Is Undertale's Neutral Route Morally Wrong?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 июн 2024
- Despite not being a very long game, Undertale is a game that's been talked about to death on the Internet. Undertale is an ingenuis game that seems charming and childlike on the surface, yet has a dirty secret unlocked by the player's own twisted intentions. The game contains 3 major routes the player can take. Neutral, Pacifist, and Genocide. In this video we'll be asking the moral question, is the neutral route of Undertale good or bad? Enjoy ;) #undertale #gaming
Join our Public Discord Server! / discord
Follow the Twitter: / wyvrn_onyt
I do not own any music included in this video.
0:00 Intro
1:14 Ground Rules
3:58 Ruins
6:46 Toriel boss
7:48 Snowy Forest
9:11 Papyrus boss
10:11 Waterfall
11:30 Undyne boss
12:58 Hot-Land
13:46 Mettaton boss
14:42 Asgore boss
15:35 Flowey boss
16:07 Conclusion - Игры
One thing I forgot to say near the end. I am not a "lore expert" when it comes to Undertale. If there's anything in this video that is objectively incorrect, please feel free to correct me.
Edit: Many commenters have corrected me on Papyrus' bossfight and how you can't die during it. I appreciate it but There's no need to correct me on that anymore 😂😂
Tbh the only nitpick is that MTT is a ghost like Nabstablook or Mad Dummy, so he does count as a person.
papyrus can't kill you btw he just puts you in the "capture room"
you said papyrus can kill you, he cannot
Honestly, I would've just looked at all the different neutral endings, then examining the morality of how you got there.
Did you get the ending where you killed Undine? Well, you've SEEN how psychotic that fish lady acts. It doesn't matter that she's shouting about justice for monsters and is called a heroine by all the monsters, you're a small child and she's a knight throwing spears at you like she's Vergil and they're his summoned swords. If she knew about it she would definitely try throwing out a judgement cut and yell 'scum' at you. Undine is a walking fight or flight vibe check and she can deny you the ability to run.
9:39 WOAH WOAH WOAH, PAPYRUS IS THE ONE FIGHT THAT CAN NEVER KILL YOU! NOT EVEN TORIEL'S FIGHT IS THAT SAFETY PROOFED! HE WILL DROP HIS ATTACK THE SECOND YOU FALL INTO 1 HIT KILL RANGE AND 'CAPTURE' YOU BY TAKING YOU TO HIS LAUGHABLY EASY TO ESCAPE SHED!
HELL HE EVEN STOPS TRYING ALTOGETHER AFTER 3 CAPTURES AND ESCAPES!
9:45
The only error I found in this video so far:
Papyrus is the only monster Frisk encounters that can *never* kill them! Papyrus lowers Frisk down to 1 HP, and captures them by putting them in his shed. Papyrus also willingly heals Frisk up, so he does show that he does have a lot of restraint.
True, but a lot of monsters don’t understand how humans work. The best they know is that human souls strong, and they are physical. They don’t understand how fragile that strong soul is at LOVE 1. 20 HP is so low compared to half the monsters after Snowdin, and we don’t know how much the general population knows about that. Only Toriel, Asgore, Gerson, and Undyne has actually met humans before and from we know, only Toriel, Asgore, and Gerson have a chance to really know how weak human children are compared to adults (they were in the original war, they be old) and Undyne has only heard humans are strong, and anime. Anime. She also at most probably has met one human, and we don’t know how much that human had in terms of LV. The only person who we can say who else has met a human is maybe… MAYBE Alphys.
Somebody else corrected me on this too, so thanks to both of you.
@@NanaNanaBananaCrown to be fair, even if humans have really low hp, they have far higher defense. Frisk with a plastic knife can deal 30 damage to toriel at lv 1, while monsters in the core who are trained mercenaries deal single digit damage unless you have really high lv at which point frisk can take many hits from them.
Also, Papyrus does say that he wants to be your friend, but he can’t because his dreams
Just realised he said mettaton wasn’t a monster and was a robot and I can understand that but it’s actually a ghost that inhabits the body
don't forget that you are still technically playing neutral in pacifist
It’s still a part of the true pacifist, you are not killing at any chance you don’t have to. Even then, at the end you aren’t even the one who killed asgore.
Yeah that's true these two routes are similar. So I guess Pacifist is just a narrowed down and more restrictive neutral route.
@@TJ-hg6op you can kill asgore in pacifist tho
the deltarot consumes. don't forget, I'm with you in the dark
@@slaoqeubotoaqyeah but he attacked us first, and he wanted us to kill him. So us killing him is VERY justified.
13:30 Another error. No matter what's the route, even if you're in genocide, Muffet gets a letter from the spiders in the RUINS saying you never hurt a single spider and then (even if you didn't buy a donut) she spares you, and if you still try giving money, she refuses.
While she has the same spare method as papyrus there is 2 key differences
1 she is actually trying to kill you
2 unlike papyrus you can kill her before the letter arrives
3 she is a morally far worse character than most of the cast she is literally a cannibal both making treats of spiders but in genocide even regretting not turning alphys into a donut when she came to warn her to evacuate
This doesn't really make a difference in the morality of killing her because this happens if you decided not to fight back for a long enough period of time (you would have already been justified to fight back)
Also my point was that it's possible to skip the boss entirely but the method is so obscure and insensible that you shouldn't be expected to take it, so this moment in particular is not an error :)
@@WyvrnOnYT I used Fight most of the time in the buffet battle on my first playthrough and I still got the Spare. In my opinion, it's morally wrong to kill her if she spares you.
Not to mention she refused to evacuate on genocide and is the entire reason why hotland and the core are accesible AND have killable monsters in them @@danielgonzalez-vm5lj
@@Octopus2480 Doesn't matter if she is dead before giving you a chance to spare her.
The worst ending you can get is killing everyone except for glad dummy. Everyone everyone loves is dead and glad dummy will eventually become to depression with its coming hatred for the body it fused with.
You could leave any one character alive and make the same argument
The worst part ending has a required grammar check. You haven't seen bull yet.
Ah yes the transphobia ending
@@IcyDiamond Fucking real
@Nooy_ Not really. Mad Dummy is a special case since they'll be depressed of two reasons.
Actually, something not really covered in the neutral route often (because most people don't know about it) is that, if you go through the neutral route while killing a few monsters, flowey tells you "if you get through the whole underground without killing a SINGLE monster, I WON'T kill the king."
