|
People can also be in on a conspiracy because they're being blackmailed or because someone important to them is being threatened. Is anyone proposing that literally everyone is being bribed with a share of gold or equity?
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 02:09 |
|
|
POOL IS CLOSED posted:People can also be in on a conspiracy because they're being blackmailed or because someone important to them is being threatened. Is anyone proposing that literally everyone is being bribed with a share of gold or equity? Witchcore's assertion is that because they need money, any of the adults can be bribed, therefore Krauss and Rudolf are being bribed to pretend Kanon is in the other room. Motive is evidence for action, essentially. My assertion is, by the same logic, I can argue anyone is being bribed with gold because they looked for it at one point. While we're on that particular subject, Krauss was noted to be the only one who didn't need money urgently.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
This LP is fun to speculate on but not when people are acting all aggro 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:Reminder that he's arguing against the context of "they all have the possibility of being accomplices because motive so they're accomplices when it's helpful to my argument and not accomplices when it's not". Why is the burden of proof on him to counter the argument that they're in a Schrodinger's state of being bribed? Why is the burden of proof not on the one proposing this? I mean, You do have to accept that argument. If someone can propose a theory with several accomplices that fit clues for a particular game and it doesn't contradict red, how is it not a valid theory? Phrasing it as "cherry picking" is silly, if the theory is weak you should be able to refute it, if its not weak you can't just say "I don't like this theory because it has too many accomplices" and discount it instead of, I don't know, looking for actual counter-evidence. This isn't a small bombs or chimpatrice. I'm mainly just arguing this because asserting that its impossible for some people to be accomplices in some games but not others seems ridiculous and baseless and i'm 99% sure the game is unsolvable that way. If nothing else, Rosa is almost certainly an accomplice in episode 2 as far as I can tell (she and maria live the whole game, shes in chapel but doesn't die, she has the key to the room in the last bit near the end) but she dies first in games 1, 4, and 5,and does almost nothing sinister in game 3 (other then be a bad mom), and we don't even see a money letter for her. If this isn't the case I'd like to see the argument supporting Rosa being an accomplice all the time or an argument that somehow contradicts the tons of actual evidence in episode 2 that Rosa is the accomplice there. You can't just cite Knox's 8th to brush this away, there's tons of evidence in episode 2 and nothing anywhere else. The motive is already there (shes literally running away with gold at the end), and it doesn't even require her to kill her own daughter. Personally the evidence is so dense in episode 2 I'd consider it evidence in and of itself that there can be people who can be accomplices only in one game and not in the others.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
Lisonfire posted:I mean, You do have to accept that argument. If someone can propose a theory with several accomplices that fit clues for a particular game and it doesn't contradict red, how is it not a valid theory? Phrasing it as "cherry picking" is silly, if the theory is weak you should be able to refute it, if its not weak you can't just say "I don't like this theory because it has too many accomplices" and discount it instead of, I don't know, looking for actual counter-evidence. This isn't a small bombs or chimpatrice. His point is if you're using "has motive" as evidence for them being an accomplice, then you have to accept that they're accomplices in all situations where that's true, assuming nothing else is different. If you start from the realistic answer (no accomplices) and find evidence from there (all the cited evidence for Rosa in chapter 2), then sure. That's evidence that exists only in chapter 2. But if you take an incredibly generic thing like "WANTS MONEY NOW" and apply that motive as evidence for why they're an accomplice in some games but not in others, with nothing else to back it up, then that doesn't hold up. Why would "adults need money therefore bribed accomplice sometimes maybe" be a valid argument, while "everyone searched for the gold so therefore bribed accomplice sometimes maybe" isn't?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Lisonfire posted:I'm mainly just arguing this because asserting that its impossible for some people to be accomplices in some games but not others seems ridiculous and baseless and i'm 99% sure the game is unsolvable that way. Good thing nobody is arguing this. I'm arguing that it is impossible for someone to be not an accomplice in one game, and then yes an accomplice in another, without any evidence being shown to differentiate the two. Rosa being shown the gold bricks in episode 2, and later carrying one around at the end, is the evidence that she is an accomplice in episode 2. However, since she is never seen clutching a gold brick like her life depends on it at any time in episode 3, we cannot claim that she was also an accomplice in that episode. Because the condition that indicates an accomplice only exists in the one episode. However, we know the money delivered to the sons of Kumasawa and Nanjo was sent before October 4th, and is therefore true for all games. Thus we can conclude, indeed must conclude, that Kumasawa and Nanjo are accomplices in every episode. And if somehow a construction of the crime depended on Kumasawa or Nanjo not be an accomplice for that episode (not that I can think of what that might look like) there would need to be evidence somewhere that they were not an accomplice in this game, despite the payoff being sent out. Just like Battler had to see Kinzo in Ep5 as evidence that his viewpoint was no longer reliable. PS. People keep referring to me as he. Rude.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
