Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31371445-20170222233857/@comment-32182236-20180902172203

"Then you are just not getting it."

No, it's you. Hope is hope. This is as obvious as it can possibly get.

"So the condition of befriending them may not apply. It is then purely just the memories of you, I guess."

Yes, that's a more plausible solution.

"Implying there's an entire species of mean monsters, rather than a single jerk named Jerry of an unknown/unnamed species of alien saucer butts? The latter is the simpler option, so I'm taking that."

There's an entire species of every encounter that's not a "unique encounter". If you can encounter them after killing them, there's more than one of them.

"For the last time, unless explicitly stated, no one wants to kill you. I think I've made my point(s) clear."

Your main point(s) was just a bunch of argument from authority fallacies.

"One of my points."

The only four monsters that have ever used green magic were Woshua, Vegetoid, Parsnik, and Whimsalot. That's IT. Now, let's take a look at these four encounters.

Vegetoid only starts using green attacks AFTER you ask for "Dinner". So it's clear that before then, there was no intent on helping you.

Woshua attacks you because they apparently don't like things that are unclean, and you are one of them. But, by asking them to clean you, they give you a chance-Just run into one of the green bullets!

For SOME reason, praying will turn some of Whimsalot's butterflies green. This is because you managed to get Whimsalot to "remember its conscience". That implies it wasn't using it before then, aka:It wanted to kill you before starting to use green attacks.

Parsnik is just like Vegetoid.

If you collect a green bullet, the monster becomes spareable right away. This hints that at this point, they're not trying to kill you. Yet, if you don't, they.. don't. ..That means there must be something about NOT accepting getting healed that gets them to NOT spare you. But.. what?

"He let's us have a choice, although he did program the game push us towards the pacifist ending. Hence why I'm saying that was his point... besides giving you the freedom of NOT doing the right thing, of course. But you keep implying we were all playing the game incorrectly, by being merciful to the monsters."

Yeah, but I didn't quite say it. That's just as far-fetched (actually more!) as saying that if you did Genocide, you're playing the game wrong. The game is about choice, after all. Kind of like the Stanley Parable.

"There's no change to be observed. The INV effect perhaps. But monster bodies don't blink when you hit them, so they wouldn't know what that means."

It should be enough to give away that it's not a monster body. And, what's the other race that just about everyone knows exists?

"Hence why I said: 'they are accustomed to their attacks not dealing damage if they do not wish to harm them'; not that they never deal damage."

And yet there's no indicator amongst them, meaning that a monster has no way of knowing whether or not they're about to be harmed by an attack.

...Also, Undyne and Asgore could have tried using those non-lethal attacks, so that they don't harm each other when practicing attacks.

"If we don't, they don't. Unless twinkle twinkle HUD HUD HUD hurr hurr durr. Besides, only boss monster souls show upon death, remember?"

Yeah, that's my take on the matter too. Hence why I put more effort into a response to THAT than the alternative that they somehow do.

"Or, as I've speculated previously, the soul sometimes represents our entire body. Just simplified a lot so that we can control it with nothing but the arrow keys."

..You do know that we can also control our body with just the arrow keys, right? There's really no reason why you shouldn't just be able to put the overworld body sprite and place it in the battle screen.

Also, Flowey proves you wrong.

"See that heart? That's your SOUL, the very culmination of your being!"

It's most definitely your SOUL.

"You're blue now. That's my attack!"

"As long as you're GREEN, you CAN'T ESCAPE!!"-Undyne

Colors are visible like that too.

"After all, Undyne's spears did do damage to the bridge in Waterfall, so this isn't unheard of. And as for how that harms the soul, maybe the body is like a conductor, transmitting the damage to the soul even though it wasn't hit directly."

And yet Undyne's spears do absolutely NOTHING to us until a FIGHT is triggered. It seems they only deal with things that involve magic.

"Lack of education. Assuming they can see it, which I don't think they can."

They can. Flowey, Papyrus, the fact that attacks are mainly aimed at your SOUL..

"Besides, I don't think their edu is really that lacking. So it has to be that they don't see it then."

Or your original hypothesis is false.

"That applies to ghosts only."

So, at what points does Occam's Razor apply and not apply according to your standards? You've tried using it to assume something, and then use that to prove something else, but at the same time, you've disregarded it just to make another theory possible.

"It is incredibly easy for them to pull out a weapon they're fully atuned to."

