AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Discussion > Older Series > Retired > Umineko

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2012-10-16, 17:27   Link #30881
jjblue1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
Questions if I may:

How are conversations during magical scenes interpreted?

It's just me but I just find some sense behind Belphegor mentioning Rudolf having anticipated the 2 Sisters with him mentioning that "Ever since the time Rosa was killed he had a general Idea."
I guess it depends from scene to scene.
For example the conversation between Kyrie and one of the stakes is usually interpreted as a way to give additional information about how jealous Kyrie was of Asumu.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
2nd:
Why are the stakings so awkward in EP3?

5 not 7.
And weren't Natsuhi and Krauss staked weird as well with the thigh and foot despite the other 3 fitting?
There were attempts to interpret ep 3 as a game in which Eva solved the epitaph but things went wrong anyway. Since someone solved the epitaph murders should have stopped so since they continued it was suspected Yasu might not have been the only killer ence some facts went oddly.

It's just a theory though and not universally shared so do with it what you want.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
I can remember someone saying no staking is needed for the 2nd and 3rd though why the sudden change compared to EP 1 and 2?
No idea as I wondered the same thing. The previous theory might explain it (if someone else killed Rosa and Maria that someone else might not have had the stakes and so no staking) though then we would have to explain why Yasu resumed the killing as she was the one who murdered Nanjo.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
EP 1: Eva and Hideyoshi perhaps weren't actually staked and it was staged?
It could be they believed they would have to fake being killed but I think in the end they were killed for real as it always happens to those who believes they're playing a murder game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
EP 2: Kanon not getting staked may be self-explainantory.Still beatrices line regarding Jessica sorta bothers me.
When Jessica's corpse was discovered, only Battler, George, Maria, Rosa, Genji, Gohda, Shannon, Kumasawa, and Nanjo were in Jessica's room
"[Whoops, the corpse of] Jessica is also included"

Why the sudden change in red in terms of her corpse?
Sounds like her corpse was discovered yet there is no corpse in her room.

Terribly sorry for bothering!
I wonder if it was to make the red tricky. In this way, if Battler asks her to repeat something in red she can insist on the word 'corpse'.
If the word 'body' had come up, maybe due to Battler's prompting her to repeat in red something, then Kanon's body was there as well as Shannon and Kanon share the same body.

However this might work in English. I don't know if in Japanese it would still work but that's how I interpreted the scene.
jjblue1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-17, 02:21   Link #30882
Kealym
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
I was thinking along the lines of a mirror effect.
Kyrie and Rudolf Investigate suspecting Eva and battling Evatrices furniture.
Kyrie and Rudolf rampage with Eva putting a stop to them.

Eva killed Battler.
Battlers fate is unknown.
Let me start by saying that I don't wanna be rude or anything ... but could you clarify? I'm still not seeing much of a link between EP3 and EP7, specifically, other than "Eva survives".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
The number of shots fired by Kyrie and Rudolf in EP 3 fits to the number of people they killed in EP 7 if Shannon and Kanon = 1.
I'm pretty sure that's not true. I don't think something like that would hold much value on it's own even if it were true, but I'm almost sure they only fired like 5 or 6 shots, between them, in that scene?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
I remember reading on the wiki something like:
Maria: The corpse leaves no traces of abuse.
In contrast: Maria strangled to death.
Well ... so? What does this mean besides that the one time we KNOW Yasu killed Maria, she did it as passively as possible?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
Yasu HAS to have been there.
"HAS to have been there" ... based on what? The end result seems to imply much more that she wasn't.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
Evatrice = the King in this Chessgame.
Rudolf pinned the King and the Rook.Evatrice said it herself.Kyrie and Rudolf thought they checkmated the King and are proven Bishops with Hideyoshi potentially aiding them as the White Knight.
Several indications put Maria as the Black King such as her status in each EP except where Kyrie and Rudolf rampaged.Her status implies several stalemates with the White King Battler.
However, a King cannot "Kill" another King in Chess as they cannot move next to another nor can they check each other.
The reason for this is because if Kings are next to another they check each other which is an illegal move.
In other words, by Chess Logic, Eva cannot kill Maria.
Thats why we see Beatrice doing so.
Here's what probably happened:
Maria/Black King was in a hopeless position on the board after Rosa was killed.
Beatrice/Yasu resigned/gave up and fell her own King/killed Maria.
From here on, Evatrice had opened a new game replacing Maria.
Well, thisis the point where I have to stress that I mean no disrespect, but ... that makes no sense. It's both highly arbitrary, and blatantly contrary to how we're told a witch's game is constructed. I think you're probably assuming a number of allusions correlate to some hard, concrete laws, but, I mean, Occams Razor, man.
Kealym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-17, 05:15   Link #30883
Wanderer
Goat
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiltias View Post
EP 2: Kanon not getting staked may be self-explainantory.Still beatrices line regarding Jessica sorta bothers me.
When Jessica's corpse was discovered, only Battler, George, Maria, Rosa, Genji, Gohda, Shannon, Kumasawa, and Nanjo were in Jessica's room
"[Whoops, the corpse of] Jessica is also included"