ZiegeDame posted:PS. People keep referring to me as he. Rude. I suspect the Shingen avatar will constantly continue to throw me off.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:His point is if you're using "has motive" as evidence for them being an accomplice, then you have to accept that they're accomplices in all situations where that's true, assuming nothing else is different. If you start from the realistic answer (no accomplices) and find evidence from there (all the cited evidence for Rosa in chapter 2), then sure. That's evidence that exists only in chapter 2. But if you take an incredibly generic thing like "WANTS MONEY NOW" and apply that motive as evidence for why they're an accomplice in some games but not in others, with nothing else to back it up, then that doesn't hold up. You can't have this both ways. Is Rosa and accomplice in only episode 2 or not? If so, it is demonstrated directly in the story that someone in the story with a motive could be an accomplice in one game but not the others. How this occurs isn't really important (presumably the culprit approaches them at some point before the killings happen and offers them specifically a deal, and this occurs to different people in different games simply because the games are different, you don't need evidence for the specific process if you've proved the result exists). ZiegeDame posted:Good thing nobody is arguing this. I'm arguing that it is impossible for someone to be not an accomplice in one game, and then yes an accomplice in another, without any evidence being shown to differentiate the two. Rosa being shown the gold bricks in episode 2, and later carrying one around at the end, is the evidence that she is an accomplice in episode 2. However, since she is never seen clutching a gold brick like her life depends on it at any time in episode 3, we cannot claim that she was also an accomplice in that episode. Because the condition that indicates an accomplice only exists in the one episode. I don't think anyone thinks Kumasawa or Nanjo aren't always accomplices. I don't really know how this is relevant to the theory that some people might be lying about who is in the room. The theory requires additional accomplices, not less. I really doubt you'll find super obvious evidence of other accomplices like Rosa in episode 2, where they literally show her in the chapel, surviving to the end and running off with the gold, as that entire episode seems like it exists partially to dangle the fact that their are accomplices in our faces. As for hard evidence, the episode isn't over yet and we don't yet know how this room setup will play out, the demand for evidence required by Knox's 8th is only really important once the detective or author has declared we have all things we need. I'm suspecting we will end up with a situation where it would have been impossible without someone lying or misleading Erika somehow, at which point we will have evidence by virtue of there being no other possibility. Like I'm curious how you think episode 4 works when all the confirmed accomplices are dead or locked in a shed and there's no super obvious "she was literally in the chapel when they all died" hints. I'm not 100% sure myself, but it sure can't be explained with just the existing confirmed accomplices.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
witchcore ricepunk posted:This LP is fun to speculate on but not when people are acting all aggro All we need is love? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
Lisonfire posted:How this occurs isn't really important quote:I don't think anyone thinks Kumasawa or Nanjo aren't always accomplices. I don't really know how this is relevant to the theory that some people might be lying about who is in the room. The theory requires additional accomplices, not less. It's called a hypothetical example to illustrate a point, dude. For the record, my theory is completely unshaken here because it involves Shannon and Kanon being two separate people who can easily exist in two different rooms at the same time without anyone having to lie. quote:Like I'm curious how you think episode 4 works when all the confirmed accomplices are dead or locked in a shed and there's no super obvious "she was literally in the chapel when they all died" hints. I'm not 100% sure myself, but it sure can't be explained with just the existing confirmed accomplices. You can check my post history for the full rundown, but the short version is Kanon did it. Kanon shot a lot of people with guns, accomplices included, when their usefulness had ended. Replace 'Kanon' with 'Yoshiya' or 'Beatrice' as you like to circumvent the red truth. Known accomplices are different from the true culprit, the person who does all the actual killing, the person whose identity is the entire central mystery at hand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
ZiegeDame posted:PS. People keep referring to me as he. Rude. Sorry. I just view you as a bro-in-arms, bro. No offense meant by it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
I feel obliged to point out that if you feel that there's already sufficient evidence supporting S=K --- for example, if you want to use the narrative conceit arguments from this chapter, like Zepar and Furfur's genders or the cups and coins puzzle, or the fact that Shannon and Kanon refer to themselves as "furniture," a term that has been pretty firmly established to mean "a witch's imaginary friend whom she uses to cope with unpleasant reality" --- then you can use the fact that some other character nevertheless seems to acknowledge them as separate people in a circumstance where it would be impossible to be fooled as evidence that said character must be an accomplice, rather than the other way around. That said, the "furniture" bit can just as well be taken as a reference to the way Sayo and Yoshiya use Shannon and Kanon, respectively, and I think Zepar and Furfur and cups and coins provide equally good support for another hypothesis I remember someone mentioning earlier in the thread, namely, that Sayo/Shannon and Yoshiya/Kanon are two separate people in two separate bodies but Yoshiya/Kanon was presenting as female six years ago (whenever the event that Battler forgot occurred) and is now presenting as male. That possibility seems to be satisfactorily consistent with what we know without having the plausibility issues of "there are two people running around in the same body and literally 15* other people confined with them in close-ish quarters are either oblivious or bribed." The big thing I'm still not satisfied with is what the conditions of the love trial mean, whereby only Shannon or Kanon or Beatrice can get what he/she wants. I haven't come up with a good non-S=K=B explanation for that one, and the only non-magical explanation the game has given us is rank bullshit. *16, if you count Erika, which I wasn't. Confused Llama fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