..Um, what? How can you be attuned to a WEAPON? And how does that imply expression?

"Kanashi is. Follow her on Amino: https://aminoapps.com/p/7smr6o"

..So, when was that implied that Kanashi escaped the war? All I've seen so far is that Kanashi is the monster with a human SOUL that likely started the war, more than likely the same one seen on the Waterfall plaques. ...In the Glitchtale interpretation, that is.

"And he was not the only one, according to the history books she made (which you can find on her Tumblr)."

History books? Where is that tagged?

After searching through, I just found further hints of this monster with a human SOUL thing, as the same Waterfall plaques that I mentioned earlier were shown in a post, followed by the question "So tell me... Why did the humans attack?", tagged "prequel", the same thing that Kanashi was tagged.

"Okay, re-explaining: in my interpretation, humans are like us. They have all they need inside their physical bodies, and also all that they don't need, but that is natural to them, such as emotions and intelligence. The soul therefore adds nothing, it is merely a useless extra piece, like the Appendix for example. The reason why the wizards gave them to them, was partly so that the monsters could effectively defend themselves from them, and also partly because [spoilers]."

It's to give Kanashi (Or who they are in the canon Undertale.. I'll just call them Kanashi for now, since we don't get a name) the ability to gain unfathomable power, wasn't it?

Wait, what is that spoilers OF-oh right, you're making a fanfic.. So Wizardtale.

By the way, was LV a thing prior to the creation of SOUL?

"Monster souls on the other hand generate their emotions. Heck, they generate everything, they ARE them. So cutting off their emotions means cutting off their soul. This is what the books mean, that they cannot survive without these emotions, unlike the humans. It's not that they always have them, it's also not that losing them kills them. It's losing the means of generating them that kills them, because that translates to them losing their soul, the one and only thing that produces them. That would be like you getting your neurons, the stuff that is responsible for your emotions, sucked out of your brain."

It's just love, hope, and compassion, nothing else. Flowey makes it very clear what happens emotionally when a monster is SOULless. (Flowers, as plants, don't have any emotions, so the ones Flowey felt must have come from Asriel's monster essence.)

And why doesn't the book just say the more accurate term-That SOULs are responsible for love, hope, and compassion? An easy way to resolve this error.

"That was an unforeseen side effect, unfortunately."

...I suppose, since Flowey could absorb both of them.

"They certainly love the monsters more, I'll tell you that."

Right, I was asking if they wanted the humans dead. You know, if they'd WANT a monster to absorb a human SOUL and destroy all of humanity, and basically become a god?

"Could have been a figure of speech, could have been an actual oversight, but considering he makes no more points about this anywhere, I do not consider it a substantial antithesis to the aforementioned statement from the books."

Really? I'd say that even ONE point is a substantial antithesis.

"So you take direct evidence."

Exactly. I've been trying to say this for all of this time. DIRECT evidence is what matters.

"Me too, but I also consider consistency."

Plot consistency? I consider that too. Oh, you mean that weird meta stuff that isn't even a part of the game.

"Why accept one such instance, but ignore all the others?"

They don't count if they're not referenced via direct evidence. That's the line, so my rule is consistent.

"If Toby said everything is canon, or whatever he said, I think we cannot just trash whatever he didn't directly explain."

..I'll just give you the direct quote of what he said and let you try and interpret it-I'll interpret it too, of course:

"Use the format of a video game to tell the story: traditional fourth-wall breaking tropes such as "SAVING," "EXP," and "LV" are an intergrated part of the game's world."

He did indeed say it was an actual world, and that they're canon. That's under a list of "Existing Features", by the way. Here's the post:https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1002143342/undertale/

"And this leads to the mechanics being so convoluted, I'd rather employ the translating explanation, that whatever the characters may look to be doing on the screen isn't necessarily what they're doing in actuality. Such as, Mettaton hinting at the idea of your own keyboard being canon with his actions."

What, by writing an essay? By "bringing" a keyboard? This hints that Frisk BROUGHT a keyboard, not that we're playing through the entire game with one that controls Frisk's every action. And even then, he "hopes you brought one". Taking it directly at face value, there isn't really much hint of a player here-And it's pretty clear that a keyboard would be far more effective at writing an essay than being stuck writing when you can only control your SOUL.

"Sure. But considering we are already playing with the meta concept, it's not out of the question."