Why the sudden change in red in terms of her corpse?
Sounds like her corpse was discovered yet there is no corpse in her room.
I had always thought that line was suspicious from the moment I read it. As far as I'm concerned, there's no red that guarantees Jessica was dead at the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonozakiUshiromiya View Post
@Kiltias
It's probably more of a timing issue. When Jessica's body is discovered, she isn't dead, but is badly wounded. Since there's no one competent to help her, she bleeds to death. Then Beatrice says her red.
I think the first red only applies to the time as Battler understood it, and not to the actual state of things at that time. There's an example of this in EP5: Ushiromiya Battler returned to the cousins' room at 3:00 AM and fell asleep. After that, until the discovery of the crime, absolutely nothing out of the ordinary happened in the room! Yet in fact we know there was no crime there in the first place. In other words "the discovery of the crime" is a point in time and doesn't tell us anything about whether the crime was actual or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drifloon View Post
Is there really any need for her to say the "corpse of" part in red? I don't think there's any significance about it; the red/blue statements are often started mid-sentence for no obvious reason, for example:

- The six linked rooms, the murders of Rosa oba-san and Maria, Dad and the rest's deaths in the hall, the murders of Krauss oji-san and Natsuhi oba-san...all of that can be explained if we suppose that Eva oba-san was the culprit.

- Know that my window is sealed from the inside and Natsuhi did not let Kinzo escape...!!
I noticed you chose examples that create incomplete sentences out of the red and blue portions, but they come out that way entirely due to translation issues. As far as I know, the only times that colored portions actually made incomplete sentences is when the speaker was interrupted mid-sentence.

Japanese often doesn't use sentence subjects, so (It) can be explained if we suppose that Eva oba-san was the culprit. would be the standalone sentence version for your first example.

Japanese doesn't use "a" or "the", so (The) window is sealed from the inside and Natsuhi did not let Kinzo escape...!! would be the standalone sentence version for your second example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kealym View Post
If anything, maybe Beato wanted to leave a small space for a Jessica culprit answer at the moment. Probably just insignificant though.
I think you're right, on both accounts. It doesn't mean she isn't dead at the time, just that she doesn't have to be.
Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 00:04   Link #30884
Ryuudou
Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Do the Van Dine rules presented in EP7 apply to the Rokkenjima gameboards?

Will's red when he solves a separate case at the beginning: It is forbidden for a servant to be the culprit! ...Van Dine's Twenty Rules, Rule #11

Last edited by Ryuudou; 2012-10-18 at 04:32.
Ryuudou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 00:39   Link #30885
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
If it does, there's still no contradiction. The culprit isn't a servant, it's the head of the Ushiromiya family posing as a servant.

