Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Discuss video games from Pong to Call of Duty, including Ace Attorney games.

Moderators: EN - Assistant Moderators, EN - Forum Moderators

What is the best part of Umineko?

MUSIC DUH I MEAN COME ON!!!
12
22%
The characters. I mean, wow, they're just so... developed.
3
5%
Magic. Magic is awesome.
3
5%
MYSTERY, HECK YEAH DENY THAT WITCH'S BUTT TO THE ENDS OF PURGATORY!
6
11%
Trolling. I know I may sound masochistic when I say this but... yeah. I like being trolled.
1
2%
Theorizing and trying to figure out what the heck is going on.
6
11%
I can't pick. Can I choose everything?
15
27%
Umineko sucks. It's cliche. You should watch Twilight.
9
16%
 
Total votes: 55

User avatar
eighthbit
Posts: 896
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 12:11 pm
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English
Location: There...

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by eighthbit »

Also, I think the reason 'Kishi never revealed the solution is because of a matter of principle. He keeps on stating that multiple truths should and can co-exist, so it makes more sense that he wouldn't blow all the truths away. Even everything that he says about the solution isn't clear, leaving a lot of room for interpretation on the subject.
'Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive.'
-Elbert Hubbard
User avatar
Ferdielance
Posts: 778
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 12:46 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by Ferdielance »

I was improvising poetry in the xat in response to requests, and someone suggested that I do a poem about Beatrice. Of course, I decided to pick the most masochistic option I could and did a rondeau, a form that can be reasonably compared to a cage of words. Here we go.
Spoiler : You Made Me So :
You Made Me So

You made me so to cage your love -
There are no words in red to prove
This private, hopeless, silent truth,
Inscrutable to prying sleuth
And all the tricks and stakes thereof.

So bend the bars and madly shove
Against the door and grope above
For secret exits! But we both
Know I've no mercy, pity, ruth --
  You made me so.

A peacock caged, a mourning dove,
A gold wing on a tattered glove,
A laugh, a smile, a serpent's tooth,
An ageless crone, a wasted youth,
An Endless Witch. And all for love,
  You made me so.
"A slow sort of country!" said the Queen. "Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!"
Mimi
Posts: 10382
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:35 am
Gender: Female
Spoken languages: English: the only language I can brag about

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by Mimi »

Ferdielance wrote:I was improvising poetry in the xat in response to requests, and someone suggested that I do a poem about Beatrice. Of course, I decided to pick the most masochistic option I could and did a rondeau, a form that can be reasonably compared to a cage of words. Here we go.
Spoiler : You Made Me So :
You Made Me So

You made me so to cage your love -
There are no words in red to prove
This private, hopeless, silent truth,
Inscrutable to prying sleuth
And all the tricks and stakes thereof.

So bend the bars and madly shove
Against the door and grope above
For secret exits! But we both
Know I've no mercy, pity, ruth --
  You made me so.

A peacock caged, a mourning dove,
A gold wing on a tattered glove,
A laugh, a smile, a serpent's tooth,
An ageless crone, a wasted youth,
An Endless Witch. And all for love,
  You made me so.
...I-I love it. :cry:
User avatar
NihilisticNinja
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 9:23 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, Latin

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by NihilisticNinja »

Mimika wrote:
Ferdielance wrote:I was improvising poetry in the xat in response to requests, and someone suggested that I do a poem about Beatrice. Of course, I decided to pick the most masochistic option I could and did a rondeau, a form that can be reasonably compared to a cage of words. Here we go.
Spoiler : You Made Me So :
You Made Me So

You made me so to cage your love -
There are no words in red to prove
This private, hopeless, silent truth,
Inscrutable to prying sleuth
And all the tricks and stakes thereof.

So bend the bars and madly shove
Against the door and grope above
For secret exits! But we both
Know I've no mercy, pity, ruth --
  You made me so.

A peacock caged, a mourning dove,
A gold wing on a tattered glove,
A laugh, a smile, a serpent's tooth,
An ageless crone, a wasted youth,
An Endless Witch. And all for love,
  You made me so.
...I-I love it. :cry:
Loved it when he made it in Xat, and love it now.
"With good friends by your side, anything is possible. If you really care for each other, it makes everyone stronger! Then you'll have the will to succeed! The world is filled with painful things, it's sad sometimes, and you won't be able to handle it by yourself. But just know: If there's someone that you love, you'll stay on the right path. And you won't ever give in! As long as you keep that person in your heart, you'll keep getting back up. Understand? That's why a Hero never loses!"
Image
Miki by Hershey's Chocolate Bars.
User avatar
kwando1313
Posts: 7684
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 6:33 pm
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, Français (un peu), Ancient Belkan
Location: Uminari City

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by kwando1313 »

Agreed. It was really really well made. :D
Avatar made by Rimuu~

Image

"The Knight of the Iron Hammer, Vita, and the Steel Count, Graf Eisen. There's nothing in this world we can't destroy."
User avatar
Sligneris
Posts: 1743
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:22 pm
Spoken languages: English, Polish

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by Sligneris »

I got a weird habit of reading spoilers before playing or watching something. I must stop.
Spoiler : :
All that Yasu stuff is craaaaaaaaazyyyyy.
Zohar the Shiny
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 6:17 pm
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by Zohar the Shiny »

Sligneris wrote:I got a weird habit of reading spoilers before playing or watching something. I must stop.
Spoiler : :
All that Yasu stuff is craaaaaaaaazyyyyy.
AA DD spoilers
Spoiler : :
Is that why Fullbright is your signature?
User avatar
Sligneris
Posts: 1743
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:22 pm
Spoken languages: English, Polish

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by Sligneris »

Spoiler : :
I see no relation, actually. xD I did watch DD playthroughs, at least.
User avatar
Bad Player
Posts: 7228
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:53 pm
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: American
Location: Under a bridge

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by Bad Player »

the ushiromiyas are literally the worst estate planners ever
User avatar
kwando1313
Posts: 7684
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 6:33 pm
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, Français (un peu), Ancient Belkan
Location: Uminari City

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by kwando1313 »

Yes, the Ushiromiyas, are in fact, idiots.
Avatar made by Rimuu~

Image

"The Knight of the Iron Hammer, Vita, and the Steel Count, Graf Eisen. There's nothing in this world we can't destroy."
User avatar
TheDoctor
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:13 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by TheDoctor »

Agreed. The massacre only happened because of a series of foolish decisions on almost everyone's part.
Spoiler : True Culprit spoilers :
Aside from that, in the manga, it's stated that Kinzo had left a will stating whoever found the gold got to be the next head. If Sayo didn't want to be the next head, why not just give Krauss a few hints on how to find the gold, or simply say "Hey Krauss-sama, I found the gold, and Kinzo-sama left a will saying whoever found the gold gets to be the next head. I don't want to be the head, so I'd like to give that position to you."

Seriously, there was literally no reason for her to cover up what happened that night, and if she didn't want people treating her differently on account of technically being the true head of the family, she could have, like I said, given Krauss (or heck, even Natsuhi) some hints on how to find the gold. That's one problem solved, at least.

Now, the problem with Sayo's "cursed" body... That's a little bit more complicated, but still possible to figure a way out of. If doctors are able to surgically alter someone's *ahem* equipment, to the point where females can technically have male bodies, and vice versa, it shouldn't be horribly difficult for them to help Sayo out of her predicament (and I looked up how long the procedure's been around for, and it's been around long enough to where it's not unthinkable she could have it done in 1986). Sure, she'd still be unable to get pregnant, but that's what adoption is for.

Note: I'm using female pronouns to refer to Sayo because the majority of her personas are female, and because I believe there's plenty of reason to suspect she is indeed female, albeit with a very messed up body due to the accident. I remember hearing/reading that Genji hid Sayo away because he didn't want history to repeat itself with Kinzo potentially believing her to be another reincarnation of his dead lover. I don't recall Kinzo ever having been portrayed as ambiguously gay/bi, so the idea that he might start making unwanted advances toward his son, thinking he's the reincarnation of his dead lover, is a bit of a stretch for me (not impossible, just a bit of a stretch).
Image Image Image
User avatar
NihilisticNinja
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 9:23 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English, Latin

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by NihilisticNinja »

Hey! Know I've been gone from AAO a long time, but got a treat for everyone. I decided, on a whim, to go through all of KNM's 8 hour Rosatrice theory and give my SOC reaction. Basically, very little of it makes sense and the "official explanation" as he refers to it, better explains all the gameboards given the information we have. But if you want a more detailed point-by-point response, here ya go!

NOTE 1: In case for some reason somebody who hasn't finished 1-7 of Umi is reading this, Rosatrice does not NECESSARILY have to be false for KNM to be wrong. My point would merely be that his arguments don't hold water, particularly when it comes to motive. His dissatisfaction with the "official explanation" could just be in regards to Rosa's supposed accomplices (or not having any), solutions to the locked rooms, etc.

NOTE 1: I will be separating each part by spoiler tag and through subparts, which will be noted in bold. I don't want to go through the video again so timestamps won't be noted, but if anybody reading is really curious I can edit in timestamps. I usually make his arguments relatively clear and (often at least) summarize his points, but I AM willing to do a bit of extra legwork if necessary.

NOTE 2: There will be numbers in brackets throughout my commentary. These are annotations that will be at the end of each part. Sometimes they'll be notes on problems in KNM's theory that I didn't notice at the time, or problems regarding things he didn't clarify, or even just aspects of my critique that don't fit into a smooth narrative deconstruction of his arguments. Other times they'll be corrections regarding things I got wrong/left vague, for your own edification. words in brackets are me adding in words when appropriate for the sake of clarity.

NOTE 3: This takes the form of a Skype convo because it was initially in a private skype conversation between me and kwand. (I wasn't going to do this without an audience!)

NOTE 4: I would like to note that at times- especially when we get to his solution to the locked 4 closed room but at points before then- I become snarky and perhaps disrespectful. I would like to make it clear I mean no ill will towards KNM as a person- he may be quite intelligent. Any ridicule is intended to be heaped upon the contortions his reasoning forces him to go through, and not him himself. (Except for one comment which I will apologize for when it comes up.)

NOTE 5: I also did some cutting of things that ended up being irrelevant or arguments I really don't need, or things that discussed later and I wanted to cut some repetitive cruft- since KNM tends to repeat himself a bit and his videos lack that much focus. But none of it would invalidate anything that isn't invalidated by what I DO present, and certainly none of it rebuts my arguments (Any cases where they are rebutted I will note and give alternate rebuttals).

That's a lot of notes. Anyway on with the show. This is probably obvious, but given that it discusses the real culprit of Umineko and essentially gives an explanation of most of its elements, nobody who hasn't played all the episodes, or doesn't mind spoilers for all of them, should read this. (Although I'm not sure the latter group would get too much out of it anyway.)
Spoiler : Part 1- On the Impossibility of the Official Explanation, and beginnings of positive arguments :
On KNM's Methodology, and the Impossibility of Shkanon, Part 1- His explanation of the Contradictory Reds at the end of Game 6, and the Logic Error

[5/2/2016 11:14:02 AM] Nozomi: So I just want this on record. I don't know for SURE he'll contradict himself later, but in case- KNM's definition of elegant (which ftr is a definition I'm mostly fine with) is:
1. Relies on as few assumptions as possible
2. Doesn't use accomplices without evidence
3. Doesn't attempt to work around red statements.

The only problem I have here is 3. He argues that the theory needs to be made to fit the red truth, rather than interpreting the red truth to fit the theory. Now in THEORY this sounds good, until you realize how subjective red truth is. If laughter can be put in red truth, or things like "I'll love you so much, and make you my toy until you turn to ashes" (2) which doesn't actually happen on the gameboard or even in the meta-world (as I recall) in red, at best you can argue that red is conditional (she would have if Bern didn't rescue Battler), which means that on some level you are going to HAVE to interpret reds and determine which are conditional and which aren't, and what the conditions precisely ARE.[1]

[5/2/2016 11:23:37 AM] Nozomi: Alright, I'd say his sum up of the evidence for shkanon is pretty accurate-
1. The logic error and its conclusion (Battler's red statement
2. Shannon and Kanon never appearing in front of Battler at the same time (while Battler has a reliable perspective
3. The bit where Shannon gets killed and Kanon disappears forever in Bern's game
4. The incomplete souls of Shannon and Kanon and Beatrice. (Which I'll presume includes the Love Duel.)

I think there's a bit more- we have the disappearing corpse in the 2nd game (Though I'm sure KNM will explain that once he gets to the murders), and all the emphasis in 2 and 3 on Shannon and Kanon's relationship to George and Jessica which seem pointless if in the end it isn't relevant to the solution. (Particularly Kanon-Jessica, since at least he uses George's feelings for Shannon as George's motive for murder. We'll get into why that's silly later.)[2]

[5/2/2016 11:24:16 AM] Nozomi: Also how Battler just happens to not find Kanon's corpse in Game 3[3] because it's "in the well", but again, maybe when we finally get to his explanations of the murders we can go over that
[5/2/2016 11:24:28 AM] Nozomi: Also Nanjo's murder but see above
[5/2/2016 11:25:09 AM | Edited 11:25:21 AM] Nozomi: So he's excluding a bit but most of it can be covered later so it's not a bad summation. I don't like 3 much because Bern's game is so different from the rest that it could just be an arbitrary rule, but the others are decent representation of the main non-circumstantial evidence

[5/2/2016 11:26:28 AM] Nozomi: I'm honestly not sure why KNM goes into Battler's red BEFORE going into the Logic Error but I guess it doesn't matter
[5/2/2016 11:33:11 AM] Nozomi: So, KNM argues that Shkanon is one person and therefore the red should reflect this. The problem with this is that Beato never defines the word "person". Neither does Lambda. So they can mean whatever Beato or Lambda perceive as a person. The only person who defines "Person" is Battler, and it is a completely conditional situation.
[5/2/2016 11:33:54 AM] Nozomi: "[Confirming definition. Can I accept 'three people' to mean to the number of bodies? You're saying that three bodies went in or out of the room, right?] Of course. Three people--in other words, three bodies--went in or out. Only you and Kanon entered, and only Battler left." So, IN THIS SPECIFIC CASE, 3 people means three bodies. He is answering Erika's question.
[5/2/2016 11:34:25 AM] Nozomi: There is no reason to assume that this applies even to the rest of his game, LET ALONE to games he isn't the GM of.
[5/2/2016 11:34:30 AM] Nozomi: And yet I know he will completely ignore this.

[5/2/2016 11:37:18 AM] Nozomi: So yup he uses Battler's definition. That's all well and good. But he says this is the definition of people in UMINEKO
[5/2/2016 11:37:25 AM] Nozomi: I don't see how he can claim this

[5/2/2016 11:39:17 AM | Edited 11:39:31 AM] Nozomi: I mean, even if we dismiss Bern's game that had totally different rules because it technically wasn't a gameboard... though KNM doesn't SEEM TO since he is willing to use it as evidence for shkanon so such a claim wouldn't be internally consistent[4], Lamba's gameboard introduced a character with superpowers that are equivalent to the red truth. So CLEARLY GMs can have gameboards that have different rules.

[5/2/2016 11:40:28 AM] Nozomi: And therefore GMs can have gameboards with different definitions, so [that] the definition of one GM is totally different from another GM.[5] So I can totally dismiss any example he uses outside of Battler's gameboard out of hand, even if I grant that Battler's definition wasn't [necessarily] conditional.

[5/2/2016 11:41:31 AM] Nozomi: Ah, apparently he addresses this objection in an addendum to part 1, so I guess we'll get there.
[5/2/2016 11:41:52 AM | Edited 11:42:00 AM] Nozomi: Actually I'll just go skip to it, since this entire argument kind of hinges on it
[5/2/2016 11:42:44 AM] Nozomi: Fortunately this one is only 9 minutes
[5/2/2016 11:44:51 AM] Nozomi: I mean this entire argument kinda revolves around Ryukishi not lying in red again but I'll just grant, again, for sake of argument, that aside from "dead" declarations we can rely on red, because honestly most of his theory crumbles if I don't.
[5/2/2016 11:46:23 AM] Nozomi: Oh, he's going to use the parlor scene to argue that we have to accept that shkanon have separate bodies. I mean some people who accept the shkanon explanation DO argue this, and that's not really a problem because it's Lambda's game and "lolwithoutlove" and "lolthingsBeatricewouldn'tdo"
[5/2/2016 11:47:16 AM] Nozomi: Beatrice probably wouldn't have allowed Battler to get superpowers either
[5/2/2016 11:47:24 AM] Nozomi: But Lambda was like "k it's cool"

[5/2/2016 11:48:28 AM] Nozomi: "From a meta-fiction perspective the fifth novel would have the same author as the third and fourth novel"
[5/2/2016 11:48:30 AM] Nozomi: ... Says who?
[5/2/2016 11:49:01 AM] Nozomi: A totally different GM, with totally different rules, with a new character who is only rumored to have been on the island... and it has to be by the same author?
[5/2/2016 11:49:53 AM] Nozomi: ftr he doesn't justify that assertion at all. Maybe he will when he gets to the metafiction portion of his analysis.[6]

His next claim is that people and human bodies is, even in Beato's games, used interchangeable in the red. His evidence being "Before now, I have proclaimed that no more than 18 humans exist on this island. I will lower that by one for Kinzo!! No more than 17 humans exist on this island!!
That excludes any 18th person." (Which also refers back to a "person" red)

I see a couple ways around this, though. "proclaimed" doesn't mean "proclaimed in red", and I honestly don't recall if Beato said that no more than 18 humans exist at any point. But let's say she didn't. Even if she didn't, she could very well be using Battler's definition of "person" and not her own here, since she's referring to Battler's hypothesis of a 19th (or 18th) party that committed the crimes.[7]

[5/2/2016 12:28:35 PM | Edited 12:31:09 PM] Nozomi: He then claims that claiming that "persons" could refer to roles and the like violates Knox's 8th. Let's take it for granted that Beato's games follow Knox. I don't recall that being guaranteed and even Dlanor and Will themselves admitted their rules aren't infallible and even may be outdated (in Will's case), but hey, they fought the goats in ep. 8. So let's just grant it. And KNM has a point that it's a pretty important plot point so it should be foreshadowed. How about the subplots that revolve around Shannon and ESPECAILLY Kanon considering themselves not human? And how this comes up over and over and over and over again?
[5/2/2016 12:29:38 PM | Edited 12:30:07 PM] Nozomi: Given that "persons" clearly includes Shannon and Kanon, Knox's 8th seems pretty intact to me

[5/2/2016 12:32:33 PM] Nozomi: He next argues, though this isn't really connected to his point but whatever, it's in the video so I'll respond, that there is no evidence for role erasure. To an extent I actually agree! Role erasure was a cheap trick that wasn't foreshadowed well.
[5/2/2016 12:32:38 PM] Nozomi: That doesn't make it wrong.
[5/2/2016 12:33:21 PM] Nozomi: (If I had to find foreshadowing, I could refer back to shkanon talking about how they aren't human and George and Jessica trying to make them human, and then them dying. Or Kanon's body's disappearance, but again, I'm sure he'll explain that.)

[5/2/2016 12:34:37 PM] Nozomi: So, because I want to be AS FAIR AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE
[5/2/2016 12:35:20 PM] Nozomi: I decided to check the comments and see what his responses to criticisms were. I'll skip over most of them, the only remotely compelling one is that he argues that reds in 1-4 must apply in 5 because Battler used them to prove he didn't have a reliable perspective.
[5/2/2016 12:37:27 PM] Nozomi: Except, two things
A. He isn't using those as proof, but as, in essence, potential evidence. The fact that Dlanor could actually respond should kinda indicate that.
B. Battler CAN'T use reds as proof and apply it to this game. That would, more or less, make it a red in this game, and that would require knowing the truth of the 5th game, something he doesn't know. There is NO EVIDENCE that if Lambda wanted, she couldn't have gone "Yeah, sorry, you could mistake somebody else as Kinzo in this game." The fact that she doesn't only proves that she sees no reason for the rules to be different not that they COULDN'T BE.
[5/2/2016 12:38:25 PM] Nozomi: (Especially if this was part of her plan all along, which is, though not a certainty, a pretty strong possibility)

[5/2/2016 12:40:17 PM] Nozomi: I mean, maybe there is some need for them to remain consistent (Though then you have Battler's game to deal with, which he never addresses in this regard, I'm 100% sure)[7], but that's something that you have to prove if you want to use it as a premise for your argument, if you want it to be convincing.

[5/2/2016 12:50:54 PM] Nozomi: So welp, looks like we're back where we started after all. [At this point I return to his original video.]

[5/2/2016 12:52:04 PM] Nozomi: So looks like he tries to use Beato reds to prove his argument, I have now explained in detail why that doesn't work, so let's move on.
[5/2/2016 12:59:47 PM] Nozomi: He next argues that because you have the Yasu and Kanon and Shannon roles and maybe even the Beatrice role, the logic error makes no sense if shkanon is true. But here he stumbles over himself. If he wants to argue that Battler's red isn't conditional, then it must apply to his entire game, at a minimum. Thus people=human bodies for the entirety of Episode 6. Therefore when Battler says that "There are only 17 people" he is saying "There are only 17 human bodies [even if you join us]". So the fact that Yasu might have several roles doesn't matter, because she has one human body.

[5/2/2016 1:05:39 PM] Nozomi: He argues that this implies that Yasu herself is not a person. But, what reason is there to think Yasu IS a person on the gameboard?
[5/2/2016 1:05:56 PM] Nozomi: She is a person in REALITY, but she doesn't appear in the gameboard once, only Shannon and Kanon do
[5/2/2016 1:08:59 PM] Nozomi: The only time Yasu would necessarily have to be alive is in episode 1 if you assume both that the Shannon personality actually died in the shed, something never confirmed, and the Kanon personality died in the boiler room, something never confirmed.[8]
[5/2/2016 1:09:22 PM] Nozomi: And even then you could argue that her Beatrice personality did the final twilights, and Beato is a witch and thus didn't count as a person
[5/2/2016 1:09:29 PM] Nozomi: (Personality=role obv)

[5/2/2016 1:13:06 PM] Nozomi: But let's say that Yasu does exist. There isn't really anything that stops her from not counting as a person. After all, her sense of self is essentially divided between the roles she plays as Shannon and Kanon and Beato. By herself she has no real singular personality, singular essence. Again, Beato never defines what person means, so who can say?

[5/2/2016 1:15:53 PM | Edited 1:16:12 PM] Nozomi: He tries to argue this is ridiculous because it means that if Yasu were the only person alive on the island it could be said in red "there are no people on the island". If we assume that the red is the subjective truth of the gamemaster, or merely reflecting the rules set up by the gameboard, and not something that needs to be objectively true by every perspective at all times, there's nothing wrong with that.. Given the potential justification for not calling Yasu a person that I specified, there's nothing contradictory about it. Yes, it sounds silly, but it sounding silly doesn't really make it wrong.

[5/2/2016 1:18:27 PM] Nozomi: Honestly, if anything, he's kind of guilty of begging the question here. He acts like such a proposal would be self-contradictory.. But it is only self-contradictory IF persons=human bodies, which is the thing he is aiming to prove.

[5/2/2016 1:19:45 PM] Nozomi: "even the designer of a game needs to play by his own rules"
And the fact that KNM has this as a premise is why his entire hypothesis fails by definition

[5/2/2016 1:19:53 PM] Nozomi: There is nothing FORCING Ryukishi to play by his own rules.

[5/2/2016 1:20:00 PM] Nozomi: Nobody with a gun to his head.

[5/2/2016 1:20:13 PM] Nozomi: He plays by his own rules at our grace, and then in the end he basically chose not to.

[5/2/2016 1:23:56 PM] Nozomi: "I think you can all agree with me that [it's unlikely] the author simply made a mistake" You don't have to say he made a mistake, per se. I would say the reds could be perfectly intentional. He could have simply chosen to cheat because as I said, there is no outside party forcing him to not do so. Mystery writers do it plenty of times.

But... why couldn't he have just screwed up? What makes the narrative "Ryukishi from the start planned on doing shkanon [maybe even had Yasu thought up, who can say]. People start to catch on really quick. He realizes he needs to fool them, so he creates contradictory reds." There's nothing about this that is against human nature, illogical, or self-contradictory. So it is a distinct possibility.

[NN NOTE: I've complained about KNM's logic error solution in the past, so I didn't feel like going over what I feel is its crippling problem when I was discussing the issue with kwand, but for sake of clarity I should explain it here. Basically, in KNM's version, Erika can't actually seal all the windows with duct tape instantly. After all, that was a fantasy scene that obviously didn't happen. She would have had to go and seal them by hand, which would take time. In that time, Kanon realizes what is going on, slips from the room he was supposed "sealed in" prior to Erika sealing it, and goes to warn Battler. He then ends up going into the closet and getting killed by being shot by Erika. My main problem, which I supplement in my SOC breakdown- is that if the sealings weren't at least PERCEIVED to be instantaneous by Erika, she would have to be a total moron to not even consider this possibility. And the implications narratively for her perceiving it as instantaneous but it not actually being so I go into below.]

[5/2/2016 1:27:07 PM | Edited 1:27:37 PM] Nozomi: Honestly, I can kind of skip the rest of this section of the video because I already explained what's wrong with his logic error solution and explained one problem with his contradictory red hypothesis, but I'll see if there's anything I have to add.

[5/2/2016 1:29:59 PM | Edited 1:39:06 PM] Nozomi: This is kind of half an additional problem because it's just an additional reason to support the previous problem I noted- Erika asks for a location check immediately before sealing the rooms. If the room sealing wasn't supposed to be instantaneous, what on Earth is the point of the location check? SURELY Erika would realize that if time passes, people could leave the room for whatever reason.

[5/2/2016 1:32:57 PM] Nozomi: Therefore, at a minimum, Erika is of the UNDERSTANDING that the rooms were sealed instantaneously. And given that Battler is not a total moron in 6, he would realize that she thinks this and, if this was not true, point it out. If you would argue that he didn't, he is either pretty incompetent at picking up implications, which I would say isn't really characteristic of his Chiru self, or he maliciously kept this information from her. And if you accept that Battler planned for the Logic Error in order to rescue Beatrice as I do, we go from "Battler outsmarts Erika through his knowledge of the truth" to "Battler out-tricks Erika using lame wordplay and keeping knowledge from her". Which basically makes him a dick and the ending far less satisfying.
[5/2/2016 1:33:57 PM] Nozomi: You could argue that he COULDN'T point this out because he needs for Kanon to escape from the room for his plan to work, but then you're assuming KNM's logic error solution, and begging the question.
[5/2/2016 1:37:49 PM | Edited 1:38:07 PM] Nozomi: (Ok, he basically STILL out-tricks Erika using lame wordplay, but that's Ryukishi's fault, not his)

[5/2/2016 1:42:04 PM] Nozomi: He tries to create this realistic narrative for how things could have
worked... but there's simply no reason to. The clear idea here is that Erika essentially sets up parameters. The idea of Erika's red is less "I sealed things so that nobody could escape" though that is what would have had to have occurred narratively, but "These rooms are now sealed."
[5/2/2016 1:42:31 PM | Edited 1:42:42 PM] Nozomi: She is adding an additional condition to the narrative that Battler needs to fulfill. That's the whole nature of a Logic Error- your narrative doesn't fulfill its own pre-existing conditions
[5/2/2016 1:43:54 PM] Nozomi: Erika is an unreliable narrator so who knows how she did what she did, if we even need to come up with a reason. Maybe in reality there were no actual seals and it was just that nobody decided to leave, and they were only "seals" in a meta/fantasy sense.

[5/2/2016 1:46:08 PM] Nozomi: Meta and the gameboard get mashed together at around this point anyway. Why does Battler hide in the bathroom? Why would Natsuhi come to rescue him, as he suggests? Why does Erika kill everyone? Everything these characters do is meta-based.
[5/2/2016 1:46:49 PM] Nozomi: The only reason KNM gives for Erika killing everyone is "She's insane", while given that there's plenty of sign of Meta-Erika and Piece-Erika being linked in a way Meta and Piece Battler were not[10], Erika having meta-motives for what she did is far more satisfying.

[5/2/2016 1:59:57 PM] Nozomi: Ok, now let's talk about his motivation for Kanon being in the closet.
Since he rejects meta-motives (after all he picks apart why it wouldn't be "logical" for role death to occur the way it did in the Logic Error), he must have some sound logical reason why Kanon doesn't try to get the heck out of dodge after he explains the situation to Battler, right?
[5/2/2016 2:00:09 PM] Nozomi: So instead
[5/2/2016 2:00:17 PM] Nozomi: Kanon goes into the closet and gets shot by Erika
[5/2/2016 2:02:21 PM] Nozomi: Though actually first- why would Erika shoot through the door without opening it?
[5/2/2016 2:02:27 PM] Nozomi: I mean it just seems pointless and silly
[5/2/2016 2:02:34 PM] Nozomi: There's always a chance you'll miss
[5/2/2016 2:03:07 PM] Nozomi: Also APPARENTLY the scene where Erika shoots in the meta-world IS reflective of the gameboard
[5/2/2016 2:03:15 PM] Nozomi: But the instant sealing in the fantasy scene is NOT
[5/2/2016 2:03:16 PM] Nozomi: Ok
[5/2/2016 2:05:36 PM] Nozomi: Oh he's not going to explain why Kanon did that for now and move onto the contradictory reds at the end of 6. I'll complain about his motive later I guess.[11]

[5/2/2016 2:14:44 PM] Nozomi: Hey
[5/2/2016 2:14:55 PM] Nozomi: Remember when KNM used Knox's 8th?
[5/2/2016 2:15:35 PM] Nozomi: Because now he's claiming that Erika actually washed up on the island, when there is absolutely no evidence to support that
[5/2/2016 2:16:37 PM] Nozomi: Like, if you take "The forgery writer was right and Erika washed up on Rokkenjima" and "The forgery writer was wrong and Erika died at sea/washed up somewhere else" there is no evidence to support or contradict either claim. So the only real reason to take a stance either way is because you have a pet theory you want to support.[12]

[5/2/2016 8:52:18 PM] Nozomi: So, to recap, [since I took a break at this point] KNM argues that the contradictory reds are not the result of shkanon, but instead the result of Battler denying that Erika could have ever interacted with anyone on Rokkenjima Prime, because she died shortly after reaching the island. Because this is Game 6, which is a counterfactual where Erika DID live and DID interact, she can say she is the 18th person in red. However Battler, being the GM and the Endless Sorcerer (Which KNM seems to think means he knows what happens on R-Prime[13]), is able to say in red that even if she did join, there would only be 17 people, because she was dead before she could interact with anybody.
[5/2/2016 8:53:33 PM] Nozomi: The glaring issue here, is that a counterfactual is something that is objectively not the case. So if the red truth is in some way an objective truth, you shouldn't be able to say counterfactuals. By that logic, you could say pretty much ANYTHING in red.

[5/2/2016 8:54:23 PM] Nozomi: Now, let's say that red IS subjective to a small degree and Erika was able to say it in red because she's on a gameboard where she exists. Fair enough. But in that case Battler shouldn't be able to deny her on red in that SAME GAMEBOARD, Endless Sorcerer or not
[5/2/2016 8:55:18 PM] Nozomi: Logically, Erika's red HAS to apply to that gameboard for KNM's theory to work, but Battler's doesn't. But then why was it in red? Why not, say, gold?
[5/2/2016 8:58:06 PM] Nozomi: Now, KNM asks why Erika's red statement was an introduction, and that's a good question. The idea is that her very existence is being denied. In essence, she was always considered by those that didn't know the truth "the 18th person on Rokkenjima". That was who she was. It's her title. So she can say it in red because, she is in essence, saying "I'm called (or my purpose is to be) the visitor, the 18th human on Rokkenjima!" And then Battler says "No, that's impossible, because there are only 17 people [even if you join us]." And poof! There goes Erika, because who she was is no more.

On KNM's Methodology, and the Impossibility of Shkanon, Part 2- His Rebuttal of the rest of the "Shkanon" arguments

[5/2/2016 9:03:26 PM | Edited 9:04:49 PM] Nozomi: So his main argument here is that as an argument from silence it can't be used as positive evidence. And I understand where he's coming from, but I don't agree. Sometimes silence screams. When you have two similar characters that are conspicuously never in front of Battler at the same time only when his perspective is objective, that's pretty suggestive. Not to mention the time that Kyrie tells Battler where everybody's bodies are, and Battler goes to look for Kanon's body and finds its supposed location inaccessible, despite the fact that as I recall EVERY SINGLE OTHER BODY WAS EXACTLY WHERE SHE SAID IT WOULD BE.
[5/2/2016 9:04:19 PM] Nozomi: He then goes back to them appearing in front of Erika and I dealt with that so I won't go over it again.
[5/2/2016 9:05:53 PM] Nozomi: He then addresses the two corpse disappearances of Kanon, first by saying that it's another argument from silence, which it is, but as the song goes "All and all it's just another brick in the wall"
[5/2/2016 9:07:09 PM] Nozomi: He then summarizes what his explanation for the two body disappearances is- Kanon is in the well in the fourth game, and it IS just a total coincidence that it is in an inaccessible location. How wacky! And in the second game it was hidden so that he could appear as a "demon" later. I guess I can deal with that when it becomes more important.

[5/2/2016 9:13:28 PM] Nozomi: And now we go over the problems with Shkanon, as we see it in all the forgeries, existing in R-Prime. Now these are reasonable objections given the premise that some or all of these elements aren't a forgery construct, but I think that's a problematic assumption. Let's break this down.

1. Jessica doesn't notice despite being in love with Kanon and best friends with Shannon. Was she in love with Kanon? I'm not sure we can say that with any confidence. The relationship really clearly evolves as the series goes on. In Ep. 1 she's certainly really sad, but there's no real signs that she loves her. In ep. 2 there was a couple lines but nothing really definitive. It's only when we get to the forgeries that we start seeing a Kanon-Jessica relationship really develop, particularly on Jessica's end. It's likely that Kanon DID feel something for Jessica, but even assuming the message bottles reflect reality in terms of characterization, there isn't much sign that Jessica really paid much attention to him at all. And if she wasn't paying too much attention to him, it's not too hard she wouldn't notice if he disguised his voice and changed mannerisms, given that the two have quite different body types.

I won't detail my explanation for why it's not a problem if George doesn't notice, because as KNM notes later on in this series, George comes to the island outside family conferences, a fact I'd forgotten somehow. But it doesn't really matter, because even if we grant that shkanon is representative of Prime, if George just happens to be off the island whenever Kanon is on the island, and Kanon doesn't have shifts when George is on the island (since it's noted Fukuin servants tend to live off the island outside of shifts) there's no reason for him to notice. Heck, even if he is on the island, as long as he's never supposed to be in an area where Kanon is, and George for some reason CONFIRMS that Kanon was supposed to be in that location (I have no clue why he would care about Kanon in the slightest, but whatever.), there is not even a problem to solve, or for him to look stupid because of.

[5/2/2016 9:20:31 PM] Nozomi: - Natsuhi and Krauss didn't notice. Finally, a legitimate problem that I don't have a great workaround except to say that I just don't believe that if there was a "Real" Rokkenjima, Kanon was an actual servant. If I were to try, I could argue that Genji and Kumasawa are in charge of scheduling, and put up some forged documents said "Hey here is a new servant" and Krauss and Natsuhi just never really paid much attention to the whole deal. It's not an explanation I'm that satisfied with though.
[5/2/2016 9:22:59 PM] Nozomi: - The servants didn't notice. I'm not sure what evidence we have that they didn't? I mean the only time we SEE other servants is in Clair's recollections from Yasu's perspective, and that's HARDLY impartial, reliable narration. It's quite probable that they did notice, but either were just like "That freak Yasu being weird again" and got used to it or even if they complained, they'd be complaining to Genji and Kumasawa whose response would be "suck it up. btw Krauss and Natsuhi really can't do anything about this so don't bother telling them." It's not like it's anything they could get Yasu fired over anyway. Cosplaying isn't really a serious offense, you know?
[5/2/2016 9:23:33 PM | Edited 9:23:40 PM] Nozomi: (Besides BP's told me Japanese employer laws are CRAZY worker friendly, but your typical servants wouldn't know that)

[5/2/2016 9:26:43 PM] Nozomi: Finally he argues that Gohda worked there for two years and didn't notice. Again with shifts I'm not sure how long two years really is, honestly. But even so, he's the chef. He's primarily going to be focused on the cooking and getting help every once in a while. He's never portrayed as particularly attentive, and since the mansion does seem to have a decent amount of servants it's quite possible he just didn't spend enough time in lengthy contact with them for it to even be reasonable for him to come to the conclusion that they are the same person. We have to assume that it's somewhat reasonable for short periods, given that Piece-Battler never did and Meta-Battler didn't figure it out until episode 5. And let's say he did. Why would he care? He has no grudge against Yasu and thus no reason to complain about it. It'd just be a weird quirk to him.
[5/2/2016 9:27:29 PM | Edited 9:27:40 PM] Nozomi: And he'd assume that Natsuhi and Krauss knew and thought it was ok, so even less reason to say anything.

[5/2/2016 9:35:16 PM] Nozomi: Next he goes onto the statement in Bern's game and I honestly agree that this isn't very good evidence of much of anything. I find it kind of amusing that he is willing to argue that BERN'S reds are specific to fit his theory but it IS a totally different game and isn't even a gameboard so much as a riddle, so I honestly don't have any major objections here.
[5/2/2016 9:36:02 PM] Nozomi: Oh, I'm sorry.
[5/2/2016 9:36:05 PM] Nozomi: I do have an objection.
[5/2/2016 9:36:49 PM] Nozomi: He argues that the entire "When Shannon dies Kanon goes missing forever" statement isn't evidence because it isn't what the red says. The issue is that the red is in the context OF THAT STATEMENT. It elaborates on its significance and confirms its truth.
[5/2/2016 9:37:50 PM | Edited 9:38:01 PM] Nozomi: No it isn't STRICTLY said in red, but that's like saying that the times Battler says "Acknowledged." In isolation are completely meaningless because the questions/points of clarification Erika asks are in white text.
[5/2/2016 9:39:16 PM] Nozomi: It's not the exact same relationship but it's pretty close. Man KNM, even when I agree with you you manage to say things for me to complain about.

Part 3- Who are Lion and Yasu?

