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 > Retired M-Z > Umineko

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2013-08-14, 08:53   Link #32761
GuestSpeaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Also, after reading the ep 5 trial again, I have noted two things.

1. Considering Ryu initially intended there to be an affair between Natsuhi and Ghoda, he must have felt funny writing that sequence

2. Lambda tells Battler after using the Gold Truth that to speak more would be dangerous, and that the "thing" he is thinking does not contradict reds in THIS TRIAL. Based on that, I wonder if he was guaranteeing Kinzos corpse with the idea that he killed Kinzo himself (though this would not require a gold truth and would somewhat reduce the special that goes along with its vague nature). It would however fit with Lamda saying in white that only the gamemaster can use gold, which is untrue and just said (unless Ryu just later backpeddled) to allow him to reverse the verdict of the trial...

Here's hoping ep 8 provides some clarity
GuestSpeaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 10:04   Link #32762
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker View Post
Also, Beatrice was a soft author, because she essentially always had the power in red to proclaim that "Beatrice did X". Apart from the fact that Beatrice was definitively non-human, she was constructed in much the same way as Shannon or Kanon. As Ronove said, it would break the game, but you could easily have said. "Beatrice killed Dr Nanjo" in red.
She could have, but that's basically mate for her; at that point Battler just has to say by Eva-BEATRICE's admission, Beatrice is a human and not a witch and then she's kinda stuck, because Eva-B said a human, with their feet on the ground, held up a weapon and killed with it!.
Quote:
Plus, I think all those points you raise about the Golden Land are points I've always wondered about heaven in general. The conclusion to draw is that if a state of eternal happiness exists, it can't be that concrete. It would just have to be eternal happiness, otherwise what happens if you die and 30 years later your wife dies? Same issues.

Also note: Someone needs to always be on the outside door of the golden land, because if you don't stay alive to tell people that everyone in it is happy, the golden land doesn't exist. Proof for Battler/Yasu surviving maybe?
Battler didn't survive though. At least per the story, he didn't "survive" to a point that he couldn't be declared dead. Tohya isn't Battler to sufficient satisfaction to probably constitute being him, even if he is somewhat aware of Battler's memories. To him, Battler's family is basically someone else's family, just a family he knows fairly well. His family is the crazy lady he works with who he is totally banging, because seriously now.

Anyway I don't think we're meant to read too closely into how the Golden Land actually functions, but damn it, I have to. We'll just pretend it's that thing from Star Trek: Generations or something. It doesn't make a lot of sense as an existing meta-construct, especially since Forgeries still can or do happen and presumably everybody has to reprise their roles in all those Fragments. Or is that a different them? Battler and Erika acted like it both was and wasn't them who would meet again, and the story says they didn't even though they surely will in Forgeries. It's confusing.
__________________
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 2013-08-14, 13:47   Link #32763
DokEnkephalin
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Beatrice has said the Golden Land was eternal. Just to metaphysical fanwank, I'd suggest observers in eternity and the physical world view the passage of their own time as constant, observers in eternity view the passage of time in the physical world as fixed, and to those in physical time the passage of eternity is too instantaneous to observe. Sea of Fragments would have to have at least these temporal properties in order to exist.

So Battler and anyone else entering the Golden Land don't have to survive in order to live forever.
DokEnkephalin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 15:37   Link #32764
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
About "only the GM can use golden truth":

Lambda was most likely just saying that, while saying something in gold is possible for anyone, only the GM's golden truth is valid in a logic battle on the gameboard.
__________________
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 16:12   Link #32765
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Honestly I'm not sure we know. I'm not sure Ryukishi knew. I'm not sure how this particular gold conforms to the way gold is later used in the story and how it's discussed (although in the ep6 discussion between Erika and Dlanor, neither of them appears to know how it works).

