[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Jan-Poo]

Only inside the limits of her three rooms, Wanderer, only inside those limits. Don't be that nitpicky now, it was well specified what Erika could do, Lambda didn't need to be so specific, it was implicit.

Lambda was not the game master she had no power whatsoever on the gameboard, she couldn't extend Erika's power in any way on her whim.
In fact neither Bernkastel nor Lambda made up any new rule there, they were simply stating the facts.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Only inside the limits of her three rooms, Wanderer, only inside those limits. Don't be that nitpicky now, it was well specified what Erika could do, Lambda didn't need to be so specific, it was implicit

Spoiler for yet more quotes:

Dlanor:"......UNDERSTOOD. Three rooms' worth of duct tape seals, ACCEPTED. ......Regarding this matter...should we consider them as being accepted retroactively, back when Lady Erika received the non-sticky duct tape from <Mrs> Kumasawa?"

Erika had borrowed duct tape from Kumasawa to make seals with.
However, Battler had made it so that those were not sticky...
If he made it so that there was never any problem with the stickiness of that duct tape, the transition could be made smoothly.

Battler:"Sure, that's fine. ......I'll rewrite the tale. ......The duct tape that Erika received from Kumasawa-san late at night on the first day was sticky, but there was only enough left to use on three rooms.
......I'll apply that from here on out."

Dlanor:"UNDERSTOOD. Lady Erika will also retroactively adjust her movements, starting before the discovery of the first twilight, and taking into account that the application of this privilege is now POSSIBLE. ......As soon as these changes affect the progression of the game, they will be reported to the Game MASTER."

Battler:"......Letting you do it retroactively, even though you know which rooms the crime will occur in... ...That gives you a pretty big advantage. You won't have to waste tape on other rooms."

Where was it "well specified" that Erika could take retroactive action "only inside the limits of her three rooms"? Where was it even implied?

[AuraTwilight]

"この部屋のトリック" was translated as "trick in this room", but could just as easily be "trick of this room" or "this room's trick". There's no "inside" anywhere in that sentence in its original Japanese.

The Japanese does have an "inside" mentioned in Erika's first sentence "これより、この部屋での戦い", in "From here on, for the fight in this room...".

As someone who speaks fluent Japanese...it amounts to the same thing.

All things considered, it makes more sense to me to just go with the idea that everything was retroactive instead of just 1 of Erika's actions not being so, especially when retroactive moves were flying left and right at the time. And furthermore, I don't know how Erika would know all about logic error rules but be completely ignorant of the board mechanic where the Game Master would have been aware long ago that she had killed the fakers.

It's not like there isn't precedent for her making these enormous flaws due to minor details. Episode 5 and that whole parlor scene argument, anyone?

As soon as these changes affect the progression of the game, they will be reported to the Game MASTER."

Oh hi, passage that entirely obliterates Wanderer's train of thought.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Where was it "well specified" that Erika could take retroactive action "only inside the limits of her three rooms"? Where was it even implied?

Where was it implied this allowance will permit her to do something she didn't previously do and have Battler be unaware of it? It doesn't.

You're making the extraordinary claim here (that ep8 is, in fact, wrong). You have to defend that. Asking other people where it says Erika can't take retroactive moves unrelated to what she was given permission for and have them wholly concealed from the Game Master is like asking somebody to prove Santa Claus doesn't exist. The default assumption is that he doesn't, and it needs to be demonstrated that he does by the person who wants us to believe in him.

There is nothing in ep6 that suggests Battler does not or cannot know what Erika's actions are, even if she can take retroactive actions independent of what Battler explicitly gave her permission to do. Moreover, ep8 explicitly says that he must know, and hints that he did know but chose to act otherwise on purpose. To say nothing of all of the thematic elements of ep6 that only make sense in the context of him doing it on purpose, which I've intentionally left out of most of these conversations because it's like bludgeoning a beached dolphin with a sack full of carpentry screws.

Again, if Erika is free to rewrite her entire set of actions prior to the Logic Error and hide them from Battler outright, why didn't she just kill him as well? There's no indication that Battler must still be alive for BATTLER to continue with the story. He doesn't need a piece any more than Beatrice needed one at the end of Turn or Alliance. As to why he didn't just retroactively kill Erika... he probably could have. But he didn't. Because it's not sporting, and he's not trying to win. You want to see him being a petty dick about it, there's the scene in Twilight.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Oh hi, passage that entirely obliterates Wanderer's train of thought.

