AnimeSuki Forums

AuraTwilight · 2011-07-11, 17:01

Quote:

Didn't you guys say earlier in an interview that Ryu didn't ''follow every Van Dine'' rule? Kind of hard to violate something you don't follow, I figured that would've been why Will lost against Bern(that or if she really is supposed to be based on the internet, anonymous sort of kicks the ass of any truth out there).

Van Dine didn't work because what Bernkastel was presenting wasn't a mystery. There was nothing to solve and it wasn't really any sort of puzzle. It was just a fucking snuff film.

Cao Ni Ma · 2011-07-11, 20:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Prove it.

In the stories? Yeah she was almost certainly the only person capable of committing. But if Eva really was hiding something at the end of it all, I seriously doubt she would stick her neck out for a maid she or Ange barely knew. "It was the actual head of the family, an illegitimate child born out of incest that decided to play the part of a servant just because. She killed everyone out of incest lust or something. I know it sounds dumb but thats how it is, deal with it kid."

AuraTwilight · 2011-07-11, 20:31

Eva doesn't know any better. Yasu killed everyone else, but Eva only saw Rudolf and Kyrie killing Shannon, who was next to George's body. Knowing of their romance, Eva concludes that Kyrie and Rudolf are the killers and kills them back, and resolves to never tell Ange.

Prove me wrong.

Kealym · 2011-07-11, 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Holy shit, people really need to understand these goddamn rules, it's not difficult.
NO, IT DIDN'T. THIS IS AN ERROR CREATED BY PEOPLE THINKING THE RULES ARE PROSCRIPTIVE AND LITERAL, INSTEAD OF DESCRIPTIVE AND ACTING ON ETHIC OF NARRATIVE.

For instance, the rule forbidding "A servant being the culprit" doesn't mean that a person that is a servant can never be the murderer. What the rule actually fucking means is that the culprit can't be an expendable, effectively emotionless character that can be tossed under the guillotine without any real drama (would anyone really give a shit if the culprit turned out to be Genji or Gohda or something?)

Meanwhile, someone like Shannon would not fall under this rule. Yes, they're a servant. But they're also a major love interest, a significant character full of drama, emotion, and perspective value, and are at the crux of everything even if you don't posit that they're a murderer or an accomplice. Shannon being a murderer is valid in Dine Rules without ever having to go to "She was only pretending to be a servant as the Head."

I won't claim to be a mystery veteran. I would agree as much that, reading both sets of "rules", they do seem to carry different intentions. The Knox rules seem more concerned with "fairness" to the reader, and the Van Dine rules, while also concerned with fairness, are more concerned with avoiding literary cliche'. I don't want to just completely abandon the literal definition of the words, though. Shannon IS a servant, and a theory with her as culprit violates that rule, whether she'd been given narrative weight or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

But your response doesn't really hit the core of what I said anyway. The point is that people vastly misunderstand the Knox and Dine rules to the point of embarassment.

Really? Most of them seem fairly straightforward. Umineko even simplifies the rules to avoid the nonsense that would've arisen from the original wordings in order to serve it's plot better. What are people mistaking with them? (No, really, I'm asking, because I dunno if I'm guilty of it, too...)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cronnoponno

Finally, I really cannot fathom how Erika would even dream to take part in some sort of prank, scheme, or ''fake detective mystery'', she doesn't want to be a pretend detective.

Well, since she's the Detective, she wouldn't be in on the prank being played against her. In EP5 she believes the murders are real (and with Krauss, we can be sure it at least kind of was), and in EP6, well, ...you know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renall

It was never even explicitly stated that Beatrice followed Knox. Battler asked Dlanor and Virgilia and they were evasive on the matter. Conventional wisdom would seem to be that Beatrice "respected" rules such as Knox and Van Dine without explicitly holding to them as absolute rulesets.

This. Though as far as we've seen (disregarding EP8, which I haven't read yet...), all the games seem to adhere, at least to Knox, rather well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Van Dine didn't work because what Bernkastel was presenting wasn't a mystery. There was nothing to solve and it wasn't really any sort of puzzle. It was just a fucking snuff film.

