and do all this without her having to ask for it or it doesn't mean anything to her. So the murders are one, final, desperate cry for help, and if no one stops her, then...

If no one stops her, maybe no one every really loved the real her anyway. She might as well disappear and take everyone complicit in her pain with her. That's how she thinks.

What you are describing here is a motive for suicide. It's not a motive for mass murder though.

Literally the majority of Umineko was spent building up this character and defining her mindset and the rules it creates in her worldview, and this is continued in symbolic subtext such as the comparisons with Maria, Ange, and through her three avatars and faces.

Yasu was always present in Umineko, and so were her thoughts and beliefs. It's just muddled in so much fantasy that you need to clear it up one layer at a time and understand why the author is making these characters say and do these things.

Erm, no. Yasu wasn't anywhere in the story for the first 6 episodes.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

I think you got it wrong. It's not because 'the interviews said so' that people came to the solution.
They figured out then they got to the end of the book and checked with interviews, with the manga, with whatever.
ShKannon was suspected way before Ep 7 of the VN version.
Interviews are used only to confirm theories not to pull out theories out of thin air.
And I know you probably won't feel like checking all the messages posted but those theories were posted in this board also, way before interviews and manga.

I understand that Shkannon was suspected back then, but it was nowhere near completely solved.

So it's not like in your example, where the solution handed from the book is obviously wrong because the question was really clear cut.
It's more like many figured out that the solution had to be 7, checked it was 7 and not that you're telling them, no, it has to be 3 they're answering you: "Sweety, there's no discussion, EVEN the textbook says it's 7, deal with it."

If the solution was as obvious like the in your example (5-2) and 7 was obviously an answer to whom nobody with normal math knowledge could arrive no one prior to Ep 7 would have suspected ShKannon and everyone would have been a supporter of your theory who mysteriously changed his/her mind when the solution came out.

I understand that my analogy isn't perfect because Umineko is obviously harder than 5-2.

You claim Ryukishi's solution crumbles under your criticism but you can't present a more persuasive solution and I love parallel solutions.

Then I find it very odd that you didn't argue any specifics of my theory at all.

Originally Posted by haguruma

I'm still replying because I am too stubborn to just make it appear to you as if everyone had given in to your opinion...

No need to be embarassed about it.

The thing you don't seem to understand is, there is no "facts" to what you are claiming...that is what the whole of Umineko is about. All of these stories are fiction, even the horrible nature of all the character (while true to a degree) is an embelishment on the part of the author within the fiction. What you don't seem to get is, that Umineko isn't a classical mystery, it is an anti-mystery. It comes down to the conclusion that there isn't always rhyme and reason to crime, sometimes the solution is simply people making horrible choices.

Did we really read the same Umineko? Because I don't remember reading anything like that. Umineko may not be the classiest of mysteries, but it's still a solvable mystery. All of these stories are fiction. So what? All mysteries are fiction, lol. That doesn't change anything even if they are fiction inside fiction. They are still mysteries, and they were solved by Battler by using Knox decalogue.

You said you'd accept both the manga and the Red Truth, right?

Spoiler for The Book of One Truth:

Ange: What happened on that day on Rokkenjima...
Eva's diary: I write this down in order to forget.
No. It might be that I want to write this down in order not to forget.
Ah, the reason might as well be anything.
If I do not vomit out everything that happened on that day, I feel like I might just loose it.




......

Ange: I have...seen this...before somewhere
Bern: I thought I told you often enough that there was no GM!


THIS IS ALL TRUTH

This is the truth of Rokkenjima, as found in Eva's diary and as even you have to admit, in Eva's diary, the Book of One Truth, the truth of Rokkenjima, concerning October 4th and 5th 1986 is written down.
There is no intricate truth behind the truth, just a sad person imagining themrself able to commit the perfect crime spectacle in order to turn life around and miserably dragging all those loved AND hated down to hell along with themself.

I have a problem with it, though. The same scene was present in VN in Ep.7.
Bern said in red that "this is all truth", but she was interrupted by Ange's scream.
And later in Ep.8 she revealed that was she was going to say was "this is all truth of sorts but not neccessary the truth".

If you don't understand Yasu's motive on a logical level...be our guest and don't. It is not supposed to be logical, even Ryûkishi has finally taken some measure with the manga and admitted that she acted illogical and foolish. That is the tragedy.

But this is a problem. Because deducing something is done with logic. And if her motive isn't logical then it can't be deduced. And if it can't be deduced, then the game isn't fair.