[There'll be a good chunk of cutting here because his Yasu explanation is REALLY CONFUSING and he doesn't explain it that clearly, so I wasn't really able to get what he was talking about for a while. In essence, in KNM's hypothesis, Yasu is a fictional creation that exists in Rosa's head, who Shannon acts as an "anchor" for (I still have no idea what exactly that means but let's just go with it. This creation was made in response to guilt and shame over the Kuwadorian-Beatrice's "death", much like Yasu pushed all her love for Battler onto her Beatrice persona.]

[5/2/2016 9:44:51 PM] Nozomi: ... I don't take Ep. 7 in a straightforward way at all [RE: KNM claiming that "believers in the official explanation" take Ep. 7 straightforwardly and at face value]
[5/2/2016 9:45:58 PM] Nozomi: ... You think that somebody could understand shkanontrice with just the 7th novel
[5/2/2016 9:46:07 PM] Nozomi: Are you kidding me
[5/2/2016 9:46:22 PM] Nozomi: There is SO MUCH CONTEXT that needs to be established

[5/2/2016 9:47:44 PM] Nozomi: Anyway, he argues that for an "obscured" message, it was pretty obvious, citing Bern's statement that people who wouldn't understand, wouldn't find the answers.
[5/2/2016 9:50:25 PM] Nozomi: "Clair's" portion of the novel is REALLY CLEARLY not from a reliable perspective. And in many ways it is hard to tell exactly what is going on at points, or construct a complete timeline. A good deal of it is in some ways symbolic or metaphoric, and you do need shkanon glasses on to interpret some parts coherently. (We'll see if KNM can, but to be honest I doubt it). And then there's the strange parts like when fantasy/meta characters spring into existence in a seemingly-normal scene. In many ways it IS obscured. It isn't a straight telling of how Yasu became shkanon became Beatrice, despite how KNM tries to paint it as such.
[5/2/2016 9:51:07 PM] Nozomi: Now is it obvious to a lot of people what Ryukishi was implying? Yes. But that's because shkanon was obvious to a lot of people to begin with
[5/2/2016 9:51:34 PM] Nozomi: Like after the logic error most of the fanbase caught on to shkanon I think, if not before.
[5/2/2016 9:56:03 PM] Nozomi: And KNM argues that Clair was used to obscure Beatrice's identity. No. It was used to obscure what Yasu looks like. Because what Yasu looks like was meant to be a mystery because her struggle with her self-identity and her own appearance was a key aspect of her emotional traumas. It's the same reason Lion was androgynous and we never learned their gender. (The manga proceeded to ruin this but lolmanga)
[5/2/2016 9:59:31 PM] Nozomi: He notes that we don't see what Yasu looks like, yet again missing that is PART OF THE POINT

[5/2/2016 10:03:03 PM] Nozomi: KNM notes that Ep. 7 is entirely meta, but given that unlike him I have no problem with gleaning information from Meta I don't really see this as a valid objection to anything.

[5/2/2016 10:10:38 PM] Nozomi: "We should keep in mind that it is also a theme that you should be able to figure out the motive without a confession from the culprit."
Really? That seems kinda odd, given how gun-ho Will was in 7 about understanding people's hearts, and how understanding Beato's heart was a pretty big part of 6 at a minimum, and a decent chunk of 5. What's your evidence for this theme?

"Erika says this is the sign of a weak mystery novel."

Ok, an antagonistic figure that we are very very clearly supposed to dislike says something about it not being good. Not compelling evidence by itself, but if it's a THEME there must be several more examples. What else ya got?
[5/2/2016 10:10:57 PM] Nozomi: *Crickets*

[5/2/2016 10:13:39 PM] Nozomi: So he claims that there aren't many clues for Shannon's motive prior to 7 which isn't TOTALLY wrong, I mean there could have been more, but there WAS a decent emphasis on Battler's sin and that if he hadn't come the murders wouldn't have happened.
[5/2/2016 10:14:34 PM] Nozomi: He also dismisses it because it supports shkanon but given that he failed to disprove shkanon he's trying to build based on a non-existent foundation

[5/2/2016 10:16:40 PM] Nozomi: Ok so Yasu is NOT the baby that fell off the cliff, did NOT work as a servant, and is NOT a possible person. Also Lion's world couldn't exist. Alright time to prove all this let's go
[5/2/2016 10:18:51 PM] Nozomi: Ok, so Yasu doesn't exist outside the culprit (Rosa)'s head.
[5/2/2016 10:19:33 PM] Nozomi: And is symbolic of the baby who fell off the cliff
[5/2/2016 10:19:59 PM] Nozomi: And then Rosa used Shannon to connect Yasu to the real world
[5/2/2016 10:20:03 PM] Nozomi: But why does Rosa care about Shannon?
[5/2/2016 10:20:17 PM] Nozomi: Why choose Shannon of all people?
[5/2/2016 10:20:38 PM] Nozomi: And... wait.
[5/2/2016 10:20:44 PM] Nozomi: The motive for the Rokkenjima murders
[5/2/2016 10:20:51 PM] Nozomi: Is Battler's sin against Shannon
[5/2/2016 10:20:52 PM] Nozomi: But
[5/2/2016 10:20:53 PM] Nozomi: You
[5/2/2016 10:20:58 PM] Nozomi: Were just complaining
[5/2/2016 10:21:03 PM] Nozomi: About how Shannon's motive lacked foreshadowing
[5/2/2016 10:21:09 PM] Nozomi: And Shannon's motive
[5/2/2016 10:21:12 PM] Nozomi: IS Battler's sin against SHannon
[5/2/2016 10:21:52 PM] Nozomi: How on EARTH are you going to claim that somebody killing BY ASSOCIATION for an event was more foreshadowed than the event itself?
[5/2/2016 10:26:21 PM] Nozomi: Ok, the person who created Yasu (given that you already named the culprit I'm not sure why you're not just saying Rosa unless you think being wordy makes you look smarter) CARRIES Shannon's love for Battler. Which is romantic. However Rosa is NOT in romantic love with Battler. Not sure how that could work logically but alright, let's go with it.
[5/2/2016 10:26:36 PM] Nozomi: And... then... after all that... Rosa betrays Shannon?
[5/2/2016 10:26:37 PM] Nozomi: What?
[5/2/2016 10:26:50 PM] Nozomi: This... wow I didn't think this could get this silly this quickly
[5/2/2016 10:28:00 PM | Edited 10:28:28 PM] Nozomi: Ok so Yasu is a personification of guilt regarding the death of the Kuadorian Beatrice. I mean... I don't recall seeing much guilt when it comes to Yasu, more shame and anger and loneliness. But maybe you can convince me.

[5/2/2016 10:35:30 PM] Nozomi: Umm no KNM A LOT IS MISSING RIGHT NOW
[5/2/2016 10:35:32 PM] Nozomi: LIKE A LOT
[5/2/2016 10:35:50 PM] Nozomi: But ok why Yasu isn't Lion. Fire away.
[5/2/2016 10:44:55 PM] Nozomi: 1. KNM argues that I can't argue that Yasu isn't the same person as Lion in a different timeline. Good thing I don't. I argue that they're essentially Yasu's idealization of what her life could be like. Her most unachievable dream.

1a. Of course there's, as usual, a problem with his reasoning. He notes that Lion is an extra person on the island with all the other characters present, including Shannon and Kanon. The point KNM is missing is that this is an agglomeration of worlds, both of Lion's idealized world and a more "realistic" Rokkenjima. Kinzo is alive or dead when it is convenient for him to be so. Kanon (I believe) freaks out when asked to bring Shannon out, indicating that shkanon is real, which would mean that Shannon and Kanon are, on some level, the selves that we know of from "realer" Rokkenjimas. (Wonder if he'll deal with that?). You're making the error of assuming that this is all one timeline. Bern rammed things together so WIll could get all the information he needs to fill in all the holes he has left in the story.
[5/2/2016 10:48:59 PM] Nozomi: As for Lion's world being "magical" on the basis of fragments being a magical explanation, Will being a magical character, and Kinzo still being alive- you're confusing magical for meta. Will is a meta character. "Fragments" are a meta explanation for all the theories and stories regarding the rokkenjima incident. Kinzo being alive doesn't make something "magical". It means it differs from the realities that we have perceived. Yes, Kinzo has solely appeared in unreliable and fantasy scenes up to this point, but that's because we've been in realities where he is dead. This is a reality where he is not. Without more evidence, that isn't enough to call him "magical".
[5/2/2016 10:53:32 PM | Edited 10:54:00 PM] Nozomi: Though I'm curious to see how he explains Bern's bizarre math about how many fragments it took to find Lion, if Lion's world is impossible. Let's just look at it from a character standpoint- wouldn't it be even more devastating for Lion if Bern said that Lion's world was impossible, instead of incredibly infinitesimally unlikely? Wouldn't it crush Lion to know that they are nothing more than a figment of somebody's imagination? And wasn't that Bern's entire purpose at that moment? So why didn't she? Oh, because Ryukishi is lying to us. So basically he makes his characters act in ways they wouldn't naturally because he wants to lie to his audience for no reason. What good writing.

[5/2/2016 11:17:17 PM] Nozomi: NO I DON'T NEED TO LOOK AT LION'S WORLD FROM A MAGICAL CONTEXT. I NEED TO LOOK AT IT FROM A META CONTEXT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT IS. META. THE MAGICAL WORLD AND META WORLD ARE INTERLINKED BUT ARE SEPARATE CONCEPTS.
[5/2/2016 11:19:50 PM] Nozomi: Lion's world CAN be taken literally in the sense of "This is literally what the idealized world of Yasu would look like, setting all the Theatergoing Authority stuff and Bern's meddling aside". That part isn't a metaphor or allegory, more or less.
[5/2/2016 11:20:15 PM] Nozomi: But ok, the connection between Yasu and Lion is non-literal. What is it then.
[5/2/2016 11:21:35 PM] Nozomi: So
[5/2/2016 11:22:41 PM] Nozomi: The baby that fell off a cliff lived on symbolically in a non-physical being that was the embodiment of guilt regarding Rosa's murder of the Kuwadorian Beatrice.
[5/2/2016 11:22:56 PM] Nozomi: We have VERY different definitions of "elegant"
[5/2/2016 11:24:17 PM | Edited 11:24:47 PM] Nozomi: Ok so the baby that fell down the cliff WAS the child of the Kuwadorian Beatrice. And Lion symbolizes what would happen if that child had lived. Sure, that's fine.
[5/2/2016 11:25:46 PM] Nozomi: [Regarding Genji and Nanjo's testimony about recovering the baby in Ep. 7] Well, I mean, sure, if you remove the testimony that directly contradicts your hypothesis, your hypothesis will tend to make more sense.
[5/2/2016 11:27:33 PM] Nozomi: Ok we went over the whole "Family is stupid" argument earlier but it's even weaker if you push for Yashannon instead of shkanon. So yeah, that's not going to fly for Yasu being a fictional character. Strike 1.

[5/3/2016 12:10:37 AM] Nozomi: KNM raises the point that Yasu basically vanishes when she becomes Beatrice and is never seen in the story prior to Ep. 7. And this is... in some ways true? We DO see her through Kanon and Shannon and Beatrice. Because that is who Yasu is. She is the composite of these three entities, the original person behind them that gave them life. And she does kind of vanish when she becomes Beatrice because she has, as the story indicates, essentially split herself into those three personas. Three selves. Now I don't believe in the DID nonsense as you know, but essentially who she IS are divided into the three roles she play acts.
[5/3/2016 12:11:09 AM] Nozomi: I would say that Yasu still exists as the main entity, the main controller, but she is represented through those three beings in the gameboards, at least.

[5/3/2016 12:13:59 AM] Nozomi: "Are there any good reasons to believe Yasu is real in the first place?"

Let's set aside Nanjo and Genji's testimony for now since you claim you're getting to that.

1. The love duel- which I know you claim you'll explain
2. Everything you claim to have refuted but really haven't at all
3. The fact that Lion is in any way relevant to solving the gameboards, since you yourself admit that they are the baby that fell off the cliff
4. Kanon having a freakout when asked to bring Shannon out and WIll's reaction

And that's off the top of my head.
[5/3/2016 12:16:26 AM] Nozomi: "After all, why should I shoulder all the burden of proof?"
I would say "The author, who finished his story and provided a potential solution to the gameboards at a minimum, engaged in a massive deception and continues to engage in a massive deception regarding the very nature of their story" is a pretty extraordinary claim
[5/3/2016 12:16:35 AM] Nozomi: And as the maxim goes: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
[5/3/2016 12:17:33 AM] Nozomi: Good try on shifting the burden of proof though. I knew begging the question wasn't the only logical fallacy you could bring out of your toolkit

[5/3/2016 12:24:02 AM | Edited 12:24:15 AM] Nozomi: "[Regarding the scene where GEnji and Nanjo talk about saving Yasu] In a scene where neither Genji or Nanjo are actually present"
[5/3/2016 12:24:20 AM] Nozomi: Wow you didn't get what was going on in 7 AT ALL did you
[5/3/2016 12:24:33 AM] Nozomi: Like I've been trying to be polite here but this is getting ridiculous.
[5/3/2016 12:25:09 AM] Nozomi: Genji and Nanjo WERE present, because it was a meta scene in which Bern summoned representatives from a Rokkenjima where Yasu existed to testify
[5/3/2016 12:25:24 AM] Nozomi: Did he not notice how Kinzo kept being alive and dead?
[5/3/2016 12:25:45 AM] Nozomi: Did he somehow miss that?
[5/3/2016 12:27:12 AM] Nozomi: btw I think it's worth noting that this entire time he's discussed 7 and hasn't even touched upon the moment right at the beginning when Will asks Kanon to bring Shannon out and he basically kind of short-circuits
[5/3/2016 12:27:19 AM] Nozomi: And then Will is like "nm I get it"

[5/3/2016 12:30:56 AM | Edited 12:31:23 AM] Nozomi: Ok, back to being polite. It's a good point that it is ridiculously unlikely that the baby would survive the fall. That said, greater contrivances have happened in Ryukishi stories, and there is a good of emphasis of taking a colossal amount of low-chance risk to create a miracle. There's also the backdoor option of Yasu not ACTUALLY BEING the baby. I mean given how we don't really know Genji's motive for doing anything in these stories and he's basically a robot, making a replacement child after this one dies is totally possible

[5/3/2016 12:35:28 AM] Nozomi: Essentially, the rest of his argument is "The fact that they wouldn't have severe injuries if they DID survive is ridiculously improbable" in which case I refer back to my previous response. Though I will add that the very concept of suspension of disbelief is allowing yourself to accept contrived events for the sake of the existence of the story.

Part 4- Rosa and Yasu


[5/3/2016 12:37:14 AM] Nozomi: Ok, so I skipped the rest of that scene because he takes 2 minutes to explain what should take 1. Anyway, understanding the heart of Rosa. Sure, I can try to do that.
[5/3/2016 12:38:33 AM] Nozomi: Anyway, yeah, she thinks she's a murderer even though it's not really her fault. That sucks, I agree she hasn't had a fun life.
[5/3/2016 12:39:57 AM] Nozomi: Wait. So why are we taking these scenes with Rosa [In ep. 7] seriously? Didn't you cast shade on the Genji-Nanjo Ep. 7 testimony because it wasn't "Really" them?
[5/3/2016 12:40:03 AM] Nozomi: Yet this testimony from Rosa is totally legit?
[5/3/2016 12:40:08 AM] Nozomi: How are you making a distinction?
[5/3/2016 12:40:48 AM] Nozomi: (Yes I know he had further arguments but that was his initial point
[5/3/2016 12:41:52 AM] Nozomi: I'll concede that Rosa drifting away from any relationship with Kinzo she has is pretty logical, but I would also note that there is no textual evidence to back that up.
[5/3/2016 12:47:41 AM] Nozomi: Ok, now we get to the thrust of his argument, or timeline rather, basically, the baby and Kuwadorian Beatrice coinciding leads to Rosa having a lot of shame and guilt, and wanting to displace that on another person... [Truncating because I initially thought that Yasu was supposed to be an imaginary being that lived THROUGH Shannon, rather than just a strict construct in Rosa's head. Like I said, KNM is not clear on what Yasu is supposed to be at all. I'll give you the portions of the video to watch for yourself if you don't believe me.]

[5/3/2016 12:49:15 AM] Nozomi: Except this is all supposition. There is no evidence to support the idea that any of this happened.
[5/3/2016 12:49:34 AM] Nozomi: And why would Rosa do this exactly? I get the whole idea of feeling guilt and shame, but why would that lead her to displacing that guilt and shame onto somebody else?
[5/3/2016 12:52:14 AM] Nozomi: Ok, so she did this because she wants to revive the Kuwadorian Beatrice by becoming Beatrice herself. It's worth noting that again this seems to be based on nothing. Rosa never expresses any interest in black magic or the idea of "becoming Beatrice". She's interested in the gold, of course, because they all are. And why would she think that
A. Becoming Beatrice would do this?
B. That this was a necessary step in this process? It's a process that she herself seems to be making up
[5/3/2016 12:53:35 AM] Nozomi: I mean we haven't gotten to him actually proving his Rosatrice case yet so I ASSUME he'll answer these questions
[5/3/2016 12:53:44 AM] Nozomi: But I ALSO assumed he'd explain why Kanon was in the closet
[5/3/2016 12:53:47 AM] Nozomi: and look where we are

[5/3/2016 1:00:21 AM] Nozomi: "Now one may wonder what Shannon has got to do with this in the first place."
Thank you! That's a very good question.
[5/3/2016 1:01:52 AM] Nozomi: So he uses the whole "it takes two to create a universe" theme to explain Shannon's involvement in Rosa's fixation with bringing Kuwadorian Beatrice back. Now, this isn't damning by any stretch, but I think it IS worth noting that I don't believe Rosa herself ever expresses any familiarity with this term, either in fantasy or non-fantasy sccenes.
[5/3/2016 1:05:18 AM] Nozomi: > The theme "It takes two to create a universe" was foreshadowing the fact that Rosa needed another party to bring Kuwadorian Beatrice to life, in essence somebody for Yasu to live her life through, and she chose Shannon.
KNM... that isn't what the phrase meant. "It takes two to create is universe" is referring to the fact that magic you only experience yourself is indistinguishable from a delusion. It takes two people to experience and achnowledge it for it to be real. That has absolutely nothing to do with what you're proposing.
[5/3/2016 1:06:46 AM] Nozomi: But ok, sure. This doesn't answer- why did she choose Shannon? Just randomly?[14]

[5/3/2016 1:11:10 AM] Nozomi: So I'm confused. How was showing us the life of somebody who didn't exist in reality supposed to bring us closer to the truth?
[5/3/2016 1:11:23 AM] Nozomi: Rosa doesn't even come up in Yasu's story
[5/3/2016 1:12:33 AM | Edited 1:13:10 AM] Nozomi: Like even before Shannon she isn't mentioned. She seems totally inconsequential to Yasu, which is strange for a narrative about somebody who owes their existence to that person. AT BEST that is a massive failure at foreshadowing.

Part 5: Why Shannon cannot be Beatrice

[5/3/2016 1:19:21 AM] Nozomi: "If Shannon and Beatrice are the same person, whatever Battler does against Shannon he does against Beatrice"
Umm no that's not how it works. They AREN'T the same person. They're different roles/identities Yasu has.
[5/3/2016 1:20:33 AM] Nozomi: The reason why this particular Shannon sin is important to Beatriec is because Yasu HAD Beatrice shoulder this burden
[5/3/2016 1:20:50 AM] Nozomi: Because as I said earlier, Yasu is basically the controller of her different selves
[5/3/2016 1:21:13 AM] Nozomi: But let's keep going
[5/3/2016 1:22:55 AM] Nozomi: > The red "The sin I am now demanding that you remember is not between UShiromiya Battler and Beatrice proves that Shannon can't be Beatrice due to my previous premise [quoted above]

Bzzt.
[5/3/2016 1:23:18 AM] Nozomi: Because while Beato bears the WEIGHT of that sin, Battler did not COMMIT that sin to Beato.
[5/3/2016 1:23:51 AM] Nozomi: This honestly shouldn't be that hard a concept for you to grasp KNM, you summed it up relatively well when you defending the idea of creating an imaginary Yasu to allieviate Rosa's guilt

[5/3/2016 1:26:41 AM] Nozomi: "You would have to say that the sin is against Shannon and not her Beatrice personality"
I do say that. And you say that makes the red meaningless.... how?
[5/3/2016 1:27:10 AM] Nozomi: I mean I won't pretend these word games aren't BS, but it's still not a meaningless red
[5/3/2016 1:28:03 AM] Nozomi: "And how you could you ever know such a distinction can be made"
How can I know that a red action can apply to one persona and not another persona? I mean... that's pretty easy
[5/3/2016 1:28:06 AM] Nozomi: Like really easy
[5/3/2016 1:28:20 AM] Nozomi: Like most of the reds with Kanon or Shannon in them

[5/3/2016 1:30:31 AM] Nozomi: "1. What is your basis for doing this? [reconciling the red statement]
All the evidence supporting Shkanon, a few of which you haven't even addressed.
2. "Why would you want to do this?"
[5/3/2016 1:30:34 AM] Nozomi: Because I like being right?

[5/3/2016 1:33:52 AM] Nozomi: > If you interpret enough, any contradiction can be reconciled.
Hey, welcome to the wonderful world of red truths Ryukishi created!
[5/3/2016 1:34:02 AM] Nozomi: Where they are subjective and situationally dependent
[5/3/2016 1:34:14 AM] Nozomi: Oh right you don't believe that for some reason ok

[RE: Why I would reject KNM's interpretation of the red statement, if I recall correctly.]

[5/3/2016 1:39:33 AM] Nozomi: Because there's evidence contradicting it and thus far very little has been brought supporting it? At most right now you've shown that shkanon requires major plot contrivances. And that could be true. But given that the evidence STILL supports that explanation, you need to either bring out your evidence or do a better job refuting the evidence that exists.

Question 2: If it WERE true that Battler's sin was not against Beatrice, what WOULD such a red statement look like?

Hmm... let me think about that for a moment...
[5/3/2016 1:40:07 AM] Nozomi: "The sin I am now demanding that you remember is not between Ushiromiya Battler and Beatrice"
[5/3/2016 1:40:09 AM] Nozomi: That was easy
[5/3/2016 1:40:36 AM] Nozomi: If only the game HAD such a red statement
[5/3/2016 1:40:38 AM] Nozomi: If only

[5/3/2016 1:48:17 AM] Nozomi: > The Gollum argument: Maria stated that Beatrice appeared to all the servants present at the table in EP7, including shkanon. Since logically Beatrice can not appear as Beatrice in front of herself, she would need to be doing something ridiculous akin to Gollum of Lord of the Rings, which would hardly be believable.

Let's assume this testimony is reliable for a moment, no reason not to. Given that this was when Maria was even younger than she was in 1986, I genuinely don't think it would be that hard to fool her.[15] Also, it doesn't say HOW she appeared to these people? Did she appear directly, as a person? Did they claim to see her when Maria couldn't, for whatever reason? Did they just claim to feel her "presence"? We don't know, because Maria didn't let us in on the full context. So there's no reason to assume a ridiculous scenario where Yasu is talking to herself without more information.
[5/3/2016 1:50:05 AM] Nozomi: Also you randomly make it so that both shkanon need to see Beatrice at the same time, something Maria didn't even IMPLY.

[5/3/2016 1:55:25 AM] Nozomi: > There's a discrepancy between the tattoo placement on Beatrice and Shannon's legs that Battler should have seen in Ep. 4! If you're willing to argue that Battler couldn't notice this because Beato was on the balcony, you can't argue that Rosa's hair color and eye color keep her from being Beatrice.
Assuming that that sprite depiction is reliable, sure, I doubt I'll need to do that. That was easy.
[5/3/2016 1:56:45 AM] Nozomi: You know, if you're going to say "Well if you're going to make a counter-argument to my position, you have to grant me X and Y", it's usually not a good idea in arguments to note that the opponent assumes X ANYWAY
[5/3/2016 2:00:57 AM] Nozomi: > If Beato is Shannon, why place her tattoo on her leg at all, and potentially create a discrepancy? Why not place it somewhere the reader typically can't see?

Hmm...
A. To Mislead the reader. If he's willing to cheat with the red, he'd perfectly be willing to play fast and loose with proper sprite placement, particularly when it's never seen from a reliable perspective.
B. He wanted them both to have the tattoo in a visible place, and got lazy about potential places that aren't blatantly obvious. A lot of his sprites are like that dude.

[5/3/2016 2:06:11 AM] Nozomi: I don't feel like "Eva has it tattooed on her arm" is enough evidence to conclude that every family member has the one-winged eagle tattooed somewhere on their body, given how Eva is probably the family member outside of Natsuhi biggest on upholding the family name and all that. But given that this is Kinzo we're talking about I'll just grant it for sake of argument.

Part 5: Arguments for Rosa being Beatrice

[5/3/2016 2:07:10 AM] Nozomi: OH THANK GOD WE'RE AT THE POSITIVE ARGUMENTS
[5/3/2016 2:07:13 AM] Nozomi: WEVE MADE PROGRESS
[5/3/2016 2:08:40 AM] Nozomi: > We must account for Eva having discovered the truth

Well, as we've discussed, we don't know what exactly that means. Does she know basically everything? Does she know enough to get a broad idea? Did she see snippets OF the truth but there might be other factors involved and it was a complicated situation? We can't say.
[5/3/2016 2:10:43 AM] Nozomi: > I definitely do not share the belief that Ange's world is R-Prime

Yes, because that would make more of Umi narratively meaningful, and we CAN'T have that
[5/3/2016 2:11:32 AM] Nozomi: Anyway, I honestly don't care which world the Anges are from
[5/3/2016 2:12:27 AM] Nozomi: Like EP4 Ange could be from the world of 3 I suppose (if you discount the metafictional explanation I'll get into later), but 6 (if there was any non Meta-Ange) and 8? Who can say?
[5/3/2016 2:14:22 AM] Nozomi: > Episode 3 Eva had to know about the bomb
[5/3/2016 2:14:24 AM] Nozomi: ... Why
[5/3/2016 2:14:46 AM] Nozomi: I mean I'm willing to say she did, but I see no reason to say she HAS to have.
[5/3/2016 2:15:24 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: lol

[5/3/2016 2:15:38 AM] Nozomi: Given how vague and weird Game 3 is, the bomb could be set and Eva could have gone in the tunnels for some other reason
[5/3/2016 2:15:45 AM] Nozomi: Maybe just exploring this place she found
[5/3/2016 2:16:10 AM] Nozomi: Or, hey, I know you don't like this idea, and I don't find it likely, but Yasu could have told her about it[16]
[5/3/2016 2:18:35 AM] Nozomi: > When Eva discovered the gold the servants were already dead (see red), so shkanon could not have told her about it, making shkanontrice impossible

Well your attempts to disprove role death ended in failure sooooo

[5/3/2016 2:24:37 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa just happening to solve the epitaph right after Eva is way too convenient a coincidence.
COINCIDENCES CAN NOT HAPPEN IN UMINEKO, KNM HAS DEEMED IT. ESPECIALLY NOT IN UNRELIABLE PERSPECTIVES
[5/3/2016 2:25:51 AM] Nozomi: Ok he's talking about Rosa and Maria's deaths in EP3 but I'll discuss that at the proper time unlike him
[5/3/2016 2:26:52 AM] Nozomi: Come on get baaaack to evidence for Rosatrice we can discuss this when you break down the gameboards
[5/3/2016 2:31:26 AM] Nozomi: Oh, fine. You want to talk about it THAT badly. So basically his solution for Nanjo is instead of Wounded Kyrie[17], Wounded George, the only real twist being that it's Nanjo who wounds him. There's nothing here that is contradicted by a red so I'll wait to see how this shakes out timeline wise before passing judgment
[5/3/2016 2:31:55 AM] Nozomi: (Not sure WHY George would kill Nanjo anymore than I'm sure why Yasu would, but shrug)

[5/3/2016 2:36:34 AM] Nozomi: > Eva shot Battler in order to keep her son's guilt secret and protect her son's honor
You know, Eva, you kinda know about a room full of gold
[5/3/2016 2:36:40 AM] Nozomi: Not going to even TRY to bribe him?
[5/3/2016 2:36:49 AM] Nozomi: Just going to resort straight to murder?
[5/3/2016 2:36:59 AM] Nozomi: Ok seems legit

[5/3/2016 2:41:01 AM] Nozomi: > Eva knowing the truth remains an inexplicable mystery given the official explanation

Well... I mean... That's kinda dependent upon the truth being from Game 3. Which you... can't believe? Since you think Battler was killed by Rosa?[16] But anyway, I'm pretty sure the Book of Truth is dependent on the universe Ep. 8 Ange is from, and there is basically no way of knowing that that was 3.
[5/3/2016 2:41:03 AM] Nozomi: So yeah

[5/3/2016 2:51:11 AM] Nozomi: So kwand I have a question for you
[5/3/2016 2:51:22 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Yeshu?
[5/3/2016 2:51:30 AM] Nozomi: Let's say you're playing an Umineko episode. Let's say... 4.
[5/3/2016 2:52:57 AM] Nozomi: And a character is both not noted to be reliable and we have very good reasons to believe is unreliable. Now something happens to... her, let's call the person a her. Something horrific. They're distraught, in great emotional pain. And then, even though it should be impossible, the person they want most comes to help them in their time of need. Then in a future episode, let's say, 7, we get testimony from that same character that would seem to indicate that encounter never happened. Should we take the ep. 4 encounter as reliable?
[5/3/2016 2:53:55 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: I would say no
[5/3/2016 2:53:56 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Why?
[5/3/2016 2:54:02 AM] Nozomi: KnownNoMore disagrees!
[5/3/2016 2:58:40 AM] Nozomi: KNM's argument for Rosatrice here, is that Maria says in 7 that Beato said that she couldn't meet her off the island and never does. Now, instead of looking at the 4 scene and thinking "Hm. Maria was really upset, it's likely she just imagined/pretended Beatrice was there to make her feel better." He thinks "No this is evidence for Rosatrice. Rosa typically feels bad after a while when she hurts Maria, and even though this time she was FURIOUS, she gets over it and guilt sets in fast enough to dress up as Beato (presumably) and to come to Maria when she's still crying over Sakutarou, because this was an extreme enough situation that she could "break the rules". Now, the torture scene that IMMEDIATELY RESULTS is of course heavily fictionalized and didn't strictly happen. But the fake torture was organized by Rosa."[19]
[5/3/2016 2:58:47 AM] Nozomi: I'll let you decide which option is more probable.

[5/3/2016 3:00:58 AM] Nozomi: So you can only speculate on the magical torture scene, but the scene where Beato magically appears you can make declarative statements about. Ok
[5/3/2016 3:03:44 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: (What was that about assumptions again...?)
[5/3/2016 3:08:13 AM] Nozomi: > Why does it need to be specifically mentioned that Sakutarou can not be revived because Rosa denied it?
Because logically Maria wouldn't want Beato to say "Just 'cuz" and as a little kid she is dependent upon her mother's permission for everything, so she applies this to Beatrice in this case too? Alternately, she is currently very upset at Rosa and so when Beatrice can't do the impossible, she attributes this to the person she's upset at? Nah those are way too sensible.
[5/3/2016 3:09:48 AM] Nozomi: So basically Rosa felt guilty enough to break well-established rules and appear as Beato, but not guilty enough to change her mind and make a new toy for Maria? Ok.

[5/3/2016 3:14:23 AM] Nozomi: > Maria regards Rosa as the "Black witch" when she gets mad, so it makes logical sense that when she acts especially nice, she would consider her a different type of witch.

No, no, no. You're missing the point again. As the anime scene you're showing right now actually kind of shows, KNM, Rosa is the default state. Rosa is the Good Mom, the nice person who is sorry for the things that she does, and is kind to Maria. When she gets angry, Maria retreats into her fantasy world and instead of either considering what she may have done wrong or think about what caused her mother to react that way, she attributes it to something outside her mother's control, a "black witch". Keep in mind that unlike Beatrice there is no real lore behind this witch. It has no name. It's just an evil force that comes into Rosa when she gets mad. I certainly can't deny that it's POSSIBLE that the inverse would be true, but there's no evidence for it, and it seems to go against Maria's character a bit- Maria thinks her mother is good and kind and loving BY DEFAULT. Why would she think her some special thing if she was especially nice?

[5/3/2016 3:20:45 AM] Nozomi: > Maria's behavior [when the occult/Beatrice the Golden Witch are mentioned], while potentially impacted by her mother's abuse, is more likely the result of a role model in her life.

Umm... why? She's a girl that is obsessed with the occult, gets bullied at school, doesn't have any friends except somebody who claims to be a Witch and made her her apprentice, and gets abused by her mother frequently, even if she does regret it later. I'd say having a totally different side of her when the occult or Beatrice comes up makes total sense without Rosa feeding it into her

[5/3/2016 3:22:02 AM] Nozomi: > Maria is mimicking Rosa

But... you're claiming that Rosa portrays herself as Beatrice. And when Maria goes all Occcult Mode, she acts [basically] nothing like Beatrice?

[5/3/2016 3:23:32 AM | Edited 3:24:21 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa is definitely "One yet many"

... Clair said that. Clair was referring to Yasu, whom she was channeling. You agree that Clair was channeling Yasu. You agree that Yasu was, to some extent, a separate person from Rosa, and that we weren't seeing things from Rosa's perspective in her story. I can understand wanting to spin the "I'm one yet many" line because it fits with shkanontrice but doesn't fit with your Yasu explanation well at all, but it really doesn't work.
[5/3/2016 3:30:32 AM | Edited 3:34:19 AM] Nozomi: > Maria knows a lot about black magic. Now, if Rosa wanted her to NOT know black magic, like she acts in front of others, she would have easy ways to stop her from getting access to such books, even if she's away a lot. Therefore the logical conclusion is that Rosa is into Black Magic herself and is acting this way to keep that a secret.

1. Honestly you're kind of hurting Rosa's character here after talking about how we should consider her heart earlier on in the video. Would somebody who feels guilty after acting abusive towards her daughter proceed to act abusive as an act?

2. How would Maria being into black magic necessitate that Rosa is? Just act like you don't care, or that you disapprove but it's what she's interested in, or even lie and say you try to stop her but aren't having an easy time at it. Any of these would be simpler (and easier on Rosa's conscience) than being abusive.

3. Aside from the stuff Maria makes up, Maria could very well get books on the occult from Beato when they go to the island and then hide them where Rosa can't find them. It's also possible that Rosa, feeling guilty for always being away and for often being abusive, CAN get cajoled into letting Maria have her fun from time to time. There may have been times where she DID take all the books away, and Maria then proceeded to get access to some anyway (because she hid them) so Rosa gave up on trying to deny access.

4. Even if I grant that Rosa isn't as against black magic as she appears, that in no way necessitates Rosatrice, or even an interest in black magic. The black magic hobby isn't something that Rosa necessarily objects to in itself, potentially (except when Beatrice is involved), but because it alienates her from friends and gets her bullied and all that bad stuff. So, as a compromise, she's ok with it happening at home, but gets really upset when it happens anywhere else. This is incredibly speculative, but so is KNM's hypothesis
[5/3/2016 3:38:00 AM] Nozomi: > Gaap was in essence a proto-Beatrice and was based on things "magically" getting lost and appearing. Interestingly, this is a kind of magic Maria fixates on too.

So, wait. We learn those things about Gaap via Yasu's "testimony". Is Yasu Maria now? Because my conception was that Yasu was in essence initially a symbolic representation, until it hitched onto Shannon parasitically. So, Maria's fixation shouldn't be that relevant. And I mean, Gaap is a proto-Beatrice, specializes in that kind of magic, so it's probably the sort of magic that Beatrice would talk to Maria about and show her and the like. Doesn't seem that strange no matter if you argue Rosatrice, Shkanontrice, or Jessitrice.
[5/3/2016 3:40:32 AM] Nozomi: >The only person that could make things go missing from Maria's room is Rosa.

Or Maria could misplace them in her room. Or take them somewhere and forget about it.
[5/3/2016 3:44:34 AM] Nozomi: > Gaap has a ridiculous dress and Rosa runs an unsuccessful dress company.

And Jessica has blonde hair. What's your point? We can draw weak connections all day long, but at the absolute best this is incredibly speculative and circumstantial.

Also, again, this was Yasu, and Yasu doesn't mention Rosa once. She doesn't mention observing her, she doesn't mention her being a big part of her life at all. This doesn't kill your hypothesis- an extended part of Rosa's psyche has no obligation to be interested in her- but it does mean that this argument doesn't work at all. Why would Yasu base her first "demon" around somebody she doesn't seem to have cared the least about, or even really known much about at all?
[5/3/2016 3:58:42 AM] Nozomi: > Maria surviving G1, G2, but being poisoned in the 4th game is evidence of Rosatrice. It makes sense for Rosa to spare the daughter that she loves. And if they are going to die, they will die together. While you can argue that she has the charm in G1, so shkanontrice CAN'T kill her anyway, her surviving G2 is rather odd. It being because Maria is her friend doesn't really suffice because Kumasawa was always kind to her but gets murdered anyway. And given the brutality of the murders, her "being a kid" doesn't seem like a good excuse either.

1. Maybe she considers Maria being her Apprentice a closer status than just a mere friendship. Maybe she finds all Maria's occult and witch talk beneficial and sees no need to kill her. Maybe she simply doesn't find a good opportunity when other, deemed better targets aren't available- Maria doesn't tend to be isolated all that much, after all. All of these support the "official explanation" just fine, and are decently logical (some more probable than others).

2. Why does Rosa die with Maria typically? Maybe because as mother and daughter they're together a lot. I'm not sure I need another explanation.

> If Shannon is the murderer and poisoned Maria at, say, dinner, it means it was premeditated prior to dinner. And why poison Maria specifically?

1. Yes? And? So much of Game 4 is a blank slate and the reds aren't very helpful in that regard. There are plenty of possibilities.

2. Could be a whim. Could be what Yasu found the most convenient way to kill her. She could want her Apprentice to have a peaceful death. (I find this relatively likely.) There's really no huge mystery here.

> Rosa gave Maria a gentle death and then blew her own face off.

