[Game] Umineko no Naku Koro ni Chiru - Ep. 8 Twilight of the golden witch

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by Toku

On a similar note, Dlanor never said that Red couldn't be used in certain specific arguments. She said that certain specific individuals can't use it to support their arguments. Namely, humans. Though, she seems to enforce this rule only when it's advantageous to her...

Yes she did. She said:

Originally Posted by EP5

[Dlanor:] `"Knox's 2nd!! `@/
`It is forbidden for supernatural agencies to be employed as a detective technique! `@/
`If you would show that Kinzo has died with the red truth, then I demand that you display proof of a human's truth which could be used to make that point...!"`\

[Battler:] `"Presentation of evidence. `@/
`I'll present a corpse which could possibly be identified as Ushiromiya Kinzo's...!!"`\

[Dlanor:] `"Can you prove that this corpse is Ushiromiya Kinzo's?! `@/
`No matter how much it resembles him, unless you can prove that it is him, `@/
`it is possible to claim that it was a substitute corpse from someone ELSE!! `@/
`Can you show that it was Kinzo's corpse with the truth of HUMANS?! `@/
`In this case alone, and with the red truth specifically, no counterargument will be effective...!!"`\

Basicly this means, that ANY riddle on the gamboard must be solvable without any of the red truths from the meta world, as you also don't have any red truths in any mystery novels. You must be able to get the right idea just from the story itself.

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by GreyZone

Basicly this means, that ANY riddle on the gamboard must be solvable without any of the red truths from the meta world, as you also don't have any red truths in any mystery novels. You must be able to get the right idea just from the story itself.

And that's just ... so problematic.

I agree with R07 saying that the game was solvable with just EP1-4, but only if one includes the Red. Otherwise, while it's possible to guess correctly the solution, it would require a WILD amount of unsubstantiated assumptions.

[Toku]

Originally Posted by GreyZone

Yes she did. She said:



Basicly this means, that ANY riddle on the gamboard must be solvable without any of the red truths from the meta world, as you also don't have any red truths in any mystery novels. You must be able to get the right idea just from the story itself.

That Red Truth refers to the "Detective." In other words, the Detective must not employ magic or something to make their deductions and arguments. It should be obvious that it only applies to the Detective. Otherwise, you're not violating Knox's 2nd.

The Red Truths are still true. It's just that, in the same way that the culprit isn't supposed to use magic to commit crimes, the detective isn't supposed to either, and should explain things in a way so that the culprit is not using magic.

[Captain Bluebeard]

Originally Posted by Toku

That Red Truth refers to the "Detective." In other words, the Detective must not employ magic or something to make their deductions and arguments. It should be obvious that it only applies to the Detective. Otherwise, you're not violating Knox's 2nd.

The Red Truths are still true. It's just that, in the same way that the culprit isn't supposed to use magic to commit crimes, the detective isn't supposed to either, and should explain things in a way so that the culprit is not using magic.

After all, in the Witch's Trial in EP5, Erika had pieces of evidence to justify the red truths given to her by Bernkastel. On the other hand, the witch's side doesn't need to do that, because obviously they aren't the detective.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by GreyZone

Yes she did. She said:

Basicly this means, that ANY riddle on the gamboard must be solvable without any of the red truths from the meta world, as you also don't have any red truths in any mystery novels. You must be able to get the right idea just from the story itself.

There's a thing in what you quoted that contraddicts your conclusions:

In this case alone, and with the red truth specifically, no counterargument will be effective...!!"`\

All the other reds that Sorcerer Battler and his friends used until that point were accepted, it's only in this specific case that Dlanor doesn't let it pass. And that's because she "sealed" this specific red somehow.

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

All the other reds that Sorcerer Battler and his friends used until that point were accepted, it's only in this specific case that Dlanor doesn't let it pass. And that's because she "sealed" this specific red somehow.

It was sealed, because the detective just had no way to confirm it was really Ushiromya Kinzo, while all other riddles SHOULD be solvable. With that i mean like any detective novel. You don't have any red truths in detective novels either.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by GreyZone

It was sealed, because the detective just had no way to confirm it was really Ushiromya Kinzo, while all other riddles SHOULD be solvable. With that i mean like any detective novel.

I don't think your interpretation is correct. There are many reds that were accepted without any rebuttal before that point that had even less evidences to back them, for example:


After George's death, his corpse was never moved!

Why Dlanor didn't block that? How the detective could prove it?