Which brings us to an exception. If an exact meta element (say, turns) has been proven to be canon elsewhere, then the rule about us assuming it's not talking about that particular element no longer applies-It's already canon, why should we try to interpret it like it's not after we've proven it is? So, other mentions hinting at turns (if they exist) could be interpreted as actually talking about turns, now that Sans has proven their existence.

"And so I ask, what if the meta is simpler than the non-meta? Because this is one of the few instances where this is the case. With the non-meta, we gotta ask a series of complicated questions in goal of explaining Flowey's knowledge of Chara, convoluting the story further."

It's really simple-We already know Chara's the narrator, and monsters like Tsunderplane can hear/read the narrator, and Flowey can see the HUD. I'm pretty sure that's enough to conclude that Flowey would know about the narrator as well. It's less that he was talking about Chara, and more that he was talking about "whoever the narrator is".

Besides, while that one point seems like it's simpler, try taking this new knowledge, and see how that affects the canon. You'll see that things start becoming a lot more complicated from there.

"With the meta, we can simply stash it away."

Contradicting the principal of direct evidence.

"And I repeat, the meta is not out of the question yet, Toby making direct 4th-wall referenes at any point in the game is not disproved yet. This IS a valid explanation still. So the final question is, what is more important, keeping everything non-meta, or keeping the story without unnecessary question marks?"

How about keeping everything canon? There being no contradictions/plot holes is the most important thing. Next is explaining as much as we can through this evidence.

"By the way, the biggest question mark still stands, a full explanation of how the HUD works. So far, I've only received "it just is that way" from both of you. But both of you, including me, know jackshit about parallel universes. How do you know what is possible and what isn't?"

A set of consistent rules.

"A LITERAL meta space controlling minds and the movements of everyone that interacts with a specific person (not even an explanation of how it recognizes that person from for example a chair, or a tube of DT, or an essence of someone dead, or an essence of someone dead next to a tube of DT and a chair? smh I'm deeply disappointed in you), centered in one corner of one planet inside one galaxy? Give me a break, please."

One, it DOESN'T control anyone's minds! I've already told you why nobody takes note of it-It's natural to them! Second, an "entity" is what happens when a DT and essence naturally combine to form a sentient form. This is what an entity is defined as. And how many times do I have to say that the monster is the one who initiates the encounter? Also, the HUD is everywhere. It's ONLY the power to S/L/R that's centered in the Underground. Nothing more. How do you think not a single human was killed in the war? My take on the matter is because humans usually have initiative. (I mean, you ALWAYS get the first attack. Except in Sans' and Undyne's case for some reason.) They attack first, so the monster never gets a chance to attack, seeing that the humans' weapons and their high LV was enough to one-shot the majority of monsters they encountered.

"The HUD imposes so many questions, I gave up on the idea of it being real a long time ago. I just view it as a way of translating the in-game events to us in a simple manner, because Toby can't do anything better than that. And the characters utilizing it? The HUD is a direct translation of whatever is going on in actuality, so whatever they do, however they might break the "established rules", their actions WILL be translatable back to the original format."

Look, whatever you think Sans said rather than "so, uh. i've decided... it's not gonna BE your turn. ever. i'm just gonna keep having MY turn until you give up. even if it means we have to stand here until the end of time. capiche?", would've been what we hear him say if Toby didn't want turns to be canon. It would make total sense for us to hear that, because we'd probably understand what's going on.

"For example, Sans taking a really long turn and sleeping during it, could actually be just him faking his sleep, still paying attention to your movements"

Why does he stop teleporting you when you approach the end of the box then?

"and you being unable to just attack him right away could translate as him holding a really powerful attack ready to snipe you, so you have to be VERY sneaky with your attack (e.g. preparing your weapon into an attacking position), illustrated by the box moving very slowly towards the attack button."

Why can't he just use that attack right away?

"huh. always wondered why people never use their strongest attack first."-Sans

"Alright. We presume the characters audibly talk to Frisk. That they've all got their own voices, instead of speaking in a "trrrrrrrrrrrr"-sounding text."

Though not Chara, but we still have no reason to assume the sound is canon. If it WERE to be text, it would be displayed right as they're displaying their text, no backspace, because of the Wrong Number Song person cutting themselves off. ("Is this G-") ..Yet at the same time, there is a backspace "RUN. INTO. THE BULLETS!" *replaces "BULLETS" with "friendliness pellets"*

...Okay, I don't know what that's supposed to signify. Flowey doesn't have control over the HUD anymore, so we can't say that backspace IS a real thing but only Flowey could do it because HUD.. But, I'd say that's pretty good evidence that only Chara's text is actually written text.