And the spirit of the rule is important. In Van Dine's time, servants in mystery novels were usually paper-thin Redshirts that could be sacrificed as the villain without any fleshed out "real" characters having to be punished. What the rule is actually forbidding is the culprit being some throwaway character who's completely expendable, such as Genji, who has basically no personality.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 01:21   Link #30886
Drifloon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
To be fair, though, the actual justification given by Van Dine for that rule is that the culprit shouldn't be someone who would ordinarily come under suspicion, or in other words, someone who isn't "obvious". Considering the amount of times that the servants get suspected because of the master keys, making one of them the culprit DOES sort of violate the spirit of the rule. But in the end, Ryukishi repurposes a lot of the Knox/Dine rules, so it doesn't really matter.
Drifloon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 01:53   Link #30887
qno2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
I hope it's alright if I barge into the discussion like this. It's a question that has been bugging me for a while and I'm probably just missing the obvious solution. I mean, Rosatrice is so popular that they couldn't have overlooked something this obvious. Because this doesn't really relate to the current topic here, I'll just put it into spoiler-tags to not be an eyesore.
Spoiler:
qno2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 02:02   Link #30888
Drifloon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Yeah, I'm curious to see how he explains that one too. I'm at the second twilight of EP1 in my viewing of it, so I'll tell you when I get there. It's probably just as stupid as his ridiculous interpretations of the love trial and the Yasu story, though.
Drifloon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 02:12   Link #30889
qno2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
As I said, to my shame I haven't watched it at all...

Maybe I should add: sure, there is something about an illness for Kanon... we could think, right? Rosatrice is disregarding the entirety of EP7 anyway. Can't go about picking only the "fitting" stuff now can we? And after all if Shkanon doesn't apply the "illness" affects Shannon.

'sides, it's not portrayed as an "illness" that would cause death anytime (though we could argue about it due to the lack of information, sure; heck we can't be sure whether the author, Yasu, was really the child from 19 years ago, assuming that it existed in the first place, but that's primetalk), but as an injury that made love out of Yasu's perspective impossible. "Just adopt some", jeez.

On a lighter note, I've found the manuscript of Land of the Golden Witch. Totally legit.


...

I sure hope nobody took that seriously.

@Drifloon: if you don't mind, what is the general gist of his explanations?

Last edited by qno2; 2012-10-18 at 03:08.
qno2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 04:31   Link #30890
Ryuudou
Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
If it does, there's still no contradiction. The culprit isn't a servant, it's the head of the Ushiromiya family posing as a servant.
They aren't mutually exclusive actually. If Yasu is employed as a servant then Yasu is a servant regardless of heritage; after all he/she was raised that way.
Ryuudou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 06:55   Link #30891
Wanderer
Goat
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
Quote:
Originally Posted by qno2 View Post
I hope it's alright if I barge into the discussion like this. It's a question that has been bugging me for a while and I'm probably just missing the obvious solution. I mean, Rosatrice is so popular that they couldn't have overlooked something this obvious. Because this doesn't really relate to the current topic here, I'll just put it into spoiler-tags to not be an eyesore.
Spoiler:
"ShKanon scum"? Tell me where those bullies are and I'll gladly support you; I like arguing with Rosatricers.

KnownNoMore discusses the EP1 5th twilight in detail in his third video, at 23:10. The explanation is about 10 minutes if you can stomach him that long. You might want to know ahead of time that he does use Nanjo as an accomplice for this twilight as well as in his overall theory.

By the way, a cute red against Rosatrice: I keep my promises. "Mom of the year" is a serial promise-breaker. Anyway, I brought this one up a while ago to KnownNoMore and he said that the red was not a general statement- that it was only talking about the promise that the murders would stop if the epitaph was solved. How he interprets it that way, I have no idea.
Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 06:56   Link #30892
jjblue1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryuudou View Post
They aren't mutually exclusive actually. If Yasu is employed as a servant then Yasu is a servant regardless of heritage; after all he/she was raised that way.
Yasu in the end was employed by Kinzo and was a servant under him. Kinzo died, Yasu remains without a work but hey also inherits everything. Natsuhi and Krauss don't know about the inheritance part and ask Yasu to continue being a servant of the head however the head is Yasu so all the job he/she is doing is... to serve himself/herself. In short, it's due to his/her own will he/she is doing what Natsuhi & Krauss ask him and not because he/she is on their paycheck.
This makes Yasu someone who has stopped being a servant and it's just posing as one.

Agatha Christie used a similar technique in one of her mystery to have the servant being the culprit.
jjblue1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 07:54   Link #30893
Ryuudou
Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjblue1 View Post
Yasu in the end was employed by Kinzo and was a servant under him. Kinzo died, Yasu remains without a work but hey also inherits everything. Natsuhi and Krauss don't know about the inheritance part and ask Yasu to continue being a servant of the head however the head is Yasu so all the job he/she is doing is... to serve himself/herself. In short, it's due to his/her own will he/she is doing what Natsuhi & Krauss ask him and not because he/she is on their paycheck.
This makes Yasu someone who has stopped being a servant and it's just posing as one.