If Rosa had poison... why not use it on herself? Or did she conveniently only have enough for Maria? Oh well, you say you'll cover this in the Alliance sum-up, so we'll get there. Someday.
[5/3/2016 3:59:37 AM] Nozomi: I'm torn because you concede that this argument is wrong (I will give you credit for admitting that by the way), but you maintain that the end stands. So I'll truncate it a bit I guess
[5/3/2016 4:35:15 AM] Nozomi: > Beatrice's appearance just happens to coincide with when Rosa is out of sight. In addition, despite the fact that Maria is back with the cousins by the time Kyrie returns to the room, Rosa isn't back yet.

Even granting for the sake of argument that Kyrie wasn't bribed to pretend to see Beatrice. (Why bribe her? Who can say for sure? More witnesses are better than less and Kyrie is relatively reliable and one of the least connected to the whole affair. Why have Rosa "see" her when you have a bunch of people that are happy to testify to seeing her anyway?)

This could be a coincidence. She could in fact be meeting with Yasu at this point to talk about their plan, or she could have decided she needed some air or sometihng. It could be a red herring, since Rosa's involvement is almost needed for the Chapel murder to work, and the game kind of revolves around her. This is incredibly circumstantial at best.

> Given that Rosa needs to be involved in the second game, believers in the "official explanation" need to have her as an accomplice. So what makes more sense, that she is an accomplice or the culprit? The following factors make the former more probable:

> 1. Aside from necessity, why would Rosa aid Shannon in her murder scheme?
Well if Murder game theory is true, at least at first she had no idea she was IN on a murder scheme, and who knows if she caught on before Shannon was found. But also, lolgold isn't that terrible a motive if you think the games are fake and nobody is actually going to die. If you have evidence that Rosa knew the murders were real, be my guest and share it. There are plenty of pieces of evidence- Eva's line at the shed in 1[21], Maria's over-the-top behavior, Hideyoshi and Eva being happy to wander off into their rooms when there is ostensibly a murderer on the loose, etc. that the POSSIBILITY at least exists that, at first at least, Rosa thought that these were fake deaths and nobody was really dying. And afterwards it's possible she was scared to talk due to the presence of the servants.

> What evidence is there to support the idea of Rosa being bribed with gold?

Well aside from the fact that her being involved makes the crimes far more elegant (I thought you liked elegance?), we have her financial situation- out of everyone she's probably one of the most desperate, and this is something that was made clear in Legend and I believe comes up again in Turn.

> Why would Shannon involve Rosa, when it'd be a very dangerous move? It'd be a character acting like a moron! After all, accomplices are the most dangerous part of a crime, particularly when they don't share similar motives. Even in the case of bribery, retaliation is quite possible. And given that for most of the game she has a gun, she could just shoot Shannon and get all the money she needs! Heck, Yasu could have just set up the chapel slightly differently and wouldn't have needed Rosa's help at all. Thus from neither character's perspective does the idea of Rosa-Accomplice make much sense.

There's a lot to unpack here.

1. I actually agree that accomplices are the riskiest part of a crime. You say that when we (finally) get to Our Confession you'll elaborate on your point and I'm sure I'll mostly concur with it. On the other hand, much emphasis is put on the killer playing a high-risk, high-reward game: if one of the adults solves the epitaph, as 3 proves is possible, the entire plan is ruined to start with. The fact that it takes risk to create a miracle is emphasized again and again, so Yasu taking chances here makes some sense. And the chance of betrayal, telling people, etc. is lessened as long as Rosa believes that they're playing a game and nobody is really getting killed. And even if Rosa figures it out, she's quite heavily outnumbered, even with her gun.

2. "Hey, Rosa. I'll show you some gold bars. If you do as I say, there are a good deal more in an undisclosed location. I also have a cash card worth X amount of money in an undisclosed location." Even if this seems kinda fishy to her, there's still no real reason to assume that Yasu is going to murder anybody.

3. Maybe you'll explain the whole chapel thing when we get to 2-1, so I won't comment much here, except to say that apparently Yasu didn't want to set up the chapel differently. Also I can see pretty of benefit of enlisting the person that can take charge and basically direct everything into your scheme, even if they aren't directly involved in many murder tricks.

> (This is more implied than anything but) it's ridiculous for Rosa to pull the letter trick, since she knows Shannon is dead!

She probably does. But she could potentially be unsure that Battler isn't involved somehow (there's no strict need for Yasu to explain her entire plan to Rosa, including all the accomplices), and therefore want to try and escape somehow with Maria alone, just to be safe. So she needs an excuse to separate from Battler, and framing him with the letter, which Yasu probably prepared already for some other occasion, was an excellent option.

[5/3/2016 4:38:11 AM] Nozomi: > Isn't it more likely that Rosa did this [The Happy Halloween for Maria message] as an apology for crushing the candy than that Yasu did it?

... I don't see any real difference in likelihood here. They both seem perfectly possible on paper. You would have to explain why one is more probable, and you don't.

[5/3/2016 4:55:39 AM] Nozomi: > Given that Rosa is in this scene and yet isn't a victim in the chapel, it's quite easy to interpret this as the other 6 acknowledging Rosa as Beatrice/the family head. Admittedly it isn't objective, but if we are to take it metaphorically, it points to Rosatrice.

1. Why would Rosa care about the people she's going to brutally murder achnowledging her as the head, or Beatrice, or whatever? Maybe you'll explain this later.

2. The scene could equally be interpreted as Yasu doing the same (though the same objection could be raised) or getting everybody in on the murder game- whether Rosa was fully aware of the details at this point or not (It's very unlikely Kyrie is since she wasn't outside for long). Rosa then leaves the chapel, thinking that the other 6 will fake their deaths when they'll really be murdered for real. In this sense, this could be interpreted as one of the pieces of evidence supporting rosa-accomplice you were complaining was absent.

3. If I wanted to, I could simply handwave this scene as unreliable and just smoke and mirrors. So it's circumstantial at best and as I've shown, could easily be interpreted to fit shkanontrice.

> Rosa randomly uses the term furniture in the second game, a trait Beatrice possesses as well (as well as shkanon and Genji). Other people never use the word and typically try to convince the other party to not use it either (George and Jessica).

There's a sidenote about Yasu calling themselves furniture in here, but I want to get into the meat and potatoes of the argument first.

1. This is, I'll confess, a really strange moment. Given that it is a sudden moment of cruelty and callousness from Rosa, it could also be a red herring.

2. Another possibility, given Murder Game theory, is that this is either a line Yasu gave Rosa to use, or Rosa picked up the word at some point in discussions with Yasu or acomplices or whatever, and decided it would make an effective statement.

3. Given that this is a single throwaway line that never leads anywhere, it is, regardless, at best flimsy circumstantial evidence. It at most supports the possibility of Rosatrice, and doesn't do much for its probability. (To his credit, KNM admits that it isn't "overwhelmingly convincing" evidence, he just finds it "interesting")

[5/3/2016 5:22:22 AM] Nozomi: > When Yasu is talking about being incapable of love, she is talking about the low status of a servant

Except that such a thing is not a theme in the novel at all, and there is no evidence to support this interpretation. Eva doesn't like the idea of George being in a relationship with Shannon, but in the end there really wouldn't be much she could do about it anyway, since they could just elope. If Kanon wants to be with Jessica, he could just quit and no longer have that low social ranking. Whenever Shannon and Kanon talk about being "furniture" and thus being incapable of love, it is never connected to their servant status, and the emphasis is always on George and Jessica trying to get them to acknowledge that they're people too. Being incapable of love seems to mean something aside from lacking social status in Umi. While it doesn't necessarily mean what it's "officially" supposed to mean either, this interpretation is at best equally lacking in support.

> The ending of G2 also supports Rosatrice. Logically, people who support the "official explanation" need to reject the final scene with Battler surrendering to the Witch as unreliable fantasy, just as those who support Rosatrice can't accept the final scene of her going to the chapel. However, I can account for why the Beatrice scene occurs. Given that Battler is the detective and it isn't midnight, he could still very well have a distorted- due to his drunkenness and general emotional instability- but generally reliable perspective. This is impossible if shkanontrice is true, but possible if Rosatrice is.

1. I think you're wrong to say that this is partially an unreliable scene. Even ignoring the fact that Yasu is dead, why would Genji come and say that now that everything is over, the truth can be learned? Outside of meta-motives, what motivation does Beatrice have to share this with Battler? Nothing like that happened in the first game. Natsuhi just got murdered. And Battler was already drunk by the time Genji arrived, so there's no need to think his perspective was objective and then suddenly became subjective after his arrival.

2. It is indeed still before midnight, which is slightly odd, but Battler is drunk, he could have fallen asleep, etc. There are plenty of factors that could make this scene unreliable that have nothing to do with the usual midnight loss of perspective that don't require partial-reliability or anything of the sort.

3. I could also argue that this is a meta-based scene, that by giving up to the witch fully on both the meta-side and the piece-side, Battler forfeits his rights as detective and thus we see the consequences.[20] And therefore not have to dismiss the scene at all.

4. The problem is that I could explain the Rosa scene (Rosa, now knowing that the murder game is no game and that the person who headed it is dead, maybe knowing about the bomb maybe not, separates from the only other person who could be involved and attempts to escape, knowing that Genji is still out there.), while KNM completely dismisses it as a red herring. So in the end, in the best case scenario for KNM, the two of us are at par. At the worst, I can explain both scenes without resorting to handwaving, while he can explain one. (And at least with my handwaving I have foreshadowing to back me up. Rosa's perspective being unreliable is just because it's fantasy so it must be unreliable.)

5. Also, why did Rosa do this? And why didn't she do it in Game 1? (Since I assume she was the one that killed Natsuhi?)

> Presuming the official explanation, what purpose did the Beatrice scene serve? Why was it included?

1. I provided a potential meta explanation for the Beato scene.

2. Even if you dislike that, it fits thematically. Battler has surrendered to the witch, and now needs to pay the price.

3. And even if you don't like either of these explanations, you freely admit that the primary purpose of the Rosa scene is as a red herring. So why can't the Beatrice scene be the same? Special pleading is the new fallacy of the day, it seems.

And we're done with Part 1. Next time we'll go into motive and discussion of the love duel from a Rosatrice perspective apparently. Joy.

[5/3/2016 5:47:34 AM] Nozomi: But first, let's wrap this up- in the end, what did this video accomplish?

1. It set to disprove shkanon but it did no such thing. It ignored some pieces of evidence in favor of shkanon and failed to create a complete and coherent explanation for the actions of the characters in the logic error, after seeming to indicate that such is required. At best what it proved is that shkanon requires a good deal of contrivances and luck, and potentially stupidity from the characters. The other evidences it either did not compellingly refute or weren't particularly persuasive to begin with.

2. It tries to explain the origin of Yasu and Lion from a non-shkanontrice perspective. After first completely confusing Meta with Fantasy, the explanation given is relatively confusing and honestly still relatively unclear. Not to mention it doesn't explain some aspects of the episode (such as Bern's exchange to Lion), the arguments against Yasu being Lion are incredibly faulty and not persuasive in the slightest, and doesn't explain why Lion's existence helps Will figure out what's going on in the slightest. Nor is it made clear why seeing through the eyes of a character that really doesn't even exist without giving any signs of a connection to their maker is in any way helpful towards leading to a solution of any kind. Rosa's actions are strange and don't really make much sense, though he will elaborate on them in the future.

3. It tries to argue against Shannon as Beatrice. It fails pretty miserably and doesn't make a compelling case. The closest it comes is the Gollum argument, and even that is speculative and shaky.

4. It tries to argue FOR Rosa as Beatrice. Most of the evidence can be rejected, and the evidence that can't be rejected is incredibly circumstantial and could easily be interpreted another way.

So. Instead of eliminating an option, he's merely proven that shkanon is perhaps improbable, particularly in R-Prime, which we have no idea about. If we were merely speculating, this would be fine, but when the author has definitely given a solution for the gameboards at a minimum, and you're claiming that they are deliberately lying, you either need to prove the "official version" impossible, or your version infinitely more probable, or else you're nothing more than a conspiracy theorist.
[5/3/2016 6:01:52 AM] Nozomi: I'm pretty sure KNM is done with his attempts to do the former and it was a spectacular failure, so his case will be riding on the latter. And given how it's gone so far, I don't have my hopes up. But more elaboration on Rosatrice and hopefully we'll get into some George stuff tomorrow.

ANNOTATIONS:
[1] I also note another example of this-with kwand contributing- and my main issue with Number 3 in general
[5/2/2016 11:15:01 AM] Nozomi: And then of course there's dlanor's reds which are meaningless at times
[5/2/2016 11:15:08 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Die the DEATH
[5/2/2016 11:15:11 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Sentence the DEATH
[5/2/2016 11:15:14 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Great equalizer is the DEATH
[5/2/2016 11:15:18 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: best most reds dlanor thanks
[5/2/2016 11:16:00 AM | Edited 11:16:21 AM] Nozomi: But anyway, to be fair this doesn't invalidate or honestly even necessarily cripple the theory, but given that he'll be criticizing the elegance of shkanontrice and is a big part of his methodology it is problematic.

After his gameboard explanations he argues for the infallibility of red truth, so we can discuss his point more then.

[2] Additionally, why Shannon and Kanon don't seem to consider themselves as "real people" the way George and Jessica do, which is decently strong evidence in its own right.

[3] Typo on my part, I meant Game 4.

[4] This was unfair on my part. All KNM was saying was that OTHER people use it as such, so I shouldn't ascribe any motivations to him based off that statement. The rest of it stands, though.

[5] This was kind of fast-paced, because again SOC, so I didn't really explain this clearly, but I think it's relatively intuitive. If one character can change the rules so that characters can have SUPERPOWERS, changing definitions shouldn't be particularly difficult. Also different characterizations, if we accept that Yasu was the man from 19 years ago calling Natsuhi.

[6] For reference, he never does.

[7] A quick double-checking basically confirms that my second explanation is probably what Ryu intended-

[5/2/2016 12:46:37 PM] Nozomi: In fact, my second hypothesis regarding the reds is actually probably true, because in her VERY NEXT RED she says this:
"In short, this 18th person X does not exist!!"
[5/2/2016 12:46:48 PM] Nozomi: This is a title, in essence
[5/2/2016 12:47:29 PM] Nozomi: IT's a reference of the concept of an "extra person/human" on Rokkenjima and being described using certain terms
[5/2/2016 12:47:55 PM | Edited 12:50:17 PM] Nozomi: And since this clearly goes back to her previous red (given the "in short") we can assume they are talking about the same thing
[5/2/2016 12:48:42 PM] Nozomi: Heck she says "THIS 18th person X" and is thus really clearly creating a name for a concept
[5/2/2016 12:49:33 PM] Nozomi: Thus, what she IS saying is "No more than 17 humans exist on this island! Therefore your idea of an "18th person X" is wrong!" and since Shannon and Kanon don't have to be "humans" in Beato or Lambda's game, the red is completely consistent.

[8] In fact, quite conspicuously NOT confirmed! Nor is Shannon's death explicitly confirmed either

[9] For reference, I was correct. He never does.

[10] Erika refers to Bern on the gameboard, Erika speaks in red on the gameboard, even referring to herself as "the detective", which is a meta construct, etc.

[11] Since he never gets into why Kanon goes into the closet in his solution instead of escaping with Battler in the videos, I'll provide the explanation he gives in the comments (I believe, somebody explained his solution to the problem on the animesuki Umi thread so he must have mentioned it somewhere): Basically, he's attempting to preserve the locked room mystery of Battler's escape. The key issue with this is, however- that only works if the narrative just STOPS when we shift to the metaworld. Because Erika, unless she was an absolute moron, WOULD open the door post-shooting, if only to make sure she hit Battler. When she sees Kanon in there, it would become pretty obvious what happened.

[12] Or if you like purely theoretical discussion, which is perfectly fine, I do myself, but in this case it's clearly the former for KnownNoMore!

[13] I should define R-Prime and it's derivatives because it'll come up a lot, ESPECIALLY in KNM's last part. R-Prime, Rokkenjima Prime, etc. are just fan-names for the "real" Rokkenjima. As in, the Rokkenjima that actually did exist in the world of Umineko, which most of us believe is Ange's world in 8, though there are some people who argue there IS no prime. (KNM is the first person I've seen to argue something ASIDE from one of these options, but we're a ways away from that yet.)

[14] He never explains why she chose Shannon so I have to assume that yes, it was just random.

[15] Especially if on some level she WANTED to be fooled!

[16] Or she could have seen it when she entered the gold tunnel, either before the murders began (except probably the closed room ring) or after everybody else was dead.

[17] Wounded Kyrie is just short-hand for the theory Battler gives in Alliance, in essence, for Nanjo's murder in 3, where Nanjo was killed by somebody who was wounded prior. They then die prior to the red statements being given by EVA-Beatrice.

[18] This is in reference to KNM thinking that Turn is a depiction of R-Prime.

[19] And the best part is that KNM doesn't have any room to complain about this. He thinks that Umi as a whole follows van Dine, and according to Dine's 6th, as it is written in Umineko: "The detective novel must have a detective in it; and a detective is not a detective unless he detects." Saying "ok, ok! A witch probably did it! Don't make me suspect my friends/family!" isn't doing much "detect[ing]", is it?

[20] On the one hand, I got confused here and forgot that as KNM noted, Maria recognized Beato based off personality rather than identification. So the costume wouldn't be needed. Apologies there. On the OTHER HAND, KNM doesn't note that there is still a contradiction between 7 and 4! Regardless of HOW or WHY she appeared, Ep7!Maria says Beatrice didn't appear outside the island. So either she didn't appear, in which case this speculative scenario fails, or she DID appear, in which case this portion of Ep!7Maria's testimony (at a minimum) is unreliable, in which case the hypothesis is weakened at best. We also come back to the "How do we know which parts of EP7 testimony are reliable and which aren't?" problem, creating even more uncertainty than KNM will claim the "common belief" regarding Ange's world creates.

[21] She essentially equates the wounds the victims had to really gory makeup and given her (Snd Hideyoshi's) bizarre behavior after the bodies are discovered- abandoning the group where it would be safe and wandering to their rooms, potentially even taking a bath!- there's slight evidence that that is actually what she believes.
Spoiler : Part 2- Motive, the Love Duel, and Game 5 :

Part 1- Rosa's Motive


[5/3/2016 5:23:38 PM] Nozomi: > Given all the scenes regarding Kinzo trying to revive Beatrice, and Beatrice continually talking about her revival, the motive can logically be that the culprit believes that through following the epitaph in a literal fashon, they will be able to resurrect the Kuwadorian Beatrice

1. This is kind of nitpicky, but Beatrice DOESN'T follow the epitaph literally. Sometimes she skips the third twilight. But even aside from that, aside from the "gouge the X and kill" portions, which you could argue aren't STRICTLY literal either, she doesn't actually TEAR APART The two that are close, she tears them apart metaphorically. Also there is no "key" that chooses the victims of the first twilight, as far as I can tell. That's the killer.
[5/3/2016 5:25:22 PM | Edited 5:25:35 PM] Nozomi: 2. Also kinda nitpicky, but I feel like you're continually nitpicking which fantasy/meta scenes (since you conflate the two) are misdirection and which aren't without much grounding
[5/3/2016 5:27:16 PM] Nozomi: 3. But ok, to be a bit less nitpicky, why would following the epitaph resurrect the Kuwadorian Beatrice? The epitaph's revival of Beatrice pretty clearly means the witch that Kinzo got the gold from and as far as age goes, that doesn't fit it being the Kuwadorian Beatrice. And even it's the whole "everybody will be revived" portion, that's never interpreted as being anything beyond ""everybody who died for the twilights will be reunited in the golden land" so you have no evidence for this interpretation.
[5/3/2016 5:29:50 PM] Nozomi: > From just the first six games I doubt anyone would object to my interpretation of the motive.

I would. I really really would.
[5/3/2016 5:43:41 PM] Nozomi: > The imaginary Yasu construct then "developed" a life of her own as a servant for the Ushiromiya family

How? Nobody knows that Yasu exists except Rosa. So she can only be a servant inside the head of Rosa. Yes she "attached" herself to Shannon, but from what I tell from your theory Shannon has absolutely no idea that this happened. So how did Yasu begin to exist as any sort of entity? If you interpret the Yasu portions metaphorically it's fine, but now you're claiming that that's not the case and that she somehow becomes "alive"

[5/3/2016 5:46:46 PM] Nozomi: > Through doing things like misplacing objects Rosa could cause the servants to interpret this sort of thing as magic, and then of course this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy to an extent, since they'll interpret the same thing as magic even when Rosa isn't there. This is how Rosa learned how to "become a witch"

By itself this isn't particularly objectionable. Primarily quoting it for context because it is a relatively important part of your hypothesis. Carry on.

[5/3/2016 5:48:46 PM] Nozomi: > Yasu begins to develop an interest in mystery novels and shares this with Shannon, who begins developing an interest in those books as well.

So... wait. Did anchoring Yasu to Shannon involve Shannon learning she existed? Did Rosa tell her at some point and she just kind of went along with it? Because otherwise there is really no way Shannon could interact with Yasu in real life in any capacity. What Yasu is and what they can do is INCREDIBLY unclear in your theory.

[5/3/2016 6:01:12 PM | Edited 6:01:41 PM] Nozomi: Another issue, after epitaph is solved [or completed], what happens to Rosa's motive? I mean she still plays Beatrice in the end of 4 and 2 (according to KNM's hypothesis). Let's say she just does that to keep the illusion of the witch alive or something. How does her lacking any motivation work with her relationship with George, who has no reason to stop killing if he hasn't fulfilled his goals? Does she just trust him?[1]

[5/3/2016 6:21:33 PM] Nozomi: > She was a fictional character to begin with, and could be changed at will by the one who created her.

But shouldn't she need Shannon to agree to this?
[5/3/2016 6:21:46 PM] Nozomi: I mean earlier you outright stated that Yasu interacted with Shannon.
[5/3/2016 6:22:30 PM] Nozomi: So Shannon needs to be aware of Yasu's "existence" and accept it as a part of herself to a degree.
[5/3/2016 6:22:37 PM] Nozomi: This theory isn't particularly consistent

[5/3/2016 6:26:50 PM] Nozomi: >Rosa is like furniture herself (and therefore incapable of love) for the following reasons: she lost her honor through being a "murderer" and getting away with it, lost the right to be loved by her father as a result, her biological mother died, she was looked down upon by her siblings, Rosa's husband ran out on her without romantic love, has trouble finding a new romantic partner, has problems with her relationship with Maria and can't give her the love she often feels she deserves. In essence, her life is devoid of love.
[5/3/2016 6:28:53 PM | Edited 6:29:18 PM] Nozomi: 1. Aside from essentially your first reason and your final reason, that's people not giving love TO Rosa. That doesn't mean that Rosa herself is INCAPABLE of love.

2. In regards to your first reason, there is no real evidence that she felt she was incapable of love as a result of this. She clearly didn't, since as far as I can tell she did love the husband who walked out on her and does love Maria.
[5/3/2016 6:30:11 PM] Nozomi: 3. She doesn't give as much love to Maria as she might want to, that's true. But that doesn't mean she doesn't give ANY, and there's no sign she even thinks that way. She may think that she's a bad mom sometimes because she isn't as loving as she could be, but there's no sign, even in the Rosa-Maria scenes, that she doesn't ether love Maria or KNOW that she loves Maria.
[5/3/2016 6:31:05 PM] Nozomi: 4. There's a pretty massive equivocation going on here. You're equivicating "lacking love in her life" with being "incapable of love". They are two VERY DIFFERENT THINGS.

[5/3/2016 6:32:07 PM | Edited 6:32:26 PM] Nozomi: 5. Like, yeah. Rosa has had a hard life. I truly feel bad for her in a lot of ways. But there is no sign she considers herself furniture- she never calls herself that, as you've noted before, and there is no sign that she is incapable of love. In fact she TRIES to be a loving mother to Maria. She TRIES to find a new husband. That indicates that she believes that she IS capable of love.

[5/3/2016 6:37:34 PM] Nozomi: > Shannon falls in love with Battler, Battler doesn't recognize Shannon's feelings, and makes the horse promise, then doesn't return. This is Battler's sin against Shannon. However, Rosa as Beatrice continually encourages Shannon, saying he will return. This is both shown in the magical scenes in 7 with "Yasu" being encouraged that Battler will come back by Beatrice, and Rosa being the only one that ever shows any signs that she misses Battler.

1. Well I mean, aside from your evidence this can apply to any Beato theory, including Yasu. So doesn't mean much.

2. Or maybe Rosa just liked Battler? Like... this is massively circumstantial at best despite your attempts to hype it up. Like Rosa and Battler have a really friendly relationship when he DOES come back as I recall.

[5/3/2016 6:43:14 PM] Nozomi: > Shannon then realizes that there was no promise, and partially blamed Beatrice for continually keeping her hopes up. In order to make up for what she did, she first finds a boy in the orphanage who can love Shannon like a brother, namely Kanon.

1. Even if it's not colossally important in the grand scheme of things, this IS Rosa-Beatrice's first step to making things up to Shannon. So you think it would warrant more focus in "Yasu"'s narrative than "I want a brother poof".

[I had more here but it was tied to confusion as to what point in the timeline we were in regarding Yasu becoming Beatrice, and the objection I raised isn't all that valid in my opinion. So we'll just grant that Rosa could get the money and had the influence to get Kanon a job, and Krausshi just went along with it. It's not much of a sticking point.]

[5/3/2016 10:15:08 PM] Nozomi: Ok, So after helping get Kanon as a brother-friend, she decides to get Shannon to pursue George instead [of Battler]. Ok, sure. I mean, I guess why not do that

[5/3/2016 10:35:45 PM] Nozomi: > Rosatrice fits the beginning of Episode 2 far better than Shkanontrice, since Episode 7 implies that she should have known Beatrice for a substantial amount of time, and yet episode 2 shows Shannon first meet her right before she starts dating George, when she gives her the butterfly brooch.

1. No, no, no. At least, that's not how I see shkanontrice. Yasu keeps the three roles of Shannon, Kanon, and Beatrice separate. When Yasu creates Beatrice and has her bear the weight of Battler's "sin", Shannon has no idea. Because Shannon is her own separate entity, at least in terms of how Yasu perceives things. Though I don't recall there being a great time marker even indicating how much time has passed between Shannon getting the brooch and hooking up with George in EP2. But let's assume it wasn't long. The most this means is that EP2 was playing fast and loose with time, in what was probably a scene symbolic of Beatrice taking Battler's "sin" on and allowing for Shannon to move on and find love with George. But it's a fantasy scene that plays a part in establishing a fantasy narrative for the rest of the episode. Why shouldn't it be allowed to do that? We then get Ep. 7, which, while slightly fictionalized, gives a more direct account of how things worked.

2. Here you are, as you did regarding the end of Ep. 2, essentially taking a fantasy scene almost entirely literally. That isn't how one should interpret them, and the more fantastical and out-there nature of future fantasy scenes makes that really clear.

3. So essentially at most you have an explanation of this scene (that may just be entirely made up, who knows) that FITS with Rosatrice, but it doesn't fit with it any more than shkanontrice does, because there is no more inherent merit to assuming that a fantasy scene is generally reliable than it is to assuming that it [is] relatively unreliable in many respects.

[5/3/2016 10:41:07 PM] Nozomi: KNM does realize that a large part of the reason Rosa is so desperate to find a new husband is both so Maria can have a father and she doesn't have to be a single mother?
[5/3/2016 10:41:34 PM] Nozomi: Her being away from her company as a result in no way proves she "doesn't care about money"
[5/3/2016 10:41:54 PM | Edited 10:41:59 PM] Nozomi: If she didn't care about money, what was all that posturing with the other cousins even FOR?
[5/3/2016 10:42:07 PM] Nozomi: In some sense it must have been important to her.
[5/3/2016 10:45:16 PM | Edited 10:45:30 PM] Nozomi: I'm not sure why, if after solving it in a symbolic way and in some way succeeding (getting ONE of the treasures- the gold), her not getting any of the others would not indicate "Oh, so that's all Kinzo's magic could do." Or "Oh, so the epitaph was a lie." instead of "THUS I MUST RECREATE IT LITERALLY."

[5/3/2016 10:54:43 PM] Nozomi: Ok, so she thinks that If she follows the epitaph literally, then she can resurrect the dead and get love again. I'm not sure why she believes ANY of this, KNM has yet to provide a good reason why she takes the epitaph seriously at all as something magical and not just "The riddle to Kinzo's gold"
[5/3/2016 10:55:50 PM] Nozomi: Speaking of Kinzo's gold, the fact that according to KNM R-Prime is one of the gameboards and this is an explanation of Rosa's gameboard motives for murdering, means that he thinks that the gold exists and that she could find a way to get a colossal amount of money from unmarked stolen Italian gold without getting caught.
[5/3/2016 10:57:09 PM] Nozomi: Oh so she might have not even really believed that it was probable that it would happen
[5/3/2016 10:57:15 PM] Nozomi: but just kinda gambled on it happening anyway
[5/3/2016 10:57:25 PM] Nozomi: To be fair Yasu has a similar motivation so I can't be TOO critical
[5/3/2016 10:58:15 PM] Nozomi: But here's the thing- a whole lot of this IS similar to Yasu's motivation. It's not a pallet-swap, for sure, but you can't argue against Yasu's motives for killing people when Rosa's honestly aren't that different, and if anything are even more ridiculous.

[5/3/2016 11:02:06 PM | Edited 11:02:18 PM] Nozomi: So Rosa's motivations for wanting to fulfill the epitaph in a literal fashion include: Kinzo and Kuwadorian-B being revived, Rosa's husband would possibly come back, Maria would have an actual Best Mom, "furniture" would be worthy of love, and Battler's sin would be redeemed (somehow)[2]

[5/3/2016 11:02:48 PM] Nozomi: But then how could Beato say in red-
Ushiromiya Battler has a sin
Because of your sin, people die. (This is referring to Battler's sin.)
Due to your sin, a great many humans on this island die.

[5/3/2016 11:03:26 PM] Nozomi: The only possible response I can see is that Battler's sin IS a cause. But it's not the only cause, and we have no evidence that this cause is stronger than all the other causes Rosa had.

[5/3/2016 11:06:19 PM | Edited 11:06:36 PM] Nozomi: I suppose KNM could argue that Battler coming back is what caused her to actually carry out the murder plan, and thus the sin is the cause. But I feel like that's playing kinda fast and loose with the red, something that KNM acted like he was opposed to.

[5/3/2016 11:08:22 PM] Nozomi: It is pretty clear here that Beatrice is refer to the exact cause of the murders. If you hadn't sinned, X wouldn't have occurred. Since KNM likes his counterfactuals, let's imagine a counterfactual universe where all of KNM's solution is true, but Battler never makes his white horse promise, which is the sin. He just leaves and doesn't come back. Everything is the same, as far as I can tell, except Battler's sin is not a motivation. Would KNM argue that in this case, Rosa would have ignored all her other reasons to try and recreate the epitaph?

[5/3/2016 11:09:18 PM | Edited 11:09:46 PM] Nozomi: If he does, then they obviously aren't as important to Rosa as he's letting on. If he doesn't, then he can't say that it is valid to say they all died due to Battler's sin in red. [last portion of the last sentence slightly edited and restructured for clarity.]

[5/3/2016 11:11:38 PM] Nozomi: "Even money can not buy the things she wanted. She had very, very little to care about in her life."

Um... what? What about her daughter? Also, nowhere in the novels does Rosa give the slightest inclination of suffering from a suicidal level of depression.[3]

[5/3/2016 11:12:09 PM] Nozomi: She still seems to be motivated in 2 and 4 to repair her business, repair her relationship with Maria, and fix everything.

[5/3/2016 11:14:15 PM | Edited 11:16:42 PM] Nozomi: > So to carry out the witch's resurrection ceremony, Rosa made plans for carrying out various murders in seemingly impossible and magical ways

Except... the epitaph doesn't require that, even taken literally, which Rosa doesn't do. (KNM thinks R-Prime is Turn, and as I recall Rosa even skips the third Twilight there. She probably does in 4 too.) Killing using magic isn't mentioned anywhere in the epitaph.

[5/3/2016 11:24:02 PM | Edited 11:25:28 PM] Nozomi: > She wrote plans of the murders on pages of her daughter's diary and then put them inside message bottles both to create a catbox and because she wanted to be understood.

1. If we assume that magic scenes are in Turn (Message bottle version that is), why would she include that second-to-last one with the goats if she wants to be understood? It directly obscures her motivations! If the magical scenes AREN'T in Turn, a colossal amount of pieces of the puzzle are missing, since you, at a bare minimum, don't get the Beatrice-Shannon conversations.

2. If she wants to be understood through the message bottles, why make herself the victim of the first twilight in one of the murder scenarios (Legend)? That kind of seems contrary and makes it harder to people to both suss out that she's the killer and gives her less chances to elaborate on what her goals were, especially given that Legend appears to lack any fantasy scenes aside from gold butterflies.

3. Also how did Rosa predict things like what the weather was going to be like on Rokkenjima, and Ange not showing up?

[5/3/2016 11:26:20 PM | Edited 11:26:39 PM] Nozomi: 4. Also if Turn does have magic scenes (and an entire magical subplot), which it logically should to fit this narrative, why doesn't Legend?[4]

[5/3/2016 11:31:00 PM] Nozomi: > Rosa plans to kill everyone still alive at the end with the bomb, including herself, to fulfill the final twilight.

So basically Rosa is letting the daughter she loves get killed for a plan she has no reason to believe will work, that she might even believe has a pretty decent chance of not working! This makes her roughly as crazy as Yasu would have to be to have committed these murders. The only difference is that Yasu didn't actually kill anyone.

[5/3/2016 11:31:33 PM] Nozomi: Like seriously
[5/3/2016 11:31:39 PM] Nozomi: It's not like Rosa NEEDED to bring Maria along
[5/3/2016 11:32:07 PM] Nozomi: Find some sitter or something to take care of her, or if worst comes to worst, figure out a way for her to stay home alone
[5/3/2016 11:32:12 PM] Nozomi: It's better than MURDERING HER
[5/3/2016 11:32:30 PM] Nozomi: If you're right, you come back to life anyway and can be Best Mom
[5/3/2016 11:32:45 PM] Nozomi: If you're not then Rosa has Ange's fate, and that really sucks and I'd feel horrible for her
[5/3/2016 11:32:47 PM] Nozomi: But you know what?
[5/3/2016 11:32:53 PM] Nozomi: Having Ange's fate is probably better than being DEAD
[5/3/2016 11:34:06 PM] Nozomi: (Honestly she might even have it better than Ange since her father would be forced to take custody of her and we know pretty much nothing about him. He probably wouldn't be Best Dad, but unless he's a TOTAL scumbag he'd at least feel sympathy for Maria and try and be a good parent for her.)

[5/3/2016 11:35:35 PM] Nozomi: > There are multiple aspects to the connection between Battler's return and Beatrice's ceremony
[5/3/2016 11:35:46 PM] Nozomi: So it wasn't even just because of the sin that Battler's return caused Rosa to kill people
[5/3/2016 11:35:52 PM] Nozomi: So the red isn't even true in that sense
[5/3/2016 11:35:54 PM] Nozomi: Awesome

[5/3/2016 11:36:43 PM] Nozomi: > Since she carried Shannon's burden of love for Battler, she wanted Battler to achnoowledge her as a witch.
How on EARTH are those two things connected?

[5/3/2016 11:38:33 PM] Nozomi: > And a murder mystery needs a detective

Since when was Rosa trying to create a murder mystery? I thought she was trying to create impossible murders that everybody might think is magic. Why does she need a detective for that? And why would Battler make that good a detective? Rosa knows nothing about him at this point. What makes him a better choice than, say, Kyrie?

[5/3/2016 11:39:59 PM] Nozomi: "Probably one of the main deciders of Beatrice is to be understood by someone"

And since you're separating that from her sin.. she can't say in red it was the sin that caused her to commit the murders without doing what you would call "tapdancing" or engaging in ad hoc reasoning. HOW DO YOU NOT GET THIS?

[KNM repeats his claim that Rosa "carries" Shannon's love for Battler without actually being romantically involved with him]

[5/3/2016 11:46:01 PM] Nozomi: How can you carry a love without having it?
[5/3/2016 11:46:16 PM] Nozomi: Beato carries Shannon's love for Battler but realy really clearly loves Battler herself
[5/3/2016 11:46:30 PM] Nozomi: Like I'm not even sure what that would MEAN
[5/3/2016 11:46:52 PM] Nozomi: You're.... carrying the emotions associated with that love I guess?

