AnimeSuki Forums

Tyabann · 2010-04-18, 03:49

It's kind of implied that people can only use red if they know what red is, mind. It's not as though everything people say that's 100% true is automatically said in red text, right?

Erika doesn't exist is aware of her status as Bernkastel's piece, so she can use red, but Natsuhi...

Laserworm · 2010-04-18, 03:53

Quote:

It's kind of implied that people can only use red if they know what red is, mind. It's not as though everything people say that's 100% true is automatically said in red text, right?

Erika doesn't exist is aware of her status as Bernkastel's piece, so she can use red, but Natsuhi...

Oh no people say truth in white too. But I think Ryu07 is trying to convince us that only Shannon knows what seaon, it is one of the traps of the ep, I'm guessing.

Judoh · 2010-04-18, 03:53

Really? when was that ever implied? Well even so an implication isn't really proof is it? I guess that maybe Natsuhi is proof that you can say something equivalent to the red text and not know it exists as a rule?

Tyabann · 2010-04-18, 03:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judoh

Really? when was that ever implied? Well even so an implication isn't really proof is it? I guess that maybe Natsuhi is proof that you can say something equivalent to the red text and not know it exists as a rule?

It's just a feeling I got. Battler in Ep4 seems to have to consciously "choose" to switch to red text rather than white, for example.

Laserworm · 2010-04-18, 04:01

Quote:

It's just a feeling I got. Battler in Ep4 seems to have to consciously "choose" to switch to red text rather than white, for example.

Beatrice gave him the right to use red for that one point. So it seems that Lambdadelta probably gave Natsuhi the right for that one time. It was all to try and make it seem like this 19 year old baby exists it seems.

Tyabann · 2010-04-18, 04:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laserworm

Beatrice gave him the right to use red for that one point. So it seems that Lambdadelta probably gave Natsuhi the right for that one time. It was all to try and make it seem like this 19 year old baby exists it seems.

Okay, see, there. There's the explanation I was looking for. Thank you.

Renall · 2010-04-18, 04:12

Who says Natsuhi thought in red, or had any reason to know what red is? The fact that it is the only time red appears in conscious first-person narration is not particularly meaningful. The GM could apply red to practically any part of the storyline, the way I see it. It's clear that it was done for a particular motive, as Natsuhi herself didn't seem all that suspicious of Shannon in particular even after coming to that realization. Alternately, it's an instructive example of how human certainty can permit red without a witch's power.

The case would be different for Meta characters. They're consciously aware of the red text and choose when to use it.

Or, Author Theory: Red can be used whenever the author wants it to be used. The author generally restricts it to the Meta sequences because it would be jarring and confusing otherwise, but did it for Natsuhi for some particular reason.

Laserworm · 2010-04-18, 04:19

Quote:

Okay, see, there. There's the explanation I was looking for. Thank you.

Your welcome.

Quote:

Author Theory: Red can be used whenever the author wants it to be used. The author generally restricts it to the Meta sequences because it would be jarring and confusing otherwise, but did it for Natsuhi for some particular reason.

Yeah, it is basically a fact Ryu07 is telling us is 100% true.

Tyabann · 2010-04-18, 04:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renall

Who says Natsuhi thought in red, or had any reason to know what red is? The fact that it is the only time red appears in conscious first-person narration is not particularly meaningful. The GM could apply red to practically any part of the storyline, the way I see it. It's clear that it was done for a particular motive, as Natsuhi herself didn't seem all that suspicious of Shannon in particular even after coming to that realization. Alternately, it's an instructive example of how human certainty can permit red without a witch's power.

The case would be different for Meta characters. They're consciously aware of the red text and choose when to use it.

Or, Author Theory: Red can be used whenever the author wants it to be used. The author generally restricts it to the Meta sequences because it would be jarring and confusing otherwise, but did it for Natsuhi for some particular reason.

I know, I know, it just seems "off" to me and I'm generally suspicious of anything that feels that way.

Laserworm · 2010-04-18, 04:24

Quote:

I know, I know, it just seems "off" to me and I'm generally suspicious of anything that feels that way.

I agree with you. It seemed strange when she did it to me. But which way is the trap? Are we supposed to think that this red is a hint that means that the culprit only put one card in the room. Or are we supposed to treat this as a trap by Ryu07 and he is trying to get us to frame Shannon for something she might not have a part in.

Kylon99 · 2010-04-18, 04:40

By the way, this did bring up an interesting notion.

Was it ever mentioned why Rule #5 is not included? I remember Battler asking why but I don't remember an explanation from Dlanor or anyone else. And if it is included, what would it be?

I think Kaisos touched on this with the idea, "The butler did it."

If it was merely the idea of someone being introduced late being the culprit then that would already fall under rule #1. So #5 wouldn't add anything new. But could it really be like, "No cliche culprits?" It's not like we have any cliche villans except for maybe Genji.

If it is an analogue of Ronald's real Knox rules then wouldn't it be more fittingly as, "No obvious culprit must actually be the culprit." But... this rule is not included. Why?

Don't tell me he can't stick to this rule and that's why he can't use it? Or he intends to bring this out later?

