Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31371445-20170222233857/@comment-31536324-20181019010122

""We REFUSE after the SOUL shatters as well. As we were leaving the mortal coil.."''

We refuse only when our soul is about to shatter during the last fight. Not when it already did. And Flowey had no soul, so his actions aren't really comparable. We don't know how it works for soulless creatures."

The soul literally breaks in two every time you die; Flowey is the only entity whose actions we have to compare to, and he clearly states how the power worked when he had it. Since our situation is no different compared to what he said, then what he says about it has to be the norm by logical deduction.

"We can reach there by normal means, so that falls under canon principals-Especially since we get to open a door that was always there because of this. It's one last challenge, to find one last bit of lore."

"And now, the next question, does it make sense? You could argue that since it's there, it's canon, but say, isn't it simpler to excuse it from being canon, rather than struggling to come up with some outrageous theory just to keep it canon? Must we necessarily stick to a single method, no matter the results we obtain using it? Also, by arguing that you can get there without hacking, that makes the game's changing name also canon, technically."

Technically, yes, but since it was never mentioned in, exploited by, or referred to in-game as anything beyond a gag it doesn't really count as a can event.

Razor 1: If it's mentioned or exploited in-game by a character or characters, then it happened.

Razor 2: If it's accessible in normal gameplay, then it's viable to be canon.

My Razor 2: If it can only be accessed by hacking, but connectible to an element or plot point in the game's normal gameplay, then it's canon. If it can be accessed only through hacking, doesn't connect to anything in the game, and is only meant as a joke or calling out, then it is not.

"Humans DID fall, and they WON'T be trapped forever. So we can't call the plaques as perfect pieces of information that can't ever be wrong."

"That's assuming the plaques were written when the hole was already there. If the hole hasn't formed yet, or if the plaques were written when not all of underground was explored yet (so assuming they entered from the New Home end, which I consider to be the default assumption by the way), the lines could still be true."

Considering that the hole has been there for centuries, and years worth of natural tectonic movement hasn't changed anything about its position in the underground at all, I think it's safe to say that it was always there but the monsters never thought anyone would fall down. Although, yes, you would technically be correct, but only by virtue of them not knowing about the hole to begin with until they reached the end of the cavern.

Even then though, the layout implies that the Ruins is where the monsters started their new civilization, and that they worked their way toward the location of the barrier after exploring.

Keep in mind, the two races lived peacefully together until the war broke out. So it wouldn't be that far fetched to assume that the monsters already knew about the Barrier Spell through equal trade of knowledge, the hole was how they were forced underground, and that the belief that no human would fall through the hole came from the fact that not only was that where they were forced underground from, but also that no one in their right mind would do so knowing that.

"It IS disputed elsewhere in the game! By the lab entries! That's the WHOLE reason why I made this workaround in the first place! So that everything fits! Like Einstein and his theory of general relativity!"

"But there was no reason to trash that information. From Toby's perspective, this had no point. The old facts didn't even have a chance to be utilized before getting replaced by the new ones."

What were you trying to prove here?

"Tell me, where is the information of the intro disputed by the rest of the game?"

"When the game said the war was short, and that there were 7 magicians, not just one."

The intro never said only one magician made the barrier (I go the game on switch, so I can verify this); and while the war may have been long to humans, it may be short to Monsters since they lost more soldiers more quickly by comparison. They just don't say so directly because, from their perspective, it clearly wasn't.

Or do you want someone in the game to directly say this to Frisk too?

"But one leads to problems and contradicitions, eventually culminating in the Asriel paradox, and you decide to handwave it as a "plot error", creating a plot hole, and the other keeps everything canon."

"To summarize, if SP is DT, then that simply means we didn't have the DT to outmatch Asriel, and that Asriel couldn't reset, which however does not contradict anything presented in the OF fight."

It does actually.