"The reason we see it so however, is because once again, the game translates it to us."

No, it's because there's MAYBE 1 voice actor. (Flowey doesn't count, Toby just used Ronald McDonald clips. Mettaton is the "maybe"-I don't know what the source for his "OH YES" is.)

"And that means it needs to stay consistent with its other translations, nominally, translating a fluid battle into a turn-based one."

There are ways to do fluid battles better. Omega Flowey even demonstrated how you could do it better. It's not perfect, but it's far better than your typical turn-based combat. And Sans STILL starts causing problems with this interpretation.

"That was a last resort approach of course. Other logical steps take precedence. Such as, why would Toby put it in the game, if it had no value? True, this could be a plot twist, but it's too small to be any meaningful."

That's not even logical steps:That's just making assumptions about Toby again. I mean, the Mystery Room just turned out to be a room with a dog. Pretty small, don't you think?

"I'd assume any standard plot twist to be either bigger, or better explained. For example, the "inaccuracy" of the books could have been hinted at."

It was. "Uhh, am I at the page minimum yet? I'm kinda sick of writing this"-Red Book

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B6gS2LPXdIc5QkRlRGV5NEIzejQ

The very EXISTENCE of the yellow book (Read it)

"Therefore, if a being with a powerful SOUL struck with the desire to kill... ..Um, let's end the chapter here."-Orange Book

"Again, our kind is very bad at names...?"-Light Green Book

..The librarby isn't known for bringing credible educational books, and in one case, a book that didn't even TRY to be educational. That calls into question the credibility of the blue one. That alone's not enough to say anything though:The New Home quote is our definitive evidence, but this does qualify as a possible hint, that maybe, it's not as factually based as you might think..

"In that case yes, I would start doubting them. But not if the entire ordeal is missing a point."

What ordeal, and what point? I can only think of the contradiction between hope being necessary and hope having been gone.

"That's precisely what I meant what metaphorically happened. Our will to escape and Asgore's will to kill us has been represented by him smashing that button. As in, that a truce isn't possible."

Yet you can try to reason with him by talking just fine. It fails, of course, but still.

"I wonder what's your opinion about DDLC. If that one does this, why not Undertale? The hints are so obvious and you just KEEP claiming they are in some twisted way actually canon..."

Haven't played that, but it's probably some weird simulation, if what I heard about it being a story with unrealistically craziness of love, and your hint on it taking note of game mechanics are both correct.

"Only because they're canon and 'we' might not be?"

Basically that, but you've overestimated the plausibility and odds of "us" being canon. (Separate from Frisk, that is.)

"How about what I said earlier, that if that included us, a lot of things would get simplified?"

One thing. It'd actually create far more complexities. Tsunderplane knowing about the narrator, Flowey knowing about the HUD.. That already hints that Flowey would know about the narrator.

And as for Flowey's plea not to reset, if we DO say he means us, the player, we have to ask why he used Chara's name, why he didn't specify he wasn't talking to Chara, how he learned of our existence while everyone else, including Chara themselves didn't (They take Frisk's SOUL, so they were talking to Frisk, and thus, think it was FRISK'S fault, not ours.)

"As in, if this hinted at us, it wasn't canon, since this is what the 4th wall warrants, and also since there's no confirmed "inner" player playing as Frisk."

And that's why we must say it DIDN'T hint at us. If a particular theory makes it so that a particular scene can no longer fit in with the rest of the story, the theory is wrong.

"And as I said before, removing these scenes brings up a lot less questions than keeping them in and trying to rationalize them."

They can be rationalized just fine, and removing the scenes opens up a whole can of problems (if that scene isn't canon, what can we say about all the other scenes to ever exist?)

"Refusing to cooperate is as simple and natural as farting."

No, it's the idea that it actually works. The six humans didn't refuse to cooperate until Frisk called out to them. Why didn't they?

"Unless you hurt a particularly determined monster, that isn't happening."

The crime rate for homicides in the US was around 5.3 for every 100,000 people in 2016. So, that's around 1 for every 20,000 people. Convert that into monsters, take into consideration that doing this gives you unfathomable power in this new system, adding some temptation to the equation, and...

"Want me to repeat it for the millionth time?"