Agatha Christie used a similar technique in one of her mystery to have the servant being the culprit.
What would make Yasu the head over Krauss anyways? Krauss vastly outranks Yasu who should be on the same level as the cousins, or slightly below Rosa whether you count her as a child or a grandchild. Is it the epitaph? Is there any confirmation Yasu actually solved it? There's a scene in EP3 that implicitly shows Kinzo stating that he thinks a female heir is completely, absolutely, and utterly unfitting (mentioning this because Beatrice 2 is Kinzo's child and was actually female) and this is when Eva was around 17-20 I assume so it's not like it was before he was crazed over Beatrice 1/2. Sure he loved Beatrice 1 more than his marriage wife, but did Kinzo ever put it in writing about Yasu getting it over Krauss? Krauss was born before Beatrice 2.
Ryuudou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 08:42   Link #30894
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by qno2 View Post
Why am I insisting on Kanon's death? Rosa just went in there, injured him mortally and he died due to that then, right? Well... all this leaves one of the "canon"-red. You see where I'm going, in fact you probably saw it coming a mile away.

Red from EP4: All of the survivors have alibis! Let us include the dead as well!! In short, no kind of human or dead person on the island could have killed Kanon!
Lord only knows why I would bother defending this other than fun, and I haven't seen that thing either, but let's do it, Ryukishi-style*:

"Survivor" as used in the context of this red refers not to actual physically living people, but to people believed to be alive based upon the scenario presented! In the same manner, "body" or "corpse" can refer to the physical body of an individual without specifically stating, even though it implies, their life or death status! Rosa was not believed to be a survivor, and thus is not included as a "survivor," but she wasn't "dead" either. Also "human" doesn't refer to a living human being, but to an individual perceived to be human, which Rosa would not be, because she is a dick she is believed to be dead.

Alternatively, Rosa was a survivor with an alibi of "being dead," but was not a human because (personality death/not believed to be human because thought dead/is actually a lizard-person in disguise, which is why we never saw Kinzo's first wife).

* By which I mean cheat semantically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjblue1 View Post
This makes Yasu someone who has stopped being a servant and it's just posing as one.

Agatha Christie used a similar technique in one of her mystery to have the servant being the culprit.
And Christie was wrong to do so, I think. It's a stupid technical detail related to a stupid misleading rule. It's also, like, the first thing I thought of in ep4, but like all things I thought of Shkanon-related I discarded it for being too goddamn stupid. Oh well.

It's probably better to just pretend that rule isn't even being considered.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 10:41   Link #30895
qno2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Lord only knows why I would bother defending this other than fun, and I haven't seen that thing either, but let's do it, Ryukishi-style*:

"Survivor" as used in the context of this red refers not to actual physically living people, but to people believed to be alive based upon the scenario presented! In the same manner, "body" or "corpse" can refer to the physical body of an individual without specifically stating, even though it implies, their life or death status! Rosa was not believed to be a survivor, and thus is not included as a "survivor," but she wasn't "dead" either. Also "human" doesn't refer to a living human being, but to an individual perceived to be human, which Rosa would not be, because she is a dick she is believed to be dead.

Alternatively, Rosa was a survivor with an alibi of "being dead," but was not a human because (personality death/not believed to be human because thought dead/is actually a lizard-person in disguise, which is why we never saw Kinzo's first wife).

* By which I mean cheat semantically.
Very impressive semantic cheat, I'm tempted to ask whether you are Ryukishi but I suppose that wouldn't be very nice, eh?

Thanks to your new definition of "human" I'm thinking whether I should present the Joe the Mighty Seagull of Sadness who was perceived to be human-theory. (finally a theory that refers to the title of this friggin' series!)
It's also notable how your semantic definition of "human" actually promotes Shkanon. The other aspect, of being neither dead nor alive, would actually fit quite well with "that old equation" (18>x>19) - Rosa hid in the x during this statement. Similar to Beatrice.

