So recently there was another tidbit brought to my attention regarding the whole Sayo vs Shannon or Kanon debate, and sadly we forgot to cover that in the podcast over all the many other topics, so I’ll post it here instead. The idea that I was told could actually lead the argument in the other direction, making my theory impossible. I’ll write it in blue I guess:
[color=blue]The red truth[/color] [color=red]“Furudo Erika only increases it by one person. Besides her, the number of people on this island is exactly the same as it was in the previous games.”[/color] [color=blue] applies to the amount of people actually on the island, not to the maximum of people that could exist on the island. Therefore, for it being possible for Erika to even enter the game, the maximum given for all games back in the fourth game in the red truth[/color] [color=red]“No more than 17 humans exist on this island!! That excludes any 18th person. In short, this 18th person X does not exist!! This applies to all games!!!”[/color] [color=blue]needs to be at least one higher than the actual amount of people seen so far. In conclusion, Kanon and Shannon have to be the same person, as they are the only ones where proper foreshadowing was presented for this being possible.[/color]
And yeah, there isn’t much room for me to counter this. The only move I have in my repertoire is questioning whether the second red truth I quoted was already applying to future games or not. Or rather, if that red truth was a condition of the gameboard that Lambda couldn’t have changed, or if it is only a move that Beatrice did, with Lambda being able to change that under the argument that Beatrice never expected someone to add another human piece, basically not knowing how future games might look like. And that’s why I don’t like my counter. For my theory to work, it is pretty damn close to accusing Lambda of foul play.