I've said it again and again:Hope means hope, and devoid of hope means devoid of hope.

"Did he now?"

Yep.

"Use the format of a video game to tell the story: traditional fourth-wall breaking tropes such as "SAVING," "EXP," and "LV" are an intergrated part of the game's world."

"On the music. That's not what confused me."

Oh, just the music? I see..

Still, the fact that Homestuck does this means there's no reason to assume Undertale isn't also like this. He still worked on Homestuck, so some of Homestuck's design probably inspired him. Or he just so happened to be like the designer of Homestuck's story.

"Yeah. Because the game interpreting the world to us doesn't make any sense, but discontinuation of reality itself totally does."

Let me flip that around to show the nonsense (now based on your alternate point of view):The idea that magic can send you into a box, buttons to exist for fighting doesn't make any sense, but the game flipping our senses of the world upside-down, changing what everyone says arbitrarily, making a huge soup mix of truth and lies within the dialogue totally does.

"No, we didn't."

Twilight is shining through the barrier. That one line is enough to debunk that.

"Because we totally don't have hands. Because coming arbitrarily close to some monster removes them and prevents us from moving our physical body."

No, we have hands. It's just instead of controlling our body, we now control our SOUL, because it was separated from our body, and essence is usually within your SOUL-So if your body and SOUL separated, what would you be more likely to find yourself as? Your SOUL, of course!

"Strange that the game would mention that only during Asriel's battle."

Doubly strange that right afterwards, our movement speed of the SOUL slowed down.

"Was it implying we could have moved before that? As in, for example, run away, without needing to press a button with our soul, however that might even work?"

We tried to reach our SAVE. That's probably the only action we could have done.

"What's the point? Are you planning to graduate from this stuff or something?"

If it's up for the fans to build the rest of the story, why can't I use purely what the game says, and build the rest of the story on top of that? You know, like I've been trying to do THIS WHOLE TIME? (Finding everything that's currently canon is the first step towards doing that.)

"It fits literally anything."

Blue's the closest match though, since it's all about using your original style.

"So you don't want to make rules that complicate things to explain turns, which was flat-out mentioned by Sans, but you DO want to make rules that complicate things just to make red NOT determination, when there's no real evidence it can't be determination?"

"Quite the opposite. Red being determination has already been sufficiently disproven, even if not officially confirmed yet, that it may as well be the new accepted truth."

It really hasn't. Your "proof" was based on assuming that DT was SOUL power, and that assumption has been sufficiently disproven based off of Alphys' entries, and the existence of DT fluctuations (Asriel and Omega Flowey), which simply cannot exist if DT and SOUL power are the same. Then you complicate things by saying that wasn't a DT fluctuation, but some composite SOUL, when another possibility is that DT just isn't SOUL power, and correlation does not imply causation. You know, the stuff they tell you in statistics.

"And with turns, I'm just showing an alternative interpretation, one that would be compatible with the overworld. Toby may have said that turns are canon, but did he ever provide a consistent explanation? That's what I'm missing here. I don't understand turns in light of the overworld mechanics, and I don't understand the overworld mechanics in light of the HUD."

They're both two different "states". First off, they're more similar than you think:The world looks mostly the same in both states: The only differences are the fact that your SOUL is visible, there's a box, and there's buttons. Mechanically speaking, a FIGHT begins when your SOUL is forced outside of your body, bringing your essence with it, thus shifting your vessel that you control from your body to just your SOUL. During a monster's turn, things are easy to understand-Your SOUL is trapped in the box, it can't reach the buttons that are used for attacks, and the SOUL can't attack on its own-It's just a heart, after all.

By the way, I'm altering a bit of my take on it, in light of new information-The fact that you CAN teleport your SOUL between the buttons in green, but CAN'T use that to escape the battle. The SOUL can't naturally teleport-There's something about the buttons that allow it to teleport between them-Perhaps a kind of wormhole between the four?

"Composite soul it is then. Thanks for cementing it for me."

..You're welcome? I still say it's not a composite SOUL. It raises just as many questions as you say the HUD does, and unlike the HUD, it's never mentioned by the game.

"They literally are. Defeating a literal god? How more literal can we even go?"

Then they are in your take on the matter too. And that makes the six human SOULs ALSO Mary Sues. So, if your goal is to not make Mary Sues, mine's the way to go, because 2 is far better than EIGHT. (Chara could have done it under the same situation)

"Well, no one can. Also, no one has enough sanity to keep living on forever in an endless loop."