... are we sure that those two theories are different?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wanderer
"ShKanon scum"? Tell me where those bullies are and I'll gladly support you; I like arguing with Rosatricers.
Basically everywhere in the english Umineko "community" except here. No point in going against it, if others prefer an empty story about nothing and more than 80% of pure filler-material, let them have it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wanderer
KnownNoMore discusses the EP1 5th twilight in detail in his third video, at 23:10. The explanation is about 10 minutes if you can stomach him that long. You might want to know ahead of time that he does use Nanjo as an accomplice for this twilight as well as in his overall theory.
1st theory (that he doesn't support himself): Fake-death drug? Wasn't there something about drugs and all, scientific stuff and all... one of the Knox's.
Knox's 4th. It is forbidden for unknown drugs or hard to understand scientific devices to be USED!!
And it's mighty nice that Nanjo just left him conveniently alive because he's not a killer, it's like the meta-world has influence over him. Like, this theory is trying to go for realistic behaviour and such, right?

2nd theory: ... oh rly, he just happened to snatch one of the stakes? Just one? Not more? To, you know, prevent more stake killing? Since he knew about their location, as noted by KnowNoMore himself.
And even more important: Rosa didn't relocate them for "personal use"? Unknown variables my ass, you can carry the stakes, if you want to kill with the stakes, you better at least have them at hand or hide them somewhere... heck, his first one makes more sense. But let's take his 2nd theory for the following statement that is now, thanks to the might of KnowNoMore, able to live as red: Rosa is f*ckin' retarded. Oh wait. Kanon too. Ah yes, and still the fake-death-drug issue.


Btw.: thanks for your translations, Wanderer.

Then let's ignore the RosaBAKA-theories for now (a semantical cheat alā Shkanon still seems like the best bet for Rosatrice.. they can choose between Kanon=/=Yoshiya and playing with the definition of alive, dead, human ... JUST LIKE SHKANON), you folks mentioned something very interesting. About the stories having been written AFTER the incident?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomAvatarFan
I mean, in EP8 was still have the whole "No one is to blame" spin in Battler's game. Sacrificing one's self to be a scapegoat comes up too. We also have the fact that Ange did not appear in Yasu's tales, something Yasu would not have been able to know about until much closer to the date of the conference, not enough time to have written those stories before the banquet anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ootsuki, EP4
Later on, it was confirmed that a smilar message bottle had been recovered from the nearby ocean on the day of the accident by the police in their search for lost articles, and this caused a sensation.It seems that, due to evidence from the surrounding area and the fact that the bottle was sealed, the police had decided that it's likelihood of being a fabrication was low and that it had been abandoned no earlier than a few days before the accident.
So either we didn't see the "original bottle"-stories or... well. Ryukishi, it happens to the best of us.

Unless it was actually known for about a week that Ange is going to be sick and Yasu just changed it to "suddenly, on this day, she got sick" to add credibility to the story. Why?
...
Why do you ask? It's When they Cry. Since the bottles are more of an emotional ventil for Yasu an addition like that seems pointless. And probably is.

Was it said somewhere in EP4 or EP8 (therefore, outside the catbox) when Ange got sick? I thought that it said the same as EP1, so on a very short notice, but I might be wrong.

Last edited by qno2; 2012-10-18 at 11:25.
qno2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 13:20   Link #30896
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by qno2 View Post
... are we sure that those two theories are different?
When you can just make up what definitions mean on the fly, it's fairly easy for random things to run together because it's just as easy as anything else.

Changing, for example, the definition of "human" causes a number of unforseen problems by opening up the possibility of someone who is human not being counted as such and something that is not human being counted as one. This is a problem Shkanon itself runs into, but it's slightly better-defined in that instance (though still potentially problematic if you think about it too hard).

So yes, if the definition of "human" somehow permits a seagull to be human, then you can in fact say it's a human... and possibly also say it's not a human at other times, by just changing which definition of "human" you're using.

