[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Renall]

Originally Posted by chronotrig

The problem with Shkanon is that it looks so ridiculous on the face of it that most people reject it when they first hear about it. Since the first version that comes to mind is probably something ridiculously impossible, people argue against the theory, and once you've started arguing against something, it's hard to admit you've been wrong. This is especially true if you've spent a great deal of time and effort into "disproving" or even insulting versions of the theory that are now obsolete. The reason we're playing this game is because we want to find the answers ourselves, not because we want someone else to tell us the answers, much less someone who we've been arguing against for a long time.

Why, how very magnanimous of you to offer everyone the chance to subscribe to your theory and forgive them for being so very, very wrong. That's not passive-aggressive at all. Incidentally, no thanks.

I don't buy the spoon-fed Shkanon of ep6 precisely because I trust ryukishi to be a better writer than that. Ep6 is filled with nonsense and there are only two ways a story gets filled with that stuff: The author doesn't know any better, or the author is doing it on purpose. Since I do not believe after 5 episodes (plus whatever else he's written that I'm aware of) that ryukishi doesn't know any better, I have to conclude he did it on purpose. Chiru has been... an authorial experiment, to be sure. Ep5-6 are parallels to ep1-2 that go well and truly off the rails, yet maintain some degree of thematic parallel. It's those contrasts that I think he wants us to look at for the answers.

We are assuming a linear progression when perhaps we should be reflecting. Ep5 gave us thematic elements that harkened back especially to ep1. We sort of glossed them because we already knew the part about Kinzo. But maybe we were meant to see something else there, a thematic similarity arising from the differences between ep1 and ep5. Ep6 spoonfeeds us Shannon and Kanon in much the same way ep2 did. But just how important was Shkanon to ep3-4? I think that's something to think about. If ep7 continues the pattern, it will parallel ep3 (I'm not sure what this might mean, other than possibly a survivor). Nobody needs to be reminded of the amount of involvement Shannon and Kanon had in (most of) ep3.

My position has always been: Either Shkanon is not true, or Umineko has a crappy payoff. The only way I will be "wrong" (By the way, why do you always have to "win" every argument? Speculation is not a game, you don't have to win or lose) is if Shkanon is true and ryukishi comes up with a brilliant explanation. But if he does, well, he's one of the better writers around, because I don't believe it's fundamentally possible because it's so insipid. But hey, if he does it I'll admit he got me. But he's the one who's got me, not you and not anybody else. It's his work, and it's all on him to make a fundamentally stupid idea work. If that's his intent at all. With possibly two episodes left, I have to think we're not anywhere near as close as everyone seems to think we are.

Oh, yes, and for the 8000th time: Shkanon doesn't solve most puzzles and in fact makes them harder. Because apparently that needs to be stated over and over until someone actually explains it.

[UsagiTenpura]

An arc 3 parallel feels like it would be, someone becomes the new Beatrice and we're led to believe that person is the culprit, but it turns out to be wrong. It could also be telling the story on how current Beato solved the epitaph (arc 6 hinted she had to solve it herself).

It's interesting tho that arc 7 of higurashi was Rika's arc, and Bernkastel is the gamemaster of arc 7. I'm pretty sure it's wanted to be that way (tho isn't meaningful, just easter egg ish). Actually thinking of it Higurashi's answer arcs always felt to me like 5-6-7 each were meant to represent a rule, namely X-Z-Y. It's a possible angle to watch the umineko core arcs from.

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by Renall

Why, how very magnanimous of you to offer everyone the chance to subscribe to your theory and forgive them for being so very, very wrong. That's not passive-aggressive at all. Incidentally, no thanks.

This would probably be a lot better for all of us if you wouldn't get angry and start insulting people every time you disagree with them. I've never said that Shkanon is the only answer, just that there does exist a way to make it work.

After all, what are the odds that you will ever be fair-minded to a theory after you've insulted it and called it moronic repeatedly? You're now motivated to prove it wrong or bad or "unfair" at any cost. Even if a perfectly reasonably explanation appeared, the odds are good that you'd still see it as a bad one at this rate. I don't want that to happen to anyone, even someone who has insulted me on several occasions.

[DaBackpack]

Originally Posted by Renall

Why, how very magnanimous of you to offer everyone the chance to subscribe to your theory and forgive them for being so very, very wrong. That's not passive-aggressive at all. Incidentally, no thanks.

