A lot of Deltarune… isn’t quite a refutation or counterargument to Undertale’s themes as much as it is going, like, “I mean, you’re not wrong… but it’s a bit more complicated than that sometimes”. Or, like, elaborating on nuances that were present in Undertale but weren’t given as much focus as Deltarune, as a much longer and more complex game building on Undertale’s themes, can give them.
And it happens most often with Ralsei. Ralsei’s worldview often seems to be an oversimplified and corrupted reflection of Undertale’s themes. Exaggerating them and stripping them of their nuances so that the other characters (mostly Susie) can respond to them and re-introduce nuances and complications back into them.
Most obviously this is done in Chapter 1 with his ultra-Pacifistic and ultra-nice attitude to conflict. His views at the start were a lot more simplified than Undertale, as even a True Pacifist Playthrough requires one to defeat Asgore and Flowey through violence at least once. Plus a bunch of times where Sparing an enemy required an acknowledgment that they can’t be appeased or convinced to back down from a fight. There was sometimes a bit of trickery involved, rather than just 'being nice'.
But these nuances weren’t really Undertale’s narrative focus, the focus was on selling the Player on the value of Pacifism in the first place. So Ralsei’s oversimplification of the idea is a good basis for Deltarune to start putting these nuances to the forefront of the story and really focusing on them, now that Undertale has already established the baseline of “even Random Encounters can be real people with feelings and you should always strive to non-violence.”
And I think a similar thing is kinda happening with his whole…
Which feels to me very reminiscent of…
Like, okay, it is very thematically important that Asriel can’t be ‘saved’ in Undertale. The Royal Siblings Tragedy is a traumatic shadow looming over so many characters in the game, and it’s not something that can be perfectly fixed by being nice or even with Unkillable Time God Powers. Toriel and Asgore and, yes, Flowey/Asriel himself all have character arcs centered around moving on from the tragedy and accepting the present, and would be weakened if a Player could just… magically fix things.
But that doesn’t mean that doesn’t hurt to hear Asriel be so resigned to his fate. Susie Deltarune’s reaction to hearing Ralsei speak so plainly about the idea that he’s just an illusion and that she should prioritize her ‘Real Friends’ very much echoes the emotional reactions of most Undertale Players seeing Asriel ask them to not worry about him and focus on their real friends because he’s already doomed. And in both cases it’s extremely understandable.
The fact that even with Unkillable Time God Powers, the past is the past and there is a value in acceptance and moving on is itself an important nuance in Undertale’s central theme of Determination. With enough Willpower and Defiance, the Player can defy the concept of a kill-or-be-killed world, and free the Monsters from their seemingly hopeless prison, and resist the laws of death and time… it’s a power that comes from a refusal to accept the inevitable. But if you deny everything that goes against your personal will, you’re gonna end up like Flowey, utterly consumed by grief and denial over Chara’s death.
Flowey has to accept that the game between him and the Player is going to end, Asriel has to accept Chara is dead, Asgore has to accept his family will never truly return to what it was before, the Player also has to accept the game is over and that replaying it will just tear away the characters from their happy ending, and that the Asriel they saw at the True Pacifist Ending is gone.
But even with all of that… that doesn’t lessen the emotional pain of watching a little goat boy asking you very kindly and very genuinely to abandon him. It doesn’t make it any less valid for one’s reaction to be “Well, who said I have to leave and forget you? I’m sure that with the pure strength of my heart and the Power of Friendship(TM) I could save you too!!”. It doesn’t make it any less heartbreaking, even frustrating, that this is the thing the game ask you to give up on.
Undertale already added some nuance to the situation, first things first, Asriel does honestly appreciate it if you go all the way back to the start of the game and talk with him. Although he still feels that he's doomed, at least he accepted that Frisk is going to remember him.