Laserworm · 2010-04-18, 04:43

Knox's 5th: No Chinaman must figure in the story.

This was how it was written in Knox's book.

Kylon99 · 2010-04-18, 05:13

Yes... I suspect there's a reason that it's omitted. Otherwise he would've just introduced it and it would have no consequence in the story...

Oliver · 2010-04-18, 05:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laserworm

Knox's 5th: No Chinaman must figure in the story.

This was how it was written in Knox's book.

"No thinly disguised Fu Manchu from a foreign land with mysterious powers that verge on supernatural must figure in the story." is what it should be read as, because that's what Knox was pointing at as the cliche that does not improve the story.

The reason it is never mentioned is because Meta-Beatrice is one, obviously, and so is Erika.

Which is why saying that the story follows Knox is impossible to state in red, as it is blocked by this one rule broken from the very start.

goldenlove27 · 2010-04-18, 05:26

I don't see how Natsuhi speaking in red is a trap. To me it is a gift telling us that Shannon knows the culprit or at least has a connection to them.

I was looking at some earlier post and I like to share some of my thoughts on it:

Spoiler for Maria & the Letter:

I can claim this:

Spoiler for Maria, "Beatrice". & Kinzo:

Lastly I would like to say something I bet everyone knows/or is thinking:

Spoiler for Kinzo's death:

Forgive me for my crazy ideas. I hope you all Find it uses for or question it. See ya soon...

Kylon99 · 2010-04-18, 05:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver

"No thinly disguised Fu Manchu from a foreign land with mysterious powers that verge on supernatural must figure in the story." is what it should be read as, because that's what Knox was pointing at as the cliche that does not improve the story.

The reason it is never mentioned is because Meta-Beatrice is one, obviously, and so is Erika.

Which is why saying that the story follows Knox is impossible to state in red, as it is blocked by this one rule broken from the very start.

You can almost say Beatrice is the reverse Fu Manchu... since she is a Western lady in an Eastern setting.

But you know, technically with what we believe, she wouldn't violate the Knox rule if it was presented as we suspect she's not the real culprit anyways....

Kylon99 · 2010-04-18, 05:37

Oh.. one more thing. The last line of the Epitaph indicates that 'Beatrice' will sleep for all eternity. That's been puzzling until we were talking about the 'heart of Beatrice' being rule X, being what we suspect is a bomb.

So isn't it kinda obvious now that if you solve the Epitaph, you would disarm the bomb? We see Eva attempting to do this, perhaps, in a fantasy scene. This would imply that Kinzo really WOULD have blown up his own family. (That bastard!) And that the Beatrice faction (if it is them) wants the Epitaph solved not just to help them with the gold but to disarm the bomb.

But... the bomb still goes off in EP3, indicating maybe that someone (the mastermind?) has tampered with it so that it goes off anyways...

(Not sure what would've happened in EP5. I suspected that large numbers would've survived the end if it carried on...)

Tyabann · 2010-04-18, 05:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kylon99

(Not sure what would've happened in EP5. I suspected that large numbers would've survived the end if it carried on...)

If they did survive, Bernkastel would have actually made good on her promise.

Not only did she make Battler the head, both him and his immediate family got to go home to Ange.

Laserworm · 2010-04-18, 05:57

Quote:

If they did survive, Bernkastel would have actually made good on her promise.

Not only did she make Battler the head, both him and his immediate family got to go home to Ange.

Bernkastel keep her promise..... not a chance. Everyone probably dies at the end.

Oliver · 2010-04-18, 06:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kylon99

You can almost say Beatrice is the reverse Fu Manchu... since she is a Western lady in an Eastern setting.

But you know, technically with what we believe, she wouldn't violate the Knox rule if it was presented as we suspect she's not the real culprit anyways....

She sort of is -- exactly the reverse, a Western witch in an Eastern setting.

That she isn't the culprit but a virtual scapegoat is very probably true, but, she clearly figures in the story prominently, doesn't she, and early on too, (and indirectly just like Fu Manchu, who is more heard of than seen) so it's kind of too late.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kylon99

So isn't it kinda obvious now that if you solve the Epitaph, you would disarm the bomb? We see Eva attempting to do this, perhaps, in a fantasy scene. This would imply that Kinzo really WOULD have blown up his own family. (That bastard!) And that the Beatrice faction (if it is them) wants the Epitaph solved not just to help them with the gold but to disarm the bomb.

While Kinzo, with his repeated statements of supreme dissatisfaction in his descendants is a prime candidate for establishing a way to posthumously eradicate them, the problem with it is that it would involve him setting the timer for well over a year.

I don't know many reliable methods of setting a detonation timer for that long. Uninterrupted independent power for a year with no human intervention or maintenance is an engineering problem, particularly in 1986 - not an extremely complex one, but kind of tricky to solve in secret.

I also don't see a reason why it would happen in 1986 and not 1985 if Kinzo was dead before the 1985 conference.

I do notice that Maria knows about it and expects it, when whoever pretends to be Beatrice for her seems not to.