I mean, what is Battler saying exactly and how does it win the argument? Is he saying he believes the body is Kinzo's? Is he saying people agree the body is Kinzo's? How do either of those things defeat Erika's theory in a way saying Natsuhi didn't do it or Kinzo is dead in red don't? Because he can't say "Kinzo is dead" (which is essentially what the gold is end-running around in this case, proving Erika's theory false by making Kinzo incapable of doing what she proposed he did). He isn't allowed to. So how exactly does "well, I can get everybody to agree that he's dead" any better as an argument? And isn't Erika entitled to know what gold truth actually is before everybody just declares it effective and Battler the winner?

I hate to say this after she sleazed her way to that point, but I think Erika got shafted there. The ep6 discussion makes clear she has no idea why she lost, which seems completely unfair to her... to say nothing of completely unfair to the audience, because we don't exactly know why she lost either.
__________________
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 2013-08-14, 16:20   Link #32766
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Honestly I'm not sure we know. I'm not sure Ryukishi knew. I'm not sure how this particular gold conforms to the way gold is later used in the story and how it's discussed (although in the ep6 discussion between Erika and Dlanor, neither of them appears to know how it works).

I mean, what is Battler saying exactly and how does it win the argument? Is he saying he believes the body is Kinzo's? Is he saying people agree the body is Kinzo's? How do either of those things defeat Erika's theory in a way saying Natsuhi didn't do it or Kinzo is dead in red don't? Because he can't say "Kinzo is dead" (which is essentially what the gold is end-running around in this case, proving Erika's theory false by making Kinzo incapable of doing what she proposed he did). He isn't allowed to. So how exactly does "well, I can get everybody to agree that he's dead" any better as an argument? And isn't Erika entitled to know what gold truth actually is before everybody just declares it effective and Battler the winner?

I hate to say this after she sleazed her way to that point, but I think Erika got shafted there. The ep6 discussion makes clear she has no idea why she lost, which seems completely unfair to her... to say nothing of completely unfair to the audience, because we don't exactly know why she lost either.
In this case though, you should ask: Why can Dlanor refuse Battler's red about Kinzo being dead?.
All of a sudden the game master has to give proof. Battler said the exact same thing when red truth was introduced in EP2 but there it was handwaved by Beato as "I don't need proof! Red is simply truth!"... but now for some reason that does not work anymore?
__________________
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 19:57   Link #32767
Wanderer
Goat
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
It was because of Knox's 2nd. Unlike gold, red is "witch truth" therefore it's of supernatural origin.
Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 20:36   Link #32768
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
It was because of Knox's 2nd. Unlike gold, red is "witch truth" therefore it's of supernatural origin.
You could use that argument for ANYTHING. There is absolutely no reason why for this one specific case "witches truth" is invilid, but for other cases it is valid.
__________________
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 20:46   Link #32769
LyricalAura
Dea ex Kakera
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sea of Fragments
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyZone View Post
You could use that argument for ANYTHING. There is absolutely no reason why for this one specific case "witches truth" is invilid, but for other cases it is valid.
At that point in the game, he hadn't yet shown that he qualified as a witch. Human players can't use red without the GM's permission.
__________________
"Something has fallen on us that falls very seldom on men; perhaps the worst thing that can fall on them. We have found the truth; and the truth makes no sense."
LyricalAura is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 20:50   Link #32770
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalAura View Post
At that point in the game, he hadn't yet shown that he qualified as a witch. Human players can't use red without the GM's permission.
He was aknowledged as the game master by Lambdadelta, also why was specifically Kinzo's body targeted by Dlanor and not, say, the red about the cousins' "corpses" not being moved?

And if I remember correctly, when Lambda aknowledged Battler, Erika got very angry that he could use red truth now.

Also Dlanors comment "for this case alone I cannot aknowledge the red", or something like that. Why?
__________________
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 20:52   Link #32771
GuestSpeaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
It was because at that point he was making a human-side argument, just one that was different to Erika's. He still used a human culprit without magic after all, he didn't switch to witch side fully until game 6.