First: If SP is DT, then Frisk' DT can't increase or decrease in any way, as it would go against the basic rule of a metric. A metric (Almost all Monsters = 1 Human SOUL) that has been proven to be true in the game itself. And since Frisk both GAINED an ability they never had before through a clear increasing flux of DT, and could still SAVE and load their SAVE during the GoHD fight - something that still hasn't been patched out even to this day - showing that they had more DT that a 7 SOUL wielding Asriel, then that means that DT can't be SP since it just blatantly went against the metric; and that's just on the human side of things.

Undyne clearly showed that a Monster's DT can increase too, and without the need for an injection of DT from a human SOUL. It's just the natural fact that Monsters (who are made of magic and dust) don't have as much physical matter in them as Humans (who are made of the stuff) do, hence why they melt (ala Amalgamates and Undying).

DT can naturally fluctuate, increase and decrease, the very thing anything that's a part of a metric is to NEVER do otherwise the metric is just wrong. And since Frisk clearly showed that the DT of a single SOUL can surpass the DT of multiple SOULS - under the right circumstances - then by having DT = SP you make the very (canon and true) metric you've been constantly referring to wrong. By not having DT = SP, the metric is right period, this is why I say that SP is the power of the SOUL as a whole (Determination, Bravery, Justice, Kindness, Patience, Integrity, and Perseverance) rather than just DT.

Second: Omega Flowey had 6 SOULS, yet managed to take the ability to SAVE from us then; Asriel had 7 SOULS but didn't because he couldn't. The only real difference here is that Flowey/Asriel is adding (what amounts to) one SOUL to the mix, and getting a stronger form from it. By all means, he should be able to do the exact thing he did as Omega Flowey here, but he didn't. And since the one rule of S/L/R is that it goes to the person with the most DT, and Asriel needed to kill us to get the ability back, then the only logical reason is that Frisk STILL surpassed him in terms of DT. That is, after all, how Frisk got the ability in the first place.

"If DT is not SP, then we're met with an impossibility: either we've had more DT, in which case, what was the big deal?"

What are you asking here? Be more clear.

"Or we didn't, in which case, again, how come Asriel couldn't reset..."

Both the situation and one rule of S/L/R paints the idea that we did have more though. If we didn't have more DT than him, then he would've reset, but he didn't because we did have more, that's all there is to it. Once again, the only problem here is that in your theory you have DT = SP, which is the source of the problem you keep bringing up. The problem you keep bringing up is in YOUR theory, not mine or THA's.

"Heck, you're saying my way of avoiding this weird plot point is too convoluted. Well, is it? Is my theory of soul composition playing a role in the scope of the SLR ability that far fetched?"

Yes.

"What about Malice's idea of Asriel canceling this power of ours with his immensely strong attacks? Isn't that also totally unfounded? (or idk if it was you who came up with it, I don't recall anymore)"

I don't recall ever saying that, I believe that was THA. I go by what Asriel said: that each time we "die" in that fight our grip on the world, and everyone else's memories of us, fades; implying that when we actually die by the time no one remembers us, the ability to SAVE will go back to him.

Hold on a second! Doesn't that sound kind of similar to Gaster's situation?

"This is what I remember from this convo. That yes, I've made a big logical leap, but so did you."

Fair enough.

"Besides, it says right there that the greatest strength is also it's weakness, then goes onto talk about this power. This strength. I really don't see the problem. This is "the SOUL's strength" that also happens to be its greatest weakness, not "The power (level) of the SOUL." It's an ability, not a measure of power level. There is a VERY clear difference between the two concepts."

"All I see is "the strength of the soul, whose power...". That's what that plaque simplifies into."

Once again, here is the whole plaque: "But humans have one weakness. Ironically, it is the strength of their SOUL. It's power allows it to persist outside the human body, even after death."

"That the weakness of human beings lies in the strength of their soul, which is determination. And I wouldn't be making all this fuss, if it wasn't for "soul power" being an actual defined term."

And both it and Determination being classified as two different things by the very same one who coined those terms.