On the one hand, I mostly agree with that. On the other hand, maybe it WAS a mystery! Just ... a bad one, and Bern fashions her fantasy scenes with "and then she went CRAAAAAZY" instead of Beato's "Magic circle lasers pew pew!" because she still has the bitter taste of Higurashi in her mouth. XD

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Eva doesn't know any better. Yasu killed everyone else, but Eva only saw Rudolf and Kyrie killing Shannon, who was next to George's body. Knowing of their romance, Eva concludes that Kyrie and Rudolf are the killers and kills them back, and resolves to never tell Ange.

Prove me wrong.

Actually, verybody survived Rokkenjima! Oh, at first Yasu was gonna fake-murder everyone, and then Kyrie was gonna real-murder everyone, but it turns out both she and Rudolf were amazingly bad shots. Every person passed out at the shock of being shot at. SInce they were filled in to the evil plan before being shot at, all people knew about the Kuwadorian and bomb, but not how to shut it off. Rudolf and Kyrie took an ingot and swam away to a new life in Hawaii, because screw Ange. Every other person, in a bizarre string of coincidental timing, woke up in 5 minute increments from one another, took an ingot, and swam away to new Hawaii lives beleiving their relatives dead. Even Maria. Battler and Yasu pulled their little stint from EP8. Eva was last, stayed in Kuwadorian because the bomb going off freaked her the hell out.

Everyone is living new ingot lives in Hawaii. Nobody calls Ange because "lol why?"

...that was probably too elaborate, but...

cronnoponno · 2011-07-11, 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Eva doesn't know any better. Yasu killed everyone else, but Eva only saw Rudolf and Kyrie killing Shannon, who was next to George's body. Knowing of their romance, Eva concludes that Kyrie and Rudolf are the killers and kills them back, and resolves to never tell Ange.

Prove me wrong.

I like this counter-argument.

By suspecting that Culprit(s) X is responsible, this mystery can be solved.

Cao Ni Ma · 2011-07-11, 21:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Eva doesn't know any better. Yasu killed everyone else, but Eva only saw Rudolf and Kyrie killing Shannon, who was next to George's body. Knowing of their romance, Eva concludes that Kyrie and Rudolf are the killers and kills them back, and resolves to never tell Ange.

Prove me wrong.

Eh, thats essentially my idea of what happened as well. But that doesn't make Eva the culprit. My issue is that Ange (like most of the people in japan in the story I guess) would think that Eva was the culprit already. So coming out clean about the issue would just be a net positive for her.

AuraTwilight · 2011-07-11, 21:55

Quote:

I won't claim to be a mystery veteran. I would agree as much that, reading both sets of "rules", they do seem to carry different intentions. The Knox rules seem more concerned with "fairness" to the reader, and the Van Dine rules, while also concerned with fairness, are more concerned with avoiding literary cliche'. I don't want to just completely abandon the literal definition of the words, though. Shannon IS a servant, and a theory with her as culprit violates that rule, whether she'd been given narrative weight or not.

You're not grasping the fact that literal definition is not why Van Dine wrote those rules. For instance, the Knox rule of "no Chinamen" doesn't mean that you can never have a story where a Chinese person is the culprit, merely that you shouldn't have a story that blames the mysterious foreign guy no one cares about. Same with the servant rule. People care about Shannon, she's important to other characters, and she is a figure that can be played for tragedy and dramatic impact. It's all about avoiding the use of SCAPEGOATS.

Quote:

Really? Most of them seem fairly straightforward. Umineko even simplifies the rules to avoid the nonsense that would've arisen from the original wordings in order to serve it's plot better. What are people mistaking with them? (No, really, I'm asking, because I dunno if I'm guilty of it, too...)

It's not necessary how they're worded so much as how they're applied. People thoughtlessly use them as proscriptive rules that can never be broken and never think about the SPIRIT of the rules, instead focusing on their WORDING. A mindset encouraged in us in the Red Truth, so not entirely the fandom's fault. Ryukishi also fails to properly explain a lot of rules to people not familiar with them.