I don't see how.

Originally Posted by Renall

Asking other people where it says Erika can't take retroactive moves unrelated to what she was given permission for and have them wholly concealed from the Game Master is like asking somebody to prove Santa Claus doesn't exist. The default assumption is that he doesn't, and it needs to be demonstrated that he does by the person who wants us to believe in him.

Jan-Poo said "it was specifically stated that that retroactive power was only limited to the three rooms Erika selected" which is wrong. And now I get chewed out for pointing that out? The fuck, Renall.

Originally Posted by Renall

You're making the extraordinary claim here (that ep8 is, in fact, wrong).

Except that I am not. I'm saying that the plot changes by virtue of the "later queen" issue. The Game Master always knows what's been written, but things left unaccounted for in the written story are fair game to fill in with whatever the Game Master and Player decide.

I'm saying that "the story" is different from "the game". Erika never actually killed anyone in Dawn, the story; she only did in the game that was based on Dawn. What was strange in EP8 was that Ange had disappeared from the story itself.

Originally Posted by Renall

There is nothing in ep6 that suggests Battler does not or cannot know what Erika's actions are,

Except the whole entire narrative of EP6 itself.

You do realize that the implications of your position leads us to the have to believe that Lambdadelta knew ahead of time everything that Erika did in EP5 too, right? Which basically means she lost completely on purpose. And again, how does your theory account for the reds that Bernkastel threw out in EP5?

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by Wanderer

You do realize that the implications of your position leads us to the have to believe that Lambdadelta knew ahead of time everything that Erika did in EP5 too, right? Which basically means she lost completely on purpose. And again, how does your theory account for the reds that Bernkastel threw out in EP5?

On this point, it's pretty obvious at the point that Virgilia declares Natsuhi's innocence that Lambda was losing EP5 toooootally on purpose. I can only assume she was "certain" Battler would make a comeback, or she found Erika's theory too entertaining to kill. Or both, or something. She barely fought at all as a GM.

[jjblue1]

For me the whole trick is a matter of specifics.
Battler allows Erika to seal 3 rooms and Erika could extend that definition to 'I've also repaired the chain' without telling him.
Battler allowed Erika to examinate the bodies and she could include in it 'oh, I've also cut their heads' without telling him.

We can say it's a dirty trick because that's not what a normal person would do when checking a body... but actually there's no rule that says she should have only looked at them without damaging them beyond 'the police wouldn't like it'. We know though that Erika knows the police won't come so she can play with the corpses as she pleases.

And note that, although she was supposed to report immediately what she did with the duck tape she actually did it only later.

So yes, I think as long as she can fit an action in the bounds of the agreements she has with Battler she can do something he could have not expected.

Now... was Battler really not expecting this?

He was searching for a logic error and he gave Erika all the chances to create one. Likely he expected her to do something to the bodies, be it chopping their head, shooting at them, stabbing them or tying them in such a way they couldn't move.

Likely he also expected her to play dirty.

So maybe he didn't know the specifics of Erika's actions (because she didn't tell him if he checked the pulse, if they were breathing, if they had wounds and so on) but he could figure out how it would end so I don't think Battler was surprised by the fact that Erika killed those people... though maybe he could have been surprised by the brutal method she used.

[GreyZone]

But if we go so far, it is even possible to claim that nothing of this happened, because Erika is not the detective, therefore her perspective can contain falsehoods.

Guess who can choose how many falsehoods a non-detective character can use? Right! It's the game master!

The whole game was only a dream of Erika. So even real magic can appear inside.

[AuraTwilight]

I don't see how.

Because it means that BATTLER is aware of every move Erika makes retroactively. Given how UBER LAWFUL and non-evil Dlanor is, she would've reported it even if Battler weren't omniscient and Erika decided to cheat.

Except that I am not. I'm saying that the plot changes by virtue of the "later queen" issue. The Game Master always knows what's been written, but things left unaccounted for in the written story are fair game to fill in with whatever the Game Master and Player decide.

I'm saying that "the story" is different from "the game". Erika never actually killed anyone in Dawn, the story; she only did in the game that was based on Dawn. What was strange in EP8 was that Ange had disappeared from the story itself.

There's not necessarily any difference from the point of view of the Meta-characters. The forgeries having a separate textual existence from what WE see is really only a plot point for characters in 1998.