2010-04-18, 03:53	Link #8283
Judoh Mystery buff Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Gone Fishin!	Really? when was that ever implied? Well even so an implication isn't really proof is it? I guess that maybe Natsuhi is proof that you can say something equivalent to the red text and not know it exists as a rule? __________________ Judoh's George Culprit Analysis George steals candy from kids! Archive of Ryukishi interviews Gold truth theories:"

2010-04-18, 05:26	Link #8295
goldenlove27 Tortured Pet Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: In "Her" crime scenes Age: 32	I don't see how Natsuhi speaking in red is a trap. To me it is a gift telling us that Shannon knows the culprit or at least has a connection to them. I was looking at some earlier post and I like to share some of my thoughts on it: Spoiler for Maria & the Letter: About Maria getting the letter and who it is... people say that it was since she say it was Beatrice through out the first 3 games and changes the person to Kinzo, I've concluded that the individual has both the title of Kinzo & Beatrice. The red: No person would mistake Ushiromiya Kinzo by sight. is still valid as the rules of how the title of Kinzo has been proven to go onto the successor/head to the family. I can claim this: Spoiler for Maria, "Beatrice". & Kinzo: During the 2 year time period Maria spent with "Beatrice", she could have said that she is now Kinzo due to his will which he left to her. This leads me to my next statement: When Kinzo pasted away 2 year before the game stared "Beatrice" killed him by some method. He pasted away suddenly beyond everyone's expectations. There are several red truths that can prove this but don't see anything that can mess with my theory. Lastly I would like to say something I bet everyone knows/or is thinking: Spoiler for Kinzo's death: Chiyo, Genji, Nanjo, Kanon, and Shannon all know the culprit however they are all rapped up in the legend to believe its "her". By the time Kinzo had been killed by "Beatrice" he called the servants to his room and told them, without telling who killed him, to look after her for them. Oh I forgot to mention that Old Beatrice & Kinzo had a child 19 years ago and all of the above know about her existence. Forgive me for my crazy ideas. I hope you all Find it uses for or question it. See ya soon... __________________ http://www.youtube.com/user/MrBoynton27

2010-04-18, 03:49	Link #8281
Tyabann Homo Ludens Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Canada Age: 34	It's kind of implied that people can only use red if they know what red is, mind. It's not as though everything people say that's 100% true is automatically said in red text, right? Erika doesn't exist is aware of her status as Bernkastel's piece, so she can use red, but Natsuhi...

2010-04-18, 04:12	Link #8287
Renall BUY MY BOOK!!! Join Date: May 2009	Who says Natsuhi thought in red, or had any reason to know what red is? The fact that it is the only time red appears in conscious first-person narration is not particularly meaningful. The GM could apply red to practically any part of the storyline, the way I see it. It's clear that it was done for a particular motive, as Natsuhi herself didn't seem all that suspicious of Shannon in particular even after coming to that realization. Alternately, it's an instructive example of how human certainty can permit red without a witch's power. The case would be different for Meta characters. They're consciously aware of the red text and choose when to use it. Or, Author Theory: Red can be used whenever the author wants it to be used. The author generally restricts it to the Meta sequences because it would be jarring and confusing otherwise, but did it for Natsuhi for some particular reason.

2010-04-18, 04:40	Link #8291
Kylon99 Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space	By the way, this did bring up an interesting notion. Was it ever mentioned why Rule #5 is not included? I remember Battler asking why but I don't remember an explanation from Dlanor or anyone else. And if it is included, what would it be? I think Kaisos touched on this with the idea, "The butler did it." If it was merely the idea of someone being introduced late being the culprit then that would already fall under rule #1. So #5 wouldn't add anything new. But could it really be like, "No cliche culprits?" It's not like we have any cliche villans except for maybe Genji. If it is an analogue of Ronald's real Knox rules then wouldn't it be more fittingly as, "No obvious culprit must actually be the culprit." But... this rule is not included. Why? Don't tell me he can't stick to this rule and that's why he can't use it? Or he intends to bring this out later?

2010-04-18, 04:43	Link #8292
Laserworm Maelstorm-Fenrir Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: On Rokkenjima (I'm the 19th person) Age: 32	Knox's 5th: No Chinaman must figure in the story. This was how it was written in Knox's book.

2010-04-18, 05:13	Link #8293
Kylon99 Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space	Yes... I suspect there's a reason that it's omitted. Otherwise he would've just introduced it and it would have no consequence in the story...

2010-04-18, 05:37	Link #8297
Kylon99 Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space	Oh.. one more thing. The last line of the Epitaph indicates that 'Beatrice' will sleep for all eternity. That's been puzzling until we were talking about the 'heart of Beatrice' being rule X, being what we suspect is a bomb. So isn't it kinda obvious now that if you solve the Epitaph, you would disarm the bomb? We see Eva attempting to do this, perhaps, in a fantasy scene. This would imply that Kinzo really WOULD have blown up his own family. (That bastard!) And that the Beatrice faction (if it is them) wants the Epitaph solved not just to help them with the gold but to disarm the bomb. But... the bomb still goes off in EP3, indicating maybe that someone (the mastermind?) has tampered with it so that it goes off anyways... (Not sure what would've happened in EP5. I suspected that large numbers would've survived the end if it carried on...)