Qrr posted:

She is not hands off with the servants. She pays attention to them and their schedules.

tiistai posted:

Hang on, what is this claim based on

I don't know if I can hotlink images from the LP archive posted:

Ange: "At that time, there were two types of corpses. Some had their faces pulverized, and some had half of their faces pulverized."

BEATORICHE: "That's right. The ones with their faces smashed were Rudolf, Kyrie, Rosa, and Gohda. The ones with the sides of their heads smashed were Krauss and Shannon. At the time, I fickly created two types of corpses, but I realized that the former, more atrocious type was actually disadvantageous for me."

Battler: "...Disadvantageous for you...? I see. So that's what this is."

That's right. The smashed faces might look atrocious. But that made it hard to confirm the identity of each person.

For example, at the time, Uncle Krauss and Shannon-chan had had their heads only half-smashed.

That alone was atrocious enough, but because half of their faces remained, it was easy to confirm their identities. But Dad and the other three were different. Because his face had been completely destroyed, even I, as his son, could only guess by inference that it had to be Dad because of his clothes and the like. In short, it remained vague until the end whether that really had been Dad's corpse.

Battler: "If this reasoning battle had taken place during the first game as well, I would probably have claimed that, since the identities of Dad and the rests' bodies were impossible to confirm, there was a possibility that one was a fake corpse. After all, Beato didn't state anything in red during that game."

GAP brand clothing store: "Well done. Correct. A faked death is one of the basics of the mystery genre. Even if you make a doctor examine the corpse, you can't trust the results if you suspect him of being the culprit's accomplice. Therefore, corpses that can't guarantee a death for certain are always disadvantageous for the witch's side."

Ange Burger: "You can suspect faked deaths for all corpses, hypothesizing that one or more of them is the culprit for the crimes that follow. It's a move Battler doesn't like, but it's the most elementary move to use against a witch."

Bato: "Yeah, that's right. That's why Beato started using the red. With the red truth, she can carry out a perfect autopsy."

Beatrice the amazing: "*cackle*cackle*! That's how it is. Normally, for the first twilight, I would use the red truth right away, confirming the deaths of these six. However, as you know, my battle strategy this time is the complete opposite of previous games, and I'll now use red truth starvation tactics...! "Since you use it as a grounding from which to counterattack, I will not use the red easily. I'll make you come apart at the seams by using red in just a single place, as rarely as possible! In the end, it means I will permit all rants regarding your guesswork for all the closed rooms, and I only have to smash one of those once with the red truth."

Battler the giggler: "Ihihi! Even though you've always teased me, once I start counterattacking, you now hole up back inside your shell. Quit kidding around."

Bullytrice: "At any rate, I do not want to use the red, I want to be stingy! I want to bully Battleeer!! But how could I guarantee a death for certain without using red? I worried and worried over it. Then, Gaap gave me an idea! It truly is a simple method. *cackle*cackle*!"

GRAWP: "...I just pointed out something obvious and you hit upon the idea, Riiche. I simply said that you only had to create corpses whose identity could be distinguished and whose complete death would be understood."

Bea the Golden: "Kuhhihihihi! In short, I put those two things together! The face, which is necessary to distinguish their identity, and the pulverization of the head, the vessel for the soul, which is the perfect symbol of death! When I put those two parts neatly together, aah, wonderful! I came up with the perfect answer of corpses with their heads half-smashed!"

Battler the As If He Wouldn't Do the Same: "I'll bet you love two-colored bread and two-colored ice cream. You're just like a greedy kid..."

Ange before she got hired to narrate Amazon e-books for bored witches: "...At any rate, even if half of their heads are smashed, we shouldn't assume that they're dead at this point in time."

EagerSleeper posted:

Still looking for the part where Gohda and Kumasawa were dead in a shed, but for sure, they were hanging. Kumasawa was looking more towards us in the CG. I don't know if this is relevant anymore, but this is what I found in "Ushiromiya Kinzo III" in the archived LP about supposedly dead bodies.


That's why I don't think that everyone in the shed was dead in the first game. Whatever or how unlikely the method that is being used to pretend to be a corpse is, it's still fairly effective. Relying on the characters' skills in determining whether they can determine dead bodies or not is not really reliable since they are just pieces on a board game. Hopefully this quoted section proves useful.