bman in 2288 posted:Sorry. I just view you as a bro-in-arms, bro. No offense meant by it. I'm going to make fun of you for the next ten years for saying this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ yooooooooooooo Cyouni posted:Witchcore's assertion is that because they need money, any of the adults can be bribed, therefore Krauss and Rudolf are being bribed to pretend Kanon is in the other room. Motive is evidence for action, essentially. That's not exactly what I mean. So, obviously, we don't know what really happened on Rokkenjima. All we know is what the writer(s) of the texts know about the characters—their possible motives, their backgrounds, their general personalities—because everyone who was present for that weekend is dead. Except for Eva, who's not talking. Like the text keeps asserting w/r/t "pieces," they only act in the scenarios according to what would potentially make sense for their characters. I'm saying that it would be logical for any of the Ushiromiya adults to be an accomplice in any of the scenarios, given what we know of their backgrounds and pressing need for money. It comes down to Sayo's choices in any situation. If you think about these games on a meta level, especially with Kinzo's repeated references to a "roulette," the writers are using the Ushiromiyas' common need for $$, among other factors, to come up with different variations of the narrative that might explain the disaster. Also if Krauss didn't need money urgently he would have copped to Kinzo being dead when he actually died, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
u, uwhoa... oh desire...!!!
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
Okay, I think this thread could use a little time to chill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
I don't even know where to begin with everything wrong with that
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
 BGM: Deep Blue Jeer It was one of those letters sent by the witch... with the seal of the One-Winged Eagle on it. It had been wedged under the outside mat in front of the entrance... as though someone had predicted that Erika would eventually leave for the mansion by this way. It was in the shadows of the large eaves, so it had avoided the rain entirely.  "...So, it's here already. Almost as though it was waiting for me."She bent over and picked it up. She then tore it open recklessly and pulled the letter inside out of it. A message had been written in neat letters...   "What does it SAY...?" "It's an advance notice for a crime. No, I should say it's a report after the fact. Apparently, they have taken Ushiromiya Battler's corpse. It says something like 'please try looking for it'." "...So this isn't the 'tear apart the two who are close' of the second TWILIGHT?" "Well, disappearing corpses happened a few times in Beato's games too. There's nothing really new about this."Erika shrugged and scorned the letter. However, this letter was a real attack. All of the survivors were sealed in the rooms on the second floor. And, after Krauss and the others had gone around checking doors and windows, Erika had personally made sure that there was nothing at this spot. So, it was an attack saying 'someone who shouldn't be here placed the letter', and that the someone was a witch. That was also an attack that the old Beato had often used. "Haah, sheesh. If the way you show it is the same, please tell me that the actual trick isn't the same too. Dlanor. Please call Battler here." BGM: None  "Got it. Let's have it." "My apologies. Actually, I don't have a new move to announce." "...?" BGM: Smile-less Soiree Apologize...? Battler and Beato's eyes went wide. However, though Erika said that she wanted to apologize, she had a confident look on her face, as though even that apology would be a new move. So, Battler glared at her dubiously, without letting his guard down.   "...You already sealed something? In other words, you've already used up all three rooms' worth?" "Yes. I promised that I'd report on it right away, but I completely forgot until just now. You have my sincere apologies." "You don't look like someone who's sincerely apologizing... Well, that's fine. I'm the one who gave you that privilege. So? Where did you seal?" "Dlanor."  "...!"Beato tried not to let it show on her face, but her eyebrows twitched visibly and her gaze flicked over to Battler. "Normally, I would have liked to seal all of the closed rooms, but I didn't have enough duct tape. Out of respect for the Game Master, I sealed only the room with Battler-san's corpse." "...So you were kind enough to close the lid on my coffin." "I remembered a short while ago and was planning to tell you when we reached the mansion and investigated the guest room with your corpse in it. However, when this letter appeared, I figured I should report it right away." "Wh, why did you think that...?" "Well, after all, Battler-san has been playing this game not knowing that his corpse was sealed in the guest room. Because of that, I thought, possibly... that it might change things regarding the appearance of this letter." "...The cousins' room and the next room over are currently SEALED. Sorry for the late report, but the guest room with your corpse in it is also SEALED. And, there are 17 people on the island excluding Lady Erika. The existence of an 18th person has already been denied in a previous GAME." "In that case, the person who could have placed the letter... and erased your corpse... I thought, maybe... heheheheheheheheheh... I thought maybe things might be different..."Erika laughed crudely while staring into Battler's eyes to see if he was panicked or disturbed...  "...Battler-san..." Erika had suspected it since the beginning. It was possible that Battler actually hadn't been killed and was still alive. And, if he was alive, then the letter that had suddenly appeared was easy to explain, even though all of the 'survivors' were sealed up. Judging by Beato's faint agitation, maybe... Erika's guess had been right on the mark. Battler had played dead and somehow misled Erika's examination. And then, when everyone had holed up in the guesthouse, he had snuck out of the guest room. Then, he had placed a letter, which was about how his own corpse had disappeared, in the entrance to the lobby... and hid himself... If this was the truth, then the seals that had been placed on Battler's guest room at the time of Erika's examination... were now very significant. In other words, if they had used this trick, then Battler would have 'broken the seals' when he left his guest room. The trick would not be workable 'without breaking the seals'. Since the survivors were all sealed in the guesthouse, then if the seals on the guest room were broken, it meant acknowledging that at least one of the victims was actually alive. If Battler had known about the seals earlier, it was likely that he would have advanced the game in a very different way to avoid this. In other words, it was very likely that an announcement about the seals would have had a large effect on the rest of Battler's game. Erika was saying: 'if Battler, playing the part of the corpse, didn't want to break the seals and remained inside the guest room, the plot would not have included this letter'... If Battler was actually alive and had placed the letter there, then, now that Erika's seals had come into play, there was a chance that he would find a contradiction in his trick somewhere down the line. That sort of contradiction is called a logic error.   "...It's a violation of the rules, the greatest and worst form of error that the witch side must avoid making." "Yeah, I remember. It was something about the two sides of the tale not matching and creating a contradiction." "Do you remember the magic for making candy appear inside an overturned cup...?" "Yeah. Maria onee-chan and Erika were fighting about that. Apparently, that was just a simple trick where someone slipped the candy into the cup while Onee-chan had her eyes closed." "That's right. Since Maria did not observe the process of the trick and was only given the result, she accepted 'the illusion of magic'--that the candy had appeared by magic inside the cup--and magic was established..." "...Okay, so a logic error would be...'a trick that has become impossible'." BGM: A Single Moment Let's try to remember that exchange. The heartless truth was... that it had all been a trick. Making the candy appear in the cup by magic had been nothing more than Beato's claim. 'Magic can only do things that one can accomplish.' In other words, you can only have a magical result if it was something that could have been done without magic. Let's be clear. There are two general types of magic. If you summon giants... and make towers grow from the ground... But, when the lid is taken off, nothing has happened in the rose garden, that's one type of magic. That is just an 'illusion'. It's a 'lie' with no observers that takes place where the witch says it did, in a location without any of the anti-magic toxin. Magic that doesn't have to match a result is the most simple kind... a 'lie'. This is the same as a worthless delusion, an illusion, a daydream. Even Battler saw through it partway through the third game. Then, there is another kind, which we might call true magic: 'magic that matches a result'. The cup trick is an example of 'magic that matches a result', since an observer actually checks to see that the cup's contents were empty before the candy appears, and thus an actual observer is gained. I have noticed that, unlike the magic of illusions, magic that matches a result must follow one big rule. The rule is... that only the unobserved process of what you accomplished can be transformed into magic. I can speak even more generally and ruthlessly. In short, all forms of magic are tricks. 'Only things that can be accomplished without magic can match the result.' Ironically, this also proves that magic doesn't exist, but out of respect for the witch's game, let's call it making the game solvable and fair for the human player.  "Correct. Since all of the survivors are sealed within the closed room of the guesthouse, it is possible to embellish this suddenly appearing letter and say that it was 'a strange magic, and only a witch could have placed it there'. But even so, it must be a 'possible trick' in the end."In order to see through the trick with the candy and the cup, Erika had countered with the blue truth saying that the candy had been snuck in there while her eyes were closed. That was the correct answer, so Maria hadn't had any red that she could use. But what if she had used it?  "The red truth can only be used to refer to the truth, right? If you could lie with it, it'd be a massive violation of the rules." "True. Denying your own trick with the red truth is a large violation of the rules. However, if you instantly switch over to another trick that doesn't violate that red truth, it may be slightly unfair, but that red truth can be acknowledged." "...So in this case, the witch side would need to immediately propose another trick that doesn't contradict the red truth saying, 'the closed room inside the cup was preserved'. Like the excuses of a politician when he keeps backtracking as new evidence is shown to him." "Yes. Well, for a red like this, she might be able to get away with some painful excuse. Maybe there was some device in the table, or maybe it was a trick cup with a fake bottom... But if those possibilities had been denied beforehand, they would not be effective. The more red truths there are, the harder it is to talk your way out."In actuality, the candy had been put in the cup while Maria's eyes were closed. However, if, when Erika saw through that, Maria had used the red truth to say that the closed room of the cup had been preserved... The witch would have to rush and revise the scenario to a new trick that 'still worked logically' after that new red. Revising the scenario is an unfair move that would never be allowed in mysteries. However, the very act of revising the scenario takes place inside the witch's head, which is an unobservable world. So, if she claims that she'd been using the trick with the fake-bottomed cup 'from the beginning', no one could deny that. ...So, even if it really was a trick done while Onee-chan's eyes were closed... As long as the witch leaves herself a way out, she can even switch between truths (tricks). Rather than calling this an action allowed to witches, we should probably say that it is only allowed for the Game Master, the one who creates and writes. But even so. The new truth must not contradict any of the previously stated red truths. If the red truth makes it so that 'the trick no longer makes logical sense', then there will be a mismatch between the two sides of the story: the illusion result that the Game Master claims is magic, and the true result that was brought about by a trick. So, when we get a contradiction and it no longer makes logical sense, we call it a logic error...  BGM: Golden Sneer "This world is a game that is possible to explain with humans. In other words, it must be possible for all magic to have been done 'by tricks as well'. If it's impossible to do with tricks, then the human side has no move and we get a stalemate." "No, that's wrong. That is where we get the fatal and horrible violation known as a logic error. When the witch side does this, the game is instantly destroyed and they suffer a fatal defeat..." "Erika has probably seen through to Onii-chan's trick. Without the detective's authority, Erika can't perform a proper examination of the corpses. Because of that, he continued to play dead, snuck out of the guest room, and placed the letter at the entrance to the guesthouse." "However, because Battler was so overly gracious in giving out those retroactive seals, things went wrong." "...Stupid Onii-chan." "The current situation still does not warrant panic... It still hasn't been specified with red truth that the seals around the guest room are intact. He is free to break the seals. If he doesn't, then he can probably have it so that someone other than Battler was alive, and swap them in as the person who placed the letter..." "That's right... It's not just Onii-chan. The other corpses haven't been specified as dead by the red yet. So far, there wouldn't be any problem if they were all faking." "True. This is not a stage to get flustered at. All he has to do is change his move so that Erika's seals and the placement of the letter don't contradict each other." "...And revising the plot without contradictions is one of the moves available to the Game Master." "However, taking a scenario one has imagined and revising it partway through can sometimes create flaws in the tale. It would be a very regrettable move to make when the first twilight has only just ended." "...It would seem that Battler was the one with an enemy piece moved deep behind his lines... This hidden piece will probably cause him pain and discomfort with each step from now on, like a pebble caught in one's shoe... This single pebble might kill Battler..." "..." BGM: Fishy Aroma "...Retroactively rewrite the plot...?" "Hmph, I see. If 'I' placed the letter there, then that would be impossible as soon as 'I' was sealed in that closed room. In which case, this letter shouldn't have appeared here." "Correct. So, I thought you should have the chance to revise this small inconsistency." "...We have discovered this letter HERE. We are saying that we do not mind if you want to undo that, or if you want to use a revised SCENARIO." "Just by the existence of the letter and duct tape, this sort of move is possible for Furudo Erika. What do you think, everyone...?"...drat, what a dirty move... Well, what else should I expect from Erika...? I made a promise with Dlanor too... Well, we're both playing all-out and mercilessly...  However, if I revise the scenario now that my move's been spotted, it'll be the same as admitting that it was spotted. Even if I have to be stubborn about it, I don't want to admit that I was seen through here. I don't want to acknowledge a pathetic plot change where I try to sneak out of the guest room and break the seals. I want... to change over to a different trick, so that the letter will be placed and my corpse will be hidden... while still preserving the seals on the guest room... It doesn't really have to be me who places that letter. I can still revise the logic without contradictions...   "...I still have time. Let me think until the last second. Dammit..."With a painful laugh, Battler unconsciously scratched at his head...  "Anyway, we'll leave the letter like this. I can't say oh, sorry about that, having the guest room sealed makes a big contradiction so I'd like to revise my move...! It would mean acknowledging that she caught me. Heheh, I feel like a ninja hiding above the ceiling. Even though I was noticed and stabbed by a spear, I just withstand the pain, wipe up the blood, and act as though nothing happened. False courage works well enough. I can't let her know that this one hurt..." "...Battler-san..." "Heh, heheheh. Hey, Beato. Do you know what my face looks like now...? I'm sure it's the same expression you had when I managed to hit you where it hurts in the past... Heh... heheheh... Dammit..."Beato couldn't think of anything to say... Useless words of comfort would only get in the way of Battler's thinking now.   "Nn... nn..."Beato trembled and groaned. The old her had been an expert at closed room tricks. If only that memory... that power... could revive, she would be able to help Battler... There's still time to think... There's still time...  
