AnimeSuki Forums

Renall · 2009-08-24, 19:03

Also there's the whole matter with the witches' game being fundamentally unfair. I think it's meant to contrast with Beatrice only using the red strategically, and only when the game couldn't possibly progress if she didn't. The other characters are basically using the blue and red as a bludgeon, without respect for the rules or flow of things, to get the ending to the story they want. Whether or not it's true is inconsequential, so they can attack Battler and force him to prove things they don't have to prove because... well, they're jerks, and the game is rigged.

TheForsaken · 2009-08-24, 19:08

No, Erika's side must have evidence in real world for any red truth they use.
The only one can use red without limitation is Lambdadelta.

Tyabann · 2009-08-24, 19:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheForsaken

That red truth is said by Lambdadelta. She is the Game Master, the only one can say red truth without any limitation.

...So, the red truth has limits? Where have we heard this before, ever?

The way it seems from the summary, is that they're just deliberately trying to fuck Battler over by contradicting themselves. I'm probably wrong, but this really doesn't seem that justified.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renall

Maybe you're right and the game characters are wrong. Maybe Battler's red is exactly what it claims to be?

Hey, there's no need for such sarcasm.

It just feels off given what we already know about the red text.

I mean, if they justify it in game, sure, but it feels a lot like a huge ass pull to me.

WHEN WE USE RED TRUTH, WE DON'T NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE

WHEN YOU USE RED TRUTH, YOU DO. WHY? WE WANT YOU TO LOSE

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renall

Also there's the whole matter with the witches' game being fundamentally unfair. I think it's meant to contrast with Beatrice only using the red strategically, and only when the game couldn't possibly progress if she didn't. The other characters are basically using the blue and red as a bludgeon, without respect for the rules or flow of things, to get the ending to the story they want. Whether or not it's true is inconsequential, so they can attack Battler and force him to prove things they don't have to prove because... well, they're jerks, and the game is rigged.

Okay, there we go. I posted the above before I even saw this.

If that's true then, yeah, it makes a lot more sense. I always said that there's no way we can figure out the truth yet anyway.

We're still missing something important.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheForsaken

No, Erika's side must have evidence in real world for any red truth they use.

But, wait, what?

The summary said this:

Spoiler for meotwister's summary:

Um... where does it say that THEY need evidence?

TheForsaken · 2009-08-24, 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaisos Erranon

...So, the red truth has limits? Where have we heard this before, ever?

In previous game, Beato is the Game Master. So she and anyone in her side can say red truth.
In this game, 34 is GM, so she is the only one can use red truth. Beato (and Virgillia) can't say in red or their red truths are not counted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaisos Erranon

WHEN WE USE RED TRUTH, WE DON'T NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE

WHEN YOU USE RED TRUTH, YOU DO. WHY? WE WANT YOU TO LOSE

Okay, there we go. I posted the above before I even saw this.

If that's true then, yeah, it makes a lot more sense. I always said that there's no way we can figure out the truth yet anyway.

We're still missing something important.

But, wait, what?

The summary said this:

Spoiler for meotwister's summary:

Um... where does it say that THEY need evidence?

Cornelia recited what Lambdadelta said before. So it is the absolute truth.

AncientSpark · 2009-08-24, 19:41

This is how I reason why Battler lost.

Spoiler for The Red Truth Paradox:

luckyssol · 2009-08-24, 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by AncientSpark

This is how I reason why Battler lost.

Spoiler for The Red Truth Paradox:

Exactly. This is also why Erika can't just ask Bern to say a bunch of red lines that would corner Natsuhi. She has justify her reasoning before truth can be asserted.

Tyabann · 2009-08-24, 19:57

Right, okay. Things make more sense now.

Thanks guys.

Renall · 2009-08-24, 21:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaisos Erranon

Hey, there's no need for such sarcasm.

I'm not being sarcastic. It's red, it's always been true before, why isn't it true now? Don't fall for everybody citing rules and outrageous claims and just assume it's true; what then?

Used Can · 2009-08-24, 22:04

Most of the Red Truths used by Erika's side were the Knox's rules, I believe. Anyway, as it's already been pointed out, the Red Truths are there for the anti-mystery side to use, not for anti-fantasy (at least, not without permission). That, and the anti-fantasy has to abide by Knox's rules; the use of the red would violate those.