[5/3/2016 11:48:09 PM] Nozomi: And then he's like "WELL ROSA DOES ACT INAPPROPRIATELY TOWARD BATTLER SOMETIMES" so he's trying to have his cake and eat it too I guess
[5/3/2016 11:48:18 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: o lol
[5/3/2016 11:48:27 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: yes that's right
[5/3/2016 11:48:32 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: rosa x battler is the real OTP
[5/3/2016 11:49:58 PM] Nozomi: I mean, honestly, I'm not sure how much of the scene he cites was Rosa even being playfully flirtatious and how much was just because we're clearly filtering this through Battler's perspective.
[5/3/2016 11:50:09 PM] Nozomi: I mean it's even 1st person
[5/3/2016 11:50:28 PM] Nozomi: And Battler misreads and misinterprets things ALL THE TIME


Part 2- George and Nanjo's motive for murder and Shannon's ludicrous characterization


[5/3/2016 11:53:50 PM] Nozomi: Yes, why would George murder his family and all the servants?
[5/3/2016 11:53:55 PM] Nozomi: That is a very good question
[5/3/2016 11:54:11 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Because George is
[5/3/2016 11:54:14 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: SECRETLY
[5/3/2016 11:54:15 PM] Nozomi: fat??
[5/3/2016 11:54:17 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Genderbent Erika
[5/3/2016 11:54:21 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: NN pls
[5/3/2016 11:54:26 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: I said SECRETLY
[5/3/2016 11:54:30 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: George is OBVIOUSLY fat

[5/3/2016 11:54:42 PM] Nozomi: Are you ready for his motive for murdering over a dozen people kwand
[5/3/2016 11:54:49 PM] Nozomi: And helping a clearly deranged woman
[5/3/2016 11:54:50 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Because hes' fat
[5/3/2016 11:54:53 PM] Nozomi: No
[5/3/2016 11:54:55 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: is that why
[5/3/2016 11:54:57 PM] Nozomi: It's FAR more sensible
[5/3/2016 11:55:06 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: it's because he's genderbent erika
[5/3/2016 11:55:07 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: ISN'T IT
[5/3/2016 11:55:08 PM] Nozomi: Because he loves Shannon
[5/3/2016 11:55:19 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: i like my answer better
[5/3/2016 11:55:41 PM] Nozomi: I mean I know that if I had a crush but my family wouldn't let me be with them I'd not only murder my family, but also everybody associated with them or unlucky enough to be around at the time
[5/3/2016 11:55:46 PM] Nozomi: So it makes sense
[5/3/2016 11:56:45 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: lol
[5/3/2016 11:56:50 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Seems legit

[5/3/2016 11:57:14 PM] Nozomi: Also, hey, remember this from Alliance?
"Because of your sin, people die. (This is referring to Battler's sin.)
Due to your sin, a great many humans on this island die.
[5/3/2016 11:57:14 PM] Nozomi: No one escapes, all die." (Which seems to tie back to the previous two reds, but you COULD spin this as unrelated[5])
[5/3/2016 11:57:30 PM] Nozomi: Well, KNM has already spoiled that George is the main killer of Gameboard 3
[5/3/2016 11:57:40 PM] Nozomi: So in no way did those people die due to Battler's sin
[5/3/2016 11:57:51 PM] Nozomi: Except in the most roundabout way imaginable
[5/3/2016 11:58:43 PM] Nozomi: "You said you'd come back on a white horse. You didn't, and I helped hook Shannon up with George, who turned out to be a crazed lunatic who is willing to kill everyone! But that's YOUR fault!"
[5/3/2016 11:59:20 PM] Nozomi: "But wait NN", one might say "That was from GAME 4, not GAME 3!" Ah, but in terms of general facts, KNM wants red truths to be universal. So this fact regarding the motivations of the murders certainly should be.

[5/4/2016 12:02:24 AM] Nozomi: >[George wants to] Eliminate Battler and his [George's] family

And R-Prime is Turn, a gameboard where Battler survives to the end

[5/4/2016 12:02:28 AM] Nozomi: George is a TERRIBLE murderer

[Regarding his Culprit!George having a "strong motive" to commit all the murders]
[5/4/2016 12:03:51 AM] Nozomi: No George does not have a strong motive. He has a strong motive to kill AT MOST 3 PEOPLE
[5/4/2016 12:04:15 AM] Nozomi: ONE OF WHOM LIVES TO THE END OF THE GAME YOU THINK IS CANON
[5/4/2016 12:06:10 AM] Nozomi: I just kinda skimmed over [the rest of] his explanation of George's motive because apparently there's nothing else to it and on paper I don't necessarily disagree that Umi sets him up as somebody who would be willing to kill for Shannon.
[5/4/2016 12:06:27 AM] Nozomi: The idea that it'd actually happen the way it does is just ludicrous
[5/4/2016 12:06:45 AM] Nozomi: Anyway, now, KNM, how are these two characters connected?

[5/4/2016 12:07:59 AM] Nozomi: > There is admittedly no direct evidence of a connection but for the "official explanation" there is NO evidence, direct or indirect, regarding accomplices such as Rosa or Hideyoshi
[5/4/2016 12:09:31 AM] Nozomi: 1. That's the tu quoque logical fallacy.
2. Evidence for Eva being involved- and Hideyoshi by association- exists in her "makeup" comment, and certainly the fact that they'd split off from the group and go relax, Hideyoshi EVEN TAKING A BATH right after having seen a murder isn't exactly normal. Evidence for Rosa being involved- we have the scene in the chapel with everyone acknowledging Beatrice and then Rosa being the only one surviving. We have on some level the necessity of her being involved, regardless of one's theory, as KNM himself argues. We have the end scene with the goats.
[5/4/2016 12:10:10 AM] Nozomi: Anyway, KNM does provide some indirect evidence
[5/4/2016 12:11:16 AM] Nozomi: "Rose and George are shown to visit the island apart from the annual family conferences"

For seemingly separate reasons, and it in no way links them together in a murder plot? We don't even have any evidence that outside the conferences they were there at the SAME TIME, though I don't find it that unlikely.

[5/4/2016 12:12:32 AM] Nozomi: "Both Rosa and George are connected to Shannon""

Given the trainwreck your attempt to connect Rosa to Shannon was, this kinda falls flat. And even if it were true, it again doesn't indicate that they would conspire to kill a single person.

[5/4/2016 12:14:05 AM] Nozomi: > George is on the best terms with Maria, suggesting a stronger connection between the two than with the other family members. This by extension is a connection to Rosa.

Or it could mean, as Battler suggests, that he's just kind of good with kids.

[5/4/2016 12:15:44 AM] Nozomi: ."George makes references to magic, even saying that his relationship with Shannon is a product of it."

Given that this was both unreliable perspective, I'm pretty sure, and we have no idea what George MEANT by "magic", this doesn't really mean that much. But are you trying to sell me that Rosa actually told George everything? And he agreed to work with somebody that mentally unstable, strong motive or not?

[5/4/2016 12:16:55 AM] Nozomi: > Knowing he would benefit as well from taking out the entire family

HOW?

[5/4/2016 12:17:16 AM] Nozomi: Actually, George HAS to think that he's going to survive this, no matter what Rosa plans, right?
[5/4/2016 12:17:20 AM] Nozomi: Like that's his entire motive right?
[5/4/2016 12:17:47 AM] Nozomi: How is it going to look when somebody and his new fiancée come back and pretty much everybody else is dead?
[5/4/2016 12:17:51 AM] Nozomi: How does he expect to get out of that?
[5/4/2016 12:19:12 AM | Edited 12:19:26 AM] Nozomi: I see a lot of contradictions KNM
[5/4/2016 12:19:32 AM] Nozomi: The fact that Shannon and George sometimes die are the LEAST of your worries
[5/4/2016 12:20:05 AM] Nozomi: Say, how does George think he's going to sell Shannon on this
[5/4/2016 12:20:41 AM] Nozomi: "I love you. By the way I'm going to kill everyone, including the boy you used to love, and that friend of your Kanon, and your employers and the rest of their family."
"k"
[5/4/2016 12:21:21 AM | Edited 12:21:28 AM] Nozomi: Remember when you were complaining about characters being idiots KNM?

[5/4/2016 12:22:54 AM] Nozomi: George going along with this is just flat out idiocy
[5/4/2016 12:24:47 AM] Nozomi: BUT HEY SPEAKING OF IDIOCY
[5/4/2016 12:24:58 AM] Nozomi: WHAT IS DR. NANJO'S MOTIVE [FOR] GOING ALONG WITH THIS PLAN
[5/4/2016 12:28:33 AM] Nozomi: > There was one sentence in 3 that indicated that Nanjo has a sick granddaughter. This means that he might need an expensive operation, knowing that Rosa has a large sum of money. He also may feel a sense of responsibility for not being able to cure her himself.
[5/4/2016 12:28:35 AM] Nozomi: So
[5/4/2016 12:28:36 AM] Nozomi: Hey
[5/4/2016 12:28:50 AM] Nozomi: You would think that a practicing doctor would have... connections to other doctors? Additional resources?
[5/4/2016 12:29:07 AM] Nozomi: Potentially ways to find a cheaper method of curing his granddaughter's ailment[6]
[5/4/2016 12:29:23 AM] Nozomi: How do we even know that the operation was expensive?
[5/4/2016 12:29:31 AM] Nozomi: Or that it was expensive enough to justify murder?

[5/4/2016 12:29:42 AM] Nozomi: If it was just a debilitating sickness and the operation was so expensive
[5/4/2016 12:29:49 AM] Nozomi: WHY DOES NANJO'S SON REFUSE TO USE THE MONEY GIVEN TO HIM
[5/4/2016 12:29:54 AM] Nozomi: JUST BECAUSE IT'S "SHADY"
[5/4/2016 12:31:14 AM] Nozomi: Also you have no idea if Rosa was there when she became head or even any particular reason to know that she was the head, but I'll just grant that as an assumption
[5/4/2016 12:32:34 AM] Nozomi: Now, before I continue, I want to point out something. Dr. Nanjo is not only trusting one mentally unstable person, but TWO (at least from his perspective). He might even know that they don't have the same motive for being involved in this. And he thinks he'll get out alive.... why?
[5/4/2016 12:32:46 AM] Nozomi: Like they have no motivation NOT to kill him to keep him quiet, at a minimum
[5/4/2016 12:33:01 AM | Edited 12:33:07 AM] Nozomi: He has no bargaining power here and is totally at Rosa's mercy
[5/4/2016 12:33:36 AM] Nozomi: But this also has the George problem- Nanjo comes back from an island where murders have occurred, and suddenly has a pretty large sum of money
[5/4/2016 12:33:45 AM] Nozomi: And he thinks he's going to be able to get away with that?
[5/4/2016 12:33:52 AM] Nozomi: Does KNM think the cops are freaking idiots?
[5/4/2016 12:35:21 AM] Nozomi: Now, instead of actually discussing the Love Duel or getting into the games we have some side-stuff with the servants. Honestly my attitude here is pretty much "Whatever"

[RE: Shannon's motivation for not explaining to anybody what's going on after the murders have started in Turn.]
[5/4/2016 12:36:01 AM] Nozomi: ... Hold on.
[5/4/2016 12:36:14 AM] Nozomi: You just killed Shannon's character
[5/4/2016 12:36:39 AM] Nozomi: Like seriously "mmkay. I know Rosa is probably the one killing everyone, but I got to love George for a few months so whatevs~!"
[5/4/2016 12:36:52 AM] Nozomi: Like according to KNM she has no idea George is even in on it
[5/4/2016 12:37:37 AM | Edited 12:37:47 AM] Nozomi: That is literally her motivation. and it's basically her FANTASY motivation as a PIECE for letting this happen. Like it is so blatantly a fantasy construct I almost can't believe that somebody is using it as an explanation for a character's motivation

[5/4/2016 12:39:36 AM] Nozomi: So, basically, Kumasawa's family receives money, which was a key piece of evidence for Nanjo's motive, but it could have a totally different interpretation
[5/4/2016 12:39:48 AM] Nozomi: And you justify this on the grounds that it isn't NECESSARY that Kumasawa be an accomplice
[5/4/2016 12:40:13 AM] Nozomi: Which is essentially an admission (which you outright make in the comments) that Nanjo is an accomplice only because you NEED HIM to be for the narrative to work.
[5/4/2016 12:40:49 AM] Nozomi: Which honestly I don't inherently object to, but you really can't complain about the lack of evidence of accomplices in the "official explanation" then
[5/4/2016 12:40:57 AM] Nozomi: Given how terrible your case for Nanjo Accomplice is


Part 3: On the Love Duel- Wait no I don't want to talk about that yet. Let's talk about Game 5.


[5/4/2016 12:48:54 AM | Edited 12:49:19 AM] Nozomi: > Beatrice's betrayal of Shannon is not accounted for in the "official explanation" despite them getting along in the 7th novel and beginning of the 2nd.

That's actually pretty easy. The Beatrice and Shannon personas have coinciding ideals and values so long as Battler is away. Beatrice is burdened with Shannon's love for Battler, but even if she perceives that that's not real reason to hold it against her. So if the two did interact (which they obviously don't outside Yasu's imagination) there's no reason to not have an amicable relationship. However, when Battler comes back into the picture, things change, at least in terms of gameboards 1, 2, and 4. The Shannon persona is in love with George and wants to spend his life with her, and the Beatrice persona is in love with Battler and if he doesn't remember her, wants to seek vengeance. This is all of course a fictional construction, given that the two personas could never interact outside Yasu's imagination, but it honestly doesn't require a weak explanation at all.

[5/4/2016 12:50:08 AM] Nozomi: An inner struggle also works, sure.
[5/4/2016 12:51:38 AM | Edited 12:51:51 AM] Nozomi: Yes. Beatrice's motives overcome those of shkanon and thus they are betrayed and eventually sacrificed. How could that not symbolize an inner struggle? Especially since, unlike you, I don't think that Turn ever actually happened, and in the end this was all the intent of the writer (or whoever wrote the fantasy scene) anyway?
[5/4/2016 12:54:11 AM] Nozomi: I don't see how it isn't betrayal in a shkanontrice model. It's just not betrayal on a direct "knife in the back" level, but on a more mental level in terms of what Yasu considers important
[5/4/2016 12:54:43 AM] Nozomi: Which honestly is an idea I find more interesting than "the narrative depicts it this way because Rosa was nice to Shannon then killed her"
[5/4/2016 12:57:20 AM] Nozomi: > He wants to use the bomb to obscure the fact that he and Shannon are still alive

I'm a tad confused as to why Rosa TOLD George about the bomb. She KNOWS they have different motives, and even if she doesn't care about her own life or the life of her DAUGHTER for the sake of the ceremony, isn't there the risk of him just getting Shannon, convincing her to go with him, and then blowing everybody up before the ceremony can ever start?

[5/4/2016 12:59:27 AM] Nozomi: So wait, George plans to kill Rosa because it isn't smart to leave a witness alive, and yet isn't afraid at all that Rosa will do the same to him?
[5/4/2016 12:59:45 AM] Nozomi: Because if he IS that "Leave with Shannon immediately" plan should kinda be what he does
[5/4/2016 1:00:19 AM] Nozomi: I don't like George but you REALLY ARE making him seem incompetent here
[5/4/2016 1:00:38 AM] Nozomi: I'm also still confused on how George plans to explain all this to Shannon
[5/4/2016 1:01:45 AM] Nozomi: Even IF you blow up everything and get new identities or whatever (Which... I assume George prepared? Because it's not an easy thing to do and it wouldn't be too hard to get caught if he tries after the fact), you need to get Shannon to agree with this, and surely he knows she wouldn't be a fan of jumping to murdering EVERYONE as the first option.

[5/4/2016 1:03:09 AM] Nozomi: > Erika notes that death drugs are allowed under Knox because there are drugs that simulate death, and death drugs are needed for the 5th game, so they must be available to the culprit
[5/4/2016 1:03:14 AM] Nozomi: WOW THIS EVIDENCE IS HORRIBLE
[5/4/2016 1:03:26 AM] Nozomi: 1. Fake death drugs aren't necessary for the 5th game. At all.
[5/4/2016 1:03:55 AM] Nozomi: Like the fifth game is weird and there's a lot of uncertain stuff, but there's absolutely no need to invoke fake death drugs
[5/4/2016 1:04:43 AM] Nozomi: 2. So small bombs and flying stake traps pass Knox then? Battler mentioned them earlier in the series! That must have been a clue!
[5/4/2016 1:05:09 AM] Nozomi: Heck I think both Battler AND George suggested flying stake-traps, so it's even MORE foreshadowed than death drugs!
[5/4/2016 1:05:44 AM] Nozomi: Like seriously you are reaching so hard here

[5/4/2016 1:08:10 AM] Nozomi: > The drug would have been provided [by] Dr. Nanjo and he's a doctor so he would have easy access to drugs that could induce fake death

I certainly don't know of any particularly common drugs that could do that that would allow you to snap out of it afterwards (there's a couple drugs I know of that can induce comatose states as a result of overdose), so I don't know of anything that a general practitioner like Nanjo could get his hands on without awkward questions (which would FURTHER make him wonder how he was going to get away with this)
[5/4/2016 1:08:24 AM] Nozomi: And I have a hunch you aren't going to name any examples and just take Erika's word as gospel
[5/4/2016 1:09:05 AM] Nozomi: I mean, I don't know WHAT drugs Erika or Ryukishi could even be talking about
[5/4/2016 1:09:38 AM] Nozomi: I've only heard about things like this in the context of being used as a literary device.

[5/4/2016 1:11:34 AM] Nozomi: yeeeah culprit of 5 is George Expected/10
[5/4/2016 1:13:29 AM] Nozomi: > Just arming the bomb and hoping everyone dies in the explosion is a difficult plan that could easily fail because Shannon knows nothing about the plan and Rosa could be in his way

1. SHANNON KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT HIS PLANS REGARDLESS. YOU ALREADY ESTABLISHED THAT. WHICH IS A FREAKING HORRIBLE IDEA.

2. Weaken/kill Rosa, go arm the bomb. Simple.

[On George's motive for 5 being "shaming and disrupting" the Ushiromiya family, as well as the deaths of Krauss and Natsuhi.]

[5/4/2016 1:14:35 AM] Nozomi: umm... what does shaming and "disrupt"ing the UShiromiya family have to do with being with Shannon
[5/4/2016 1:14:44 AM] Nozomi: And why would he want to kill Krauss and Natsuhi
[5/4/2016 1:14:48 AM] Nozomi: They have nothing to do with anything
[5/4/2016 1:15:21 AM] Nozomi: And if he wanted to kill Natsuhi and potentially Battler, he failed spectacularly
[5/4/2016 1:15:34 AM] Nozomi: And when he faked his own death, why wouldn't he want to do it WITH Shannon?
[5/4/2016 1:15:45 AM] Nozomi: That way Shannon doesn't have any questions when he turns out to be alive?
[5/4/2016 1:16:05 AM] Nozomi: KNM you're making Game 5 make LESS sense stop

[5/4/2016 1:17:50 AM | Edited 1:18:11 AM] Nozomi: umm... why wouldn't there be servants in the mansion given Krauss and Natsuhi's death? Even if George knows Kinzo is dead (Rosa told him for no reason I guess?), wouldn't Eva or Rudolf just inherit?
[5/4/2016 1:18:52 AM] Nozomi: (I mean I have no idea how the Japanese inheritance process works but I have a hunch KNM doesn't either)
[5/4/2016 1:19:01 AM] Nozomi: also
[5/4/2016 1:19:03 AM] Nozomi: Hey
[5/4/2016 1:19:05 AM] Nozomi: you know
[5/4/2016 1:19:07 AM] Nozomi: SHANNON CAN KINDA QUIT
[5/4/2016 1:19:17 AM] Nozomi: CONVINCE HER TO QUIT
[5/4/2016 1:19:21 AM] Nozomi: AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO KILL ANYONE
[5/4/2016 1:19:26 AM] Nozomi: OR DO CONVOLUTED BLACKMAIL PLOTS

[5/4/2016 1:21:01 AM] Nozomi: Ok
[5/4/2016 1:21:11 AM] Nozomi: He mentioned George killing Hideyoshi
[5/4/2016 1:21:21 AM] Nozomi: So let's talk about how obviously fake Hideyoshi's death was
[5/4/2016 1:27:22 AM] Nozomi: 1. when the killer enters the room Hideyoshi says "Who are you?" Even though we know there are no unknown people on the island.

2. The killer SOMEHOW OVERPOWERS HIDEYOSHI

3. The killer then DRAGS HIM AWAY[7]

4. Kyrie thinks to check the bathroom but not under the bed or in the closet? Why is she suddenly so sloppy?

5. Kyrie and Battler interfere with Erika's investigation, which would undoubtedly have lead to Natsuhi's discovery.

6. Why is the killer creating a closed room and trapping both Natsuhi AND himself in it? If he just wanted her to not have an alibi, then why not just force her to stay in her own room or somewhere else? Or if he wanted Natsuhi to be discovered, wouldn't he, by hiding in the same room, be risking his own discovery as much, if not more? If Natsuhi were to be discovered, wouldn't she end up revealing that the actual killer is still in the room?

7. What if nobody came into the room at all? KNM claims that George didn't plan to kill Hideyoshi, he just happened to have been the one that came in. Which seems to indicate he had no contingency plan for if nobody came in. What if Hideyoshi AND Eva had come in? What would he have done then?

[5/4/2016 1:33:16 AM] Nozomi: Ok, so "all the pieces of the 5th game fall into place" assuming that Rosa tells George about that one baby that caused her severe mental trauma and maybe even the very personal way she coped.
[5/4/2016 1:33:22 AM] Nozomi: And you have no evidence to support this assumption
[5/4/2016 1:33:36 AM | Edited 1:33:51 AM] Nozomi: I can sure see why I'd want to go for this instead of "Faked by Yasu/Battler"
[5/4/2016 1:34:16 AM] Nozomi: Actually, I wonder how KNM explains the random call Battler gives Jessica [days prior to the murders] that is totally different from all the other games that we don't get to hear the content of
[5/4/2016 1:34:33 AM] Nozomi: eeeeeeh it's probably not important.

Part 4- NOW we get to the Love Duel and some other stuff.


[I don't really explain what his version of the Love Duel is. Basically it's the three possibilities dueling- If Rosa and Battler win, then that means Rosa fulfilled the ceremony and got Battler to acknowledge her. If George and Shannon win, George kills everyone and gets away with his murder plan. If Kanon-Jessica win both of them are caught before either is killed. However, the other parties can't live if the other parties win, George-Shannon and Rosa-Battler especially.]

[5/4/2016 1:37:00 AM] Nozomi: Objection #1: Why would Rosa-Battler be in competition with Shannon-George and Kanon-Jessica? Rosa has no romantic inclination according to you. It's totally out of place.

[5/4/2016 1:39:56 AM | Edited 1:40:28 AM] Nozomi: Objection #2: Rosa can never really "win'. After all, the epitaph isn't actually magical. She can never achieve her goals. So again, why is she in this in the first place?
[5/4/2016 1:41:31 AM] Nozomi: Objection #3: Why Jessica-Kanon? That seems incredibly random. Why is Kanon important at all in KNM's version of Umineko? Why not have it be Natsuhi-Krauss, for instance?
[5/4/2016 1:42:26 AM | Edited 1:42:40 AM] Nozomi: Objection #4: Just because you don't have romantic love doesn't make your life incomplete. Screw you.
[5/4/2016 1:45:28 AM] Nozomi: Obejction #5: Why is it that Kanon is fated to lose the duel? I don't see any reason why George and Rosa CAN'T both get caught before Kanon and Jessica die.

[5/4/2016 4:24:50 AM] Nozomi: This is amazing. He is totally rewriting Yasu's entire furniture speech. Like, he has basically no basis for any of this except his previous arguments that are based on nothing.

[5/4/2016 4:26:04 AM] Nozomi: The fact that KNM explicitly notes that Nanjo's son doesn't collect the money and even connects this TO the granddaughter makes me wonder if he honestly didn't think his arguments through, or is just skipping over anything he finds inconvenient. Well he's basically admitted its the latter in Nanjo's case so
[5/4/2016 4:26:34 AM] Nozomi: Oh he lied.
[5/4/2016 4:27:00 AM] Nozomi: A completely unfalsifiable argument that really explains nothing but happens to cover up a massive hole in your hypothesis!
[5/4/2016 4:32:08 AM | Edited 4:32:58 AM] Nozomi: Though honestly, I don't see why he couldn't be honest. "Yeah, I took the money. It might have been wrong of me, but I have a sick daughter who really needed an operation and I just couldn't afford it otherwise. Judge me all you like." There's nothing in his established character that would prevent this, given that prior to the Ange scene he HAD no character. If Ryukishi had presented it like this, we could make up our own minds on whether he had made a moral or immoral choice (or even neutral), as could Ange. It would make the reader think and could even touch on the issues of sacrificing ones own morals to achieve a greater end, which could be spun to apply to the motive you've given both Rosa and George (though admittedly probably not too successfully). Assuming that Ryukishi was crafting the narrative you say he was crafting, there really ISN'T much reason for him to have not done it this way unless you want to argue he's a lazy writer. (Which I wouldn''t have that much objection to, but much of what you say IS predicated on him not being lazy). You don't even have the exception of the deception this time, because Dr. Nanjo being an accomplice in no way immediately leads to either Rosa OR George, let alone both of them. And it is only the second reference [to said granddaughter] in... 4 books.[8]

Part 5: Appropriately, back to Game 5!

[Regarding KNM's statement that the first call made by TMF19YA is made in all the games by George]

[5/4/2016 5:32:39 AM] Nozomi: You're for some reason assuming that TMF19YA (typical abbreviation for the man from 19 years ago just to be clear) is present outside Lambda's game. There's no reason to assume that. Lambda's game is noted several times to be different in many respects, and has some key differences, Erika's presence just being the one off the top of my head.

[RE: Noting that Rosa gives Battler a clue to solve the epitaph.]
[5/4/2016 5:34:33 AM | Edited 5:35:26 AM] Nozomi: But... if Rosa's gambling on people not solving the epitaph.. why would she give Battler a hint to solve it? I know that Beatrice makes pointless self-defeating moves all the time, but that's a trait that makes sense for YASU. Not so much for Rosa.
[5/4/2016 5:35:10 AM] Nozomi: Especially given that Rosa has far far more motivation to have the ceremony completed than Yasu did in the games where she's the culprit.
[5/4/2016 5:38:03 AM | Edited 5:38:43 AM] Nozomi: "Rosa is like one of those serial killers that leave behind hints for the police, because they essentially want to be stopped."

You asserted that Rosa quite possibly believed that (for no good reason granted, but this is your theory) the following would happen if the epitaph was solved in a literal, murderous sense:

1. She'll actually become literal Best Mom
2. Her husband would come back
3. Kinzo and the Kuwadorian Beatrice would be revived
4. Battler's sin would be redeemed (somehow)
And more. Why on EARTH would she "want to be stopped", especially given that you claim that she has nothing to live for?
[5/4/2016 5:39:56 AM] Nozomi: I can accept her just "leaving it up to fate" and "what happens, happens" if she is truly so unmotivated to keep living and such. What I can't accept is that she would go out of her way to CHANGE fate, so that it DOESN'T happen.
[5/4/2016 5:42:13 AM | Edited 5:42:52 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa argued for Battler to be the head despite objections from other family members because she's Beatrice

Or maybe she did it because she likes Battler and thinks "Fair's fair"? He DID supposedly solve the epitaph after all. Heck, maybe she thinks that by supporting Battler she can get in a good bargaining position for gold, if you want to put a more negative spin on it.

[5/4/2016 5:43:18 AM] Nozomi: Ok, the knock. whooooo.
[5/4/2016 5:44:52 AM] Nozomi: You know KNM, typically in Umi when pretty much every single logical option is eliminated, the answer is: It didn't happen. Particularly when we don't see it from a reliable perspective. There's no real reason to think that a change in GM would change this (before you accuse me of hypocrisy), and the simplest answer for the knock mystery IS: Everybody was in on it. It didn't happen.

[KNM claims that the solution for the knock was clued in Will's opening speech, when he comments on a clock not necessarily telling the correct time.]
[5/4/2016 5:46:55 AM] Nozomi: So basically Ryukishi had the solution of the knock be foreshadowed by a throwaway line from Will on a totally different topic that is never even linked to ANY of the gameboards in any way?
[5/4/2016 5:47:01 AM] Nozomi: Even for YOU that's a new low KNM

[5/4/2016 5:48:34 AM] Nozomi: Let me say, I genuinely like the concept of it being because the clock was changed. That's a decent workaround for the red.
[5/4/2016 5:48:51 AM | Edited 5:49:01 AM] Nozomi: I've been pretty aggressive towards you at points, KNM, but I do like this explanation. It's just wrong.
[5/4/2016 5:52:26 AM | Edited 5:52:44 AM] Nozomi: I like how you're claiming that people who "support the official explanation" need to accept your theory when there's no real basis for it.

[5/4/2016 5:52:56 AM] Nozomi: Wait how do we know that Jessica knows that Kinzo is dead?

[5/4/2016 5:56:02 AM] Nozomi: Like, this is kind of a tangent, but there's no real reason to assume that given in the text. She definitely should find it ODD that "Gee, I haven't seen the grandfather who I live in the same house with in YEARS", but we never see any sign that she knows more than she's letting on. She could accept that it's just her grandfather being reclusive or eccentric or whatever. She could get suspicious and ask her parents, they babble out some excuse or get mad at her, she goes "ok : (" and is maybe suspicious but never presses further. She could also know and the text just didn't think It an important point. But there's no real reason to accept any of these over the others. It's just not something Ryukishi felt the need to explain.

[5/4/2016 6:13:27 AM | Edited 6:14:33 AM] Nozomi: 1. WHY would George change the clock? It creates no mystery for the other pieces, because they have no access to the red truths that make it so that the letter couldn't have been delivered at the time it actually was? The best option is that it's so he could set-up an alibi, but the other clocks would be noticeably different.

1a. Your explanation for this basically amounts to "Well, George might not be around at midnight, which would be the thematically appropriate time". Now George has absolutely no reason to care about this. But let's say Rosa does it for him or he plays along. It's a cheap excuse and there honestly isn't too much that indicates that Beatrice OR Rosa have a major affinity for midnight. Midnight tends to be emphasized in the stories, but that's a narrative device and because midnight has that sort of significance to US. Midnight on the second day is only significant because that's when the bomb goes off, and we have no idea is that time was chosen simply as an arbitrary time limit, or if there was some sort of significance to it. Most of Beato's twilights occur during the day or evening at latest. And since you consider Turn to be R-Prime, there is no evidence that the adults were killed at midnight. None at all. The closest to evidence we have for Legend certainly doesn't indicate as much

2. The problems get worse though, because one commenter says something that essentially causes the entire argument to collapse: "[regarding discussing with a Japanese coworker the red truth that nobody outside the mansion could have set the letter] He said it's worded such that anyone outside of the mansion when the meeting starts couldn't cause anything to happen in the mansion for the duration of the meeting. What's funny is that he also said they could still conceivably enter, but that even if they did they still couldn't cause anything to happen there."

George wasn't in the mansion when the conference started.
George therefore cannot cause anything to happen in the mansion
Setting down a letting and changing the clock would by definition "be causing things to happen"
George did neither of these things.
QED.

(It's worth noting that when this was pointed out KNM essentially completely concedes the argument.)

[5/4/2016 6:15:11 AM] Nozomi: I mean, given that we're back to the only reasonable explanation for the letter being "They lied", there honestly isn't much reason to entertain the rest of KNM's theory for episode 5. But let's indulge him.

[5/4/2016 6:21:03 AM] Nozomi: Him discussing the second phone call Natsuhi gets actually makes me realize that this interpretation of the Japanese completely falsifies his entire theory for the 5th game. Because in order for his George theory to work, George has to make this second phone call. THAT is connected with him placing the letter and changing the clock, something that he couldn't of done. Thus we know that the person who sent the second phone call wasn't George. And if we assume that that person is the culprit and killer, that can't be George.

[5/4/2016 6:23:15 AM | Edited 6:23:24 AM] Nozomi: However, I'll at least give a cursory glance to the rest of his arguments.

[5/4/2016 6:27:05 AM | Edited 6:27:27 AM] Nozomi: "The fact that Natsuhi only told Shannon that she liked fall and the fall tarot card was placed at her door is not evidence that it couldn't have been George, because either Shannon could have told George or he could have used a basic magic trick where he places a card of each season everywhere in her room, then when Natsuhi finds the fall card and remarks on it, George acts like he knew all along."

1. The George-was-told hypothesis is purely speculative and based on nothing, so it can basically be dismissed.

2. The magic trick observation is completely true, but that makes it possible for anybody other than Yasu with the opportunity to place the cards there to have done it, including the common suspect- Battler. It in no way implicates George.

[5/4/2016 6:29:40 AM] Nozomi: "Shannon and Kanon could not have made the phone call because they were in the dining room when Natsuhi was on the phone, according to the reds."

Alright. Battler did it. Not a hard problem to solve.

[5/4/2016 6:40:26 AM | Edited 6:41:36 AM] Nozomi: > George (called the culprit here for some reason) attacked Genji in the waiting room prior to 1:00 AM. He then used a fake death drug and fake blood to fake his death. Eva then sealed the room at 1 AM having never checked inside, and then the unconscious Genji was discovered and believed to be dead by Kanon and Kumasawa when the seals were broken.

[5/4/2016 6:41:56 AM] Nozomi: 1. Why did Eva put the seals on the room Genji was found in anyway? What would that have gained her?

[5/4/2016 6:42:22 AM | Edited 6:43:21 AM] Nozomi: 2. I'll assume that he got the death drug from Nanjo who is cooperating for whatever reason. But where did he get the fake blood? Did Nanjo provide that too? If so, why not just use real blood? Surely he could get access to that pretty easily.

[5/4/2016 6:44:42 AM | Edited 6:45:17 AM] Nozomi: > Krauss was attacked at some point prior to 1:00 AM. We can presume he was tied up and unconscious after this. He was then left behind by George and return the following morning, and the culprit killed Krauss after the next call to Natsuhi. Since his corpse wasn't moved post-death, the traces in his room were fake.

No major complaints about this. Carry on.

[5/4/2016 6:52:24 AM | Edited 7:02:19 AM] Nozomi: > 1st twilight: Jessica, Rosa, George, and Maria are all found faking death complete with fake blood and fake wounds. George attacked the four of them and fed them a fake death drug, and then faked his own death.

1. I'm still confused as to why he wouldn't have at some point clued Shannon in on everything and had them fake their deaths together.
2. How many of these fake death drugs does he have? He's used 6. How did Nanjo get so many?
3. Isn't it convenient that the family members covered up the bodies in a way just so Erika couldn't determine that the supposed wounds were fake?

4. Also, why wasn't Battler the main suspect for the cousin's room murder, given that he was sleeping in the room, before Erika revealed that she'd been listening in? He's really the obvious candidate.

4a. In the comments KNM responds to this criticism that this is simply a trait of Umi, that people rarely accuse each other aside from making broad sweeping statements like "the servants did it or helped". But that is simply not true:

In Legend, Eva accuses Natsuhi of killing Kinzo. In Turn, Rosa initially blames Kanon, and then blames Battler at the end of the game. In Ep. 3 both Jessica and Battler blame Eva. Then in Ep. 4 everything is blamed on Kinzo.

> The culprit behind the fake deaths has to have been one of Jessica, Maria, Rosa, or George.

Or it could have been all of them. Since pretty much everybody (or outright everybody) was in on it.

[5/4/2016 7:04:44 AM] Nozomi: I'm honestly ignoring his contrived way to make Genji's body "disappear" because it's simply less elegant than the logical explanation- that it was all a set-up. It's hard to say much about Krauss' murder because of how little we know about it.

[5/4/2016 7:06:01 AM | Edited 7:06:16 AM] Nozomi: > Battler provides an explanation for Kinzo to have escaped from his study, thereby giving another person an excuse to carry away the corpses.

That's another thing. Battler's explanation was contrived and never would have worked realistically. And yet Eva and Rudolf immediately buy it? Really? Just because lolkinzo?

[5/4/2016 7:13:10 AM | Edited 7:14:17 AM] Nozomi: > 2nd twilight: George hides under the bed before Natsuhi enters the guest room. Then Hideyoshi enters and he kills him. He then hides under the bed again. Nobody checks under the bed, including Natsuhi, so nobody finds him.

1. Ah yes, lolhiding. Far better than "it was fake".
2. I repeat my previous objection regarding Hideyoshi not recognizing his murderer
3. I repeat my previous objection regarding the killer locking HIMSELF in a locked room.
4. I repeat my previous objection regarding putting Natsuhi in the locked room when she can out him immediately.
5. I repeat my previous objection regarding the sloppiness of the investigation and the way that Erika was outright HINDERED from investigating the crime scene.

[5/4/2016 7:15:39 AM] Nozomi: You really don't find it strange that NOBODY looked in the two most obvious places for the killer, KNM?
[5/4/2016 7:15:43 AM] Nozomi: NOBODY?

[5/4/2016 7:18:46 AM] Nozomi: > Given that we have nothing to go on for the rest of Game 5, since it gets suspended, we can only speculate. It's possible George sets the bomb. It's possible that Rosa sets the bomb in retaliation. We don't know.

1. Well given that all we can do is speculate and you operate under completely unfounded and a basically-proven-false premise, I'm glad you didn't spend much time on it.
2. So wait, I thought Rosa lacked any sort of motivation or desire to live. Why would she have been so upset about George's betrayal? Surely she could have expected it?

[5/4/2016 7:19:15 AM | Edited 7:19:58 AM] Nozomi: > I don't have a clue how believers in the official explanation would explain this game.

Well, I've given my crack at it. Think it's better than yours', honestly. The only thing you explain that I don't is Krauss and that's because we simply don't know who kidnapped him, or why. Or why he was killed. And I don't like speculating when I have basically no info.

[5/4/2016 7:21:51 AM] Nozomi: Why are you applying reds from a totally different GM to this game?
[5/4/2016 7:22:01 AM] Nozomi: Oh because it makes your theory look better.

[5/4/2016 7:27:43 AM | Edited 7:27:58 AM] Nozomi: > The fifth game was not a prank because there is no evidence whatsoever that suggests it was, the epitaph was solved so the family would have things on their mind rather than pranking Erika, the family wasn't annoyed by Erika, Eva's outrage makes it ridiculously unlikely that it was a prank.

1. I think I've provided plenty of evidence. Let me check.... 9 reasons (if you will permit me to count the fact that "they lied" is the only logical answer still remaining for the letter mystery as a reason)[9] to believe that this was faked. None of these have even been touched on by you, let alone refuted.

2. Why assume the prank was for Erika's benefit? All of this was clearly targeted toward Natsuhi. Erika just popped in and interfered, and everybody did their best to control the situation the best way they could.

3. Eva is a good actress, what can I say. By itself this really doesn't mean that much.

"My explanation is both possible, plausible, consistent, coherent, and elegant."

Absolutely none of that is true except maybe consistent.

Part 6- A Quickie on Gold Truth

[5/4/2016 7:32:46 AM] Nozomi: > We know the first gold statement (The one in 5 about guaranteeing Kinzo's corpse) is true

No we don't. We don't know that at all. We never see the corpse, we never get details on it. All we know is that Battler presents a corpse, and a bunch of people agree that it's Kinzo's. WAS it? Maybe. Probably, even. But we in no way know that.

[5/4/2016 7:36:21 AM | Edited 7:37:48 AM] Nozomi: > The gold truth is based off consensus. It is not based on the inherent truth of the statement, just that it is believed by an individual.

Oh, I actually agree more or less. Alright then, carry on. (I mean as KNM says this is basically explained in 8, but still. Pleasantly surprised it wasn't dumb.)
[5/4/2016 7:39:43 AM] Nozomi: > If Will's solutions are false, they serve no purpose whatsoever. After all, Will understands Beatrice, and that's the whole point of the 7th game, to a degree.

