[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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.

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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.

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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.

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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.

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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.

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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".

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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?

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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?

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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.

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by Kiltias

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.

Originally Posted by SonozakiUshiromiya

@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.

Originally Posted by Drifloon

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.

Originally Posted by Kealym

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.

[Ryuudou]

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

[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.

[Drifloon]

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.

[qno2]

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:

While there are generally not many difficult spots, mainly due to the nature of Umineko, and thanks to Knox's 8th only being applied by them when it's convenient... how do they deal with EP1, 5th twilight (Kanon)? I'm not really interested in disproving the theory itself, but I'd like to know how they solve it. Sorry, if this is common knowledge from KnowNoMore's videos, can't work up the motivation for 9 hours of getting insulted. Of course, I'll use all the red concerned, since Rosatrice followers claim that us "Shkanon-scum" is just ignoring whatever we want.

Let's collect, the red I'll use at the first is based on the notion that Rosatrice applies, since that is the point.

Fanon: If we assume that Rosa and George are the culprits, Kanon isn't the culprit.

Necessity: The culprit has the stakes.

Therefore, Kanon couldn't have pretended to get hurt, as he lacks the stake. Additionally, if he is not the culprit, he lacks a motive. If we assume that Van Dine applies (not to my knowledge), which is something that Rosatrice-followers like to do to disprove Shkannon, then Kanon isn't even allowed to deceive.

(Van's #2: No willful tricks or deceptions may be placed on the reader other than those played legitimately by the criminal on the detective himself.)

So did he just get wounded...? What about Nanjo?

Fanon: If Rosatrice applies, Nanjo is not an accomplice. And even if he were, why would he lie about Kanon's life and death status?

Therefore, Nanjo doesn't have a reason to lie about Kanon's life and death status. Again, Van Dine's #2 if you swing that way.
...

In light of those conclusions solely based on the notion that Rosatrice applies, it is unlikely that Kanon just happened to survive a fatal wound that even Nanjo, the physicist, claimed to have taken his life. Because this is an Umineko discussion, let's be redundant (just like in the good ol' days!):
Kanon lacks the means and the motive to fake his injury, Nanjo lacks the motive to lie. Thus it is, I repeat, unlikely that he just happened to survive - Knox's 8th. In fact it'd make a mockery out of the series bigger than Shkanon.

So how did Rosa kill Kanon then (George was still up in the hallway, under surveillance by the incompetent Detective). Rosa, after
a) breaking out of the shed with the help of the "weird" machines in the shed, yes there were actually hints that could support it after all,
b) hiding in the guest room that Eva & Hideyoshi happened to go into, killing them, hiding again,
c) fleeing through the window as soon as everyone leaves,
d) running through the front door to the backyard, to the boiler room (what a day, right, Rosa?) to stake Kinzo...
e) met Kanon, 'somehow' injured him with a stake (or shot/stabbed him and just left the stake there)... that's it, right? Sounds easy, right?

Red from EP4: Kanon did not commit suicide

Knox's 8th: . It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not PRESENTED!!

No hints were brought by the author about some kind of illness. No suicide.
... but in light of the conclusions above any other conclusion than 'Kanon got attacked, suffered major injuries and died to them (in short: Kanon was killed)' would be very unlikely.

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!

If no human or dead person could have killed him, then Rosa is actually a witch. Discussion is closed, she is not human, witches EXIST, there is no mystery.

Jokes aside, the only solution I could come up with... oh, you're going to love it, everyone. I had a good laugh about this one.

It wasn't Kanon, but Yoshiya.

Of course, acknowledging this mechanism is like admitting defeat to Shkannon, so there is probably a simpler one that I'm just not seeing (granted, it's been awhile since I read EP1).
Are we going to use Trap X again? Or is this just a cheap play with words? No human, dead or alive, could've killed him because he did not die instantly? ... well who's playing with words now?

Sorry for using up your time dear reader.

[Drifloon]

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.

[qno2]

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?