Anyway, a friend of mine sent me a quote that, according to him, was used in this episode:

Spoiler:

Was it actually used? If it was, when was it used?

MeoTwister5 · 2009-08-24, 22:15

Ok from my interpretation this is why there's a huge conflict in the usage of red:

I. Erika
She does not use red per se because she is a human piece. Notice that for her side it has to be either Bern or Dlanor+servants to use red for her. For Dlanor's side, she uses Knox articles in red and because these articles are empirically true for the games it can be said i red and undisputed. As for Bern, this is because she and Erika have proof (the seals etc.) that can prove their side, which validates their red.

II. Lambda
She's the game master and can state the red as she sees fit.

III. Red as Evidence
Red can only be used as evidence by the Mystery side if and only if there is evidence to support it. The Knox articles limit it's usage in such a way that it cannot be red if there is no supporting evidence. If they can sa it in red, it is because there is evidence.

The biggest problem I had was interpreting the usage of red as a method of investigation. From my interpretation it means that red cannot be used to assert a truth or a fact if, again, this is unsubstantiated. This means that the red can only be used as a validated truth; it cannot be used as a method to ascertain said truth via an investigation to validate itself. Therefore, a truth exists only in it's complete and validated form. It must have been validated by some other, none-red means.

IV. Only Supernatural Creatures can use Red.
This is probably the biggest obstacle to the usage of red. Lambda and/or Bern made a passing comment saying that only from a supernatural can supernatural arise. Specifically, unless I translated this wrong, because the red itself is a supernatural entity, it can only come from a supernatural source. This means that only supernatural entities such as witches and the like can wield the red. This is why Battler is questioned as to his usage of it, and why Erika needs Bern and Dlanor to state it for her. They are human and therefore cannot use it.

This in turn brings out the question of how Battler used in in the end. Lambda questions his usage and Bern demanded validation. Does this mean that Battler is a supernatural entity because he managed to wield the red?

I'll get to that myself after I study.

Used Can · 2009-08-24, 22:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by MeoTwister5

Does this mean that Battler is a supernatural entity because he managed to wield the red?

If that's right, this would be an interesting twist, in my opinion.

Tyabann · 2009-08-24, 22:53

Could be for two reasons:

1) Meta-Batter being Meta-Battler. Either he no longer counts as human, since he's sort-of dead, or he's spent so long in the Meta-World he now counts as a supernatural entity.

2) The black blood, the sorcerous bloodline he inherited from Kinzo, ties him to the magic world and thus counts him as a supernatural entity.

Either of those, or Battler was a witch all along and didn't know it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renall

I'm not being sarcastic. It's red, it's always been true before, why isn't it true now? Don't fall for everybody citing rules and outrageous claims and just assume it's true; what then?

Sorry...

Well, then Natsuhi isn't the culprit. Which we knew anyway, she wouldn't kill

Spoiler for is this even needed anymore?:

kagato3 · 2009-08-24, 23:16

"- Battler questions that while you can confirm them dead with their corpses, Krauss doesn't have a corpse. This violates (?) Knox's rules (?).
- Cornelia states in red that the red truth is true and needs no evidence to confirm it."
Doesn't this still violate Knox article 8, that it is prohibited to have a solution using an unpresented clue and Knox article 2, it is prohibited to use supernatural abilities in the mehtod of investigation for Erika? If there is no corpse she can't confirm he is dead, with out supernatural means so he also has no albi and if she does know where the corpse is the she violates Knox article 8.

luckyssol · 2009-08-25, 01:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by kagato3

"- Battler questions that while you can confirm them dead with their corpses, Krauss doesn't have a corpse. This violates (?) Knox's rules (?).
- Cornelia states in red that the red truth is true and needs no evidence to confirm it."
Doesn't this still violate Knox article 8, that it is prohibited to have a solution using an unpresented clue and Knox article 2, it is prohibited to use supernatural abilities in the mehtod of investigation for Erika? If there is no corpse she can't confirm he is dead, with out supernatural means so he also has no albi and if she does know where the corpse is the she violates Knox article 8.