Except the whole entire narrative of EP6 itself.

Which also implies the exact opposite while comparing Battler to Kinzo, who did outrageous, potentially self-ruining stunts to create miracles.

and Lambdadelta's immense praise of Battler's performance.

You do realize that the implications of your position leads us to the have to believe that Lambdadelta knew ahead of time everything that Erika did in EP5 too, right? Which basically means she lost completely on purpose. And again, how does your theory account for the reds that Bernkastel threw out in EP5?

Given that it turns out that Lambdadelta was on Battler's and Beatrice's side the whole time, this isn't really a problem. Lambdadelta has always backed Beatrice for her own personal interests, while also being interested in "being friends with [Beatrice]", and in EP5, she is so quite obviously not doing her job as a Gamemaster in order to create a situation she wants to see. While she seemingly cheats with Bern, she very much immediately takes Battler's side to pronounce him Territory Lord and Golden Sorcerer.

...And she throws popcorn to give Beatrice the oppurtunity to save Battler...

And she rescued Will and Lion...

And of course all of EP8 happened.

Seriously, despite her claiming so, Lambdadelta has NEVER been neutral at any point in the series. She's always been pursuing her relationship with Bernkastel or protecting Beatrice, Battler, and their interests.

[Wanderer]

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Because it means that BATTLER is aware of every move Erika makes retroactively. Given how UBER LAWFUL and non-evil Dlanor is, she would've reported it even if Battler weren't omniscient and Erika decided to cheat.

Yeah, she'll dutifully report "as soon as it affects the progression of the game". I can only see this as supporting my position, because it basically means reporting it "as soon as Battler's already fallen into the trap".

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Which also implies the exact opposite while comparing Battler to Kinzo, who did outrageous, potentially self-ruining stunts to create miracles.

and Lambdadelta's immense praise of Battler's performance.

Yes, I'm not at all trying to say otherwise. I just can't accept the bald claim that "There is nothing in ep6 that suggests Battler does not or cannot know what Erika's actions are".

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Given that it turns out that Lambdadelta was on Battler's and Beatrice's side the whole time, this isn't really a problem. Lambdadelta has always backed Beatrice for her own personal interests, while also being interested in "being friends with [Beatrice]", and in EP5, she is so quite obviously not doing her job as a Gamemaster in order to create a situation she wants to see. While she seemingly cheats with Bern, she very much immediately takes Battler's side to pronounce him Territory Lord and Golden Sorcerer.

Lambda just likes to side with determined people, who in this case happen to be the good guys (in Higurashi it was the bad guy). I don't think she was planning to help Battler out from the beginning or anything... Not that it means Lambda was trying to win in EP5; she probably didn't really care about winning.

On the other hand, Lambda did act surprised by Erika's moves in EP5, which would mean Lambda was trolling Erika from the very beginning into thinking she couldn't observe Erika's movements. And still, what's with Bern providing red for EP5? Does Bern know about this? And wait, why didn't Bern make a comment later? As a Game Master in EP7 and EP8, she would have known that Lambda and Battler pulled an epic team troll on Erika. You would think she'd at least make some kind of cryptic, sarcastic comment about it.

Anyway, by my theory, Erika and Bern were just filling in Erika's actions after-the-fact at the trial.

[AuraTwilight]

Yeah, she'll dutifully report "as soon as it affects the progression of the game". I can only see this as supporting my position, because it basically means reporting it "as soon as Battler's already fallen into the trap".

It effects the progression of the game as soon as it happens. That's what mysteries are about, son. The author has to know shit in order to write mysteries.

Lambda just likes to side with determined people, who in this case happen to be the good guys (in Higurashi it was the bad guy). I don't think she was planning to help Battler out from the beginning or anything... Not that it means Lambda was trying to win in EP5; she probably didn't really care about winning.

Personally, I think she's siding with Battler because he's on Beatrice's side now. My point remains the same.

On the other hand, Lambda did act surprised by Erika's moves in EP5, which would mean Lambda was trolling Erika from the very beginning into thinking she couldn't observe Erika's movements. And still, what's with Bern providing red for EP5? Does Bern know about this? And wait, why didn't Bern make a comment later? As a Game Master in EP7 and EP8, she would have known that Lambda and Battler pulled an epic team troll on Erika. You would think she'd at least make some kind of cryptic, sarcastic comment about it.

