[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[TehChron]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Now I have the feeling you are just contradicting me for the sake of contradicting me.

You should know as well as I do that no Beatrice corpse appeared before Will solved that particular catbox. And Dine most certainly intended the corpse to appear before the start of the investigation or at least soon after it begins. Else this rule is kinda pointless.

Not necessarily, if the point is to reinforce that all mysteries should be about solving murders. The necessity of a corpse reinforces that belief, while also trying to impose a limit on the tricks that can be used.

"There *was* a murder, but the corpse will never appear" is kind of a cheat. We can make the case that Kanon's deaths in episodes 1-4 are violations, but only if we claim that he possesses his own body.

As far as the message bottles go, I maintain this theory:

The purpose of the message bottles and the various confrontations between Beatrice and Kanon therein were to indicate a series of personality clashes in YasuShkannontrice. It was YasuBeato that wrote the bottles, and sent them out in hopes that the true culprit would be discovered. If we also assume that all the games up until now have been entirely fictional, we can conclude that there are various presumptions at the core of each story that may be flawed.

For example: George's sparkling personality may be an exaggeration. Eva's, at times, damn near bipolar divergence between sweet, kind mother-type and hardass bitch.

Or, even more specifically: The idea that Battler forgot the "White Horse" promise. He may have remembered, and Battler forgetting Shannon in the first place may be simply an illusion created by George in order to win her for himself.

Battler may have remembered that promise, George would have been confronted, and all hell would have broken loose.

Regardless, the message bottles are an indication that "Beatrice" is not the culprit, and that they made their moves in order to draw attention to the suspicious nature of the Rokkenjimma murders. If the default conclusion is that Beatrice is an alternate personality of Shannon, this makes sense. Shannon is aware of George's murder plot...Let's adapt the "fake murder mystery" theory here.

The adults are aware of Battler's return. Against all expectations, while the siblings may hate one another, they may all care deeply for the cousins. Battler is an acknowledged mystery buff, probably by the family as well. Outside of the Kinzo facade, the family sets up a fake murder scenario to screw with Battler both to welcome him back, and chide him for being gone for six years.

Although apparently, no one blames him, because Rudolph is a bastard.

Anyway, this kind of a setup takes considerable time to implement. So while the cousins themselves would not have been aware, the adults likely would have. And as a servant on duty that day, Shannon also would have been informed of the setup of that little play.

George hears about this, and sees an opportunity to fuck things up. He convinces Shannon to go along with it, and "Beatrice" awakens, and decides to take some kind of limited action to mitigate the damage, or at least ensure the truth survives. Being forced to write in code due to Shannon preventing Beatrice claiming George is the culprit outright.

Now I add in my personal flavor:

The first twilight goes according to the normal false murder scenario. George kills them, with Shannon's help, while he's "proposing" to her.

Jessica, being someone who lives in the house and is on good terms with the involved servants, likely would also be aware of what the plan for the game was. She puts two and two together, and, like in Episode 3, makes a run straight for Eva/Hideyoshi, who would have survived. Or whomever she wound up blaming for her parent's death.

The Second twilight lacks the gouge part, so shes free to be creative. This may be when Kanon dies as well, as a personality, or whatever. The point is that Jessica takes perceived vengeance.

George, being aware of what's going on, takes action and kills Jessica, then we see the stake pattern being adopted. The reason it isnt universally applied to the second twilight in each of the episodes, is due to the fact that its a different killer.

This satisfies the one culprit rule, as Jessica is not the actual "culprit", just a grief-stricken vigilante. No premeditation involved.

The bomb is irrelevant to the nature of the true culprit. It exists outside the culprit and is one the XYZ Rules of the gameboard.

[Jan-Poo]

I don't think our interpretation is correct, that rule is meant to give the reader an assurance that he's undertaking an intellectual challenge about a murder and not some kind of other crime or even a non-crime.

You totally wouldn't get the intended purpose if the corpse was shown at the very end. Plus if the detective solves the crime before you even have a chance to see the body then that's yet another infringement of the rules, since you should have equal chances to find the culprit with the detective and you can't certainly miss such an important clues as the victim corpse.

"There *was* a murder, but the corpse will never appear" is kind of a cheat. We can make the case that Kanon's deaths in episodes 1-4 are violations, but only if we claim that he possesses his own body.