Also, what about the violation of Knox Article 6?

Erika sets up the tape on the door traps for a criminal when a crime hasn't even been committed yet.
She had an intuitive feeling that since they found the gold someone is going to kill.
That intuitive feeling, which was used to set up all the tape on the door traps, should have nullified them as evidence due to Knox Article 6.

**Klashikari** · 2009-08-25, 02:52

1) Cornelia just repeats the red confirmed by Bern. Therefore, Cornerla just had to remind Beato's rule that "red" is always the truth.
This isn't an evidence provided by Erika, but rather by Bern.

2) That is a complete different matter.
Erika didn't make an investigation with the tape. Actually, it was a measure "in the plot". It wasn't a 6th sense method "during the trial".
Furthermore, Erika's reasoning is absolutely right: Battler is only 18 years old and suddenly became the controller of 20 frigging billion yens. Rokkenjima is stuck in a typhoon, so you have your usual locked island situation.
Therefore, it isn't even surprising for a detective to expect a murder. And even if there isn't any, these efforts would be only wasted, while doing nothing would leave the culprit roaming free if the detective didn't do anything.

MeoTwister5 · 2009-08-25, 03:23

Klash is absolutely correct on the second point regarding Erika's assumptions that led to her sealing all sorts of entrances all over the place.

Basically said, she did rely on detective's intuition to expect a murder, but this came about by logical probability and not by some clarivoyant vision. Also these actions would become admissible in the trial because her theories and assumptions became validated: some people died, confirming their suspicions. Therefore her evidence and attempts became justified and not some unproven conjecture.

AncientSpark · 2009-08-25, 07:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ssol

Also, what about the violation of Knox Article 6?

Erika sets up the tape on the door traps for a criminal when a crime hasn't even been committed yet.
She had an intuitive feeling that since they found the gold someone is going to kill.
That intuitive feeling, which was used to set up all the tape on the door traps, should have nullified them as evidence due to Knox Article 6.

Knox Article 6 merely supplies that you can't use the 6th Sense as evidence. In this case, the evidence was the seals placed on the doors and the results, not the intuition that Erika brought to bear in creating them. In any non-Umineko mystery, you could chalk this up to coincidence or detective's intuition.

If this example of Erika's usage of intuition had, in fact, been violation of Knox Article 6, that means the Blue Truth would have also been a violation of Knox Article 6 all along, as that's a supernatural method/sense, but while its usage results in evidence, the Blue Truth in itself is not evidence. Only the response can be seen as conclusive evidence.

If instead Erika said "Natsuhi murdered them because I have a gut instinct that she did", then that would be an actual violation of Knox Article 6, although I suspect if she merely thought that and not actually presented it, it would be fine.

crimmy88 · 2009-08-25, 08:38

@Meotwister5

Is that how the episode ends (including tea parties) ?

MeoTwister5 · 2009-08-25, 08:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by crimmy88

@Meotwister5

Is that how the episode ends (including tea parties) ?

Not yet. I'm still in the game and it looks nowehere done.

Actually I can't post my summaru yet because there's a bit of Blue Text claimed by Bern that I need confirmation on, because if I'm incorrect... well...

Can anyone confirm this...

Spoiler for Very Big Ass Spoilers:

Because if my interpetation is correct, this just just opened a whole truck of canned worms that is creepy and completely wrong on every conceivable level.

**Klashikari** · 2009-08-25, 09:03

Yes, that's what Bern was "suggesting", or rather Erika as well. The big insult to the injury.
That said, "kinzo is dead!" red wasn't used up to this point, so the thing is absolutely "safe" considering I doubt such thing would happen, unless Natsuhi has deviant necro fetish, which is arguably difficult to imagine.

and yes you are nowhere to be done: Ura tea party is the third longest chapter in ep5, which is, IIRC, still longer than the longest ep4 chapter.

