Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-32182236-20190716014521/@comment-32182236-20190805214053

"Most of those points are bogus, but some are really good."

Alright, let's analyze it. We'll take a look at every premise in the argument, and eliminate the ones that haven't been shown to be true. Then, with the remaining premises, we'll see if the conclusion follows.

First off, the narrator is that which narrates to Frisk. "Name the fallen human" is an in-game text screen. It's just as much of the "narrator" as "When your HP reaches 0, you lose".

We also know that CHECK uses up a turn-So the narrator is doing something to gather the stats. Glyde "refuses to give more information about its statistics", so the monsters decide whether or not to give such stats. This would also explain why the CHECK stats often don't match the stats in the files, which determine how strong the attacks actually are to Frisk-They're getting the stats right from the monsters.

Chara also doesn't wish to help Frisk... Well, they do want to keep Frisk alive, because Frisk is their vessel. If Frisk dies, Chara dies again as well.

However, the LV mechanic means that Chara was already going for the job well before they would have been corrupted... Meaning they weren't.

But this is assuming that Chara is the narrator, or is the one who made that statement.

So.. either Chara is not the narrator, or Chara wanted to destroy monsters from the start.

The latter is far more plausible for right now. After all, they're Soulless now ("they were not mine, but YOURS"), and Asriel basically got the both of them killed just to avoid a war with humanity.

Yes, Chara is not a normal human anymore. Their rebirth made them incorporeal. They're essentially the human version of a ghost. But.. more than that. LV is your willingness to hurt. Chara wanted to destroy humanity. So Chara probably had max LV. This could have influenced their revival, and made them revive as the demon they claim to be.

Also, I believe that Asriel is the person we saved.. Not Chara. After all, after we call out to this mysterious person, ASRIEL gets saved.

But there is one claim... One giant hole that IS indeed spliced.

But not in the way you think.

The coffin.

Chara naturally shouldn't have felt it. ...But neither should whoever the narrator is.

Who else was there? ...This would mean the narrator would have to be an omniscient narrator.

...And we know the narrator is not omniscient, because the narrator gets the flavor of Monster Candy wrong.

...Actually, it's likely that the narrator (Chara or not) was guessing how comfortable it was. Chara was the only one there.. And they were DEAD.

"If we wanna be pedantic (like TheHumanAmbassador usually is) and say that even the tiniest contradiction matters and that we must take everything at a face value, then this post alone completely disproves this theory."

Not if we can explain all of it.

"On the other hand, if we wanna cut ourselves some slack, then let's ackowledge that coming up with novel explanations when our theories don't work is an okay thing to do. It's not how you'd normally do the scientific method, for example, when an experiment proves that the Earth is round, you accept it, you don't make up some bogus idea like "the astral winds have tampered with the results" or some shit to reaffirm your theory. But this is okay to do for Undertale, since we cannot test our theories, we can only compare them based on their subjective probability. And in that regard, the narrator Chara theory is VERY probable."

I actually have a system for subjective probability.. That is, when we can't just tell by math.

It's the same system that historians use. (Well, mostly.)

There are four main good qualities that a theory would have over the others.


 * Explanatory scope (It will explain more of the evidence)
 * Explanatory power (It will make the evidence more probable)
 * Plausibility (It will fit better with true background beliefs-In this case, primary canon)
 * Less ad hoc (Requires fewer new assumptions-Occam's Razor)