(L) Ranpo Kitan - Game of Laplace

[Domonkazu]

wait a sec, Kobayashi is a boy?

[Wandering Soul]

Kobayashi must have really been bored with the life he had before. I guess it takes a twisted person to solve twisted cases. I can't really say this case was fair to viewers. We didn't even know the culprit's name until they were already caught. Not to mention the fact that coming up with the story seems to rely on coming to insane conclusions that wouldn't make sense to most people.

[VDZ]

The real problem I have with the solution is the fact that the motive wasn't properly foreshadowed. The teacher was in love with Kobayashi and with a student? We didn't even know he was in a relationship! Human chairs made out of love from willing victims? I don't mind the fact these are all outrageous ideas; what I do mind is that none of these were foreshadowed. The best foreshadowing we got was Kobayashi being a cute trap. The whydunnit is an essential part of any mystery story (in my opinion really more important than the whodunnit or howdunnit - the set of circumstances leading to the murder tends to be far more interesting than how the actual murder was committed; the whodunnit can generally be inferred from the whydunnit and the howdunnit is often simple enough).

I'd also like to reiterate something I've posted earlier:

Originally Posted by VDZ

Way too naive. The best clues are the ones you don't notice. For an example of this, an earlier poster theorized that the teacher's hug at 10:28 could have been used in some way to incriminate Kobayashi using fingerprinted tools. Who knows, maybe Hashiba's clinginess is a big clue? Or the girls being jealous of Kobayashi's cuteness, maybe that was a clue to the motive behind framing Kobayashi for the crime?

Originally Posted by AC-Phoenix

The problem I have with this case isn't even that the culprit was darkened out the entire time but that she wasn't properly introduced at all. I went back and checked several places in the episode where the culprit appeared and yet we were never told her name until the conclusion of the crime. - Not very sportsmanish to the vierwer/reader.

No matter if you go by Van Dine or Knox, a very important rule for mysteries was broken here. That inevitably lead to me and probably several other people exclusding her as her being the culprit was rather well random.

First of all, neither Knox's Decalogue nor Van Dine's Commandments are holy. They are just guidelines, and it's up to the author whether or not to stick to said rules. Fairness is subjective, and you can have a fair mystery even while violating the Decalogue and Commandments. (I especially dislike Van Dine's set of rules since it forces mysteries to be boring with rules like 'there must be a corpse' and 'no romance'.)

That said, this story violates does not violate Knox's rules.

Originally Posted by Knox

1. The criminal must be mentioned in the early part of the story, but must not be anyone whose thoughts the reader has been allowed to know.

(Context note: This refers to written fiction. 'Mentioned' needs not be in dialogue; it can be in narration.)

The girl has been shown. Even if as silhouette, we ourselves have discussed this girl making an odd remark. That is enough to qualify her as a potential culprit, in the same way the culprit can be "the janitor" or any person referred to but not shown. You don't necessarily need to know their name and personality, though the whydunnit is harder to make fair if you don't.

(It does violate Van Dine's rules, but fuck Van Dine.)

Originally Posted by p-kun

So, why did Kobayashi jump into conclusion that if the teacher had reason to talk to him about topics unrelated to bad grades or attitude at school, the teacher must have wanted to confess to him? The teacher was dead before Kobayashi even met him and there are many other reasons that a teacher could have when calling a student, so how did he come into this conclusion? Is it because he was called via email? Did I miss anything?

Yes and no. You didn't miss anything shown in the anime. You did miss relevant information that was never shown to viewers. The fact that the teacher had a crush on him was known to Kobayashi but not to the viewers; the case was solved using clues unknown to the viewer. Which is rather bullshit especially considering the lack of other clues to the motive.

[AC-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by the one above all

Kobayashi must have really been bored with the life he had before. I guess it takes a twisted person to solve twisted cases. I can't really say this case was fair to viewers. We didn't even know the culprit's name until they were already caught. Not to mention the fact that coming up with the story seems to rely on coming to insane conclusions that wouldn't make sense to most people.

Its not that it makes no sense, its just that the common sense and mystery rules ruled her as a possible culprit due to being greyed out.

Edit:
@VDZ saw your post too late, writing and editing in an answer in a bit

Edit 2 - Done:

TL;DR…

 

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[Alf]

I'm a bit disappointed that they tried not to scare the audiences. The scent of death is being blown away by gag before it registers.