Except he may understand that Beatrice wants to HEAR certain answers, and is telling her the answers she wants to HEAR. But I'll grant you that they are probably the solutions to the gameboards.

ANNOTATIONS:

[1] Given that KNM never explicitly addresses this, I can only go by the rest of what he DOES say, and basically it would amount to either: "Yes she does" or "She doesn't really care". Neither are exactly compelling.

[2] Or level of apathy, or however KNM might want to spin it.

[3] He never explains how fulfilling the epitaph will do this.

[4] This ends up being incredibly relevant to his theory regarding Prime so I want to include it so it doesn't look like it came out of thin air. My objections are kinda answered by his explanation, but it only opens the door to more questions.

[5] Given that KNM gives a full analysis of this sequence to prove that they ARE all referring to the same thing later on, he basically made my objection almost airtight if we want Beatrice to be considered reasonable in any way whatsoever.

[6] Given that, as I noticed later on, Nanjo granddaughter's illness was terminal, and hence uncurable, this entire motive is utterly incoherent. The only alternative KNM gives (in the comments) is that this was his way of getting vengeance as a result, which is even worse than his original motive.

[7] I may have misremembered this one. I feel that my other points stand though, and this was really a minor one. The only one KNM even comes close to contesting is 2, and I genuinely don't think that even an experienced martial artist would be able to easily overpower a big guy like Hideyoshi without much of a struggle, given George's frame and stature.

[8] Given that it's a terminal illness this objection doesn't even matter, but I kept it in because it's still valid.

[9] Actually, now that I've gone over my analysis again, if you count the knock I've provided 12 reasons, discounting my third reason for Hideyoshi's death being fakery. If you discount the knock, I still have 11. If you discount my second reason for Hideyoshi's death being fakery because KNM did at least try to explain it, I have 10. That's pretty substantial, I'd say.
Spoiler : Part 3- Explanations for Gameboards 1-4 :

Part 1- Explanation for Legend of the Golden Witch


[5/4/2016 7:40:21 AM] Nozomi: Wheee still not tired so let's see how much of this we can burn through. Gameboards 1-4, let's rock!
[5/4/2016 7:42:34 AM] Nozomi: I agree, as BP and I have discussed, that Rosa is one of the best letter-giving candidates for Legend. I think I may have tossed out almost this exact theory.
[5/4/2016 7:43:01 AM | Edited 7:45:42 AM] Nozomi: Anyway, let us begin. This is really the ultimate test of your hypothesis- if you can provide more compelling theories than the "official explanations", I will at least have to concede that the Rosa-George-Nanjo hypothesis is equally possible. So I'll be keeping a tally of which model explains the murders better.

[5/4/2016 7:46:10 AM] Nozomi: First game, first twilight. Six corpses in the gardening shed.
[5/4/2016 7:49:47 AM] Nozomi: > The official explanation is impossible because shkanon is impossible. In addition, there isn't any evidence that Hideyoshi is an accomplice, and a theory that involves accomplices when no evidence points to them should be rejected.

1. Well, you've proven no such thing. So that isn't a particularly valid objection.

2. A couple times now I've provided a couple pieces of circumstantial evidence that Hideyoshi and Eva likely were in on a murder game plot. I would said it's around as good as your evidence in favor of Nanjo, if not better, so it might be best not to be throwing stones.

[5/4/2016 7:57:22 AM] Nozomi: > George, Nanjo, and Rosa take the victims (Gohda, Kyrie, Rudolf, Shannon, and Gohda) to the garden shed, and then rip their faces apart with garden tools. The plan was to fake Rosa and Shannon's deaths. George probably knocked Shannon unconscious prior to them killing everybody, since he likely wouldn't want her to know he was a murderer. They fake Shannon and Rosa's wounds and then the death drug was taken (Shannon's was either force-fed or taken earlier I assume), then Nanjo lies about Rosa being dead the next day. Will's riddle doesn't refer to a corpse that doesn't exist, but a corpse that can't return to Earth because it's still living.

[5/4/2016 7:57:38 AM] Nozomi: I know you said to wait until you were finished, but I already have a couple objections
[5/4/2016 8:00:34 AM | Edited 8:00:55 AM] Nozomi: 1. How does George believe he's going to fool Shannon into thinking he didn't kill people? Shannon isn't THAT dim. I know you need Shannon to not know for Natsuhi's locked room in 2 to work, but it really creates problems.

2. A fake death drug may be clued in Chiru (if we're being REALLY REALLY GENEROUS), but it was in NO WAY clued in Beato's gameboards, so in no way can you say that Knox's 8th was fulfilled. If you don't care about Knox, you shouldn't have cited it earlier in your series.[1]

3. This is a less effective solution. If it was that the corpse was fake, why wouldn't Will's riddle be "won't" return, rather than "can't" return? A human body is perfectly capable of returning to Earth. Will seems to be rather clearly implying that a body there CAN'T return to earth, because it's NOT actually a body. Whether that be because it's some kind of fake body, or there isn't a body at all. Either works with shkanon.

[5/4/2016 8:11:00 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa and Shannon were in the garden shed all night together, with Shannon in a state of fake death, so my theory regarding the murderers betraying one another comes into play. Rosa killed Shannon during the night before she took the fake death drug and after George left. Rosa killed Shannon and then smashed her face apart, meshing this solution with Will's riddle and explaining the statement that the plan would have fallen apart if George had tried to look at Shannon's face, because he would have seen that she was already dead. Hideyoshi merely wanted to keep his son from seeing her smashed up face. Alternatively, Rosa could have poisoned George's fake death drug and George killed Shannon without realizing it.

[5/4/2016 8:12:26 AM] Nozomi: 1. Your alternate explanation doesn't explain Will's comment to Clair very well. How would George known Shannon was dead if she was poisoned by the drug? The drug simulates death, yes?

2. Your main theory is kinda absurd too, however. George, knowing that Rosa is mentally unstable, would leave BEFORE Rosa has taken the death drug and just assume that everything would be ok? Even if he doesn't know the totality of Rosa's plan, he clearly doesn't trust her and knows they have totally different goals. He has no reason to leave.

[5/4/2016 8:14:01 AM | Edited 8:27:36 AM] Nozomi: 3. Also, throughout the rest of the game he never goes and tries to convince Natsuhi to give him the key to wake her up? Or goes and tries to get into the shed himself somehow? That never happens? He's KILLING PEOPLE FOR HER. What will he do if she wakes up before his plan is over with? Everything could be thrown out of whack for him, but Rosa too, and he can hardly predict what she'll do when under pressure. (And if Rosa can get out of the shed, Shannon can too, so any idea that she'd be stuck there doesn't work. And given what her last moments would be, waking up around a bunch of dead bodies would REALLY make her want to know what the heck was happening)

[5/4/2016 8:16:42 AM | Edited 8:17:25 AM] Nozomi: > The fact that Rosa was in full view of Battler doesn't matter, because there isn't any evidence he actually took a good look at her and only closely observed his parents (and potentially Krauss). Therefore, at the very least, Gohda, Rosa, and Shannon's deaths are not confirmed based off detective's authority and any of the corpses could be fake. Also in the anime version Nanjo was standing in front of Rosa, blocking his view.
[5/4/2016 8:17:29 AM] Nozomi: 1. lolanime
[5/4/2016 8:22:40 AM] Nozomi: 2. Other than that, no major objections

[5/4/2016 8:29:06 AM | Edited 8:31:11 AM] Nozomi: > Genji locking the shed afterwards and giving the key to NAtsuhi doesn't mean Rosa couldn't get out of the shed, since it's very possible for her to have escaped- she could have destroyed the shutter using a tool, the anime suggests that the window might have been big enough to squeeze through, or Genji might have pretended to lock the shutter.

1. Destroying the shutter is incredibly risky- not only is there the chance it won't work[2], but if anybody comes by the garden shed for whatever reason, they'll see that it's destroyed and know that something is up. If they then see Rosa's body missing they'll even know who the killer is.

2. lolanime. Also it [being able to use the window] potentially compounds the George problem- if Rosa could get out that way, George could get in. Why does he never even try to get the opportunity to do so? (Also seriously, using the Devil's Proof since it isn't strictly mentioned as impossible in the VN? Hardly the groundwork for a convincing argument)

3. This is purely theoretical and unfalsifiable and you yourself admit you don't actually think it's what happened.

[5/4/2016 8:34:47 AM] Nozomi: > All the factors I mentioned are mentioned in the story- Fake death, death drugs, and faking wounds are all hinted at in the 5th novel- the first and third are inherently parts of Kanon's death in the boiler room so this isn't something that can be objected to- shutter being destroyed (hinted at in 4th novel), escape through the window (hinted at in the anime), Genji's loyalty to the family head and willingness to lie about the shutter being locked (a common theme throughout the novels), and using poison (hinted at in the 4th novel)

[5/4/2016 8:36:48 AM] Nozomi: 1. The factor that this entire theory revolves around, a fake death drug, isn't even hinted at, but even if it is, it isn't hinted at as being relevant for Beatrice's games. So this fails at being foreshadowed in pretty much any sense. At least when Battler learned the truth his gameboard revolved around people faking their deaths (while, notably, not seeming to use drugs of any sort).
2. Also, I repeat, lolanime

[5/4/2016 8:37:50 AM] Nozomi: So, while the only iffy part of shkanon's theory is Hideyoshi as an accomplice which is only vaguely hinted at, your theory revolves around a mechanism that isn't hinted at at all in Beato's games, and can very barely claim to be hinted at in the entire series. In addition, the "official explanation" fits Will's riddle better. Score one for shkanontrice I'm afraid.
[5/4/2016 8:38:01 AM] Nozomi: shkanontrice: 1 rosatrice: 0

[5/4/2016 8:39:02 AM] Nozomi: First game, second twilight. Two corpses are close together in a closed room protected by a chain.
[5/4/2016 8:41:44 AM] Nozomi: > Given the implausibility of shkanon, you would have to invoke Kanon as the second culprit
[5/4/2016 8:42:29 AM] Nozomi: Not so. Will's solution, as I've noted, fits with a fake body just as well, which would be difficult but not impossible to sneak onto the island, and that doesn't require shkanon, even if you had disproven it.

[5/4/2016 8:50:26 AM] Nozomi: > Even if Hideyoshi and Eva are accomplices, they would be careful not to trust a murderer because they would fear being killed as well. Let alone let them into the room while Hideyoshi is taking a bath. So logically they would set the chain to protect themselves. And therefore Kanon would destroy the chain and then commit the crime. But then Will's solution doesn't follow.

1. See my comments about Murder Game Theory. If they don't think shkanon (or Kanon) is a murderer, they have no reason to distrust him, so no reason to set the chain. If the bath thing was not set up by the murderer to creep people out or on a whim, it's possible that they just didn't expect shkanon to look in or anything when Hideyoshi was taking a bath and didn't mind it. I prefer the first explanation but either works fine.

2. Even if they DO set the chain and Kanon destroys it, they still create a lie about the chain being set when the bodies are "discovered". That's still a "chain of illusions".

[5/4/2016 8:58:39 AM] Nozomi: > Logically, given Hideyoshi was taking a bath, and they would set the chain, it makes sense that it is somebody they would never expect to be the culprit in the room. George went to his parents room and killed them both, and then left. He then met up with Rosa, who was hiding somewhere in the mansion. Afterwards, he leaves the room and joins up with the others in the parlor. Rosa proceeds to enter the room and plant stakes in the corpses. She then sets the chain and places the letter under the door. After Genji and Kanon discover the room shut and leave, Rosa went and unset the chain, painted the magic circle on the door, then went back in, set the chain, and hid under the bed again. George then hides Rosa through pretending to be distraught over his parents, keeping the room from being investigated.

1. lolhiding again?
2. Pretty big gamble. Anybody could have checked under the bed and Rosa would have been screwed, since Rosa has no guarantee that George can be trusted.
3. Why did George do this anyway? What incentive does he has to keep Rosa alive and active in the murdering business, given that he has no guarantee George won't be on Rosa's list eventually?

[5/4/2016 9:05:26 AM] Nozomi: > It's worth noting the full riddle/solution. It's not simply "a chain of illusions" but that "a chain of illusions can only hold back illusions". Whether set or not, the chain is still present, and it's not established that "a chain of illusions" inherently refers to an unset one. It could merely mean the PURPOSE of the chain. The first illusion is that the chain did serve its function and keep someone from the outside coming in, and the second illusion is the culprit coming in from the outside into the inside.

1. Honestly, given that Will is speaking in riddles (literally), that could be more a dramatic flourish on his part than anything particularly important to his solution.

2. Of course it's an assumption. Will is speaking in riddles and you don't believe anything Ryukishi says when he clarifies the solution. Assumptions are all we have to work from.

3. Honestly, I would phrase the riddle as "a culprit of illusions can only be held back by illusions" if your solution was accurate, but that's a matter of interpretation so I have to concede that your interpretation is at least possible.

[5/4/2016 9:06:34 AM] Nozomi: > George doesn't necessarily have an alibi for Eyayoshi's murder. After all, we don't see what happens for several hours, George could have committed the crime quite quickly, and it is specifically mentioned that several people did leave the parlor and come back. George could have been one of them.
[5/4/2016 9:06:40 AM] Nozomi: No objections here.
[5/4/2016 9:09:37 AM | Edited 9:10:08 AM] Nozomi: > Alternatively Rosa could have been hiding inside the room the whole time and then gone out of hiding and killed them. Then hid again.

1. I repeat: really? lolhiding?
2. I think your other solution fits Will's riddle much better, because here the chain isn't even relevant, so why does Will center his riddle around it, let alone call it an illusion? My alternate suggestion is even stronger in this case.

[5/4/2016 9:12:22 AM] Nozomi: So, while I question the psychology of the culprits in this case, I must admit loltheylied is not a particularly good explanation either. Otherwise your theory is consistent, fits with the story well, and doesn't have any major holes. So let's get your theory half a point. That said, you don't demonstrate any real holes in the shkanontrice explanation, so I have to give that one a point as well.
[5/4/2016 9:12:39 AM] Nozomi: Rosa-George-Nanjo: 0.5 Shkanontrice: 2

[5/4/2016 9:12:57 AM] Nozomi: First game, fourth twilight. The old Head from the closed room study, confined in a scorching furnace.
[5/4/2016 9:13:12 AM] Nozomi: You skip over this one, but it honestly isn't a problem for either party, so let's give a point to both.[3]
[5/4/2016 9:13:30 AM] Nozomi: Rosa-George-Nanjo: 1.5 Shkanontrice: 3

[5/4/2016 9:14:19 AM] Nozomi: First game, fifth twilight. The last moments of the sacrificed boy with a stake in his chest.
[5/4/2016 9:16:38 AM | Edited 9:18:01 AM] Nozomi: > I've proven shkanon false, but if you believe a Shannon-Kanon culprit theory, I admit there's nothing wrong with the "official" explanation.
[5/4/2016 9:16:43 AM | Edited 9:17:43 AM] Nozomi: Glad to hear it! (I mean you didn't actually prove shkanon wrong but still)
[5/4/2016 9:19:02 AM | Edited 9:19:41 AM] Nozomi: I'm skipping over your first explanation because you admit that it doesn't really fit Will's riddle very well, and that you don't actually believe it.
[5/4/2016 9:30:06 AM] Nozomi: > Kanon did fake his death in the boiler room, despite not being a culprit or an accomplice. Given that Kanon knows what's going on and is defiant of Beatrice's plan, combined with [the death of] his friend-sister Shannon. By faking his death, he plans to create a fake fifth twilight, despite still being alive. However, afterwards, Dr. Nanjo sees that he isn't dead and uses a fake death drug to eliminate him from the equation. He is then killed by the bomb.

1. So that's... 3 fake death drugs we're at the moment. Just keeping track. Not as bad as the colossal amount needed to explain 5.
2. Overall this narrative is fine and meshes with the story well, I'll happily concede. My only concern is why Nanjo would go this far. Surely he doesn't enjoy doing this to people, and even if he doesn't know about the bomb, Rosa (or George even) could come kill him while he's in this state, so he is going even farther than he typically does. Rosa would have no idea he let Kanon fake his death, and George, even if he does, honestly has no reason to care that much. But maybe he thinks George would care and fears possible retribution. That's possible enough.

So I'd say that your theory is perfectly possible. However, you concede that the other theory is plausible as well, the only objection being that you've refuted shkanon. I of course deny this, so I have to give a point to both sides again.
[5/4/2016 9:30:35 AM | Edited 9:30:46 AM] Nozomi: Rosa-George-Nanjo: 2.5 Shkanontrice: 4

[5/4/2016 9:33:55 AM] Nozomi: > My theory fits better than the official explanation, because Kanon is the culprit. while from the magical perspective he tries to go against Beatrice's ceremony.

The magical perspective fits just fine for shkanon too. The Kanon persona isn't in favor of the murders at all, while the Beatrice persona is, so the two are in conflict. However Kanon is not in control of his body. Yasu is. And as we know from the love duel, Kanon will always lose regardless of if George-Shannon or Battler-Beato win. So him being sacrificed is of little concern to Yasu.
[5/4/2016 9:34:04 AM] Nozomi: So again, point to both sides.
[5/4/2016 9:35:04 AM | Edited 9:35:22 AM] Nozomi: I agree that Kanon getting his hand on one of the stakes isn't a particularly big deal in your theory. I can accept a bit of suspension of disbelief.

[5/4/2016 9:36:08 AM] Nozomi: First game, sixth, seventh and eighth twilights. Three corpses lying in the closed room of the singing girl.
[5/4/2016 9:37:45 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa expected them to lock themselves in Kinzo's room, [so] she prepares a letter that she gave to Dr. Nanjo. He throws it on the table, and this forces the four of them out of the room. Rosa then goes into the parlor with a gun, and has Mara sing her song. She then commits the murders, leaves the phone off the hook, left the parlor, and locked it with Shannon or Gohda's master key
[5/4/2016 9:39:49 AM] Nozomi: The locked room is certainly not a problem. My only concern would be that Nanjo would logically have to know what Rosa intended with the letter, and that he would be a likely victim, so it seems unlikely he'd do it. I find it more likely that he would explain the situation at this point. The only excuses I can think of are that he doesn't think that people would believe him, and that he knows of the bomb and thinks it'll go off anyway, rendering going against the plan pointless. I don't really like either of these explanations, but I can't deny they're possible.
[5/4/2016 9:41:39 AM | Edited 9:43:39 AM] Nozomi: The shkanon explanation would essentially be the same, I agree, and I agree with your interpretation of Will's solution. So let's move on, giving a point to both again.
[5/4/2016 9:42:07 AM | Edited 9:52:34 AM] Nozomi: Rosa-George-Nanjo: 4.5 Shkanontrice: 6

[5/4/2016 9:42:56 AM] Nozomi: 9th twilight, first game. Sadly Will didn't bother with this one so I don't have anything catchy to put here. : (
[5/4/2016 9:46:15 AM | Edited 9:46:25 AM] Nozomi: > After committing the parlor murder, Rosa was hiding somewhere and shot Natsuhi. They then switched guns, or Natsuhi actually took a shot but just missed. This may seem to contradict a red, given that it says "all survivors have alibis", which would include people who fake their deaths. (I would argue this might not apply to role death), however it is commonly interpreted that "all survivors" is merely a title for Battler's group, and doesn't refer to any extra parties.
[5/4/2016 9:48:24 AM | Edited 9:49:48 AM] Nozomi: I won't cover KNM's alternative explanation because I feel like it contradicts either the red that none of the people on the island could have killed Kanon, or Kanon couldn't have died in an accident, and he admits he doesn't believe it and it's a workaround for the red, when I think his interpretation is perfectly acceptable.
[5/4/2016 9:50:20 AM] Nozomi: > Natsuhi could have put the letter in her pocket, put it somewhere in the pocket, or she could have lying/mistaken.
[5/4/2016 9:50:25 AM] Nozomi: Perfectly acceptable.
[5/4/2016 9:51:02 AM] Nozomi: Of course, as you note, this is almost exactly the same as the "official" explanation, and you raise no objections against it except in a hypothetical scenario you agree is probably not the case.
[5/4/2016 9:51:10 AM] Nozomi: So point to both sides.
[5/4/2016 9:52:56 AM] Nozomi: Rosa-George-Nanjo: 5.5 Shkanontrice: 7

[5/4/2016 10:02:10 AM | Edited 10:02:53 AM] Nozomi: > To tie up some loose ends: The scratches on Natsuhi's door was because of the scorpion charm. Rudolf was being hyperbolic when talking about getting killed. He was speaking in a tongue-in-cheek way about their reaction when they learned about the Battler-Kyrie explanation. The gold is an indicator from Ryukishi that the gold exists, not related to Krauss/Natsuhi being bribed- after all, Krauss was a first twilight victim, and Natsuhi isn't strictly necessary as an accomplice.

The explanations for Natsuhi's door and Rudolf's comments are essentially what everybody I know of believes and I agree with them myself. [Regarding Natsuhi being an accomplice] I think that Krauss' death can be explained through Murder Game Theory. And it is worth noting that Rosa played pretty much the exact same role Natsuhi plays in Legend, and she WAS an accomplice. That said, I agree that Natsuhi isn't really a necessary accomplice, so her not being involved is perfectly possible. I disagree on your interpretation of the gold however. I think this is an entirely unreliable scene and if not intended as a clue, intended as misdirection. Perhaps towards future bribery theories, perhaps that the gold exists at all, or that anybody has access to it aside from Beatrice.

[5/4/2016 10:04:34 AM] Nozomi: So final sum-up here- 5.5 to 7. Sorry, but the fact that shkanon explains the second twilight a bit better and the first twilight MUCH better makes shkanon the better explanation here. I will admit that George-Rosa-Nanjo fared decently well as an explanation, despite some psychological sketchiness. We'll see if they can hold up in future games.

Part 2- Turn of the Golden Witch


[5/4/2016 10:05:24 AM] Nozomi: So, onto Turn. This one is actually incredibly important since KnownNoMore thinks that Turn is Prime. If Rosa-George-Nanjo is not at least as equally probable, his entire hypothesis crumbles. Let's see how it fares.

[5/4/2016 10:06:51 AM] Nozomi: Second game, first twilight. Six with their stomachs split open in the closed room chapel.
[5/4/2016 10:08:56 AM] Nozomi: > The door of the chapel was simply never locked. Rosa unlocks it, and the servants assume the key was missing. She is the only one that tries to open the door and is the one to get the key and "unlock" it. This fits with Will's solution because aside from Rosa everyone BELIEVED the chapel was locked, hence it was a gold truth.
[5/4/2016 10:09:51 AM] Nozomi: Total agreement essentially. The only possible complaint I can see being raised is that in the English version it's claimed that the servants tried to open the door, but according to the comments the Japanese version uses words that are vaguer so this is a wash.
[5/4/2016 10:11:51 AM] Nozomi: However, this is essentially the same explanation as shkanontrice, and KNM doesn't even try to dispute the "official explanation" here, despite his claims earlier that Yasu could have set it up so she didn't even need Rosa as an accomplice at all. (Did he assume we'd forgotten about that?) He just talks about how one could interpret the "gold truth" as a reference to bribery. Since I think it could be viewed either way for shkanontrice, I don't think it really matters.
[5/4/2016 10:11:56 AM] Nozomi: So again, point to both sides.
[5/4/2016 10:12:07 AM] Nozomi: George-Rosa-Nanjo: 1 Shkanontrice: 1

[5/4/2016 10:12:43 AM] Nozomi: Second game, second twilight. The corpses of the two who are close are not close.
[5/4/2016 10:14:16 AM | Edited 10:15:03 AM] Nozomi: > I have proven the shkanon explanation is impossible so Will's solution can't entail shkanon
[5/4/2016 10:14:24 AM | Edited 10:14:52 AM] Nozomi: How many times will I have to say that you haven't?

[5/4/2016 10:18:59 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa has the opportunity to kill Jessica and Kanon, because she went to Kinzo's study where she had sent Genji and Shannon earlier on. She could then kill the two of them during that timeframe.

Now, Genji and Shannon would know that Kinzo is dead and that thus Rosa is lying, and thus would logically know what is going on. However, given that Genji is a robot and the LUDICROUS characterization KNM has attributed to Shannon given that he claims Turn is prime, this isn't inherently a flaw in his theory.

[5/4/2016 10:23:37 AM | Edited 10:24:16 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa locked the room with Kanon's masterkey, and created the illusion of Kanon having the key by secretly handing it over to Dr. Nanjo who then pretends to retrieve it from Jessica's pocket.
[5/4/2016 10:23:50 AM] Nozomi: Nothing really wrong with this. Nothing in the text supporting it, but nothing contradicting it either. It's a feasible solution.
[5/4/2016 10:25:04 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa wanted to make Kanon disappear to create the murderous demon in the next twilight. So she hid him in an unknown location.
[5/4/2016 10:25:09 AM | Edited 10:25:22 AM] Nozomi: Again, no real problems yet. We'll see how the demon scenario turns out.

[5/4/2016 10:29:12 AM] Nozomi: > Will's solution meshes with mine because it is referring to the illusion of Kanon being the murderer, and hiding away his corpse made it seem magical. Rosa immediately accuses Kanon after all. I have another reason for believing Rosa is behind this murder, but I'll save it for the appropriate chapter.
[5/4/2016 10:30:33 AM] Nozomi: I don't feel like this meshes with Will's solution at all. If the illusion refers to Kanon, according to you he hasn't fulfilled his role yet because he has to appear as the demon. If it refers to the idea of kanon being a murderer, the second part makes no sense because of course ideas don't leave corpses, that's ludicrous. But we're talking about the supposed murder of Kanon in the second twilight, so logically its solution should refer to him in some capacity, otherwise... is it really a solution at all?
[5/4/2016 10:31:37 AM | Edited 10:32:41 AM] Nozomi: So, since the only objection raised is that shkanon is impossible, and I've been over why that's false, and I don't feel like this explanation properly meshes with Will's solution, have to give shkanon a point here, even if I honestly think that in the end I would have preferred this solution over the nonsensical concept of personality/role death
[5/4/2016 10:32:03 AM] Nozomi: George-Rosa-Nanjo: 1 Shkanontrice: 2

[5/4/2016 10:33:33 AM] Nozomi: 7th and 8th twilights: The Appearance of Demon Kanon
[5/4/2016 10:33:50 AM] Nozomi: Since this is not a mystery will had to solve, I don't have anything catchy to put here : (
[5/4/2016 10:37:44 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa and Nanjo have a conversation about something that Battler doesn't hear. Nanjo draws a gun and holds Kumasawa hostage, which forces the other servants to cooperate. Fake blood is poured on the ground, Kanon's and Kumasawa's master keys are placed in the envelope, he then tells them that the murderer is among the people in the parlor so they don't spill the beans later on. He then takes Kumasawa and hides her in an unknown location.

[5/4/2016 10:41:18 AM] Nozomi: While I agree that you could argue that this was vaguely foreshadowed, Rosa's choice confuses me. Dr. Nanjo is an old man that could be easily overpowered, and there is no guarantee that Shannon and Gohda won't at least try to do so, since Rosa can't rely on Shannon and Goha not trying to do so- Gohda is certainly a match for an old man, especially with Shannon's help.
[5/4/2016 10:42:09 AM] Nozomi: Even if she didn't want to go herself, she supposedly shows in 5 willingness to have George perform duties for her, so I don't see how he couldn't have done that here too.
[5/4/2016 10:42:59 AM] Nozomi: That aside, though, this is workable. Of course, as of yet, KNM hasn't shown that this is any more probable than the shkanon solution to the Demon Kanon incident, which is similar. We'll see if he does when he gets to the rest of the twilight.

[5/4/2016 10:45:24 AM] Nozomi: Second game, forth, fifth, and sixth twilights. In Natsuhi's closed room, none are left alive.
[5/4/2016 10:51:24 AM] Nozomi: > The issue is that Natsuhi's room is a perfect closed room. This means that the culprit has to be inside the room. Given that there is no evidence that Gohda is involved in any of the shady stuff going on in the island, the culprit has to be Shannon or George.
[5/4/2016 10:51:27 AM] Nozomi: With you so far.

[5/4/2016 10:52:05 AM | Edited 10:52:16 AM] Nozomi: But actually, let me first note the motive for why this locked room took place, which he said before officially seguing into this twilight.

[5/4/2016 10:52:29 AM] Nozomi: > George then takes control of the murders temporarily. He leads them to Natsuhi's room, and plans to have him and Shannon fake their death with the fake death drug. However, this requires explaining the situation to Shannon. This ends up not going as planned, and they both die.
[5/4/2016 10:55:05 AM] Nozomi: 1. Why didn't he tell Shannon after this BEFORE THE MURDERS? Given how he and Rosa have totally different motivations, there was always the chance she would end up a victim like in the first game. If she knew what was going on, she could be on her guard.

2. Let's say you don't think she's going to take it well. In that case you should probably explain the situation to her somewhere that isn't a sealed off room with a witness, especially if you were forced to kill that witness prior, since that's not going to make her receptive to what you have to say. If you can't do that for some reason, why not force her to take the drug like you did in the first game?

[5/4/2016 10:55:32 AM] Nozomi: Now, KNM has a couple explanations, and one that involves Rosa added as an addendum.
[5/4/2016 10:55:36 AM] Nozomi: Explanation #1
[5/4/2016 10:59:12 AM] Nozomi: > Given the state of Natsuhi's room, it is extremely likely that a struggle took place. In this theory, Shannon and George kill each other in a simultaneous murder. The stakes themselves were the murder weapons, Shannon managed to take one of the stakes George had with him, and stab him in the stomach. Furious, George then took the other take and jammed it in Shannon's skull. Shannon died instantly and George bled to death. The stake didn't go in deep enough to leave a serious wound however, and thus fell into the pool of blood. Feeling defeated George bled to death.

[5/4/2016 11:01:33 AM] Nozomi: 1. I would like to point out that the "stakes" are glorified letter openers. And apparently one can use them to pierce somebody's frontal lobe and their chest resulting in a wound serious enough that they'll bleed to death.

2. George has to know that there is the possibility that Shannon won't take this well, particularly if it happens after he kills Gohda. Yet he lets his guard down enough for Shannon to grab one of the stakes? And if there was an extended struggle, how on Earth could somebody skilled at martial arts get outmaneuvered enough to receive a fatal wound from a servant girl who has no experience in such a thing?

3. The stake just happening to not be deep enough and fall out is a pretty convenient coincidence, I'd say.
[5/4/2016 11:01:49 AM] Nozomi: But KNM doesn't believe this explanation, so let's get to the REAL one.

[5/4/2016 11:08:44 AM] Nozomi: > George comes clean about the incident to Shannon. Shannon of course does not accept this, particularly since he'd killed Gohda beforehand. This results in a struggle. George was then forced to kill Shannon with a stake. He felt despair, but chose to fake his death in order to potentially still get a lot of money. He then put something under his clothes to stab into, faking the wound. If the gun trick is allowed, which Ryukishi admits was barely hinted at, this should be allowed too, given that faking wounds at least has precedent. Rosa had, however, poisoned the fake death drug, and thus George actually died. Rosa prevents Battler from examining George's corpse so that he can't notice any traces that he was poisoned. This means that the clues for the truth couldn't even be seen.

[5/4/2016 11:16:21 AM | Edited 11:16:36 AM] Nozomi: 1. Given that it was specifically noted previously in KNM's series that money isn't of that much interest to George, I don't believe that right after killing Shannon his immediate thought would be faking his death so he can get money from the gold or whatever.

2. This again relies on fake death drugs, something that wasn't even truly hinted at in the entire story. Ryukishi didn't give many clues as to the gun trick, but that's better than NOTHING.

3. Also given that Rosa is still around, I genuinely don't believe that George would fake his death while Rosa is still alive. She'd recognize the signs (and know that she didn't kill him) and potentially kill him somehow. I mean, again, he has no motivation to trust her and is essentially leaving himself helpless. (And theoretically Shannon too) Even if he doesn't BELIEVE that Rosa will kill him for whatever reason, it's a huge risk and one that isn't, as of yet, truly necessary. And a chain lock doesn't help because we know that there are bolt cutters on the island, and there's no reason to assume George doesn't know that too.

4. Heck, why are you even trusting drugs that Rosa is giving you? You should be getting them directly from Dr. Nanjo.[4]

5. Why would you put yourself in a situation where you have to kill a man before explaining the whole situation to Shannon? It makes no sense.

6. Basically the only clue for ANY OF THIS is that Rosa didn't allow Battler to investigate Kanon's body. But that could potentially be for plenty of other reasons and is incredibly circumstantial. A struggle doesn't mean much either, particularly given that KNM admits that could have been faked and just thinks it's more reasonable to assume one did take place.

[5/4/2016 11:17:59 AM] Nozomi: There is then a theory about Rosa being the culprit but it doesn't fit with Will's solution at all and its obvious implications so I'm just going to not bother saying anything about it other than that otherwise I suppose it's possible.
[5/4/2016 11:19:07 AM] Nozomi: This was poorly clued at best, and the motivations of George make absolutely no sense. Shannon's motives are at least comprehensible in the official explanation and while it is not adequately clued in my opinion, this solution is even less effectively clued. Gotta give a point to shkanon, since KNM doesn't even try to explain why the "official explanation" is insufficient.
[5/4/2016 11:21:40 AM] Nozomi: George-Rosa-Nanjo: 1 Shkanontrice: 3

[5/4/2016 11:22:28 AM] Nozomi: Second game, seventh and eighth twilights. The two sliced to death by the red-eyed phantom.
[5/4/2016 11:23:32 AM] Nozomi: > Kumasawa and Nanjo are killed by George after he kills Gohda and Shannon. Then he returned to Natsuhi's room to fake his death. He used a large kitchen blade or some equivalent to slide their necks open. George betrays Nanjo and kills him as well.
[5/4/2016 11:24:57 AM] Nozomi: Nothing wrong with this explanation, and it fits with Will's solution just fine. But he notes that this requires the same main assumption (That Kumasawa and Nanjo were killed prior to the creation of Natsuhi's closed room) in the shkanontrice model, but otherwise doesn't comment on it at all. So gotta give a point to both sides.
[5/4/2016 11:25:25 AM] Nozomi: George-Rosa-Nanjo: 2 Shkanontrice: 4

[5/4/2016 11:25:50 AM] Nozomi: We talked about the endgame of 2 already and explained why if anything the Shkanontrice explanation is better, but both are strictly possible. So I'll give a point to both.
[5/4/2016 11:25:58 AM] Nozomi: George-Rosa-Nanjo: 3 Shkanontrice: 5

[5/4/2016 11:26:09 AM] Nozomi: Well, looks like George-Rosa-Nanjo loses again
[5/4/2016 11:27:04 AM] Nozomi: I honestly like KNM's solution to the second twilight more than the "official" one, but his just doesn't fit Will's solution well at all, while the shkanontrice one does perfectly. And his Natsuhi's closed room solution is just a mess, is completely unclued, and George's mindset makes no sense.
[5/4/2016 11:30:24 AM] Nozomi: This is particularly bad since according to KNM THIS is R-Prime. So his own explanation doesn't even fit better in the scenario he thinks actually happened. He should have put in a lot more effort to discrediting the official explanations than he does here, particularly when it comes to Shannon's suicide. Honestly I could end it here, because between the mess of motives, inability to refute shkanon or even shkanontrice, and the fact that it honestly accounts, given all the factors, better for everything than KNM's alternative in the Rokkenjima he thinks actually happened... there's really nothing more that can be done.

Part 3: Nah, let's move on to Banquet of the Golden Witch.

[5/4/2016 11:30:24 AM] Nozomi: But let's see if, at the VERY LEAST, the George-Rosa-Nanjo scenario can get on par with Shkanontrice. This isn't even that hard given how little Yasu appears to do with the third game, and the fourth game is kind of open season in terms of possibilities.

[5/4/2016 11:31:59 AM] Nozomi: Third game, first twilight. Six corpses connected by the linked closed rooms.

[5/4/2016 11:32:55 AM] Nozomi: "There is no way that this scenario can be explained given the official explanation. As I explained the red statement concerns the deaths of 6 people..."

Yeah you were wrong then and you're wrong now. Let's move on.

[5/4/2016 11:34:42 AM] Nozomi: "There would be no point to having red statements if the red is that ambiguous [concerning the red of no suicides not applying because it was the Beatrice personal killing the Shannon or Kanon persona]"

Hey, don't blame the theorizer, blame Ryukishi. He's the one that broke the red in the first place. Honestly I don't even see any need to go that far.

[5/5/2016 12:17:23 AM] Nozomi: Given how Wounded George was already invoked to explain Nanjo's murder (though I'm very curious why George would try to kill his accomplice when Eva and Battler are both still alive), I'm mostly interested in if he's try and solve the most bizarre part of the game
[5/5/2016 12:18:36 AM] Nozomi: "Hey honey, I know I said we don't need food. And trust me, we DON'T. But we should get some anyway."

"Um... why?"

"I CAN'T TELL YOU. BECAUSE REASONS."

*Whispers* "Is it because you suspect somebody might hear us? Write it down?

"I CAN'T DO THAT EITHER. BECAUSE REASONS."

"Is your behavior being contorted to be bizarre and almost out of character to conform to red truths again?"

"Wow, how did you know?"[5]

[5/5/2016 12:36:50 AM] Nozomi: > Will's solution [To G3-1] isn't related to the "fact" of shkanon, but the fact that the illusion ITSELF is that we're dealing with a closed room ring. It's not a ring at all, but actually a line. Essentially, Battler's explanation at the end of the 4th novel was completely correct.

1. That isn't really how Will has phrased his riddles thus far though. "illusions to illusions" is just one of his traditional opening statements, and it's not entirely clear what it means. Some people think that it means deaths that were ostensibly supposed to be (at least) "fake", and "Earth to Earth" means real deaths. But regardless, he says that AND THEN gives his solution. But for this interpretation to work, illusions to illusions HAS to be part of the solution itself.
[5/5/2016 12:37:48 AM] Nozomi: Because otherwise it's just a factual statement- that in a closed room ring, the beginning and end overlap. Which works for shkanontrice, but not for if we aren't dealing with a closed room ring at all.