Oh Erika definitely got shafted, Lambda basically orchestrated the thing, she recommended Battler so that he could appeal, and claimed the gold made him automatic GM, and THEN told him to basically shut up so she could quickly declare the retrial in his favour. That bit I quoted before makes it quite clear they are basically rushing things so that Erika doesn't pick up on what Battler is doing, just like Battler initially did to Eva when she first started.
GuestSpeaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 20:55   Link #32772
GuestSpeaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
The bodies not being moved wasn't an important point to his argument, it stood without that fact potentially. He was just doing it to abuse Erika.
GuestSpeaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 20:56   Link #32773
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker View Post
It was because at that point he was making a human-side argument, just one that was different to Erika's. He still used a human culprit without magic after all, he didn't switch to witch side fully until game 6.

Oh Erika definitely got shafted, Lambda basically orchestrated the thing, she recommended Battler so that he could appeal, and claimed the gold made him automatic GM, and THEN told him to basically shut up so she could quickly declare the retrial in his favour. That bit I quoted before makes it quite clear they are basically rushing things so that Erika doesn't pick up on what Battler is doing, just like Battler initially did to Eva when she first started.
Kinzo being dead had nothing to do with Battler's theory though. It was about denying Erika's theory with Kinzo carrying the corpses.
__________________
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 21:18   Link #32774
GuestSpeaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Good point, the only (somewhat desperate) answer I have to that is that he was throwing a human side move into her theory. The way Erika treated it was basically that he was trying to force her detective skills to make a deduction, like showing her piece the corpse in-game and trying to force her to acknowledge it. The only reason he can't just throw the red at her (since he can now make them), is I suppose because he is still trying to force a human solution, even if he has reds now.

It is also just possible that Ryu needed a reason to wheel out the gold...
GuestSpeaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 21:28   Link #32775
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker View Post
Good point, the only (somewhat desperate) answer I have to that is that he was throwing a human side move into her theory. The way Erika treated it was basically that he was trying to force her detective skills to make a deduction, like showing her piece the corpse in-game and trying to force her to acknowledge it. The only reason he can't just throw the red at her (since he can now make them), is I suppose because he is still trying to force a human solution, even if he has reds now.

It is also just possible that Ryu needed a reason to wheel out the gold...
The "presentation of evidence" was probably just along the lines of: "If the game went on, this corpse would have been found by Erika sooner or later." She just didn't, because she stopped the game mid-way.

I think what you say about it being probably nothing more than an excuse to use gold seems very plausible. Renall also said multiple times that the rules were changed in the trial as R07 saw fit and I have to agree with that.
__________________
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-14, 22:19   Link #32776
GuestSpeaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
You know, after rereading ep 4, I remember now how much I like the character development that Ange goes through. I hope Ryu had some thematically decent reason for taking so much of it back later that I just don't understand...

Maybe the fact of the matter is that it is easy for Ange to say she should have forgiven and loved Eva after she is gone, and hard to actually do it when faced with her as a living person.
GuestSpeaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-15, 16:29   Link #32777
Kealym
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Well, they are just characters; that's why they can only be human in the Golden Land where there is no such distinction (although there's it's more that everyone is like them than that they are human).
I guess that works, it's just ... especially in light of "onlt the actor can kill the character" and themes of theatricality in EP7, but ...argh, you're convincing me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Honestly the Golden Land is kind of disturbing to me on many levels...
Well that's not just the Golden Land, is it? That's just a problem with fluffy-cloud-heaven, in general. I've always had much more of a problem with the idea that all 18 people would be entirely peachy-keen that they were just exploded in the face. All the humans are presented as sorta just "Oh, well, yeah I guess we might be deading up the place. WHAT OF IT."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Couldn't we also argue that Kanon being there is just a giant boneheaded contrivance or mistake? Yes, the manga still also shows it, but that doesn't make it not a mistake, just a non-corrected mistake.
Possible, but it seems an awfully big mistake considering there are obvious, better alternatives.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
The other possibility is that Ryukishi earnestly believes that if there's no reliable/detective perspective, literally anything can be shown and it's not unfair to Erika, hence why she can have Kanon in the room in front of her piece's eyes and not complain about this later, or why she can separate everyone into two rooms in ep6 and somehow not notice Kanon isn't where she intended him to be.
I'm almost certain this isn't the case. Erika is apparently able to Red Truth verify people her piece witnessed by sight without the Detective's Authority, though it's that same lack that apparently allows the idea of someone being able to hide from her. But she has those Mary Sue abilities in EP5, so it implies that her sight can't be so easily tricked, and you're talking about putting a whole person out of sight for over an entire day of moving around and interviewing and miscellaneous CSI style analysis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyZone View Post
In this case though, you should ask: Why can Dlanor refuse Battler's red about Kinzo being dead?.
Rule of Drama. It's just as arbitrary as Dlanor being able to seal arguments about the Guesthouse window in EP6.
Kealym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-15, 16:55   Link #32778
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kealym View Post
I'm almost certain this isn't the case. Erika is apparently able to Red Truth verify people her piece witnessed by sight without the Detective's Authority, though it's that same lack that apparently allows the idea of someone being able to hide from her. But she has those Mary Sue abilities in EP5, so it implies that her sight can't be so easily tricked, and you're talking about putting a whole person out of sight for over an entire day of moving around and interviewing and miscellaneous CSI style analysis.
I mentioned ep6 here for a reason though. Your argument turns on Kanon having a body in ep5 and you cite the parlor scene for evidence, but an ep6 Shkanon solution necessitates Kanon not have a body distinct from Shannon's, as otherwise it's impossible for him to get out of the cousins' room. Yet to Erika, these situations are fairly similar: Kanon would appear before her in a non-investigatory physical sense when this shouldn't be possible if Shannon is also present.

