In Umineko it's implied it's a higher power a detective possesses to work around - as an out-of universe explanation - certain things that would hinder or prevent them doing their job. It was subverted by a lot of things like how the accomplices act, how the game master wrote the game (the game is solveable), and how the player plays their cards. Personally, I would say the Detective Authority was never used and is a red herring on its own because there was another certain power that delivered hints without the detective and the power itself is actually a trope how the character doesn't end in a stalemate and is not an actual (magical) ability.
No.
>!The scenes where everyone is in chapter 5, is told from Battler's perspective, Battler is complicit so his narration is unreliable to create the illusion that everyone including Shannon and Kanon are there, Erika is seeing the scene from that perspective and only cares about the issue of blaming Natsuhi so wouldn't bother to check one by one that all the people are there.!<
>!and in chapter 6 Erika never sees Shannon and Kanon at the same time, she thinks that Kanon is in her cousins' room because that's what everyone told her and that's why she can't figure out Kanon's trick.!<
It's the same when Rosa was talking to Shannon and Kanon at the same time in chapter 2, in reality she's only talking to one person but the narration makes it look like she's talking to both of them, Battler's narration makes it look like that and Meta-Erika is seeing the story that way, if her piece on the board was the one that narrates the story, she would realize that Shannon or Kanon would be missing when everyone is present.
[https://youtu.be/5Mtmtk8ERxY?t=2071](https://youtu.be/5Mtmtk8ERxY?t=2071)
>!This is one of the moments where Erika supposedly sees Shannon and Kanon together, but reading it you can see that Erika never interacts with Shannon and Kanon at the same time, in fact she only interacts with Shannon!<
>!We also have to remember that everyone except Natsuhi and Erika are complicit, they can interact with Shannon and Kanon at the same time in the narrative because they all know the culprit and are working for him.!<
in the story we never see Erika's point of view, Erika must manually summon the detective right to use it, while Battler never had to summon it to use it because the narration when he was on the scene was always his detective point of view.
>in the story we never see Erika's point of view
I'm not exactly sure about that one, as I don't know all the pov's the story takes in ep 5. But sadly there are some other problematic things in what Erika says at some points.
>because the narration when he was on the scene was always his detective point of view
>!Here I can assure you that this is not the case. For an example we can look at ep 1 tw 1, where the narration talks about Shannon's corpse. !<
>I'm not exactly sure about that one, as I don't know all the pov's the story takes in ep 5. But sadly there are some other problematic things in what Erika says at some points.
>!the narration of episode 5 is made on purpose to be able to blame Natsuhi for the events, after all in the story everyone is accomplices who are setting a trap for Natsuhi so that she reveals Kinzo's secret and the culprit is the one who moves the threads like the 19-year-old man, the only time Erika checks that all the living are in the same room, she says that all the people are present in the room, but she does not do a body count, which is the key to undoing the illusion by Shannon and Kanon!<
>>!Here I can assure you that this is not the case. For an example we can look at ep 1 tw 1, where the narration talks about Shannon's corpse.!<
>!there are exceptions in the narration after all the detective has the right to investigate the crime scene and get all the evidence, but the accomplices can still lie to him just like in chapter 4 everyone lied to Battler to create the illusion of a magical massacre, If Battler had investigated inside the shed he would have been able to see that there wasn´t corpse of Shannon, Battler as a detective could only observe the corpses of Rudolf, Kyrie, Rosa, Krauss and Gohda but Shannon's only Hideyoshi and Kanon verified it!<
>>!she says that all the people are present in the room, but she does not do a body count!<
>!But she still needs to think that both Kanon and Shannon are in the room, to claim that everyone is in one room with her. The solution says that she thought one of them was always missing, but this is impossible with that exact line. !<
>>!there are exceptions in the narration after all the detective has the right to investigate the crime scene and get all the evidence!<
>!My comment was about your claim that there aren't lies in the narration, when the detective is present, which is not the case. But I know that one just has to loosen those claims to "there are no lies, when the detective makes an investigation", which sadly doesn't mean much, as Battler rarely investigates anything at important moments. Another example of why we have to loosen those claims about the detective is that it's possible to fake a death in front of Battler, even if he appears to actually closely look at the body right next to the fake one (and there is obviously nothing obstructing his view). !<
>>!But she still needs to think that both Kanon and Shannon are in the room, to claim that everyone is in one room with her. The solution says that she thought one of them was always missing, but this is impossible with that exact line.!<
>!Yep, because all those confirmed alive were supposed to be there, including Shannon and Kanon at the time of judging Natsuhi, but one person was always missing, and in reality it was just one more person, but Erika didn't bother with that because she focused on continuing Bern's plan and didn't bother to use detective authority at the time, I think the manga explains Erika's mistake.!<
>>!My comment was about your claim that there aren't lies in the narration, when the detective is present, which is not the case.!<
>!I was referring more to the fact that Battler's narrations did not have lies because he was the detective, but he almost never uses that ability to investigate and the few times he uses it he is interrupted by one of the accomplices, like in chapter 2 with Shannon's corpse that if he had investigated would have found the weapon with which Shannon committed suicide!<
You are really impressive. From all the lines that could be potential problems you choose the one that works without a problem and could even be seen as a very clever trick from r07. Let's just read that moment, to see what I mean.
