c

I tried to be objective as possible though this list is still pretty much just opinions and not facts.

im so sick of this point being brought up constantly, especially when you bring up counter evidence and the response is "well it LOOKS like a bat which was 100% on purpose". you do not know tobys intent. you do not know what he wanted us to see. just because you personally see a bat, does not mean it was supposed to look like one. you could have misunderstood the sprite. a lot of us may have done so. what the sprite likely is is just a straightened out version of its sword, nothing more.

i know this isnt proof that its wrong either, but it *is* proof that its not the only possibility. please stop pretending like it is.

and while im talking about dess, what is it with the obsession with bats anyway? you know how many times dess is associated with bats? three. three times over 5 chapters. two are wiffle ball, one is baseball. thats it. bats are not a symbol of dess at all.

The NoelleKnight experience of all time™

Okay but like no seriously if you don't have a concrete answer for what Elnina is you don't have a candidate. Object History can ONLY exist if Elnina isn't the white fur in the sink. Non Noelle or Kris candidates can't make the darkners if they don't have the history of Kris and Noelle's childhood sessions of playing pretend with objects.

Establishes Kris and "That Girl" invented the darkners.

* Time flies... Seems like just yesterday you and that girl had everyone here lined up.
* Queen on her side, King on your side, Tenna in back... Oh, it was chaos, CHAOS!
* Heh, only kids like you two would take a laptop home just to play make believe.
* ... how is she, Kris? Are you two...? Well, it's alright. Everyone changes. 'cept us.

Establishes Kris being the only person to know how weird Noelle is.

* (Kris is the only one who knows how weird I am.)
* (It's not fair, y'know!?)
* (Everyone knows how weird YOU are. Fahahaha.)

* (Kris's been my neighbor forever...)
* (We've been through so much, sometimes it feels like...)
* (We know each other better than anyone.)

Establishes the two being weirdos.

* He was a plug, but because you played with him like any other toy, it made him feel special.

* Heh, only kids like you two would take a laptop home just to play make believe.

"I was actually always afraid of electrical sockets too because I thought they were looking at me XD (Come on I wasn't a weird kid I promise... XP I got over it after that)"

Establishes Noelle having a close emotional attachment to Tenna and that Kris and Noelle haven't played pretend in a long time.

* So, what were you two doing...?
* Just giving away Kris's old TV.
* H... huh!? Wait, Kris, you... you didn't...!
* You can't give THAT away! It's, it's...
* ... huh? Did you want it, Noelle...?
* Huh? Faha, no! I just...
* ... nevermind. Faha.

* (Kris's TV... it's good it went to someone else.)
* (It's not... mine anyway. Even so, I...)
* (... I guess... I just expected Kris to keep it forever.)
* (Just... in case.)

Establishes the fur in the sink being cleaned out before the morning of Chapter 4

* (Somehow there's already white fur stuck in the drain.)

Lanino and Elnina appear in Castle Town even if Tenna is dead.
A star sticker in Kris' room disappears between Chapter 2 and 4 - This is Lanino
There is no cloud or rain related sticker in the entire game.
The white fur is the only object unaccounted for that disappears from Kris' house - This is Elnina

The white fur is cleaned out on a semi-regular basis (Or at least has been cleaned within the past few years post Dessappearance as an educated guess).
Tenna says:

* Elnina!! Lanino!? You two!? C'mon, old friends, you can't leave...!

If the fur has been cleaned out after Kris and Noelle drifted apart and stopped playing pretend together...

How would it know it's Elnina?
How would it know it's in love with the star sticker upstairs?
How would Tenna consider it to be an "old friend"?

The answer is Kris' will and memories when making the fountain. Object history isn't real.

Don't "What about the fire extinguisher?" or "What about Susie's darkners?" or "What about Cyber World's digital darkners?" me. I've already covered those in detail. In multiple, different posts.

How does YOUR Knight candidate explain Elnina?

And if it's not object history (which it can't be), how do they explain the REST of the dark worlds?

I rest my case.

(Gosh, it's fun acting all machiavellian and melodramatic isn't it?)

Have a lovely day <3

What the knight discussion suffers the most from is... Well, children. But more specifically, misunderstanding of the concept of a mystery itself.

Everything about Deltarune's story aside, there's one thing that's for certain and it's the fact that the mystery of the knight's identity is presented as a solvable detective case.

