[Game] Umineko no Naku Koro ni - Ep. 4 Alliance of the golden witch

[izmosmolnar]

Absolutely no factors other than humans participate in this game board!

Strictly speaking that would also mean that the culprit couldn't use an already dead body, because then said body would "take part" (=participate) in one of the twilights, which is also one of the primary aspects of the boardgame.

We could get around that, if the culprit would dump one of the corpses of the 17 people in the boiler room. However the problem is with the first twilight of Ep3, since "Kinzo's" body is confirmed there in the boiler room, plus all the other corpses in their respective room, while everyone else is alive. Which means that someone had to use an already dead body (I mean someone's body who died sometimes somewhere before the beginning of the game).
However if someone is using a dead body inside the game for whatever purpose, by strict interpretation we could understand it in such a way, where the dead body is "participating" in the twilight, and by that in the game board. But that's kinda in a contradiction with the quoted red text.

edit: I know she's referring about the murders, but "participate" and "humans" on the whole game board, can kinda mean everyone is well and alive, and there shouldn't be no dead bodies anywhere around to tamper with.

[MeoTwister5]

Spoiler for Spoilarz:

Regarding the scene where Maria continuously kills Rosa and refuses to forgive her "sins" while Rosa curses at her for being born... and the scene after where Maria wakes up, throws a tantrum and ominously "forgives" Battler for teasing her.

After seeing the scene I'm pretty much thinking that Maria killing Rosa was not actually an event that happened in this game, but more like the dream Maria was having when Battler's noise woke her up. Granted she had a lot of repressed rage at Rosa but looking back at it, it doesn't seem too real to assume that Rosa had that much animosity for her own daughter, and that her "hatred" for Maria isn't as extreme as the scene presents.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by izmosmolnar

Strictly speaking that would also mean that the culprit couldn't use an already dead body, because then said body would "take part" (=participate) in one of the twilights, which is also one of the primary aspects of the boardgame.

We could get around that, if the culprit would dump one of the corpses of the 17 people in the boiler room. However the problem is with the first twilight of Ep3, since "Kinzo's" body is confirmed there in the boiler room, plus all the other corpses in their respective room, while everyone else is alive. Which means that someone had to use an already dead body (I mean someone's body who died sometimes somewhere before the beginning of the game).
However if someone is using a dead body inside the game for whatever purpose, by strict interpretation we could understand it in such a way, where the dead body is "participating" in the twilight, and by that in the game board. But that's kinda in a contradiction with the quoted red text.

edit: I know she's referring about the murders, but "participate" and "humans" on the whole game board, can kinda mean everyone is well and alive, and there shouldn't be no dead bodies anywhere around.

Well I think that "participate" must be interpreted as "having an active role". So anything that is passive like a dead body doesn't count.

Pretty much as the

"You are the only one alive on this island" must be interpreted as "you are the only person alive on this island", because clearly plants, trees and insects are not included.

[theacefrehley]

Originally Posted by izmosmolnar

Strictly speaking that would also mean that the culprit couldn't use an already dead body, because then said body would "take part" (=participate) in one of the twilights, which is also one of the primary aspects of the boardgame.

We could get around that, if the culprit would dump one of the corpses of the 17 people in the boiler room. However the problem is with the first twilight of Ep3, since "Kinzo's" body is confirmed there in the boiler room, plus all the other corpses in their respective room, while everyone else is alive. Which means that someone had to use an already dead body (I mean someone's body who died sometimes somewhere before the beginning of the game).
However if someone is using a dead body inside the game for whatever purpose, by strict interpretation we could understand it in such a way, where the dead body is "participating" in the twilight, and by that in the game board. But that's kinda in a contradiction with the quoted red text.

edit: I know she's referring about the murders, but "participate" and "humans" on the whole game board, can kinda mean everyone is well and alive, and there shouldn't be no dead bodies anywhere around.

If you'll go that far, you'll have to say that poison, blades, guns, 'perfect dolls' or any weapons or objects can't 'participate' in the game... And the killings have to be carried out by bare hands...

A dead body is still a human body.