Quote:

On the one hand, I mostly agree with that. On the other hand, maybe it WAS a mystery! Just ... a bad one, and Bern fashions her fantasy scenes with "and then she went CRAAAAAZY" instead of Beato's "Magic circle lasers pew pew!" because she still has the bitter taste of Higurashi in her mouth. XD

But it's literally not a mystery. There's nothing to solve. We watch the culprit going "Bang bang bang".

Quote:

Eh, thats essentially my idea of what happened as well. But that doesn't make Eva the culprit. My issue is that Ange (like most of the people in japan in the story I guess) would think that Eva was the culprit already. So coming out clean about the issue would just be a net positive for her.

I wasn't saying Eva was the culprit; read me again. I'm saying that EP7 Tea Party is basically what Eva BELIEVES, but not the TRUTH.

Frisko · 2011-07-11, 23:00

Knox actually gave the reason for disallowing Chinamen. Namely, they were stereotypically portrayed as being "over - equipped in the matter of brains, and under - equipped in the matter of morals." Which, amusingly sounds a lot like Erika. Perhaps that's why Knox's 5th isn't included.

Regarding whether Shannon can be the culprit without breaking Dine's 11th. At one point Dlanor stated that while secret passages would violate Knox's 3rd. They'd still be allowed under Knox's 8th if they were foreshadowed. I assume Dine's 1st override Dine's 11th in the same manner. To me, Beatrice's letter is enough to remove the protection Dine's 11th grants from all of the servants on the island.

AuraTwilight · 2011-07-11, 23:34

Quote:

Knox actually gave the reason for disallowing Chinamen. Namely, they were stereotypically portrayed as being "over - equipped in the matter of brains, and under - equipped in the matter of morals." Which, amusingly sounds a lot like Erika. Perhaps that's why Knox's 5th isn't included.

That was one reason. It was a mix of both, but yea, that's probably the particular reason why Knox's 5th wasn't allowed. It still demonstrates my point of the Spirit of the Rule being predominant over it's literal wording.

Quote:

Regarding whether Shannon can be the culprit without breaking Dine's 11th. At one point Dlanor stated that while secret passages would violate Knox's 3rd. They'd still be allowed under Knox's 8th if they were foreshadowed. I assume Dine's 1st override Dine's 11th in the same manner. To me, Beatrice's letter is enough to remove the protection Dine's 11th grants from all of the servants on the island.

It's generally accepting that the rules of both sets trump each other in numerical order. 1 trumps 2 trumps 3 trumps 4...

rogerpepitone · 2011-07-12, 10:55

I think Umineko wants to be like this chess problem:

White to play and mate in 1.

(Try working it out on your own. I'll explain more afterwards.)

bekyuubi · 2011-07-12, 11:47

Spoiler for Chess game:

rogerpepitone · 2011-07-12, 13:22

White to play and mate in 1.

AuraTwilight · 2011-07-12, 14:14

He must have typed the question wrong, then, because solving this in 1 move isn't possible. It's just not.

Xenon_gun · 2011-07-12, 14:27

The pull of this problem was too big, so I hope you don't mind me joining in.

Indeed, this problem is not solvable. But,

Spoiler:

rogerpepitone · 2011-07-12, 14:34

If you think you've solved the problem, send me a PM with your solution.

Xenon gun, re solution in PM, you are correct.
Lyrical Aura is close enough.

Meltyred · 2011-07-12, 21:34

So what, you mean to say battler should have turned the chessboard this way?
Isn't that...
Cheating?

cronnoponno · 2011-07-13, 19:16

I know you guys hate dodging reds, but when Lambdadelta said ''Krauss, Natsuhi, and Genji did not even touch that letter!''. Do you notice something strange?

It was already said that ''They found a letter in an envelope''. Meaning, one can touch the envelope and thus remove themselves of any responsibility of the letter by doing so. Meaning that if Erika's reasoning about the envelope being attached to the serving cart was right, no one ''placed the letter there''. Because the cart had the envelope glued to it, not the letter, so it was ''placed there by no one'' in a sense if you interpret it this way. Any problems with this?