But here's the thing. You still don't have to do true pacifist for this. Meaning, if you just spare everyone and befriend nobody, you can get to the end of the game and have Asgore not die!!! Right?? ......right?
Wrong.
If you do this and attempt to spare Asgore, he will recognize that keeping you trapped in the underground is cruel, and he will KILL HIMSELF so that you can take his soul, and then flowey destroys his soul.
It doesn't really matter if you spare or kill him, he was going to die no matter what.
He never really wanted to kill you, he just wanted the fight to be over.
I can't blame Frisk for accidentally killing the first froggit as its a new environment to them and probably reacted out of pure fear not realizing they could spare the froggit. Undyne is completely reasonable to kill/ not give water to, that monster is literally hunting you down and not giving you an option to surrender, Mettaton is throwing their life into mortal danger and makes it clear that they have ill intent towards Frisk, Asgore striaght up doesn't let you spare him, meaning Frisk has no other option than to kill him. Flowey is a no brainer, he's far too dangerous to be left alive and terrorize the underground, yes they're a deeply traumatized child who was unfairly hunted by humans, but he's shown he's indifferent to commit mass murder and extremely dangerous and willing to harm others if given the option
Fair point, for Asgore though, I think it is somewhat better if you spare him after winning
That doesn’t make killing him unjustified, but a bit lower on the moral scale
to not give water to undyne is to pour out whole cooler on the ground via a single cup at a time. that is pretty sadistic and morally wrong, imo
@@nghiaoantrong899
Asgore also has the mindset where he feels guilt and wants Frisk to finish him off if he loses. If you spare him and he isn’t murdered, then he commits self-unalive and renders your choice meaningless. (Censored because of youtube) It’s a lose-lose situation where he can’t be spared ever, because his guilt can only drive him forward or to the grave.
Self-defense is not always morally justifiable. Frisk's soul would free potentially thousands of monsters (idk if they ever say how many, at least more than one) of equal worth. If it's between Frisk and even just two monsters, Frisk is not morally justified disregarding any further context that may change the math, 2>1
@@crypt5129 it is, stop saying bs
This may be a random enemy to bring up, but killing Vulkin seems a bit more morally questionable than other monsters. I'd still say it's justified since your life is still in danger, but it's made clear throughout the fight that Vulkin is not trying to hurt you, they're just stupid. Vulkin thinks their attacks heal you. Killing Vulkin would still fall under self-defence, but it would be a little worse than killing someone like Doggo or Migosp.
I think many of the enemies are like that and are simply trying to interact with you, and don't realize that their magic hurts you.
being ignorant does not hold up in any court of law
@@chess123mate Haha! NO! They deliberately stated that Vulkin is just stupid. Only them. It's a bit weird for them to explicitely state that if everyobne does that.
@@dragondastan4763 most monsters don't know you're human. look at bratty and catty, papyrus, the snowdin shopkeeper, and basically every regular monster besides the ones in the core. if they knew you were human, why would they be friendly with you if it was the king's orders that every human dies? also i'm not counting MK, they're a child and probably didn't even think humans were real
I think trying to kill Nabstablook after willingly engaging it is ... questionable. At least on the first turn, I don't see a reason to not try talking to it.
Also, something to consider about the self defence thing is that you can attack enemies until they don't want to fight anymore.
Do they tho
Cause yeah their names turn yellow but they still attack you
@@angelapuzzleYou may also accidentally go too far and end them anyway. Assuming a more “human” play through where you don’t save scum everything, that’s already being locked in Neutral.
My argument against your point is that even if they allow you to spare them once you beat them up they on the contrary would never spare if frisk is on low hp. torial notices when your hp is low and starts purposefully missing, and Pap lowers you to exactly one before capturing you. But other monsters don’t do this, they have no mercy so thus I don’t feel too bad about them getting a taste of that same medicine.
@@angelapuzzle A Froggit in the game directly says "If a monster does not want to fight you"
@@legalza0843 Well, the monsters want your soul, right? So they can escape the underground that humans trapped them in. There isn't really a way to accomplish their goal peacefully. You'd probably just get killed later after being captured by Papyrus (maybe just not by HIS hand)
in my opinion, Undyne, MTT, Asgore and Flowey can definitvely be justified. Undyne cannot be spared under any circumstance. MTT also doesn't allow you to spare him. Asgore actually begs you to kill him. Flowey.
Toriel and Papyrus do not deserve it.
Toriel does not pose a *threat*. She is an obstacle, but she doesn't threaten your life on purpose.
Papyrus would be justifible... if you could just kill him. Papyrus is so bulky that you *cannot kill him unless you do it after he spares you*. It's hard to call self defense when the other person gives up
actually, I agree with you on Toriel. I forgot she asks you to fight lol
@@W.D_Gaster I love how you give actual reasons for why Undyne, MTT, and Asgore can be justified. Then you just put Flowey. 😭🤣☠️
Actually with Papyrus he did want to capture you and if you stayed captured Undyne probably would've came there and killed you but Papyrus probably didn't know about that part but he does pose somewhat a threat but he doesn't actually kill you but in the video with Toriel yeah the "she challenged you to fight" in the video was bad because she doesn't want to kill you and only does on accident and only fights to prove yourself strong enough against the monsters ahead.
i agree with that thought with papyrus, there's also the fact that you can't actually die to him, when he gets low he just puts you in the garage thing (i forget what it's called) and you can get out of there very easily, there's also the fact if you lose 3 times he'll allow you to not have to fight him.
Nah, Toriel is fair game, she was trying to forcefully keep a child from outside world.
Essentially kidnapping them.
2:48 Sans actually can’t remember. He is just very good at examining body language and he knows of the existence of resets. Though never experiencing one.
But he is aware of the resets based on the dialogue of his genocide boss fight correct?
@@WyvrnOnYT no, as I said before he is EXTREMELY good at reading body language. Hence why Asgore would make him the judge. Since he is extremely good at estimating events and emotions based on the body.
In the video it says nothing about remembering. Sans is AWARE of resets (as implied by his “timelines starting and stopping” dialogue) he just doesn’t remember anything
@@Bengt2509…? Well, one the creator literally responded thinking he remembered and 2 “these” implies he remembered the resets in the creators context if it was just “aware of resets” then you would be correct with your statement. And the creator even implies they are not very knowledgeable in the lore of Undertale.
Well, unlike the player and Flowey, Sans doesn’t know what happened in past timelines, eg. before a reset or loading your save. But Sans does know that resets are a thing, and he knows that you have control of the timeline due to being a human.
This is also why Sans is so “lazy”, or rather, depressed. It’s tough for him to do his best and try to achieve things because he knows that all of his effort can just be undone at the whims of the player, or Flowey before Frisk fell into the Underground.
accidentally killing them is justified if it’s self defense but purposely killing them when you can spare them, is not justified to me
I guess that opens a discussion of responsibility, because is it really some kid’s responsibility to show unending patience to monsters until they give up rather then playing behind the line they already set? They certainly don’t intend on being merciful until you appease them or beat them into a corner.
@@legalza0843 yes
@@legalza0843I mean, it’s a kid. Usually kids would rather not fight and be friends instead of yknow, trying to get rid of an entire race from existence
9:39
You can *_not_* die to Papyrus. He truly does nonlethally capture you, just as he claimed, and then put you inside of a jerry-rigged jail inside of his shed.
… he made the bars too wide, like he did at the bridge before Sans' sentry point, though.
thanks for the useless information nerd 🤓
Random enemies can be justified as self defense(except whimsun). Toriel can be justified as she does ask us to prove us we are strong enough to survive, imply we have to fight her. You can't kill Papyrus before he spares you so Papyrus is unjustified as you have to attack after he surrenders. Undyne, Muffett, Mettaton and Asgore literally want your soul so that's justified. Flowey attempts to kill you immediately. Attempts to kill you over and over again until he's satisfied while taunting you which definitely counts as strange and unusual forms of torture on top of murder. Flowey is 100% justified. Keep in mind this is just my opinion. If you disagree that's okay.
Moldsmal can also be spared instantly
@@someone8206 oh yes, forgot about Modsmol, it’s self defense except whimsun and modsmol
Some enemies can be spared by bringing them down to low hp
@@akitteninabowl8872 yeah but they still try to kill you even if they’re yellow
Jerry
I do think we should factor in the fact Frisk can undo their own death if they fall. So no enemy is a true threat to Frisk (Except Flowey) so kill Flowey if you wish.
It's something to consider
Not really, you could reset the universe a billion times to dodge a bullet, but for that matter, they aren't entitled to you to go your way to save them when they are trying to kill you. It is something that falls in a moral gray, it is not like seeing a person in danger and not saving them, here they are seeking to harm you.
@@mado-wh4jv Not entitled to be helped but still Sans makes a good point that if you have the amount of power and knowledge Frisk does you may have to consider that you have a responsibility to use it. Of course, in game and out of universe you can say: No, Frisk doesn’t have to spare enemies just because they are not truly in danger (Outside of the Flowey fight) but it should be considered.
"Hee hee hee.
Did you really think I'd be satisfied...
killing you only one time?"
I remember those lines.
@@SuperBatSpider Something else to consider...Dying hurts. For a child to die painfully, come back and spare their murderer is a lot to ask. And how many times will this happen with in a run? Guess it's a good thing they're so determined
neutral is what actually would happen realistically
Frisk would basically be like
“oh hey these guys don’t want to fight anymore” and spare them, or
“oh crap these guys are trying to kill me” and kill them
@@Mrsir529I don’t know if a child would ACTUALLY tried to kill anyone, so I feel like realistically Frisk would just run away
Tbh, i dont think killing tori is justified for a few reasons
1: she actively *avoids* killing frisk when they're fighting. Although she can accidentally kill Frisk, she doesn't straight up attempt to. Plus simply challenging someone in a fight doesn't justify killing.
2: tori actually has a good reason for keeping frisk at the ruins, as according to her most of the other monsters would kill frisk, which actually is true. So it becomes less like tori holding frisk against her will.
And more like tori trying to prevent frisk from getting yourself murdered. Kinda like a mother trying to stop a child from running into a busy high-way. Which kinda makes killing tori, the furthest from justified.
Also tori litterally saves frisk from death so yeah.. its straight up impossible for frisk to justify killing toriel. Unless She considers a child killing a mother for trying to stop said child from doing something dangerous justified.
The thing that made me kill Toriel was that I was trying to get her health low enough to spare her. In a real situation, it would be "fight enough to let her know you're strong enough to survive". However, the final hit does way more damage than all the other hits, which took me by surprise. You could think of it as a training accident. Though what Frisk intended matters. Is it an intentional kill, or an accidental kill? That changes pretty much everything. That's what makes these questions so complicated, it's not JUST about the action, it's about why they chose that action in the first place as well.
A big thing people fail to consider is that you can reset if you die IN UNIVERSE. Yes, normally them trying to kill you would be wrong, but they not only have a valid reason to do so, they also will never actually succeed. This is why you're judged harsher than you would be if resetting wasn't an in-universe mechanic. That's why I would consider Clover's neutral route more justified, Clover was told they can get reset if they die, but since they don't remember resets, they have no actual reason to believe Flowey.
It's straightup impossible to say if the neutral route is morally good or bad, because your actions can range from killing nobody but not hanging out with undyne, to killing literally everybody except one enemy that is required to continue the geno route
I think it depends on how you play the neutral ending- like fighting monsters isn’t wrong, most of them are trying to kill you or doing something that would lead to you dying. I think where it becomes morally wrong to fight on neutral is when an enemy either starts to spare you or tries to run away.
Like killing Undyne is justified, but because on neutral you can never kill papyrus before he stops fighting, killing him is wrong
a lot of monsters are trying to kill you all the time so as much as u love all the characters, if you're a random kid in a place full with monsters that say they need your soul then HOW can you not be terrified?
By the fact that you cant really permanently die.
Yeah, terrified, and what do kids do when they’re terrified? Usually they ran away. Let’s say if Undertale is real, would Frisk ACTUALLY have enough willpower to actually KILL anyone instead of running?
Would be cool to see if this is also true for yellow, especially considering clovers naive but noble intentions making even its geno route sympathetic, even if morally wrong
Decibat is iffy for you to kill, as he engaged the fight but he's only asking for you to be quiet.
You are following Dalv around, and he's asking you to leave him alone, so I don't think killing him is justifiable.
You can't kill Martlet.
El Bailador is iffy, as he engages the "fight" but he's just asking for you to play DDR with him.
Starlo is iffy, as he spends the entire wild east bonding with you, and it's clear he's not in a good state when you fight him, but he does outright say he's going to kill you several times.
Guardner is justifiable, he's binded you with vines and is saying that it's going to kill you.
Axis is questionable, because you are trespassing and he's trying to simply apprehend you, but he does say that he's going to kill you several times.
You can't kill flowey in neutral.
14:35 I never really understood why people say this about Napstablook, Mettaton, Papyrus or Sans. it's not like Sans and Papyrus are UNDEAD CORPSES, they're skeleton-type monsters. so no, they're not already dead. same with Napstablook, it's not like he's the soul of some human, he's just a ghost monster, a type of monster. and Mettaton isn't a robot, he's a ghost possessing a robotic vessel created by Alphys. I know you don't use that as an argument for why killing them is okay, but you mentioned it as if it's a fact, so I wanted to correct that, is all. love the video btw.
10:08 last time I checked papyrus cannot actually kill you. He always leaves you at 1 hp and just takes you to his garage to a supposed cell where the bars are too wide and the door is unlocked. Even if you lose to him 2 more times he just lets you go even without beating him.
Oh no you can absolutely murder mettaton, robot in body but that is still a monster, since you might not know that’s a ghost in a robot body
Alphys made mettaton for… mettaton (the ghost) then using mettaton (the robot) she convinced asgore she could make a robot with a monster soul but really it was a ghost possessing a robot giving it a soul, once a ghost is fused with a body it can be killed like any other monster, we see this with mad dummy in the genocide route as they turn into glad dummy having fused to their body and can now be killed, this also applies to mettaton
Morally? Yeah frisk wouldn’t know, mettaton has purposefully hid his life behind him and tried to erase all the evidence of him being a ghost, the most you can find is the key which leads to his old house but even then it’s not clear
Frisk killing mettaton would be justified as it would be like breaking a machine that had gone haywire and is now dangerous, you don’t think about it too much cause it’s just a robot, but even in the externally off chance frisk did learn this was a living person that isn’t bound by code and can’t be rebuilt as their soul would break once they die, mettaton still admits that someone has to die, that he would rather kill you thank let all of humanity die, and that he hired people to murder you, at the end of the day that’s just not okay and knowing he isn’t just a robot doesn’t change that
Btw Napstablook, Mettaton(the ghost), Papyrus, and Sans aren’t UNDEAD humans or something, they’re some TYPE of monsters. They resembles the characteristics of ghosts and skeletons, but they were never dead (like… they were not humans who died and came back in a different form)
Be honest if you were frisk realistically, would you ACTUALLY spare flowey after the omega flowey fight?
No.
Yes.
I don't agree with the moster kid part. Undyne is literally moving to you trying to kill you and it's not like that it's your fault that monster kid tripped so Frisk trying to escape would make sense. Basically not risking your own life to safe another one makes sense for me especially because its expected that monster kid gets saved anyway by Undyne.
I definitely should've taken more time to go over this encounter looking back on it. It's more complicated than it seems.
Well, Frisk is a kid. From what I know about kids is that (if they’re not pricks) they want to help people that they see are in trouble
frisk in neutral/pacifist: im in danger
frisk in genocide: *IM THE DANGER*
edit: OMG i have 42 likes
another edit: SIXTY SIX !?1?11?!?!!
Frisk is essentially chuck norris in genocide.
@@WyvrnOnYTI’m uncivilised because I don’t know chuck norris
@@hananaltair3563 So Uncivilised. Just kidding i also don't know
@@hananaltair3563wth bro? Check Him out in Google bc He is on his way to Your location
OMG you have 66 likes
Can’t you just like- run away tho
I think assuming a kid will attempt to kill in self defense in the first place is presumptuous, if I’m a kid in this environment my first instinct is to run…
I think that, in a neutral run, you are not only justifyed in killing Flowey, but morally obligated to.
I'd argue Greator Dog was justified because he always looked nice and never said they wanted to kill you and just look happy and you need to do normal dog tricks that any other person would know to spare them so Frisk could understand that pretty nicely but yeah other that and the Toriel part great video!
And you cant judge him cuz the spear, it would be like killing papyrus cuz bones
I'd like to say there *are* some monsters which I consider it's morally wrong to kill, like whimsum and vulkin.
It's clear that whimsum encounters you by accideny and does NOT want to kill you, but only to defened herself and keep you away cuz she's scared. Her attacks don't even aim at you so the only way you can die is by intentionally getting hit, best thing to do here would be run or spare her.
And with vulkin, she just wants a hug, but ends up unintentionally hurting you in the proccess, like a playful dog being too brute with a child. As before, the solution is sparing or flee
same goes for temmie btw
I did a run and when I beat asgore I spared him and he told me to kill him anyway beacuse he said “I’m sorry but we just can’t have a happy ending, take my soul and leave this place.” And when flowey takes the souls he just says “let’s get this over with” and puts me in the end credits without fighting omega flowey
So then you’ve already done neutral. Flowey skips becoming photoshop/omega/whatever flowey if you’ve already finished neutral
Wow really? I didn't know something like that could happen. That's pretty cool.
@@WyvrnOnYTthat happens once you reset and do a neutral route again. Flowey skips becoming photoshop/omega flowey
@@Bengt2509 no I started in a new account and was very confused
@@Bengt2509 bcz I was trying the Nintendo switch version for the first time
Gotta say, this was an interesting video. I would love to see you do more morality character play through analysis with other games. Good job man!
Something I love about the neutral route is the closure for the children's human souls who were murdered before you by supposedly Asgore (although there are hints they could have died before reaching him). It is satisfying as an ending the fact that once you get to fight flowey they are the ones to answer your call as they are the only ones who would realistically be sympathetic to your on self-defense. So you get to sort of avenge them and free them from their limbo.
9:45 he says "papyrus is" just when the dialogue box cuts off perfectly at "papyrus is"
9:41 you actually can't die in Papyrus boss fight, he will catch u and bring u to a prison that you really easy-escape prison
Froggit says "Monsters wont want to fight you when their hp is lowered" or something along the lines. Clearly, attacking when you can spare the enemy for good is the immoral thing to do
That Froggit you are talking about is the same first Froggit you encounter with Toriel. And as stated in the video, it is ok to kill him. And if you kill him, he won't show up to tell you what you are reffering.
@@merphinsky5193 What about what TORIEL says? She tells you to NOT fight enemies, that she will sort the mess up right before the room you encounter that Froggit. Just stall. And after that, you will have Froggit tell you if you hurt monsters enough they won't fight you anymore. And conveniently, Froggit appears ONCE Toriel leaves.
@@KasecTheTravelerThat Froggit is weaker than the other Froggits. You can oneshot this one with a Stick while the others can't be oneshot. Furthermore this is Frisks first real combat encounter after Flowey. It is not unreasonable trying to fend it off with a stick. Flowey a literal Flower can bring you down to 1HP with one single bullet and survived a fireball straight into his face. It's not wrong to at first assume that all monster are as strong as Flowey or Toriel and therefore attack it in the heat of the moment. Also Flowey literally says that in this world it's kill or be killed. This is an unknown place for humans with unknown inhabitants and if Flowey is the first one that you encounter it's not unreasonable that you attack a Frog monster that innetiates combat with you - regardless of what Toriel has said before.
@@selena3467I think Frisk’s actions could be justified based on the INTENTIONS. The last hit is stronger than the others, so if you *tried to* prove to Toriel that you’re strong enough by lowering her HP, but accidentally actually killing her, it could maybe be justified since it’s an accident and she told you to prove to her? It’s like an accident in training. So we can’t really count it if we don’t know Frisk’s intentions
7:28 Toriel practically encourges you to kill her... Then drops her defense like 5 hits away from what you'd expect to be the finishing blow.
I think that killing Papyrus was unjustified since no matter how many times you get hit PAPYRUS WON'T KILL YOU, he brings you down to 1 HP and then "captures" you so he can finally live out his lifelong dream.
The end RUINs dialogue you got only happens if you trigger a genocide and abort it, iunno, think genocide is pretty non-moral
Is that so? I don't believe the added context matters though because this dialogue has nothing to do with previous routes of the game, and only has to do with the choices you made at the ruins. I think regardless of whether or not this dialogue requires an aborted genocide route, my opinion would stay the same.
That’s not true. This dialogue is triggered when you spare Toriel but have killed any monsters in the Ruins. He says something different if you killed Toriel, then reloaded and spared her, though, even if you have killed other monsters. This is something that most players do on their first playthrough, so that might be why you thought this was exclusive to an aborted geno route.
@@MutedAndReported3032 Ah, that's my bad, I've only ever really seen it in the context of aborted genos, personally. Forgot about the requirement just being exp + SPARING Toriel.
Correct answer is that it depends on who you aren’t a pacifist with. Killing some one like undyne, mettaton, or the core enemies is 100% justified self defense
I wouldn’t say mettaton is tho, I have a feeling he wasn’t actually trying to kill frisk but more was set up as a reason to prop up alphys. Alphys literally gets exposed at the end of the core for setting up stuff to oppose frisk and who says they didn’t tamper with mettaton? Mettaton was probably only attacking frisk and doing things with them because it got him views and was good for show buisness. And we aren’t even considering the fact alphys trusted you and you murdered mettaton who was there friend causing them to commit suicide later in the run.
That's actually very interesting because I have done a run like that myself a few months back. "What if I happened to fall into the Underground with no prior knowledge?" was basically what I was doing and tried to be as morally good as I reasonably could. I ended up at like LV 12 or something like that mainly by killing the bosses except for Papyrus. One thing that didn't make sense was when Undyne was talking about her going though waterfall with dust everywhere or something like that, implying that I had killed any enemies in waterfall when the only person I had killed up to that point was Toriel.
2:47 the characters KNOW there are resets but dont remember exactly what you did, flowey is most likely just numb from how many resets he did. Counting sans would include mettaton, toriel, temmie, asgore, actually just everyone. (Also there IS a flee option to run from enemies)
no they don't, minus flowey as she can also remember the past. (sans dialogue is bc of the face, so he assumes it was bc he's too pro.)
however, sans is aware of resets ("timelines starting and ending")
I just have a few points of info to give and some questions !!
Napstablook is actually a they, Mad Dummy is a they/it BUT because she does transition into Mew Mew, all three work imo
Would it he justifiable to kill Temmie? While knowing all about her and how she functions - and that she has an unavoidable attack. Temmie knows you can come back after death (speaking as the collective temmie) so is dying to her really bad when she is aware?
Is it justifiable to "kill" Mew Mew? We're the one's who cause her new binding and self sense but she does challenge us again - and will kill us with no remourse in battle, we make or break her body, and iirc we are told this too, so would preventing her permanent body connection be evil?
I think toriel depends on how well you play after you fall to 2 hp it becomes very clear that she doesn't want to kill you so it can be up to debate
As someone who loves Undertale. I LOVE this idea. and honestly, I think it would be really cool to do this topic but to encompass all of the different routes of Neutral. And don't worry, while there are 80+ variations of these endings. there's like 10 Actual endings of Neutral. Undyne, Family, Alphys, Papyrus, Metaton, Exiled Queen, Dog, and No King. There are variations in these, but overall they stay relatively similar in how the Underground is ran when the Human leaves. And in case you're wondering, the ending you talked about here, was the Papyrus ending :) but overall, loved the video and the topic!
and I do have one point against yours with the first froggit you encountered. While yes, it does "jump" you, it can be seen as an over reaction to dusting it (don't want to go against TOS) when all it did was appear. and since in the previous room it was reinforced that "you don't want to hurt people" with the dummy, I can see this being one where you would try to talk first and toriel comes in to stop the encounter
Something to note about Papyrus, he only knocks you out if you actually die to him. He even leaves water for you in case. while it might not be known on a first playthrough of a game (especially if you dont die to him) Papyrus never has the intent to kill, he doesnt even bring you to Undyne. He of course willingly spares you (in genocide and pacifist) so its always wrong to kill him
One thing that I should point out is that you can abort the Genocide Run to become a Neutral Run at any point in the game. However, I would think these routes are still morally wrong to a degree, especially if you abort the Route in Hotland. There's a unique ending for it, but one thing I should point out is that Frisk still has an urge to kill the monsters during the New Home segment as a smile appears above the encounters. I just thought it was a bit interesting.
You can abort until the final “but nobody came”
That's a really good point. Aborting a genocide route, especially deeper into the game, gives us a neutral ending where we indeed were a villain.
@@WyvrnOnYT "I should have killed you when I had the chance."
6:15 as a child fleeing will be the first thing on your mind . Frisk special, Band-Aid makes it so they can automatically flee any encounter.