I don't buy the spoon-fed Shkanon of ep6 precisely because I trust ryukishi to be a better writer than that. Ep6 is filled with nonsense and there are only two ways a story gets filled with that stuff: The author doesn't know any better, or the author is doing it on purpose. Since I do not believe after 5 episodes (plus whatever else he's written that I'm aware of) that ryukishi doesn't know any better, I have to conclude he did it on purpose. Chiru has been... an authorial experiment, to be sure. Ep5-6 are parallels to ep1-2 that go well and truly off the rails, yet maintain some degree of thematic parallel. It's those contrasts that I think he wants us to look at for the answers.

We are assuming a linear progression when perhaps we should be reflecting. Ep5 gave us thematic elements that harkened back especially to ep1. We sort of glossed them because we already knew the part about Kinzo. But maybe we were meant to see something else there, a thematic similarity arising from the differences between ep1 and ep5. Ep6 spoonfeeds us Shannon and Kanon in much the same way ep2 did. But just how important was Shkanon to ep3-4? I think that's something to think about. If ep7 continues the pattern, it will parallel ep3 (I'm not sure what this might mean, other than possibly a survivor). Nobody needs to be reminded of the amount of involvement Shannon and Kanon had in (most of) ep3.

My position has always been: Either Shkanon is not true, or Umineko has a crappy payoff. The only way I will be "wrong" (By the way, why do you always have to "win" every argument? Speculation is not a game, you don't have to win or lose) is if Shkanon is true and ryukishi comes up with a brilliant explanation. But if he does, well, he's one of the better writers around, because I don't believe it's fundamentally possible because it's so insipid. But hey, if he does it I'll admit he got me. But he's the one who's got me, not you and not anybody else. It's his work, and it's all on him to make a fundamentally stupid idea work. If that's his intent at all. With possibly two episodes left, I have to think we're not anywhere near as close as everyone seems to think we are.

Oh, yes, and for the 8000th time: Shkanon doesn't solve most puzzles and in fact makes them harder. Because apparently that needs to be stated over and over until someone actually explains it.

To be honest, I don't really see why Shkanon is that terrible. I mean, it may be forced down our throats in EP6, but I can see how somebody could miss something like that if their minds aren't in the right place. But you are correct, in my opinion, about this: it would be very underwhelming if Shkanon turns out to be the answer to Umineko.

But I still don't see why Shkanon can't be true, but not the solution. I still feel like it will turn into a Kinzo situation: his existence is denied on the gameboard, but that just narrows down the possibilities of who could of dunnit. So really, if Shkanon is true (but not Shkanontrice) it would just provide a part of "the final answer," but would not fully explain everything.

Think of it this way: why would Ryukishi give away something as big as Kinzo is dead at the start of all games as early as EP4? That was even more blatant than this is. Hell, the characters even cornered Krauss and Natsuhi about it. So why bother mentioning it? Because, obviously, he wanted us to know. Either that or it was vital for the progression of the story.

So I present this:
If Shkanon turns out to be true, it will help the progression of the story and will contribute to us solving the mystery. It may not necessarily become a part of the solution, but will become comparable to the Kinzo revelation in EP4.

EDIT: Also, Kinzo being dead provides a bit of a possible motive for the murders (in Krauss and Natsuhi's case).

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura

always felt to me like 5-6-7 each were meant to represent a rule, namely X-Z-Y. It's a possible angle to watch the umineko core arcs from.

I think the order in Higurashi was actually Z, X, Y. Unless your going by different arcs than I am.

Meakashi focused on the sonazaki conspiracy rule Z, Tsumihoroboshi emphasized madness in rule X with Rena and the scrap books. and Minagoroshi emphasized rule Y by emphasizing the importance of who is behind the murders and the disaster.

To be honest I don't see that parallel in Umineko. I think he gave some scattered hints for some of the rules in episode 5, which I thought emphasized Umineko's rule Y, (which I think has something to do with Battler's sin), but so did episode 6 sort of as well as what I think Umineko's rule X is. Unlike Higurashi the hints are very very scattered. It probably is better to reflect, but rereading the core arcs probably isn't a bad idea either.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by chronotrig

This would probably be a lot better for all of us if you wouldn't get angry and start insulting people every time you disagree with them. I've never said that Shkanon is the only answer, just that there does exist a way to make it work.