[5/5/2016 12:39:06 AM] Nozomi: Let me give an example of what I mean
[5/5/2016 12:40:13 AM] Nozomi: 4th twilight first game:

Illusions to illusions. Let the man of illusions go to where he belongs.
[5/5/2016 12:40:19 AM] Nozomi: You don't NEED illusions to illusions here
[5/5/2016 12:40:35 AM] Nozomi: The riddle is completely coherent without it, it's just that that's how Will opens the riddle.
[5/5/2016 12:41:08 AM] Nozomi: "Earth to earth. No one would dispute that a coffin is a closed room."
In this case, "Earth to earth" has NOTHING to do with the solution directly or even the riddle. It's again, just an opening.

[5/5/2016 12:42:27 AM] Nozomi: (And keep in mind I'm not assuming shkanontrice here, even in KNM's explanation, you don't need "earth to earth" or "illusions to illusions" for these riddles. They are completely unneccesary.)
[5/5/2016 12:43:17 AM] Nozomi: But in THIS SPECIFIC CASE, Will couldn't be bothered to actually phrase his riddle in a direct way and instead used a statement that in every other one thus far has just seemed to be fluff, or at least not directly key to understanding what he's saying, as the main clue to the solution.
[5/5/2016 12:44:20 AM] Nozomi: Whereas if you accept the "official explanation" it makes complete sense. The end and the beginning overlap in the ring in the sense that it is the same person in both cases pretending to be dead.

[5/5/2016 12:51:14 AM] Nozomi: [After conceding the possibility of Ryukishi repeating tricks and Battler being correct] That said, there's basically no reason to put any credence in his theory either. It's true that Beato doesn't deny it, but she's also really clearly not even trying.
[5/5/2016 12:53:35 AM | Edited 12:53:49 AM] Nozomi: I mean earlier in the battle she denies a theory about a fake corpse, which should rebut his theory for the second twilight of that game. Yet Beatrice just lets this theory slide, something that is explicitly noted by Lambda in the ???
[5/5/2016 12:54:49 AM] Nozomi: Also Lambda DOES kind of say that she could have denied everything else Battler said beyond the first two games if she wanted to. Which COULD be a bluff, but given his track record...
[5/5/2016 12:55:52 AM] Nozomi: So actualy, no, KNM's solution doesn't really work at all.
[5/5/2016 12:55:59 AM] Nozomi: Don't worry he has alternative ones!
[5/5/2016 12:57:33 AM] Nozomi: I mean I guess to be fair I'll explain his theory in full

> George kills all the servants and he and Nanjo then begin to set up the locked room chain. George then gives Nanjo Shannon's master key after all the rooms are locked, and he then "discovers" it, when examining her corpse.

[5/5/2016 12:58:10 AM] Nozomi: so like I said, just 2-2 repackaged only George instead of Rosa really, and the scenario is slightly more elaborate.
[5/5/2016 12:58:45 AM] Nozomi: And given that it relies on Battler's explanation being true and we have no reason to assume it was and reasons to think it wasn't...
[5/5/2016 12:59:07 AM] Nozomi: (Also the interpretation requires a wonky view of Will's line that doesn't fit with the rest of the riddles, at least thus far)

[5/5/2016 1:06:54 AM] Nozomi: Anyway, onto alternate theory #1, though honestly it's really just an expansion on his initial theory
[5/5/2016 1:07:02 AM] Nozomi: explaining why Shannon dies if George is behind the murders
[5/5/2016 1:09:43 AM] Nozomi: > George fakes a wound on Shannon which appear fatal and then gives her the fake death drug, but Rosa had poisoned it and Shannon dies.

1. But... Nanjo would notice that she was poisoned. Wasn't Rosa very clearly betraying her supposed partner be the moment Nanjo goes "I SHOUDLN'T WORK WITH THIS WOMAN"

2. Why is George getting fake death drugs from Rosa instead of DR. Nanjo? Or if he is getting them from Nanjo, giving Rosa an opportunity to poison them somehow?

3. It's lucky that George didn't stick around long enough to notice that Shannon was being poisoned to death, or the entire plot would be have been foiled.

4. Again, this is a repeat of a previous proposed solution. See 1-1.

[5/5/2016 1:10:46 AM] Nozomi: Honestly I don't need to go into his second solution given that I've established that it's Gold Truth, if you will, that WH messed up.
[5/5/2016 1:11:16 AM] Nozomi: So the premise behind the solution is flawed.[6]

[5/5/2016 1:18:44 AM] Nozomi: > Now, there does seem to be a red Beato gave in the confrontation that contradicts Battler's solution. But I think this is a terminology issue, similar to "survivors" in the first game. Given that in essence it makes no sense for Battler to respond to a red stating that "all the keys were inside the closed rooms" with a theory suggesting that one was planted there.

I honestly don't think it needs to be one, given that Battler gives theories that contradict reds given very shortly before and Beato just rolls with it. She just accepts that Battler doesn't get it and moves on.
[5/5/2016 1:20:15 AM | Edited 1:20:35 AM] Nozomi: And don't worry, KNM doesn't give any possible interpretations from a Japanese speaker or even his own view on what the translation SHOULD be

[5/5/2016 1:22:58 AM] Nozomi: THEORY #3:
> George tricked Shannon into believing they were pulling a parnk or convinced her of his goals. HE then fakes he wound and had Shannon lock the room from the inside and then takes the fake death drug herself, she then dies because either the fake death drug was poisoned or is killed by Rosa later.
[5/5/2016 1:23:00 AM] Nozomi: Umm
[5/5/2016 1:23:11 AM] Nozomi: This doesn't even fit with your incredibly twisted interpretation of Will's solution
[5/5/2016 1:23:26 AM] Nozomi: Again, the end has nothing to do with anything here

[5/5/2016 1:29:43 AM] Nozomi: Anyway, that was a pretty big failure. So, tally!
George-Rosa-Nanjo: 0 Shkanontrice: 1

[5/5/2016 1:31:10 AM] Nozomi: Third game, second twilight. The corpses of mother and child lay together in the rose garden.
[5/5/2016 1:33:05 AM] Nozomi: > I explained this earlier in my video, George killed rosa and Maria because Rosa wanted to put a stop to the murder scheme because the epitaph was solved. Will's solution simply refers to the fact that there is nothing magical in general here, and it's just two corpses.

1. Honestly, if Rosa is so disconnected, why does she care about what George does after the epitaph is solved? Like, you seem to have her be both ambivalent towards life and yet oddly motivated whenever it suits you.

2. that's kinda a wonky reading of "No falsehoods in their final moments AS TOLD"[7]

[5/5/2016 1:37:03 AM] Nozomi: I mean, I kinda want to give a full point here, but given that I don't feel like this really properly covers Will's solution and Rosa's psychology seems off, will only be giving half a point. To be fair Shkanontrice has nothing to do with this, so it gets only half a point as well.[8]
[5/5/2016 1:37:29 AM] Nozomi: George-Rosa-NanjoL 0.5 Shkanontrice: 1.5

[5/5/2016 1:43:29 AM] Nozomi: Third game, fourth, fifth, and sixth twilights. Three corpses lying in the mansion.
[5/5/2016 1:48:33 AM | Edited 1:49:56 AM] Nozomi: > Why were the stakes in the bodies if Eva was responsible? She has no reason to put them there. Also the rose garden scenario doesn't seem to follow logically from what we see come before, and Eva killing for the gold doesn't seem like a sound motive.

1. Who knows? Maybe they were in the gold room for some reason. Maybe Yasu was putting them there just 'cause. Or she somehow didn't know the epitaph was solved and wanted things to fulfill the twilights to an extent. I mean, I don't pretend to understand what happens in a lot of banquet tbh.

2. RE: Rose garden scenario. Unreliable perspective bro. Who knows what really could have been exchanged in that scene? If you're able to completely make it a conversation between TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE without contradicting Will's solution, I can say things just went down a bit differently.

3. Welcome to, what is in my opinion, the point of Banquet. On some level Eva being the culprit isn't SUPPOSED to totally make sense, especially given the closed room chain and Nanjo's murder. This is then to contrast with what we see in 4, where people, including Ange herself, think that Eva did it. Or at least consider it quite possible.

[5/5/2016 1:56:18 AM] Nozomi: > Eva was indeed probably not in her room at the time of the second twilight, but chances are what she was doing was carry as many golden ingots through the tunnel as possible, given that in Ange's world Eva apparently has a lot of money as a result of the gold. But the bomb blew up which should have destroyed it, which indicates that Eva would have had to relocate the gold at some point. We have no GUARANTEE Eva wasn't in her room at her time, but that would be a logical explanation that doesn't involve her being the killer.

[5/5/2016 1:58:47 AM | Edited 1:59:46 AM] Nozomi: 1. I mean sure, but it's purely hypothetical, given that the world I believe you're referring to is 4, and that is almost by necessity a fictional construction by Touya, a witch hunter, or someone [else] (In your opinion, Battler[9]). (Unless you believe in wacky fantasy and meta shenanigans, which you clearly don't.) That person doesn't need to know about Banquet at all, or even if they do know that the gold was in the blast radius of the lolbomb. Heck the fact that Eva was able to somehow make money off this gold is already kind of suspect to say the least, given the whole context of her situation and the nature of the gold to begin with. The money would be far more likely from Yasu giving her the cash card if we need some kind of causal link here.

[5/5/2016 2:03:33 AM] Nozomi: "Overall, I'm just saying there are far too many unknowable factors here to blasely declare that Eva is the killer."

Hey, I actually agree! But there are way too many unknowable factors no matter WHO you consider the killer, and things that don't seem to make sense no matter who you make it. And apparently those unknowable factors don't keep you from making George the killer of Maria and Rosa even though you have no evidence to support this, because....

[5/5/2016 2:06:35 AM | Edited 2:08:57 AM] Nozomi: > And hey, in my theory I don't NEED Eva to be the killer.

Hey, man, your implication is SO not true. If I wanted, especially if I'm allowed the leeway with Will's solutions that you evidently are, I can easily make Hypothesis: LOLYASUAGAIN, but I don't feel like it's particularly justified so I don't. Yasu pretty much HAS to have done the closed room chain and Nanjo's murder. Aside from that.... idk. (And I mean Dying Kyrie IS possible. Just unlikely.)

[5/5/2016 2:09:35 AM] Nozomi: But finally the solution for this twilight- LOLGEORGEAGAIN
[5/5/2016 2:10:15 AM] Nozomi: > George sneaks out of the guesthouse and kills Kyrie Rudolf and Hideyoshi on their way to the mansion.
[5/5/2016 2:15:49 AM | Edited 2:16:12 AM] Nozomi: > Regarding George having an alibi for these murders due to being in the cousin's room with Battler, it's a fair point but also unprovable because we don't see things from Battler's perspective during that timeframe. There are also some things that suggest George could have slipped out- he could have wanted to be alone to mourn Shannon, as is his excuse later. It's noted that they take a nap in the cousin's room at one point and George could have left and killed the three of them and said that he went to his parent's room to check on them.

I mean, sure you can construct various hypothetical scenarios and assumptions that allow your theory to be true. Your response that I'm making an equal assumption that he DIDN'T leave is fine, but given that I know he WAS there, and have no reason to think that he DID leave, such an assumption seems pretty justified.

[5/5/2016 2:18:25 AM] Nozomi: > Regarding the objection that George using the stakes makes as little sense as Eva, adding this element would at least create confusion and fear.

That's why Eva did it. Genji told her where the stakes are. Boom.
[5/5/2016 2:19:46 AM | Edited 2:19:55 AM] Nozomi: So... randomly murdering people doesn't create ENOUGH confusion and fear?
[5/5/2016 2:20:02 AM] Nozomi: I mean I'd be pretty confused and scared if that was happening on my island

[5/5/2016 2:24:11 AM] Nozomi: > Also George knew about the stakes and where they were, whereas Eva would have needed to be told by Rosa, which isn't impossible, but it makes more sense to me as George, especially since Hideyoshi was killed as well.

Hdeyoshi objected to Eva murdering people. Eva loved her husband, but loved the gold more. Boom. See how this motive is incredibly unsatisfying and doesn't really feel genuine? Now look at your motives and tell me what you think. For instance: why IS George murdering Kyrie, Rudolf, and Hideyoshi?
[5/5/2016 2:24:52 AM] Nozomi: Also don't think I didn't notice you sneak your conclusion in there and try to disguise it as a premise.

[5/5/2016 2:29:04 AM] Nozomi: > After all, taking this serious, we would have to accept EVA-Beatrice as the culprit, Will mentions "the obvious culprit" by name in the next scenario. All this means is that there are no real tricks here.

1. Agan, I don't think that "AS SHOWN" makes much sense in that interpretation. What does "AS SHOWN" mean?
2. Will changes his approach because in that case, what we saw isn't literally what happened and he needs to actually provide an explanation.
3. See my interpretation of Will's comment above. I think it covers that complaint quite nicely.

[5/5/2016 2:32:33 AM] Nozomi: > What I believe happened is that George follows Rudolf and Kyrie from the guesthouse, shooting Rudolf and Kyrie first, given that they carried the guns. He then shot his father and planted the stakes.
Ok. Why? Like seriously. Why? Why did he kill Hdieyoshi? Why did he kill Rudolf and Kyrie, who have nothing to do with anything?
Why DID Kyrie go out of the guesthouse anyway? You never really explain that, which is disappointing.

[5/5/2016 2:35:58 AM] Nozomi: Anyway, can't give a point to either side here because GEorge is just killing people because he likes killing I guess and shkanontrice really have nothing to do with anything here. So... .yeah.

[5/5/2016 2:38:10 AM] Third game, seventh and eighth twilights. The corpses of husband and wife lay exposed under the arbor.

[5/5/2016 2:37:13 AM] Nozomi: > George didn't intend to kill Krauss and Natsuhi at that specific point in time and instead snuck out the guesthouse using the window.

... Why
[5/5/2016 2:37:17 AM] Nozomi: He's going to kill them ANYWAY
[5/5/2016 2:37:20 AM] Nozomi: Why not now

[5/5/2016 2:39:58 AM] Nozomi: > Eva has to be the culprit through process of elimination, Eva has a motive, and Will refers to the "obvious culprit".
[5/5/2016 2:40:09 AM] Nozomi: I'll grant the first and third, but what's this about the second?

[5/5/2016 2:46:23 AM] Nozomi: > Even though Beatrice/Rosa was killed, murders were still going on. However, Krauss' family had been completely untouched. Given that Eva would no longer have support from the other siblings if she revealed that she solved the epitaph, given that Kinzo is dead too. In addition, there was no way Krauss and Natsuhi would let her keep the gold, worsening matters. However, her primary motive was that she was certain Krauss and Natsuhi were the killers and began to fear for both George's life and her own. Eva thus poisoned their coffee and then went down to the VIP room to arm the bomb so that all traces of evidence would be erased.

1. Oh, the reason George didn't kill Krausuhi was so you could have an excuse for Eva to do it. Got it.

2. It's nice how contrivances just set themselves up like that, George just happened to never feel like killing one of Krauss, Natsuhi, or Jessica (And he certainly could have done so during the nap, if he was able to kill Battler's parents and his dad in that timeframe) so that Eva would think that it had to be them.

3. Ok, let's assume for sake of argument that she thinks Jessica is involved in some way. Why not at least warn Battler about what's going on? His parents were murdered, he almost certainly isn't involved. Or Dr. Nanjo, who seems to have nothing to do with anything?

[5/5/2016 2:49:15 AM] Nozomi: > However, why were the two of them found at the arbor? That's simple. Look at it from Nanjo's perspective. Nanjo comes down and finds Krauss and Natsuhi poisoned. This couldn't have been done by George, given that he let George out through the window and George wouldn't have had the opportunity, so it logically must have been Eva.
Hold the phone. I can believe assuming that Jessica wouldn't kill her own parents, but why not Battler? Nanjo doesn't have access to red truth.
[5/5/2016 2:49:56 AM] Nozomi: Given that supposedly Eva has done nothing wrong up to this point either, I don't see why he jumps to Eva automatically.
[5/5/2016 2:51:05 AM] Nozomi: Ok, Eva was missing, yes, but that doesn't= killer

[5/5/2016 2:51:32 AM] Nozomi: > He then realized that he was quite foolish to have George escape through the guesthouse window, since he and Eva were the only ones that could have done that.
[5/5/2016 2:51:36 AM] Nozomi: Yeah. Why DID he do that anyway?[10]

[5/5/2016 2:53:48 AM] Nozomi: > Given that suspicion would be put even more on him as a doctor if it was found out that Natsuhi and Krauss were poisoned,
Say, how did Eva get her hands on poison?
[5/5/2016 2:53:55 AM] Nozomi: It's not like this was premeditated

[5/5/2016 2:55:31 AM] Nozomi: > he decided to stage it to look like the rest of the murders. He had kept some of the stakes, something Eva obviously wouldn't have known. He also faked strangulation wounds, something that would fit a martial artist far more than an old guy.

And he would look FAR MORE suspicious if anybody still alive happened to catch him doing any of this. Why not, say, go up to the cousin's room and go "OH MY GOD EVA HAS GONE CRAZY AND STARTED KILLING EVERYONE, AND GEORGE HAS DISAPPEARED, PLEASE HELP." It's not foolproof but it certainly doesn't seem like a WORSE plan.
[5/5/2016 2:56:04 AM] Nozomi: Also why did Nanjo have the stakes?
[5/5/2016 2:57:15 AM] Nozomi: > Knowing, however, that psychology dictates that suspicion could shift right back to him because it looks TOO MUCH like Eva did it, he decides to make it look like an impossible crime and the work of the witch
[5/5/2016 2:58:09 AM] Nozomi: I'm sure that people in high-stress situations are certainly going to consider the possibility of reverse-psychology while they're being told that there's a crazed killer out there and there are two dead people. Especially the girl who happens to be the daughter of those two dead people. Yup seems legit.
[5/5/2016 2:59:05 AM] Nozomi: So again, nothing really to do with Shkanontrice, so no points there, but so much about this murder is left unexplained or underdeveloped by KNM, and also contrived, that I can't give his theory a point either.
[5/5/2016 2:59:53 AM] Nozomi: George's murder. No cute line because Will didn't explain this one.
[5/5/2016 3:02:18 AM] Nozomi: > George tries to revive Shannon, and discovers that she is actually dead. George becomes enraged, thinking that Nanjo has turned on him. Nanjo thus shoots George in the parlor and then runs out and locks the door behind him. However, due to the fact that this was both very sudden and unplanned, Nanjo never checked to see if George truly was dead. George's death not being able to be faked because Battler saw his body isn't a valid objection, as George's death was faked in the sense that he was playing dead. He was unconscious and badly wounded.

Theoretically possible I guess.

> The shkanon theory has benn checkmated already.

Yeah no it hasn't.

[5/5/2016 3:07:03 AM] Nozomi: Say, KNM, speaking of Shkanon... WHY did Kanon go into the closet again?
[5/5/2016 3:07:29 AM] Nozomi: What was with the freakout at the beginning of the episode [Ep. 7] with Kanon and Will?
[5/5/2016 3:07:47 AM | Edited 3:08:03 AM] Nozomi: What did Lion have to do with the solution at all?
[5/5/2016 3:08:42 AM] Nozomi: Why was the 5th game without love?
[5/5/2016 3:08:48 AM] Nozomi: Oh not going to answer any of those ok let's carry on

[5/5/2016 3:09:35 AM] Nozomi: The rest of Game 3

[5/5/2016 3:10:00 AM | Edited 3:10:14 AM] Nozomi: > Nanjo tries to get back to the parlor to finish off George

Wait, he had those stakes on hand for Krausshi, but no fake death drugs to render George irrelevant? Could have slipped one when the others weren't looking.[11]

[5/5/2016 3:12:42 AM] Nozomi: > George, who had regained consciousness, killed Nanjo, then made his way to Eva and Battler.

Wow, pretty impressive for a guy with an apparently severe gunshot wound (since he seemed lifeless when Battler popped in) to be able to not only kill Nanjo, but reach Battler and Eva. What did he hope to accomplish by doing that again?

[5/5/2016 3:13:50 AM] Nozomi: > Eva then kills George and kills Battler to keep him quiet.

I maintain that she could have at least considered asking "Hey how about a few bars of THIS GOLD I HAVE. WOULD THAT CHANGE YOUR MIND ABOUT TALKING?

[5/5/2016 3:15:16 AM] Nozomi: > she then escaped to Kuwadorian and set off the bomb to cover up her son's crimes, killing Jessica in the explosion.
[5/5/2016 3:15:44 AM] Nozomi: Say, why did Rosa tell her about the bomb anyway? "HEY JUST IN CASE YOU WANT TO MURDER EVERYONE LIKE I DID, HERE'S A HANDY WAY TO DO IT"[12]

[5/5/2016 3:16:49 AM] Nozomi: > My theory makes a lot of sense
lolk

[5/5/2016 3:19:16 AM] Nozomi: Oh also I need to give shkanontrice a point for the Nanjo murder, less because the explanation ITSELF makes no sense, but that the lead-up and follow-up to it don't at all which makes it completely implausible.
[5/5/2016 3:19:47 AM] Nozomi: George-Rosa-Nanjo: 0.5 Shkanontrice: 2.5

[5/5/2016 3:20:20 AM] Nozomi: "If I can explain the fourth game with Rosa and George as the culprits, I will have proven that my theory can account for all the gameboards in the story."
[5/5/2016 3:21:03 AM | Edited 3:21:50 AM] Nozomi: Well, the score above seems to disagree. As does the score for Turn and Legend. Oh, and your 5th game explanation was outright refuted by the Japanese version of the red. And you never fully explained your 6th game explanation, but what you did explain was nonsense.

Part 4: Heeere's Alliance!


[5/5/2016 3:22:01 AM] Nozomi: But let's see if you can get at least ONE game.
[5/5/2016 3:22:17 AM] Nozomi: I mean given how little we have to go on in 4, almost as little as 3, surely you can at least break even here right? Right?

[5/5/2016 3:24:49 AM] Nozomi: Anyway, let's just quickly cut to the chase and do scores for the things that he already covered.
[5/5/2016 3:25:04 AM] Nozomi: Appearance of Beatrice- as he himself admits, either theory accounts for this fine. So points for both
[5/5/2016 3:25:20 AM | Edited 3:25:39 AM] Nozomi: Shkanontrice: 1 Rosa-George-Nanjo: 1
[5/5/2016 3:25:29 AM] Nozomi: Kanon's corpse being absent
[5/5/2016 3:25:49 AM] Nozomi: In the shkanontrice explanation... this HAS an actual explanation
[5/5/2016 3:26:10 AM] Nozomi: In the Rosatrice explanation, it's a preposterous contrivance. Gotta give a point to the "official" explanation here
[5/5/2016 3:26:24 AM] Nozomi: shkanontrice: 2 Rosa-George-Nanjo: 1
[5/5/2016 3:26:41 AM] Nozomi: Now onto his new stuff

[5/5/2016 3:27:30 AM] Nozomi: Fourth game, first twilight. A massacring storm sweeps through the dining hall. (That is a great line btw)
[5/5/2016 3:27:36 AM] Nozomi: MASSACRING STORM
[5/5/2016 3:30:34 AM] Nozomi: > Battler's explanation is correct. The new head of the family IS the new Kinzo, and Kinzo is essentially being viewed as a title rather than a replacement or second name. Titles are clearly allowed given that certain Ushiromiyas have positions of authority in companies. The scene indicates the siblings accepting this new "Kinzo" as the family head.
[5/5/2016 3:30:42 AM] Nozomi: Absolutely correct, that is exactly what Yasu did.
[5/5/2016 3:30:43 AM] Nozomi: Rosa.
[5/5/2016 3:30:45 AM] Nozomi: I mean Rosa.
[5/5/2016 3:30:50 AM] Nozomi: Totally different explanation here.

[5/5/2016 3:33:21 AM] Nozomi: > In essence, this game was Rosa's backup plan. Rosa comes clean about being the family head since Krauss and Natsuhi had to admit that he was dead. She and Nanjo then took everyone hostage using guns. It's quite possible that Rosa killed people using guns here, but not necessarily. She then has Kumasawa and Gohda make up some story about a magical shootout.
[5/5/2016 3:33:32 AM] Nozomi: Absolutely correct, that is exactly what Yasu did. Rosa. I mean Rosa. Totally different explanation here.
[5/5/2016 3:34:04 AM] Nozomi: I like to think he isn't noting what the "official explanation" here is because it is almost exactly the same
[5/5/2016 3:34:45 AM | Edited 3:34:54 AM] Nozomi: Yeah, your interpretation re: Will's solution is fine.

[5/5/2016 3:35:51 AM] Nozomi: > The plan was to make Battler believe in magic through other people's testimony, people he would seemingly trust.

Yes, that was probably at least part of Yasu's plan
[5/5/2016 3:35:53 AM] Nozomi: I mean Rosa's
[5/5/2016 3:36:55 AM] Nozomi: Do I even need to give an explanation for the score change here?
[5/5/2016 3:37:13 AM] Nozomi: Shkanontrice: 3 Rosa-George-Nanjo: 2

[5/5/2016 3:37:53 AM] Nozomi: Fourth game, second twilight. The two young ones face their trials and pass away together.

[5/5/2016 3:39:44 AM] Nozomi: > Krauss is forced by Rosa to call the Guesthouse. George and Jessica are told to leave the guesthouse, and then when isolated, George takes Jessica hostage
Wait what why
[5/5/2016 3:40:26 AM] Nozomi: > George then has Jessica lie on the phone to Battler and then kills heh
[5/5/2016 3:40:28 AM] Nozomi: Wait what why
[5/5/2016 3:41:07 AM] Nozomi: "Let's move onto the third murder scenario..."
[5/5/2016 3:41:08 AM] Nozomi: NO
[5/5/2016 3:41:16 AM] Nozomi: WHY DID GEORGE DO THAT
[5/5/2016 3:41:24 AM] Nozomi: LIKE LITERALLY WHY
[5/5/2016 3:41:34 AM] Nozomi: DID HE EVEN KNOW SOMETHING WAS GOING ON?
[5/5/2016 3:41:45 AM] Nozomi: THIS WAS ROSA'S BACKUP PLAN RIGHT AND GEORGE WASN'T THERE TO SEE IT UNFOLD
[5/5/2016 3:42:06 AM] Nozomi: I THINK SHANNON
[5/5/2016 3:42:12 AM] Nozomi: MIGHT NOT LIKE IT
[5/5/2016 3:42:20 AM] Nozomi: IF SHE FINDS OUT GEORG MURDERED HER BEST FRIEND FOR LITERALLY NO REASON
[5/5/2016 3:43:12 AM] Nozomi: I'm going to put as much effort into explaining the score change here as KNM put into explaining this solution
[5/5/2016 3:43:45 AM] Nozomi: Shkanontrice gets a point
[5/5/2016 3:44:00 AM] Nozomi: Shkanontrice: 4 George-Rosa-Nanjo: 2

[5/5/2016 3:46:10 AM] Nozomi: Fourth game, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth twilights. None of the runaways are left alive.

[5/5/2016 3:48:07 AM] Nozomi: > Kanon just fell into the well and died. No incoherent shaknon stuff is required for this game's solution.
Nope, only ridiculous plot contrivance!
[5/5/2016 3:49:03 AM] Nozomi: "So yeah, Kyrie is able to point Battler to every single corpse except Kanon. Oh THAT JUST HAPPENS to be because he fell into an area Battler couldn't access. It is IN NO WAY connected to how he also mysteriously disappeared after dying in the second game. Not at all."
[5/5/2016 3:51:19 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa then goes on a killing spree, and forces Kyrie in making a phone call to Battler telling him not to doubt the existence of demons, hence the bullet holes in the floor around Kyrie.
[5/5/2016 3:52:19 AM] Nozomi: I mean, this is perfectly possible. A recording is also possible though. Battler, after all, basically only asks a couple questions that would be even slightly difficult to predict in advance, and even then her answers can easily be interpreted as answering them, or simply changing the subject. So either way works for either explanation.
[5/5/2016 3:54:03 AM] Nozomi: Works for either explanation, so points for both.
[5/5/2016 3:55:28 AM] Nozomi: Shkanontrice: 5 Rosa-George-Nanjo: 3

[5/5/2016 3:55:56 AM] Nozomi: Fourth game, ninth twilight. And none shall be left alive.

[5/5/2016 3:57:21 AM] Nozomi: > The garden shed is a perfect closed room

Oh come on don't screw this one up this one is SO EASY. BATTLER DIDN'T EVEN FEEL THE NEED TO EXPLAIN IT.
[5/5/2016 3:58:12 AM] Nozomi: > George's involvement is necessary to explain this scenario
[5/5/2016 3:58:17 AM] Nozomi: wow you are going to screw this one up
[5/5/2016 3:58:20 AM] Nozomi: Well then

[5/5/2016 4:04:19 AM] Nozomi: > George didn't throw in the garden shed key, and instead used a key swap method. He then used the real key to kill Gohda and Kumasawa. George returned the real key via the window which he had to leave closed but unlocked. If he couldn't fit through he could have used a wire.
[5/5/2016 4:04:29 AM] Nozomi: No. No. No.
[5/5/2016 4:04:31 AM] Nozomi: No. No. No.
[5/5/2016 4:04:33 AM] Nozomi: No. No. No.
[5/5/2016 4:04:35 AM] Nozomi: No. No. No.
[5/5/2016 4:04:41 AM] Nozomi: DID YOU EVEN READ THE FOURTH NOVEL?

[5/5/2016 4:04:56 AM] Nozomi: First of all, there is no evidence of this key swap method. None.
[5/5/2016 4:05:00 AM] Nozomi: You literally just made it up.
[5/5/2016 4:05:09 AM] Nozomi: You have no evidence of a wire trick being used.
[5/5/2016 4:05:52 AM] Nozomi: You have no evidence that George could fit through the window
[5/5/2016 4:06:00 AM] Nozomi: Your entire hypothesis is entirely speculative.

[5/5/2016 4:06:06 AM] Nozomi: Meanwhile, if we ACTUALLY READ THE FOURTH NOVEL
[5/5/2016 4:07:07 AM] Nozomi: We find that their feet were on the floor and the lengths of the nooses were set so that the two could stand without choking. Everything about this points to them being told to fake their deaths, either forced to or as a joke or prank.
[5/5/2016 4:07:37 AM] Nozomi: The culprit then shoots them from the window after they have faked their deaths.

[5/5/2016 4:09:45 AM] Nozomi: Also, hey, fun fact: The fact that Beatrice sets up a locked room that can be so easily seen through if somebody gets a close look implies that she predicted that he would not be able to break the window and squeeze inside[13], which somewhat points against somebody like Rosa being able to get through the window, and that she didn't believe that he would be able to break the shutter door open. Which implies that at best it is INCREDIBLY difficult to do, which doesn't speak well for your hypothesis that Rosa got out using tools.
[5/5/2016 4:11:32 AM] Nozomi: Also hey funner fact: The fact that this theory requires that George be able to get through the window somehow makes it even MORE questionable why he didn't seem even interested in making such an attempt in game. That problem has just gotten WORSE due to your own theorizing!
[5/5/2016 4:12:40 AM] Nozomi: Basically all you plausibly have left for Rosa getting out of the shed is lollying by Genji, and I'm not sure why I should consider that more plausible than lollying by Hideyoshi, given that both have motive, even if one is weaker. It's also a very weak explanation that you yourself admit you don't believe.
[5/5/2016 4:13:16 AM] Nozomi: And [this] compounded your problems regarding George never checking on Shannon because of your own dumb theory.
[5/5/2016 4:15:02 AM | Edited 4:15:16 AM] Nozomi: It's quite appropriate that the final twilight you explain of the fourth gameboards almost completely shuts the door on the possibility of the first twilight of the first gameboard even having Rosa as a culprit, and makes George an incredibly unlikely accomplice, at least in the way you describe.

[5/5/2016 4:17:22 AM] Nozomi: > how could Kanon have hung Gohda on that noose? And George needs to be involved because he tossed the key. Also this doesn't explain Will's solution.
[5/5/2016 4:17:34 AM] Nozomi: Sigh.
[5/5/2016 4:19:37 AM] Nozomi: I've explained why the first two things don't matter. Will's solution doesn't involve this closed room in particular- like Battler he found the solution too obvious to even bother mentioning and Clair finds it too obvious to even bring up. He's referring to the fiction of the murders being committed by magic, as Beatrice has gone out of her way to depict throughout this game. Hence the bomb.

[5/5/2016 4:19:59 AM | Edited 4:21:38 AM] Nozomi: Did you not notice that Clair's comment isn't anything about Gohda and Kumasawa but "And none shall be left alive"?
[5/5/2016 4:22:05 AM] Nozomi: Shkanon: 6 George-Gohda-Nanjo: 3

[5/5/2016 4:23:58 AM] Nozomi: > Rosa shoots George in the head, and then meets up with Battler. Battler doesn't understand what she says, so she sets the bomb, and then gets Maria. She poisons Maria and thten shoots herself in the head
[5/5/2016 4:24:24 AM] Nozomi: I assumed that when you actually explained this murder, you'd explain why Rosa shoots herself. Maybe give a psychological reason. You don't.
[5/5/2016 4:26:49 AM] Nozomi: That aside I guess this is possible
[5/5/2016 4:27:16 AM] Nozomi: Shkanon: 7 George-Gohd-Nanjo: 4

[KNM takes some time to point to evidence that Ryukishi "lied" in an interview. This is really irrelevant to me given that I don't care what he says in interviews, so I'm cutting a bit of cruft and excluding this rebuttal. If anybody actually wants to see it I can show it.]

[5/5/2016 4:35:01 AM] Nozomi: > Not only have I demonstrated that there is another option inside the catbox, but given the impossibility of shkanon and the logical inconsistencies with the explanations of the murders if you do invoke such a theory, I have at least raised the distinct possibility that it was never an option to begin with.

[5/5/2016 4:38:58 AM] Nozomi: Let's look at what you have actually done. You have attempted to debunk the evidence in favor of shkanon and failed miserably, not even accounting for some things, and even aspects of your own explanations. You then concoct a half-baked motive for your three culprits that does not hold up to scrutiny, and then toss them into the gameboards and come up with ad-hoc rationalizations for them being the culprits in all 5, despite the fact that they didn't even need to be the culprits in 3 or 5. However, as I believe I have painstakingly shown, your explanations are typically at best on par with shkanon. At worst they fail to account for all the data or are just plain wrong. You are often guilty of complaining about explanations lacking evidence and then coming up with your own ad-hoc explanations, even arguing that because you can't be proven wrong, you should be able to make assumptions X or Y, mostly just because they are convenient for your theory.
[5/5/2016 4:39:26 AM] Nozomi: I will attempt to not psychologically analyze somebody I don't know. I get that on paper the shkanon theory seems like it makes Ryukishi a bad writer, and there are aspects I hate myself. There are also aspects that I like.
[5/5/2016 4:40:02 AM] Nozomi: It's a mixed bag. But it's still far better than the theory you've proposed and utterly failed to support.
[5/5/2016 4:40:14 AM] Nozomi: Anyway, this was a... what do you mean we still have roughly 150 minutes?


Part 5: On the absoluteness of the Red Truth, and possibility of Ryukishi deceiving his readers.


[5/5/2016 4:47:43 AM] Nozomi: > Two key elements of the story are the absoluteness of the red truth and the subjective perspective used to deceive us.

This is such a superficial examination of either of these that it saddens me. The red truth was never meant to be absolute. I'm sure you're willing to concede that it is contextual in terms of life or death status, otherwise madness lies. However, it's more than that. What is the absolute truth of Beatrice's laughter? What is the absolute truth of DIE THE DEATH? What is the absolute truth of THIS TRIAL IS FINISHED when it continues after Dlanor says that red?

Heck, what is the absolute truth of Erika's final statement? What is the absolute truth of Knox and van dine rules, which are allowed to be spoken in red? Does that mean that no writer should ever break them? This is all nonsense. The red truth is inherently subjective to the viewpoint of both the person making it and up to the whims of the GM assuming it is a non-GM party stating such a truth (like dlanor or Battler or Will). The red truth works because it is based on a deductive game where the creator challenges an opponent to explain the mysteries of their world. But their world is based upon their subjective perspective on what reality is like. I know you wouldn't like this explanation much because you think Turn is Prime, but we'll get to that later.

[5/5/2016 4:49:31 AM] Nozomi: You provide 4 reds in order to back your statement that the red is absolute. At best this is circular, but let's look at them. The first is spoken by an antagonist, EVA-Beatrice. But it doesn't even need to be wrong. What are we defining as "truth"? EVA-Beatrice doesn't say that reds are objectively true or show objective reality. Merely that they show truth. And I agree- they show what somebody else perceives as true, based upon the reality they created via their gameboard.
[5/5/2016 4:53:28 AM] Nozomi: The second one was said by Bern in episode 8. I like Bern, but she is really clearly intended to be portrayed as all mixed up in this scene. The idea is clearly that Ange got her happy ending with her family, despite the protestations of the Witch of Miracles. This is supposed to be a moment of Ange's victory, and you are trying to tell me that the indignant sputters of her opposition are something that we need to keep in mind?

[5/5/2016 4:55:36 AM | Edited 4:55:44 AM] Nozomi: (there's also the distinct probablility that that's not actually Bern and merely a mental construct, but that's a whole other discussion)
[5/5/2016 4:56:00 AM | Edited 4:56:16 AM] Nozomi: The third statement, a statement Bern makes in 6, really doesn't add anything to the first one and my reply stands.

[5/5/2016 5:00:00 AM] Nozomi: The fourth is "Gretel"-Ange from 4. While not strictly an antagonist, Ange isn't exactly a hero either. She's cold and distant, and this is clearly not something that is supposed to be encouraged. It is considered a victorious moment when her rough counterpart, Ep. 4 Ange, at the end desperately pleas for Mammon, the friend she lost due to anger and cynicism, and she "returns". It's, again, somebody that is clearly not portrayed as being in the right. And heck, we even know that this isn't strictly true. While we can't be certain, words in gold most likely told the truth in 5, and the white has certainly been used to tell truthful things- we all agree about Battler's objective perspective and Erika's Detective's Authority, no? The only difference is that they do not carry a guarantee. So this in itself is a subjective claim made by somebody who certainly doesn't seem heroic and whose non-meta analogue seems, like the others, all mixed up, according to Ryukishi.