Quinn2win fucked around with this message at 13:47 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 13:24
|
|
|
...Did we just get an entire update scolding authors for sloppy retcons? Also, I don't see exactly how this works. Rather, I understand the rule, I just don't understand how it's supposed to be enforced. The witch side has to be playing a fair game, so the situation has to be solvable using human tricks, but at the same time, the witches' goal is still to present a situation that the human side fails to solve, i.e., concludes to be impossible. Who is the arbiter who determines when a "logic error" has occurred? If the human side can just go screaming "logic error" when they can't figure out the puzzle, and that's good enough, then the game is rigged and the witch side can never win, because they also can't present the "human" solution that they've concocted as proof that the game was fair because they'll destroy their own illusion in the process.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
Confused Llama posted:...Did we just get an entire update scolding authors for sloppy retcons? My guess is that the human side can propose in blue that "this is a logical error" and if said accusation is false the witch side can answer "it's not, you're just an idiot" in red without revealing anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
So this is basically Erika going "oh btw I moved my bishop and now your king is checkmate'd".
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:
Presented without comment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
This is a lot like Beatrice vs Virgilia in E3! Oh btw you're dead
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
I'm still amazed that Battler managed to not notice any potential risk in allowing Erika to make changes to the game board retroactively.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:I'd laugh if Erika just seals a room with Battler in it, which leads to the prologue of this game that we saw. I'm laughing. Not all-out yet, but I'm laughing. Turns out that my move would have led to the game's prologue...if Battler can't find a way around it. witchcore ricepunk posted:That's not exactly what I mean. So, obviously, we don't know what really happened on Rokkenjima. All we know is what the writer(s) of the texts know about the characters—their possible motives, their backgrounds, their general personalities—because everyone who was present for that weekend is dead. Except for Eva, who's not talking. Like the text keeps asserting w/r/t "pieces," they only act in the scenarios according to what would potentially make sense for their characters. I'm saying that it would be logical for any of the Ushiromiya adults to be an accomplice in any of the scenarios, given what we know of their backgrounds and pressing need for money. It comes down to Sayo's choices in any situation. If you think about these games on a meta level, especially with Kinzo's repeated references to a "roulette," the writers are using the Ushiromiyas' common need for $$, among other factors, to come up with different variations of the narrative that might explain the disaster. Granted for being theoretically possible for pieces. The problem with this, again, is that it's so general, there has to be some clue as to when it's used and when it's not. You can't just say "because it's theoretically possible, I arbitrarily choose that these particular people are bribed". That's the same as there being no clues. It's theoretically possible, but there's no clues as to it happening. To again take an extreme example, it's like saying "because the seagulls have been shown to be missing, they have the possibility to be the true mastermind because they've never been caught somewhere". It's a large jump from "possibility" to "action", and I don't recall you ever providing any clues that would fill that gap. Also Krauss does to some degree need money (as I suppose everyone not-Kinzo does), but he in no way needs it nearly as urgently as anyone else. He's sat for a year and some on Kinzo's death and been fine - his big problem is lacking time. If the others tried to do that, their respective businesses would be screwed - Hideyoshi would be bought out, Rudolf would go bankrupt thanks to that settlement, and Rosa's failing company would fail. Confused Llama posted:...Did we just get an entire update scolding authors for sloppy retcons? It automatically results in a logic error when it's physically impossible to perform the trick, and I assume from how they described it, the game fuzzes and implodes on its own. Probably into a wedding chapel.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
I imagine that the source of a logic error is if there's a contradiction of red text (and red text equivalents, like the room seals). Nothing else is guaranteed, so that's the only place they could come from. As for Battler, here's some advice: Break the seals on Battler's room and then provide red saying that he didn't leave the letter. That's a much easier scenario for you to work around than trying to get battler out of the room while keeping the seals intact. Really, people are treating these seals as inviolate, but until they're verified as broken or intact they're trivial. The only thing they provide is evidence, and if the game master knows where they are then the best thing to do is find an excuse to break them. Also Battler, wow are you incompetent. Erika doesn't need seals to resolve the problem you posed. A simple blue Battler wasn't dead, and he walked out of his room and left the letter would have done it. The seal on his room seems completely irrelevant - the seal is broken whether Battler or someone else stole the corpse, so the only thing a seal really does is guarantee that the body went through the door. And basically any theory that the body didn't go through the door would assert that the corpse was never there in the first place, which red already contradicts. Or that the corpse is still in the room, but hidden.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