The death of a personality doesn't comply with Dine's standards.

[TehChron]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

I don't think our interpretation is correct, that rule is meant to give the reader an assurance that he's undertaking an intellectual challenge about a murder and not some kind of other crime or even a non-crime.

You totally wouldn't get the intended purpose if the corpse was shown at the very end. Plus if the detective solves the crime before you even have a chance to see the body then that's yet another infringement of the rules, since you should have equal chances to find the culprit with the detective and you can't certainly miss such an important clues as the victim corpse.



The death of a personality doesn't comply with Dine's standards.

It's a loophole. A blatant one.

And there are plenty of corpses, over a dozen at times, so it's not like there can be any mistake of there being murders going on.

Edit: Let me clarify:

The wording of the law is that there "must be a corpse", in reference to the mystery at large. Therefore, in terms of "the mystery of the Rokkenjimma Serial Murders", that law is satisfied. In terms of the specific mystery "How did Kanon die", its not.

But the "death of Kanon" is treated as a component question in the larger "Rokkenjimma Murders" mystery, which is what the story is about. We're not reading "Umineko no Naku Kanon died how did that happen Koro Ni".

Kanon is one component, his absence does not mean that there are no corpses in this mystery, it just means that there is one less, which is in itself a clue to the solution of the larger mystery.

[Jan-Poo]

Not pertinent.

My argument is that we were shown a broad interpretation of at least one Dine rule, not that Dine rules do not apply in Umineko.

The evidence is the specific case of Bern's catbox world she presented to Will, where Will himself had a problem because in that particular setting there was no corpse. However regardless of the evident lack of corpse it appears that some kind of free interpretation was used in order to counter that rule.

What happens in the other games is irrelevant to this discussion.
Also stating that that Van Dine rules still apply if you see them "in a certain way" is not pertinent because that's exactly my point.

[chounokoe]

Originally Posted by Will Wright

The killer is Jessica. After she killed everyone, she set off the bomb, and died from Asthma. Natural death is not covered as either accident or suicide. Therefore she will murder Battler even though she is already dead. Her physical condition has been foreshadowed before, so it wouldn't be a surprise if she died due to the stress of the events. This satisfies foreshadowing conditions, the one culprit condition, and the no suicide condition.

Originally Posted by Will Wright

It was never confirmed that was her body to start with. One could easily make an argument that it was actually Shannon's body dressed as Jessica's.

Regarding that, another question from me...
If that person in Jessica's room was really Shannon dressed as Jessica, killed by Jessica, then who was the Shannon near the sealed well that had half her face ripped off?! Would that be Kanon in your theory? Because if it was Jessica, dressed as Shannon, she would have to have been killed by Kanon ...

That would actually be a few disguised corpses to many, even for my taste.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

The death of a personality doesn't comply with Dine's standards.

Like TehChron already said, this is just a matter of applying the correct wording of a sentence. Bern possibly found a way around that red truth, even if there is no corpse of the current Beatrice to begin with.
The mystery just is 'Who killed Beatrice'. All people in contact with any Beatrice are in the church. Once a Beatrice existed, now there isn't any Beatrice anymore.
It's really a matter of wordplay, but Umineko is full of that stuff...

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by chounokoe

Like TehChron already said, this is just a matter of applying the correct wording of a sentence. Bern possibly found a way around that red truth, even if there is no corpse of the current Beatrice to begin with.
The mystery just is 'Who killed Beatrice'. All people in contact with any Beatrice are in the church. Once a Beatrice existed, now there isn't any Beatrice anymore.
It's really a matter of wordplay, but Umineko is full of that stuff...

And that's exactly what I am saying.
If you think Van Dine rules are strictly respected as Van Dine intended them then you disagree with me.
If you think the Van Dine rules apply with some kind of free interpretation then you agree with me.

[TehChron]

Originally Posted by chounokoe

Regarding that, another question from me...
If that person in Jessica's room was really Shannon dressed as Jessica, killed by Jessica, then who was the Shannon near the sealed well that had half her face ripped off?! Would that be Kanon in your theory? Because if it was Jessica, dressed as Shannon, she would have to have been killed by Kanon ...

That would actually be a few disguised corpses to many, even for my taste.

It's never said which half of a skull Battler saw on each corpse.

Two halves make one whole, after all.