2009-08-24, 19:41	Link #425
AncientSpark Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2009	This is how I reason why Battler lost. Spoiler for The Red Truth Paradox: According to Knox Rule 2, supernatural means cannot be used in investigation, as a detective. Knox Rules are Red Truths themselves, so they cannot be disputed normally. Since Red Truth is classified as "Supernatural", we reach a paradox; Battler used Red Truth as an Anti-Fantasy measure, but he violated Knox Rule 2, thereby nullifying another Red Truth. Absolute truth cannot be negated, even by another absolute truth, so the court asks Battler to provide evidence to fix this. If Battler provided sufficient evidence, Battler's desperado move would no longer be nullifying Knox Rule 2, since Battler's idea would have had non-supernatural evidence, and thus both Red Truths can exist. However, because Battler did not provide evidence, we reach a point where the paradox must be resolved in some manner. Obviously, as Knox Rule 2 is a timeless rule, the "less powerful" truth (Natsuhi's innocence) is instead effectively nullified, instead becoming a mere statement rather then the Red Absolute Truth. In addition, the powers that be (the witches) had justification to have the source of the other Red Truth removed, that being Battler. Thus, Battler lost, because he effectively caused the system of Red Truths to crash into an impossible state. This is symbolized in Battler dying from a Red Stake, of which was Knox Rule 2 that he violated. Since I haven't read Part 5 myself, the rest of this is speculation, but I assume how Battler revives is that evidence is found that makes Natsuhi not guilty. Thus, Knox Rule 2's violation is effectively undone and, with it, the very reason why Battler was allowed to die, so his death is reversed.

2009-08-24, 22:04	Link #429
Used Can Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008	Most of the Red Truths used by Erika's side were the Knox's rules, I believe. Anyway, as it's already been pointed out, the Red Truths are there for the anti-mystery side to use, not for anti-fantasy (at least, not without permission). That, and the anti-fantasy has to abide by Knox's rules; the use of the red would violate those. Anyway, a friend of mine sent me a quote that, according to him, was used in this episode: Spoiler: "The one who made someone weather eternal torture wasn't you... it was me! I made you stand up against terrible torture! And still, you stood until the end... while I continued complaining... And now... that I've finally climbed this mountain... you're not waiting... any more. You've slipped from my grasp..." Was it actually used? If it was, when was it used? __________________ "The name is Tin; Used is just an alias. I'm everything Shoe Box would like to be." - Used Can of the Aluminium Kingdom

2009-08-24, 22:15	Link #430
MeoTwister5 Komrades of Kitamura Kou Join Date: Jul 2004 Age: 39	Ok from my interpretation this is why there's a huge conflict in the usage of red: I. Erika She does not use red per se because she is a human piece. Notice that for her side it has to be either Bern or Dlanor+servants to use red for her. For Dlanor's side, she uses Knox articles in red and because these articles are empirically true for the games it can be said i red and undisputed. As for Bern, this is because she and Erika have proof (the seals etc.) that can prove their side, which validates their red. II. Lambda She's the game master and can state the red as she sees fit. III. Red as Evidence Red can only be used as evidence by the Mystery side if and only if there is evidence to support it. The Knox articles limit it's usage in such a way that it cannot be red if there is no supporting evidence. If they can sa it in red, it is because there is evidence. The biggest problem I had was interpreting the usage of red as a method of investigation. From my interpretation it means that red cannot be used to assert a truth or a fact if, again, this is unsubstantiated. This means that the red can only be used as a validated truth; it cannot be used as a method to ascertain said truth via an investigation to validate itself. Therefore, a truth exists only in it's complete and validated form. It must have been validated by some other, none-red means. IV. Only Supernatural Creatures can use Red. This is probably the biggest obstacle to the usage of red. Lambda and/or Bern made a passing comment saying that only from a supernatural can supernatural arise. Specifically, unless I translated this wrong, because the red itself is a supernatural entity, it can only come from a supernatural source. This means that only supernatural entities such as witches and the like can wield the red. This is why Battler is questioned as to his usage of it, and why Erika needs Bern and Dlanor to state it for her. They are human and therefore cannot use it. This in turn brings out the question of how Battler used in in the end. Lambda questions his usage and Bern demanded validation. Does this mean that Battler is a supernatural entity because he managed to wield the red? I'll get to that myself after I study. __________________ Medical Student vs. Anime Last Exile - Fam the Silver Wing -