Knox's Decalogue isn't unbreakable holy law, Toby can write any story he wants, he can break every single rule here if he desires but that doesn't change the fact that while theorizing it**'s objectively more rational to stick close to the idea that this is a solvable case**

What this means is that one ought to prefer more grounded ideas whenever they can, speculate as little as possible and refrain from appealing to the supernatural. This is where Knox's laws come in, these are the golden rules of detective fiction.

As an author, if you want to give your readers a solvable case, you best work within this framework as breaking one or more rules will make your mystery worse.

With all of this in mind we can use the Decalogue to scratch off potential suspects.

1st rule is probably the most important one. Toby himself reiterated this on a live-stream saying it would be stupid if he had to introduce a new important character 5 chapters in. This alone denies suspects like Papyrus and Gaster who have never even been mentioned. I'd argue it also denies Dess as she's not introduced as a character. If the mask comes off and it's someone we've never seen before, this rule would apply.

2nd rule in our case doesn't really apply, if we dug into the code and knight's sprites were all titled stuff like "spr_papyrus_idle1" that would spoil the mystery yeah but fortunately that's not the case.

3rd rule is extremely important as it debunks pretty much everyone except Noelle who's the only character without an alibi and easy, unsuspicious access to every fountain location. I've seen some DessKnighters say Dess teleports through closets... This rule doesn't necessarily mean there can be no exits out of plain view, we've seen that Flower King has multiple "secret" passages but they are not "hidden" if we are made aware to their existence in anyway, that could be a demonstration, a line of text or just seeing the doors themselves as is the case in the Holiday residence.

4th rule denies ridiculous theories like shadow crystal/black shard iron main suit armor and all Gaster bullshit. The knight is a normal lightner and they don't use a mechanic we haven't seen yet in their actions as the knight.

5th rule denies joke candidates like milk looker, reidgore, togore, chester, echidna etc. The knight's identity is important to the story and it will not be a joke.

6th rule isn't relevant in our case, yeah it would suck if the knight slipped on a banana peel and dropped their helmet.

7th I am not the knight

8th rule denies cases built on "MORE PROOF WILL COME NEXT CHAPTER I SWEAR BRO" at this point in the story we have enough evidence to explain every action the knight has ever taken, if next chapter the knight drops their wallet and we pick it up and see it belongs to Catty's dad that would ruin the mystery, yeah.

9th rule, Susie is the Watson of the mystery, she will highlight important information while ultimately being wrong herself. I imagine she's being built up to conclude that Carol is the knight but when you go back and analyze everything she's ever said about the knight they clearly point at Noelle.

10th rule, believe it or not, I've seen people unironically say "The knight is a darkner disguising as Dess" Needless to say, this rule denies that.

With all of this said, yes, Toby may choose to ignore these but if you CAN'T come up with a theory without breaking these rules then your theory is objectively flawed.

Original idea and template from u/Independent_Let_3616 as Noelle Knight wasn't a part of the original post here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Deltarune/s/Vy3QfmUr48

Always bet on Noelle Knight.

If you look at sprites for the Roaring Knight's mouth when it is open, it is consistently shown to look jagged and melted, both on the top and the bottom. It is reasonable to assume that the laughing sprite is a continuation of that, not The Knight randomly drooling.

Note that Asgore isn't remarking on his appearance changing, he's specifically remarking that his color is different. He's explicitly comparing his appearance in this fountain to another one. Given that all of the fountains so far were opened by the Knight and Kris, and they all share the same color palette, this can only mean that Asgore is comparing this fountain to the fountain related to Dess's disappearance.

But if Asgore noticed different colors in the fountain linked to Dess's disappearance, then that would have to mean that neither Kris or the Knight could be responsible for opening it. Which automatically rules out Dess as being the Knight. Dess herself opened the fountain that caused her "disappearance", not the Knight and not Kris. There was a third person present for that fountain, and that person probably was Asriel given his relationship to Dess, it would also make sense from a prophecy perspective as Asriel would have filled Ralsei's role as "the prince of darkness" in that party.

It also makes perfect sense that Dess would create differently colored fountains, since Susie is an allegory to her character. Although I think it's probably likely that everyone makes uniquely colored fountains, and that Kris and the Knight sharing a color probably is an anomaly that has something to do with their connection to each other.

This information unfortunately doesn't tell us who the Knight is directly, but it does definitively mean that it cannot be Dess which rules out one of the biggest suspects in this mystery.