[5/5/2016 5:06:19 AM] Nozomi: The subjective perspective does give us plenty of things of value. It can teach us about the characters in a way that we simply may not be able to with Battler present. Heck, let's look at Natsuhi and Rosa. Natsuhi gets two episodes to shine in, 1 and 5. In both cases her perspective is subjective, even though she might get more POV-time than Erika in Ep 5. However we learned a good deal about her, especially in 5. About how much she loves her husband, about her relationship with Kinzo and Beatrice, and how in the end, she is a flawed but decent human being.

You've basically torn Rosa apart for your theory and made her bargain-bin Yasu, but Turn (and Alliance to a lesser extent) tell a different story in their subjective perspectives. They tell us about a woman who has gone through a lot, who has suffered. She screws up a lot. She knows she screws up a lot. And hates herself for it. But continually tries to find some way to get redemption, and deeply cares for her family, especially Maria. We get a somewhat darker take on her in 4, particularly since we mainly see things through Maria's eyes, but even there we see glimmers. Rosa isn't an awful person, she isn't a great person. She's a flawed human being.

That's a lesson that merely listening to the red or even the objective perspective would never have taught us.

[5/5/2016 5:17:52 AM] Nozomi: > Evidence that Ryukishi intended to be deceitful from the start is that in a sense he created a character that represents himself in the novel in Ikuko/Featherine. She hides the truth through various forgeries she writes, despite knowing it, and decides at the last second to keep the truth to herself, and lies to Ange on multiple occasions.

Well, assuming that Ikuko and Featherine are separate people (I'll get back to that when we get to your discussion of the metaverse in your final video), I would say that neither is honestly depicted particularly positively. At best, Featherine is depicted in a relatively neutral sense, but is capable of great cruelty, as well as being tutor of Bern, a key antagonist in Chiru. And Ikuko is a character we honestly know very little about, but what we know doesn't tell us good things. So if Ryukishi IS inserting himself to an extent, is it really aspects of himself that he likes? That he wants people to appreciate or respect him for?

[5/5/2016 5:21:37 AM | Edited 5:22:04 AM] Nozomi: > The 7th novel was done in a deceitful and cryptic fashion.

I know you aren't going to accept this, but this likely stems from the fact that Ryukishi has explicitly stated he didn't want an answer that could be copy+pasted. If he spelled everything out in 7, either in terms of whodunit or howdunnit, it would have spilled all over the internet and there would have been little point for a lot of people in actually reading his work. So instead he cloaked the solution in a layer of fantasy and gave the solutions to the gameboards as riddles (Probably. And mostly- the fact that Will didn't even have to solve the end of three is pretty inexcusable in my opinion.)
[5/5/2016 5:23:01 AM] Nozomi: We've been over your "Red" evidence so I won't go over it again.

[5/5/2016 5:28:03 AM] Nozomi: The idea that the opening of the 7th novel is a clue that the rest of the novel is a "false accusation" because the opening is a servant being falsely accused is really weak. Firstly because one can easily note that Yasu isn't really a servant anymore- she's the head of the house and posing AS a servant. I'm positive there's a van dine novel with exactly this twist, and that could even be intentional on Ryukishi's part. There is also absolutely no real linking of the two together- no real common themes aside from the clock solution already debunked.

The purpose of the opening was to show Will as somebody who will defend the accused but also desires to understand people, to understand the heart- a theme you seemed to argue against to a degree earlier on by arguing that we shouldn't need a culprit's confession to solve a mystery, despite citing it earlier on concerning Rosa. He's somebody who in some ways is sick of the methodological way that mysteries are treated- ironically the exact way KNM is treating Umineko. Hence the whole thing of him "resigning" from the VVSD.

[5/5/2016 5:29:03 AM] Nozomi: > We should have paid attention to the red statement Will makes that a servant can't be the culprit in the beginning of 7

[5/5/2016 5:31:17 AM | Edited 5:32:46 AM] Nozomi: tthat's one of van dine's rules that Will stated in red. Do you believe those are absolute? Because somebody who would disagree with you is S.S. Van Dine. He was pretty tsundere toward the genre and broke his own rules pretty frequently. I may be very critical toward Ryukishi, but I honestly have enough faith in his knowledge of mystery novels that he would have picked this up himself, and Will not putting all that much stock in his own rules is in fact a recurring thing from him, if only because they're "outdated".

[5/5/2016 5:37:44 AM | Edited 5:38:11 AM] Nozomi: > Maria notes that she'll "kill [someone] like mama killed the others!" Not only could this not refer to Sakutarou since he has already been revived and this is a meta scene, but would "the others" really be appropriate for just Sakutarou and the forest bunnies? This makes more sense as an evatrice clue.

I'm not going to bother finding the context for that quote, because honestly if Ryukishi not only lied to us, but expected us to discover that lie buried in a single line in a totally different context that could be interpreted various ways (who knows that Rosa hasn't destroyed Maria's stuffed animals in the past out of anger? Or perhaps she's using some other definition of "killed"), then he's an even bigger hack than I realized. As I've said in the past, if KNM is right, I will never read another Ryukishi novel because I can have no respect in his as an author.

[5/5/2016 5:39:56 AM] Nozomi: > Although people talk about how Studio DEEN ruined the anime, ryukishi continually talked about how there would be ihnts in the anime and how he had creative control. So, shouldn't we instead take these discrepancies as a sign of something?

No. We should take it as a sign that Ryukishi is not good at having creative control, at least in regards to an anime. Or, to be more generous, he is overhyping the amount of control he has or he simply thought he had more say than he did. Any of these are more likely than your hypothesis.

[5/5/2016 5:47:30 AM] Nozomi: > I believe that it sucks to get to know the truth of a mystery if you haven't "worked" for it. For instance, take And Then There Were None. You can get to near the end of the book, get impatient because you don't know who did it, and have everything revealed to you in the final chapter, without having done the brainwork to actually get the answer.

Then we come at this from totally different mindsets. I feel being rewarded with the solution should merely come at the price of in some sense getting engaged with a work. If I read the first third of a Kindaichi novel, come up with some theories, and skip to a portion of the end to see if I'm on the right track at least (something I have admittedly done), I don't believe I haven't "earned" to see the mystery solved and the culprit apprehended. I earned it through virtue of being willing to experience the work in the first place. Not to mention mysteries aren't just about thinking, they're about thinking the same way as the writer. I could probably come up with elaborate tricks to make other people culprits in And Then There Were None. I could even do this after the final chapter, claiming Wargrave is just crazy or covering up the murders for his own reasons. However then I would be thinking the way I want to think, rather than the way Christie wants [me] to think. And sometimes with mysteries, mindsets just don't mesh. You don't think the same way as the author so you aren't going to get the solution until it's explained to you, and you get to have that moment of realization where you realize why you should have seen it all along, which can be quite satisfying in its own right when done well.

I totally understand not wanting your answer to be something that can be spread all over the internet in minutes, especially if you're a popular author writing a long-running mystery. And I don't begrudge Ryukishi that at all. But if he feels that concealing the truth is warranted because those who don't think about it the way he does haven't "earned" the answer, I fundamentally disagree with him.

[5/5/2016 5:50:06 AM] Nozomi: > The motive for Ryukishi creating a false "official explanation" so that the catbox would be protected against people who would not be able to see through such a deception.
[5/5/2016 5:50:13 AM] Nozomi: I think it's worth noting that a lot of my rebuttal I am doing from memory.
[5/5/2016 5:50:35 AM] Nozomi: Because although I did play Umi a few years ago, I played it several times. I took notes- not on this computer unfortunately, but still.
[5/5/2016 5:51:59 AM] Nozomi: I reached Shkanon roughly around.... the end of 3 or 4? I don't really remember at this point. But it was prior to Chiru at least. I put in a lot of work. I didn't like the solution so I kept looking for other options but taking the red as literal and absolute or as more subjective, I didn't find anything that was any more satisfying. And I still haven't, after spending 6 hours watching your piece.
[5/5/2016 5:52:38 AM] Nozomi: Why should the catbox be "protected" from me?

[5/5/2016 5:54:17 AM] Nozomi: "For which lethal evidence existed against it throughout the entire story"

None of which you've managed to present. Your arguments have been incredibly lackluster. I don't even like some of the implications of shkanon, many of which you didn't even focus on- like how meaningless shkanon makes the red or the concept of "death" in said red.

[5/5/2016 5:57:43 AM] Nozomi: > This way the truth behind the story would be fully protected against people "Not deserving of knowing the truth".

Why don't I deserve to know the truth after all the effort I put into solving Umineko and enjoying it as a story? What gives Ryukishi the right to declare that of anyone? I know some quite intelligent people who accept shkanon who don't like it but given the confirmation Ryukishi has provided in interviews, Our Confession and the like, and the evidence in the VNs themselves, see no other option and try to take the good with the bad. Why don't they "deserve to know the solution"? Honestly I would consider Ryukishi an arrogant bully who basically deprives readers of being able to fully enjoy his work for no good reason if your hypothesis was accurate. Fortunately, it is not.

[5/5/2016 6:16:09 AM] Nozomi: > Clarification- perhaps it could be likened to a computer game. There will be people who get to the end of a game and people who don't. Some of the people who don't will have just been lazy, but others may have tried their hardest and for whatever reason just not gotten to the final level. Ryukishi created the shkanon ending as a "compromise" for those people. In essence, It is worth noting that this deception was an inherent part of the story from the beginning, and that the readers who fell for the deception are in some ways better off than the people who fail to finish a computer game, in that they did get to reach a "truth" of sorts. The shkanontrice explanation is, in a way, another "magical" golden truth in the story. The deception was not a nature of Ryukishi declaring people not good enough to understand his story, because of the nature of gold truth. Gold truth is formed through belief, particularly consensus belief. Supporters of the official explanation create a gold truth of the story that acts as a second layer. It's a layer that, while not strictly true, in its own way beautiful in the way much of the fantasy narrative could be quite beautiful despite being fiction. And while the gold truth may not be absolute reality, as in the ending Ryukishi had in mind when designing Umineko, it is "real" to that person. And that can be enough for plenty of people. But Ryukishi designed a third level, an extra level for people who DO "beat the game" and thus get the final reward, of knowing the absolute truth.

You may have noticed that I started off trying to be as polite as possible and then ended up growing incredibly snarky and potentially kind of rude and condescending. That's mostly because of the tone KNM has used throughout his videos. Admittedly it's also partially frustration at his verboseness, but it's mostly that he continually felt like he was talking down to individuals who support the "official explanation" and instead of feeling like he was providing an alternate explanation, was providing the TRUE explanation that the rest of us were too stupid to get. If the attitude displayed in this brief annotation that goes by in around a second was the attitude of the last 6 hours, I would have probably approached this slightly differently. And I do appreciate that, if these words are sincere, he at least understands that people who view the author as having been sincere in his work aren't incompetent idiots, and that in fact the explanation does have some value in it, if only akin to a fantasy narrative. On some level I can appreciate that, and for the last part will attempt to have my words recover the respectfulness that has slipped from them as we have continued forward.

That said, I still feel like at the core here, there's arrogance. I played all 8 of his novels. I spent hours thinking about them, getting attached to the characters, even discussing them. In what sense did I not get to the final level of his game? Why do my efforts not count? There's still a level of elitism here that I highly dislike, and if true would still leave a terrible taste in my mouth. Although there are aspects of shkanon that I like, and I do really like Yasu as a character, there's plenty of stuff I'm dissatisfied with. And if there is a bonus ending, or whatever, I'd love to have some sort of clue on how to reach it. But the only clues being given to me, at least as seen thus far in this series, are little scraps that just don't fit together at all, so I can't call them clues, and have to think that people like KNM and his followers are essentially dissatisfied with what they got, potentially because of higher expectations (KNM puts way too much undeserved praise upon Ryukishi- he's not a terrible writer, but he's not great. I call him a "Hack" but I do it in an affectionate way- I'll definitely read his next When They Cry work, and I might even read Rose Gun Days eventually. He's an okay writer that really needs an editor because he continually makes amateurish mistakes that could be easily caught.)

[5/5/2016 6:19:02 AM] Nozomi: In the end, KNM is essentially done presenting his case. More or less what's left are tying up the loose ends- what is Rokkenjima prime, and why? What is the meta-narrative? What about the Ange universes? What about Our Confessions- how does this support the Rosatrice hypothesis or falsify the "official explanation"? And we'll get to that tomorrow (well today at this point). And then this grand journey will be over.

ANNOTATIONS:

1. And KNM has to think that Knox's rules apply, because they're stated in red by Dlanor and he thinks that general facts stated in red are universal.

2. And as we'll see when we get to the Gohda, Kumasawa locked room in 4, there's reason to think that BEATRICE thinks it wouldn't work, or at least would be very difficult. So why would she put herself in that position?

3. He does elaborate on it later, but there's nothing really worth commenting on, and my scoring doesn't change.

4. And as I'll note when we get to his solutions for 3/Banquet, if he IS getting them from Nanjo, why is he giving Rosa any opportunity to poison them? Also, why didn't Rosa poison his in 5?

5. Spoiler alert: He doesn't even try to explain this issue, despite explaining "Demon Kanon" in 2. But since I agree that there IS no good explanation available beyond "She did it for Reason X", I don't really hold this one against him.

6. Here's what I mean:

[5/5/2016 1:01:20 AM] Nozomi: "All of them had wounds resembling gunshot wounds which became fatal"
Which when reading in English, pretty naturally leads to the conclusion that they are wounds that regardless if they were gunshot wounds or not, became fatal. But at a minimum looked like them.
[5/5/2016 1:01:39 AM] Nozomi: But in Japanese it's far less specific and just says that they're wounds that RESEMBLE fatal gunshot wounds
[5/5/2016 1:01:59 AM] Nozomi: The positioning of fatal is really important here
[5/5/2016 1:02:28 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Ah
[5/5/2016 1:02:32 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Yeah, for me, it reads as
[5/5/2016 1:02:34 AM] Nozomi: Because it can either look like the resembling is just describing the wounds, or also the fact that they were fatal
[5/5/2016 1:02:39 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: They have wounds that look like gunshots
[5/5/2016 1:02:41 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: And they were fatal
[5/5/2016 1:02:45 AM | Edited 1:02:50 AM] Nozomi: Exactly
[5/5/2016 1:02:59 AM] Nozomi: And in Japanese it's just "They're wounds that look like fatal gunshot wonds"
[5/5/2016 1:03:25 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Yeah, that's... Poorly done
[5/5/2016 1:03:38 AM] Nozomi: I'm not sure how that happened, but eh.
[5/5/2016 1:03:40 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: And for something LIKE Umi it's really important to get the wording correct
[5/5/2016 1:03:47 AM] Nozomi: In a RED TRUTH no less!

[7] For the record, here's what I think that means, since obviously I don't believe there were no falsehoods as we saw it either.
[5/5/2016 1:34:35 AM] Nozomi: (I mean obviously there's SOMETHING off here because there WERE necessarily falsehoods in those final moments. The only thing that I can think of is that Will is saying that essentially the scene is what it appears to be without the magical trappings- Rosa and Maria get killed by Eva. The end.)

[8] You'll note that I switched to giving no points to shkanon until Nanjo's murder, because I decided that made more sense. You'll also note that this is me being pretty generous TO KNM's hypothesis, because now he literally just has to score higher than 2.5 and I'll accept his theory as a possible alternate explanation. I'm hardly stacking the deck against him.

[9] You'll see why I'm making a distinction between Touya and Battler in Part 4, when he explains what he thinks of Author Theory and what he thinks the nature of the series really is.

[10] I'll freely admit to not understanding why Nanjo did that, but I'm not making it a key part of a hypothesis regarding the murders, so for me it's just a bizarre oddity. Not so for KNM.

[11] And it's worth noting that the fake death drugs are used more frequently in Legend and even MORE frequently in Game 5, so there's reason to believe that he could very well have some on hand, even if we grant the logical assumptions we need to make in order for Nanjo to have possession of them.

[12] As noted she could probably have noticed the bomb without anyone telling her about it, so this isn't a particularly strong objection. But given that KNM doesn't seem to have considered this possibility himself, it remains a curiosity in regards to his theory.

13. Or he could have broken the window, undid the lock from the outside, and then entered that way. Which is even more plausible.
Spoiler : Part 4- Tying up the Loose Ends :
Part 1- What does "Our Confession" REALLY mean?

[5/6/2016 10:42:38 AM] Nozomi: At the time KNM is making this video Our Confession hadn't been fully translated and only a summary had been provided, so that's what he's working from. Since then somebody HAS translated the whole thing, but since he can't see the future I won't note any minor details that contradict him and mostly play the game on his terms, so to speak.

[5/6/2016 10:48:48 AM] Nozomi: > Obviously this isn't a full revelation of the truth. After all, although it has some similarities to the gameboards [a closed room chain, Kinzo appears, etc.], there isn't any actual explanation of the tricks in the games. Thus I see it more as a guide on both how TO think and how NOT to think.

Interesting perspective, will be interested in seeing you expand upon that.

I think the fact that it doesn't talk about the 1-4 tricks explicitly is natural. Will explained 2.5 of the games, after all. (Explaining the end of 3 and pretty much all of 4 would have been nice, though I guess not strictly necessary. The manga is evidently clearer anyway.) And it would kind of go against the whole "Don't want for people to be able to C+P the answer" thing if he then gave the answers here, since obviously the booklet (OC was initially released as a booklet that was then put onto the interwebs) would be able to be C+Ped once it was released.

> I see the Beatrice here as not actually a representation of the actual Beatrice, but more of it being a representation of Ikuko

This a pretty legitimate interpretation. It both has the "1 in 1000 will understand this story" motif, which is something that you don't really hear from Beatrice but hear from Ikuko/Featherine, and has the phrase "Tear out the guts", and only two characters ever say that in the story: Featherine and Bern, who picked it up from Featherine.

That said it's heavily disputed and by no means NEEDS to be true- which to be fair KNM completely agrees with. And even if it is, I would argue that it could indicate that Featherine and Meta-Beato actually COULD originate from the same source, which would support Ikuko-Yasu.

[5/6/2016 3:21:00 PM] Nozomi: > The portion of the summary that "Although Beato claims that she writes for only one in a thousand people, she actually wishes that the other 999 people would enjoy it too. It's foolish to deny herself that by burying her own story in darkness."

He uses the next part as evidence for essentially the same reason so I'll just deal with it here. I think that whether or not this is Featherine or not, the "only one in a thousand people" is still most likely a reference to Battler. I also feel like the second sentence goes against the explanation a bit. While it could strictly be referring to the fact that OC is a rough draft that wouldn't have come to light without Dlanor releasing it, given that much of the Dlanor segment is about how she should be making sure her story is clear to everyone, you could also interpret as "Beatrice should make sure that her story is clear to everybody and not buried in a way that nobody will understand" which goes directly against KNM's theory. But that's a matter of interpretation so let's continue on.
[5/6/2016 3:23:14 PM] Nozomi: Most of the first chunk of KNM's video is just him reading the summary, since it wasn't readily accessible to most people and he wants to make sure that people know what he's talking about. So I'll be skipping most of that and getting to his analysis.
[5/6/2016 3:23:45 PM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Yay
[5/6/2016 3:25:57 PM] Nozomi: > While I have no problem accepting that shkanon is true and that Yasu is the culprit in our confession, I don't think that has much bearing on the rest of Umineko. In essence I would argue Our Confession is a test, not an answer book.

Well, I agree that strictly speaking it's not an answer book, in that it contains no direct answers to anything, only implications. However I would say that it is clearly another hint and indicating to people exactly what is important and what is not. But I'm sure KNM will clarify exactly what he means as we go forward.

[5/6/2016 3:28:00 PM] Nozomi: Basically, to just spoil it, he's saying that Our Confession IS a game with shkanon and where Yasu is the culprit, but that it demonstrates all the inconsistencies that COME WITH such an explanation.
[5/6/2016 3:29:10 PM] Nozomi: > One problem with the reliability of Our Confession is that it's told from Dlanor's perspective

It's not actually (as I recall), though from the summary I get why you'd think that. She just writes an afterward (which was mistaken for a foreword in the summary) The conceit of Our Confession is that it goes through the process of Beato making her game.

However, the entire thing is a meta construct, so you kind of have to roll with that as the conceit whether you accept the meta-world existing or not.

[5/6/2016 3:31:02 PM] Nozomi: He tries to equate this with when Erika presents her Natsuhi theory. The problem there is that later on in the same story that's proven wrong, or at least more improbable than an alternative hypothesis. Nobody in Our Confession at the end goes "Wait what we just saw made no sense" (As much as parts of it didn't)[1]
[5/6/2016 3:31:39 PM] Nozomi: Honestly if it is Ikuko, this could just be Ryukishi saying "Ikuko WAS TERRIBLE at making mysteries before Touya started helping her"

[5/6/2016 3:34:09 PM] Nozomi: Honestly, I see no reason to assume that the problems with Our Confession were deliberate. But let's assume they were. I can take this and apply it to the shkanontrice theory just fine. Basically everything in Our Confession runs on meta motives. The actual motivations given to characters are weak and shaky, as I'm sure KNM will get into, and essentially they're doing more because they're PIECES rather than because they're PEOPLE. Which, if you want to take this as a clue, could simply be Ryukishi cluing that Yasu would never have actually killed anybody in Prime, because it just doesn't fit with her character at all.

[5/6/2016 3:36:43 PM] Nozomi: > The accomplices in Our Confession are accomplices for incredibly sloppy reasons.
[5/6/2016 3:36:47 PM] Nozomi: Agreed.

[5/6/2016 3:42:05 PM | Edited 3:42:29 PM] Nozomi: > It is incredibly hard to believe they would BECOME accomplices in the first place, regardless of if they believe that the bomb is real or not, the THREAT is legitimate, and that should be raising alarm bells in their head. The chances of Krausshi retaliating are very high. Even if accomplices are important/necessary, they are the most dangerous part of your plan. They need to be under constant threat in some sense to prevent retaliation, they need to never be able to get the upper hand (either in terms of being armed, strength in numbers, what-have-you). The threat should typically be out of their control- a loved one being held hostage is a good example. They will essentially never trust you, and that is something that you need to keep in mind.

Pretty much totally agreed again. You're missing something though. If the accomplice doesn't see the killer as a THREAT, this doesn't apply, which is where Murder Game Theory comes into play. The only time I'd argue you have an "accomplice" without MGT is maybe game 4 (though I've seen people argue that one) and game 5, but in game 4 you have multiple people armed with guns, and in game 5 Natsuhi is both being blackmailed AND Krauss is kidnapped. And 5 has little to do with Beato's games anyway.

[5/6/2016 3:45:32 PM] Nozomi: > Let's take game 2. For Rosa to be Shannon's accomplice, Shannon would have to be the biggest idiot in the world. Not only does Rosa get a gun, but she knows that Shannon has the cash card (potentially), the key to the VIP room, and knows where the gold is. Essentially Rosa could turn the tables at any point.

Murder Game Theory, bro. If Rosa doesn't think people are actually dying, even if she thinks the whole thing is pretty odd, she has no real reason to get suspicious, let alone actually shoot Shannon or anything of the sort. Heck, she may actually get suspicious earlier on when she accuses the servants, though we can't be sure of her exact thought process here. That could also just be her playing a part until she learns Shannon is dead. Hard to tell.

[5/6/2016 3:49:08 PM] Nozomi: > Bribing people is hardly easy either, given that wanting money for the sake of wanting money is a very fragile motive. If they have the opportunity to get the money without helping you, they'll take it. They'll never trust you, after all, and have no reason to assume you won't betray them at some point. And if you are the one who holds the key TO the money, all they have to go is get through you.

Again, more or less agreed. Unless, of course, the accomplice essentially sees no reason to believe they'll be killed. Again, MGT. The only games where I would argue this NEEDS to be relevant are Legend and Turn. I've explained why this doesn't really apply for Turn. You COULD argue this applies for Natsuhi in Legend, but there's no actual need for her to be an accomplice, and she could just be in denial or kinda slow on the uptake. Eva and Hdieyoshi are killed immediately after their part is done.

[5/6/2016 3:52:04 PM] Nozomi: I mean, seriously, I can't help but find it relevant that when the two people who know the truth create a game (I know that Lambda's game is very disconnected from Beato's, but I still find it interesting), in BOTH cases the crimes rely on people being in on fake murders.

[5/6/2016 8:18:32 PM] Nozomi: > Not to mention the more accomplices you have, the more danger you're in, due to the difficulties in trying to control an entire group of people. This is especially true if it's a single culprit. It's better to either have multiple culprits, so you aren't the single obstacle, less accomplices, making them be able to take you out more difficult, or both.

1. Well, let's look at the accomplices. Shannon/Kanon are accomplices by default obviously. Genji is a robot so that's not a problem. Nanjo is all accomplice all the time regardless of your theory, but at least he has known Yasu for well over a decade. I've explained Eva, Rosa, and Hideyoshi (and Natsuhi, though you again don't strictly NEED her, though there's implications that she could be involved.) The only other accomplice I can think of is Kumasawa. In 4 she could be being forced to help at gun-point. She also has always been kind to Yasu, is the servant and Yasu is the family head, and she (and Dr. Nanjo for that matter) could be threatened with the bomb if need be. And she might not even get that anything is going on.

So for the "official explanation" accomplices aren't too much of a problem. Nanjo and Kumasawa are the sketchiest but there's ways around them and Kumasawa is barely even necessary except in 4, I believe, and there the bad guys have guns, if you need some incentive other than "she doesn't know what's going on".

2. I would typically agree, except when the culprits aren't working for even remotely similar goals. Then you have problems. For instance, Nanjo gains nothing from helping George. Threat of being killed? Nothing indicates that George doesn't plan on killing him anyway. Your Nanjo motive for Rosa doesn't really work but at least it makes SOME sense. But when you have two culprits working for totally separate ends and an accomplice who has motivation for working for one and not really any for working for the other... it gets kinda messy and doesn't work that well.

[5/6/2016 8:23:32 PM] Nozomi: > Dr. Nanjo works as an accomplice partially because he's not a member of the Ushiromiyas and is thus more likely to be willing to sacrifice them for his own.

Sure, but he was Kinzo's friend for like... well over a decade and has been a consistent presence on the island. You don't think he has any attachment to the Ushiromiyas? He was certainly willing to go against his morals and deny that Kinzo is dead. And how much could Krauss have been paying him, given their dire financial straits?

[5/6/2016 8:24:22 PM] Nozomi: (I'm just ignoring that we have no evidence that Nanjo's granddaughter's illness was even curable, and decent evidence against it- the EP4 TIP)

[5/6/2016 8:27:06 PM] Nozomi: I will give KNM credit for admitting that he isn't satisfied with Dr. Nanjo as an accomplice- he really isn't satisfied with the idea of "accomplices" to begin with and just feels forced to have him as one to make a workable theory, which is fair.

[5/6/2016 8:35:07 PM] Nozomi: > Overall the 2nd game was the most well-orchestrated game by Rosa, though 4 was executed well as well. The only truly risky parts were the beginning when the servants were at the chapel...

That was a pretty colossal risk. If Kanon, Shannon, OR Gohda had even tried to open the chapel door the whole thing would be ruined. I mean you probably would have Genji telling them to wait, but one of them could easily have tried anyway. I mean, what could it hurt?

[5/6/2016 8:40:17 PM] Nozomi: > Not to mention that the money can already be collected due to the card she's holding

A valid point, but a couple of things

1. It's worth noting that ignoring the bomb Yasu IS promising more money if they cooperate

2. There's absolutely no guarantee that cash card is worth anything. It's not like there are ATMs on Rokkenjima. At least with the gold you have some evidence that it exists and has value. I mean, if you're going to emphasize how little reason Krauss and Natsuhi have to trust Yasu, why trust that that cash card is worth a cent?

3. If you're going to emphasize how little Natsuhi and Krauss have to trust Yasu, they could think she's lying and there's no way to disable the bomb. Why? I don't know. To lull them into a false sense of security, perhaps.

[5/6/2016 8:43:54 PM] Nozomi: > The servants and Nanjo believing Yasu is ridiculous. They were getting led to believe they would be paid a BILLION yen each just to pull a prank on Battler? And none of them suspected there would be a catch?

Well, Genji probably knows what's going on. Gohda is never portrayed as particularly intelligent and if anything is rather gullible. Dr. Nanjo is in on it too, most likely, but even if he isn't, both he and Kumasawa KNOW that Yasu has that much money easily due to Kinzo's gold, and probably know that Yasu doesn't care that much about money in the first place.

[5/6/2016 8:53:30 PM | Edited 8:53:45 PM] Nozomi: > Are the servants ever introduced as greedy, money hungry, or in need for a large sum of money?

You would turn down an offer of 1 billion yen unless you were greedy or needed it? I mean I'd take that in a heartbeat. Is Yasu's offer kind of shady? Certainly. But if you feel like you have reason to trust her, or at least no reason NOT to trust her, and have at least one person backing up that she CAN give you that money (Genji, with Nanjo and Kumasawa knowing, most likely that she can)... honestly I'd go with the money over some doubts I had. Maybe you're just a better person than I?
[5/6/2016 8:55:09 PM] Nozomi: I mean I won't claim these are bad objections per se, but when criticizing Our Confession I feel like there are bigger targets that could be being hit here

[5/6/2016 8:58:40 PM | Edited 8:59:32 PM] Nozomi: > It's ridiculous that either Kumasawa is so gullible that she can buy that the deaths of Evayoshi in Legend are fake, when they have stakes through their heads, or so moneyhungry that she would be happy to let everyone get murdered by a maniac.

As I recall the deaths in the first twilight of 5 were supposedly pretty brutal. If something even resembling that can be faked, I don't see how Evayoshi's deaths couldn't be faked too. And if you would grant me for the sake of argument that Rosa thinks that the chapel deaths are fake (Which I know you don't believe, but indulge me), then there is even LESS reason to believe Kumasawa couldn't be fooled.

[5/6/2016 9:01:52 PM] Nozomi: I've already conceded that the characterization is heavily meta-based and doesn't really make sense on its own. Also you say "Rosa in 3" when I assume you mean Rosa in 2, and I've explained why she went along with things for most of the game a few times.

[5/6/2016 9:04:15 PM] Nozomi: I've gone over the "contradiction" regarding Shannon and Kanon's attitude toward Beatrice before. And in Our Confession, as I've said before, meta-motives. I mean Shannon's attitude toward Beatrice in your theory is honestly not that believable either to be frank.

Part 2: Ange's Universe(s)

[5/6/2016 9:21:37 PM] Nozomi: > My perception of the general consensus regarding Ange's universes is that people think that Ange's world is the real world. She's the real protagonist of Umineko, and her perspective can show reality to us while games are mere fiction. In fact, the general view is that in-universe the gameboards are literally stories, written by Ikuko/Touya-Battler

Aside from a couple kinda quibbles (I doubt heavily that 5 was written by Ikuko or Touya, and there's no guarantee that Touya is actually Battler) your perception of Author Theory is mostly accurate.

Now onto Ange. Either my perspective is far more controversial than I've observed it to be (which it may be because lolyoutube), or you're playing a bit fast and loose with what the "consensus view" is. The only Ange I think is probably real is Episode 8, and even that Ange I don't think we actually SEE until she's Yukari, with most of 8 being, essentially, the depiction of an internal struggle. (You can argue whether some of the stuff we see might be other things mixed in, like the battles against the goats and the witch fights and the Battler-Erika fight, but I feel like 8, like 3, is kinda messy no matter what your interpretation is. The meta world being real helps some though.)

That said, I DO think that 4-Ange can tell us stuff about R-Prime, because I think it was most likely written by somebody in R-Prime. I'm sure you'll go into more detail about 4-Ange, but I'll just put my cards on the table now. Essentially, I would argue that 4 Ange's adventures are, whether they were actually published or not (probably not), a story written by Touya to help him cope mentally. Most likely, like what maybe possibly happened in 6, Ange tries to talk to the author of 3 and 4, ether to discuss the forgeries or because she thinks they know something about what really happened. Touya, for whatever reason, refuses to meet with her. Maybe he just doesn't care about Ange. Maybe he's actually angry that somebody from his (supposed) old life is now coming back and making him feel things he doesn't want to feel. Then time passes and Ange completely disappears and is probably presumed dead. Consumed by guilt, Touya writes a story about Ange to try and make peace with his inner demons and vent about his feelings.

Now, I think this CAN actually tell us stuff about the real world, given that Touya has, at this point, done a lot of research into the whole dealio, and might even do more to construct his Ange story. So most of the things that can even be possibly fact-checked at least somewhat easily probably were, and given that as I recall Ikuko at least has access to Maria's diary, there's almost 100% certainty that stuff is authentic.

[5/6/2016 9:23:03 PM] Nozomi: We'll talk about 6 Ange when you get to her, because... yeah. 6 Ange is kinda a mess.

[5/6/2016 9:25:16 PM] Nozomi: I kinda agree that it's impossible to prove the true nature of Ange's world. I could be wrong and 4 could be the real world and Ange just dies, and 8 is a construction of some sort. Or 6 could be real. But it's impossible to prove ANYTHING in Umineko. Like... literally anything.

[5/6/2016 9:29:26 PM] Nozomi: > Common views on Ange's world: It's the real world/real future

Are you talking 4 or 8 here? That's not entirely clear. If 4 I don't agree, though I think it tells us things about the "real world".

> Ange's perspective is objective (more or less)

Well... maybe the stuff in the middle? Like all that stuff in the orphanage is mostly clearly not objective, and the end clearly isn't. There is a stretch in the middle you could argue is objective though. If you're talking Magic end of 8, I more or less agree if you skip to when she's Yukari.

> Ange didn't die

Well she dies in 4, because Touya doesn't know what else could have happened to her. In 8 she almost dies but chooses to not commit suicide and instead changes her life. (For the better or not is up for debate). In 6... again, I suppose we'll get there.

- Ikuko is a real person and wrote the games together with Tohya-battler

I'll discuss Ikuko when we get to both your dialogue on Author Theory and the metaworld.

- Rokkenjima prime is almost completely unknown.

Total agreement.

[5/6/2016 9:35:24 PM] Nozomi: > Ange's world is a counterfactual future resulting from the 3rd game

I can see believing that about 4, not sure I can see believing that about 6 or 8. But let's continue.

> Ange's perspective is extremely subjective and largely fictional

Again, 4 is a mixed bag, 6 is... 6. And 8 is subjective and largely fictional up until the magic ending.

> Battler didn't survive (Eva did but not in the real world)

If I were to be glib I'd say you're right, TOUYA survived. But we don't even know if Battler is Tohya or if, indeed, Battler is dead. So *shrug*

> Ikuko is probably a fictional character altogether.

We'll get there.

> There may have been bottle forgeries written but those were not the games we have been reading about.

Well, if by "Bottle forgeries" you mean 1 and 2... I kinda agree? I'm not sure. Like the meta stuff in 2 is obviously tacked on, the magic stuff COULD be (I think it probably is but I'm not totally sure), and there's that weird exchange in 8 that seems to imply the conference scene in 1 (at a minimum) isn't in the message bottles.[2] So who freaking knows. In terms of 3, 4, 5, and 6, tho, nah, those were definitely forgeries.

> Tohya-Battler is a fictional character

We can discuss that in author theory too I guess

> Rokkenjima prime doesn't exist in ange's world as her future originated from the third game.

I assume you mean Ange's world isn't R-Prime. Ok.

> Rokkenjima prime may very well be game 1, 2, or 4. (And I believe it to be 2)

Well... that we'll have to have a chat about.

[5/6/2016 9:37:37 PM] Nozomi: > There is no evidence of Ange's world being the real future.

Well, I mean, if we can't LEARN things about R-Prime from 4... what was the point of that entire portion of 4? 6 at least has a narrative purpose, as I'll discuss in a bit.[3] And I feel like the whole victorious nature of the Magic end kinda loses a lot of its steam if "lol sry none of it really happened"
[5/6/2016 9:38:11 PM] Nozomi: So narratively there's some good reason to believe that Ange's world is real in SOME sense at least.
[5/6/2016 9:38:27 PM] Nozomi: As for like... hard definitive evidence? No, but again, where is that for almost anything in Umineko?

[5/6/2016 9:39:05 PM] Nozomi: Scratch the almost. Where is that for ANYTHING in Umineko? You claim the red is a foundation, but what if Beato was lying all along and lies can be in the red? You have no evidence that this ISN'T the case
[5/6/2016 9:40:04 PM] Nozomi: (And we have genuine cases where things that are, at least, not ENTIRELY true are spoken in red, even outside the whole "personality death" deal. I mentioned the whole "You can't trust anything that isn't in red" red line being at best half-true before.

[5/6/2016 9:43:23 PM] Nozomi: Here he goes on about the explanatory power regarding his view regarding Eva escaping to Kuwadorian in Game 3, as he discussed back in... I want to say the first video. I've already discussed it, not going to rehash tihngs.

[5/6/2016 9:46:11 PM | Edited 9:46:29 PM] Nozomi: > Given that if we take the perspective that Ange's world is the real world, and not a perspective stemming from the end of Game 3, we can't really reach many conclusions about Rokkenjima Prime at all, whereas if we accept my hypothesis we at least have the possibility of doing so, my hypothesis is more favorable.

Except it doesn't work as well narratively. Again, what is the point of showing us a counterfactual of 3? What did it serve? You say it clued that George was the culprit of 3. Ok. Why couldn't that have been a quick thing in the Tea party or ??? segment and then we moved onto a fuller Game 4? Why did we need an entire side-quest of Ange's Wondrous Adventures, if it didn't exist to communicate something to us?

[5/6/2016 9:49:42 PM] Nozomi: > There is also no evidence AGAINST my hypothesis

Aside from narrative significance, I guess there isn't, but this comes back to that snarky comment I made back when I was doing [video] three.[4] We HAVE to make certain assumptions in Umineko otherwise we can't do anything. You've made the assumption that the red is absolute, which you have no real grounding for aside from it being said in the story. Like in reality, we all need to make basic assumptions about what is real and what isn't. And at least, unlike your assumption that the red, at least in terms of general statements, is absolute, there is nothing CONTRADICTING the idea that Ange is R-Prime. But it might not be. We might not know R-Prime. There might not BE an R-Prime even in the Umi universe. We just can't tell.

