When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
2 comments
Newest
OldestMost Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
D
ZeroCredibility
6 months ago
But the actual crime where the hostages were killed makes no narrative sense in this reality-rewrite, and isn’t that a requirement?
With the reality-rewrite, first the Agency somehow gained access to information about a secret meeting to prosecute them (how?), took the people present captive, and rigged up an insanely complex mechanical device at the meeting location to kill them (why? Such complexity works against their motive).
Their next step must have been to send out a message to the military police threatening to kill the hostages, otherwise the military police wouldn’t be there at all, right? But their motive for this crime would be to protect the Agency, which means they’d need to kill all the people present at that meeting to prevent prosecution, so why send out a threat or let anyone know where and when they were killing people?
Next they wait around until the military has had time to arrive (why?), before positioning themselves in front of the windows (where they’d obviously be sniper targets) and revealing their faces on cue. Then they intentionally kill everyone except the most important person in the Agency’s prosecution, leaving him as a witness to their crimes and faces. Effectively making this entire crime utterly pointless.
Wasn’t the Book supposed to require narrative consistency? This crime is ridiculous and makes no sense.
But the actual crime where the hostages were killed makes no narrative sense in this reality-rewrite, and isn’t that a requirement?
With the reality-rewrite, first the Agency somehow gained access to information about a secret meeting to prosecute them (how?), took the people present captive, and rigged up an insanely complex mechanical device at the meeting location to kill them (why? Such complexity works against their motive).
Their next step must have been to send out a message to the military police threatening to kill the hostages, otherwise the military police wouldn’t be there at all, right? But their motive for this crime would be to protect the Agency, which means they’d need to kill all the people present at that meeting to prevent prosecution, so why send out a threat or let anyone know where and when they were killing people?
Next they wait around until the military has had time to arrive (why?), before positioning themselves in front of the windows (where they’d obviously be sniper targets) and revealing their faces on cue. Then they intentionally kill everyone except the most important person in the Agency’s prosecution, leaving him as a witness to their crimes and faces. Effectively making this entire crime utterly pointless.
Wasn’t the Book supposed to require narrative consistency? This crime is ridiculous and makes no sense.
That group is Cursed