Like TehChron already said, this is just a matter of applying the correct wording of a sentence. Bern possibly found a way around that red truth, even if there is no corpse of the current Beatrice to begin with.
The mystery just is 'Who killed Beatrice'. All people in contact with any Beatrice are in the church. Once a Beatrice existed, now there isn't any Beatrice anymore.
It's really a matter of wordplay, but Umineko is full of that stuff...

More or less, yeah. We'd never get anywhere if we took each Red at face value.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Not pertinent.

My argument is that we were shown a broad interpretation of at least one Dine rule, not that Dine rules do not apply in Umineko.

The evidence is the specific case of Bern's catbox world she presented to Will, where Will himself had a problem because in that particular setting there was no corpse. However regardless of the evident lack of corpse it appears that some kind of free interpretation was used in order to counter that rule.

What happens in the other games is irrelevant to this discussion.
Also stating that that Van Dine rules still apply if you see them "in a certain way" is not pertinent because that's exactly my point.

Then what the heck are you even trying to argue? That Ryukishi isn't being a Golden Age purist?

Well, color me shocked and appalled at this sudden revelation.

[Will Wright]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Those are broad interpretations of the Dine rule. Read the explanation, it says "the deader the corpse is the better it is". There's absolutely no doubt that Van Dine was talking about a real dead corpse and he was talking about a visible manifest and apparent corpse.

Lion doesn't qualify as a corpse, s/he is alive an well, nowhere close to be "as deader" as possible. A book also doesn't qualify as a corpse strictly speaking.


So in the end if Van Dine rules apply in umineko they are absolutely not the way Van Dine meant them to be and they have such a free interpretation that their intended purpose was completely twisted.

As the Golden Age specialist here, allow me to say that Dine's intention with that rule is to confirm to the reader that murder did happen. It is not meant to allow the reader to investigate the corpse, as Dine himself had a novel where the corpse(though existent) was missing for a part of the novel. I just caught up with Umineko last week, but I dare say I know something about the Golden Age.

His rule only establishes that a corpse must exist somewhere, and that someone must have been murdered. This rule destroys the "everyone is faking" idea.

It is not unheard of for even those who follow Dine to hide a body. "The deader the better" means "if you are going to show a body, show it off like you mean it." which Umineko follows pretty well.

The golden age comparison for that rule would be "Hercule Poirot's Christmas" that has the deadest body ever.

Dine doesn't forbid a body from not being shown. It forbids a body from not existing(no murder).

Important to note is that this rule does not rule out other crimes in the novel, it merely denies the possibility of no murder at all. So Shkanon/personalities dying is still okay.

Ironically, this means that Erika saved Battler from a logic error by killing people in episode 6. (Not that anyone playing the game could have used the Dine rule, but yeah).

It is however important to note that Dine's 14th denies Shkanon.

The death of a personality doesn't comply with Dine's standards.

So long as said mystery isn't the only mystery in the novel, it complies with Dine alright. So long as one murder happens, then it's fine.

I think that, rather than rules, it's better to think of them as "properties that many fair play mysteries have." Neither Knox nor Dine is used by every mystery author because they can be too restrictive -- it's possible to play fair while not following every rule to the letter. Every author (including author-characters) has the right to decide which ones to follow, if any, and a given mystery might even have some of those properties incidentally without the author having set out to follow a particular ruleset.

Part of Will's character is that after a long history of ruthlessly applying the Van Dine rules and earning his nickname, he became disillusioned with the way the SSVD does business. It shouldn't be that shocking that he doesn't want to arrogantly apply those rules to someone else's game anymore. He only used the bare minimum to ensure that Bern's game was solvable. Contrast that with Erika, who force-fed Knox to everyone who would listen and used it as a weapon to wreck games.

I can live with that argument. It was already stated that Will's 20 wedges were reduced to 12 during the game, so 8 rules must have been broken.

Regarding that, another question from me...
If that person in Jessica's room was really Shannon dressed as Jessica, killed by Jessica, then who was the Shannon near the sealed well that had half her face ripped off?! Would that be Kanon in your theory? Because if it was Jessica, dressed as Shannon, she would have to have been killed by Kanon ...

That would actually be a few disguised corpses to many, even for my taste.

