Quote:
Originally Posted by Smeckledorf
The incident is not defined, so it does not particularly pertain to what I said. "No one escapes, all die" does not mean that Battler caused everyone to die. Another way to think about it is if you believe this red truth is to be taken at face value, then the 1998 world is completely fake. Unless, the only people who do not escape are people who are supposed to die.
|
I've been thinking pretty much the same thing from back then. In once case it is said that everyone dies from the tragedy. In the other case, we may have at least one survivor who escaped the murders of that day. So how can this be reconciled?
It's possible for both to be true if the Tragedy is not the murders during those two days but some event that people were caught up in that winds up killing people prematurely?
If you look at what happened to Eva, she became the head of the family and it's possible the story in EP3 was to point out that her life was ruined. The cost of becoming the head of a family surrounded by greedy sycophants (in her case though, the Sumaderas?)
Before EP7, I took this to mean that Battler had some responsibility to the headship of the family, but after EP7... hmmm... could this mean Beatrice intended to pass heirship to Battler, in her own staged version of the Epitaph? If Kinzo cheated, she could too, right?