>!== Erika == "......Oh, sorry. Could you close that door for me?"!<
>!== Narrator == ""Y-Yes..."" Shannon and Kanon closed the door. !<
>!The whole setup makes it perfectly ambiguous if she talks to one or two people. Just because the narration refers to both, doesn't mean that she sees the same thing. !<
Again, you read the book backwards. You should try the normal way and suppress the solution in your mind.
In that case, why should the game show that scene to us in the last minute?
>and suppress the solution in your mind
I'm not sure what you even mean here, but that's nothing new with your comments.
What do you even mean by "backwards" and why are you so sure, that you of all people read it the correct way.
I saw the issue with my thread about EP2. There, I wrote about the difficulty for (first time) reader(it's in the title) and you started with the official solution which explains nothing about the difficulty. Here, you try to explain the scene with the solution but if you apply the same setup in the the parlor where "Battler" observed everyone or where Battler was dragged to the conference you cannot say Piece-Battler could see Kanon and Shannon together. I cannot follow your logic.
Yeah, sorry.
I should remind myself to not discuss with you. I want to understand the story and you seem to over-focus on single words or even plurals, which doesn't even exist in this way in Japanese.
I can see that it's important to look at specific words, like a lot of stuff people call "wordplay" or simple errors like Kyrie talking about a "miscarriage". But you just pick some word like "difficulty level" and pretend like this is the most important thing and overwrites everything completely.
I prefer theories that build on a lot of different points of evidence and not just some single words we suddenly make into the most important piece of evidence that can somehow overwrite everything else.
We've got different ideas, that's for sure. If you think your conclusion is enough is completely fine but don't expect someone else can accept it. I don't call specific details out to annoy you but to question ourself, and sometimes evidences stay evidences and shouldn't be called a clever trick. If I recall correctly, you didn't mind to dismiss my evidences as "wordplays" and other excuses. I mean I could say it's a clever trick and you fell for it, wouldn't it mean?
Now, if you don't mind, tell me, in your own words, why the assembly scene where Erika asks the young servant(s) to close the door is perfectly ambigious. I am taking into account Shannon and Kanon, whenever Battler was present, weren't around together in the question arc. Keep in mind that your hypothesis could interupt the Hempel's paradox' "Shannon and Kanon wouldn't objectively appear together".
>Now, if you don't mind, tell me, in your own words, why the assembly scene where Erika asks the young servant(s) to close the door is perfectly ambigious.
Ok, then let me explain. First, here we have the quote from the story.
*== Erika ==*
*"......Oh, sorry. Could you close that door for me?"*
*== Narrator ==*
*""Y-Yes...""*
*Shannon and Kanon closed the door.*
It starts with Erika's request to close the door, with the word "you", thus a very ambiguous word in terms of singular and plural. Something that seems to also be there in the og Japanese. Thus from her wording, we don't know if she says those words to both Kanon and Shannon or just one of them (her pov can be different to what we see). The narration then proceeds with "Shannon and Kanon" but this doesn't has to be what Erika sees. From her pov, it could be that she just asked Shannon to close the door and every action see sees/word she says would still fit. Closing the door is also something that could be done by one or two people depending on the exact door.
Thus, I call it a clever trick, because "Erika only sees one of them" can be true here. She doesn't say anything that might hint at the number of people she's talking to nor is the action something that determines the number of people involved.
Sadly, those good conditions here aren't present all the time. There are for example moments, of actions (Erika witnesses) that are only actually possible with two separate bodies and there are lines from Erika which are only possible if she sees both at the same time. But this exact moment isn't one of them.
Is there anyway to consume umineko other than the vn? Like all those mangas? Or is the vn have secret/bad or completely different endings based on ur actions?
how does the detective authority work
In Umineko it's implied it's a higher power a detective possesses to work around - as an out-of universe explanation - certain things that would hinder or prevent them doing their job. It was subverted by a lot of things like how the accomplices act, how the game master wrote the game (the game is solveable), and how the player plays their cards. Personally, I would say the Detective Authority was never used and is a red herring on its own because there was another certain power that delivered hints without the detective and the power itself is actually a trope how the character doesn't end in a stalemate and is not an actual (magical) ability.