Secondly, with Flowey’s Post-Pacifist Dialogue
And especially that Winter Alarm Clock Dialogue…
…both showing that while there was nothing that could be done to stop Asriel from turning back into Flowey, that does not necessarily mean Flowey is doomed. Despite his claims both in his Flowey form and as Original Flavor Goatboy Asriel, Flowey does still show hints that he cares for other people, that he has been truly affected by the events of the True Pacifist Playthrough, that the heart he had as Asriel isn’t actually truly gone…
We’re still dealing with the fact that we can’t undo the trauma of the Royal Siblings Tragedy but… Just because Flowey can’t be magically turned back into the person he was before his Trauma, doesn’t mean he is doomed. What happened happened, but he is still capable of healing and self-improvement. And although he’s still kind of in the margins of the Post Pacifist Friend Group, it doesn’t seem like he’s just been abandoned or forgotten for the sake of the people who are more ‘real’.
So just like with Ralsei’s Pacifism, I think his fatalism and absolute lack of self-worth is an exaggerated and simplified reflection of Asriel's situation. It's kind of a Very Different Thing between Ralsei believing he's ontologically doomed to matter less than Lightners and Asriel believing he's ontologically doomed to be an asshole, but...
It still creates a basic foundation to add nuances and subversions to the point about the importance of moving on and acceptance. Not rejecting it outright, but demonstrating how seemingly clear-cut situations of acceptance can become more complicated.
Because in Susie we now have an actual character to voice the frustrations many players felt about being unable to 'save' Asriel and argue in favor of the desire to never abandon a friend, no matter how doomed or unimportant or lesser he claims he is.
Because now we can better demonstrate the more toxic and unhealthy manifestations of the idea of ‘moving on’. How it can be just as bad as clinging to the past relentlessly.
And allow more time on-screen to explore the nuanced alternatives that aren't either unhealthily clinging to the past or quietly accepting your own lousy fate.
And now we can create more situations where Susie’s instincts to reject acceptance and reject leaving anyone behind and reject ‘moving on’ are actually the unambiguously correct answers.
Not necessarily always, I do think she’ll have to accept that Gerson is dead. And obviously with this being DivorceRune the Divorce Game, the theme of needing to move on from clinging to a past that will never be restored just as you remember it is still very important.
But she has a point, and just like with Pacifism, I think she actually has an important lesson to teach Ralsei specifically.
Undertale’s Meta Narrative: Understanding the player's three main narrative “stand-ins.”
For those who came in late or are currently playing deltarune, I'd like to take a moment to revisit Undertale, its parallel story, for the sake of context in themes. In this post I will analyze the meta-narrarive of Undertale as represented through its main characters.
Frisk, Chara and Flowey/Asriel each represent a core aspects of the player while being distinctly separate from the player. Because, unlike the player, they can't be removed from their world. Their context.
In Deltarune, (I haven't yet touched Ch. 4&5 because of exam season,) the questions of control, identity, freedom, escapist sentimentality etc. are central–and the game provides an even more mature exploration of them, through a protagonist that is both completely aware of the player's control and outwardly rejects them. There's a lot more to discuss when it comes to analyzing Kris, but this is an Undertale post first and foremost, to provide some context to the same themes.
1. Frisk:
Playable, but not representative of the player nor a self-insert. Their character is purposefully vague and quiet, so that you ASSUME they are a self-insert, (just as you assume it is them you are naming at the beginning of the game,) while actually having a full personality & agency of their own.
They choose how to deliver the lines you make them say & go out of their way to introduce themself to Asriel by name without you doing anything to prompt that. Also, all by themself, they ask Gerson what would happen if Asgore adopted them–if he'd continue aging. This implies a semblance of free will outside of the player–as well as them having their own desires.
I like to think that frisk is aware of Chara, but isn't aware of the fourth wall or the player as a separate entity. They go on to live their life, having no control over the player's choice to reset. Hence why Flowey tells you to let Frisk live their life. The determination stems from their soul, awakening Chara and having the power of resetting appear. But once they're out of the underground, it is not up to them.