Qrr posted:I imagine that the source of a logic error is if there's a contradiction of red text (and red text equivalents, like the room seals). Nothing else is guaranteed, so that's the only place they could come from. The problem is that it's trivially easy to resolve anything from there on out. Because after that, Erika can just blame everything on one of the 'dead' people. Remember, Erika's victory condition is that she needs to prove that it was possible for 'a human', so the tricks you're pulling only make it easier for her.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:It automatically results in a logic error when it's physically impossible to perform the trick, and I assume from how they described it, the game fuzzes and implodes on its own. Probably into a wedding chapel. Okay. So what happens if the witch side gets flustered and accidentally provides enough red that neither player can see a valid human solution, but there actually still IS one, it's just that neither one is smart enough to see it? Does "the game" (now operating as an independent entity, in a sense) give the witch side a pass because a solution technically still exists, or does the witch player have to have at least one valid human solution actively in mind for the game state to remain legal? (I have no idea whether this question is actually relevant to the story; I'm just chasing thoughts in random directions now.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
So is this Ryukishi admitting that he changed the solution to some of the puzzles between games? I suppose the simplest way out of this one for Battler is to have Maria place the letter and return to playing dead while Battler just hides under the bed. Since Erika doesn't have Detective Authority Battler can hide in the guest room without being found, and if Erika breaks the seal to look for him he's free to sneak out once she leaves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:The problem is that it's trivially easy to resolve anything from there on out. Because after that, Erika can just blame everything on one of the 'dead' people. Remember, Erika's victory condition is that she needs to prove that it was possible for 'a human', so the tricks you're pulling only make it easier for her. That's typical, though. The "witch" needs to block off the possibilities the detective brings up, while having things be possible in some way the "detective" won't think of. That's the way it's been from the start, and they've managed to puzzle the thread with a number of these. And while the thread sometimes misses the obvious, Erika is incompetent, so she also shouldn't be that hard to beat. She put a lot of effort into her room seals and is very proud of them and they're completely pointless and trivial to defeat. Seriously, the seal on Battlers room does straight up nothing. She and Battler and Beato are treating it as a great move and it is totally pointless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:Granted for being theoretically possible for pieces. The problem with this, again, is that it's so general, there has to be some clue as to when it's used and when it's not. You can't just say "because it's theoretically possible, I arbitrarily choose that these particular people are bribed". Well, it's a good thing I didn't say that. I think we're going to have to agree to disagree: I see clues in the characters' behaviors, and draw my theories from that. For example, my thoughts on the accomplice question in Episode 1 stem from Hideyoshi "seeing" Shannon in the shed and having a private and lighthearted conversation about taking a vacation with Eva shortly thereafter. I wouldn't find an obvious "Character X is approached by Y with a proposition" scene to be a satisfactory way to set up the mystery: for me, the pleasure in figuring out what happened lies in reading between the lines. I frankly think what you're asking for would make for a bad story.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
The detective's authority grants the ability to say with 'absolute certainty' that clues don't exist if the detective can't find them
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
alcharagia posted:I'm going to make fun of you for the next ten years for saying this. I'd be let down if you didn't. So the big question is: what's the plot here? Is Battler attacking Erika for being such a poo poo, or is there another reason the family helped fake his death. Oh, also figured out how Erika catches Battler: she uses the red of how how everyone is either in one room, or another, and uses clues to figure out Battler is the one dropping the letters. But how can he be dropping the letters if he's supposed to be in the room where everyone else is? Yeah, this is hella bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Confused Llama posted:Okay. So what happens if the witch side gets flustered and accidentally provides enough red that neither player can see a valid human solution, but there actually still IS one, it's just that neither one is smart enough to see it? Does "the game" (now operating as an independent entity, in a sense) give the witch side a pass because a solution technically still exists, or does the witch player have to have at least one valid human solution actively in mind for the game state to remain legal? (I have no idea whether this question is actually relevant to the story; I'm just chasing thoughts in random directions now.) Given the witch side is the one setting up the game, I'd presume that they'd have to have a solution in mind. ZiegeDame posted:So is this Ryukishi admitting that he changed the solution to some of the puzzles between games? I suspect that's the exact trap Battler's going to fall into. My predicted countermove for Erika is that if Battler does that, she reseals the room in a similar fashion to the parlour as soon as she walks in, trapping them both inside and likely forcing a logic error. It troubles me to say it, but this is looking bad. BATTLER changing his move would look bad, but is honestly the safest move to break the trap he's in. Breaking the seal only makes it more obvious that a 'human' did it, and is basically conceding that play to Erika. Hiding in the room and trying to sneak out bears the same risk as Kinzo's study from the previous game, but can questionably work if the second twilight is advanced quickly enough to be a distraction. If BATTLER wants to keep his play the same, probably having Battler hide to delay Erika while he advances the second twilight is the only possible move that has a chance of victory. Depending on how the pieces are allowed to move, this may be able to break both seals on the survivors, in a fashion akin to the first episode. It'll have to sacrifice this play, but maybe that'll be enough. Edit: I also suppose that lacking the 'certainty' of Detective Authority may make it possible that she just