In the ep6 instance, she sorts people into rooms. Shannon and Kanon are explicitly separated. Somehow, Erika doesn't notice that one of them isn't present, because it shouldn't be possible for both of them to be there at once (unless they both have bodies, and if they do, Beatrice can't use her maneuver later). Assume Shkanon is indeed the case here. How can we reconcile this?
  • Erika did not see Shannon and Kanon at the same time or in very close proximity of time to one another. Somehow, Shkanon maneuvered between rooms and between costumes prior to being sealed into the next room over as Shannon, and Erika never noticed this and not one other person commented on this, considered it odd, or felt inclined to mention it to Erika, and also there was no evidence of them doing so like being wet or part of the room being wet/cold.
  • As above but in such a short period of time that Shkanon has to be a Houdini-level escape and quick-change artist to defy Erika's senses in a matter of moments, all in contradiction of any common sense or natural laws.
  • Erika didn't see Kanon, but the narrative convinced her that she did. Obviously, this is exploitation of her lack of detective authority and would imply that her piece can be blatantly lied to in the narration as long as she lacks such a reliable perspective. In the "true" narrative, Erika simply didn't know Kanon existed or didn't care that he wasn't present, and Shannon was the only person she observed and sealed. Note that any "Kanon was retroactively Shkanoned" argument falls under this basic exception, where instead of being deceived that Kanon was present to sort, the entire narrative was deceived that Kanon existed to be sorted. Either way, Erika saw something that wasn't "true."
  • Erika didn't see Kanon, but thought she knew where he was anyway. Kanon was behind Gohda, again, and she just took somebody's word for it that he was in the cousins' room. She really needs to stop doing that.
  • Erika didn't see Kanon, but assumed his location was assured by the "everyone else" red. However we then have to ask why the narrative we saw (and that, we think, she saw) mentions Kanon being sorted into the cousins' room when in fact that never happened and Erika just retroactively "confirmed" that later with Battler's red. Why wouldn't she have objected to that ahead of time as something her piece did not witness? Unless she can't, then see above and the narrative can simply lie about events even in front of her.
  • Author error. Kanon should not have been described in that manner knowing he was going to be Shkanoned out of the room. Alternately, Beatrice is just hardline interpreting the reds in blatant disregard for the narrative since it's possible for Shkanon to be true under the reds as presented. At best this is incredibly unsporting, at worst this same logic can be applied to get literally anyone out of the cousins' room by simply claiming that in this story there's actually only 5 people using multiple names each. By this logic, Jessica can be Kanon, as long as she's also Kumasawa, and Eva can be Hideyoshi. "All people can only use their own names" doesn't apply if one person has multiple names, and if Beatrice is playing this kind of game there's no reason for this not to be possible for any character, not just Shkanon.
  • Some other explanation I can't think of offhand.
None of these are particularly good answers.
__________________
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 2013-08-15, 19:22   Link #32779
Kealym
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
I mentioned ep6 here for a reason though. Your argument turns on Kanon having a body in ep5 and you cite the parlor scene for evidence, but an ep6 Shkanon solution necessitates Kanon not have a body distinct from Shannon's, as otherwise it's impossible for him to get out of the cousins' room. Yet to Erika, these situations are fairly similar: Kanon would appear before her in a non-investigatory physical sense when this shouldn't be possible if Shannon is also present.
Yes, EP6 necessitates Shkanon, I wouldn't argue otherwise. However, when are you claiming both Shannon and Kanon appeared before Erika in EP6? The situation is entirely different from Lambda's explicit "everybody here is everybody there is" moment in the parlor in EP5.