Showing mobs as shadows turns out to be Kyabashi's inability to register his attention to uninterested people. But that is also a little bit cheating on the mystery side, he should have recognized her by the time she comment on the teacher's dead body, but then you can also say she is recognized only after he is sure. And having her coming out of shadow will make her an obvious answer.

Kobayashi is still interesting enough as he seems to be able to feel the teacher's intention for making those corpse chairs. Will see is it going to get better in later arcs.

[ChampDream]

Lol, that autopsy.
This case feel so unfair I don't think anyone could had guess that.

[Akito Kinomoto]

I could've done without the autopsy and the teacher's panic attack; talk about mood whiplash. It's also strange how a few more character models got filled in while the rest remained as silhouettes, even though some of the detailed models were irrelevant to the story. They could at least be consistent with how much they're trying to hide their budget, if at all. I feel like the investigation Kobayashi asked his friend to do had more stuff that would've made this more believable, because the only thing he really had to go on was one of the classmates going 'a shape like that' when only the police would've seen what it looked like.

Nitpicks aside, still a mostly enjoyable episode. Kobayashi's morbid curiosity belying that cute face is just an uncomfortable combination that has me cheering for him very awkwardly. Very, very awkwardly.

[AC-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Akuma Kinomoto

I could've done without the autopsy and the teacher's panic attack; talk about mood whiplash. It's also strange how a few more character models got filled in while the rest remained as silhouettes, even though some of the detailed models were irrelevant to the story. They could at least be consistent with how much they're trying to hide their budget, if at all. I feel like the investigation Kobayashi asked his friend to do had more stuff that would've made this more believable, because the only thing he really had to go on was one of the classmates going 'a shape like that' when only the police would've seen what it looked like.

Usually that would be enough since there was an information ban on the media. We are talking about a confined space (a school) here though where rumors will travel rather fast. So her having heard about the shape was rather solid.
It was apparently also more the way she said it than that she actually knew about the shape that was supposed to give her away.

[VDZ]

Originally Posted by AC-Phoenix

Yes you guessed that right - but thats really all it - was a guess.

-explanation as to why it's bullshit-

You missed my point entirely. I wasn't serious when I suggested Kobayashi's cuteness itself may be a clue. It was an example of something that was so inane that it would be very unlikely to be a clue - specifically to illustrate my point that even the most inane-seeming things CAN, in fact, be clues. Just like what happened here: Kobayashi's cuteness WAS in fact a clue after all, as silly as it is.

My point is this: Do not dismiss anything as potential clue, no matter how silly. The most inane things could be the most important clues.

Originally Posted by AC-Phoenix

Knox 1 and 7 are in fact holy, otherwise its not a proper detective mystery.
And no, bringing in a random character right at the end who turns out to be the culprit is not subjective unfairness but objective unfairness. And that is not only because readers won't be able to solve it but also because you are pretty much wasting the readers time.

Nope. Neither are holy.

Let's start with #7, "The detective himself must not commit the crime.". The reason this was forbidden was because too many stories used it as a cheap twist. However, in the right context, even something like this can be allowed. For example, in Remember11 (major spoilers)...

Spoiler for Major Remember11 spoilers:

(For context: Remember11 is a story (two stories depending on the way you look at it) about two people exchanging bodies every so often, both in different locations with their own set of problems.)

In the SPHIA part of the story, protagonist Satoru is inside a psychiatric hospital he can't leave, and one of the patients (4 including Satoru, all known to the reader) is trying to kill him.

Near the end of the story, this mystery is resolved in a big twist: Rather than two people switching bodies, there's actually a third person, a baby, in the body-exchanging process, and every so often his body is controlled by a baby for half an hour. That is why 'the murderer tried to drown Satoru in the bathtub' (the baby fell in and doesn't understand how to get out), 'the murderer poisoned Satoru' (the baby just drank the liquid in his hands), and so on. The protagonist is the culprit (his body is taking the actions that almost kill him), but for completely justifiable reasons.