(Erika said ''Letter'' and not ''Envelope'', and thus can still be contradicted)

AuraTwilight · 2011-07-13, 19:53

That's pretty goddamn dodgy. If I were the Gamemaster I personally wouldn't allow that on the basis of good faith ruling, and just have touching the sealed envelope as the same as touching the letter.

cronnoponno · 2011-07-13, 20:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

That's pretty goddamn dodgy. If I were the Gamemaster I personally wouldn't allow that on the basis of good faith ruling, and just have touching the sealed envelope as the same as touching the letter.

However, heart would allow someone to deduce that it was clued that ''Lambdadelta was being very serious and completely literal with her reds''. This scene is probably the most ''Literal'' in every red battle ever spoken in Umineko, why would she magically choose to be vague on that one part? All I hear is ''faith'' and ''heart'', but where is the heart even violated here? Is there any counter-argument other than that?

Hell, maybe the Cheese Riddle in EP 6 that Battler solved was a clue to ''Use vague reds to your advantage'', I don't see how this violates some pre-determined definition of heart, it's virtually the same as me ''making up my own definitions and wordings to bypass reds''.

Lets ignore the definition of heart for a minute, and put that aside. Lets say my reasoning is heartless, okay. Now, is there any counter-argument that can contradict this answer that doesn't involve morality in the rules of a mystery? This theory isn't COMPLETELY insane, after all, I am not using bullshit logic to make aliens appear from the sky and abduct everyone, this is pure and simple.
Mistranslated wording for ''letter and envelope'', a red that I've overlooked, anything like this, is what I want to hear.

Yopee · 2011-07-13, 21:25

But you're approaching these reds just like last time again. You're approaching these as absolutely unfair riddles where common sense will result in the wrong answer and until ryukishi publishes an umineko dictionary, you would continue to question every single word possible.

The letters have always shown up inside one-winged eagle envelopes. Common sense says that people, including you and me, would refer to a letter and its envelope as 'a letter', not as 'an envelope+a letter inside the envelope'. It's kind of like calling a person as 'a person+the clothes s/he is wearing+any possessions that s/he has in her/his clothes'.

I get where you're coming from but rather than lacking trust, you're just completely skeptical about whatever is written in umineko as in the very definition of each and every single word. I understand that and I think it's good that you don't stop thinking, that you're not letting a single potential clue get past you but it's taking things a bit too extreme. Lambda was clearly trying to be as thorough as possible to cut down on all possibilities with her definitions of words like knock but you're picking at the words that she didn't define or didn't define thoroughly enough. If that's how it is, then like I said, wait for that umineko dictionary.

The reds could have been written instead using 'the letter and the envelope' and you would still be able to argue that nowhere did it say the letter was actually inside the envelope to begin with so therefore the letter could have been inside something else. Or better yet, it could have been the letter inside an envelope inside another envelope.
Or you could say there were more than one letter/envelope. There are no reds saying that there was only one letter/envelope and we've seen there are more than one of them. You already did it with the knock and the door before so might as well roll with it all the way through with the letters and the envelopes too. Maybe even include the servant's carts too. There are two servants for the anti-shkanon people so each servant could have pushed one cart. And for the pro-shkanon people, well, s/he has two hands so one cart in each hand (lol I can't believe I'm typing this). There were quite a number of people in the dining hall too so it makes sense to bring another cart to serve them with.
Every single one of Lambda's reds could then be dodged by juggling them between one of each item. 'Cart' could have referred to the decoy cart that didn't have the letter, 'knocking sound' referred to hitting any other door in the mansion except for the dining hall's, 'letter and envelope' referring to the decoy envelope that did not contain the letter and referring to the letter that was not written by Beatrice or whoever it was that wrote the letter.