In addition, if we’re just going by Frisk perspective punching the dummy makes Frisk feel bad regardless of anything you said no matter what you said frisk would see it morally objective to hurt inanimate objects, and let alone monsters. So any argument you make about frisk feeling is immediately negated
I'd say that while Frisk would attack if they see it as self-defense, they're just a kid. I doubt they would want to kill anyone assuming they have no reason to. This logic leads me to believe that Papyrus is spared by Frisk, as he specifically states he's sparing you, and at that point Frisk no longer has a good reason to kill Papyrus at all.
It is true it would be morally okay to kill muffet during the fight but if they had to heal and such got to the point where she spares you then i dont think it would be that morally okay
I kinda love how the final choice on whether to kill or spare Flowey can even give pause to somebody who committed to a pacifist run on a first playthrough. I remember when Markiplier got to that point, despite having spared everyone else he encountered, he hesitated for a moment, and said, "If anyone deserved to die..."
One of my leadt favorite things about undertale is theres not enough hateable characters wich means the game rarely trys to push you to kill in any way ut doesnt challenge your resolve. And the one super hateable character (Alphys) isnt killable
lmao. True lol
Realistically, How (If you don't already know the rest of the plot, which invalidates killing anyone really (For in game, moral reasons, not external reasons)), is Alphys more hateable than Undyne?
Bro cannot handle morally grey characters 😭😭😭🙏🙏
Can't kill Alphys Mengele in any route, makes me sad :
Jerry
I’d like to make the argument that fleeing from any encounter that allows you to while still progressing is more often than not the justifiable decision. Granted, the term is fight or flight for a reason. Just another avenue to consider since so many of the non-boss fights bar undyne offer this option
what i feel about papyrus:
If he spares you and you feel as if he cannot be trusted (IF you have not been captured yet), its i guess ok to kill him..? I mean idrk.
If you fake out papyrus, that's morally wrong, obvi.
If you get captured once or twice and then he tries to spare you when the battle is almost over, i feel like it would not be moral to kill him, after all, he does heal you and doesn't kill you. And also the fact that he seems genuine.
If you get captured three times and then papyrus spares you, i feel as if a random man came up to me and started attacking me and then putting me in a shed with the intention of trapping me, 3 TIMES. (Even if you are being healed i dont feel as if it justifies the whole thing) i would NOT trust him, like what if he just captures us again.
Ik sans tells u hes harmless, but also again, hes a total stranger, both of them
Also papyrus is willing to harm u in the multicolor puzzle due to him allowing you to be endangered by all of these things: electrocution, piranha attacks and fighting monsters without consent.
One thing I like to point out is the Snowman/Snowman Piece interaction.
While it's technically not part of the combat or neutral route, it is a rather personal bit of morality.
You have the option to take the snowman piece all the way to the end, but you can also eat or drop the piece in front of the snowman.
After doing it a second time, he'll never forgive you. This even gets dialogue if you've done a True Pacifist afterwards, to reflect on your actions.
3:05 “they really aren’t that dangerous” this is said as if most monsters can’t literally kill the human
especially in the case of undyne, muffet, mettaton and asgore the only reason frisk survives the underground is because they can literally rewind time
Also about the Toriel thing, for the first five times Toriel didn’t even let you spare her, meaning you probably thought you couldn’t and felt you were forced to kill her.
7:00
I think one part of the rationality to this fight is to think more about Toriel's motivations. Just like Napstablook, even though you can't really tell at first, Toriel isn't really coming at Frisk to kill
Even ignoring her avoiding killing you when you're at low health, her dialogue before and during the fight say it as well: She's trying to discourage you from leaving
Which is not a good look for her either, but she also firmly believes Frisk will die on their way to Asgore or to Asgore himself. She wants Frisk to turn around and head back up into the house, not to kill them.
And then also adding in the fact that when Frisk is at low health, Toriel's attacks get weaker, and when Frisk is even lower, Toriel just plain goes out of her way to aim her attacks off to the side to avoid hitting them
Still not good to be holding Frisk against their will, but, outside of the constraints of the game, killing her is a bit much. (Unfortunately there is no "Just beat her down and walk past her unconscious but still breathing body" option, lol, though I guess something like that would make it too easy to avoid tough decisions)
Edit: There's also the idea given through the intro to some battles that some Monsters aren't *actually* fighting you? I forget which ones in particular except for Shyren, but sometimes the flavor text talks about how the Monsters are minding their own business and just wander up to you. . . Honestly it's really weird, but yeah, those enemies it's probably better to spare
But the Royal Guard? Nah, waste them, lol. Dust them all.
the ending where you almost kill everyone, leads to sans just hating you.
my first playthrough of undertale I didn't really consider the implications of killing the random critters, and I didn't even know you could spare toriel tbh :(
Great video!
I think that killing toriel isn't that bad because if you try to talk to her the first few times she doesn't answer so you could think that this is the only option. On the other side you can clearly see that she tries not to hit you when you're low and you really need to try to die to her so i don't know. And since when can you die to Papyrus?
My answer to whether you’re good or bad on neutral
Yesn’t
My first playthru of Undertale, I killed every boss except Papyrus, though I would have spared any boss if they had decided to walk away. At the end when Sans was explaining Exp in the judgement hall, I was like "I mean, it was all self-defense, so I don't feel bad" lol.
If you ever kill Papyrus, you will become my worst enemy. However I did kill him in the gynecide route to fight Sans. Was it worth it? Idk. Sadly I never finished that run. He's still dead.
I get where the videos coming from but I feel it misses one of the biggest parts of undertale. I see the first couple monsters that can’t be spared immeadietly being fine to morally kill. But as soon as Frisk dies once Frisk would find out that she can’t truly die. This makes killing a monster from then on the easy choice to spending the extra time finding out how to spare one. The main point would be: if you have infinite time and infinite lives is it morally correct to kill something when you know it’s possible to avoid doing so?
One thing that makes me believe why killing most of the cast, even the minor monsters unjustifiable, is that self defense must be proportional to the assault.
You can’t kill someone just because they pushed you hard to the ground with kill intent.
Most deals pretty minor damage compared to your 20 HP, and you can always dodge or defuse the situation, or run away, since they don’t chase after you.
Undyne,Mettaton and Asgore might be the only ones that pose enough of a threat for you to consider killing them self defense.
What I've always wondered: If your SOUL shatters into pieces when you die, how are those who are trying to kill you for your SOUL going about taking it when they kill you? Do they just... sweep up the pieces and deliver them to Asgore?
Maybe alphys assembles them in lab or smt?
I think the whole SOUL break animation is just for the looks. I mean it would be pretty lame if everything disappeared and just left the SOUL alone on the screen before the Game Over appears. Maybe Toby could have made it so on Game Over we see the SOUL being trapped in a container (like Asgore's), but I feel like it wouldn't give the same effect.
It’s so funny that he says that killing is justified so casually 😂
I'm going to give my own thoughts. This is going to be a long comment.
I'm not entirely sure about Toriel since she does, in fact, start the battle, but she also avoids killing you. You can die to her, but it's rather difficult, especially if you aren't actively trying to do it. However, since we're assuming it's Frisk's first playthrough and how often first-time players don't understand how to spare her, I'd say it's justified.
Papyrus is completely unjustified. But I really like how the game handles him in terms of judging you because the judge, Sans, obviously doesn't like it when you kill his brother, so he'd judge you more harshly. But the game justifies this harsher judgment by making it literally impossible to kill him by accident, therefore removing any possible justification for killing him.
By the way, in the game, Napstablook and Mad Dummy are both shown to use they/them and not he/him. It's very easy to make this mistake, but I still want to let people know if they get it wrong. Mad Dummy also later switches to using she/her in certain versions of the game (specifically Switch and Xbox, but yes, this is still canon).
Also, Mettaton is even more confusing because, although the only way to learn this is by getting into a secret area in Waterfall, he is a ghost, not a robot. That's why you gain EXP from killing him. Also, he doesn't want to kill humans; he wants to entertain them. To do that, he'd need to absorb your soul and go to the surface. I'd still say it's justified, though, because he is rather clear about his intentions to kill you and take your soul.
Finally, Asgore. He literally asks you to unalive him. If you don't, Flowey will. If you stop Flowey from removing him, he will commit self-die. In a neutral route, there is no way to spare him.
I don’t think it’s morally wrong to kill Papyrus. Especially if, say, you end the fight with like 3HP. Imagine if some guy kept talking about capturing you, brought you close to death, and now you’re morally expected to spare him because “He’s worn out”. That’s ridiculous. We also know Papyrus is stubborn and resilient. There’s nothing stopping him from getting rest and continuing to hunt us down “for the Royal Guard” except for our preconceived notions as a gamer of knowing that the boss fight is the probably the final time we’ll have an altercation with him. (And yes, Papyrus will never kill the human, but they don’t know that)
And then you are in no way morally obligated to help Monster Kid. Undyne is literally right there and to help them is to move extremely close to her. You’re essentially jumping in front of a bullet (or spear) to save someone you met just two minutes ago and, again, Undyne is right there. She’s just as able to save Monster Kid as you are.
I still liked the video, despite these disagreements because props to you for posting an Undertale video where you say there’s nothing wrong with killing Toriel.
Papyrus was going to bring undying there to kill you so probably best if you killed him also Papyrus is on that Dan Schneider shit Bro went on a date with a child that's probably not even in the double digits💀💀💀💀💀💀💀 do not let this man anywhere near Society
I feel like something important to consider here is that most non-boss monsters become sparable if their HP is low enough. I personally feel that going out of your way to kill them when you have the option to stop fighting isn't a very morally just action. Sure they were trying to kill you, but at that point in the battle they are willing to end the fight with both lives in tact.
I have a few things to say.
First some monsters are not actually trying to hurt you. Such as Greater Dog (who just think that fighting is playing) or Vulkin (who thinks it can heal you). I can also mention monsters who are not actually dangerous such as Whimsun (who will never damage you if you don't move and keeps apologizing, the poor is just scared) Mitgosp (Who pays you no mind when they are alone with you) or Jerry (Jerry.).
Second, fighting is NOT what a child would try first if they found themselves in this situation. They would run away from danger first.
Third, Papyrus can't kill you. He always brings you down to 1 HP but never 0. He even lets you pass if you fail too much. Killing Papyrus is heavilly unjustified as he is not a threat, and it is made clear during all of Snowdin's area.
Also I think that the morally right thing to do after beating Flowey is to spare him, yes he did awful things, but he can't fight back even if he threatens you, and if we do not take resets in account, it's the last time Frisk sees Flowey ever, so he can't hurt Frisk ever again after this point, so why kill him ? (I'm not sure if this point is only me though)
I think that's about it, still good video though, because I disagree doesn't mean it's bad. If anyone want to add anything, you're welcome to do so.
The entire point of Frisk it's that they are a representation of the player, it isn't a regular human, it's you
And by that perspective, neutral makes so much sense, we are learning the game, and it's the first time we have an RPG were you can spare enemies, we don't know the concept of genocide and pacifist routes, maybe we don't know how to proceed with certain characters in order to spare them, or we killed them by accident.
My first route was neutral because my English wasn't the best, and I was getting used to the spare mechanic
1:09 As someone who dosen‘t have a guinea pig. I see this as an absolute win. (I subbed tho)
💀Thanks for watching.
Honestly in my neutral root I wasn’t keen on killing the doggos in the snowy forest but some of them had to go
To be honest, I think the only reason I spared Flowey after his Omega fight (when I had Undertale at least...) was because when you think about it, it would just make him suffer more.
Think about it. In the genocide run, he mentions to you (Frisk, not the reader) that he did _everything_ he could think of doing to every monster in the underground. Killing them, getting answers out of them, likely verbally abusing them as well... (among other things I don't really want to get into), he eventually got bored with it all.
On top of that, he basically gets the last laugh when you kill him, since he says he knew you had it in yourself to be apart of his mentality of "kill or be killed." Am I really gonna let someone get satisfaction from that after trying to kill me? No.
...then again, I doubt Frisk would think about that when dealing with Flowey on their first run.
A reset is not a form of turning back time.
See it as in watching and editing a video.
You let the video run for a while, an at some point you decide you want to watch it again. But instead of reversing, you cut the video at that point and place the start of the video at the now cutted point.
It's not gone, it's still there and the monster can "remember" them. But for them, it felt more like a weak dream they had at night, which is why dialouge changes when you load back.
Now to Sans. It's difficult to say, but I believe he don't notice the reset like Flowey does.
He know they exist, probably like Alphys, but he can't notice them. He always reads your facial expression when he kills you. (Maybe a reason why he barely change his facial expression)
3:23
Welp, RIP Flowey later on.