After all, what are the odds that you will ever be fair-minded to a theory after you've insulted it and called it moronic repeatedly? You're now motivated to prove it wrong or bad or "unfair" at any cost. Even if a perfectly reasonably explanation appeared, the odds are good that you'd still see it as a bad one at this rate. I don't want that to happen to anyone, even someone who has insulted me on several occasions.

You have once again projected exactly what you are doing on another person (as you do repeatedly to people who do not let you get away with passive-aggressive behavior) and completely misconstructed the arguments of just about everyone present.

You will find few people more fair toward reasonable theories than me. I do not have a pet theory, and I have abandoned most of the ones I've fancied over time and no longer really think they're all that probable (or desirable). I do not set it as my objective to prove Shkanon wrong, I simply do not believe that if it were true it would be worth thinking about, because any resolution of it (short of a brilliant turn by ryukishi himself) would be silly. I do not believe any Shkanon-centric answer yet proposed is not silly. This includes your theory, which makes you defensive, because you can only think in terms of winning and losing and therefore assume I am out to persecute you for your theory. I have no idea where you have gotten this idea, but based upon your behavior I have to assume it has something to do with my refusal to believe your explanations are supported by evidence and your own refusal to answer questions any proper theory should be able to trivially answer. This shifty behavior disinclines me to the rest of your argument because I feel that you are being evasive.

Is that a bias? Yes, absolutely. Does it cause me to be less fair to your theory than to others? Yes, I won't deny it. Is the bias entirely justifiable in its formation? Yes it is. Bias is not inherently bad when the reasons for it are understandable.

And, by the way, you have represented to me, in personal conversations, that you believe you have the correct answer. Therefore your claim that "I've never said that Shkanon is the only answer" is a blatant lie, and you should know this because you are the one who told me you had the answer. Unless you want to claim that you never actually represented to me that claim, in which case you are calling me a liar. Alternately, you no longer believe your theory is correct as strongly as you once did, which I suggested might happen when we spoke privately.

I do not appreciate people lying about other people's attitudes, behavior, and arguments. I apologize if you feel personally insulted by that position, but that is what I have taken from your behavior over time, and I find it takes away from the fun parts of the speculation thread (in which both of us often engage in very spirited and friendly discussion) when you derail things into passive-aggressive flagellations.

Well, this is me being just regular aggressive. I have to speak my mind.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by DaBackpack

EDIT: Also, Kinzo being dead provides a bit of a possible motive for the murders (in Krauss and Natsuhi's case).

How? Please explain to me why this works. I've said this before, but it's exactly the opposite of this. It doesn't work as a motive. Murders happening means people want to see father to tell him about it. It's counter productive for both of them. What do they have to gain from that? I just don't understand what motive Kinzo brings to the table anymore for these two.

And what about the reds saying they're not culprits? or do you have a reason to think they could be the culprits in all other games except episode 5?

[chronotrig]

Originally Posted by Renall

And, by the way, you have represented to me, in personal conversations, that you believe you have the correct answer. Therefore your claim that "I've never said that Shkanon is the only answer" is a blatant lie

I point out this statement as proof of what I've been saying. You are so determined to prove me wrong that you fail to realize that this is ridiculous. Just because I think the answer I have is right doesn't mean I can prove that it's the only answer, nor does it mean that I'll never consider other answers. In fact, I've changed my core theory since we had that conversation.

So, once again, I'm ending my part in this conversation. It's true that I'm thickheaded and don't walk away when I should, but I've made my points and they're out there for anyone to see.

[Renall]

You told me that your answer was correct, and that you would demonstrate it to me.

I was not satisfied with your answer, and also noted that there was no way to prove any answer was true. You suggested this would be borne out in later episodes which would vindicate you.

So you are calling me a liar and saying that conversation never happened. Well, thank you for making that clear.

[DaBackpack]

Originally Posted by Judoh

How? Please explain to me why this works. I've said this before, but it's exactly the opposite of this. It doesn't work as a motive. Murders happening means people want to see father to tell him about it. It's counter productive for both of them. What do they have to gain from that? I just don't understand what motive Kinzo brings to the table anymore for these two.

And what about the reds saying they're not culprits? or do you have a reason to think they could be the culprits in all other games except episode 5?