[Rias]

Originally Posted by crazysjd89

My own personal explanation for that is that "Only when you're defending can you use red" and "only when you're attacking you can use blue".

Battler is attacking constantly to prove Beatrice is a witch, so he uses blue and she uses red.

When Beatrice attacks Battler to prove he isn't worthy of playing, she uses blue and he uses red.

Battler trying to prove Beatrice is a witch...? It's the other way around. Also, Red text has been used to "attack" several times.

Red is absolute truth, and blue is conditional truth (using the red truth blue truth analogy). In a sense, blue text is only the truth when an argument cannot be refuted.

[k//eternal]

Originally Posted by MeoTwister5

Spoiler for Spoilarz:

Regarding the scene where Maria continuously kills Rosa and refuses to forgive her "sins" while Rosa curses at her for being born... and the scene after where Maria wakes up, throws a tantrum and ominously "forgives" Battler for teasing her.

After seeing the scene I'm pretty much thinking that Maria killing Rosa was not actually an event that happened in this game, but more like the dream Maria was having when Battler's noise woke her up. Granted she had a lot of repressed rage at Rosa but looking back at it, it doesn't seem too real to assume that Rosa had that much animosity for her own daughter, and that her "hatred" for Maria isn't as extreme as the scene presents.

Yeah, that's been said a few times in this thread. Rosa was already dead at that point, so even if you want to think it's "real" for her, it's strictly anti-mystery.

The weird thing about that dream is how it clashes with the image of Maria in the journal, but I guess she really couldn't take Sakutaro's death.

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by k//eternal

Yeah, that's been said a few times in this thread. Rosa was already dead at that point, so even if you want to think it's "real" for her, it's strictly anti-mystery.

The weird thing about that dream is how it clashes with the image of Maria in the journal, but I guess she really couldn't take Sakutaro's death.

Actually, it doesn't really clash. We find out in the scene with Ange on Rokkenjima that after Sakutarou's 'death', Maria's diary started to be filled with evil spells and curses and the like. You could probably even argue that the whole scene was something Ange imagined Maria would do based on what she read in the diary.
...If you can accept the 'Ange hallucination' route.

[Naeght]

74 pages, thats too much so i will just ask :P
Is the theory of battler beeing the culprit beeing considered? Or atleast on the culprit side. Its would explain why he almost always get to the last twilight every time the magic-theory is posible. He goes mad with guilt over killing his family and creates a word where he isn't the culprit, yet a part of him is still concius enough, making the Beato-Battler battle just a confrontation with himself.
by the way, i didnt quite get the last part, but i guess i'll play through it again sometime. Is Battler not the real battler? Or, by what kyrie said in ep 3 ( that Asumu stole rudolf from her by getting sudenly pregnant), we can guess that she obtained a baby by some sort of way, and pretended to have given birth?

By the way, excuse the bad engrish, it has become easy for me to interpret it, but to express myself with it becomes a whole different level. Even Ange has better pronunciation than me

[Jan-Poo]

With all those many pages I'd be surprised if there was one of the 18 that has never been suspected by anyone. Hell even Maria didn't escape the suspicions.

Anyway there are a few things that can make Battler a very unlikely mastermind.

Battler is not Beatrice. That has been stated in red. That doesn't completely removes any suspicion but at very least demonstrates that whoever impersonates Beatrice is not Battler, at least not the Battler we know.

In ep3 it is stated in red that Battler is not the culprit nor an accomplice, that however might only work for Episode3. Even so he is unlikely the mastermind behind all this tragedy.

As for Battler, he is Battler Ushiromiya, because he can state that in red, however it seems that there is another Battler Ushiromiya. The issue here is not fake/real, the Battler we know is definitely Kinzo's grandson (stated in red) and the other Battler is definitely Asumu's son (stated in red). At this point it is difficult to imagine when the two got mixed up. Maybe Asumu's son died soon after being born or maybe he is the one who attended all the family meeting untill 1980, anyway the one who commited a sin is the Battler we know, since Beatrice used "you".

The theory that Battler is actually Kyrie's son is pretty popular, however mind that if that's the case then Kyrie is lying about the misscarriage. Misscarriage means that the fetus doesn't even reach the critical stage for being able to live without the mother support. So if a pregnancy gets interrupted at that time there is no way for the fetus to survive.

