[Renall]

Originally Posted by Ssol

That is a ridiculous request after I posted those two quotes directly from the game. Of course only Lambda saw it.

Let me follow your logic. Oh hey, I'm Beato and I found a solution to the logic error. I'm going to reveal the clues that lead to figuring out the trick I came up with.

Get real. It doesn't friggin' matter what the specific clues were. The game was suspended and Erika had no ability to go back and investigate since Battler was in some sort of coma caused by the logic error. Erika could not go back and find those clues, therefore, it was her fault.

So why couldn't Battler revise the story too, if he knew the answer? And if he didn't, why can't people just say "he didn't know?" Am I missing something here? Is Battler both simultaneously so incompetent as to not be able to find a solution, and so deeply aware of the central truth of the game that he shouldn't have been tripped up by anything? Either he doesn't know the solution, or he doesn't say what it is. This is inescapable. The error is provably solvable.

So which is it? Are people just afraid that the possibility Battler might have made a mistake means they might also be mistaken? Why is that a problem to people when the solution they seem to want appears to be the one Beatrice used?

Sure it does. There were no clues that anything was killed in that example I posted. The solution was not possible with the information I presented. The story needed to be revised and clues needed to be added.

We are told plenty of times that someone is dead - in red - whose death we cannot possibly confirm. Does the story show them dying? Sometimes, in a magic scene. But it also shows us things in reverse; that is, things that could not have been seen (per red) which we're told were.

And again: Why can't Battler do exactly the same thing? His story wasn't even finished being "written" at the time. He was still making calls up to that point. He even sussed to the close approximation of the solution (someone else freeing him), without correctly identifying the person who could free him. All anyone has to say is "he didn't know Kanon was available to free him." And there are several possible reasons why. One I just thought of is Shkanon-related, but not in the way you might think.

You really shouldn't ignore something like this.

It's possible that Shkanon was the solution that Beato came up with to solve the logic error. However, this was only a solution due a revision in the story. The original story that Battler tried to present to prove that he understood the truth did not involve Shannon being the same person as Kanon.

This is a rare case for me, so enjoy it while it lasts, but I'm going to agree with chronotrig on this one and note that ep6 has flags pointing to Shkanon all over the place (I disagree with him on WHY, but he isn't wrong about that fact). If it wasn't part of Battler's story, then we must be reading the version Beatrice came up with, because there's no way Knox would stop Shkanon being advanced as a possibility if the ep6 we have available to us is Battler's story. It's entirely valid.

So why didn't Battler think Kanon was available? Assume for now he didn't really know the answer. Two possibilities I can think of, though there are tons more:

1) He didn't believe in Shkanon when it was true, and therefore thought Kanon was trapped in the other room.

2) He did believe in Shkanon, and knew he couldn't get Shannon out of her room, when in fact Kanon was free even without worrying about the seal on the window of the room Shannon is in.

You can actually look at Beatrice's solution being Shkanon (if it was) two ways: Battler and Erika assumed Shkanon wasn't true, and Beatrice knew it was, or Battler and Erika both suspected Shkanon, and Beatrice realized it wasn't true.

With this theory, Shkanon is important because you have to understand it to know why Beato would come up with that answer.

And just why would she come up with that answer?

However, Shkanon is only a misinterpretation of the true answer, as I posted in the Mary had a Little Lamb example, and was a revision in episode 6 to solve the logic error.

What does it misinterpret? How does it get around Erika's expectations sufficient to make her lose out to it? What is Erika's standpoint on Shkanon, anyway? She should already have known whether it was true or false, honestly, but some people still seem to think she can be kept in the dark about it.

And your example still doesn't work; the statement of the lamb's death or its appearance as a corpse is sufficient to justify searching for an explanation which explains how it was killed. If a body simply turns up in a mystery, it's not against Knox just because there were no clues this person was going to die. That isn't what Knox's rule means, in his formulation or in Umineko. Heck, a body turning up in a mystery is practically the point of the genre.

Originally Posted by chronotrig

A more general point. Remember that Battler couldn't make use of either Shannon or Kanon himself before he went all catatonic. At that point in time, the state of Erika's seals hadn't been mentioned yet, and if Battler had chosen to take a person from one of those rooms, it would be obvious to Erika how he had managed to escape (Erika figures out the puzzle and wins, game over). In a way, when Dlanor declared that the seals around the cousins' room were still active, she gave Battler and Beatrice a way out. This made it possible for Beato to eventually use "Kanon", a person who was supposed to be in the sealed room, without Erika knowing how Kanon had escaped. Unfortunately, Battler was already at the point of giving up when Dlanor used that red, and it doesn't really sound like a good thing unless you really think about it.

So you posit the logic error was unsolvable for Battler? Because that seems to be what you're saying. What makes you so sure?