[goldendust]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

The games are to find out the truth of Beato, and the truth she wants Battler to reach. It's not enough to understand the games, but also to understand her, and she's aiming at Battler specifically, who has a slightly different and more personal knowledgebase than we do. If she wants him to see through her ruse and learn of her martyrdom and keep everyone else deceived with her "I did it" game, then it makes sense why Battler starts helping her hide the truth.

Understanding her is the key to figuring out everything. In EP8 it was said Battler understood "everything" and Ange understood "nothing".

Though lets say you are right.

If you thought Eva was the murderer of EP3 then you totally misunderstood EVERYTHING.

No the game was suppose to be a huge hint Beatrice's nature. If Eva was truly the culprit doesn't matter. The point is how Beatraice portrayed the game in attempt to convey something to Battler.

The point Bern was showing is that the tragedy happens in ALL OF THEM though. There's only One Truth, regardless of what fictions or alternate worlds say. The incredibly strong implication is that the tragedy is outside of Yasu's control. Bernkastel told her to her face that no matter what she did, she can't have a happy live and survive 1986.

So the truth that Kirie and Rudolf are homicidal maniacs may be also true, that the whole tragedy happened becasue Yasu guided someone to the gold?

Though what happens if nobody finds the gold? Yasu still has to continue the game.

Basically. I'm pretty confident that it has to be either George or Battler. I prefer George because I'd like to trust Battler's characterization.

But Battler theory is pretty great.

You keep saying that Yasu has no motive but what to those have that qualifies as something better?

I can see George being an additional culprit based that the later games portrayed him in a more negative light.

However Yasu also been portrayed as very emotionally/mentally unbalanced. I wouldn't put it past him/her to come up with a murder game.

Fictional realities don't count. Prove that Yasu killed someone in a world that isn't a product of her own imagination.

It is impossible to prove that given that the author wants to reader to create their own answer. The games are suppose to help us with that.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Well, I don't commit murders for pleasure either because... I don't commit murders at all.

Or you can say that the "murders" she committed are contextual to her stories.

By saying you don't do something for a reason. It implies you done it for another reason.

In that case it's only in the context of fiction.

Yeah but the thing with red truth, the more brief it is. The harder it is to find out what it means.

I'm not really talking about the "murder game" specifically. Her actions that asserted her status as a witch began long before 1986.

Yeah but also during that time she was fascinated with the idea of magic/mystery ideas. Maybe she wanted to try that fantasy out.

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Yeah, what you are saying pretty much explains either scenario. So, why do you think that Rosa is so hostile towards her fellow accomplices, including Kanon and Shannon? Does she know, or can she guess, who Beatrice actually is?

My theory is that Rosa had some kind of agreement with the culprit but he/she renegaded on it. Leading to Rosa being paranoid.