Talk:Chara/@comment-4015220-20180519220127/@comment-35700847-20180609031908

"First:Chara had to make Asriel think they were freeing the monsters. Maybe they were indeed trying to do this. Second:One soul is enough to destroy everyone in the VILLAGE, but they didn't just want to eradicate the whole village. They wanted to eradicate the entire planet.Third.. maybe they are part-megalomaniac? "HP. ATK. DEF. GOLD. EXP. LOVE. When a number goes up, that feeling.. That's me."-Chara"

I think it was more of a bonus than anything else, since they were planning on breaking the barrier(Maybe to start a war?). Chara didn't want to destroy the world, they wanted to get revenge against humanity, unless you meant they wanted to eradicate humans all over the planet. I still don't think that 100% goes against my point though since the monsters said Chasriel could have wiped them out easily. Since there's nothing to say otherwise it's entirely possible that they had enough power to do even more damage.

Also for the, "HP. ATK. DEF. GOLD. EXP. LOVE. When a number goes up, that feeling.. That's me. -Chara" thing it's possible that they are but that would only apply to end of genocide Chara. Since the only reason they are that feeling is because they got attached to Frisk near the start of the game. Even then I still think the idea of them just wanting to gain power for the sake of gaining power is not likely in genocide, they seem to be killing in genocide specifically so they can destroy the world.

"Hence Chara's plan of having Asriel do the absorbing, so they actually CAN do that."

Yeah, I guess they really were prepared do anything. Since a buttercup flower death is pretty painful.

"Did you read my proof that they DID know?"

Yeah but I responded with my own point. Asriel says something like they will do it together but can't "together" mean more than that? Even if it turned out that Chara had no control and Asriel was the one controlling everything for example, they would still by default be doing it together since they're in one body and their souls are merged.

"Pacifist is what this discussion is mainly about. Let's just say my statement was talking about Geno!Chara, so that we can both understand what I was saying."

Oh, that was my mistake sorry about that.

"You're saying Chara LOST information that they already KNEW was a fact? Science never progresses backwards-What Chara already knew remains a fact. They likely took Asriel doing nothing as consent to let Chara do this:Which might further explain why THEY were the ones that attacked:They thought Asriel was fine with it, AND they didn't want to risk Asriel backing out. ...He did so anyway."

I'm saying it's possible that if Chara did know about everything that would happen, it would quickly be disproved when they are in full control. It's not like they have experienced something like this before, they could have easily assumed it would be split control. BUT when they were originally one Chara was the one who had full control, from underground to the village. However, that quote you mentioned earlier of Asriel saying "together" could still be taken another way so the possibility that they didn't know from the beginning is still there. There would be no reason to think Asriel has any sort of control if Asriel hasn't done a single thing since the fusion. Chara could have just as easily attacked because they wanted too. Can't that point still support mine? It could just as easily explain why Chara was so careless when attacking and didn't bother to get any confirmation from Asriel. I mean, it can support your point too but it

"I was hoping you weren't going to say something like "neutral good" or even "true neutral."

There's no way I would try to say that about Chara when they first fell. If they were they would have probably tried to kill the necessary amount like they said, instead of going all out. Also they would have put how Asriel felt before the plan which they definitely didn't.

"My point is they didn't. Which means they WOULD need to. Let's get back to this point once we determine whether Chara assumed they had full control or not, because otherwise we'll just be contradicting each other without providing evidence-If they knew, my point is correct, and if they didn't, then yours is."

Alright that works.

"I used Soulless Pacifist as evidence for them remembering:When I said they turned evil again, I meant after a True Reset, period:They return to their state from the start of the game, when they should remain good, considering that they remember turning good-I don't see why Frisk doing a True Reset should make them turn evil again, when we consider that they didn't just forget the True Pacifist run."

But the Soulles Pacifist ending is a special case, they remember because they got Frisk's soul from genocide and can definitely keep it and use it for whatever they want to. (For some reason). I may be missing your point howeversince I'm a little confused by what you mean by this? Are you saying this applies to a situation where Frisk does True Pacifist, Genocide, and then True Pacifist again?

"You think they were going to take no for an answer? Of course not! It's just having Asriel be willing to do it eliminates the risk of Asriel fighting back, and causing them to die. If Chara knew Asriel could fight back, they'd take this important piece into consideration. Which is exactly what I'm arguing they did. Manipulating the variables to minimize the odds of Asriel betraying the plan, by making fighting the only option besides death itself:This was the reasoning behind Chara rallying up the villagers."

I think they would if they have too. I'm going to go mix in your idea to get this point across. If we were say Chara needed his support all the way, then it would have made sense for Chara to ask for an okay. It's not like Chara had anything to lose anyway, they could have just went back into the underground and try somewhere else the next day. But they didn't(Going back to my point here)most likely because they didn't know he would even resurface with his own control and out of all things stop them.

If it were in Chara's best interest to keep Asriel on their side and live they could have easily asked him for his opinion, and flee if things they looked like they were getting out of hand. Staying alive to fight another day beats risking their life. Chara rallying up the villagers with the body could have also been so Chara could lure out the villagers too.

"Chara wasn't backed into a corner, Asriel was. Chara was the one DOING the backing. Not killing the humans counts as a failure for Chara-They had nothing to lose from their perspective. Also, about your alternative, I'm arguing it was for both reasons:Chara had other ways to attack the village, but this was the best way to do it to migitate the risk of Asriel backing out. Also, Chara would consider the possibility that Asriel just couldn't live to do it himself, and would want Chara to do it FOR him. Not only that, there's the reason that I mentioned above:Asriel doing nothing might have been taken as consent, or even a request, for Chara to be the one doing this, rather than Asriel."

Yeah, I agree that Chara was not backed into a corner. My argument is that Chara wasn't trying to back Asriel into a corner because they didn't know they needed to corner him in the first place(Not that it makes their actions any less evil, they still manipulated Asriel so they could get to that point and go against the original plan in the frist place). Well yeah, killing them is Chara's true goal but nothing says they needed to do it right away. If we agree on the one point that the body was brought to rally up the village to kill them off in one swoop then Isn't my idea just as likely? I think at this point what could debunk either of ours is figuring out how much Chara knew about the soul-asborbing but the only line we can look at for reference is Asriel saying the whole "we'll do it together thing" but I'm still debating that his question could still be taken in a different way.

That or Asriel doing nothing made Chara think they could get away with killing the villagers without interference.

"That still qualifies for my interpretation of Chara's speech:They were reincarnated for power:This power would be used to eradicate the enemy, and then destroy this pointless world, to move onto the next. Frisk still had NOTHING to do with it."

Using power to get revenge would be more accurate then. Although, it seems like that power was only needed so they could escape Frisk's body. I'm starting to think that Chara's power exceeds that of level 20, since they were able to do more damage against the entire game than they were Asgore.

"Those were two conflicting views, that I presented as two separate possibilities. The first is the revenge plot we're both talking about:Revenge against monsters because of Asriel. The latter does indeed propose that Chara was evil in life. Neither of them has been proven wrong, so they both stand, and they BOTH explain their actions in life, alongside with the Genocide speech. When there are two very reasonable explanations for something, I don't really pick just one of them."

My idea of alive Chara wasn't so far off from evil to begin with, I think the only positive thing about them were that they actually did have some care for the Dreemurr family(It doesn't excuse their actions or anything though). I don't think them being power-hungry and just wanting to gain power for the sake of it is correct though, they came to the conclusion that their reincarnation was for power in genocide only and how they came to that conclusion is unknown, BUT the only reason they are gaining that power is so that they can exact revenge on everyone. If they were just there for power the goal of destroying everything wouldn't matter because the only thing that would matter is gaining power.I don't see how revenge against Asriel shows they were a megalo in life. Also the point that they were power-hungry doesn't hold up for Chara when they were alive. They never showed any signs of wanting power just so they could have it, we already know that they were trying to kill humans in life because they hated humanity. Getting the souls was a bonus and nothing more, they planned on breaking the barrier which is why they needed the souls in the first place. There are two other possibilities for this(1. They wanted to start a war. 2. They wanted to break the barrier just because they could do it, there wasn't any downside to doing it after all and in life we know that they were manipulative and overall a bad person but they didn't hate monsters like they did humans).

"It seems we have a misunderstanding. I thought you were still going with the point that Frisk guided Chara to genocide:As you said two of your posts ago that it was FRISK who guided Chara to kill monsters. Yes, Chara DID keep Frisk along because their killing would give them power. But Frisk did not GUIDE Chara to this conclusion:They found out their purpose BEFORE then. Frisk just ended up being a worthy partner-Much better than Asriel who refused to kill a single person of either race ever! I was arguing that if Frisk was doing this, and that was teaching Chara to hate monsters, implying they DIDN'T want revenge against the monsters until Frisk showed them so, then Chara had no reason to trust this "evil" human that the "good" monsters were in fact the bad guys-They'd just see Frisk killing innocent monsters, and thus, that Frisk is the bad guy. I hope I cleared things up, and I'm glad you didn't mean what I thought you did."

We most likely do. I said I saw your point and that your point of Chara wanting revenge on monsters, in genocide, holds up.

"What would be the point in passing it up? More power makes killing the rest of them even easier. Also, they kind of need enough power to destroy the entire planet.. (aside from the underground). You think Chara only hated that one village? No, they hated ALL of humanity:Everywhere on Earth!"

More than likely it is a bonus. It already seemed like they had enough power as Chasriel but Asriel held them back. From what the monsters said they could have destroyed the entire village, and nothing implies that they couldn't have done more than just destroy the village afterwards(With only a monster+human soul).

"Still shows Flowey can't just tell the difference between Frisk and Chara like that. Of course, they don't think we're Chara in Pacifist, but they don't even think Chara is THERE until they turn into Asriel. And after the battle, Asriel says that Chara's been gone for a long time.. Even though they're right there! It's clear Asriel can't actually tell the difference between the two:He didn't even know there WERE two! So.. To say Flowey, after learning of Chara's existence as the narrator, was then able to deduce exactly what actions were of Frisk and which actions were of Chara is ludicrous, as there is no visible difference between the two."

It only shows that in genocide. Even then, Flowey only came to that conclusion because Frisk was acting weird and Flowey assumed it was Chara because he assumed Chara came back as a soulless being like him. Also Asriel is technically right, Chara has been gone for a long time, they're attatched to Frisk but they truly died a LONG time ago. He also says this because when he was Asriel he was stuck to the belief that Chara was truly alive and infront of him, not just there in spirit. It's plausible that he was saying that because A. He realized Chara was dead and not truly alive or B. He couldn't sense Chara in Frisk after the battle, but eventually realized they were there later. I think the first option is more likely though. Anyway, we agree that Chara was fighting back against the reset too now right? So he definitely has some idea here.

"No, back then, he didn't think Chara was alive, period. Even Chara's actions would be seen as Frisk's actions. This is evidenced by the Genocide Route, where in his speech, he states that he tried to "take your SOUL", all while addressing Chara-On how he didn't know it was Chara. This wasn't Chara at all, though-It was Frisk. This makes it very clear that Flowey cannot distinguish the two. He thinks there is only ONE human there, all the way to the very end. (He does learn of the narrator's existence in that speech:We know this due to him speaking about someone watching it all happening, but being too scared to do it themselves:This was referring to the narrator, whom Flowey thought was NOT Chara.. But it turned out he got the roles swapped. So.. He ended up calling Chara a sicko. Wow, Flowey. Bet that just made their relationship even worse.)"

So then he could obviously tell the difference. If we agree that he could tell Chara was fighting against the reset ability it proves that he can tell the difference. The genocide route is a completely different route, he only says that and assumes it is Chara not because he senses Chara but because of how they act. He even asks if they are Chara beforehand and moves onto how he can tell they are soulless because they are killing without mercy. It's like how Asgore calls turns around, looks at Frisk, and asks what type of monster Frisk is. He clearly knows what a human looks like, but the way they act (and we can tell that they do some stuff that we can't see, such as how Papyrus calls out that they are shambling about even though we see that the sprite itself is just walking forward like normal, or how Flowey tells Chara to stop smiling even though we can't see Frisk smiling) is showing him otherwise. Also are you sure that's meant to be taken at face-value, I mean, if from Flowey's perspective Chara is right in front of him then who is he talking to? It's not like he brings it up again either.

Also about that thing you said about Flowey referencing trying to take Chara's soul when they first met and apologizing because he did not know it was not Chara, are you referring to when he said "

"..Why does it apply to Tsunderplane, of all monsters, but not Flowsriel? Flowey probably thought the narrator's words were also Frisk's words:There's a difference between hearing the narrator and knowing the narrator isn't the same as Frisk."

Perhaps for a little joke? There is a point where Papyrus legitimately just flies over you head without any explanation and no one ever brings it up ever again. Then again your third point is possible. Maybe the narrator's words can be heard but the monsters think it's just Frisk talking while Flowey can tell the difference?

"Chara being able to share memories doesn't mean that Frisk sees what Chara sees:In fact, they DON'T, as Chara notices a monster encounter just before it happens.. Frisk only sees the monster when the encounter begins. Chara's also the one to point out that there's a blue switch behind the pillar, and narrates Toriel's silence when she's behind the pillar, despite the fact that we had NO idea that she was there-Neither did Frisk, seeing how Frisk and the player are one and the same. (And because come on, how could you notice someone because they're silent?)"

Does Chara notice a mosnter before Frisk? Doesn't the text come up at about the exact same time? I may be mistaking this because I haven't looked at the ruins in a while, but doesn't Frisk see the blue switch and interacts with it which prompts the narration? I think the pillar just blocks your view of it, not Frisk's. I'm pretty sure that Toriel thing Isn't Chara narrating, when a character's head is next to the words the character is the one talking. Plus, there Isn't actually any way for Chara to narrate silence. I just don't see how we can say Chara is the one that noticed when there's no possible way to narrate "..." and the fact that Toriel's head is next to the "..." basically shows that it's something coming from her.

"...Yeah.. He couldn't have. Having no SOUL means you don't have a powerful SOUL. Flowey's Genocide Speech shows that he was trying to get Asgore to show the human SOULs to him, and failed every time.. But.. why? So Flowey could absorb them, of course! Also, they don't still like Asriel, because.. what changed since then? Why do you propose that they changed their mind? What caused the shift, and why? Without evidence, Occam's Razor is the best approach:Chara stayed the way they were, because nothing suggests otherwise. And yes, the narration in the epilogue happens before they leave. The seal was broken before then. So, you argue the link was broken.. Because they went to the Surface? There was no barrier for them to pass through:Reaching the Surface is nothing special. There is no plausible reason why reaching the Surface should suddenly make Chara able to move on their own, separate from Frisk."

That mistake is on me, for some reason I had the idea in my head that the spell was only keeping beings with souls in. I propose that they only had the idea to get revenge on Asriel in genocide because they only see them as a traitor and don't like them in genocide. We only came to the conclusion that in genocide Chara started seeing monsters as the enemy because of two reasons, they came to the conclusion that they were rebornd for power to get revenge and they saw Asriel as a traitor(And since he's a monster they applied it to all monsters). In Pacifist however, is it ever really implied that they have any type of grudge against Asriel in pacifist? What I'm asking is, are you saying they came to the same conclusion in pacifist that they did genocide?

I'm starting to question if Chara was physically bound to Frisk. By that I mean, did they really have to stay by Frisk's side throughout the game or did they just do so because Frisk is the only one that can actually understand what/who exactly they are?

"...I suppose. Let's go back to my earlier point then:About how Chara was SPECIFICALLY fighting against ASRIEL resetting, rather than resetting in general."

You already nailed the point below this point, so I'll respond to that one since I'm assuming you got to this before you saw my point on how they helped.

"Exactly. While the speech does suggest that Chara is talking to the player, if Frisk IS the player.. It still holds. Why can't this just mean Frisk IS the player? They canonically can SAVE, all the stats are canon.. Flowey even acted very player-like when he played around with the reset ability.. So why is Frisk any different? Chara was talking to the player.. Because Frisk IS the player. They're one and the same. It's a lot simpler than arguing that Chara is bouncing between two separate entities. I don't see why fourth wall breaks are used as evidence of a separate player. It only proves there is a player, and nothing more. Nothing says that player can't be Frisk. And Flowey basically being the player at one point just further supports that."

No idea why it can't just mean Frisk is the player and the one being talked to, but I think judgement boy is the one who started that idea or at least made it well-known. I think 50% of it comes from people who are confused and think Frisk died when Chara destroyed the game, while the other 50% comes from people who, for some reason, believe that the player is an actual seperate entity from Frisk and we(as in our real selves) are an actual being referenced in the game undertale. Which does not really work since Chara never implies they are talking to some other being or someone else, they start by talking to Frisk and they end the same way.

"Chara said that Froggit attacked you BEFORE he actually sent attacks. Our turn is before Froggit's, remember? Humans almost always have initiative of battle:This probably is a huge reason why not a single human was killed:They always got the first move. Froggit didn't attack yet, so Chara had no reason to say that he DID attack. He didn't. He hasn't even used up his turn yet."

That is true but Isn't it still likely that Chara thought Froggit was coming towards them for an attack? Since they do change their text after the fight and they don't try anymore tricks.

"Perhaps they were testing Frisk, to see how far they were willing to go? To see whether or not Frisk would do an Asriel when they saw that the monsters were peaceful, like, say, Papyrus? Perhaps they thought that when Frisk LVd up (Your LOVE does increase to 2 from killing the Froggit), that would start to take them over?"

If that were the case they would have most likely done that more than once to test Frisk, at least twice. The first time you encounter a Froggit your fight gets cut short because of Toriel's interference so that can't be considered a true test to see how far Frisk is willing to go, even if you do try to attack the first Froggit, if you don't hit it perfectly in the middle you will do damage but it won't kill it and the fight will get cut off. I don't think that Chara would have tried to start the take over either, there's no reason why they would know about being able to take over in Pacifist. Not only that but getting them to kill one monster wouldn't be enough, even if it does raise your LV by 2 it would be a lot easier to play it safe and give Frisk false information again, but Chara does change it to fit what is actually happening instead of attempting to trick Frisk.

"Manipulating Frisk? ...Alright, I guess not much. Though, the fact that Flowey sees that Chara IS a threat, means that if Chara DID have the power, they likely WOULD be a threat. Why? Because they want to reset, of course! After all, Flowey didn't know that it was Frisk who had the power:They thought it was Chara."

But a part of Flowey's speech is an assumption. We can tell what is and what Isn't an assumption in his speech based on what actually has evidence to back it up or go against it. When he says Chara was fighting against the reset ability, we have proof that they were since they were narrating for Frisk. When he says Chara is a threat and implies they want a reset, where's the proof that they do? We know that they narrate for Frisk and they help them throughout the underground, they don't try to trick Frisk into resetting either which goes against his statement. Plus he was basing what he said off of the realization that Chara was a bad person when they were alive.

"A:Chara didn't know what your opinion was B:Back in the Asriel fight, Frisk's opinion didn't matter. Asriel resetting would be bad for both sides, as I explained. C:They don't narrate at all in the speech, so.. They shifted their stance a bit then. The last time the do narrate is the epilogue, and even then, the option of resetting wasn't mentioned at all. Perhaps they thought Frisk would be like Flowey, in this case? Resetting for the fun of it?

Chara wanted to help Frisk.. because that would help themselves. Nothing indicated that their stance has changed in the Pacifist Route"

Chara doesn't know what your opinion is but it doesn't stop them to provide information that benefits you in a way. If they've been helping Frisk throughout the game by narrating for Frisk's benefit (When they really don't have to) what would make them change their stance to doing it for themself in the Asriel fight? Also Chara does bring up the save idea. In the fight against Asriel when you can't move, they don't narrate your thoughts at a certain point. Instead of saying something like "You guess saving really is impossible." they say this and give a suggestion  "Seems SAVING the game really is impossible...But...Maybe, with what little power you have...You can save something else."

I think it's way more likely that Chara just does not want a reset. If there's no evidence to suggest they are pushing for one, and they even help Frisk instead of trying to push them towards an alternative that would suit them(Genocide) we can safely say they actually just wanted to help Frisk.

"Indeed, my stance has changed a bit:Chara DOES actually, genuinely want Asriel to not reset, and they DID play a role there. But stopping Asriel from resetting doesn't mean they didn't want to reset, period:As I explained above, making the reset themselves rather than Asriel would be most beneficial to the plan."

What would be the difference? If we go by the idea that Chara is evil in pacifist and they're doing this so they can get a reset, it wouldn't matter who does it. In fact, letting Asriel do it would actually be more benificial to Chara IF they were evil in Pacifist. Since by doing pacifist over and over Asriel would stop Frisk over and over again, there is always the possibility that Frisk will get frustrated and try another route which is exactly what Chara would want in this case. It would be better than banking on the alternative, which would be waiting for Frisk to reset on their own after beating Asriel. Since Frisk is the one with the power, and they would have their happy ending, their would be no real incentive for them to reset(Which is a really big risk for Chara). It would be much safer fro them to let Asriel do his thing if they were evil.

"We, as Frisk, showed no intention to reset, so we can't say Flowey saw Frisk intend to do it and then think it was Chara.. So, what made Flowey think Chara wanted to reset?"

The fact that Chara in life was a horrible person who manipulated Asriel and acted for the most part like they were always on his side in life, but that wasn't the case. If I was Asriel, even if Chara wasn't doing anything suspicious, I would seem pretty skeptical of them too since in life they were pretty horrible.

"That flaw was only due to the fact that Flowey still couldn't tell what was Frisk, and what was Chara. But, since Frisk had no intention of resetting, we can't say that spilled over to his interpretation of Chara."

But his interpretation of Chara is still wrong. There's no evidence to suggest that they want a reset. When he brings up the point that they were fighting against the reset ability we can say that's true because we know for a fact that Chara was narrating which helped Frisk. When he begs Chara to not reset and tells them they've probably heard him a thousand times or something like that, we have to scratch our heads because there is no evidence that suggests Chara does want a reset.

"They felt Chara, first-hand, and wanted them back. They clearly seemed to think Chara became good, and yet, in the end, when they DID see Chara wasn't the greatest person.. They attributed all the goodness to Frisk, as they thought Chara was gone. Once they realized Chara WAS still there.. And mentioned that Chara was fighting to stop the resets.. Things may have appeared to chance. Also, his assumption seems to be correct:There is no indication that they were a good person in death. I'm with Flowey on this one.. Except it's Frisk's choice."

I still don't see why he is right. He based his high opinion of Chara on how Chara was his best friend when he was really alive (or so he thought) and how Chara understood them on all of the good things he saw in Chara in life. Then when he thought about it harder he realized that laughing at his dad being poisoned and trying to kill humans wasn't a good thing at all, and he was just trying to hold on to an image of Chara that wasn't real. Then when they sorted out what was happening they realized Frisk was a better person than Chara because if put in the situations Chara was in they wouldn't be a complete jerk. But everything negative he says and knows about Chara by the end of the game happened when Chara was alive.

Why is there no indication that they are good in death? They narrate for Frisk and help them along on their journey without showing any type of ulterior motive.