I was just making that theory up as I go, but let me try to make it make sense.
The shannon we saw in the sealed well with half her face ripped off was not a body to start with. Shannon was an accomplice, and so was Nanjo.

...Or we could go with "Kanon died and was disguised as Shannon" but there is red that contradicts that.

[TehChron]

Originally Posted by Will Wright

As the Golden Age specialist here, allow me to say that Dine's intention with that rule is to confirm to the reader that murder did happen. It is not meant to allow the reader to investigate the corpse, as Dine himself had a novel where the corpse(though existent) was missing for a part of the novel. I just caught up with Umineko last week, but I dare say I know something about the Golden Age.

His rule only establishes that a corpse must exist somewhere, and that someone must have been murdered. This rule destroys the "everyone is faking" idea.

It is not unheard of for even those who follow Dine to hide a body. "The deader the better" means "if you are going to show a body, show it off like you mean it." which Umineko follows pretty well.

The golden age comparison for that rule would be "Hercule Poirot's Christmas" that has the deadest body ever.

Dine doesn't forbid a body from not being shown. It forbids a body from not existing(no murder).

Important to note is that this rule does not rule out other crimes in the novel, it merely denies the possibility of no murder at all. So Shkanon/personalities dying is still okay.

Ironically, this means that Erika saved Battler from a logic error by killing people in episode 6. (Not that anyone playing the game could have used the Dine rule, but yeah).

It is however important to note that Dine's 14th denies Shkanon.




So long as said mystery isn't the only mystery in the novel, it complies with Dine alright. So long as one murder happens, then it's fine.



I can live with that argument. It was already stated that Will's 20 wedges were reduced to 12 during the game, so 8 rules must have been broken.



I was just making that theory up as I go, but let me try to make it make sense.
The shannon we saw in the sealed well with half her face ripped off was not a body to start with. Shannon was an accomplice, and so was Nanjo.

...Or we could go with "Kanon died and was disguised as Shannon" but there is red that contradicts that.

Or one was a fake corpse/mannequin prepared beforehand, with half of Shannon's head attached to it, while the other was her full body...Sans half of her skull.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Leafsnail

He looks kinda prepared to do it in episode 4 tea party, though. He always seems to have another crazy theory whenever Beatrice denies one of his. She just gives up before he gets too far with it. I suppose that could be cautioning against that type of behaviour ("Trap? Suicide? Accident? Simultaneous murder? Discoverer was in on it? Everyone else was in on it? Some zany combination of the above?")- you just end up with one ridiculous theory after another.

Yeah, but what I mean is, where is the rule that benefits the witch side here? Battler was a fair player, and for no clear reason at all so was Erika (at least as befits use of the blue), but nobody would have to be.

It seems like there ought to be some additional rule like "for each individual mystery, the human side is allowed to present only one blue theory" or "the human side is restricted to x blue theories per mystery, but may 'save' those theories until after red has been used to address the current one."

Basically, the rules of the game as we know them are:

• The witch side may use red text at any time.
• The human side may use blue text at any time.
• By the end of the game, all blue text must be responded to by the witch side with red text.

Not really a very fair game for the witch side if the blue user cuts and pastes Jan-Poo's list and adds to it absolutely anything they can find that might deny witches. As far as the rules presently allow, the only thing stopping blue verbal diarrhea as a strategy is the human side player being committed to not ruining the integrity of the story.

...Errr, well, in Erika's case, not ruining it in that way.

[chounokoe]

Originally Posted by TehChron

Or one was a fake corpse/mannequin prepared beforehand, with half of Shannon's head attached to it, while the other was her full body...Sans half of her skull.

But wouldn't that being true provide us with the possibility that every personality was switched around?! I like the general idea of just a fake body being used and the other part of that head being used somewhere else...but it's generally implied that their head was 'smashed in' or 'blown away' (even in the Japanese context). For the other half to be believably used in another context, wouldn't the head need to be cleanly cut in half?! If we go by what is described in the text and given in the tachi-e in the menu, we would have to assume that mostly at least half of the head is left (if I remember correctly, with Jessica in 4 it's even implied that it seems she was shot from behind).
The general idea is interesting, but it still wouldn't solve the same 'Shannon body' problem we have in Episode 2 and 3.
In 2 we could provide the idea that every murder victim is already dead when she dies, but it still wouldn't solve the problem how that stake got into her head ... but if the endroll is any indication it's her who died first, then Gohda, then George, which brings us to a whole new level of problems until we accept that Shannon-personality death is equally possible AND she has a spare body to provide.
But in 3 we are faced with another problem. Assuming she was not dead, that would make Rudolph (or was Krauss the one who touched her?) an accomplice. That is possible but would again require either fake-corpse or personality death.
I still have to think about Will's comment, that the start and the beginning of the locked room chain are important.

