Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-27372343-20160225202002/@comment-27701762-20160226010102

Howdy Aiciclespear. I'm afraid I must plead ignorance, and resort to some excuse about my memory being poor if need be. If you're referring to this Wikia, then I do recall your username as I've been wandering aimlessly through. If you're referring to another venue, then I have no recollection.

I'm running through my mind to see if the idea that Chara talking to Frisk rather than the player works. On its face it seems like it could solve the problem. But the mechanics seem off. How does Frisk "survive" the destruction of the world, at least insofar as they are able to speak with Chara afterward? And if the player is the one ostensibly in control throughout the game, then Chara's statement if you elect not to destroy the world seems to be aimed at the player, not Frisk. So we'd again need to be collapsing Frisk and the player into a single entity to make this work, which the True Pacifist route seems to deny.

I'd thought of something along similar lines about the player only having control because Frisk is in the Underground, but this gets into those weird identity things, and I'm just not sure whether we can really import something that complex into the story.

I'm going with the conclusion that I've always learned in my studies: when there doesn't seem to be an answer, there isn't. This is just a hole in Toby's story, whether because he didn't think through the consequences of the various statements made in each route, or because he didn't go through the process of trying to clearly delineate who's who in this schema, or because he was trying to do something fancy and it didn't work out. Maybe I'm missing something, though. Or perhaps it does work, and Toby didn't put in the right clues to help us answer it.

Regardless, you're right that we can definitely say that Chara and the player are more likely than not separate entities. Anything beyond that is perhaps more than our thread creator is really asking for.