However, when they are in the underground–they provide the player with choices. To me, the dialogue options, the Fight vs Mercy mechanic and everything else, are things that Frisk is considering already. Pondering on, thinking about. They won't actually do anything that goes completely against who they are, hence why they refuse to laugh at the amalgamates, or why they refuse to even consider taking the soda from undyne's house or alphys' fridge. They hate soda! They also don't let you take any more pieces of pie, because they're intimidated by it, even though it'd be very useful. Their personality also shines through by what they are given determination by. The simplest, most mundane things–from pointless garbage, to small mice in holes. They find beauty in everything.
So, we have the characterization down–but what does Frisk represt as a figure? As our playable character?
Frisk is at that vulnerable age when you are first developing your worldview based on your influences.
In the pacifist route, Frisk represents innocence. They follow the strongest influence they've had–assuming they are a parentless child, that being Toriel–and learn to practice the way of mercy.
They represent the player's pure-hearted sentimentality. The player's ability to just love the game and its characters, as they explore the underground. The player's desire to understand what's going on for the first time, make their choices, develop their playstyle all while falling in love with the friends they make along the way and deciding that, maybe I would rather stay.
Their pondering to kill comes from fear, perhaps, at first, in neutral routes. But in genocide? There is no, "despite everything, it's still you" but instead, "it's me, Chara/ {your name}," which means Frisk has entirely lost themself in the process of wiping everyone out and someone else's influence has taken over.
‼️The player sacrifices their connection to the world and characters to the altar of curiosity, (flowey) completion (chara) and the warped sentimentality of not wanting the game to end yet (asriel.) And so, the player has sacrificed Frisk, who represents exactly what made the pacifist route so moving. Connection.
Frisk is part of this world, the player isn't. Immersion broken, the narrative sacrificed, for a deeply unsatisfying process and a conclusion in which you literally sell your soul.
2. Flowey / Asriel:
Flowey is a character who, in order to fully understand, you do in fact have to play the game in each entirety. You have to become him in order to know him. He is everywhere, everything. The villain, the hero, the protagonist, the antagonist, the victim, the perpetrator, the tale of tragedy, the tale of hope, the tutorial for genocide, the key to true pacifist. The most important character in the whole entire game.
He represents the player's curiosity–and it's clear as day.
You know there won't be any real consequences. These characters aren't real, you can take it all back. And as you commit genocide after befriending everyone probably a hundred times over, you tell yourself, "I don't like this, I'm just doing this because I *have* to know what happens–" but do you?
Just because you can, does that mean you should?
Flowey becomes desensitized to violence and even dependent on it–in this world, it's kill or be killed. To challenge that mindset, is to pretend you haven't practiced it, haven't engaged in it–which is why he mocks you when you kill toriel, even accidentally–and then come back to spare her. He considers it inevitable that eventually, you'll play the game by his rules. And eventually, you do. Not because you have to, but because you can. In the friendly rpg where no-one has to die, you're still curious to see what happens *if.*
Flowey is unfeeling and disconnected. Soulless– even though another version of him really loves the people he's hurting now to see what happens. To see how they'll react. If he'll feel anything. If things will suddenly start making more sense and if his actions will start gaining purpose again. If he'll gain more information, maybe, instead of repetitive, predictable dialogue. And isn't that the whole situation of the player? The player, you–another version of whom loves these characters, hurting them to see how they'll react and if you'll gain new data. Curiosity killed the flower–and it chastises the player, too. Leaving them soulless and hollow.
Asriel, meanwhile, has all the love. Actively.
He has too much of it. He can feel everyone's heartbeat at the same time, aching for the same catharsis. He feels endlessly and he doesn't want that to end. He'll keep you there over and over because he doesn't want to let go of these feelings. He loves you, loves this world, this connection to the friends you've made–and doesn't want to return to nothingness.