"Just like whenever determination is mentioned in the game, it always relates to the substance itself too, not just the feeling, as it is in the real world. And sometimes, the substance explicitly."

True. Every time it's mentioned via SAVE Points and characters it's the feeling, and - unless I'm remembering this wrong - only as a substance in True LAB, which also goes against the DT = SP Metric idea you've been enforcing.

"So why shouldn't this phrase simplify to "soul power?" The initial "its" at the beginning of the second sentence can gramatically refer to EITHER the word "strength," or "SOUL". Both are correct. And actually, the latter being the case is less redundant, so common sense would tell us that this is how Toby meant to word it."

1: Because there's a clear distinction between the two.

2: The former interpretation makes it so that the sentence is talking about the power of the strength of the SOUL that's mentioned in the previous sentence; which would be the proper structure. The latter interpretation actually IGNORES that mention, and just talks about the SOUL; not only making one of the most elementary mistakes in story writing, but also making the mention of "the strength of the SOUL" pointless.

"My argument therefore is, that this phrase indeed defaults to "soul power," not "the power of the strength of the soul.""

My point above this sentence is my response here.

"Convince me that the argument that Asriel would have removed our ability to reload with his attacks being more plausible than my soul composition theory and I will accept that the plaques are talking about "the power of the strength of the soul" instead."

Asriel: "I can feel it. Every time you die, your grip on this world fades away. Every time you die, your friends forget you a little more. Your life will end here, in a world where no one remembers you..."

I don't argue for it instantly being done any more - as an earlier part of my reply shows - but instead it being done over time and allowing the power transfer to happen. "If you die with less DT than me, then I'll gain the power," is what he's essentially saying here.

"Undying is a very clear case of a DT flux"

"Well, she's a monster. Monster souls aren't implied to possess static levels of DT."

No, but they are said to possess a static level of SP.

"Also, taking out a part of the game that happens under normal gameplay like that is ALWAYS dumb. Flat-earthers do that with this world all the time."

"You mean the reloading by quitting thing? Yeah. Despite being allowed to happen for that fight, I think it's an exploit. It complicates the necessary in-game explanations immensely and kinda ruins the point of everything else... which is what exploits usually do."

Considering that the game doesn't just boot you to your previous save - with no changes - from the get go when you do that, even now, I think it's safe to say that it's a canon thing.

"You can argue all you want that this is in fact the intended behavior, but I feel like at this point, I have convinced myself that you're just trying to justify the existence of a non-gamebreaking exploit (hence why Toby hasn't fixed it yet... since it technically doesn't change the outcome; and besides, who would ever utilize it in the first place, right?), purely out of stubbornness."

Considering that he knows about it, leaves it alone, and knows that people use this method, I think it's safe to say that he either intended this or accepts it as canon.

"My theories already work perfectly, and all they need, is for this to be declared an exploit."

No they don't. I've pointed out numerous times how it doesn't work; and considering how Toby STILL hasn't done anything about it - even with this newest version - and years after the games original release, I think it's safe to say that it's a canon thing.

"If you wanna go meta, please, include it in your explanations. But then again, you hate going meta, which I don't understand. I just tend to... neglect all the HUD stuff for simplicity's sake, unless absolutely necessary and logically justifiable."

In other words, you ignore facts and evidence, and only accept it when it meets your preferences and standards.

"And my philosophy is, that this system is too complicated and inconsistent when compared to the game's apparent overworld mechanics. And proclaiming even this inconsistency as canon is a bit too much for me. Chaos, simply for consistency's sake. Sheesh."

In other words, you don't want to even try.

"Also, yes, Toby did say that these mechanics are canon, but didn't say anything about their appearance."

What kind of nonsense is this?

"And I think if right now, he were to go and claim, that the world of Undertale happens EXACTLY how we see it on our screens, I think it will cause many people to laugh. This isn't originality, this is simply... bad gaming concept design. Or whatever. First off, it distracts from the message of the game. And second, it's just too bizzare. How am I supposed to feel ok with this, if I don't see the point? A fun experiment without an actual point? Heck that, why are we discussing this game even, if huge inconsistencies are freely declared as canon all around?"

