Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-29788596-20160906011125/@comment-33883848-20200211162858

"Perhaps they simply wish to destroy humanity as a society? Even still, it's clear that they're after the monsters, and there's a reason why they wanted to get through the Barrier."

Then why do they want to destroy humanity as a society?

And there's no evidences that Chara wish to cross the barrier. All they do is asking Frisk to take whatever path they want, not necerally the one that can led to Frisks freedom and theres no way for Chara to know the game story and endings.

"How do we know they haven't crossed the Moral Event Horizon?"

This doenst fit with the Rousseau trope the game is using because in this trope, everyone can be reedemened.

And how do we know that they crossed the moral event horizon?

"I'm not saying they have, and I did specifically say that's possible they get saved sometime after a Pacifist Run. But they can't be saved during a Pacifist Run. Otherwise, they wouldn't turn evil in Soulless."

The genocide run is already done at this point, so we cant take this as an argument.

"As a result, if they do get saved in Pacifist, it must happen sometime after the ending-After the point that we load from when Flowey tells us not to reset. Because by resetting and doing Genocide, we're undoing that. And we know from Soulless runs that Chara does recall previous timelines."

They still let Frisk true reset in souless pacifist run despite having their soul and despite having the ability to use this power as shown by the genocide end, which doenst makes sence if they really have vengefull motives or something.

"Chara was Soulless, though. And remember how they hated humanity? Why would they go around with Frisk?"

And why wouldnt they take over them and use their body to kill everyone when they have enough lv then instead of helping them? Why would they call them a good partner and that theyll be together forever? That doenst makes sence for Chara to help Frisk to achieve genocide run in this case because they hate humanity. On the other hand,it makes more sence that they dont trust themselves anymore, neither their opinions on humanity and thus decided to follow their guidance. "Why was i brought back to life? You with your guidance i realized the purpose of my reimcarnation Power"

"Chara hates humanity. So they'd see your evil actions as further evidence that humans are bad. Not go along with it."

This literally goes agaisnt your theory. Why would Chara helps Frisk in genocide run if their actions further prove that they are evil? Its just that they dont know which is right or wrong now, they are in the same state of mind like Flowey was until he decided that killing was "right" because kf his own experiences.

"If they went along with it, there had to have been a very good reason for it. My hypothesis on that reason is because what you're doing happens to get them what they want. That's why they help you on Genocide, encouraging you to continue on, and preventing you from accidentally aborting the route.."

Correction: they never prevent you from accidentally aborting this run. All they do is saying "shouldnt preceed" yet in watterfalls. Which is a SUGGESTION rather than an order, an advice. And yet Frisk can ignore this message and abort the run.

"While doing next to nothing in Pacifist."

If they wanted to do something in the first place, then believe me that they'll at least TRY to do so in pacifist/neitral runs. But nope, Chara doenst care, they never even tries to take ove them even if the latter has high lv. In other words, Chara doenst have murderuous motives by default.

"But how do we know that trope's in Undertale? TVTropes isn't always accurate:Did you know that originally, TVTropes' main canon was that Chara was... an irredeemable villain? That's what you were supposed to assume when making entries."

Because its in this game. This is a game where all vilains are reedemeadle, where everyone is affected by their tragedy and experiences etc...

"Wasn't that Frisk? I don't see how Chara sided with that."

I meant that they kept them alive when monsters killed them while their soul could be used by monsters to destroy humanity. They also havent killed them in front of monsters or Asgore to allow them to take their soul.

"..Wasn't the poem for the DUMMY? And how is an "it's you" affectionate? It's not like we hear their tone or anything... For all we know, they meant something like:"It's YOU"."

The poem was for Frisk because they use "you" prounoun to refer to Frisk and third prounoun to refer to enemies. The "its you" is worded in an affectionate manner because Chara is excited at describing Frisk "its you !" as you can see with the exclamation mark.

"We at least need to see it before just assuming that it exists."

Then Chara is not the narrator. Sans has no link to Gaster and Asriel and Flowey arent the same person if we need to "see" before assuming assuming it exists.

"Didn't Frisk change, though?"

That doenst mean that they are no longer responable for their actions. Asgore changed too and yet he still faces consequences as lost his wife. And Chara has a strong mentality and views of responsability.

"And even if Frisk didn't deserve a happy ending, the six monsters that were killed do."