He's willing to kill you again and again if it means you'll keep playing with him. He's willing to help you get different endings–willing to deprive everyone of their freedom, keeping them in the underground by force just so that the game keep going. And isn't that warped sentimentality entirely representative of the player?
You as the player keep depriving them of their freedom BECAUSE you love them so much and don't want your time with them to be up. The reason you keep re-creating that world, the reason you keep destroying it. Why you keep fluctuating between villain and hero, never letting go. And as you keep doing it, squeezing all the content out of the game, out of Asriel, he always asks–
“Don’t you have anything better to do?”
And no, the game doesn't punish you for loving it. It merely challenges the way you practice that love–because it knows, inevitably, you'll love it most when you're ready to let it go. And it knows, inevitably, that will take a while.
Onto the hottest topic, now.
3. Chara / “Y/N”:
Ohh, boy. We're really in it now. Let's delve into arguably the most misunderstood and controversial aspect of utdr.
The player's scapegoat, (pun intended) for their own terrible actions.
Chara is the closest thing to a self insert. You can name them whatever you want at the start of the game–still, they are their own character that predates the player's influence. They aren't your vessel. You don't design them. You don't shape their personality. Their backstory has occurred way out of your control.
And isn't that interesting? Your supposed self-insert, having control in places where you don't? Even when you're misguided to think the first human died via a mysterious illness, it's later revealed that they were, in fact, the one in control of it. It was planned.
Flowey doesn't seem to know the difference between Chara and the player. When Flowey breaks the fourth wall, something that Frisk never does–he talks to the player and calls them by Chara’s name, whatever that may be. It's what he recognizes to be his sibling’s name regardless of if it's your own.
But Flowey isn't a reliable source of understanding when it comes to Chara, considering a moment ago he also thought Chara was Frisk. He conflates these things, because he has no player behind him–yet held the same resetting power. He assumes there's no third party. He assumes you and Chara are one and the same.
Chara themself, however, MAKES A CLEAR DISTINCTION BETWEEN THEM AND THE PLAYER. "you and I are not the same," and "I do not understand those feelings," when it comes to the warped sentimentality that plagues you to keep replaying the game over and over. They don't get it.
So, Chara is the closest thing TO the player, but they aren't the player. They are the only person, however, aware of the player's presence. Of their influence over the game. And yet they also know something much more important: The player isn't part of this scripted world, so even as they orchestrate its reactions and events–they are never truly the one in control. The game is in control of itself, at the end of the day, so it seizes said control via Chara.
In the pacifist route, narrator Chara, (a headcanon so widely supported it might as well be canon) is light-hearted enough. A faded presence in the background, trying to match Frisk's energy while making the world more easier to navigate for them. They know the steps, the scripts, the names of each random encounter. They provide Frisk with helpful information through “Check” that would otherwise be unattainable to them, even if often times it's just silly commentary or snippets of judgement over tomfoolery.
In the genocide route, the execution points and the levels of violence increase right into Chara's file. The soul they share with Frisk is given their name–Frisk's determination having awakened their sprit. And as Sans explains, the more you hurt, the more you kill, the easier it becomes to keep doing it. Chara's soul–already open to violence, because of the “unhappy” influences of their youth–becomes corrupted. Pushed to the highest level of violence.
Genocide Chara represents the player's desire of completion. Of seeing things all the way through. Of getting stronger and stronger. Getting on top of their game, finishing all there is. Being untouchable.
Chara, the very person who wants to “erase this pointless world” considers the player to be sick, twisted and perverted for doing it again and again. And when, post-genocide, you attempt soulless pacifist, Chara doesn't let you forget what you did. They chastise you, they remind you of your lack of control to protect anyone after the game is over. They don't let you get away with feeling good about yourself–because if you cared about these characters the way you claim you do, you would have never done what you did in the first place.
