2011-12-09, 19:39 | Link #26141 | |||||||
Goat
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
|
Quote:
Quote:
It would be kind of like in the game of Clue (hopefully you are familiar with it) where you proclaimed what you thought was the only possible solution and opened up the answer pack (hey, it's like a cat box!), only to somehow find yourself to be wrong, thus losing the game. The problem was that you made the proclamation too early: There were still two solutions; you just didn't realize it; you should have still been making non-proclamation guesses. Quote:
You can complain about the arbitrary nature of which of, and to what extent, Piece-Erika's observations were correctly transmitted to the reader, but I don't see it as a problem because it still has to remain within the range of possible reader interpretation of End. Quote:
In any case, I don't really care if you call the idea hogwash because it's not really mine. It's a matter of how I think RK07 sees it and not a sentiment I have any personal attachment to. Quote:
Of note is that when it's Meta-Erika as the player in episode 6, not once does Piece-Erika see both Kanon and Shannon together. Aaaactually, in EP6 Piece-Erika never even sees Kanon at all. So basically I'm saying that in the case of the EP5 parlor scene it's not the detective modifying the game board, but the player herself passively modifying it (or at least our perception of it) under the possible misdirection of the gamemaster. However, the detective's actions themselves still remain fully effective in shaping the game as always. Quote:
|
|||||||
2011-12-09, 19:54 | Link #26142 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
|
Quote:
Thus, by the time he got in and saw Kinzo and Beato the island had likely gone KABOOM and that scene was a meta like his confrontation with Beato at the end of EP 4. At least that's how I explain it to myself. Another possibility is that Battler was drunk, fell asleep and dreamt it then the island went KABOOM and he never really woke up. |
|
2011-12-09, 21:50 | Link #26144 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
|
Quote:
Then again I can't remember how strongly it was hinted that the doll was mass produced in the original VN (which I guess makes Beatrice's red on the matter another silly one). |
|
2011-12-09, 22:17 | Link #26145 |
The True Culprit
|
It was only ever even suggested that there might be more than one Sakutaro TWELVE YEARS after 1986. So for all we know, three years after the incident, the Witch-Hunters started producing Rokkenjima merchandise, including your very own Sakutaro doll for a complete Maria Ushiromiya cosplay!
Honestly, these guys write fanfics about real people that died. I wouldn't put anything past them. We don't have as strong a basis for Rosa taking a mass-produced toy and lying to Maria about it, though.
__________________
|
2011-12-09, 22:28 | Link #26146 | |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
Quote:
Or she does, and you're trying to tell me Erika would never consider this relevant up to and through the Logic Error. In which case, pull the other one.
__________________
|
|
2011-12-09, 22:30 | Link #26147 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
There is something in fiction that is pretty similar to that. Again it's Ayatsuji Yukito (well he basically is one of THE rolemodels for modern Japanese detective writers) with the 3rd novel in his Mansion-Series (written 1988). It basically has a story-in-story format as well. The brother of the detective from novel 1 and 2 get's a novel titled Murder in the Labyrinth Masion (the same title as the book we are reading) in which authors invited to a labyrinth-like mansion are forced to write a murder story involving them as the first victims and they are killed in the same manner. Then he is invited to play two games with the author: (a) Find the true culprit before the book ends and (b) find out who the author of the novel is. The solution is pretty similar to this one, as it turns out to be a description trick. [spoiler=Murder in the Labyrinth Mansion]The decapitation of the first victim was guessed by the detective to have been used to hide the culprits blood. The idea of menstrual bleeding came up, but all women seemed to have alibis. In the end they didn't because there was one character who was never gendered at all, but due to being grouped with certain people and acting in certain ways the reader is lead to believe that person is a man.[/quote] In the novel within the novel we get a false solution in the end and so the detective arrives in an epilogue to clear it up to those who didn't get what actually just happened and fills in the blanks that were only hinted at (illegitimate child, inheritance, etc.). The detective within the story (which is similar to Umineko's forgeries) never understands that truth, because in that fictional world the culprit misses the defining point that makes him spottable. |
|
2011-12-09, 23:31 | Link #26148 | ||
Goat
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
|
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not sure whether Meta-Erika remembers Piece-Erika's experiences in EP5. In any case, Meta-Erika knows about Kanon somehow or another and because of:
|
||
2011-12-10, 00:15 | Link #26149 |
BUY MY BOOK!!!
Join Date: May 2009
|
It's more than interesting, it's kind of really important. If Piece-Erika has never seen Kanon and doesn't know there is such a person as "Kanon," then Erika basically has no access to her piece whatsoever, which means she's been lied to in the narrative (or just "conveniently" never been around when any important detail involving Kanon happens to come up, which is just bullshit).