There are "possible" motives is what I should have said.

Each character, if we assume them to have equal opportunity for murder (which is definitely not the case in Umineko) each of the characters would have a motive for committing murder at least once.

But my point stands: Kinzo's death is a very important revelation (I'm sure you all agree on this) but it may or may not be a part of the solution, just like Shkanon.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by DaBackpack

But my point stands: Kinzo's death is a very important revelation (I'm sure you all agree on this) but it may or may not be a part of the solution, just like Shkanon.

No this point has been discussed as well. There is a huge difference in hiding the existence of a servant boy and an obsessed grandfather nobody gets to see. You have to note things like servant schedules, which put Genji and Natsuhi involved in this cover up. Again for no reason. Jessica has to either know about it and be delusional, lie constantly in an out of character way, or be a complete moron who doesn't notice her best friend is her love interest. Again for no reason. And most of the adults have to be involved in propagating this lie for no reason despite apparently knowing this certain servant boy for a number of years. No reason.

The Kinzo conspiracy is vastly different. Kinzo's death means the inheritance problem comes up and a 70% tax is involved in that. Fewer people have to be involved which make it less complicated. Not to mention hiding Kinzo's death actually makes sense. He conveniently has a habit of being cooped up in his study while Kanon has many duties on the island. Nobody has anything to gain from hiding Kanon's nonexistence. Absolutely nobody. Not even to fool Battler because he doesn't even know him. It'd be the same as lying about Gohda being dead at the start. What's the frikkin point?

[LaplaceNoMa]

I believe the core arcs really are showing us the X-Y-Z of Umineko. And I can also agree that every core arc is a mirror of the corresponding question arc.

From what we can see now, ep1 and ep5 are mostly based on conspiracy. No matter what this conspiracy really is, the whole thing is important.

Ep2 and ep6 are mostly dedicated to the legend of Beato itself. The cliff, the mirror, the portrait, servants' stories. I don't think that 'love' is the 'second rule' which is being presented by these 2 arcs.

Speaking of the new shemale character from ep7 cover, I'm pretty much sure it's related to 07151129. And the whole story with the gold.

We can assume that ep8 (if it will be made, which I don't doubt) would be finally dedicated to Battler, his sin, and the reason behind all of this.

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Raiza Sunozaki

The Core Episodes have been giving us useful tactics, information and clues, but has not explained how things have happened, with the exception of faking deaths, which is still a shaky concept.

I'm glad I'm not the only person who thinks this. I did help the fake death conspiracy idea a lot mostly because everybody was talking about it at one point. I'm considering now that maybe we were just being shown that these people are capable of faking their deaths like people were shown to be capable of committing murder in some episodes. It doesn't really require that the first twilight is always fake. While it's still a little shaky though there aren't many other explanations for a lot of the closed rooms at this point.

[Lemon Ice]

If EP7 is parallel to EP3 I hope for another epic Myth Battle
And it seems likely it is like that, as Rosa's Beatrice is mentioned again according to the screenshots.

[ameskitty]

I think to really understand what people mean by Shkanon being "spoonfed" you have to go back, reread EP1, see how many plain-in-sight one-liners and clues there were for the other "answers" that seem to be just-as-spoonfed (Kinzo's death, Shannontrice), and see how many you can find for Shkanon.

Yes, there are a few vague observations you can make supporting it, but when I looked back trying to find clues like that for Shkanon, I failed. In fact, I found myself doubting even more that it can be an answer at all.

Just because people haven't come up with a complete alternative theory doesn't mean that it can't be pointed out that something just doesn't seem right about it. I've seen lots of assorted ideas put out here that could possibly work well - it's just that people have been too busy arguing for or against Shkanon to pay attention to those ideas and gather them together somehow (you have to consider that maybe this was exactly what EP6 was intended to provoke...). But we've still got two weeks, right?

[Heatth]

Originally Posted by LaplaceNoMa

I believe the core arcs really are showing us the X-Y-Z of Umineko. And I can also agree that every core arc is a mirror of the corresponding question arc.

From what we can see now, ep1 and ep5 are mostly based on conspiracy. No matter what this conspiracy really is, the whole thing is important.

Ep2 and ep6 are mostly dedicated to the legend of Beato itself. The cliff, the mirror, the portrait, servants' stories. I don't think that 'love' is the 'second rule' which is being presented by these 2 arcs.

