[Renall]

Originally Posted by chronotrig

So I've got a question for you. Why did Lambda let Battler use the red text? This seems to be the root cause of his victory, after all.

Pretty much for the same reason Ryukishi did: To make it more interesting in an otherwise static situation. And because she knows he knows the truth now. Whether he does or not really shouldn't change the rules though.

There's no point in Battler's apotheosis if we are intentionally left with gaps in understanding he also ought to have (even if the person he is representing perhaps doesn't, but we don't know that guy exists yet). There's also no point in it if it lets him extract himself from his situation "just because." The problem is that even if the gold text works as advertised, Battler isn't really proving his point.

Essentially, Battler has advanced an alternative theory which allows it to be introduced that Kinzo is already dead (and he has another tack on this theory which he busts out after the gold is used which seals it up). Except he still can't just say that; he points out himself that there is no objective way to verify it. He then is just... sorta like "Yeah this is it." Now, why might he say that?

Let's assume for the moment that his gold truth is not some unsolicited thing, but an actual "golden truth," as Will would put it, that establishes some manner of illusion, or could do so, on the board itself. Let's also look at the context for this. Battler wants to say that Kinzo is dead in red. Erika does not want to allow this and thus Battler must produce "proof of a human's truth that could be used to make that point."

Let us go with the operating theory that a golden truth is a "human's truth," and this is why Battler is using it. This essentially boils his argument down to the following:

BATTLER: Your theory is wrong because Kinzo is dead.
ERIKA: Prove it.
BATTLER: There exists a corpse, and that corpse might be Kinzo's.
ERIKA: Prove it.
BATTLER: I can't.
ERIKA: Right, because there's no way to say it's Kinzo's, so I win.
BATTLER: Well, no. There is a way to say it's Kinzo's: Everybody can just agree that it's Kinzo's, or I can lie that it's Kinzo's, or at least state it's Kinzo's based on a reasonable belief that I hold.
ERIKA: Okay, so you can't prove my theory is actually invalid. Just that you're capable of lying about evidence to make people doubt me, which is irrelevant in this meta-theater where objective truth can be tossed around.
BATTLER: I guess. Also, I was in on everything and the victims weren't really dead, so nobody's alibi holds up. I'm not an objective viewpoint so everything I saw and did could be a lie. This invalidates your theory far more comprehensively than any of this nonsense about Kinzo, and I could have pointed this out at any time.
ERIKA: Why didn't you?
BATTLER: I'unno. Anyway I'm a wizard.

You see the problem? Battler is making a point, but only in the very narrow sense that he is answering Erika's demand that he produce a "human's truth." What Erika appears to have meant is that she wants a truth by which a human could verify an objective fact without supernatural aid; what Battler appears to do with the gold is demonstrate the existence of a truth which a human can "verify" by just agreeing that's what the truth is. This does technically answer her demand. It doesn't, however, actually satisfy it. Worse, unlike Beatrice in Dawn who is also answering a question that wasn't actually asked, he's not actually even really contributing anything to the argument by doing it. Yeah, a human could just agree that a corpse is Kinzo's... so? That's pretty much what Dlanor is driving at in the first place.

The structure of the argument sort of doesn't even need the gold. You could still use it, but I think it best saved for the end if it shows up anywhere at all. This is how I would structure the argument:

• Erika presents her insanely detailed alibi setup for 24:00 to 1:00, indicating that nobody but Natsuhi could have been involved. Battler questions how the bodies could have disappeared later given that Natsuhi's position in the morning was known (thus, how could she be the culprit).
• Erika proposes that Kinzo moved the bodies. At this point, she makes some admission about Kinzo which is designed to explain away that nobody could have seen him but Natsuhi at any time. Perhaps something that would require Kinzo have been in Natsuhi's room at the time they were solving the epitaph, to establish him as her accomplice.
• Battler counters with the theory that he committed the murders after 1:00. Erika assures him that based upon her observation, it was impossible for the crime to have happened after 1:00.
• Battler instead proposes that the deaths did not happen during the 1:00 to the discovery period at all. Erika argues this is impossible because Battler's viewpoint is objective.
• Battler argues that his viewpoint is not objective because Erika is the detective instead of him. Erika demands evidence that this is true.
• Battler points out seeing Kinzo, which should not have happened. He explains that either he did see Kinzo and Erika's admission about Kinzo's behavior and location is wrong, or he didn't see Kinzo and his viewpoint is therefore non-objective. Since Erika still believes Kinzo is integral to her theory, she permits that his viewpoint be non-objective.
• Battler therefore concludes an equally-valid theory that the "crime" was faked with his participation, and nobody died until after the discovery, opening the possibility that Natsuhi isn't guilty.
• Erika, however, points out that her theory about Natsuhi and Kinzo is equally valid, so the two are only ever able to reach a total stalemate.
• Battler now attacks the notion that Kinzo could be alive, with Erika demanding something to support this. Battler suggests that it is possible to present a corpse which might be identifiable as Kinzo. Erika counters that there is no objective way to verify this. Battler argues that Rokkenjima is a closed state, and the corpse must belong to somebody who ought to be on the island. He argues that if everyone else is alive, the corpse cannot be anyone but Kinzo.
• OPTIONAL: Erika counters that everyone might not be alive, but that even if they are, there exists "no possible way for a human to say the corpse is Kinzo's."
• OPTIONAL: Battler now uses the gold truth, demonstrating that there is a way for a human to say that. Erika is unable to understand, but all the witches acknowledge that Battler is right. Nobody tells Erika despite her insistent demands.
• On the weight of the evidence, Lambda and Dlanor conclude Battler's theory to have greater validity than Erika's. Erika understands why she lost (her theory is flimsier than Battler's), but doesn't understand what Battler was doing with the gold truth.

It's only slightly different, but by changing the structure and adding more meat to the Kinzo argument, it allows the gold to function as a capstone that merely demonstrates Battler's mastery of understanding rather than permitting him to continue making an argument he probably could've made anyway. Is it less dramatic? Probably. However, it also works more appropriately here as a "finishing move" as it's been described in interviews. The fact that he does it is what causes Lambda to finally just admit the whole thing was silly and he's been right the whole time. It also makes the gold unnecessary; Battler's theory seems more complete than Erika's even without it, so it's not something that must be relied upon. However, by everyone's agreement with it, Erika's theory is entirely and finally discarded.

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

People kept talking about it, but as I recall, what ended up being the right answer was actually proposed with supporting evidence before Dawn came out. You can work out most of it just by looking at the restrictions Battler had to dodge around, and then you can get the rest by realizing that gold truth represents Beatrice's power of endless magic in the same way that red and blue truth represent Lambda and Bern's power. There were passages all over the series about the idea of unfalsifiable theories and how everyone's belief in something creates a kind of truth.

If by that you mean someone guessed, well yeah. People guessed Yasu by ep4. You could sort of retroactively say the person "saw the hints," but it's more that they took a thematic guess and happened to be right before sufficient evidence was in. If indeed sufficient evidence ever was in on the gold.