1: How does it distract form the message?

2: The message was that your actions have consequences, that just because you can, doesn't mean you should. That you are not above responsibility and consequence just because you can do things others can't. If Toby were to say what you say he'd say, it would only further increase the effectiveness of the message.

The world works like a game, the world essentially IS a game, but that doesn't make your more horrid actions any more justifiable, acceptable, or above consequence than everyone elses. Life isn't something you play with like a toy, and if you do think that, then YOU'LL be the one played like a toy.

"I'm gonna go all the way out and say, that Undertale would be better off as a freely interpretable game, rather than what you're suggesting, a world that works like a game."

Which is blown apart when Flowey actually talks about the world, it's people, and Frisk like they're actual people, supporting the "world-works-like-a-game" thing.

"A nice example of an extreme interpretation of this concept is Glitchtale. A glitched timeline, which allowed "the player" to play past the pacifist ending, to actually experience it, instead of just seeing glimpses of it in the form of the credits from a 3rd-person's point of view."

It is a good series, can't wait for Game Over part 2.

"My last philosophical question: All of this implies Undertale is perfectly self-enclosed. Everything is perfect, because everything has been DECLARED to be perfect. There are no inconsistencies, only an obscure plot, which explains all that we might consider to be an "inconsistency" as something canon. Alright, that's nice. Now, how do we explain Toby constantly changing this? How could anyone be claiming, that everything we see is canon/intended behavior, if Toby changed the code many times already, and even added some platform-exclusive content here and there?"

This whole section here is nothing but confused. Why do you keep insisting that the code is an intrinsic part of the world of Undertale, WHEN NOTHING ABOUT THE CODE IS EVEN MENTIONED IN THE GAME! Everything is still the same even with the changed code, and the platform exclusive content can be explained as alternate timelines or even universes.

"(I'm a programmer, and I can see it would indeed be very, very hard. Upon restarting the game, it would have to load to the precise millisecond it has been shut off, else the plot hole will persist. And that would be so bothersome it totally justifies Toby neglecting this for over 3 years now)."

The only plot hole is the one that results FROM YOUR THEORY! Not the game itself; and it's still around too, so this bit here is pointless.

"''"Not quite, Omega Flowey managed to bypass this "limitation". Just do what you did with Omega Flowey."''

"Oh that reminds me. The entire fight would lose its meaning if Toby would make Flowey realize what just happened. Or rather Asriel, after absorbing the souls."

He outright says that he has no control of the timeline, and that killing us will give it back to him, IN THAT VERY FIGHT! So no, this bit has no ground to stand on, and is just you spouting nonsense to seem like you're "in Toby's head".

"Toby wanted this to feel like the end, not like you're meant to be stuck in there. Such a mechanic worked for the OF fight, where you meant to be stuck, but this one was supposed to feel like there's an actual resolution waiting ahead. By the apparent logic of the fight itself, a reload should have caused a reset initiated by Asriel. That would make the most sense I think."

Except he outright says that he has no control over the timeline, and that killing us would give it back to him, IN THAT VERY FIGHT!

"So... at least now we know how to fix this nonsense,"

Yes, accept that Frisk had more DT than Asriel and adhere to the word and facts stated in the game itself, rather than tossing it out and trying to make a convoluted way that goes against canon.

"get Toby to code in the very first reset not initiated by us, but by Flowey."

Already done by Omega Flowey.

"You cannot possibly argue that this wouldn't make more sense than what we have right now, an inexplicable reload, when everything implied such an action would be our doom..."

Except he outright says that he has no control over the timeline, and that killing us would give it back to him, IN THAT VERY FIGHT!

"I mean, if you're content with this exploit being an actual "feature," then I don't think we can understand each other anymore. Clearly, our head canons and ideas about the game have diverged way too much for us to have a meaningful conversation anymore."