Chara does not understand the player's warped sentimentality. They only understood completion. And why? Well, as suggested by the poem about the number 9 Toby Fox released, Chara wants to become untouchable because they've been afraid. Hurt, betrayed. Humanity wronged them. Violence was instilled in them by force. Nothing can hurt you when you reach a certain point of completion. A certain point of control.
They climbed the mountain in a suicide attempt–and suddenly, became the hope of all monsters. Think of the pressure, the weight of that on a child–especially a child that has probably internalized by now that love is conditional and violence is possibly the only way. They are loved by monsters as long as they provide hope that one day the underground will be empty. The (literally) fallen angel of the prophecy–the demon that comes when people call its name.
Chara attempted suicide a second time, in sacrifice. The attempt was successful, the sacrifice wasn't. They attempted to get control of the situation to fast-forward the release of monsters. They didn't trust joy, or love, but they valued those who offered it. Monsters.
But Chara never valued their own life, or humans in general. They loved the Dreemurrs, even if they thought indeed that their hopes of equality and acceptance by humans were baseless. They let them hope, because they were loved for it.
But their affections were real. From the sweater they knitted for Asgore, to the childish little details like filling the glass to the brim because “it's the most efficient way,” to the friendship locket they shared with Asriel. To their willingness to die, trusting him to do as instructed.
They, “weren't the greatest person” and Asriel, now, as Flowey, has to redefine that whole entire codependent relationship and its many flaws–Chara's many flaws–but that doesn't make Chara evil. They climbed the mountain, “not for the happiest reason,” but desperately tried to give meaning to their survival. To give back to those who showed them what Mercy means, not matter the cost.
They are part of this world, unlike the player. They do not share the same disconnect. They're cynical–but not uncaring. They laugh to cope with pain, they joke morbidly. Never do they show vulnerability. They're in control when they die, when they kill, when whatever–they have to be. It is but a shield. Weakness is taken advantage of. Weakness, holding back, not seeing things through–that's, in Chara’s mind, what got Asriel killed.
They aren't wasteful like the player nor overly sentimental like Asriel. They are a secret third thing–efficient. Will killing 6 innocent humans free monsterkind? Do it. Will erasing this world at the end of genocide put an end to everyone's suffering? Do it. Will taking control of the soul to mock the player also take away their false sense of control, their false sense they can do whatever they want? That their choices are inconsequential and will be forgotten in the grand scheme of things? Do it.
But if it's never necessary, they'll never do it.
Pacifist Chara responds to the violence of humanity with a plan to empty the underground & free everyone. Asriel goes along with it at first but doesn't follow through. Asriel dies.
Genocide Chara responds to the violence of the player with a plan to empty the underground by “destroying this pointless world,” Flowey goes along with it at first but doesn't follow through. Flowey dies.
They're nothing if not consistent.
At the end of the day, the game is wrapped in a shroud of their tragedy. The tragedy of two siblings, two best friends, two stand-ins for the player, endlessly haunting the narrative–holding each other to impossible standards and coming to realize neither of them are what the other thought. That doesn't mean they don't love each other.
And the player, to whom their tragedy is a spectacle–the player who orchestrates it–isn't even fully in control. Because the main character that represents them does not respect them in the slightest.
Frisk, Chara and Asriel aren't the only instances of meta narrative in the game, nor the only parallels to the player. From Alphys to Sans, the conversation is endless. And the themes of identity and freedom are at the core of every single character in this game.
It is those three children, however, that are most often misrepresented, misunderstood, mischaracterized–and forced into binaries. We try to frame Frisk as the pacifist ending, Chara as the genocide ending–we treat Asriel and Flowey as one and the same, even though the notion of simplifying it that much makes Flowey himself uncomfortable– (he tried to be Asriel but the trauma shaped him into something else. The expectation of having to act as Asriel despite not feeling like it broke him.)