[Ttak]

A theory about Battler being the culprit I don't know if it was discussed before, but that would make all (or most of) the scenes we where shown (by his point of view) doubtful...
The Battler we know isn't Asumu's son (but he IS Rudolf's), we still don't know who his real mother is. There's another Ushiromiya Battler, but not much info on him, only that he is Asumu's son.

edit - oh my lazyness...

[k//eternal]

The thing about Kyrie lying about the miscarriage is a little weird, though, because she had no reason to lie under that circumstance.

BTW, when it was stated that Battler isn't the culprit or accomplice, did it say "you" or did it say "Battler"? If the latter, that excludes Asumu-Battler as well.

[Jan-Poo]

-Battler isn't the culprit or an accomplice. With this, we've made a perfect alibi for Eva

This is the exact sentence. However it doesn't mean it must work for both Battlers. After all Battler's says:

-Ushiromiya Battler was born from Ushiromiya Asumu.

And that is only valid for one of the two Battler. In fact now that we know there are two Ushiromiya Battler we can't be 100% sure that the red truths that have Battler as a subject are referring to the Battler we know. Actually as I noted before, anything with a name as subject might be questioned.

[crazysjd89]

Originally Posted by Rias

Battler trying to prove Beatrice is a witch...? It's the other way around. Also, Red text has been used to "attack" several times.

Red is absolute truth, and blue is conditional truth (using the red truth blue truth analogy). In a sense, blue text is only the truth when an argument cannot be refuted.

*isn't, my bad

I don't recall red being used to "attack", though, but since the way we're using the terms "attack" and "defend" aren't literally meaning the definitions, I think that it can change drastically by interpetation.

The reason I've said red has never been used to "attack", is because Beato will only say things to wring out a bunch of possible theories Battler could have.

Well, either way, it's not like you can't just explain it with deus ex machina anyway, so I am probably just thinking to hard, haha.

[Marion]

There are two Battlers.

One Battler is Asumu's son.
The other Battler (our Battler) is Rudolf's son.

I wouldn't be surprised if Asumu lied about being pregnant in all honesty.

[k//eternal]

Originally Posted by Marion

I wouldn't be surprised if Asumu lied about being pregnant in all honesty.

Impossible. "Ushiromiya Battler was born from Ushiromiya Asumu" says otherwise, unless you want to read some kind of weird meaning into it.

[Iskatar]

About Battler's sin. Does anyone know what it is? My friend guessed that "Battler" "solved the riddle," but rejected it by rejecting magic.
I just got here, but also what about Beato's "You and Beatrice have no connection as of six years ago in your world."

[Marion]

Originally Posted by k//eternal

Impossible. "Ushiromiya Battler was born from Ushiromiya Asumu" says otherwise, unless you want to read some kind of weird meaning into it.

I mean about the other Battler. The one that's Rudolf's son.

@Iskater: Nobody knows what the sin is. The sin has nothing to do with Beatrice though, but it does have to do with the game in general and why people have died.

[Orophin]

Originally Posted by Iskatar

About Battler's sin. Does anyone know what it is? My friend guessed that "Battler" "solved the riddle," but rejected it by rejecting magic.

Both the portrait and the riddle were made in 1984. Battler's sin happened in 1980.

[k//eternal]

Originally Posted by Marion

I mean about the other Battler. The one that's Rudolf's son.

Originally Posted by Marion

I wouldn't be surprised if Asumu lied about being pregnant in all honesty.

What kind of scenario are you trying to describe here? If Asumu "lied about being pregnant" then that implies that Asumu-Battler doesn't exist, so there would be no other Battler. But the nonexistence of Asumu-Battler contradicts red text.

If I missed your point, be more explicit about it.

[Iskatar]

Seeing as how she said 'Battler and Beatrice have no connection as of six years ago in your world.', does that mean in his alternate universe where he came from or his personal belief system that makes up his "world"? If so, then Battler and Beatrice have no connection as of six years ago according to his beliefs. Was this already stated? Anyway, if that's true then Battler and Beatrice DID have a connection, right?