Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-30088034-20170108152544/@comment-30088034-20170116043953

TO Mabian Yes I&#039;m single wrote: '''so flowey got bored.. so once "chara" fell down, he wanted to keep them trapped and always kill them, because humans act differently every time? and the only reason flowey sees chara as a "good partner is not because he feels compassion for chara, he just wants to torture them? and obviously flowey wants you to kill more, because he has no soul, right? which is why he feels happier with you in genocide? but when exiting the ruins on genocide, flowey says "let's turn them all to dust" but i thought chara just wanted to kill humans not monsters? on a side note, if chara hates humans so much, then why does she kinda help guide you (with narrations on either route) . finally, when frisk hides behind the lamp without the player telling them what to do, is it frisk or chara doing it? is frisk not the player? sorry lots of questions''' So a few things:
 * Most of the starting stuff is right. Once you get to your questions, Chara's motivation is continually in question. One way to understand Chara is that they originally just wanted to kill humans, but upon being essentially betrayed by Asriel, also began to desire to kill monsters as well.
 * so they want to kill all species. why don't they just do it in pacifist? also how does chara get so strong at the end of the genocide? (killing the game)
 * The idea that Chara is the narrator is solely a theory, and one that I don't actually buy into. So you'd need to direct that particular question to someone who does accept the theory.
 * who is the narrator then? frisk? or just the game?
 * When Frisk hides behind the lamp, who it is depends on how you interpret it. I think, from what Wildkitten has posited above, that it must be Chara. I'd go with Frisk.
 * Who the player is is an incredibly difficult question, and I tend to push the idea that the information we have is contradictory. The idea that the player is Frisk is fractured in large part by Flowey's speech at the very end of the True Pacifist route (about letting Frisk live their life). Not to mention the various places where Frisk seems to act without input from the player. But, at the end of the Genocide route, when Chara asks "you" to sell "your" soul, the player ends up making the choice, but the soul that is sold is Frisk's. Which suggests that the player and Frisk are one and the same. So as I said, it seems to contradict itself a bit.
 * i actually think frisk and the player are different characters, from the proof you said above. and you've been controlling frisk for most of the game, so choosing what they want to do with their soul is no different. but then, why ARE you controlling them? ARE YOU CHARA CONTROLLING FRISK? (jk)

papyruys recognizing a rock? I figure you would have encountered this when your brother played, but there's a particular scene where Papyrus and Sans are talking to one another, and Papyrus remarks upon a rock rather than the human. If you reset/reload and go back to that point, Papyrus says that the rock looks familiar.

'''oh i knew that papyrus confuses the human with a rock, but i didn't know about resetting. my bro didn't get that far. he still hasn't played anymore yet.'''

'''so toriel knows if you do genocide? and the quote doesn't really fit well with toriel's motive?''' Toriel doesn't exactly "know" that you're doing Genocide. What happens is that when you're on a Genocide route, you kill Toriel in one hit, and she remarks about how much hatred you must have to kill her. So she surmises that you must be out to kill all monsters, and so her attempt to stop you was actually for the good of the monsters, not for the human.

makes sense.

I don't see how it doesn't fit well with Toriel's motive. They are reactions to two different acts from the human, which thus have different meanings.

Also Mabian you said chara purposefully ate buttercups, right? but then i saw this thread "How is chara so smart, but mistakes butter for buttercups" which assumes chara did it by accident, right? or was that when asirel and chara fed them to asgore? That question would have been referring to how Chara confused "buttercups" with "cups of butter" when trying to make a pie, and thus accidentally poisoning Asgore. That is, presumably, done by accident. Once Chara devises the plan to kill themself, they remind Asriel of the event, tell them the plan, and then Asriel goes off to get buttercups for Chara to consume. That is deliberate.

'''then asriel was betraying them because they didn't kill those humans. so chara in her death is very angry at asriel which is why they kill flowey in genocide right?'''

'''also what was charas motive in genocide? selling your soul? if they want to erase reality, how does a soul do it? a human can't absorb a human soul..... and i thought chara liked everything dead, why do they want to reset?'''