I know, we either have to believe in 'Shannon + Kanon = different people' or 'spare corpse' or 'Shkannon=/=culprit' ... one of them is always ruling out the other.

Originally Posted by Renall

Not really a very fair game for the witch side if the blue user cuts and pastes Jan-Poo's list and adds to it absolutely anything they can find that might deny witches.

I think that's just one of those things in fiction that you have to accept as part of the internal logic. Like why the characters in a mystery story never decide to all bunk into one room and wait until they are no longer trapped, no there always has to be someone who goes against the rules. Or how the detective always waits the whole story out, even when further murders happened, with the only explanation, that he couldn't have provided a full truth that would have made everybody believe it...who cares, if he suspects somebody he should force the others to lock him up...especially if he's a famous detective who has solved many cases already.

Okay I could provide one argument, but it's not fully consistent.
The rule is only, that every blue truth has to be responded to with a red truth, it does not say that the red truth must answer in a 'yes' or 'no' pattern. That happened a lot during the games, when the witches side said 'let me rephrase this a little', but the red in the end seemed to make no sense at all.

[TehChron]

Originally Posted by Renall

Yeah, but what I mean is, where is the rule that benefits the witch side here? Battler was a fair player, and for no clear reason at all so was Erika (at least as befits use of the blue), but nobody would have to be.

It seems like there ought to be some additional rule like "for each individual mystery, the human side is allowed to present only one blue theory" or "the human side is restricted to x blue theories per mystery, but may 'save' those theories until after red has been used to address the current one."

Basically, the rules of the game as we know them are:

• The witch side may use red text at any time.
• The human side may use blue text at any time.
• By the end of the game, all blue text must be responded to by the witch side with red text.

Not really a very fair game for the witch side if the blue user cuts and pastes Jan-Poo's list and adds to it absolutely anything they can find that might deny witches. As far as the rules presently allow, the only thing stopping blue verbal diarrhea as a strategy is the human side player being committed to not ruining the integrity of the story.

...Errr, well, in Erika's case, not ruining it in that way.

Lack of creativity. Battler just sucks, and Erika was obsessed with a single answer/theory.

Hence why Battler was able to own her so hard in Episode 5's ???.

Battler: "Your theory is wrong, and there's multiple possible truths!"

Erika:

Even Erika admitted that fault during her duel with Beato in episode 6. It's not so much that there was somehting stopping them, its just that they...well...didnt.

[Leafsnail]

Hmm... yeah, they don't usually have multiple blue truths for the same event lying around at the same time. I would say that this is because Battler is just uncreative like that... and that, later on, the witch side tried to automatically block all obvious theories.

[DgBarca]

W-A-I-T !
How many people are aware of Kuwadorian existence...who actually got in Kuwadorian ??
There is Kinzo, Nanjo (EP4 prison), Genji, Kumasawa, Kawabata just got near, Human Beatrice, Rosa and...Maria ???

In EP4...when Mariage Sorcière thing is done and all...the background...It's Kuwadorian right ? How ?? How did Maria...went into Kuwadorian in the first place, and why ?

[Oliver]

I did mention the Kuwadorian backgrounds before. But since it doesn't get explained adequately by any mainstream theory, it's dismissed as "does not mean anything"

[chounokoe]

Originally Posted by Oliver

I did mention the Kuwadorian backgrounds before. But since it doesn't get explained adequately by any mainstream theory, it's dismissed as "does not mean anything"

It's actually quite probable that Maria was in Kuwadorian with 'Beatrice' and her servants. It's among the most probable places for a secret ceremony, that seemingly nobody knew about, to take place. It seems like it doesn't take more than 20-30 minutes to reach Kuwadorian from the mansion by the underground tunnel, so it's entirely possible for her to vanish for an hour or two.
Maria is pretty secretive about most events and it's even possible that she knows about the 'switch that can trigger the door to the golden land to open' and that is why Rosa has this sudden change of heart during the finale of Episode 2. She knows about the existence of Kuwadorian, but not the underground tunnels which connect it to the mansion grounds.