And any argument claiming that it's improbably for regular Shkanon to be happening around Erika would be among the same arguments against regular Shkanon anyway, all the way back to EP1; it's not worth talking about for the problem at hand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
In the ep6 instance, she sorts people into rooms. Shannon and Kanon are explicitly separated. Somehow, Erika doesn't notice that one of them isn't present, because it shouldn't be possible for both of them to be there at once (unless they both have bodies, and if they do, Beatrice can't use her maneuver later).
Erika sorts the people into rooms insomuch that she was the person who suggested it. It's said in the text that Hideyoshi did the actual seperating, while Erika spoke with Kradolf downstairs. Presumably, the husbands switched places even once more, since it's Rudolf who mentions "Jessica wants to stay in the same room as Krauss." At any rate, Erika herself does not personally split the people, according to both the text, and her assertion that she can only verify the people she saw in her own room, not both of them.

From your list of options, I subscribe to :
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
[*]Erika didn't see Kanon, but assumed his location was assured by the "everyone else" red. However we then have to ask why the narrative we saw (and that, we think, she saw) mentions Kanon being sorted into the cousins' room when in fact that never happened and Erika just retroactively "confirmed" that later with Battler's red. Why wouldn't she have objected to that ahead of time as something her piece did not witness? Unless she can't, then see above and the narrative can simply lie about events even in front of her.
Except none of the problems you mention are really extant.
  1. Erika herself didn't seperate the group into the rooms
  2. Erika's motives for doing so merely to let herself back to the mansion, and restrict the possible location of the survivor groupees, anyway
  3. She doesn't object to not witnessing the other room because she can reliably reason out that the people in the Guesthouse is X-6 FT victims, where X is the sum of everybody
  4. Erika has no reason to suspect that the number of names would be different from the number of people
  5. Erika's vision in EP6 isn't 100%, anyway, so it's easier for her to confirm certain facts with Red, regardless

So, the narrative lies to Erika when it says "the people were seperated into two rooms" no more than it lied to Battler when it said "Genji and Shannon rushed to alert Kinzo", as far as I see it.

Though my theory does maintain that BATTLER is taking advantage of Erika's mistaken assumptions from playing EP5, which makes him kind of a dick, but ... well, BATTLER IS kinda dickish. And Bern/Erika had many, many chances to seek a classic victory instead of a Logic Error.
Kealym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-08-15, 19:25   Link #32780
GuestSpeaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
That is the odd thing about Ep 6, it wasn't a puzzle in one game and a solution in the other.

Ryu, with his own internal rules of how the game works, created the puzzle and the solution all in one episode, therefore surely must have thought about how this trick was going to work. Either we just don't quite understand how the whole narration thing works (probably involves reader theory in that case), he simply didn't care for how that would have to work in real life (which he was usually quite careful with in the first 4 games) or he didn't actually think it through.

I am inclined to go with something about reader theory, like how Erika's piece never did witness Kanon, but when reading that is how she interpreted it. We know it to be reasonably possible, like in ep 5 when Battler argued that though the narration showed him responding to Kinzo's pointing, he never spoke a word to Kinzo and didn't necessarily actually see him.
GuestSpeaker 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 09:13.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We use Silk.