Speaking of the new shemale character from ep7 cover, I'm pretty much sure it's related to 07151129. And the whole story with the gold.

We can assume that ep8 (if it will be made, which I don't doubt) would be finally dedicated to Battler, his sin, and the reason behind all of this.

All that talk about the Rules and about Shkannon and Shannontrice possible being true but not The Answer gave me a similar idea.

First lets talk about Higurashi's rules (in the other they were being reveled)

Spoiler for Higurashi Kai:

Rule Z: is the Sonozaki family 'bluff'. Because they bluff and act though, it distract people(characters and players) from the true answer. The Sonozaki were not the responsible for Rule X and Y, but appear to be.

Rule X: Some bad thing happen to one(or more) person of Rika's circle of friends and that person goes crazy and kill people. That event don't really have nothing to do with the main conspiracy.

Rule Y: The main conspiracy. Takano kills Tomitake, fakes her death and then kills Rika and the rest of the village. Sometimes Takano may be responsable for Rule X, but that is not part of her plan and, therefore, not part of Rule Y.

Since I read Bernkastel's Letter I got the feeling the rules of Umineko were somewhat similar. To see if I could get it I tried to put Higurashi's rule in a more generic way:

Rule Z: Something that distract people from the true answer of the other Rules.

Rule X: Some thing (bad) that always happen and appear to be the core of the mystery. But it is not really related to the main conspiracy.

Rule Y: The main conspiracy.

I will skip explaining how I get it from Higurashi's rule, but please tell me if you disagree. At any case, as it was said here, the first three answers arc of Higurashi was each one focused on one of these rules (in that orther)

I believe the 'Core' arcs of Umineko also followed the same pattern here my reasoning (I believe in Shkannontrice, btw):

EP5 is focused on Kinzo's death. The conspiracy to keep his death in secret is the Rule Z. For most of the Questions Arc we get the idea the murders were some weird plot of him, following a black magic epitaph. In the end, Kinzo is dead for quite a long time and the murders don't really follow the epitaph at all. (you can say that Rule Z was a 'fail', as many people have understood that already, making Ryukishi even revealing this ahead of time).

EP6 is focused on Shannontrice and Shkannon and their motives. That weird secret is the Rule X. They may be the one doing the murders or just creating the illusion of 'Beatrice', but they are not related to the final conspiracy. That is it, they do not send the money nor to the numbers nor to the explosion. They may not even be planning to kill everybody (in EP1 they spared the children). Their actions are also probably kind of random not following a preconceived plan.

EP7 would be showing the true conspiracy of Rule Y. That is it, who send the money to the relatives of the family, the meaning of the numbers and the true cause of the explosion.

To sum up, here my take of the 3 Rules of Umineko:

Rule X: People think it is Kinzo's fault, distracting them.

Rule X: Murders happen in the island, creating the illusion of the witch.

Rule Y: Someone plotted the death of Ushiromiya family.

Also, I will like to emphasize the Rules don't really have any connection between them. Whoever plotted the explosion was probably not expecting the murders to take place. It is actually probably bad for them, as the plan relies on everybody staying on the mansion and guest house.

Well, that is it. What do you think, everybody? My take of Rule X can actually work without Shkannon or Kanontrice. But then it won't fit the pattern of the 3 first Core Arcs being about each rule.

By the way, if I have to point a finger for the responsible of Rule Y I would say the Sumadera, naturally. Of the characters presented they are the only one who fit. I also thought about Okonogi, but I realized he actually won't win anything if no one of Hideyoshi's family survives. He was probably just lucky Eva was elsewhere.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by ameskitty

Yes, there are a few vague observations you can make supporting it, but when I looked back trying to find clues like that for Shkanon, I failed. In fact, I found myself doubting even more that it can be an answer at all.

What about the two TIPS of Kanon's death in EP2? It basically tells you that Kanon doesn't exist.

What about Kanon being "the zero in the roulette" said by Kanon in EP1?

What about the fact that in EP1 there's no reasonable way Kanon could have listened to the discussion of the parents and yet you see him reporting to Kinzo? Even so the only servant that went there was Shannon.

What about EP4 with Kanon and Shannon that actually link together and are said to be "furniture from the same set"

What about the scene in the kitchen in EP1 where Kumasawa tells Battler that "Beatrice is here right now". Even though there's only Kanon, Kumasawa and Genji in front of him.