__________________
|
2011-12-10, 00:23 | Link #26150 | |
Dea ex Kakera
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sea of Fragments
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2011-12-10, 01:23 | Link #26152 | ||
Goat
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
|
Quote:
Quote:
EDIT: Found a spot where she did, when they were discussing splitting up the rooms. |
||
2011-12-10, 02:53 | Link #26153 | |
Goat
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
|
Quote:
Besides, it's impossible to solve the crime with 100% certainty on the Gameboard anyway due to a possible person X, whose existence is only denied in the Meta-World. In Gameboard terms, 5 witnesses in the room with Kanon should be good enough to verify his location. Natsuhi's Gameboard conviction from End worked much the same way (as opposed to her meta-conviction which had different criteria: Reds). So yeah, neither Meta-Erika nor Piece-Erika absolutely needed to have Kanon's location personally verified. |
|
2011-12-10, 08:43 | Link #26154 | |||
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
And in particular you are completely ignoring the fact that whenever one tries to say a red truth that isn't actually the truth he chokes and is unable to end the sentence. The clue example would work only provided that when someone tried to make wrong proclamation his red truth would break before being completed. Quote:
Meta-Erika might not have been there but Bernkastel was there and she must have seen the scene from when Meta-Erika played it before. So that means you'd have to think that for some unexplicable reason Bernkastel decided to keep sensible information hidden from Erika, and that she still kept that information hidden in EP6. So this would mean the main responsible for Erika's defeat and by extension Bernkastel's defeat in EP6 was Bernkastel herself. I think we've already come to several similar explainations that I however contemplated all of them already in my initial post about this issue check it: http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost...ostcount=25960 Quote:
__________________
Last edited by Jan-Poo; 2011-12-10 at 08:56. |
|||
2011-12-10, 09:08 | Link #26155 |
Artist
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Yesterday!
|
Was thinking about something concerning prime.
I was basically wondering if Kinzo really died in it (I mean before 1986). From his self shown in arc 7 and especially arc 8, I wonder basically if Yasu didn't make something figurative into a literal truth of her gameboard. The idea would be something like the always angry Kinzo who he used to be and is shown in the stories "died" when Yasu solved the epitaph and became the Kinzo we've seen in arc 8. Doesn't that sorta make more sense then Kinzo's death really have been hidden for so long? Btw concerning arc 5 and Erika, Dlanor mentioned that Bern and LD were planning something evil, which was probably both of them working together to frame Natsuhi basically. If we keep that in mind I don't think it's too far fetched to think Bern simply made Erika ignore everything that didn't fit into her theory. What was important in a way from her pov is that Kanon wasn't "elsewhere" in the mansion more then both of them being actually there. Edit: Another thing I was really wondering about is Bernkastel in general. If we take arc 1-2-3-4, in it we were shown Beatrice as the antagonist, but that gradually moved away. By the end of arc 4 it was hard to see her in a truly antagonistic light cause she sorta gave it away. Bernkastel however remained pretty much the antagonist of chiru until the end and only partially might have given it away when she had that talk about not wanting to be the villain in whatever new "when they cry" if it ever happens. So simply said I've been wondering if, just as we were supposed to uncover the heart of the antagonist of arc 1-2-3-4 and understand her, is Ryuukishi not wanting us to do the same thing for Bernkastel in the chiru arcs? |
2011-12-10, 09:18 | Link #26156 | |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
About Kinzo, I have already speculated about a plausible scenario where Kinzo is still alive and as far as what concerns me it's the most plausible scenario that I can apply to Rokkenjima Prime, albeit it's not necessarily the true one.
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2011-12-10, 09:31 | Link #26157 | ||
Artist
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Yesterday!
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
2011-12-10, 09:33 | Link #26158 | |
Goat
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
|
Quote:
|
|
2011-12-10, 13:05 | Link #26159 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
|
I'm starting to think that the gameboard and the pieces don't really exist.
