Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26006155-20200107155350/@comment-32182236-20200107170846

Yet all through the No Mercy Run, "Frisk" does things without player consent. Like refusing to hide behind the lamp, wrecking all of Papyrus's puzzles. Chiming in with her own red dialog at key points in the story that reveal new information from her perspective. The evidence that Chara is taking over Frisk compounds all through the game, right up until the point where Chara slashes Sans with a knife regardless of whatever weapon Frisk has equiped. And from then on, we have no agency over our character, who kills Asgore, and Flowey, and then US entirely on their own initiative.

Yes. Chara slashes them with a knife regardless of whatever weapon Frisk has equipped. What this means is that Chara did it.. In THEIR OWN body (or lack of a body, whatever..). They weren't controlling Frisk, if they were, they would have only been able to use the weapon Frisk had equipped. Therefore, they were gaining their own form, which became fully realized at the very end of the Genocide Route.

Ambassador, you say that none of this evdience counts, because Frisk did all of these things.

Frisk did most of them. Chara killed Sans in their own form, and same thing for Flowey, and they attacked Asgore, though Flowey finished Asgore off. But they weren't using Frisk's weapon, so they couldn't have been using Frisk's body. They were not controlling Frisk, they were acting on their own accord.

And yet, these things only happen on a No Mercy run. Frisk does decide to hide behind the lamp, and patiently let Papyrus work his schenanigans, without player input.

Yes. Frisk's personality is different when they don't have LV, versus when they've killed literally everyone because of player input. You pick the Evil Route, your character will act evil. Simple as that.

Chara learns from our actions. So if we, the player, decide to keep hitting the dummy, they learn that hitting things is ok, and attack the dummy with increasing ferocity on each subsequent hit. These are not things that Frisk did.. these are things that We The Player did, through our character. Frisk is not responsible for these actions.

It's not Chara, because Chara is the one narrating it, and they said "you". When we look into the mirror after Frisk reveals their name, it's "Still just you, Frisk." "You" is Frisk. Frisk is our avatar in this game, much like Link from the Legend of Zelda. This isn't true in Deltarune, but the evidence is clear that it is true in Undertale. (A lot of things are reversed in Deltarune.)

So Frisk is the one who punched the dummy, and which one of the four lines you get depends on Frisk's LV.

The more evil the player acts, the more their actions resonate with Chara. And the more control Chara exerts over Frisk. Eventually taking him over completely at the end of the Sans Fight. Which, unlike all the other battles in the game, does not say "You Win" at the end. We just hear a defeat sound, then get a bucket of Execution Points. Because Chara just killed Frisk.

Chara didn't kill Frisk. We still see Frisk afterwards, and even get to move around. We also even get to reload and reset afterwards, with no penalty for doing so. (You won't get a Soulless Pacifist either.) Frisk is not dead. The reason why it doesn't say "You Win!" is because Chara was the one that killed Sans. So Chara would have gotten that message, not Frisk. (Frisk still gains LV, though.)

Sans can address The Anomaly without knowing Frisk's name.

Yes. This is my point. So it shouldn't be a surprise that he doesn't use Frisk's name.

He flat out tells us that We're the anomaly during his fight, while also trying to jog Frisk's memory about how they might have been "friends" in another place and time.

And since there's no signifier of a switch in person that he's talking to, then he's more than likely speaking to the same person in both quotes. Therefore, Frisk more than likely IS the anomaly.

And it's only when Chara takes over completely that Sans stops trying to intervene and finally leaves, knowing there's nothing left of Frisk, his earlier self, anymore, and seeing no point in hanging around, letting Chara go and create a hell for themselves to live in while Sans goes to try and save another timeline.

He gave up because he got hit, and was about to die. And yes, he was going to die. That's the reason why he tried to use the special attack.

"i know i can't beat you. one of your turns... you're just gonna kill me. so, uh. i've decided... it's not gonna BE your turn. ever."-Sans

He KNEW Frisk had the capability of killing him. So he tried to find a way to prevent that from happening. So when Frisk found away to have a turn anyway (thus letting Chara make the final blow), and then Sans ended up getting HIT, well.. Of course he's giving up. He's dying. And our kill count doesn't go up, because we didn't kill Sans. Chara did.

Ambassador, you say that calling Chara a refleciton of ourselves is "false", And cite, without evidence, that this is a "factual error", because that's what you believe it is, and you feel you can decide which facts are real, and which ones we're allowed to use.

I did give evidence. The very fact that Chara talks on their own volition, one that we, the player, can respond to, makes it very clear that Chara is separate from us. If we say no to destroying the world, they destroy it anyway. Chara is NOT us!!

And technically, it's a factual error if we use something that hasn't already been shown to be a fact as evidence. Even if it hasn't been proven wrong. Otherwise I could say that Toriel gets back with Asgore post-Undertale, and use that as evidence that Deltarune isn't in the future, since they're apart in that game, even though Toriel and Asgore getting back together has not been proven to happen within the game. (It hasn't been disproven, either.)

Did I not break this down in detail in the script? That's Narrator Chara's dispostion depends entirely on our own player actions?

So does Frisk's. What's the point?