It's even used in the Manga and the Anime. A blatant mistake like this (if it were one) should have been noticed by Ryukishi...at least I would assume so, if they were able to enter a clue that was only later adressed in an additional TIP (Sakutarou in the futon shop).

[LyricalAura]

Oh, that's interesting... Was there a date established in EP4 for that scene where Beato and Virgilia acknowledged Sakutarou? According to EP7, Yasu didn't learn about Kuwadorian's existence until November 1984, so the Sakutarou scene would have to have been during the 1985 conference. But then Ange must have been excommunicated on the very same day... is that right?

[cmos]

It was already stated that Will's 20 wedges were reduced to 12 during the game, so 8 rules must have been broken.

I'm sorry, but where was it stated again?
His profile says "二十の楔のライト".
He cites 2 of his rules in this form in red:
ヴァンダイン二十則、第１１則。
ヴァンダイン二十則、第７則。死体なき事件であることを禁ず。

And I'm pretty sure that 二十 means "twenty". I can't find "twelve" (十二) in the text of ep7 at all.

[ijriims]

Originally Posted by cmos

I'm sorry, but where was it stated again?
His profile says "二十の楔のライト".
He cites 2 of his rules in this form in red:
ヴァンダイン二十則、第１１則。
ヴァンダイン二十則、第７則。死体なき事件であることを禁ず。

And I'm pretty sure that 二十 means "twenty". I can't find "twelve" (十二) in the text of ep7 at all.

To support this, Will said he was to use the twenty wedges to counter Bern's truth of "Kyrie and Rudolf as murderers in Leon's world".

Not twelve.

[chounokoe]

Originally Posted by LyricalAura

Oh, that's interesting... Was there a date established in EP4 for that scene where Beato and Virgilia acknowledged Sakutarou? According to EP7, Yasu didn't learn about Kuwadorian's existence until November 1984, so the Sakutarou scene would have to have been during the 1985 conference. But then Ange must have been excommunicated on the very same day... is that right?

Not an exact date, but Maria is supposed to have gotten Sakutarou on her birthday in 1984 or 1985, which is said to be in the first half of the year, so she could have taken him to Rokkenjima that year or the next (even though her mother asked her not to). She had already made him into an imaginary friend, so of course she would want to introduce him to her friends at Rokkenjima.
The strange thing about Ange is, that Maria said that Ange was a part of the Mariage Sorciere, but she was not present during the scene where Sakutarou attented (which is also supposed to be the founding of the Mariage Sorciere). That would mean that Ange was retro-actively entered into the Mariage Sorciere between two visits to Rokkenjima.

Assuming Maria got Sakutarou in 1984, they founded the Mariage Sorciere in 1985 and she decided to go back an tell Ange about it and told her she can come the next time. But in 1986 was already the fateful conference of Beatrice's game, so for Ange to deny Sakutaro she would have to have been entered and excluded from the MS on the same year. Yes that is strange.

There are several other options:
The scene did not happen at Kuwadorian at all but at some other place and we are only led to believe it is Kuwadorian, to believe in a magical Beatrice's coherent existence from the 1940's until 1986.

The idea for the Mariage Sorciere originated from Maria and not Beatrice, like so many other magical properties that Beatrice possesses. Thus she entered Ange into the circle of witches before she did so with Beatrice and her 'magical friends'.
But before she could go to Kuwadorian, Ange told her that the idea of talking to a stuffed animal is stupid, so she forbid her to come.

EP7 lied and Kuwadorian's existence was not announced to 'Beatrice' in November 1985 but earlier.

I will study my timetable again and see if there is a solution that stands out for that rather strange thing. Well it wouldn't be strange if Maria hadn't said to Jessica in EP7, that Ange really was a member of the Mariage Sorciere...
Btw, which year was that? Was that Eva's trip to Rokkenjima in 1985 which we also see in EP2?

Originally Posted by cmos

And I'm pretty sure that 二十 means "twenty". I can't find "twelve" (十二) in the text of ep7 at all.

Maybe somebody just read too fast and switched the two Kanji or a translation prog messed up and somebody brought this rumor into circulation. We all know how quickly a rumor is spread.