I'll try to explain myself better. The meta characters are the equivalent of Roleplay players. The Game master narrates a story and the players can stop him to say 'my character will do this or that' and the gamemaster will have to work said action in the story. Basically the pieces have no real will whatsoever and we only get the impression they have a will because the GM narrates the story making they move as if they have a will and taking care to keep them in character. Among the rules of the game theres that no piece can move in a way that's out of character for him (there's something similar in RP when you create a piece that is supposed to be good and so you're forbidden from moving him in such a way that can be labelled as evil). Another rule of the game is that the gamemaster must describe the actions of the detective truthfully, in short giving him a reliable point of observation. The detective can't observe Shannon and Kanon at the same time so the gamemaster can't say he did so. However if the detective doesn't require to see Shannon and Kanon at the same time (like Will does in EP 7) the gamemaster through narration, can stop the detective from having the chance to notice this. Also, since Erika as a character has certain characteristics, Lambda must work them in the story. Now... Umineko provides us and the players with visual aid, as if the scene was really played under our eyes. However piece Erika isn't really experiencing it. Picture her as a character of a computer game that moves according to yours inputs. If you don't tell her to check for the corpses SHE WON'T DO IT. If you don't tell her to check if everyone is in the parlour at the same time SHE WON'T DO IT. So if player Erika didn't specifically ask to Lambda if her piece could see everyone at the same time in the parlour Lambda never had to reveal the info that piece Erika couldn't see everyone at the same time in the parlour. Basically the trick is that Erika never checked if she could see everyone in the parlour at the same time, she was likely told that Battler could and that everyone was in the parlour. Shouldn't the characteristic of piece Erika force Lambda to reveal that Erika can't see everyone at the same time? Not really because Erika decides her piece would move in a way fitting to a guest and this forbids her from continuously looking around in each direction. It's unlikely she's against a wall so there's a lot of action taking place behind her that she can't see and confirm with her eyes. So Lambda doesn't have to reveal this info unless Erika decides to say she'll have piece Erika try to see if she can see all the characters at the same time working the action in a way that will be in character for Erika, for example Erika might say she love to dance and make a quick spin around herself as if to prove it, using it to observe each corner of the room quickly, or she'll have her move toward a window or a door with an excuse and then turn toward the room. If Erika does this Lambda will be forced to acknowledge Erika can't see everyone, though, of course, she might work the story in such a way it will still be 'normal' for Erika not to see everyone (Ex: 'as Erika walked toward the wall Kanon and Shannon left to get the dinner' or 'as Erika began to spin, the adults moved closer to her partially obscuring her view of the room'). Of course this might become a hint that there's something Lambda doesn't want Erika to notice but, as long as Lambda does it smoothly it'll become like the covers covering the bodies. Erika's observation powers would have noticed the bodies weren't corpses but she saw nothing suspicious in them being covered, she had no suspicions about the bodies being alive or dead and so she simply didn't check. If Lambda moves people in the room smoothly the fact they'll always stop Erika from having complete visual won't even look suspicious unless Erika kept on trying and something kept on getting in her way. More likely though Erika might have used her detective authority to force Lambda to show her all the people in the room but she didn't do this either. How this match with the visual aid provided? The visual aid exists merely for the players' benefits. As long as it's not in piece Erika's perspective it can show all the characters at the same time as if it was a magic scene. In fact visual aid shows magic scenes, for example Battler meeting Kinzo, but the narration make sure Erika doesn't see such scenes. So, when Battler says he 'saw grandfather' PieceErika was conveniently looking in another direction and, when she turned, Kinzo wasn't there anymore. Note that Bern said that scene took place the first time the game was played as well so Erika and Bern were shown it, although Piece Erika of course was 'turned in another direction'. Now, back to the parlour scene. Let's pretend that Erika realized that Shannon and Kanon are the same person and therefore narrative lied when it claimed they both were in the parlour. Now she might try to claim Lambda committed a logic error because her piece should have noticed the two of them weren't there. Lambda's defence will likely be that she never claimed Erika had complete visual of the room and therefore she never observed all the people at the same time. In addition to this Lambda has an advantage. She has no refeer. While Battler in game 6 had to show his cards to Lambda, Lambda doesn't have to show them to anyone and can even stop Dlanor's subordinates from using red truth. She's her own refeer and judge so what she says is law. Erika and Bern might object (as we do) but still it's Lambda who decides (like gamemasters in roleplays really...). You can't create a logic error in Lambda's game because it's up to her to decide how to interpretate things. In short if she had been the gamemaster in EP 6 and Erika had said 'with checking the corpses I meant I killed them' she could have not accepted that interpretation and destroyed the logic error. In the same way Beato as gamemaster accepted as interpretation that 'dead' might not mean phisically dead. Battler instead has Lambda as external refeer. She accepts Erika's interpretation of the description of Piece Erika's actions thus the logic error is created. And, hum... I'm trying to work this out better so sorry if it turned out a bit confusing... |
2011-12-10, 14:21 | Link #26160 | |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
I think Renall wrote pages over pages explaying why this doesn't make sense. Meta Erika must have seen whatever Piece Erika has seen in the parlor. the detective authority would be pointless if it didn't affect its meta counterpart that's the real player.
__________________
|
|
|
|