misses a hiding place. Qrr posted:That's typical, though. The "witch" needs to block off the possibilities the detective brings up, while having things be possible in some way the "detective" won't think of. The point is if the seal on Battler's door is broken, then she instantly wins that move, because there's then no trick. I don't know why you keep ignoring this. It blocks the answer to the 'body-disappearance', and guarantees that it could have been the work of humans. Forcing the use of the door means Battler can't say anything like "a demon appeared and made the body vanish through its otherworldly portal". To be fair, the real fault is Battler's for trying to reuse the same trick two episodes in a row, but still. And your solution to the other seals only works if we ignore what the pieces are capable of. "Let's just randomly go outside, compromising our safety for no reason to talk to the other room" is not something any of those pieces would do. The game even points out that the reason stated for Erika's move was because it was something regarding "information vital to the crime", which was previously established as "something she would do". Rudolf and Krauss are too busy suspecting the servants to make that move, to the point where they even refuse to talk to the servants. Hideyoshi moving would lose the only gun in that room. They want to move about as much as Natsuhi wanted to move from Kinzo's study in the first episode. witchcore ricepunk posted:Well, it's a good thing I didn't say that. I think we're going to have to agree to disagree: I see clues in the characters' behaviors, and draw my theories from that. For example, my thoughts on the accomplice question in Episode 1 stem from Hideyoshi "seeing" Shannon in the shed and having a private and lighthearted conversation about taking a vacation with Eva shortly thereafter. I wouldn't find an obvious "Character X is approached by Y with a proposition" scene to be a satisfactory way to set up the mystery: for me, the pleasure in figuring out what happened lies in reading between the lines. I frankly think what you're asking for would make for a bad story. Ok, sure regarding episode 1. What about this one? Where is there remotely any suggestion that Rudolf and Krauss might be in on this continuously-growing conspiracy? Despite all the times it's been asked, the only thing you've ever pointed to regarding that is "they need money", and the circular logic of "they're not reporting Kanon because they were bribed, which you can tell because they're not reporting Kanon". I don't recall any other clue you've pointed to this episode, and that's where the whole back-and-forth started.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:
The fact that they were crying over battlers body when he wasn't dead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
bman in 2288 posted:Oh, also figured out how Erika catches Battler: she uses the red of how how everyone is either in one room, or another, and uses clues to figure out Battler is the one dropping the letters. But how can he be dropping the letters if he's supposed to be in the room where everyone else is? I don't think this works. At the time of that red, she also got confirmation of the victims' locations, so they aren't included in "everyone." It doesn't matter for this whether they're actually victims or not; she's just talking about bodies, living or dead, as she explicitly confirms. So either way, at that time, Battler is already confirmed to have been in a specific place other than the cousins' room. ProfessorProf posted:
Arguably, this makes it a little tricky for ANY of the "victims" to be not dead and running around dropping letters, but getting around that just involves playing games related to the exact timing of when the red applies, as has been done before. So if Battler hasn't already accounted for that, he's more incompetent than we thought.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 20:29
|
|
"'The six first twilight victims are located at the places where they were discovered. Natsuhi is in her room, Eva is in the VIP room, Kyrie is in Krauss's study, Rosa and Maria are in the parlor, and you are in the guest room!'"
"...Don't worry. I acknowledge it."
|
Cyouni posted:What about this one? Where is there remotely any suggestion that Rudolf and Krauss might be in on this continuously-growing conspiracy? Despite all the times it's been asked, the only thing you've ever pointed to regarding that is "they need money", and the circular logic of "they're not reporting Kanon because they were bribed, which you can tell because they're not reporting Kanon". I don't recall any other clue you've pointed to this episode, and that's where the whole back-and-forth started. The suggestion of collusion is, as Lisonfire pointed out, the fact that they played along with Battler's faked death. I would also add the fact that they are playing along with Kanon being in the room with them when he is not. To go even further, I would say that, in all of the episodes, anyone who plays along with Kanon and Shannon being two separate people in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are not is an accomplice. Because my interpretation of these stories hinges on the theory that Shannon, Kanon, and Beatrice inhabit one body—a theory that is supported by the love battle, the front half of Episode 2, and the concept of "furniture." I believe that theory is the key to solving a lot of little mysteries as well as the central one. witchcore ricepunk fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
Why do you think Rudolf and Krauss are accomplices instead of fooled by the fake death? The text made a big deal of saying that even Erika's examinations weren't perfect. Nanjo has been notably absent, even though he was immediately called every other time there was a body. That suggests a change from previous games, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 02:09 |
|
|
Cyouni posted:
If the seal on the door is broken she's in pretty much the same scenario as having no seal at all. Without a seal, she could have used blue text that he walked out of the room. It would have been just as effective with a broken seal as with no seal. And there are a lot of options for getting them to break the seal. Yes, they're very suspicious of the servants - you could use that. Get them arguing about whether the people in the other room are still ok, maybe.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 22:10
|
|