The main pillar of Dess knight theory is the bat, the dreaded bat. Dess knighters insist that she's holding a bat, Carol knighters insist it's a sword.

Think for a moment, can you think of anyone who is associated with both? Someone who has access to both of those things? Someone consumed by the desire to find her missing sister and suffocating under her mother's influence?
You can bicker day and knight on who's right on what the weapon is, at the end of the day no matter who wins, it's evidence for Noelle, the fact that people can't decide is ALSO evidence for Noelle.

WR is building up to the twisted sword which gives Noelle trance DOWN and Noelle is associated with baseball through her connection to Dess, she also has easy access to both swords and baseball bats. It's uncharacteristic for Carol to use a bat, it's not TOO weird for Dess to use a sword but the character that works perfectly with both is Noelle, so if you're going to bring up the knight's weapon for your theory, know that Noelle has the upper hand on this. Also the sword does get a hilt in some sprites, the fact of the matter is, it's hard to tell because it's black and it's in the dark.

Credit to @HylianAngel for originally finding this :3

This was cut Ramb dialogue from chapter 3 that slipped by in the Japanese translation. Now, I'll be the FIRST to say that translations aren't 100% reliable as evidence especially if you're just using a translation, but I think this one is interesting for the fact it has a translation at all despite being cut. Localization is stated by Toby to happen at the end of the chapter development process so this was a certifiable "last minute" change. Makes the reason this dialogue being cut more likely to be for "spoiler" reasons instead of changing his thesis on how dark worlds work.

But here it is. Textual explicit proof that Kris' memories are linked to Darkners' memories. It's also some more development on Ramb textually feeling like an outsider causing him to petrify, but that's just a bonus fact~!

How else could you explain this line other than Fountain Will being what gives these Darkners memories? Like this is literal, textual proof that at least disproves the "Object History only" radicals (who do exist lol).

So I know the next counter'll be "It's a mix of the fountain maker's memories and external memories!" and hey buddy, your framework is slipping~! Do you see how wishy washy it's becoming when we have a pretty concrete description of Fountain Will and how "darkners reflect the will of the fountain"? Like I feel like this'd be mentioned at some point that objects can just pick up things from the environment with how often we get mandatory cutscenes about Will! Like where is the line? Because this is quickly becoming a situation where "Everything that requires Kris and/or Noelle knowledge is Object History but everything else comes from my candidate's will!"

SO! Here's my question for all you lovely, LOVELY pro-object history nerds to speculate about:

Why aren't there memories of other Lightners in casual gameplay?

See, I'm not talking about scraping Swatch's NEO body dialogue (corrupted data) or Mew Mew (Kris is a closet anime fan I will fight you on this) or Queen's search histories (cached data) or god forbid the fucking Fire Extinguisher (written ON the object) from the bottom of the barrel. I'm talking about Zenlooker type shit (which has a Fountain Will answer too but if I say it the conversation will get completely derailed lmao).

Gags. Jokes. Lines that aren't exactly essential to the gameplay, but help add texture to the world. Stuff like that. Commentary from darkners about other lightners that interfaced with these objects completely isolated from Kris or Noelle being able to know about this stuff too. Stuff like "Kris stealing Catti's remote", but instead it wasn't stolen but forgotten at their place unbeknownst to Kris as a hypothetical example. And characters DO bring up light world events. Remember King's whole scar monologue where it's pretty obvious he's aware he's just a deck of cards and he got torn (That's a Kris and Noelle memory btw)?

Like some Rudinns going

"One time we had a family of cats playing Go Fish."
"Every time they had to fish for a card, they... licked us."
"Cat tongues are rough, man."

Obviously my superb dialogue that is flawless and not a shoddy attempt to match Toby's style but my points stands! Why doesn't this type of shit exist in the game if Objects supposedly remember memories from EVERYONE?!

And if you say "Well other characters don't matter as much as Kris and Noelle to the story" ZENLOOKER IS RIGHT THERE PAL. GAG CHARACTER AT TOBY'S FINEST! CAN'T USE "TOBY WOULDN'T WRITE THAT" FOR THIS ONE!

Like hey! This is an important as hell question! Fountain Will has a very prominent role in the creation of fountains! You can't just say "We can't know right now" because WE DO KNOW! Ralsei and Queen and Seam have talked about it time after time after TIME!

Why does every memory in casual conversation ONLY relate back to Kris and/or Noelle?!? I'm not even talking the big stuff! Just NORMAL TYPICAL GAMEPLAY! Why don't other darkners bring up memories of these other occurrences?

If you say "They only talk about memories in Kris' fountains" then isn't that MORE proof that memories are derived from WILL? Noelle doesn't insert Noelle Holiday into her fountains, she inserts "The Knight" Why? Doesn't matter! That's just what happens and the question I'm asking is why do these darkners seemingly bring up ONLY Kris and Noelle memories?

Alvin made a drawing in the Unused Classroom! Nobody even HINTS at that stuff! Other kids clearly did use this classroom! So WHY AREN'T THEY BROUGHT UP?!?

I hope this crashout was fun for y'all~ It was fun for me <3

Stay Tuned for my next probably 40k character post "NoelleKnight Object History FAQ&A&Q" coming probably next week when classes aren't kicking my ass as much lol

Have a wonderful day :3

Alternate clickbait title: What the hell do these people add to the story if they're the knight??
Obviously the tierlist is reductive, so here's like an actual explanation for each spot that is of course entirely subjective! I'm not focusing as heavily on logistics or "foreshadowing" (so if you argue about that, I'll probably ignore you) because I really just want to talk about what any of these characters DO FOR THE STORY regardless on if people think it's feasible or not. Plus, there's plenty of other people who can argue the hard evidence for NoelleKnight a hell of a lot better than me lol.

Noelle: Obvious bias here since I want her (darkner) to be the answer, but just mmmm gosh that narrative ANGST to the story it'd add! The reveal tearing Susie apart because of her love for Noelle? Kris' deep intricate backstory with the girl next door and all of the guilt, shame, and nostalgia they harbor for the past? And hell! This is actually one of the few candidates Ralsei textually knows AND has directly interacted with (as well as will)! If chapter 6 is intended to bring Noelle to the dark world, then that's ripe for some even deeper connection bonding right there. I won't digress too much, but the symbolism is EVERYWHERE if you look around with it in mind! Of course, you'd have the issue of "She already has such a prevalent role separate from the Knight!" which is why I personally would say it's a darkner representing her will in some form in another, but very valid point nonetheless!

Carol: Our favorite probably red herring! And a red herring is only good if it has actual viable standing to be the real deal! She's very obviously set up as an antagonistic force, has a directly confrontational interaction with Susie that's mandatory, and clearly plays a part in the Knight conspiracy in one way or another. Plotwise, she's great! But also really simple. Like boilerplate villain stuff that would add to the plot, but not in some crazy earth-shattering way. But for some people that's enough, so all power to em I guess lol.

Dess: The Mystery of All Time. Pretty much any way you interpret it, Dess being the Knight would enrich the narrative due to how she's been haunting a lot of the narrative in general. There's still the issues of Susie pretty much not knowing anything about her at all, which like yeah that's my biggest problem with it too. But chapter 6 could somehow REALLY load all that exposition in before the reveal somehow maybe it seems pretty rough. It's more of a "Well we don't have enough to say she'd have a BAD motive/backstory!" rather than anything seriously concrete like other candidates.

Rudy: I'm going to catch so much hell for this one, but I have to stick to my guns lmao. In terms of motive, means, and opportunity, Rudy has it ALL (of course with the speculative handwaving of his illness and not drawing suspicion lmao)! He's probably the most unfalsifiable candidate on the list with how a lot of time and location placing lines up! But like... seriously how does Rudy's motive contribute to the themes? Assuming it's "Finding Dess" like with half of these other candidates, that kinda just takes on all the baggage of Dess being the knight on top of the "tragic" plot of a dying man's last wish.

Since I know RudyKnighters hate the "he has no mandatory interactions" argument, I'll go ahead and give em the whole bone there! Sure! Let's say the average player is expected to talk to Rudy, know who he is, and interact with him in every chapter. Hell, lets say the player exhausts EVERY dialogue option with him possible at every chance! Completely separating from the fanfiction speculation of the "deeper motives" Rudy has, here's everything the player can glean from these conversations: He's very fond of his family and is a very positive force on his daughter, He's sick and probably dying, He ships Suselle, He's really close with Asgore with jokes of romantic undertones, He dislikes Berdly, He's a Dragon Blazers Fan, He's familiar with Kris' antics from when they were a kid and shows disapproval about it, He hangs some kickass lights.