[Ryuudou]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by qno2

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:

While there are generally not many difficult spots, mainly due to the nature of Umineko, and thanks to Knox's 8th only being applied by them when it's convenient... how do they deal with EP1, 5th twilight (Kanon)? I'm not really interested in disproving the theory itself, but I'd like to know how they solve it. Sorry, if this is common knowledge from KnowNoMore's videos, can't work up the motivation for 9 hours of getting insulted. Of course, I'll use all the red concerned, since Rosatrice followers claim that us "Shkanon-scum" is just ignoring whatever we want.

Let's collect, the red I'll use at the first is based on the notion that Rosatrice applies, since that is the point.

Fanon: If we assume that Rosa and George are the culprits, Kanon isn't the culprit.

Necessity: The culprit has the stakes.

Therefore, Kanon couldn't have pretended to get hurt, as he lacks the stake. Additionally, if he is not the culprit, he lacks a motive. If we assume that Van Dine applies (not to my knowledge), which is something that Rosatrice-followers like to do to disprove Shkannon, then Kanon isn't even allowed to deceive.

(Van's #2: No willful tricks or deceptions may be placed on the reader other than those played legitimately by the criminal on the detective himself.)

So did he just get wounded...? What about Nanjo?

Fanon: If Rosatrice applies, Nanjo is not an accomplice. And even if he were, why would he lie about Kanon's life and death status?

Therefore, Nanjo doesn't have a reason to lie about Kanon's life and death status. Again, Van Dine's #2 if you swing that way.
...

In light of those conclusions solely based on the notion that Rosatrice applies, it is unlikely that Kanon just happened to survive a fatal wound that even Nanjo, the physicist, claimed to have taken his life. Because this is an Umineko discussion, let's be redundant (just like in the good ol' days!):
Kanon lacks the means and the motive to fake his injury, Nanjo lacks the motive to lie. Thus it is, I repeat, unlikely that he just happened to survive - Knox's 8th. In fact it'd make a mockery out of the series bigger than Shkanon.

So how did Rosa kill Kanon then (George was still up in the hallway, under surveillance by the incompetent Detective). Rosa, after
a) breaking out of the shed with the help of the "weird" machines in the shed, yes there were actually hints that could support it after all,
b) hiding in the guest room that Eva & Hideyoshi happened to go into, killing them, hiding again,
c) fleeing through the window as soon as everyone leaves,
d) running through the front door to the backyard, to the boiler room (what a day, right, Rosa?) to stake Kinzo...
e) met Kanon, 'somehow' injured him with a stake (or shot/stabbed him and just left the stake there)... that's it, right? Sounds easy, right?

Red from EP4: Kanon did not commit suicide

Knox's 8th: . It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not PRESENTED!!

No hints were brought by the author about some kind of illness. No suicide.
... but in light of the conclusions above any other conclusion than 'Kanon got attacked, suffered major injuries and died to them (in short: Kanon was killed)' would be very unlikely.

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!

If no human or dead person could have killed him, then Rosa is actually a witch. Discussion is closed, she is not human, witches EXIST, there is no mystery.

Jokes aside, the only solution I could come up with... oh, you're going to love it, everyone. I had a good laugh about this one.

It wasn't Kanon, but Yoshiya.

Of course, acknowledging this mechanism is like admitting defeat to Shkannon, so there is probably a simpler one that I'm just not seeing (granted, it's been awhile since I read EP1).
Are we going to use Trap X again? Or is this just a cheap play with words? No human, dead or alive, could've killed him because he did not die instantly? ... well who's playing with words now?

Sorry for using up your time dear reader.

"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.

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Ryuudou

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.

[Ryuudou]

Originally Posted by jjblue1

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.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by qno2

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.

Originally Posted by jjblue1

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.

[qno2]

Originally Posted by Renall

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?

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.

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 alâ 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?

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.

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.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by qno2

... 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.

[Joeyscraggy]

Yasu, ladies an gentlemen:

Spoiler for Yasu, really:

And yup, that's Yasu

[qno2]

Originally Posted by Renall

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.

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.

[Renall]

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.

[qno2]

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.