That if we're good, we end of saving Chara's soul in the True Pacifist Ending, and if we're evil she steals our own and actually cuts her own original soul to ribbons when she slashes Flowey out of existance?

We turn good again in Soulless Pacifist, but Chara is evil anyway. That's a clear disconnect. And exactly, they steal OUR soul. They can't steal their own soul, Ferret. That alone proves that we are not Chara.

Or how, with your own example, we teach Chara that it's ok to hit the Dummy because that's what we direct her to do?

That was FRISK that hit the dummy!

The Gaster Followers would not speculate on Alphys meeting the same fate as Gaster unless that option was availible to her.

She's dabbling in the same kind of research as Gaster. So that could eventually happen. The option IS available, just not necessarily immediately. It might take years, but that still counts, right?

It's not a question of whether she knows how yet, I imagine Gaster didn't plan on himself being shatered, either. It's something that might happen when you play around with time and dimensional travel.

Exactly. So we have no reason to suspect that she knows how to safely bring people to another dimension, or that she's comfortable doing that. A dimensional box can only hold 8 objects, and there's well over 8 surviving monsters (pre-universe wipe).

Something that Alphys flat out tells us she's been researching for a long time. So yes.. she does know how it works. She installs a dimensional portal into our phone in two seconds.

We don't know if that other dimension is suitable for life, though. Alphys wouldn't just need to make a portal to another dimension, she'd need to find a dimension suitable for life. In the case of the dimensional boxes, though, any dimension will do, because it can hold a box.

I did not read your analogy about the two books, Ambassador. But it sounds very much like you're trying to mimic the effect of having two parralell timelines by doing this. The second timeline definitley starts after the last chapter of the first timeline, and ends with characters traveling to the past, causing a new timeline to split off that runs paralell to the first, and has a different story.

It was part of my response to you earlier.. And the two books are supposed to be in the same series. One is not a spinoff of the other.

...Here, just read the original analogy I gave you as a response to an earlier time you mentioned Entry 17..

Suppose that there's a series of books. There's only two books in the series so far, but that will suffice.

The first book has 17 chapters, and they're labeled as such. What will the first chapter of the SECOND book be labeled? Chapter 1, or Chapter 18?

As anyone who reads chapter books would know, the answer is Chapter 1.

Does that make Book 2's Chapter 17 equivelant with Book 1's Chapter 17? Of course not. Same thing here.

That was the original analogy. But I'll expand a bit more here.

Even though Book 2's Entry 17 was written fairly recently, that doesn't mean there was a timeline where Gaster lived that far. Saying that had to be the case would be like asking this question:

"Book 2's Chapter 17 was only written a few weeks ago! How could Book 1's Chapter 17 possibly have existed when the author died a few months ago?"

You know the answer to that question, right? Because that's also my answer to your Entry 17 situation. Book 1 came first, before the death of the author a few months ago.

Or, in the Undertale case, Gaster's Entry 17 came first, BEFORE Alphys replaced him, BEFORE any of Alphys' entries take place in.

Book 2 is a continuation of Book 1. But that doesn't mean we call the first chapter "Chapter 18". It starts again at 1.

If Gaster's lab entries happen at a different place in time.. why does his Darkest Experiment entry seemingly wake up Flowey during Alphy's timeline? Alphys' own actions didn't wake up Flowey, and she has no idea where he's gone. "The Flower's Gone" is Entry 18. And Entry 16 is "No NO NO NO!", seemingly building anticipation up to 17.

But they did. Asriel's essence+Determination of life=Living Asriel.

The reason why the other flowers didn't meet the same fate is because they only blossomed after Asriel's dust had finished spreading-So they didn't absorb any of Asriel's essence. Otherwise, we'd have two Floweys, each with some of Asriel's remnant, much like your version of Mike and Jeremy.

Sans loses hope in the No Mercy timeline. But it's fractured in the others. Sans feels disillusioned. Yet he still keeps trying to help Frisk, in the hopes that Frisk can break the cycle and free everyone.

I mean, he's our pal? And he judges us? And he made a promise to Toriel? When did Sans even mention breaking a cycle?

The analysis said that everything ends. If everything ends, then everything ends.

Though after further analysis of the Genocide Speech, I do think Sans didn't lose hope just yet. He did think he could change the future.

"i always thought the anomaly was doing this cause they were unhappy. and when they got what they wanted, they would stop all this. and maybe all they needed was... i dunno. some good food, some bad laughs, some nice friends."-Sans

Even still, the anomaly was messing around in the future anyway. If they could stop all this, that means they already started.

We learn canonically that Sans and Alphys are friends in the True Pacifist route.

Yes. They are.

Alphy's cameras are directly helping Sans know when Frisk shows up.

Citation, please?

And Alphys is aware that Papyrus has called everyone else on the phone to stop the Asgore fight.. except "Her", meaning Toriel

Correct.. So did everyone else. Doesn't everybody know Sans? Who also talks about his brother?

It's pretty obvious that Sans and Toriel have been friends for a very long time, and that he's told her all about Papyrus via texting, even if she never knew "Sans"s actual voice.

Oh, she did know Sans' voice. That's how she recognized him. She didn't see him, but she did HEAR him.