It ain't even remotely sporting, fair, or proper of course.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 14:01   Link #30897
Joeyscraggy
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Yasu, ladies an gentlemen:

Spoiler for Yasu, really:


And yup, that's Yasu
Joeyscraggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 14:03   Link #30898
qno2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
When you can just make up what definitions mean on the fly, it's fairly easy for random things to run together because it's just as easy as anything else.
Indeed, which is why I noted that I don't really see a difference in the approach of both theories, in reference to how Rosatrice-theorists claim to follow the truth. KnowNoMore's explanations haven't convinced me in this case since there's already a red that might prove to be quite the problem. Sure, NOW we could argue about the nature of the "standard" that determines what counts as "unknown" - by "normal" standards or mystery standards. If we use "mystery standards" it basically allows any kind of drugs one could think of, therefore fake-death-drugs are fair play. If we start thinking this way, then this entire rule is completely pointless by default. If however we apply "normal" standards... then a fake-death-drug looks like a violation to me.

So in the end they'd need to use the exact same 'twisted' (non-)logic as for Shkanon (adding to that... Shkanon is a limited-use fake-death-drug in it's execution anyway, basically there's no way out for them, they'll use the exact same solution with different characters), AND they blatantly ignore the narrative at times. Doesn't really look good for Rosatrice in that case if you ask me.


Unless anyone else can think of theory that makes Rosatrice work in this case and that doesn't use the exact same reasoning of Shkanon and doesn't violate existing red I'd say that Rosatrice has kinda failed in its goal to provide a 'better' solution, at least for this twilight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall
Changing, for example, the definition of "human" causes a number of unforseen problems by opening up the possibility of someone who is human not being counted as such and something that is not human being counted as one. This is a problem Shkanon itself runs into, but it's slightly better-defined in that instance (though still potentially problematic if you think about it too hard).

So yes, if the definition of "human" somehow permits a seagull to be human, then you can in fact say it's a human... and possibly also say it's not a human at other times, by just changing which definition of "human" you're using.

It ain't even remotely sporting, fair, or proper of course.
Reminds me of the fears I had starting from EP3 - when I noticed the difference between Battler's demand of "There are no more than 18 persons" and Beatrice response, a tad later, "There are no more than 18 HUMANS". So I thought about the difference (even if this might be just the choice of words that Witch-Hunt decided to use) and obviously arrived at Shannon-Sayo, Kanon-Yoshiya (wasn't ready for Shkanon myself back then), both having two "persons". My fear was however, that this would be exploited and used on any random person.
"Genji is dead, Ronove still kicking."
"Kumasawa is dead, hi Virgilia!"
Those two wouldn't have been too bad compared to other possibilites...

"Rosa is dead, Mystical Creature X runs about."
"Gohda is dead, now he is the fantastical cook!"

Meaning that any number of "xxx is dead"-truths would've been pointless for everyone, claiming that they had a second name, a second nature, or 'cuz I say so lol'.

So in retrospect... as boring and easy (for Ryukishi) the solution is, it could've been worse. He used this cheap trick for the lowest amount of humans possible, 1, and at least made it work in the narrative (instead of being a completely random solution... like Gohda).

I suppose we've been warned with "No Dine, No Knox, No Fair."

@Joeyscraggy: He/She looks androgynous enough I guess.
qno2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 14:07   Link #30899
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Technically speaking, it is possible to say that "xxx is dead" is pointless for everyone. I suppose some theories of Fake Murder Games could even turn on that very point.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-18, 14:24   Link #30900
qno2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Personally I've thought that the games are "fake", or at least ambiguous, until the red forces a decision (of course, this assumes that whenever 'xxx is dead' is said, that it's not a lie/copout) and the lid to the box is opened. Let's take EP3 - at the end more or less every normal person that "died" received a red (with the one known loophole of course) stating this.
But until this red was said, they could've been alive the whole time, it might've been a light hearted story about a fake-murder-game at the start. The red retroactively (!), similar to the first logic-error-battle in EP6, forces a decision.

Puts the red for "Because of you, Ushiromiya Battler, people die" in a whole new light; especially if you consider that 1986 would've happened anyway, if we choose to believe in Lions world, so the blame for the "actual" (... as actual as it gets) event can't be with him, he's neither there nor the cataclyst for anything.

Because he demanded this kind of red, they actually die - he turned the gameboards into massacres. Instead of believing.

Last edited by qno2; 2012-10-18 at 15:14.
qno2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:50.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.