In other words, you're running away.

""And then you say Asriel just didn't think of doing what he did last time as Omega Flowey to take our power away, because reasons."

Yeah. I'm still working on that. I think I'll need to clear my head first."

Or just accept that he couldn't have because he can't.

"''"The battle IS a breeze to us, you literally cannot lose this fight. And I told you, hyperdeath is worse than regular death."''

"Then why is it introduced to us as a disadvantageous situation?"

Because Asriel has the power of a god, and we can't beat him in a fight, hello!

"And with so much DT, why bother with REFUSE, when you can RELOAD?"

Because with REFUSE we can continue from where we left off immediately, rather than from the beginning all over again.

"And try to come up with something better than "hyperdeath overwrites reload", that's no better than my soul composition theory. As I've said already."

Okay, how about this? You can only "die" so many times when using REFUSE before you start to weaken and eventually die for good. We can only take so much before we won't be able to continue at all.

""That SOUL is strength..?"

Never said that."

That what you're implying.

""It only multiplies 7-fold if red is not DT."

The opposite."

No, what THA said is exactly right. If Red is DT, then a Red SOUL automatically has more DT than the other six. Since Flowey had been injected with enough DT to bring him to life (some from each of the six SOULS at least), and he could still SAVE even when fighting Undying, then he had to have had more DT than all of monster kind - about human level - to even get the ability.

Omega Flowey could SAVE because he had more than Frisk; at least 7 SOULS worth of DT. Asriel on the other hand had the accumulative DT of 8 SOULS (himself, the six SOULS, and the amount of monster SOULS taken to equal one Human SOUL, thus one human SOUL's worth of DT) but couldn't SAVE.

Frisk DT needed only to increase two or three fold (to make nine SOULS worth of DT and beat out Asriel), not seven.

If Red WEREN'T DT, then Frisk DT WOULD need to jump seven fold to surpass Asriel's DT, and make 8 SOULS worth of DT. Once again, the problem comes from your theory.

"''"Frisk being able to reload during Asriel's fight. That's an issue in the plot that is created specifically by your theory."''

Exploit."

Still doesn't explain how Asriel blatantly admits how he doesn't have the power to SAVE, and that he needs to kill us to regain control of the timeline. Heck, the "exploit" actually helps further validate his statements, even moreso since Toby's NEVER patched it out.

""Can you give me a better match for the combination of the other six traits?"

I mean, determination would be a valid answer, since the definition of determination basically allows you to say you're "determined to act according to X", thereby effortlessly unifying the 6 traits. So in a way, it's like a trait wildcard, ergo, the one and only description that fits it the most is "despite everything, you continue to be yourself", since there's no common denominator for these traits. As in, the only thing you can be sure of is yourself at this point."

Can you give us a better match from the game itself?

"''"That's kind of what I thought you were doing.. You definitely are if you're willing to throw out evidence and then say what we see on the screen as text isn't what the characters are actually saying."''

"All I'm doing is interpreting the evidence. In the case of red souls, there is zero evidence for any connection with DT, as opposed to the case of DT+SP."

1: Frisk (and Chara) are associated with nothing but DT throughout the whole game.

2: Frisk (and Chara) has a Red SOUL.

3: In both tail ends of the Pacifist and Genocide routes, Determination was always stated in some way to be the source of Frisk power and capabilities.

4: The only "correlation" between DT and SP is the incredibly weak and flawed interpretation of the relationship between two words in the plaque.

"I'm not the one who first sticks to head canons and then starts tweaking the surrounding facts."

Why do I have to keep telling you that we aren't mirrors?

""For now, red being determination seems to be the only way to have Frisk's DT not just multiply 7-fold like that, and the only way for Alphys' lab entries to actually make sense is if SOUL power is not DT."

"Well, once again, if that were the case, Frisk's soul wouldn't need to REFUSE."

Why?