We arent even sure if these monsters are killed because Flowey still says that everyone is okay on the surface. Its possibly to remind that everyone was dead because of Frisk's actions. Either way, we are talking about Chara motives here, not what's objevtively "right". I'm not saying that what Chara doing is fine, just that's understable and thats not the classic "mua muah muah REVENGE die scum"

"Where everyone dies again. And it could be that since the world's not destroyed, we still have the ability on our own. Who knows?"

"Where everyone died again" uh...what? Theres neutral endings where no one except Asgore dies and despite this, Chara let Frisk to reset.

"Perhaps it's because we never make it past the Barrier?"

This is speculation and is outright contrdicated by the game. It's so obvious that they crossed it after Flowey's fight...

"Frisk never answers the phone, so we really don't know what happens after the Neutral Ending."

How did you relate the two ?

"X marks only mean you intend on killing the target. It doesn't mean you already have. I place the actual deaths after the ending, after the point where Flowey would tell us everything is fine"

And they waited all this time because?

"We do see Frisk. It's Chara we don't see until the end, as that's what it looks like when Frisk actually IS possessed."

We dont see Frisk in the CREDITS until the really end of them.

"Considering that they destroy the world when plenty of safe monsters exist in the True Lab, it's clear they don't care about the monsters anymore by the time the Genocide Route is over."

I dont even think that they CAN truly care about anyone since they are souless. Hence why you should guide them well.

"Premise 3:Chara either doesn't hate monsters, or does, but hates them less than humans (If it's false, well there goes your interpretation of Chara)"

Hate =/= not caring

"Premise 4:If Chara's fine with killing innocents, then they'd also be fine with killing the guilty. (I mean, why wouldn't they?)"

Being fine with killing =/= wanting to kill everyone.

"Conclusion 3:Thus, it's likely both worlds end up getting destroyed, and nearly certain that humanity gets killed alongside the monsters."

Sorry but i dont know how you get this conclusion. Yes Chara is fine with killing as long as you have a "valid" reason such as giving you consequneces for actions (the world destcrion) or to gain power in genocide run. But i dont see how any of this prove that both of the worlds are destroyed.

Why dont we see it then? Why dont we get any hint of this? Why dont we see Chara killing every monster and human throughout the credits?

"Has Chara gained 20LV yet?"

I'm lost now. You said that Frisk's soul allows them to take over them, which is why they asked it in the first place, so why do you argue now that they need lv?. And again, Chara couldnt have take over Frisk to kill Frisk's friends if only lv gave them power to take over them. Or maybe you mean that's frisk who kill monsters themselves to give Chara power to control them in souless end? This is non sence...

"We DO see similar powers. The powers that were used to destroy the underground."

I meant BESIDES this power. Chara seems to be familar with this power as they know how to use them and knows that they have it, implying that they had it even in lifetime.

So if:

Chara has the ability to destroy the world = Chara has the ability to invidually destroy every single human.

Then, Chara could have used this power to destroy every single being on the planet when they were alive but they didnt. That means their ability to destroy the underground doenst mean that they also have other super powers. Otherwise, they would have manifested them at least once in the game and if your hypothesis is true, they would have already used it to destroy humanity.

Chances are that Chara"s ability to destroy the world is related to their save ability because it"s the only "magic" power that Frisk has. This likely allows them to destroy the timeline by erasing your save file (since you cant load your save file when Chara destroyed the world).

So no, in this case it doenst mean that that dying gave them super powers. Just that their save ability give them the power to erase the timeline. But there's no way for Chara to induvidually destroy every single being.

And if dying gave them any super powers, why didnt Flowey use them ?

"I mean, if we do another Genocide Run, it's as if we never took the offer in the first place.."

Well yes..

"And perhaps they do feel obligated to suggest it. We already messed up the first time, by just doing another Genocide Run, rather than just doing a Pacifist Run because that's the missing ending. So maybe they feel that they HAVE to suggest it for us to even get that we need to do that.".

But if its for some personal motives, why would they feel "obligated" to suggest it? Why would they even "suggest" it instead of ordering us to choose this path if they had unlterier motives?

And neutral ending is something that exists you know -_-

"It WAS a means to an end."

Because you have any proof of this ?

"I did give an alternate explanation that involves both worlds being destroyed. That's the one that requires that Chara would rather give them a painful death than just erasing them, much as Chara did to Flowey."

