Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31371445-20170222233857/@comment-27136653-20180709053433

MagomaevaAmina

That doesn't dismiss the fact that in certain aspects, they ARE pacifist and very much unlike the player. Or that the fight button itself is labeled differently.

"That suggests that Frisk has intentions to hurt."

Ha ha ha, no. That merely means they aren't as wimpy as they look. They are a human for god's sake, they can one-hit a monster if they feel like it.

"So the reason why Frisk's attacks bring many damages isn't related to monster's defence but to their own intentions."

And that's relevant how exactly? We are talking about how they feel about fighting in general. Of COURSE when they fight they have the intention in mind, I'm not saying they are a pacifist sweetie even in the genocide run, what fool do you take me for?

"every time a monster don't want to fight Frisk, Frisk's attack will kill them"

False. There are plenty of monsters that take more than one hit to be killed.

"(I'am honestly feel proud of myself because I found this important detail myself without anyone's help and its also really important to consider because it give use details on what kind of person the main character is)"

Well congratulations. You want a medal for that shit? I'm in the business of finding all my information myself without anyone's help for over 2 years now.

"And Frisk doesn't magically becomes themself in the pacifist run"

No, they always were themselves. They always had that name, even though no one asked. They always felt differently about fighting, but could CHOOSE to suppress that feeling. We represent their choice of coping with this new underground world, but we aren't here to decide what kind of person they are, or even how they look (as you would expect from a regular RPG game, where you can choose to stylize your character).

"And Chara is NOT the player."

I didn't say that. Please read my comments more carefully. Or, for that matter, don't read them at all if they aren't meant for your eyes. I was replying to someone else after all.

''"They behaves independently of the player in the genocide..." ''- all the way to the end of this paragraph

No SHIT sherlock! This is like, the common knowledge, Undertale 101, pacifism for dummies. I know all of this and agree with all of this. What exactly are you trying to achieve here?

"Chara is talking with Frisk at the end of the genocide run and NOT the player."

That's actually debatable. So is their final power of destroying all of reality or something. In this case, the player and Frisk merge into a single being, you could say. That's one way to answer the issue. Oh and what's the issue, you ask? Chara requesting that we move onto the "next" world, which obviously means, onto the next game. Which is what the player stereotype is all about, finishing one game, and then moving on. It's kinda strange. In some parts, they were talking to Frisk, and in others, they were talking to us.

"So both dont hold any polar opposite message, both are influenced by the player."

Obviously. But from a meta point of view, Chara was meant to be the final judge to you, the realization that you messed up your entire game. All while being totally right about everything at the same time. So, if Frisk isn't this, then they are the opposite. Of COURSE Undertale is about a polar choice, ever knew someone who would be satisfied with a neutral ending?

Seriously, this fandom is so deep in its own shit at this point, I am not even surprised that it attacks me the moment I start talking about the absolute basics again, instead of proclaiming how innocent Chara is and how evil Frisk is.

All of you should think about what you write before you send it. Because from now on, I won't reply to any more idiots claiming they know more than me, by lecturing me on things I already agree with.

"And tssyx, please dont use any meta to contradict me just because you want to have the last word as wanting to have the last word would not make you strong, just stupid."

No, that just means you think this game is deeply philosophical and are rejecting any simple answers because of it. Grow up, would ya? Oh and, don't reply to me if I don't ask you from now on. I think that's gonna be the best for both of us.

"I agree with MagomaevaAmina and TheHumanAmbassador, using meta in an argument in the case of Undertale should only be done if the meta aspect in question is outright mentioned in the game to have happened or are happening."

Then you MUST agree with me that nothing that appears meta in the game is canon to the game. Not even Sans speaking of "turns" - because there aren't any turns. Or is this not what you wanted to say? (because I did get that impression)