As for #1, "The criminal must be mentioned in the early part of the story, but must not be anyone whose thoughts the reader has been allowed to know."...first of all, I strongly disagree with the latter part. Why can't you allow the reader to know their thoughts at any point in the story? Culprit-perspective before the murder can really help flesh out the motive. Even after the murder, it can be useful to indicate the character has something to hide in stories where multiple people have things to hide. Furthermore, things can be shown from his perspective without ever revealing whose perspective exactly you're seeing.

That said, even without all that, there are justifications for never mentioning the culprit; all that is required is that it's feasibly possible to deduce who the culprit is. For example, in Danganronpa 2 (major spoilers)...

Spoiler for Major Danganronpa 2 spoilers:

Surprise! Junko is back! She is never introduced during the story of Danganronpa 2, but readers are familiar with her, so she doesn't need an introduction. It's an entirely fair solution.

Speaking of Danganronpa 2, it also violates #7 in an acceptable way. After all, it's Hajime himself who planted the virus in the system that caused Monokuma to take over the simulation. But it's pre-brainwashing Hajime, so the detective himself doesn't know either until he finds out through detective-ing. The motive also checks out once you understand the broader context.

Originally Posted by AC-Phoenix

Yes, its actually a pretty good example of a pretty likely outcome of breaking certain Knox rules.

Yup, as I said, the rules are guidelines. And Knox's decalogue is a good set of guidelines. But if done properly, you can make a fair mystery even while completely ignoring the guidelines.

[Akito Kinomoto]

Originally Posted by AC-Phoenix

Usually that would be enough since there was an information ban on the media. We are talking about a confined space (a school) here though where rumors will travel rather fast. So her having heard about the shape was rather solid.
It was apparently also more the way she said it than that she actually knew about the shape that was supposed to give her away.

Right, but I'm saying it feels like Glasses Guy found out some crucial details we didn't hear, that if divulged, would make it feel like finding the culprit relied significantly less on a slip of the tongue.

[VDZ]

Originally Posted by AC-Phoenix

Usually that would be enough since there was an information ban on the media. We are talking about a confined space (a school) here though where rumors will travel rather fast. So her having heard about the shape was rather solid.
It was apparently also more the way she said it than that she actually knew about the shape that was supposed to give her away.

No, it was definitely the fact she said it. No matter how fast rumors spread, there needs to be a source for the rumors. Kobayashi definitely wasn't the source. It also seems unlikely Hashiba would just describe the morbid details of the crime scene. And why would the police leak the information, especially with an information ban?

The students knew only that the teacher had been killed. They had no idea about the circumstances.

Originally Posted by Akuma Kinomoto

It's also strange how a few more character models got filled in while the rest remained as silhouettes, even though some of the detailed models were irrelevant to the story. They could at least be consistent with how much they're trying to hide their budget, if at all.

The silhouettes only exist in Kobayashi's perspective. Part of this episode was told from Hashiba's perspective, and he pays attention to everyone like a normal person. Kobayashi is weird in that he doesn't pay any attention to people that don't interest him beyond what's necessary for basic social interaction; only when the culprit was identified and he grew interested in her did he notice how pretty her face was (15:24).

[VDZ]

Originally Posted by Akuma Kinomoto

Right, but I'm saying it feels like Glasses Guy found out some crucial details we didn't hear, that if divulged, would make it feel like finding the culprit relied significantly less on a slip of the tongue.

4:10. The teacher holds up a phone, someone panics, Hashiba tells her it's the dead teacher's phone, Hashiba looks around to see if anyone is being suspicious (4:32). Hashiba later thanks the teacher for her cooperation (18:25).

Hashiba saw the culprit freaking out when she heard the victim's phone was still near the crime scene. That's the details we didn't hear.

[AC-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by VDZ

You missed my point entirely. I wasn't serious when I suggested Kobayashi's cuteness itself may be a clue. It was an example of something that was so inane that it would be very unlikely to be a clue - specifically to illustrate my point that even the most inane-seeming things CAN, in fact, be clues. Just like what happened here: Kobayashi's cuteness WAS in fact a clue after all, as silly as it is.

My point is this: Do not dismiss anything as potential clue, no matter how silly. The most inane things could be the most important clues.

Just that the 'clue' i dismissed was actually exactly what I said it was - a minor clue that did nothing to the story at all. Moreover they almost completely forgot about it later, and never brought up any ways how the finger prints could have come on the weapons. (For how it likely happened see my explaination earlier)

Originally Posted by VDZ

Nope. Neither are holy.