..We do with Sans.

"Yeah. We didn't get that in that fight. So neither did those other children, I am assuming."

You said that's what they did when they gave their SOULs to Asgore, though.

"Yeah. Tell that to the hundred instances of their soul otherwise normally shattering. It's obviously easier for the soul to just send the essence back in time. So why then?"

The quote below is my reason.

"There is no DT flux and there never has been for no human being ever. There is proof that DT doesn't fluctuate and the proof of the contrary has been discredited. Sheesh, can you even begin to fathom my absurd patience with you? Both of you?"

Your "proof" assumes that DT is SOUL power, which is based on a correlation and nothing else, and your debunk to the contrary invents a completely new mechanic (the whole composite SOUL thing) that has no evidence at all within the game to support. Corerlation not implying causation is far simpler and more plausible than a new mechanic we have to invent.

"Not if the souls are being used as a metric."

DT =/= SOUL power.

"Malice said nothing about blue. Remember the reply chain."

True, Malice didn't. I did. And you had said that being yourself and perservearance were practically synonymous. ...They're not. It's practically synonymous with BLUE.

"Luck doesn't count."

The fact is:You can't say you HAVE to have done all the others before getting red if there's a way around it. And since Light Blue involves waiting until the ball is small, there's a pretty good chance you can do red consistently without getting a Light Blue once. Therefore, the interpretation that this implies you HAVE To get all the others first, and that's what Flag 1 meant, is null.

"Because the humanity hated them, for what they were. Once again, my headcanon works. Oh and nevermind Suzy."

What's wrong with a nice jack-of all trades?

"Just like any other human being."

They all gave up against Asgore. That's contrary to DT.

"It's both. Remember my neutron analogy?"

A neutron and proton are actually fundamentally different, though. A neutron is 2 down quarks and 1 up quark, and a proton is 2 up quarks and 1 down quark.

"He stopped on his own. Luckily for us. Luckily for anyone who would be in our shoes."

Getting to that point without dying is the problem.

"No need for power, when Asriel stops on his own. Heck, Frisk had no power to overtake him either."

I don't mean power to get him to stop, I mean power to come back to life and not die.

"You're right. It won't. Determination will. The physical substance that is yellow by nature, as evidence points out."

Yellow SAVE points, and yellow text, which had already been signified to mean that text is important, for determination.

"Well? Did we die? Frisk couldn't do literally anything besides staying determined. That was their only power left, as a human being."

Exactly. DETERMINED. That's what you need:DT. Not just one of those other traits. This was my whole point.

"Yep, without determination, it would be much more difficult. Heck, it would have been much more difficult for Frisk too, considering they had no other super powers available to them at that point."

Good thing they're naturally determined.

"You don't. You remind him of happy and let him mentally break down."

Right. With a purely perservearance standpoint though, we wouldn't make this act of kindness. We'd actually be trying to find a way to kill him.

"No. We literally only needed determination. The thing that all human beings possess. That's it."

Yes, we needed determination.

"The same thing you get when you apply for 7 different courses on a university. A migraine."

No, you get the red trait, which Frisk just so happens to be. Also, I said 6, not seven.

"It's possible to achieve a balance, but impossible to master all 7. You only got the capacity for one after all. And that's assuming the traits mix anyways."

It's SIX. The "seventh" is a result of balancing the six.

"Under what circumstance would a lack of anything mean a lack of DT? This is totally arbitrary, determination can apply to anything that has an apparent goal, as I said."

According to the context of the flags, the traits must be something that you use to overcome an obstacle. Not just achieve something random. So not only is that false, but some of what you said can't qualify to be a trait, PERIOD.

"So a better question rather, why the 6 the game mentioned, what's so special about those?"

Because those are the only ones that qualify as traits. That's the simple answer.

"The definitive explanation is, that Toby simply chose the words that fit the soul modes the closest."

...Um, canon explanation, please?

"Whereas about a possible ingame explanation, perhaps the above implies red cannot be DT, due to how arbitrary the choice of the traits is?"

What's wrong with adding a seventh "arbitrary" choice?

"I seriously don't think these 6 are truly special in anything, separated from any other psychological trait, positive, negative, strong or weak."

There HAS to be a reason why it's THESE specific traits.

"Yes. Because that's what determination truly is. The thing the Undyne experienced."

Right. So, the dictionary definition.