Actually, if you really were skeptical of that scene/ryukishi, if you really lacked heart/faith/love/whatever that thing is called, then you would have arrived at the answer that it was all a lie. The knock, the letter, the meeting in the dining hall, all of it. Not a single red said there was actually a knock or a letter on the ground in the corridor outside of the dining hall.
I'm guessing you're not satisfied by that cop out answer (I'm not really satisfied with it either) but it's the most logical answer in this situation for someone who is skeptical of it. I'm actually quite surprised that Erika and even Bern tried so hard with this, almost as if they were overlooking the most obvious answer on purpose. I'm not really smart but even I thought of that immediately after Lambda started defining a single word like knock with pages of red.
Or maybe they did come to the conclusion that it was all a lie in the first place. They just felt unsatisfied with 'the whole scene is a fantasy' answer like us and decided to approach it in a game breaking way on the replay with Battler. We just weren't shown Erika and Bern's reaction when they first saw this scene without Battler.

2011-07-11, 20:31	Link #23163
AuraTwilight The True Culprit Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: The Golden Land	Eva doesn't know any better. Yasu killed everyone else, but Eva only saw Rudolf and Kyrie killing Shannon, who was next to George's body. Knowing of their romance, Eva concludes that Kyrie and Rudolf are the killers and kills them back, and resolves to never tell Ange. Prove me wrong. __________________ When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531

2011-07-12, 10:55	Link #23170
rogerpepitone Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008	I think Umineko wants to be like this chess problem: White to play and mate in 1. (Try working it out on your own. I'll explain more afterwards.) __________________ Umineko notes: Various (1-4) Ep 3 (w/ red text) Ep 4 (w/ red text) . My projects: Higurashi Daybreak - in need of translator Higurashi DS Translation - in need of translator Never7: The End of Infinity - Finished! I/O: In progress 12Riven: In progress

2011-07-12, 11:47	Link #23171
bekyuubi Junior Member Join Date: May 2009	Spoiler for Chess game: Looks like queen to E5 for me. Pawn takes queen, castle to A6. End.

2011-07-12, 13:22	Link #23172
rogerpepitone Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008	White to play and mate in 1. __________________ Umineko notes: Various (1-4) Ep 3 (w/ red text) Ep 4 (w/ red text) . My projects: Higurashi Daybreak - in need of translator Higurashi DS Translation - in need of translator Never7: The End of Infinity - Finished! I/O: In progress 12Riven: In progress

2011-07-12, 14:14	Link #23173
AuraTwilight The True Culprit Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: The Golden Land	He must have typed the question wrong, then, because solving this in 1 move isn't possible. It's just not. __________________ When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531

2011-07-11, 23:00	Link #23168
Frisko Member Join Date: Dec 2008	Knox actually gave the reason for disallowing Chinamen. Namely, they were stereotypically portrayed as being "over - equipped in the matter of brains, and under - equipped in the matter of morals." Which, amusingly sounds a lot like Erika. Perhaps that's why Knox's 5th isn't included. Regarding whether Shannon can be the culprit without breaking Dine's 11th. At one point Dlanor stated that while secret passages would violate Knox's 3rd. They'd still be allowed under Knox's 8th if they were foreshadowed. I assume Dine's 1st override Dine's 11th in the same manner. To me, Beatrice's letter is enough to remove the protection Dine's 11th grants from all of the servants on the island.

2011-07-12, 14:27	Link #23174
Xenon_gun Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2011	The pull of this problem was too big, so I hope you don't mind me joining in. Indeed, this problem is not solvable. But, Spoiler: there is Battler's option of 'turning the chessboard over'. You remain white and keep the notation as it is. Mate in one.

2011-07-12, 14:34	Link #23175
rogerpepitone Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008	If you think you've solved the problem, send me a PM with your solution. Xenon gun, re solution in PM, you are correct. Lyrical Aura is close enough. __________________ Umineko notes: Various (1-4) Ep 3 (w/ red text) Ep 4 (w/ red text) . My projects: Higurashi Daybreak - in need of translator Higurashi DS Translation - in need of translator Never7: The End of Infinity - Finished! I/O: In progress 12Riven: In progress Last edited by rogerpepitone; 2011-07-12 at 16:40.

2011-07-12, 21:34	Link #23176
Meltyred Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2011	So what, you mean to say battler should have turned the chessboard this way? Isn't that... Cheating?

