View Single Post
Old 2011-10-24, 12:44   Link #25311
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
Originally Posted by battle22 View Post
can someone tell with what's the diference between gold truth and red truth?
Red is factual belief. Gold emotional belief.

It's impossible for Henry to be the culprit, because he was with me all night.
It's impossible for Henry to be the culprit, because I believe in Henry; he wouldn't do such a thing.

Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Once again, you are admitting that the only standard that matters is "what the GM wants." If that is the standard, and subjectivity rises to the level of objectivity (red), any GM who wields their subjectivity to intentionally mislead the player(s) (and failing to make it obvious that they are presenting their subjective interpretation is misleading, full stop) is dishonest.
I think subjectivity = objectivity was kinda the point. Beatrice could think of Battler as being "born" from Asumu metaphorically, but she just doesn't. Call it convenient, but that's how subjectivity works.

And I'm not trying to defend Beatrice on this point, just the logical consistency of Red. Using Red in the way she did in this particular instance was a cheap, mean, and abusive trick which she used because she was mad at Battler.

I realize I have said before that Beatrice intentionally mislead Battler with S/K is dead, but perhaps I should rephrase. She didn't intentionally mislead, but she said things she was aware would be misinterpreted. Her goal wasn't to fool Battler, but to give him a difficult riddle and hope he would solve it.

Of course you're free to call it a shitty riddle, and I wouldn't really argue with that. But it's different than lying.

Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Ryukishi isn't clever, he isn't a good mystery writer, he's sure as hell not a good romance writer, and the only reason the book hadn't been closed on him two years before he closed it himself is because (1) nobody thought he would actually consider his twists a good idea and thus assumed they were missing something that would make the work actually good, and (2) he lied solely to stir up contrarian debating that would guarantee his readers didn't reach consensus too quickly.
He's a very good subjective perspective writer. Onikakushi-hen was especially brilliant in this regard, IMHO.
Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote