Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-29788596-20160906011125/@comment-37602899-20200130164911

MagomaevaAmina wrote: "We really need to simply ask the question:Why did Chara hate humanity?"

Then tell me what aspects of it would led Chara to wish to kill every human, every human child, baby?. I know many misanthropes but i never heard of a misanthrope wishing to kill every human. It's also implied that Chara hate humanity as whole and that can individually like them such as Frisk.

'I just said we can't save Chara, because Chara has never been saved in any route. Sometimes, one can become too far gone. Really, we have to ask a simple question." B... B B BUt... Chara is Souless... right?

That basically means you think they are pure evil as EVERYONE can change as long as they have good left. We call in tvtropes "Rousseau was right" (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RousseauWasRight) arguing that if an individual was TURNED into a bad person by their experiences then it's possible to turn them back to good. After all, humans are CULTURAL individuals influenced by their experiences.

And Undertale is the game where even FLOWEY can change and Chara isn't even nearly as bad as Flowey

And Chara is a child at this thus very suggestible. EVERY real life kid CAN CHANGE because its how psycology works.

It's inaccurate to say that we can't redeem a freaking child in a game like Undertale that use Rousseau was right as the main trope.

Also who know maybe you don't save Chara during Asriel battle because they are already saved? They helped a HUMAN after all, refusing to let monsters kill them and destroy humanity. They treat Frisk rather well in pacifist and neutral runs, teasing them, describing stuff to them, giving them options, helping to understand monsters, making poems to them "a cotton heart and a button eye, you're the apple of my eye", affectionately describing them in mirrors "it's you!" "despite everything it's still you". You can't deny the fact that the narrator is warm and optimistic in pacifist/neutral runs. Flowey even state that the pacifist end is the only one where Chara has "nothing left to worry about" implying that it's the only run where Chara find peace.

In other words, they dont need to be saved because they are already saved. They are already "reedemed". They have their own arc in the game and just because it's subtle doesn't mean it's real because everything about Chara us subtle and never explicit.

"Just because corruption turned them evil doesn't mean its possible to turn them back. But perhaps there is a way. We really don't know. All we can say is after a single Genocide, nothing will stop Chara from killing everyone, making them impossible to save. This tells us that nothing in Pacifist can save Chara."

Flowey was EVEN worse yet he was still reedemable. Chara also only kills 6 people on the surface and thats because Frisk no longer deserve their happy ending. Yet they still let to true reset and try another run. They arent evil they arent good either. They are doing what they think is right in the souless pacifist end. They are simply carrying the game's message at this point.

And why are you saying that nothing will stop Chara from killing everyone if you did the genocide run? I dunno the neutral run is still an option and Chara doesn't kill everyone here. Even in pacifist run they "only" kill Frisk's friends as the game implies that they only killed them and they even let them to reset afterwards.

Flowey even implies that everything is fine on the surface despite the fact you had the photo of Chara with Frisk's friends with X mark. So it may be interpreted in different ways. Perhaps that means Chara has replaced Frisk and decided to live their life without giving them a glimpse of it (thus crossing frisks friends faces only leaving their own one to mock them and make them jealous). Perhaps Chara who wakes up with red eyes laughing at you is way to mock you that they stole Frisk's life because Frisk no longer deserve their happy ending? Perhaps it's a reminder of your genocide run, a way to guilt trip you? Perhaps both? After you never even see Frisk in the credits until the end of it so who knows, maybe Chara has replaced Frisk? After all, there's a reason why Chara does nothing on the surface and wait until the last scene where Frisk is normally on the screen, implying that it's really just a guilt trip tactic. And we aren't even sure why Chara let Frisk's friends to pose for the photo with them if they always planned to kill them.

So yeah even this scene can be interpreted in different ways and thus we shouldn't jump into conclusions for what Chara does to other monsters and humans because we aren't even sure what they do to Frisk's friends.

'It's conceivable that a non-Tainted Pacifist Route has a timeline where Chara is saved, sometime after the ending of the route."

And what led you to believe that Chara isnt already reedemed in the game? Why would they be reedemed AFTER the end of the game? Whats the point of this ?

"If merely the Underground was destroyed in the first swipe, then the Soulless Pacifist could just be Chara preparing for the second, to destroy BOTH worlds, rather than just the one below. (In fact, I'd say Occam's Razor leans towards it.)"

No Occam Razor has nothing to do with this. Theres no evidences that both of the worlds are destroyed in the souless pacifist end. Everyone is even fine until the end of the game. If we assume that Chara destroy humans on the surface, we not only have to assume they always had unlterier motives but also that dying somehow gave them super mary sue powers allowing them to physically destroy all humans while they never show this kind of powers in the game and Flowey died too and it did not give him any special powers. Occam razor isnt on your side because your theory purely rely on speculation with no actual evidences. We have to assume too many things to consider this possibility. Not only that but we also have to ignore Charas own words when they say that they feel "obligated" to "suggest" you another run implying that they don't have any ulterior motives for suggesting you another run as they feel obligated to do this and that they don't even try to convince to do another run, just "suggest" another one, showing that there's nothing personal here otherwise they would make more efforts to convince us to try to do another run instead of simply "suggesting" it. . We have to ignore the fact that Chara accuse us for destroying the world and that it was merely a mean to end. We have to assume that Chara only destroys the underground. We have to ignore the fact that Chara let Frisk remain in control despite having their soul and despite the fact that Frisk can simply not carry Chara "plan" (if they had any)..We have to assume that Chara destroy the surface on neutral endings despite the fact that theres no evidences of that. We have to ignore the fact that Chara doesnt kill monsters in souless neutral endings.

We have to make too much assumptions to consider this possibility so its not Occam Razor. Its quite the opposite.

"And if both worlds were destroyed in the first swipe, that's no longer an option. Meaning that there must be some other reason why Chara wanted a Pacifist Route.. While still killing off the monsters. Why Chara wanted to be on the Surface. With the humans. Meaning Chara has something planned with the humans."

And what led you to believe that Chara necessary have a master plan?? Why cant you just rule with Chara says and accept that they simply "suggest" (not force you or order you) you to take another path because they feel "obligated" to because its pointless to kill everyone all over again? Its also never implied that Chara wanted to be on the surface and its not even implied that they know Frisk would succeed at leaving the underground. And they only kill 6 monsters and all of them are Frisks friends (they dont even kill Flowey) meaning that it has to do something with punishment, not with personal motives.

You're assuming too many things regarding their motives while they mostly have the "i dont care do whatever you want but accept consequences" attitude as showed by their passivity and dialogue. This is not how a psycopath having the plan to kill everyone would behave.

P.S i personally like the interpretation that Chara decided to live Frisk's life in the souless pacifist end using the excuse that Frisk doesn't deserve their happy ending (which explains why they posed for the photo with Frisk's friends. I mean why the hell would they pose with Frisk's friends on the photo if they wanted to kill them) and constantly guilt trip Frisk that they killed them (crossing their faces on the photo). After all, Chara never get their happy ending in regular pacifist runs and are doomed to stay as a voice in Frisk's head, so the souless pacifist ending is a good opportunity for them to replace Frisk and live their life using the excuse that Frisk doesn't deserve their happy ending anymore, leaving Frisk as a voice in their head. It ads more complexity to their character and makes them really really interesting instead of the mustache twirling "kill everyone" kind of vilain. And it JUSTIFY the ending in this case because it's really what Frisk deserve. That also explains why Flowey says that everything is fine on the surface and why everything is fine until the end of the credits