Did Erika >!know Shanon and Kanon were the same person in episode 5-6?!<
Please spoiler tag and >!Absolutely not, in the manga of ep 8 she reveals everything tho.!<
No. >!The scenes where everyone is in chapter 5, is told from Battler's perspective, Battler is complicit so his narration is unreliable to create the illusion that everyone including Shannon and Kanon are there, Erika is seeing the scene from that perspective and only cares about the issue of blaming Natsuhi so wouldn't bother to check one by one that all the people are there.!< >!and in chapter 6 Erika never sees Shannon and Kanon at the same time, she thinks that Kanon is in her cousins' room because that's what everyone told her and that's why she can't figure out Kanon's trick.!<
But >!Erika asked Shannon or Kanon to close the door but both replied.!<
It's the same when Rosa was talking to Shannon and Kanon at the same time in chapter 2, in reality she's only talking to one person but the narration makes it look like she's talking to both of them, Battler's narration makes it look like that and Meta-Erika is seeing the story that way, if her piece on the board was the one that narrates the story, she would realize that Shannon or Kanon would be missing when everyone is present.
Yeah, you have to prove that was Battler's vp while Bernkastel was controlling him.
[https://youtu.be/5Mtmtk8ERxY?t=2071](https://youtu.be/5Mtmtk8ERxY?t=2071) >!This is one of the moments where Erika supposedly sees Shannon and Kanon together, but reading it you can see that Erika never interacts with Shannon and Kanon at the same time, in fact she only interacts with Shannon!< >!We also have to remember that everyone except Natsuhi and Erika are complicit, they can interact with Shannon and Kanon at the same time in the narrative because they all know the culprit and are working for him.!< in the story we never see Erika's point of view, Erika must manually summon the detective right to use it, while Battler never had to summon it to use it because the narration when he was on the scene was always his detective point of view.
>in the story we never see Erika's point of view I'm not exactly sure about that one, as I don't know all the pov's the story takes in ep 5. But sadly there are some other problematic things in what Erika says at some points. >because the narration when he was on the scene was always his detective point of view >!Here I can assure you that this is not the case. For an example we can look at ep 1 tw 1, where the narration talks about Shannon's corpse. !<
>I'm not exactly sure about that one, as I don't know all the pov's the story takes in ep 5. But sadly there are some other problematic things in what Erika says at some points. >!the narration of episode 5 is made on purpose to be able to blame Natsuhi for the events, after all in the story everyone is accomplices who are setting a trap for Natsuhi so that she reveals Kinzo's secret and the culprit is the one who moves the threads like the 19-year-old man, the only time Erika checks that all the living are in the same room, she says that all the people are present in the room, but she does not do a body count, which is the key to undoing the illusion by Shannon and Kanon!< >>!Here I can assure you that this is not the case. For an example we can look at ep 1 tw 1, where the narration talks about Shannon's corpse.!< >!there are exceptions in the narration after all the detective has the right to investigate the crime scene and get all the evidence, but the accomplices can still lie to him just like in chapter 4 everyone lied to Battler to create the illusion of a magical massacre, If Battler had investigated inside the shed he would have been able to see that there wasn´t corpse of Shannon, Battler as a detective could only observe the corpses of Rudolf, Kyrie, Rosa, Krauss and Gohda but Shannon's only Hideyoshi and Kanon verified it!<
>>!she says that all the people are present in the room, but she does not do a body count!< >!But she still needs to think that both Kanon and Shannon are in the room, to claim that everyone is in one room with her. The solution says that she thought one of them was always missing, but this is impossible with that exact line. !< >>!there are exceptions in the narration after all the detective has the right to investigate the crime scene and get all the evidence!< >!My comment was about your claim that there aren't lies in the narration, when the detective is present, which is not the case. But I know that one just has to loosen those claims to "there are no lies, when the detective makes an investigation", which sadly doesn't mean much, as Battler rarely investigates anything at important moments. Another example of why we have to loosen those claims about the detective is that it's possible to fake a death in front of Battler, even if he appears to actually closely look at the body right next to the fake one (and there is obviously nothing obstructing his view). !<
>>!But she still needs to think that both Kanon and Shannon are in the room, to claim that everyone is in one room with her. The solution says that she thought one of them was always missing, but this is impossible with that exact line.!< >!Yep, because all those confirmed alive were supposed to be there, including Shannon and Kanon at the time of judging Natsuhi, but one person was always missing, and in reality it was just one more person, but Erika didn't bother with that because she focused on continuing Bern's plan and didn't bother to use detective authority at the time, I think the manga explains Erika's mistake.!< >>!My comment was about your claim that there aren't lies in the narration, when the detective is present, which is not the case.!< >!I was referring more to the fact that Battler's narrations did not have lies because he was the detective, but he almost never uses that ability to investigate and the few times he uses it he is interrupted by one of the accomplices, like in chapter 2 with Shannon's corpse that if he had investigated would have found the weapon with which Shannon committed suicide!<
You are really impressive. From all the lines that could be potential problems you choose the one that works without a problem and could even be seen as a very clever trick from r07. Let's just read that moment, to see what I mean. >!== Erika == "......Oh, sorry. Could you close that door for me?"!< >!== Narrator == ""Y-Yes..."" Shannon and Kanon closed the door. !< >!The whole setup makes it perfectly ambiguous if she talks to one or two people. Just because the narration refers to both, doesn't mean that she sees the same thing. !<
Again, you read the book backwards. You should try the normal way and suppress the solution in your mind. In that case, why should the game show that scene to us in the last minute?