Originally Posted by GreyZone

You don't have any red truths in detective novels either.

You don't have unreliable narration either in detective novels. What would you base your reasonings on? The evidence that was exposed in the story? You can't trust that. The red truth in Umineko is a compensatory tool for the lack of reliability of the narration.

Or I could put it in a different perspective: In a standard detective novel every single word in the narration is a red truth.

[Captain Bluebeard]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

After George's death, his corpse was never moved!

Why Dlanor didn't block that? How the detective could prove it?

That depends...Please remind me, exactly who gave that red truth?

[Ouverture]

One of the stakes before piercing Erika

[Captain Bluebeard]

Then it makes sense. Since it's the witch side, they don't have to show any proof at all for their red, since the rule would lose it's meaning that way. It's quite confusing, because Battler initially fights as a human, but he defends the witch side. But when he reaches the truth, he shifts to the witch side, therefore he can use all the privilleges of the witch. After all, Beato has stated at the first point where the red was introduced that she doesn't need to show proof regarding what is said in red.

[LyricalAura]

Hm, so maybe it's the same principle Beato used when she switched sides to get around the blue prohibition in EP6. You can use red to attack (construct a mystery), but not to defend (solve a mystery).

[GreyZone]

Then what about Kinzo?

[LyricalAura]

"The mystery of Kinzo's death" was already constructed by Lambda, so stating his death in red would be resolving it, right?

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

I don't think your interpretation is correct. There are many reds that were accepted without any rebuttal before that point that had even less evidences to back them, for example:


After George's death, his corpse was never moved!

Why Dlanor didn't block that? How the detective could prove it?

I'm going to toss in a theory, though I admit I'm not 100% confident about it.
Red truth is defined as the truth we agreed with.

Erika proposed a theory that got a certain consensus.
This caused people to be unwilling to swallow a red truth that would break down Erika's theory completely without proof.

I think it could generate a situation similar to when Beato said she couldn't tell Battler witches exist in red.

So Battler was asked to provide proof for such an important red over which people weren't sure if they could agree.

So Battler uses gold truth, which is basically the truth we believe in.

As he was absolutely sure of it he managed to impose his own truth (no idea if because such certain allowed his truth to be believed by others or because his truth was actually true).

and right now I'd really like to track down the exact quotes about red and gold truth because I signed them down and can't...

Someone know how to extract the script from the game before I'll go mad trying to retrack them back playing it all?

It would be a lot faster if I could merely go through the text...

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by Captain Bluebeard

Then it makes sense. Since it's the witch side, they don't have to show any proof at all for their red, since the rule would lose it's meaning that way. It's quite confusing, because Battler initially fights as a human, but he defends the witch side. But when he reaches the truth, he shifts to the witch side, therefore he can use all the privilleges of the witch. After all, Beato has stated at the first point where the red was introduced that she doesn't need to show proof regarding what is said in red.

But that's the point. Battler was on the witch side too at the time Dlanor sealed his red truth. And he never was a detective to begin with.

The reason Dlanor sealed Battler's red truth about Kinzo has absolutely nothing to do with the reason Battler's red truth about Natsuhi wasn't accepted, because in the former case he was no longer bound by the rule that only allowed humans to use red truths if they could provide proof. At that point Battler had surpassed those limits already.

Dlanor used her "power" to seal that particular red truth the same way she sealed Gaap's blue truth in EP6. Dlanor's power has nothing to do with the limits of humans, and it is quite evident in EP6 since she uses it against Gaap, and anyway Battler was already a sorcerer in EP5.

Let's not forget that this whole scene happened off-trial, if he was still a human he couldn't even have a say on the matter because the time was up already.

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

You can use red to attack (construct a mystery), but not to defend (solve a mystery).

If that was true 99% of the red truths that came from Dlanor and Bern shouldn't be allowed.

[Toku]

Originally Posted by jjblue1

I'm going to toss in a theory, though I admit I'm not 100% confident about it.
Red truth is defined as the truth we agreed with.

Erika proposed a theory that got a certain consensus.
This caused people to be unwilling to swallow a red truth that would break down Erika's theory completely without proof.

I think it could generate a situation similar to when Beato said she couldn't tell Battler witches exist in red.

So Battler was asked to provide proof for such an important red over which people weren't sure if they could agree.

So Battler uses gold truth, which is basically the truth we believe in.