It's no less stiff than arguments of their genders! neither frisk nor chara are JUST stand-ins for the player, they're characters beyond it and their non-binary identities matter. Chara bad, Frisk good is just another pointless gender binary we try to impose on them lmao.
At the end of the day Undertale is a tale, full of allegory, that can only be told through a video game lense, or else it'd lose a whole lot of nuance.
Thinking about how Chara is just as "game breaking" in pacifist as in no mercy.
They literally refuse to let the red soul shatter while fighting Asriel. We can't choose to do it as players and Frisk finds the savepoints, they don't make them, so they certainly don't have the power to refuse to die on their own. The soul fractures to 00.0000000001 hp (9 decimals+1), but we don't die (Chara's death, which we usually would), because at that point, Chara is determined to save Asriel. It's literally their memory that saves him.
It doesn't matter in which direction the numbers go, the stats are always Chara and they can be determined in a good or a bad direction, that's all.
I've decided to remove the section dedicated to Papyrus analysis from my megatheory video script so I can spend more time really focusing on it in it's own video without it looking ridiculous in the runtime of a theory that's already going to be long.
To me, Papyrus is aspirational. When Papyrus chooses to spare you in the no mercy route, it is the same as when you spare Undyne or Asgore. They could kill you, they probably have, but you choose to show kindness because you know they deserve it. In the moment you spare them, you show that you believe they can do better, BE better. Papyrus’ encounter in the no mercy route is a perfect reflection of this. He sees someone who could kill him, who has harmed others, and he still decides that there is good in you.
The choice to interpret his decision to spare you as foolish paints a strange self-loathing on you, the player. I do not believe that even with the harm that I caused that I am beyond redemption. I can do better, I can be a better person even now. If you truly believe that Papyrus is foolish to see you as someone who can make better choices, then you inadvertently show that you do not believe yourself to be worth it. You believe you cannot improve. You think it’s foolish for anyone to see the potential for improvement in you. Do you not see how harmful this is? This cartoon skeleton sees more good in you than you do.
Here's a section I wrote. It's not really intentional but like, every time I work on this script I write stuff that is so heartbreaking. I'm glad I decided I will be naming the analysis video "A CATASTROPHIC BREAKDOWN OF PAPYRUS"
If there’s one theory-slash-prediction regarding the rumored singular ending of Deltarune I hope to be true, it’s that this hypothetical “happiest outcome” will somehow arise simply from Being Nice To Berdly.
Not just because it’s the perfect crime after years of gamers treating Kris being in Berdly’s presence like it’s a Fate Worse Than Snowgrave (because obviously hanging out with someone you casually play games with is way worse than being forced to psychologically torment your childhood friend in a twisted parody of matrimony amirite guys), but because we’ve already seen this happen before in Undertale’s Neutral Ending.
The funny thing about this ending, or rather endings, is that the overall result is the same. Frisk walks through the archway, fade to white, cut to title, credits roll, etc. Except that etc. is where the difference lies, in the form of a post-credits phone call from Sans that will change drastically depending on your very own choices. Despite all your actions technically resulting in the same conclusion, it’s what comes after that makes a difference.
And that’s not the end of it.
Following this conversation on a route where you gained some LOVE (which is most likely what happens for first time players, before everybody found out it’s better to Not Do That), Flowey will prompt you to start from scratch and go through the underground without killing anybody.
Then even if you go out of your way to spare everyone, you still witness Asgore die, still have to fight Omega Flowey, and still get that phone call.
This isn’t enough. You don’t just have to avoid gaining LOVE… you have to gain some love.
In an ending where you have spared everybody, went on a play date with Papyrus, did cooking lessons with Undyne, and went out of your way to be nice to everyone you meet… you get the Second-Happiest Outcome, where the above cutscene is exactly the same except the phone call is a little less pessimistic.
But even this isn’t the full picture. Following this “Neutral Pacifist” ending scene, Flowey appears again with some different lines… and a prompt to instead go visit Dr Alphys and see if you can be better friends.
In hindsight, this is all part of his strategy to collect every single monster soul - but it’s a plan that involves you making your way through the True Lab, learning the truth behind Flowey’s Existence, and facing Asriel Dreemur in a final showdown that frees the monsters from the underground.
And this is all set into motion… by a date with Dr Alphys.
This adorable little Egbert-esque lizard is probably one of the most underappreciated characters in game, and I’ve hardly seen anyone recognize how important she is in the path towards a True Pacifist Ending. Heck, even her story in the Neutral Route has her bond with Frisk after distantly watching them through her computer screen, giving them instructions and guiding them through puzzles, a mindset harshly acknowledged as merely playing the role of a hero through Frisk despite knowing that it’s all just an act, and she becomes motivated to be a better person and take action towards fixing her mistakes thanks to them - a direct parallel to our own relationship with Frisk, as we project onto, grow attached to, and become inspired by them despite knowing it’s all just a video game.
So I think it’s more than a little important that earning the best ending has you go out of your way to help Dr Alphys become a better person.
And now for my main reveal.
Has anybody noticed the certain choice of words that Susie and Ralsei use when hoping things could be better?
They wonder what would have happened if they were just a bit kinder.
And gifting Berdly the plush-toy-of-discord is considered an act of “unexpected kindness”, along with his freedom from Queen’s control wire being attributed to “kindness and mercy” on our behalf.
Sure, this may be entirely coincidental. Heck, Berdly going unacknowledged by those he desperately wants to be accepted by, being considered entirely irrelevant in the eyes of the prophecy even on the weird route, doing everything purely out of a misguided belief that this is the role he’s supposed to play, interrupting a personal moment between Noelle and Susie even though deep down he just wants to belong, having his creation built for the sake of impressing Queen discarded because It Sucked yet forming the base for the thrash machine, having the freedom to make a dark fountain per committee approval before Ralsei’s cutscene interrupts and retroactively makes him look stupid for Doing The Thing Literally Everybody Else Already Wanted To Do… yeah Berdly’s just a joke character meant to be a minor thorn in your side, don’t worry about it he’s definitely irrelevant to the bigger picture.
I’m sure it’s fine to forget about him and focus on the real message of Deltarune, namely that the stories we share and the games we play together bring us closer and the bonds they create matter more than we think… except for when it comes to this one random Glasses Nerd I Guess LMAO.
I don’t think you need me to point out the contradiction here. Berdly’s treatment as a joke character, despite all the evidence suggesting he’s a lot more similar to Noelle, Susie, Ralsei and even Kris, along with all the bird imagery and connections to the Player and the Angel, really just tells me there’s something going on behind the scenes that we’ve yet to fully realise.
that dastardly chara has physically forced me to write an entire video essay about why they're a multifaceted, three-dimensional person. whatever shall i do.
Toriel and Asgore are frozen at the moment of their children’s deaths. Literally, they’ve completely stopped aging, but in addition to that, they seem to keep Asriel and Chara’s rooms completely unchanged and they both repeatedly reenact their children’s deaths with the fallen humans. Even the implication that Chara was mummified reads like Asgore and Toriel were trying to preserve their appearance from when they were alive, instead of following the natural process of decay. It’s an interesting parallel to Flowey’s reaction to the trauma of his own death (living through and resetting the same span of time over and over) and to Carol’s issues stemming from Dess’s disappearance.
After nearly a decade, it's easy to forget what's canon and fanmade, and Sans' character has been interpreted in so many different ways that sometimes the line between Toby's writing and popular fan consensus gets blurry.
In this video, I aim to analyze Sans as depicted in Undertale, Deltarune, and various official media written by Toby himself, like the anniversary Q&A, the alarm clock dialogue, the casino, and newsletter materials to provide a useful reference and fun look back at why Sans is such a cool character despite all the intense hype.