[5/6/2016 9:50:33 PM] Nozomi: (Yes I know you think you have evidence contradicting it. We'll get to that in a sec, don't worry.)
[5/6/2016 9:53:48 PM] Nozomi: Whee more red fun

[5/6/2016 9:57:19 PM] Nozomi: > The red "Because of your sin, people die. Due to your sin, a great many humans on this island die No one escapes, all die." If taken as a general statement, this tells us that nobody survived, including Eva. Which makes Ange's world impossible.

Did people die due to Battler's sin in 5? Even in your theory George is the one behind everything and Rosa doesn't even kill a single person. So the red could only apply in the loosest and cheapest possible way, and basically would be Beatrice being a total tool, as I've noted prior.

This is pretty clearly referring strictly to Beato's gameboards. Heck, we even have an exchange in 8 where Beato talks about how she killed countless people and Battler reassures her, and it's clear she's talking about in the stories she wrote/gameboards she made. However, if we take one of the gameboards as real, the exchange goes like this:

"I've killed people all over the world."
"Yes, but not in this country!"

Not as reassuring, is it?

[5/6/2016 10:00:54 PM] Nozomi: > The red "That's right, I'm Ange!! The Ushiromiya Ange of a world where no one comes home...!! (bunch of ellipses) My entire family... never came home from Rokkenjima that day!" Also seems to contradict Ange's world being real. I mean, unless she's solely referring to her immediately family, that means Eva couldn't have survived.

I mean, META-Ange doesn't even need to correspond to any non-meta version of Ange. But let's say she does. She's talking to Battler here. It's pretty clear she means "You, Rudolf, and Kyrie didn't come home".

[5/6/2016 10:04:07 PM] Nozomi: > The red statement "Beatrice died in October of 1986. Therefore, the Golden Land she created was completely destroyed. Your family, which was made to live in the Golden Land, was destroyed laong with it. Your father, mother, and of course Battler... will never return to you again, and will never speak your name again. We have the same ambiguous use of "family", but it isn't the case that only those three people were "made to live in the Golden Land" to begin with. That would apply to everybody in Rokkenjima.
[5/6/2016 10:04:12 PM] Nozomi: A few problems here.

[5/6/2016 10:04:42 PM | Edited 10:04:53 PM] Nozomi: 1. Family even MORE clearly means Rudolf, Kyrie, and Battler here, because.... THE FOURTH SENTENCE IS CLEARLY REFERRING BACK TO THE THIRD AND EMPHASIZING IT.
[5/6/2016 10:05:18 PM] Nozomi: 1a. If it was referring to all the Ushiromiyas, why do we suddenly start talking about three of them in specific? Because those are the people it's been referring to all along.
[5/6/2016 10:05:45 PM] Nozomi: 1b. You yourself note that Ryukishi does this with the red when analyzing the "no one escapes all die." sequence of reds.
[5/6/2016 10:08:31 PM] Nozomi: 2. Let's break down the grammar of that sentence regarding the family being forced to live in the golden land. Your family (the subject), which was forced to live in the golden land (adding a trait associated with the subject leading to the relevance of the verb), was destroyed along with it. (The verb and key part of the sentence, declaring the fate of Ange's family.) Nobody is saying that Ange's family are the "only people" that had to "Live in the golden land", but in this case it was solely applying to them. It was noting that this was a trait associated with them, in order to explain their fate.
[5/6/2016 10:09:35 PM] Nozomi: 3. You're kind of question-begging by saying that all the Ushiromiyas were forced to live in the golden land because that's the equivalent of saying they all died. If they didn't all die and they all lived in the golden land, it would be in a more metaphoric sense, in which case the red doesn't mean what you want it to anyway.
[5/6/2016 10:09:56 PM] Nozomi: But honestly 3 is a quibble compared to 1 and 2.

[5/6/2016 10:16:38 PM] Nozomi: > Of course these reds aren't definitive because there are always ways you can intellectually tapdance over them
"Noting the actual context of the red in question", "intellectual tapdancing", tomato-tomahto I guess?
[5/6/2016 10:18:01 PM] Nozomi: Like, KNM, let's take 2. Ange is being really upset here. She's passionate, and she's seeing Battler again for the first time after he never came home. Why is it more likely for the red to refer to everyone and not just the 3 people that meant the most to her, and she would have waited so long to see come home?

[5/6/2016 10:18:53 PM] Nozomi: I mean I KNOW you dislike the idea that the reds can be personal and subjective... but they can [be].
[5/6/2016 10:19:28 PM] Nozomi: Again, are NO detective stories ever allowed to break Knox OR Dine? (The latter would be kind of devastating)
[5/6/2016 10:19:49 PM] Nozomi: "Alright, everyone, only van dine is allowed to write mysteries now."
"Didn't he die like.... decades ago?"
"Damn, guess the genre's dead."
[5/6/2016 10:21:17 PM] Nozomi: But anyway, got anything else?

[5/6/2016 10:22:09 PM] Nozomi: > Why is there nothing that confirms that Ange's world is real.

Ryukishi has confirmed in interviews (and I mean come on, this is a totally unnecessary lie even IN your deception narrative) that he really doesn't consider R-Prime important or a key aspect of the story.

[5/6/2016 10:28:29 PM] Nozomi: > Ange's perspective is unreliable.

Ok. That's cool. Can you prove that the Magic end Ange is fictional?
[5/6/2016 10:28:31 PM] Nozomi: No?
[5/6/2016 10:28:33 PM] Nozomi: Ok moving on
[5/6/2016 10:29:22 PM] Nozomi: It's a good thing nobody claims 4 happened or man would we be DOOMED
[5/6/2016 10:29:53 PM] Nozomi: (Well, I mean, YouTube comments so maybe I shouldn't say nobody. Nobody REASONABLE)

[5/6/2016 10:30:46 PM] Nozomi: >Ange's trip with Amakusa is fictional

Correct.

> The first time Ange jumped down was fiction

Correct.

> Ange jumping down was meta-fictional

Potentially correct.

Absolutely none of these are a problem for my hypothesis sorry.

[5/6/2016 10:32:29 PM | Edited 10:32:33 PM] Nozomi: "In which case you already conceded that there are fictional scenes in Ange's perspective."

Battler meeting Beatrice in Kinzo's study in Turn, anyone?
[5/6/2016 10:33:20 PM] Nozomi: Or is that ok because it was only DISTORTED. And us being fed fake information from a distorted perspective is totally different from us being fed fake information from an unreliable perspective because....

[5/6/2016 10:34:08 PM] Nozomi: Like he tries to conclude here that if we accept that the first time Ange jumped was fictional we have to concede EVERYTHING could be fictional. I've already explained how 4 could be fictional but still based on facts, but let me alter this a bit.
[5/6/2016 10:34:55 PM] Nozomi: The time Battler met Beatrice in Kinzo's study was not reliable.

In which case you've already conceded that there are fictional scenes in Battler's perspective. In which case you could even argue that anybody's death or existence in Turn was fictional.

[5/6/2016 10:36:32 PM] Nozomi: Battler's meeting with Beatrice in Kinzo's study was unreliable
But this undermines your entire view as you can now no longer be certain what portions of Battler's perspective are reliable and which are not. Is the chapel scene reliable? How about when they diacover Jessica's body? Maybe Battler got SMASHED before even coming onto Rokkenjima, and fainted, and Turn was a hallucination. How can you be sure?
[5/6/2016 10:37:49 PM] Nozomi: Battler's meeting with Beatrice in Kinzo's study was meta-fictional (which I know KNM doesn't believe)
In which case the entirety of Turn could have just been one of her stories. Even Battler being alive in 1986 could have been part of the same story.

[5/6/2016 10:37:56 PM] Nozomi: Don't make your arguments so easy to turn against you next time KNM

[5/6/2016 10:41:04 PM] Nozomi: > Ange sees Ikuko as Featherine and her cat as Bernkastel

No she doesn't, though I get how somebody could get confused. There's RAPID cutting between Ange and META-Ange in 6 but they each seem to have separate sources of information and are having separate conversations.

[5/6/2016 10:41:57 PM] Nozomi: (Also there's no reason to believe the Meta world doesn't exist, but we'll get there)

[5/6/2016 10:43:10 PM] Nozomi: > Given that Gretel-Ange and Ange seem to be interchangeable at points in the fourth novel, how can we be sure that not EVERYTHING Ange experiences in the fourth novel isn't meta-fictional?

Replace "meta-fictional" with "fictional" and you're starting to get it!

[5/6/2016 10:43:34 PM] Nozomi: (Though hey, could be meta-fiction too. Who knows.)

[5/6/2016 10:47:47 PM] Nozomi: > If almost all of Twilight is meta-fictional/a delusion, how do you know that the end of Twilight isn't meta-fictional/a delusion?

First, a delusion? Seriously? Have more love for poor Ange bro.

Second, I repeat my earlier question: How do you know you played Umineko? How do you know I exist?

[5/6/2016 10:49:44 PM] Nozomi: > Well Featherine is obviously in Ange's mind
Says who? You and I have different definitions of the word "obviously" it seems

[5/6/2016 10:53:05 PM] Nozomi: > In the 8th novel Ikuko speaks in red to Ootsuki, somebody most people would agree is likely real. You obviously can't speak in red in the real world and it would have no actual function.

Ok, the meta-world is real and Ikuko is a vessel for Featherine. Problem solved.

Oh, I can't believe that for some reason? Ok, Ryukishi wanted to guarantee his readers that Eva's diary contained the truth and given how Ikuko could easily have been lying, cheated a bit. Problem solved.

[5/6/2016 10:55:05 PM] Nozomi: > Ikuko says in red that Eva's diary contains the truth.

Ok, now you're showing a screenshot of Featherine. Are you saying you agree with me that the meta-world is real and Ikuko and Featherine are the same person?
[5/6/2016 10:59:46 PM] Nozomi: > Even if Ange's perspective is the real world it's irrelevant because we can know nothing about it if the perspective of its only observer is unreliable.

Well, I mean... I know I said I was going to be nice, but that's kinda a limit of your imagination, bro. Not anybody else's.[5]

[5/6/2016 11:00:37 PM] Nozomi: > Nobody could make any objective argument...
YOU CAN'T MAKE OBJECTIVE ARGUMENTS IN UMINEKO
[5/6/2016 11:00:40 PM] Nozomi: IT IS LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE
[5/6/2016 11:01:59 PM] Nozomi: Like, give me one objective argument that can be made and I'll refute it.

[5/6/2016 11:07:38 PM] Nozomi: > Even the validity of the red truth could be doubted on that basis.

KnownNoMore, I want you to think back to Game 2. When Battler says that Beato could lie in the red truth, did she make some objective case for its veracity? Did she prove it was true in some way? No, she just said "Well, yes, I theoretically could. But there's no real point in having a game or dialogue if we assume that, now is there?"

There was always grounds to doubt the validity of the red truth. We just didn't, because we have very little to work from otherwise.

[5/6/2016 11:11:22 PM] Nozomi: > I have a challenge for those who believe Ange's reality is the true reality- Name at least 3 scenes that you believe to be true reality, and then prove that it is reality rather than a delusion, a fiction, or part of meta-fiction. I claim that this cannot be done.

I have a counter-challenge: Name at least 3 scenes in the entirety of Umineko that you believe to be true reality, and then prove that it is reality rather than a delusion, a fiction, or part of meta-fiction. I claim that this cannot be done.

[5/6/2016 11:13:05 PM] Nozomi: Finally we're getting to the Magic ending

[5/6/2016 11:17:44 PM] Nozomi: > The entire ending is about Ange denying truth. In fact prior to jumping off the skyscraper she claims that she will create a human "blood red" truth, and that is exactly what I believe the ending of Ep. 8 is; a fantasy created by Ange to get a happy ending, despite Bern's red in the previous novel.

Wait. Wait. Wait. You CAN'T use Bern's red to refer to reality. Bern is a meta-fictional character. Unless you argue that the meta-world is real, and I know that in the next chapter you WON'T, Bern can have no knowledge OF the real world. And logically you have to have knowledge of something in order to make absolute truths about something.

Anyway, yes, Ange has that whole freakout that lasts around 5 minutes or so. Then she chills out, and decides that on some level she will accept reality, but also that she won't just accept that her loved ones are gone forever, and that they still live inside her. That's the point.

[5/6/2016 11:25:27 PM] Nozomi: I'll admit the lolamnesia loophole to the red is nonsense, but it's pretty clearly what the author intended.

But even still KNM's argument isn't very good. You can't compare "Touya is still Battler even though he changed his name" to "Ange is still Ange even though she changed her name" because Ange still has the memories OF Ange, whatever those may be.

But let's look at it this way. What are you without your memories? Let's even grant dualism for a moment and assume that there is a soul (which KNM doesn't accept but I think it's necessary for his position to be viable). The soul is, as I understand it, a container for an individual's personality, being, sense of self, and so on. And while a person's personality is also an agglomeration of genetic factors, a good chunk of it stems from... your experiences. Your interactions with others. What makes you, you is the product of what you've done in the past and what you do in the present. Not entirely, but a pretty big chunk of it. So... what happens when those memories are entirely gone? Can you really say you're the same person anymore? Even if those memories are still in that person's soul, psychological case studies such as the case of Phineas Gage prove that said personality traits and so on can't be recovered while the party is alive. So the soul can't be directly linked to the brain and be able to feed the information of one's "self" back in. So while Battler is alive, at a minimum... how is he still Battler with no memories?

Like I don't even believe lolamnesia is a good loophole and I'd be willing to be convinced, but "THERE'S MORE TO A PERSON'S IDENTITY THAN THAT", especially when they have developed a COMPLETELY SEPARATE IDENTITY TOTALLY INDEPENDENT OF USHIROMYIA BATTLER is by itself not a compelling argument.

[5/6/2016 11:27:31 PM] Nozomi: And this is really really clearly Ryukishi's intent, though I know KNM would claim this is just part of the deception. Touya even comments that the "Battler" within him got restless at certain points. Which clearly indicates that, at least to Ryukishi, Touya and Battler are separate individuals in some capacity
[5/6/2016 11:28:08 PM] Nozomi: And there are are at least SOME grounds to argue that this isn't completely untrue.

[5/6/2016 11:29:23 PM | Edited 11:30:09 PM] Nozomi: > If you believe the 8th game is something Ange wrote/occurred in her head, then the red that Battler is dead is something that Ange essentially made up.

*Shrug* or the meta-world is real. I mean there's no reason it COULDN'T just be something Ange really really strongly believed, and essentially thought was a fact

[5/6/2016 11:35:20 PM | Edited 11:35:46 PM] Nozomi: > The flow of the narrative also builds up toward a fictional ending. There's the conflict between Ange and Battler, where Ange wants to know the truth but Battler tries to keep it from her. Ange learns the truth from the diary but can't accept it. She decides to "write her own truth with her blood" (she kills herself). She's then "Revived" and the contents of the golden truth are revealed, she dies that any red truth can contradict the golden truth [Pretty sure that that was essentially established as something that could happen in EP5 brosef. Rmeember how Dlanor talked about how Gold could be more powerful than Red?] She then accepts that a trick was true magic, and then years later Battler returns to her and the impossible happy ending happens.

That is certainly one way you can interpret episode 8. However the interpretation that "Ange read the truth, whatever it was caused a minor freakout, but she managed to get over it and decides that instead of ending her life, she will live on knowing that her family were, in the end, good people, and that they will live on in her heart. So instead of killing herself she lives on, changing her name and becoming an author. This eventually allows her to meet her "brother" again." is pretty much equally valid. (Also given that the very end really clearly implies he dies, I'm not sure I'd really call the Magic end a "happy" ending. Happier than the trick ending, sure. But happy? Eh.)

[5/6/2016 11:36:57 PM] Nozomi: Wait wait wait. I'm REALLY hoping that I'm misunderstanding you here KNM. Are you asserting that Meta-Battler WAS IN THE RIGHT?
[5/6/2016 11:37:49 PM] Nozomi: Because, I mean, in the end, even if your ending was completely true, Ange had the right to know what happened to her family. (As did a bunch of other people but the narrative doesn't care about them so whatever.)


Part 3- What is the Meta-world?


[5/6/2016 11:41:53 PM] Nozomi: So your conclusion as to the [nature of the] meta world is "I dunno". Ok. Chapter over I guess?
[5/6/2016 11:42:12 PM] Nozomi: I mean that's a perfectly acceptable answer

[5/6/2016 11:44:21 PM] Nozomi: > I don't believe a fictional story such as Umineko lends itself to the discussion of deep philosophical concepts

I'm going to first off assume you mean something along the lines of "I don't believe a fictional story akin to Umineko" or "written like Umineko" because the idea that you can't discuss deep philosophical concepts in fiction is so ludicrous it doesn't even warrant discussion. The Stranger says hello.

But even in Umi, we have discussions of concepts of "love" and "truth", both of which are deep philosophical concepts, truth in particular.

[5/6/2016 11:46:37 PM | Edited 11:46:54 PM] Nozomi: > Umineko does contain philosophical concepts, but I think it would be wrong to consider Ryukishi a philosopher.

I don't have to consider somebody a philosopher to think they wanted to engage with philosophy in their text. Philosophy is an academic study, a lot of people that have written highly philosophical fictional texts would not be considered philosophers as such, they'd be considered people who wrote about philosophical concepts.

[5/6/2016 11:48:54 PM] Nozomi: I mean, I'm switching media here I know, but I would say that Urobuchi has definitely discussed philosophical concepts (Hope, despair, idealism, sacrifice, etc.) in his various anime, but in no way is he a philosopher.

[5/6/2016 11:50:44 PM] Nozomi: "Ryukishi is a fiction writer after all, not a philosopher."

Hey, here's some philosophers that were also fiction writers-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Camus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hume
Arguably Plato.
[5/6/2016 11:52:33 PM] Nozomi: I mean I don't even consider Ryukishi a philosopher, but to make that claim and discuss philosophy in other videos is just astonishing

[5/6/2016 11:56:31 PM] Nozomi: > The battle of naturalism vs .supernaturalism ends at the end of the fourth novel.

IF so, you can only conclude that supernaturalism won, since it was confirmed that most of Battler's natural explanations were wrong.

[5/7/2016 12:06:47 AM | Edited 12:07:06 AM] Nozomi: > In terms of using a meta-fictional, metaphorical explanation of the metaworld, that doesn't work as there is no evidence in favor of such an explanation, there is in fact no way to even HAVE actual evidence in favor of it, it's based on a claim written in unreliable perspective, and thus there is no real reason to believe it in the first place.

1. I mean, in essence it's a theoretical model. By itself there's no strict evidence supporting it, but it has a good deal of explanatory power if you examine the entire story through that lens. Unlike usual I'm not going to go through that here because it'd take a while.[6]

2. As noted when we discussed the nature of Umineko at the end of part 3, you don't think subjective perspectives inherently can have much truth or value unless inherently backed up by something you deem "objective". I do. So we're at an impasse on this point.

[5/7/2016 12:09:51 AM] Nozomi: > If "Ange's meta-world" experiences have a delusional explanation, why not apply that explanation to "Battler's meta-world" as well?

Well, I mean, if you want to make great swathes of the story meaningless you CAN. I don't see any reason to do that. Heck I don't even see much reason to think that Ange's meta-world experiences have a delusional explanation. The only one that's arguable is 8, and who knows if those characters are actually what Ange is seeing, or just what we the audience are seeing. They could be representations of concepts in her head.

[5/7/2016 12:12:12 AM] Nozomi: > If Ange is that delusional, why can't the bottle letters, the forgeries, and even Ikuko and Tohya-Battler be part of her delusions as well?

1. Seriously, why are you saying that somebody who goes through a colossal mental conflict is delusional? Why are you assuming that what WE see is what ANGE experienced, and it wasn't dramatized for our effect, especially since there are scenes that seem to have nothing to do with her inner conflict at all? (The scene with Dlanor, Will, et al. fighting the goats for example)

2. How has somebody who does philosophy videos never heard of the problem of hard solipsism?[7]

[5/7/2016 12:15:40 AM] Nozomi: > Another problem is that there's an unbroken flow in the narrative from the first novel to the last- the "independent stores" fit together perfectly as one unbroken narrative.

I think you're kinda overexaggerating, but that's probably partially just narrative conceit? Like, it's more enjoyable to experience a narrative if it's unbroken rather than jagged and uneven, even if strictly that's not particularly likely, realistically speaking.

[5/7/2016 12:17:44 AM] Nozomi: > This doesn't really make sense if Beatrice wrote the first two and Ikuko/Tohya-Battler wrote the others.

Ikuko and Tohya wrote 3, 4, and 6. They probably didn't write 7, definitely didn't write the 7 Tea Party, and didn't write 8. And almost definitely didn't write 5.

> It was by accident that they were discovered in order and there were probably more than two given how easily a message bottle set out to sea could get lost.

1. Isn't that supposedly what happened to Land?

2. You're assuming that they were discovered at sea and not written after-the-fact, which is in no way certain.

[5/7/2016 12:19:38 AM] Nozomi: Another problem is that without the meta-world to connect them, pretty much none of the stories have an unbroken flow, and there is pretty much 0 chance the meta-world is in the actual narratives. If it isn't real, it's symbolic.

Part 4: What Really Happened (According to KNM)


[Basically, because I never explicitly state it- Gameboard 2 is prime. After Battler enters the Study, Rosa explains everything that happened in Turn as well as other potential murder scenarios for... some reason. Then lets Battler go, leaving his fate up to... well, fate. Battler either gets badly injured by the explosion but survives, or gets to the exit- which presumably Rosa told him about for some reason. He then nearly drowns in the ocean but reaches the shore, barely alive. Games 1-4 at a minimum (Or at least 1, 3, and 4), meta-verse and all, are fictional recreations made by Battler as he is dying. Potentially 5 or even 6, KNM isn't sure. He then dies, and is replaced by a fake Battler that is a wholly fictional creation of Ryukishi.]

[5/7/2016 12:22:44 AM] Nozomi: Ok, you concede that this hypothesis is largely speculation. I mean, I could just stop here but might as well hear you out at this point.

[5/7/2016 12:30:12 AM] Nozomi: But before we get there, let me break down several key problems with Turn being Prime

1. The magical narrative. If Turn is Prime, what does that represent? Is it purely Ryukishi giving us hints? That seems kinda cheap. Why couldn't he give us hints from an objective perspective? Why was there no magical perspective in Legend? I mean, given how radically different that is in this regard, and is much more "Normal", wouldn't it make more sense for IT to be Prime?

2. If Rosa didn't actually create Turn as a message botlle, exactly what did we read? The actual events? That seems to conflict with the magical perspective. How could there be a 3rd person omniscient account of the actual events that occurred there? Why is only Battler's perspective reliable?

3. The narrative placement of Turn. If you're going to have Turn as Prime, why make it the second novel that essentially acts as a second introduction? Why not make it the climax of the first 4 novels? (Yes, I know you claim that 4 could be Prime too, but that's not the case you're making)

4. Why did Beato seem to create Turn as more of a game than reality? She creates rules and guidelines, has a hint system in the form of the red truth, and uses it as a way to taunt Battler. She herself basically calls it more of a game. Why would Ryukishi present it this way if Turn is prime?

5. What about Turn makes it unique that we should be able to TELL that it's prime? Yes there's more locked room mysteries/impossible crimes than is usual, but Ryukishi explained that as him wanting to set the difficulty higher (the introduction to the episode outright states this more or less) and then backed off when he got complaints.

[5/7/2016 12:31:35 AM] Nozomi: 5a. And given how the 3rd novel begins- with Virgilia essentially walking Battler through the nature of a subjective perspective when this was kind of just taken as a given in 2- that seems like a pretty logical conclusion

[5/7/2016 12:37:00 AM] Nozomi: Also, problem with the rest of the series being in Battler's head

1. Why is he imagining all these different gameboards? Evidently it's other plans of Rosa's... but why imagine those?

2. Again, how does red truth work? Even if Rosa tells you facts, you have no way of knowing she isn't lying to you or in some way mistaken.

3. What is the purpose of the meta-world exactly? Just filler? What about characters like Lambda and Bern, what do they represent? Why are they in the story at all; why isn't it just a conflict between Battler and Beatrice?

4. Why does Battler imagine Ange in 3 different universes? Why does Battler seem to imagine Ange imagining things?

5. Why, in your theory, is there this "unbroken chain" you claim is there? If this is the product of a dying brain, shouldn't it be more scattered and haphazard?

6. Why should I care about anything aside from board 2 if none of it reflects any sort of reality? How wasn't Ryukishi just totally wasting my time?

[5/7/2016 12:38:56 AM | Edited 12:39:05 AM] Nozomi: 7. If Battler was drunk while he learned The Real Truth, how was his memory reliable? If it isn't, why should we trust the red truth at all?

[5/7/2016 12:41:34 AM] Nozomi: > The boat scene where Battler drowns could either be symbolic of him getting caught in the explosion, or a slightly fictionalized recreation of an actual event.

What was [with] his affectionate attitude toward Beatrice in that scene? Didn't Rosa just kill his entire family? Even if you argue that that's symbolism, what is [it] supposed to symbolize?

[5/7/2016 12:41:50 AM] Nozomi: (Entire family aside from Ange ofc poor Ange)

[5/7/2016 12:45:25 AM] Nozomi: > The meta-world is a hallucination that Battler is experiencing due to being in a brain damaged state

Again, I ask: sure, the rules of the meta-world are often kinda haphazard, but there's still a certain consistency to them. If this is the product of a dying brain, shouldn't everything be all over the place? How do characters have even remotely consistent motivations from one episode to the next? How do characters manage to appear and disappear in thematically convenient ways and not just jump in and out of existence. Heck, how can we be sure that, if Battler is brain damaged, he's remembering the events of the second game correctly (assuming we're seeing his recollection in Ep. 2), or Rosa's other murder plans correctly? How can we rely on the red truth at all?

How can completely fictional beings speak red truth? What does that even mean exactly?

If Battler knows the truth, why does he appear to get everything completely wrong in 4 and it isn't until 5 that he figures stuff out, if he's also the one supplying himself with these red truths and such?

[5/7/2016 12:46:58 AM] Nozomi: Other problems with everything being in Battler's head:

1. Then, if the meta-world is a result of battler's delusional, brain-damaged state, are the fantasy scenes in the games too? Then I repeat, why did Legend barely have any and Turn an entire magical subplot?
[5/7/2016 12:48:07 AM] Nozomi: 2. Did Battler just totally make up all that background stuff with Eva, Rosa, Maria, and so on? If so, then why should I care about any of it?

[5/7/2016 12:49:14 AM | Edited 12:49:17 AM] Nozomi: > Could the rose motif [In Umineko] have been another hint pointing towards Rosa?

Or... could it have been a motif because roses are frequently used in magic?
[5/7/2016 12:50:08 AM] Nozomi: Also MAN, Battler even managed to provide symbolic hints for things that he should logically already know? That's some impressive brain-damaged mind he has!
[5/7/2016 12:50:29 AM] Nozomi: And kind of does already know because part of him is telling him facts about the plans. And taunting him for not knowing the things he knows.
[5/7/2016 12:50:30 AM] Nozomi: Or something.

[5/7/2016 12:51:30 AM] Nozomi: If you believe Bernkastel doesn't exist and is a figment of Battler's imagination, why should I care what reds she gives?
[5/7/2016 12:54:49 AM] Nozomi: If Meta Battler is Battler pre-death, and then a fictional character post-death... you're essentially saying that through factors that we had no way of knowing and you admit are mostly pure speculation, Ryukishi replaced one character with a purely fictional representation of that character?
[5/7/2016 12:54:55 AM] Nozomi: Wow, that's such a MASSIVE cheat

[5/7/2016 12:56:48 AM] Nozomi: > [RE: Why the 6th game is a good candidate for Battler's ddeath] Battler does in the end get to understand Beatrice despite the issue of not making it in time for her funeral which could also mean that he only truly comprehended her after she had already died.

Umm.... can you repeat that? Preferably with a diagram?

[5/7/2016 1:00:14 AM] Nozomi: > [RE: Why the 5th game is a good candidate for Battler's death] Battler at least symbolically died just before figuring out the truth, and the same goes for beatrie. Battler changes from a human being into a magical being and becomes game master. The whole notion of the games just being actual novels within the story itself began at the beginning of the 6th novel.

1. Actually pretty sure that a lot of people had come up with some version of Author Theory prior to Novel 6.

2. How did Battler learn the truth in 5 anyway if he knew it this entire time? How does that work? If he died just before learning the truth, why does fictional Battler have to learn it? He's a creation of Ryukishi's and thus should understand the truth already, right?
[5/7/2016 1:01:03 AM] Nozomi: (I mean Battler is a creation of Ryukishi in the first place but you know what I mean)

[5/7/2016 1:05:21 AM] Nozomi: > {Why Battler dying in the 4th game makes sense] Beatrice "died" and the 5th game got a new GM. Battler changes his focus from being anti-magic to trying to understand Beatrice. Beatrice's who am I question revolves around killing Battler in red. Battler shouldn't have known about Erika's corpse, so logically he couldn't have imagined the 5th game. It's possible that Battler's death is what acted as the dividing line between Umineko and Chiru.

1. I still don't get why Battler got so much wrong, even in KNM's theory, if he knew the truth all along and part of his mind consciously knew the truth and made an entire persona to explain the truth to him and then mock him for not knowing it.

2. Those reds are really really clearly referring to piece Battler and are meant as clues for the bomb.

3. Character development? Welp, original character must be dead.

4. Well, yes, Battler wouldn't know about Erika's corpse, making the huge assumption it washed up on Rokkenjima at all. Fortunately all your hypothesizing is based on nothing so this fact means nothing.

5. Why is there no evidence for this dividing line? Why did nothing clearly happen to Meta-Battler in 4 that would indicate death? You at least have some slight evidence that he might have undergone something in 5. [And after 6 we don't really see him beyond what could be an imaginary reconstruction]

[5/7/2016 1:08:22 AM] Nozomi: > In essence, game 1 represents Beatrice's non-perfect victory- she completes the ceremony but doesn't get acknowledgment from Battler. Game 2 is Beatrice's perfect victory, ceremony is completed and gets Battler's acknowledgement. Game 3 Beatrice loses, the epitaph is solved by Eva and Beatrice is killed by her fellow culprit

Wait wait wait. These alternate games are Rosa's plans right? Why would she have a plan where she LOSES?
[5/7/2016 1:08:43 AM] Nozomi: Not a contingency plan, but just loses and is murdered

[5/7/2016 1:10:15 AM] Nozomi: > Game 4 is Beatrice's non-perfect victory through [her] contingency plan.

Ok, but if you're constructing this story, this seems all over the place. Why would you have Beatrice's grand victory near the BEGINNING of the series, and a near-perfect victory right at the beginning? Why have one where she loses at all, and if you're going to have one where she loses, why have it in the middle? Why have a non-perfect victory as the final note to end the Beatrice-Battler match on?

[5/7/2016 1:11:33 AM] Nozomi: > The Ep. 8 puzzle is referring to a belief in Ange's world.

But... Ange's world doesn't really exist right? Like... it has no narrative significance whatsoever
[5/7/2016 1:11:37 AM] Nozomi: So again, why should I care about it?

[5/7/2016 1:14:30 AM] Nozomi: > the readers are an additional perspective in Umineko, a "5th perspective" and referred to in the narrative typically as "Theater-going witches".

Sure, that's fine. I mean the meta-world breaks the 4th wall a decent amount- my favorite moment still being when Super Paper asks for people to vote for her in the Umineko Character Poll in 8.

[5/7/2016 1:15:03 AM] Nozomi: Do I have to go into why Umi isn't actually a game again?
[5/7/2016 1:15:11 AM] Nozomi: Well, a game between me and Ryukishi
[5/7/2016 1:16:05 AM] Nozomi: Aaaand I'm done
[5/7/2016 1:16:10 AM] Nozomi: That was... certainly a theory.

ANNOTATIONS:

1. I can rant about Our Confession to people if they want, but this doesn't really seem like the place.

2. Basically, in 8 Ange sees all the siblings getting along and retorts that this doesn't make sense because they should be fighting over the inheritance. Battler responds that she really has no reason to believe that they were like that, and that their desperation regarding money were just some rumors after-the-fact that got blown out of proportion. Really? NO REASON aside from rumors? What about Legend and Turn, Legend having a scene that can be summed up as "The siblings argue over the inheritance because they need money"?

3. He never really discusses 6 Ange, just kinda touches on her, so I never really present my hypothesis. My hypotheses are that either
A. 6!Ange is pretty much a purely meta construct. The non-meta portions are just creations of Featherine, to justify her coming to talk to "Ikuko", and the context surrounding that, both before and after. This is of course assuming that the meta-world is real, which I know people may reject.
B. There is no real in-world explanation for 6!Ange. She is primarily an excuse for Meta-Ange to be the "reader" of the 6th gameboard, and therefore partially add her own take onto the narrative, coloring it. Thus the third person omniscient narration can imply that Battler doesn't know what's going on, or plan for a Logic Error, when he did the whole time. (I'll note that this Doylist interpretation is, on some level, why I think Ange is in the narrative. The only question is if there's an in-universe explanation for her to be.)

Both these solutions make sense to me. I like A a bit more, but given that the existence of the meta-verse can't really be proven B is equally possible.

4. What I'm referring to is this:

[5/5/2016 12:32:26 AM] Nozomi: "How can we know that Ange's world is real? How can we know that Ange did anything ascribed to her in the stories? How can we know that Ange even truly existed?"

Those are good questions KNM. But I have some of my own. How do you know you played Umineko no Naku Koro Ni? For all you know it was a hallucination, and anything confirming it is just your brain adjusting the data to fit your preconceptions. How do you know I even exist? I could easily be a figment of your imagination created by you in a solipsistic universe.
[5/5/2016 12:33:15 AM] Kurumi Ebisuzawa: Deep.
[5/5/2016 12:33:20 AM] Nozomi: See how in real life we kind of need to make assumptions in order to properly function and tell what's going on? I would kind of think that in a game where regular narration can't be trusted people would UNDERSTAND we need to do that here too
[5/5/2016 12:33:23 AM] Nozomi: But I guess not?

[5] As noted in my notes, this was an unwarranted personal attack, and I do apologize for it. The actual content still isn't wrong, however.

[6] And KNM really shouldn't object to this, because he admits his own theory regarding what really happened is mostly speculative and is hence pretty much purely a theoretical model as well! At least Author Theory has going for it that it creates less holes.

[7] Essentially the problem of hard solipsism is a formal version of what I outlined in annotation 4 of this part. You can't prove you aren't in the Matrix. You can't prove you aren't a brain in a vat, with information being fed to you through a hyper-advanced computer. There may be reasons to think these are UNLIKELY, but at least at the moment they are unfalsifiable. However, we have to make the assumption that other beings exist, because we interact with them and we'd like to think that this interaction means something. We also have to make that assumption because otherwise it's hard to really determine any cogent purpose for life, helping others, or anything of the sort. You're not really making any sort of tangible difference, because everything is all in your head. There are basic assumptions we have to make to function in the world and be able to reason about it. And that applies to Umi too.
So, there you go. Now to never think about KNM's videos ever again.
"With good friends by your side, anything is possible. If you really care for each other, it makes everyone stronger! Then you'll have the will to succeed! The world is filled with painful things, it's sad sometimes, and you won't be able to handle it by yourself. But just know: If there's someone that you love, you'll stay on the right path. And you won't ever give in! As long as you keep that person in your heart, you'll keep getting back up. Understand? That's why a Hero never loses!"
Image
Miki by Hershey's Chocolate Bars.
User avatar
TheDoctor
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:13 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by TheDoctor »

Unfortunately, I won't really be able to cover this theory in Turnabout of the Golden Witch, but I had a thought regarding Battler after episode 8.
Spoiler : Episode 8 :
It was said that Tohya was able to remember his life as Battler, but due to the brain damage from nearly drowning, he could never accept those memories as his own. However, what if the truth is a little more complicated than that? I'm willing to accept the premise that Tohya, at least at first, couldn't accept that Battler's memories were his own, but there's something I noticed here...

1: Tohya was an identity created for Battler.
2: Tohya has his own set of memories, but retains access to Battler's memories.
3: At some point, Tohya tried to commit suicide, but failed, leading to his being bound to a wheelchair.

Does this sound like any other character we know? If you said Sayo, you'd be right. Shannon, Kanon, and Beatrice were all identities created for Sayo, with the latter two having been created specifically because she couldn't accept herself as Sayo, and the identity of Shannon having been created for her, but eventually being used as a replacement for her identity as Sayo. Shannon, Kanon, and Beatrice all have their own memories, but have complete access to the memories of the others. And of course, Sayo tried to commit suicide, albeit, she succeeded.

So, what if Battler and Sayo are actually far more alike than at first glance? Tohya's identity was created for him, but perhaps when he finally remembered his life as Battler, the thing that actually kept him from accepting those memories as his own was his inability to accept his part in that tragedy. To cope with what he probably considered his greatest failure, he could no longer accept he and Battler were the same person. And maybe, on a day where the facade wasn't enough to help him cope, that's when he tried to kill himself, but somehow failed, and ended up stuck in a wheelchair for the rest of his life.
What are your thoughts on this?
Image Image Image
User avatar
TheDoctor
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:13 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: English

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by TheDoctor »

Not sure this was an intentional parallel, but I just realized Beatrice and...
Spoiler : Don't read until after episode 7's ???? segment :
Natsuhi have more in common than they might think. Both Sayo and Natsuhi were driven to kill (at least partially) by their insecurities about their bodies. Taken a step further, you could even say it was their inability to produce children.

Granted, I know in Sayo's case, most of it was due to Battler not returning for her, or even writing to her, but if she hadn't had that damaged body, she probably would have just moved on with George eventually. So, insecurity about her body was indeed an important factor in her motive.

I kind of wonder how that conversation would go if Sayo and Natsuhi both realized that.
Image Image Image
User avatar
enigma
Posts: 3421
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 11:05 am
Gender: Male
Spoken languages: miaou
Location: dancecat's heaven
Contact:

Re: Umineko no Naku Koro Ni

Post by enigma »

has anyone here heard of the rosatrice theory by knownomore? it's honestly my favourite documentary and higurashi theory and i dont think anyone else has seen it? :gumshoe:
Post Reply