As he was absolutely sure of it he managed to impose his own truth (no idea if because such certain allowed his truth to be believed by others or because his truth was actually true).

and right now I'd really like to track down the exact quotes about red and gold truth because I signed them down and can't...

Someone know how to extract the script from the game before I'll go mad trying to retrack them back playing it all?

It would be a lot faster if I could merely go through the text...

I'd like to give my two cents on this. That "red truth is truth that we agree on" thing is open to interpretation as well.

Red Truth is just another rule of Beato's game. She introduced it to give him hints and make sure he won't stop thinking. But what guarantee did he have that it's really Truth? When he asked that, she responded that, because of her sense of honor, she will definitely abide by the rules of her own game.

However... For example, let's say you're playing a game of chess with a human opponent. You tell your opponent that you want to introduce a special rule, and you explain it all to them. They agree, and you continue your game of chess. However, later on, they make a move which breaks your special rule. You ask them why, and they respond:
"I don't trust you. You only proposed that rule to mess with me, you weren't planning on following it. So I won't abide by that rule."

There is no trust, so the game begins to break down. If one rule can't be followed, are there any rules left which can be followed? Why would you trust them to follow certain rules and not others? So you can't play your game with that person. No matter how many times you tell them that they broke your rule, it won't affect them.

However, even if they don't accept your rule, that doesn't mean that you're not following it. In other words, the Red Truth can still be the Truth. It all depends on whether or not you have love for the Game Master. But if you don't have love, reasoning will become impossible for you.

We who intend to solve the mysteries of Umineko, aren't able to doubt the Red Truths. This is why I don't like it when people start finding loopholes in it, slowly chipping away at its credibility. If you doubt this rule, then you might as well give up on solving even a single mystery in Umineko, because what is true for you at that point?

But I've already beaten that horse to death in the Spoilers thread, so I'll leave that be.

Gold Truth is something else. When someone uses the Gold, it's the equivalent of them saying:
"I'm going to write a new story now. In this story, X is true."
Notice that before BATTLER used his Gold Truth, he made a statement in Red that the corpse can possibly be identified as Ushiromiya Kinzo's. In other words, this is now a possibility that cannot be denied.

The Gold is strong in situations where something cannot be proven true or false. In that situation, even if you guarantee that it is true, nobody can deny your statement. So it becomes Truth. However, it is the same as writing a new story with the premise that X is true, because it is still possible that X is false outside of the new story world you just created.

This should allow you to extract the script.
http://unclemion.com/onscripter/rele...scripter-tools
Drag nscript.dat to nscdec.exe. You should get a result.txt.

[LyricalAura]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

But that's the point. Battler was on the witch side too at the time Dlanor sealed his red truth. And he never was a detective to begin with.

The reason Dlanor sealed Battler's red truth about Kinzo has absolutely nothing to do with the reason Battler's red truth about Natsuhi wasn't accepted, because in the former case he was no longer bound by the rule that only allowed humans to red truths when they could provide proof. At that point Battler had surpassed those limits already.

There is one thing that sets this case apart, I think. Presenting Kinzo's corpse is also what Piece-Battler has to do in order to clear Piece-Natsuhi. Even if Meta-Battler declares Kinzo is dead, that won't actually stop Erika's truth from playing out unless it can also be established on the game board, so maybe that's what Dlanor's restriction represents?

[jjblue1]

Originally Posted by Toku

I'd like to give my two cents on this. That "red truth is truth that we agree on" thing is open to interpretation as well.

The definition of red and gold I used were based on what I read red and gold where, if I'm not wrong in Umineko game 8.

I wrote down the quote somewhere but now I can't track it down anymore... -_-

Originally Posted by Toku

This should allow you to extract the script.
http://unclemion.com/onscripter/rele...scripter-tools
Drag nscript.dat to nscdec.exe. You should get a result.txt.

Thank you a lot! You're a lifesaver!

[Prototype909]

Possibly off topic, but has there ever been any speculation about the "Game/Story" BATTLER wrote for Beatrice in Episode 7? He says it's the happiest possible story for her (I'm assuming it means the happiest possible ending for her in regards to the Rokkenjima events?), but that in itself is pretty vague.

So any guesses? Battler remembers his promise to Yasu and everyone sans Eva and "Battler" died anyway, is that the way I should be interpreting this? lol

[AuraTwilight]

I imagine it's basically a totally perfect world for Yasu, so something like Battler never forgot about her and the tragedy never happened and they lived happily ever after.