"Whereas the red trait cannot be the same thing, because it's not defined the same way."

They're just two ways of defining the same thing. As I showed, they can both define determination.

"And the definition, as I showed above, doesn't work anyways."

I don't know which part you're talking about, but.. I looked at them all, so..

"DT has no parts. It's not in the dictionary that it has parts."

Of course not-That's just a natural property of it. It's not in the dictionary that atoms are made of protons, neutrons, and electrons, after all.

"Hate to give you a reason to hunt down your enemies."

Oh, please, I could replace that with passion for whatever it is that made them your enemies. In fact, I'm now headcanoning that both love and hate are extensions of the green trait, since they're different forms of how you "care" about something. Though you could also say that you care about killing, or we can just cite Undyne's reason to strike you down.

"Solidarity to survive, as there's strength in numbers."

What does that have to do with actually CARING on the matter, and not giving up? Patience means you're willing to wait as long as it takes, so without it, you're impatient. Perservearance means you'll willing to fight on no matter how hard it is. Green means you're passionate about it-You CARE. Justice is the order of prinicpals you use to make your goals FROM. Essentially, your version of what the rules should be. Integrity is your original style, your way of doing things-This combines with Justice to form what it is you want to do, and with green to make a passionate goal. Bravery means you're not going to get scared away from your goal because of fear. In all of these cases, they're things to give you a reason to do something, and not to give up:The very definition of determination-Having a firmness of purpose, not giving up. And without solitude? You're just alone of your goal. Nothing to do with determination.

"But if you're trying to make it work together, consider, patience and bravery are opposites. A paradox. Bravery isn't just contemplating doing it somewhere a patience would hide at, it's actually moving, as the game showed, the exact opposite of patience (plus, your definition of patience was synonymous with perseverance; patience is about waiting, not about 'not getting bored'). Therefore, these 6 simply cannot work together. They're too convoluted."

Bravery means you won't cower in fear and decide it's too scary to persue. Perserveance means no matter how many times you fail, you'll fight on. Patience means no matter how long it TAKES, you'll fight one. One deals with time, delay.. being willing to wait for the perfect opportunity.. The other deals with not giving up because "it's too hard, and I keep failing."

"That's not all there is to it. Did you also show that no other trait can apply to it, as the game implied? Every single other one? If there's only a single other trait that could apply to it, you'd be proven wrong, the 6 wouldn't be enough."

There's two possibilities about traits beyond the seven we see. The first is that they simply don't exist, and thus, the question you asked was meaningless. The second is that they do exist, but the lack of flags of these traits appearing at all implies either the monsters don't know about these traits, or didn't find them important. Thus, they wouldn't decide to suddenly include them on the red flag. For simplicity's sake, I'm going with the former.

"There is no flaw. And I am saddened you haven't bothered to provide a counter example rather. I am basing this on Occam's razor. I see a strong correlation with no dispute, I think, causation."

Saying that a whole new mechanic involving compound SOULs exist is most definitely NOT based on Occam's razor. And Alphys clearly separating the two questions your former piece of evidence. A Royal Scientist says they're different. Pretty sure that's more reliable than a correlation that's just that, and is only as simple as "humans have more than monsters do in both cases", which has a 1 in 4 chance of happening anyway even if there is no relationship, which is definitely NOT significantly low odds. So, we fail to reject the null hypothesis, which is:They don't relate to each other at all.

"That's not what I said. I said the essence can allocate DT in order to utilize its potential. That's how it happens. And lost DT is replenished by some strong source, probably physical matter, which is linked to DT somehow, and I speculate ATP, or maybe just simply water."

Then what do you mean by "lost DT"? And why isn't it always at its full potential, seeing as it replenishes quick enough to make it not a problem?

"Which contained DT. Considering DT is soul power, he used the power of DT to boost his own magic. Elementary, my dear Watson."

So then you used circular reasoning in your proof. You said Flowey gaining power from the SOULs proves SOUL power is related to DT, but you did it under the assumption that they're the same anyway. Now, can you give me a proof that DOESN'T rely on circular reasoning?

"Side note for ignoramuses: a minimum DT treshold is also present in addition to the said rule."

And how's that supposed to work? (My take on it is:That "mimimum amount" is how much DT the power requires to function, and anything above that stems from the fact that with more DT, you have more control over that power, and since only one can control it at a time, it naturally finds itself with the one with the most DT.)