Let's start with #7, "The detective himself must not commit the crime.". The reason this was forbidden was because too many stories used it as a cheap twist. However, in the right context, even something like this can be allowed. For example, in Remember11 (major spoilers)...
<Remember 11 spoilers

Which makes it no proper murder mystery as there was never a proper culprit or an actual crime to begin with.

Originally Posted by VDZ

As for #1, "The criminal must be mentioned in the early part of the story, but must not be anyone whose thoughts the reader has been allowed to know."...first of all, I strongly disagree with the latter part. Why can't you allow the reader to know their thoughts at any point in the story? Culprit-perspective before the murder can really help flesh out the motive. Even after the murder, it can be useful to indicate the character has something to hide in stories where multiple people have things to hide. Furthermore, things can be shown from his perspective without ever revealing whose perspective exactly you're seeing.

That said, even without all that, there are justifications for never mentioning the culprit; all that is required is that it's feasibly possible to deduce who the culprit is. For example, in Danganronpa 2 (major spoilers)...
<DR spoiler>

Spoiler for Answer to DR spoiler: Actually spoiler free though.:

Ad DR2 - 1:
Ok lets start with DR two being a directly connected sequel and thus there being no need to introduce said person.
There was even a hint of that at the end of DR1.

Ad DR2 - 1:
Which isn't really broken but rather stretched since that other said person had no memory of those events in the first place.(Which is also part of DR's synopsis to begin with)

Breaking Knox 1 means that the detective pretends to investigate while he is actually the culprit and fully aware of that fact.


Ad whose thoughts:
You can do all those things without letting the character delve into the culprits mind and get hard facts which are completely unknown to the detective out of it.

You are supposed to get the same knowledge the detective has, so unless the detective can read minds and thus knows the culprits thoughts you are generally better off not showing what the culprit has on mind.

Moreover, this rule doesn't rfer to it in general. You can still let the reader follow the culprit for a while, although the culprit shouldn't be identifiable as person X during that time.

1 and 7 are Knox rules you should specifically not break, and they are generally being abided to too. Others however can change heavily or even fall under the rucket.

If we go with the mind reading example I brought above you could say that that would be totally fine if it is a supernatural mystery where the answer could even include such supernatural agencies.
A flat out 'realistic' detective mystery however, has no place for mind reading.

[Diveman]

This feels like one of those Phoenix Wright cases where because of either a random chance or something like that the case can be solved.

Still is an intertesting series which I find very weird but I like a lot, let's hope next case makes more sense.

Also Kobayashi CANNOT be a boy, he even wears the girl's tie and his body proportions are of a girl's

[Akito Kinomoto]

Originally Posted by Diveman

Also Kobayashi CANNOT be a boy, he even wears the girl's tie and his body proportions are of a girl's

Maybe Hashiba knows the truth firsthand You know how traps work, right?

[VDZ]

Please spoiler tag the Danganronpa comments, AC-Phoenix. We can't expect people to have played Danganronpa here. Even those vague references are huge spoilers.

[AC-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by VDZ

Please spoiler tag the Danganronpa comments, AC-Phoenix. We can't expect people to have played Danganronpa here. Even those vague references are huge spoilers.

The more pressing issue is that I forgot to cut your spoiler out of the quote this time >< - corrected that now.
And yes which is why there shouldn't be spoilers from other series in a thread in general.
Thats also why I tried to keep what I said spoiler free instead of out right answering to it.

Feel free to PM me such comparisons though and refer to it in the post if you want to. (just tag them there too pls in case I haven't seen the series yet and plan on wathcing/reading it. )

[VDZ]

TL;DR…

About the Knox Decalogue and mystery stories

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[Flower]

Ep 02

Umm ... no. Sorry. This series is not my cup of tea.

Weeping that she could not become his chair? Just ... no.

Dropped.

[Yamada II]

Episode 2

So they used a tiny hint in the first episode to determine the criminal. I did not see that coming. I like how they made the new sensei suspicious and then made her out to be innocent in this whole ordeal. Nice. The mystery played out in an interesting way. The method in which Kobayashi was explaining the stuff was nice.

That autopsy time was hilarious. I did not expect this kind of comedy here and I most certainly don't mind it at all.