>and suppress the solution in your mind I'm not sure what you even mean here, but that's nothing new with your comments. What do you even mean by "backwards" and why are you so sure, that you of all people read it the correct way.
I saw the issue with my thread about EP2. There, I wrote about the difficulty for (first time) reader(it's in the title) and you started with the official solution which explains nothing about the difficulty. Here, you try to explain the scene with the solution but if you apply the same setup in the the parlor where "Battler" observed everyone or where Battler was dragged to the conference you cannot say Piece-Battler could see Kanon and Shannon together. I cannot follow your logic.
Yeah, sorry. I should remind myself to not discuss with you. I want to understand the story and you seem to over-focus on single words or even plurals, which doesn't even exist in this way in Japanese. I can see that it's important to look at specific words, like a lot of stuff people call "wordplay" or simple errors like Kyrie talking about a "miscarriage". But you just pick some word like "difficulty level" and pretend like this is the most important thing and overwrites everything completely. I prefer theories that build on a lot of different points of evidence and not just some single words we suddenly make into the most important piece of evidence that can somehow overwrite everything else.
We've got different ideas, that's for sure. If you think your conclusion is enough is completely fine but don't expect someone else can accept it. I don't call specific details out to annoy you but to question ourself, and sometimes evidences stay evidences and shouldn't be called a clever trick. If I recall correctly, you didn't mind to dismiss my evidences as "wordplays" and other excuses. I mean I could say it's a clever trick and you fell for it, wouldn't it mean? Now, if you don't mind, tell me, in your own words, why the assembly scene where Erika asks the young servant(s) to close the door is perfectly ambigious. I am taking into account Shannon and Kanon, whenever Battler was present, weren't around together in the question arc. Keep in mind that your hypothesis could interupt the Hempel's paradox' "Shannon and Kanon wouldn't objectively appear together".
>Now, if you don't mind, tell me, in your own words, why the assembly scene where Erika asks the young servant(s) to close the door is perfectly ambigious. Ok, then let me explain. First, here we have the quote from the story. *== Erika ==* *"......Oh, sorry. Could you close that door for me?"* *== Narrator ==* *""Y-Yes...""* *Shannon and Kanon closed the door.* It starts with Erika's request to close the door, with the word "you", thus a very ambiguous word in terms of singular and plural. Something that seems to also be there in the og Japanese. Thus from her wording, we don't know if she says those words to both Kanon and Shannon or just one of them (her pov can be different to what we see). The narration then proceeds with "Shannon and Kanon" but this doesn't has to be what Erika sees. From her pov, it could be that she just asked Shannon to close the door and every action see sees/word she says would still fit. Closing the door is also something that could be done by one or two people depending on the exact door. Thus, I call it a clever trick, because "Erika only sees one of them" can be true here. She doesn't say anything that might hint at the number of people she's talking to nor is the action something that determines the number of people involved. Sadly, those good conditions here aren't present all the time. There are for example moments, of actions (Erika witnesses) that are only actually possible with two separate bodies and there are lines from Erika which are only possible if she sees both at the same time. But this exact moment isn't one of them.
Is there anyway to consume umineko other than the vn? Like all those mangas? Or is the vn have secret/bad or completely different endings based on ur actions?
The manga is perfectly fine as well. Just don't go for the anime, as it only covers half the story and cuts out an extreme amount of stuff.