Man, it was so obvious that Bern and Lambda were in cahoots behind the scenes it's not even funny. And Bern doesn't give a shit about Erika anyway.

[GuestSpeaker]

It effects the progression of the game as soon as it happens.

That's not strictly true. It didn't effect the story until later when it became a plot point. It had happened (or maybe even not), but did not actually alter anything that Battler needed to do. As for why Erika couldn't kill everyone in the cousin's room, because piece Erika couldn't have taken on a whole room without people stopping her.

In my opinion it is more likely Battler did plan to have Erika trap him somehow, and did so by leaving her a lot of blank space in the narrative to let her play with. "Erika examined the corpses" gave her a lot of leeway.

[GuestSpeaker]

Did you guys ever notice that it makes a lot of sense for Tohya to have written bottles 3 and 4?
First he writes one where Eva is painted as the killer (which in prime is basically what happened anyway, so he was helping that charade along) and next was the one where he makes a big deal out of forgetting his sin. The question is, if Beatrice wrote bottles 1 and 2 post incident as many of you believe, why didn't she make a big deal of it? I don't recall her mentioning the sin at all. And far from siding with him or being upset at Battler, her witch was too busy being evil to wrack up any of the sympathy his did.

[Captain Bluebeard]

Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker

The question is, if Beatrice wrote bottles 1 and 2 post incident as many of you believe, why didn't she make a big deal of it? I don't recall her mentioning the sin at all. And far from siding with him or being upset at Battler, her witch was too busy being evil to wrack up any of the sympathy his did.

Actually, she does make a point of trying to remind it to Battler in the later stages of EP2. She goes no further than that though, because let's not forget Beatrice is a being that has completely surrendered to its Fate. She cannot go against its ruling, so Battler has to miraculously remember everything by himself.

And second, the reason of the message bottles wasn't to boost Beatrice's popularity and portray her as an amiable character. No matter how much childish she may appear, she is a murderer.

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by Captain Bluebeard

And second, the reason of the message bottles wasn't to boost Beatrice's popularity and portray her as an amiable character. No matter how much childish she may appear, she is a murderer.

You mean a "fictional" murderer... Unless you say that she murdered in prime.

[GuestSpeaker]

Well I would argue Tohya's messages did work towards gaining her some sympathy, or at least showing her as more than just bonkers evil.

Though it is interesting that he remembered his promise to her and also who the culprit was right back as far as episode 3 (or else he couldn't have written it properly). I am not exactly sure what his magic amnesia covered then.

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by GuestSpeaker

Well I would argue Tohya's messages did work towards gaining her some sympathy, or at least showing her as more than just bonkers evil.

Though it is interesting that he remembered his promise to her and also who the culprit was right back as far as episode 3 (or else he couldn't have written it properly). I am not exactly sure what his magic amnesia covered then.

Not necessasarily true... With Ikuko=Yasu, this problem does not exist.

But now let's put that aside and assume Ikuko=RandomStranger. There is still the "book of one truth"... so not really a problem either.

[GuestSpeaker]

Hmm, I suppose, that is if she ever actually had that book. That part of the story was so weird and layered with meta it is hard to know what happened. Though a case could be made to visit Eva even if she was a random stranger (due to her association with Battler) I was still never sure whether that occurred or not.

[Captain Bluebeard]

Originally Posted by GreyZone

You mean a "fictional" murderer... Unless you say that she murdered in prime.

Obviously, we can't know anything about Prime. However, Beatrice, the Beatrice who was portrayed in EP2 at least, and the Meta Beatrice, is a murderer regardless of Prime. And after all, even though the two days of October 4th and 5th are a closed-off cat box, the truth about which we will never learn, we do learn various facts about the events prior to those two days, which may have had an impact on what happened on Rokenjima then.

Even if Beatrice didn't kill anyone, it is suggested that she did have that intention. Well, it's just speculation, really. There is an endless amount of possibilities within the limited ring of October 5th and 6th.

[GreyZone]

Originally Posted by Captain Bluebeard

Even if Beatrice didn't kill anyone, it is suggested that she did have that intention. Well, it's just speculation, really. There is an endless amount of possibilities within the limited ring of October 5th and 6th.

That completly depends on your interpretation on what the "games" are. If they are ment to "make metaphora into reality", then that would mean the "death" of people, that were only faked in reality, become true in the "games".