ProfessorProf posted:

"Then, you're saying... that the victims were alive at that time?! Even though their necks were sliced open?!"
"Did you see that yourself, Miss Detective...? It may be true that all corpses would not lead to a mistaken examination, no matter who it was that checked to see whether they were alive, but it has never been said that there was a rule against something other than a corpse being called a corpse."

Cyouni posted:

Reminder that:

"Not all of Battler's blue truths were valid. ...When talking about the first game, Beato clearly declared that she guaranteed the identities of all unidentified corpses! This defeats Battler's theory about the culprit of the Eva/Hideyoshi closed room murder being someone who faked up a corpse."

EagerSleeper posted:

This quote winds up being the same sort of tautology as the last game's climax, where corpses are corpses unless they are actually just people pretending to be corpses.


Off topic but I really want to eat the mackerel recipe that was posted in this thread earlier. It really sounds delicious.

Cyouni posted:

The difference here is that one was actually seen by the detective equivalent, whereas the other ended up being people standing there going "you really don't want to look at these corpses I'm telling you are there".

If we can't ever trust anyone's perspectives, not even the detective's, then we might as well claim no one ever died, and everyone's sitting around playing a game of make-believe because they feel like it. We'll have just as much proof then. Or that the seagulls are the culprits behind everything, puppeteering Kinzo's body on strings to commit all the murders.

Cyouni posted:

Or that the seagulls are the culprits behind everything, puppeteering Kinzo's body on strings to commit all the murders.

witchcore ricepunk posted:

You have to wonder, though... who do you think delivered the cliff baby?

ProfessorProf posted:

witchcore ricepunk posted:

Is this scene a hint towards Kinzo and Beatrice 2's relationship? Regardless, it's all really unsettling... I can get why Battler would be creeped out, but if the Kinzo parallel holds I'm more creeped out by him.

oath2order posted:

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3790134&userid=164919&perpage=40&pagenumber=1#post467713638

And here you can see the precise post where peas earned his av.

alcharagia posted:

"Of course, Battler! Resurgam, Witchcore, Peas, bman, Cottonwolf, Cyouni, ZiegeDame, AAAAAAAALL OF THEM, T H E Y N E V E R R E A L L Y E X I S T E D , R I G H T ? !"

idonotlikepeas posted:

I'm not sure it isn't intended. Seeing a new person in the body of someone you cared about is an old horror; we've had a fear of that since the dawn of recorded history, not just due to actual mental illnesses and injuries, but due to the fact that people change. Have you never run into a former significant other and wondered how they could possibly have become the person they are now, or whether they were all along and you somehow never noticed? It's an uncomfortable feeling. It's like grieving a death, in the case of change or the case of illness or even being mistaken about someone's personality, because the person you knew is actually gone, but you somehow don't feel entitled to really grieve because there is someone still there. I think we're supposed to understand that this is where Battler is here, even if his situation is a little uncomfortable for other reasons.

witchcore ricepunk posted:

Is this scene a hint towards Kinzo and Beatrice 2's relationship? Regardless, it's all really unsettling... I can get why Battler would be creeped out, but if the Kinzo parallel holds I'm more creeped out by him.

ZiegeDame posted:

So this role-reversal talk got me thinking about a few things. Particularly Beato's line in Ep4 about how the real Battler would have remembered his sin, and Ange's talk earlier this episode about how if you stopped going to school or whatever for a long time, and eventually tried to go back it wouldn't be the same and you wouldn't be the same and you could never really go back to being the same person you were before.

So when Battler showed up to the family conference in 1986, he was not the same Battler that Beato was hoping to see. Not because of any body double or baby switching shenanigans, but simply because people can change in 6 years, especially teenage years. So much of Beato's bullying stems from her frustration that this guy looks like her Battler and sounds like her Battler but doesn't act like him and is a constant reminder that her Battler is dead and gone (figuratively) and every interaction is a nail in the coffin. But she's still holding out hope that her Battler can be revived, and remember whatever it is that they shared, until the end of Ep4 where she just stops trying.

ProfessorProf posted:

"...I will... do anything for Father. My existence will bring Father happiness. That is my one and only pleasure. And..."

At that point, Beato hesitated.

"What? And what?"

EagerSleeper posted:

I don't think we're completely disregarding everything that happens but for sure everyone's perspective needs a little oversight from the audience, especially the detectives'. Erika is a detective but has a clear slant towards accusing innocent people so this perspective is not absolute 100% trustworthy. And Battler as the detective is incompetent. If he saw everything correctly and didn't need help reaching conclusions, then this game would have played out as a standard mystery story and would have been resolved from the first game.

