Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight
It's called inductive reasoning. And, no, you're misunderstanding the rule completely. Showing Meta-Erika fantasy scenes doesn't count because it's not tricking what Piece-Erika, the actual Detective, actually perceives. Nor does a Detective lying to the Villain count as falsifying perspective. It is only when the Detective lies to US, THE READERS is the rule violated.
Holy shit, people really need to understand these goddamn rules, it's not difficult.
NO, IT DIDN'T. THIS IS AN ERROR CREATED BY PEOPLE THINKING THE RULES ARE PROSCRIPTIVE AND LITERAL, INSTEAD OF DESCRIPTIVE AND ACTING ON ETHIC OF NARRATIVE.
For instance, the rule forbidding "A servant being the culprit" doesn't mean that a person that is a servant can never be the murderer. What the rule actually fucking means is that the culprit can't be an expendable, effectively emotionless character that can be tossed under the guillotine without any real drama (would anyone really give a shit if the culprit turned out to be Genji or Gohda or something?)
Meanwhile, someone like Shannon would not fall under this rule. Yes, they're a servant. But they're also a major love interest, a significant character full of drama, emotion, and perspective value, and are at the crux of everything even if you don't posit that they're a murderer or an accomplice. Shannon being a murderer is valid in Dine Rules without ever having to go to "She was only pretending to be a servant as the Head."
|
Beatrice wasn't the culprit though, anyway, and even if she was, technically she's the Ushiromiya family head posing as a servant so it works for games where she/Kanon/Shannon was the culprit. She can't be a servant and the head of the family, it doesn't work like that. Yeah, it's jammy, but Umineko was always meant to be a frustrating, twisted mystery.