What about EP2 where Kanon tries to give Maria her marshmallow back, and a few seconds later it's Beatrice that does it with "magic" (and we all know that what she did was simply switching the crushed marshmallow with another one while Maria was closing her eyes). Considering that Shannontrice is hinted so much any Kanontrice hint works automatically as a shkanontrice hint.


I think that there are plenty of shkanon hints in EP1-4. Of course they are far from being evidences, but they work as hints. They are by no way inferior to the various other hints you've found about other subjects.

[Used Can]

I think this whole Shkanon(trice) thing - assuming it's true - comes down to what you expect from a detective novel. R07 seems to be the type of person who believes that, as long as there are hints, any answer like brain parasites or fictional DID can work. There are other people who expect a more simple, conservative answer that makes the mastermind look like a complete genius after having pulled an almost perfect crime.

[ErenselTheJester]

Spoiler for Long:

Okay, this is based off of what Zepar and Furfur said about the number "19." The three most intriguing things about it is that it took that many years to write this story, for this day to come, and is the age of real Game Master. Now here's some ideas and speculations on what that number refers and catalysts along the timeline.

Starting with catalysts, going from 1967 to 1986, one could be the death of the adopted baby. It was a year before Jessica's birth I believe and might have to do with our current mystery. However, there is a question that I want to ask: What about the death was so important? The death of the baby or the death of servant who was carrying it? Then there's Battler's birth, a year later. Considering that this is sort of centered around him, it would make sense that his birth would be a catalyst, especially since his birth is wrapped up in so much mystery. Then, around 12 years later, is his sin. Whatever it may be, we are definitely sure it was one if not the main cause of this entire ordeal. And finally is Kinzo's death, which is one of the big factors in this play.

Now about the Game Master, it is said that his/her age is nineteen and it is also said that it took nineteen years for this story to be written. Considering the timeline, I'm guessing that whoever this Game Master is isn't the culprit or the puller of strings. Its as we are told: The Game Master is the creator of the game, the writer of the story. Whether he or she is the culprit just depends on them but is not really required. In this case, I'm supposing that the Human Beatrice that lived on Rokkenjima wrote the story of Umineko far beyond the events had actually happened. Now I'm saying this with two different meanings: One being that the story we're reading is just what Beatrice wrote and aren't the actual events of the Rokkenjima Incident. Second would be that the tale is just being retold by someone on the island or an outsider who had discovered the manuscripts as is already assumed. Of course, I'm basing this under the impression that the Rokkenjima accident is really an accident and not a murder. Now, if this is a real murder, then my assumption is that the culprit is using this story as a basis for the murders and then there is somebody else who is using the same story for a seperate plot. Now I'm not exactly sure on who these people are but I think its a solid idea.

Any questions, comments, feedback?

[Renall]

In this sort of story, the best possible ending I can think of is that the culprit is indistinguishable amongst the "window dressing" of the rest of the story. In other words, if the culprit were Hideyoshi (this is just an example!), he wouldn't be:

• Doing the theatrical "murders."
• Dressing up in any disguises.
• Relying on any strange people except as manipulated pawns.
• An inherently good but misguided person.

The true mastermind is either the bomber or a skillful killer who is exploiting the confusion on the island (who may or may not be aware of the endgame event). When you think about it, it's very difficult to imagine that most people know who the killer really is. Even if we assume an epitaph fakery group, I think it's likely that they don't know who specifically is doing real killings. Consider for a moment how difficult it would be to pull that off without ever getting caught. Sure, you have the fakery to hide behind, but you're also restricted in your victim selection. If the true killer is nevertheless managing, he or she is quite good at it. Figuring out how it was done when there's so many other swirling conspiracies would be quite satisfying. If we're lucky, it will be simple timing tricks that convinced us somebody who always appeared to have an alibi in fact never did at the proper times. Bonus points if they sneer at Battler and mock him over it, but not strictly necessary.

I'm not saying I demand blood, but the true mastermind really should not be a person who is pitiable and can easily be redeemed (which is why I don't think "Beatrice" is the mastermind). If you want to save the killer's life, fine. Battler might do that sort of thing. If you want to forgive him or her, fine. If you want them to try to turn it around, fine. But if nobody suffers any consequences, screw that.