2:49 if you get killed by asgore he actually acknowledges that he has killed you, showcasing his awareness of resets.
My Dad would LOVE THE GENOCIDE RUN. he loves hard games :D
It is never morally correct to purge a papyrus.
He can't even kill Frisk, he just captured as I'm sure 200,000 different comments have said.
But what they haven't said is that papyrus... uh... papyrus is just too cool a dude to justify killing...?
I feel like it isn’t that unjustified to leave monster kid. Undyne is faster than us, an adult and is the same distance from monster kid than us. Up until this point, she’s only been trying to kill Frisk. If there was a killer who’s been chasing you down now at the other end of a bridge, I don’t think it’s too wrong to run away even if someone else is in trouble
One thing that nobody said is the ability to reset that makes justifying some kills a bit harder. On your first play trough killing in self defense is 100% justified and the same can be said if you don’t know how to spare an enemy(for example, if you don’t know that you can flee during the undyne fight or that MTT stops fighting if your reach 10000 spectators) but if you replay the game and know how to end a fight without nobody dying you can’t kill for self defense, because you choose to fight instead of sparing. This thing is addressed at least twice in the game, one of you choose the talk option with toriel after killing her one (is there a way to give mercy without fighting or fleeing?), and the other with sans’ judgement if you kill papyrus (do you think that if you have some special power you should always try to do the right thing?). Still, frisk is a child and trying to spare the enemy could mean dying and suffering more times, so it doesn’t oblige you to be a pacifist, but it still makes justifying some kills a bit harder
I could see someone arguing for Doggo since he makes it clear that he can not see you, meaning that he also can not kill you (unless you actively help him to do so). It would be like fighting a blind guy with a sword. Sure, you can defend yourself but quietly sidestepping would probably be even easier.
His attacks aren't just easy to dodge, they're hard not to.
considering you can literally flee from almost all fights, i think it wouldnt be morally correct to kill most of them. Self defense is way less broader and lenient than the common sense (in the sociological definition) makes people think. If there's a option where no one dies, it isn't morally correct to use the option that someone does.
Papyrus is not justified he spares and does not kill you he stops at 1 hp and if you lose to often he offers you to walk past him
but with the previous conversations
"im gonna capture you and have the royal guards get you" which means death and another war
that's fair game to kill
@@MarcusCollins69 well Papyrus is naive he thinks they take care of us and not about kill us, he taught it would be fun for us
@@Linktheangel1993 and being naive is not an execuse
@@Linktheangel1993he's naive not a moron he knows for a fact undying is going to kill a child
Really fascinating video! I agree with a lot of what you said, but one I strongly disagree with is your stance on doggo.
So you said that Doggo threatens to kill any human he sees and is trying to kill you. However, he is a pushover. I think the fact his attacks are easy to dodge DOES matter.
Compared to frisk, doggo isn't exactly a threat. They might hit you one time but the second you understand how to avoid the attack, the fight is over. The question then becomes - if you are up against an enemy that can't hurt you anymore, should you kill them? Really, even in the context of Frisk meeting this character for the first time, I think you have to be a little cold to knowingly kill an enemy that can no longer hurt you, particularly when there is another option available.
Some morally grey things you missed are some of the encounters with enemies who aren’t actively hostile intentionally, greater dog is just playing and doesnt realize hes harming you, same with vulcan in hotland, and a couple others i imagine.
I think the ending where you kill sans and flowy without killing anyone else is probably the best...i think
We be learning kantian ethics with this one 🗣🗣🗣🔥🔥🔥
I don’t know if killing muffet is moral as they do say that someone (metaton) said that you hate spiders and kill them so she could have seen you as a threat
Just reminding you that Mettaton is not a robot and is a ghost 🤓 sorry I had to do it …
He's now permanently assigned to his body, so he is a robot now, once ghosts fuse to their body they stick
Killing Undyne, Asgore, and most deffinitley Flowey is entirely justified since these guys are the only ones with a known body count.
So in the monster kid room, you say that saving him in the only moral thing to do, but then again I feel like undyne slowly approaching would scare frisk to run away, now watching as monster kid falls down, I’d say is morally wrong, that’s just my thought
In my opnion neutral is is ok, It's self defense for monsters like Undyne and muffet, and while small monsters don't deserve dying (most don't even realise you're a human), a small child could accidentaly kill them in self defence.
-
Better than the people who say GENO is justificable, even with Papyrus, Maddy and Mk sparing you, you chasing monsters for hours, not letting them go while yhey ead for mercy and you always attacking on the first turn, meaning you are always the one to start fighting
I was thinking of what route I would do if I was in the underground, and it endup with me realising I would die to Muffet or Mettaton, but ignoring that.
-
If I was in the underground what would I do? Fight them...? Spare them...? Neither, I would just run from every encounter, monster want to fight me? Run, Napstablook is crying? Run, the dogs are after me? Run(1 is blind, 2 are dumb, 2 just care about the smell), bosses like Toriel would be harder, but I would just need to go out while she's sleeping, papyrus wouldn't kill me, so even if I couldn't run away he would do that thing if you lose 3 times, and undyne spare method is to run away in the first place.
-
With would endup with me dying on muffet stuck on her webs or with mettaton in that elevator, and even if I attacked monsters, it says is mostly on bases on intent, and I'll probably be more like "get away" then "I want you dead", so I don't think I would accidentaly kill anyone.
-
But what I am meaning to say is, some people say stuff like "why do you need to be nice to people that attack you?", but you don't need, you can run, you can attack untill you defeat them and let them go, you can scare monsters away, you can explain their attacks hurt you, you don't need to try getting along with them, just don't pick murder as your first option on peoples who are way weaker than you.
I guess another point is, what neutral run it is? A aborted geno? Killed one single monster at the beggining? Killed 80+ monsters while not activating geno?
@@ViniciusDiasissyI think you don't remember your debate with ultimate Capper,
@@jevilsugoma1743 who
@@ViniciusDiasissy that troll face pfp guy in the video called "Undertale yellow all bossesmmmm" something like that, can you help with something I wanted to talk to that guy but mssges keep getting deleted what about you tell that Ultimate Capper guy to check my about me
LMAO at "Elvis Presley Dude"!
Frisk is a child. I don’t see how they know how to spare some monsters that are trying to to kill them
I also dont see how he knows how to murder monsters instead of flee from them as a child