Just a little mix of belief and skepticism is good. But yeah, I agree. The seagulls totally did it, and is accurate with Knox's rule because they were right there in the title of the story the whole time. The thing that confuses me though is whether Kumasawa would be their ally for having mackerel, or their enemy because she has all the mackerel and not sharing.

Cyouni posted:

Oh, certainly, the interpretation of the events can differ, but it's been established over and over again that the detective's perspective is absolutely accurate to what it sees.

tiistai posted:

This is probably what you meant, but basically it means the detective can't lie about what he sees, not that his perception is absolutely accurate. If Battler couldn't tell the difference between convincing makeup and a corpse, he wouldn't magically be able to discern it.

But like you said the red guarantees the identities of unidentified corpses and the fact that there were no body double tricks.

Cyouni posted:

Really, any of Jessica, Natsuhi, or Krauss is enough to mess the whole thing up unless you're also proposing they're a co-conspirator.

CottonWolf posted:

*At the very least, there should be a coherent reason for the murders to take place that can occur within one world. If that's impossible, a witch really did do it.

Cyouni posted:

My current assumption is that this is all basically just fanfiction Battler's being forced to read until he can prove he understands Beatrice. To do that, he has to acknowledge that he forgot his promise of six years ago, and remember and acknowledge who Beatrice is. The thing I can't understand is how the riddle ties into it, given that was the provided condition in the first to fourth games.

Cyouni posted:

Also if the resurrection of the dead is included in Beatrice's I keep my promises, then the "true world" has to be one where nobody has died, since we're discounting magic.

Dr Pepper posted:

Well, Battler supposedly does understand her now, and this game right now is him proving it.

idonotlikepeas posted:

Kinzo made that promise, not her.

quote:

When the contract ends, Beatrice will have the right to collect the gold and the interest. However, if a person who disclose the hidden gold of the contract appears, Beatrice must eternally and completely abdicate of this right …From now on, the collect of the interest will be performed but, if whoever one person among everyone can satisfy the special clause,

Everything will be returned including the part already collected.

idonotlikepeas posted:

In the one-world scenario, the first two murder sprees (the ones written on notes in bottles) were fantasies written by Beatrice for (we must now assume) Battler. The later ones were written by this mysterious web author after the fact as possible ways the Rokkenjima thing could have gone down. Beatrice-the-piece is really Beatrice-the-character-in-a-story, and so is Beatrice-the-meta-witch, so their motivations can be whatever the author ascribes to them. Of course, for this game (Umineko as a whole) to be fair, those stories must be revealing useful and interesting information to us about the characters, even when they lie. Which does leave an important question; if this scenario is correct, who in the hell is that author? If we assume there are any fragments (ha ha) of truth in the stories, the most obvious answer would be that someone else survived Rokkenjima, but who? And why wouldn't they have revealed themselves? The best candidate is probably Beatrice herself, since she'd have a very strong motivation for not wanting to reveal herself after the fact. I'm not sure, though.

In the stories, I believe her motive is that she wants Battler to figure out what's going on and stop her. It's basically a really twisted way of begging him to notice her. Note that Battler is always one of the last, and perhaps actually the last, to die. He is only killed after he fails to figure things out. In some cases she appears to kill herself out of despair before that (leaving, for instance, Eva to finish the job on Battler). All of that is perfectly consistent with the particular iteration of the murder game being a love note to him; obviously the murder games PLURAL can't be, but each one individually can serve that role.

Incidentally, I've considered how this all can still satisfy Knox's first rule, even the parts that the story doesn't bother saying in red: We've never seen the story from Sayo's point of view; seeing it from Shannon's or Kanon's doesn't count. In the stories so far, she's been the murderer, even if she isn't in reality (and if we get the story of what really happened, we probably won't see from the murderer's point of view then, either). And yet, it's hard to say that we haven't been introduced to her character, so it doesn't violate the other half of the rule either. It's a bit tricky, but I think it works.

ZiegeDame posted:

Or the killings were just a means to force Battler to read the stories, and he is still alive and locked in the dungeon in Kuwadorian forced to read fan-fiction about the murder of his family until he remembers.

Qrr posted:

Or Ange is more fiction from the same source as the other fake stories about the event (or even from a different source). A meta sort of story, but we have like 5 meta levels in Umineko so far so I could believe that. Has Future Ange been proved to be canon?

Cyouni posted:

And it turned out we were Battler all along, reading about Ange reading fanfiction.