Which is SO stupid and makes them sound like a one dimesnioanl cackling vilain whose only driving motivation is sadism and hatred. And i mindless creature who prefers to make nedless efforts to satisfy their own bloodlust rather than achieving their goal with a strike.

And then you argue that you think Chara isnt one dimensioal evil ? Dont nake me laugh.

(Also, you kill Flowey at one strike in all neutral endings. So Flowey was already dead when Chara hit them the first time. They just no longer wanted to see him for some reason..)

"We do have to assume one of these things, but it doesn't matter which. I'm taking the "only the underground was destroyed" path, though. The Surface was specifically referred to as another world, after all. So when Chara destroys "the world", singular, then merely the Underground is a reasonable interpretation-And both worlds being destroyed is an assumption."

Yes, it been reefered as the "world above" by a SINGLE monster.

"Neutral:Either Frisk is still forced to restart because they can't cross the Barrier, or the Barrier is crossed, meaning Chara has the chance to destroy humanity anyway."

So we have to ASSUME that's happening on the surface in souless neutral endings despite the fact that absolutely nothing hints it?

And why doenst Chara kill monsters in this neutral end then?

Anyway, i wonder how Chara can know all the outcomes.

"Pacifist:Humanity can get destroyed."

A tinny child ghost possesing a tinny 10 year old child vs the whole fucking humamity with hundred of nuclear bombs, fire weapons, trained soldiers + stronger souls.

Yeah, defnitely Chara can destroy humanity of COURSE. This is why it's said that 7 human souls are needed for this to happen.

"OR, that Frisk never crosses the Barrier in that ending, which is supported by the fact that we still get to meet Flowey."

Who also crossed the barrier because he had the 6 souls during the battle. You can clearly see him in the other side of the barrier as you can see when you kill him.

And stop with this circular logica please.

"We're not sure WHAT Chara does in those endings. But considering that Flowey shows up to railroad us to the Pacifist Route, it's likely Chara's steering us towards that route."

1. Chara clearly doesnt kill any of Frisk's friends or monsters as they are all alive and call Frisk.

2. Flowey can be killed in neutral end. So your theory doesnt stand.

"If they just thought killing everyone again was pointless, they wouldn't X everyone out in Soulless Pacifist, hinting that, guess what... They plan on killing everyone all over again."

I said EVERYONE, not 6 persons. And i said that Chara had a good reason for doing this. While Frisk is killing everyone all over again because of their "perverted sentimentality"

"Two possibilities"

So speculations again...Arent you tired of making hundred and hundred assumptions and speculations to give a credit to your theory?

"Frisk reaches the Surface on a Neutral Run. As a result, if you take "another path", as Chara suggests, you're on the Surface. So Chara did want to be on the Surface."

Correlation =/= causation. Just because Chara very vaguely suggest "another path" and that it led to the surface at the very end doenst mean that it's what Chara wanted. Besides from the story standpoint, there's no way for Chara to know the outcomes. Chara is only suggesting you to take "another path" because as they said, they feel "obligated to" as it"s pointless to destroy and recreate the world all over again.

"Frisk does not reach the Surface on a Neutral Run. Which is where Flowey comes into play, and the form of my argument that assumes Frisk didn't reach the Surface applies."

Flowey clearly crossed the barrier and it been clearly establised by the end of his fight when you kill him. Why do you believe othewise ?

"Yet they don't do anything to US?!"

Maybe its because they want Frisk to be "together forever with them"

"It only counts as a punishment if we actually do care for them. If we do care for them, we've reformed, and don't deserve the punishment."

Just because we "care" doenst mean we are reformed. And just because we're reformed doenst mean that we dont deserve any punishment.

"They're more of a misanthrope. They want to kill these people not "For the Evulz", but because they think said people deserve to die."

But this is EXACTLY the same thing and a circular logic. Pure evil vilains may want to kill everyone because they "think they deserve to die". Who knows maybe this vilain think people deseve to die because these people are "good" and the vilain hates everything good so think that people with good in them deserve to die. That still makes them pure evil. But as long as there's no explanation for why they think people deserve to die, from a narrative standpoint, this vilain is supposed to be viewed as pure evi.

And i wonder how monsters and Frisk's friends who never did anything to them deserve to die.

And just because Chara hates humnaity as a society doens't mean that they wish their dead individually.