2011-07-13, 19:16	Link #23177
cronnoponno Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011	I know you guys hate dodging reds, but when Lambdadelta said ''Krauss, Natsuhi, and Genji did not even touch that letter!''. Do you notice something strange? It was already said that ''They found a letter in an envelope''. Meaning, one can touch the envelope and thus remove themselves of any responsibility of the letter by doing so. Meaning that if Erika's reasoning about the envelope being attached to the serving cart was right, no one ''placed the letter there''. Because the cart had the envelope glued to it, not the letter, so it was ''placed there by no one'' in a sense if you interpret it this way. Any problems with this? (Erika said ''Letter'' and not ''Envelope'', and thus can still be contradicted) Last edited by cronnoponno; 2011-07-13 at 19:34.

2011-07-13, 19:53	Link #23178
AuraTwilight The True Culprit Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: The Golden Land	That's pretty goddamn dodgy. If I were the Gamemaster I personally wouldn't allow that on the basis of good faith ruling, and just have touching the sealed envelope as the same as touching the letter. __________________ When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531

2011-07-13, 21:25	Link #23180
Yopee Zurajanai! Katsura da! Join Date: Jul 2010	But you're approaching these reds just like last time again. You're approaching these as absolutely unfair riddles where common sense will result in the wrong answer and until ryukishi publishes an umineko dictionary, you would continue to question every single word possible. The letters have always shown up inside one-winged eagle envelopes. Common sense says that people, including you and me, would refer to a letter and its envelope as 'a letter', not as 'an envelope+a letter inside the envelope'. It's kind of like calling a person as 'a person+the clothes s/he is wearing+any possessions that s/he has in her/his clothes'. I get where you're coming from but rather than lacking trust, you're just completely skeptical about whatever is written in umineko as in the very definition of each and every single word. I understand that and I think it's good that you don't stop thinking, that you're not letting a single potential clue get past you but it's taking things a bit too extreme. Lambda was clearly trying to be as thorough as possible to cut down on all possibilities with her definitions of words like knock but you're picking at the words that she didn't define or didn't define thoroughly enough. If that's how it is, then like I said, wait for that umineko dictionary. The reds could have been written instead using 'the letter and the envelope' and you would still be able to argue that nowhere did it say the letter was actually inside the envelope to begin with so therefore the letter could have been inside something else. Or better yet, it could have been the letter inside an envelope inside another envelope. Or you could say there were more than one letter/envelope. There are no reds saying that there was only one letter/envelope and we've seen there are more than one of them. You already did it with the knock and the door before so might as well roll with it all the way through with the letters and the envelopes too. Maybe even include the servant's carts too. There are two servants for the anti-shkanon people so each servant could have pushed one cart. And for the pro-shkanon people, well, s/he has two hands so one cart in each hand (lol I can't believe I'm typing this). There were quite a number of people in the dining hall too so it makes sense to bring another cart to serve them with. Every single one of Lambda's reds could then be dodged by juggling them between one of each item. 'Cart' could have referred to the decoy cart that didn't have the letter, 'knocking sound' referred to hitting any other door in the mansion except for the dining hall's, 'letter and envelope' referring to the decoy envelope that did not contain the letter and referring to the letter that was not written by Beatrice or whoever it was that wrote the letter. Actually, if you really were skeptical of that scene/ryukishi, if you really lacked heart/faith/love/whatever that thing is called, then you would have arrived at the answer that it was all a lie. The knock, the letter, the meeting in the dining hall, all of it. Not a single red said there was actually a knock or a letter on the ground in the corridor outside of the dining hall. I'm guessing you're not satisfied by that cop out answer (I'm not really satisfied with it either) but it's the most logical answer in this situation for someone who is skeptical of it. I'm actually quite surprised that Erika and even Bern tried so hard with this, almost as if they were overlooking the most obvious answer on purpose. I'm not really smart but even I thought of that immediately after Lambda started defining a single word like knock with pages of red. Or maybe they did come to the conclusion that it was all a lie in the first place. They just felt unsatisfied with 'the whole scene is a fantasy' answer like us and decided to approach it in a game breaking way on the replay with Battler. We just weren't shown Erika and Bern's reaction when they first saw this scene without Battler.