2009-08-24, 23:16	Link #433
kagato3 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006	"- Battler questions that while you can confirm them dead with their corpses, Krauss doesn't have a corpse. This violates (?) Knox's rules (?). - Cornelia states in red that the red truth is true and needs no evidence to confirm it." Doesn't this still violate Knox article 8, that it is prohibited to have a solution using an unpresented clue and Knox article 2, it is prohibited to use supernatural abilities in the mehtod of investigation for Erika? If there is no corpse she can't confirm he is dead, with out supernatural means so he also has no albi and if she does know where the corpse is the she violates Knox article 8. __________________ Higurashi: Its a bit like watching a trainwreck, except you keep getting to see different trains wrecking with roughly the same passengers, into a variety of different objects. Also, the trains are driven by monkeys. On LSD.

2009-08-25, 02:52	Link #435
Klashikari 阿賀野型3番艦、矢矧 Lv180 Graphic Designer Moderator Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Belgium, Brussels Age: 37	1) Cornelia just repeats the red confirmed by Bern. Therefore, Cornerla just had to remind Beato's rule that "red" is always the truth. This isn't an evidence provided by Erika, but rather by Bern. 2) That is a complete different matter. Erika didn't make an investigation with the tape. Actually, it was a measure "in the plot". It wasn't a 6th sense method "during the trial". Furthermore, Erika's reasoning is absolutely right: Battler is only 18 years old and suddenly became the controller of 20 frigging billion yens. Rokkenjima is stuck in a typhoon, so you have your usual locked island situation. Therefore, it isn't even surprising for a detective to expect a murder. And even if there isn't any, these efforts would be only wasted, while doing nothing would leave the culprit roaming free if the detective didn't do anything. __________________ [Sig art: Kagura Yuu, Nunukko, Maku Rako & Mishima Kurone] / [Twitter]

2009-08-24, 19:03	Link #421
Renall BUY MY BOOK!!! Join Date: May 2009	Also there's the whole matter with the witches' game being fundamentally unfair. I think it's meant to contrast with Beatrice only using the red strategically, and only when the game couldn't possibly progress if she didn't. The other characters are basically using the blue and red as a bludgeon, without respect for the rules or flow of things, to get the ending to the story they want. Whether or not it's true is inconsequential, so they can attack Battler and force him to prove things they don't have to prove because... well, they're jerks, and the game is rigged.

2009-08-24, 19:08	Link #422
TheForsaken Winter is coming Join Date: Aug 2008	No, Erika's side must have evidence in real world for any red truth they use. The only one can use red without limitation is Lambdadelta.

2009-08-24, 19:57	Link #427
Tyabann Homo Ludens Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Canada Age: 34	Right, okay. Things make more sense now. Thanks guys.

2009-08-25, 03:23	Link #436
MeoTwister5 Komrades of Kitamura Kou Join Date: Jul 2004 Age: 39	Klash is absolutely correct on the second point regarding Erika's assumptions that led to her sealing all sorts of entrances all over the place. Basically said, she did rely on detective's intuition to expect a murder, but this came about by logical probability and not by some clarivoyant vision. Also these actions would become admissible in the trial because her theories and assumptions became validated: some people died, confirming their suspicions. Therefore her evidence and attempts became justified and not some unproven conjecture. __________________ Medical Student vs. Anime Last Exile - Fam the Silver Wing -

2009-08-25, 08:38	Link #438
crimmy88 Senior Member Join Date: May 2007	@Meotwister5 Is that how the episode ends (including tea parties) ?

2009-08-25, 09:03	Link #440
Klashikari 阿賀野型3番艦、矢矧 Lv180 Graphic Designer Moderator Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Belgium, Brussels Age: 37	Yes, that's what Bern was "suggesting", or rather Erika as well. The big insult to the injury. That said, "kinzo is dead!" red wasn't used up to this point, so the thing is absolutely "safe" considering I doubt such thing would happen, unless Natsuhi has deviant necro fetish, which is arguably difficult to imagine. and yes you are nowhere to be done: Ura tea party is the third longest chapter in ep5, which is, IIRC, still longer than the longest ep4 chapter. __________________ [Sig art: Kagura Yuu, Nunukko, Maku Rako & Mishima Kurone] / [Twitter]