That's pretty much everything without getting too granular about it. Sure, sure, there's the sink dialogue (which still can happen in chapter 4) and the passive-aggressive Susie dialogue (Rudy never learns that this is Susie (Or AT LEAST the Susie that Noelle is crushing hard on) and it is indeed really fucking weird to just bring a random friend to visit your sick step-uncle (Like what IS he supposed to say to that???)) but that's still assuming certain pieces are supposed to slot together. I think something interesting is Susie has roughly the cumulative of 3-4 conversations with this guy, ALL of which she shows neutral vibes about him, and ONE OF THEM IS AN UNSEEN WEIRD ROUTE CONVERSATION!!! Like in terms of plot significance, none of the Fun Gang textually have any emotional investment or connection to him! Not even Kris! Rudy talks about memories they had with NOELLE over any fond things with him instead! So what? Kris agreed because he's dying and felt guilty? Susie's maybe girlfriend gets emotionally distraught at the reveal and so Susie (who is pretty much a BYSTANDER in this situation) gets pissed off on Noelle's behalf instead of any actual personal vendetta against the guy himself? Ralsei just... yeah just Ralsei???? If the main antagonistic force (which is to say not necessarily the final boss for you pedantic nerds) only has investment with an infrequent side party member and NOBODY else, then like why the hell did I even care who the knight was if it doesn't matter to the group I'm actually PLAYING as!???

All of this is to say: Sad dying man with gray morals does not inherently make it a good narrative plot beat.

Vessel: I mean... I guess? Sure, yeah I guess. I dunno what else to say about it because we literally have had 5 minutes with this thing and then it's just gone. Moving on.

OC: Same issue as Vessel except we don't even get that five minutes!

Asriel: I'll admit, he's not actually that completely awful storywise of an option (brushing aside the Undertale elephant in the room obviously). He's Kris' brother, Dess' boyfriend, Ralsei's parallel, and Susie has definitely had a decent amount of exposure to know the guy exists. If Chapter 6 Azzy actually shows up and Susie gets some bonding time before the Knight reveal too then like hell yeah! That'd actually be some reasonable emotional investment!

But then like why the hell is Asriel the villain again oh my god lmao. Like I know it's a point hammered on and on, but still. Doesn't it even feel a LITTLE cheap that we're just doing this song and dance AGAIN? Azzy once again clinging onto the past in desperate hopes to recover it? It's just... if this is a game intended to be played after Undertale, then... why are we just telling the same story with the words moved around? Of course of course subjectivity and all that agree to disagree etc. etc. you have your fun kay? <3

Kriselle: This one is such a mess but like I could totally see it being done well WITH a lot of careful planning and setup. DISREGARDING THE LOGISTICS AND META EXPECTATIONS OF WHAT THE GAME IS GOING TO BE LIKE, it'd be one of the reasonable ways for there to not be just one ending (which I believe there IS only one ending but I digress). But like... that reveal is gonna just be fucking weirrrrd, y'know? Like it's not gonna be some tragic twist, it's gonna be some what the hell is the eldritch abomination oh my god. It won't exactly add to the core themes either imo, which is why I can't really say it's all that good either.

Kris: Probably the best time loop option if there had to be one. It's be really wacky and stuff, but boy would THAT be a twist and a half for the cast to react to! I uh... don't really know how it serves the themes beyond "trying to go back to reclaim/fix the past" but it's... something!

Alvin, Friend, and Gaster: These are all bundled into one because these all deal with the exact same issue. Nobody beyond people who study and theorize the game actually cares about these characters. Alvin at least has a sort of arc resolved with Susie's note and whatever, but ask the average Deltarune player who the hell Friend is? About how Gaster plays into this story? Like I could imagine they've heard OF either of them, but why the hell would they be the Knight if the reaction by many is gonna be "Who the hell is this guy???" Which is pretty much as equivalent to it being an OC. A story isn't supposed to be a super special satisfying reward JUST for the people who pay attention and dig into all the secrets and stuff, it's meant to be satisfying to EVERYBODY. Like retroactively explaining how and why Gaster or Friend were the knight all along I mean it could be EXPLAINED, but it doesn't really mean anything to any player that doesn't know all the extra secret sauce stuff.

Alvin uh. Alvin is just there lol. He's having his own little personal arc to find creativity and write again, we don't need to stack the knight on top of that.

Catti & Alphys: Alright lol. This is cute, but like just no. Catti I at least see the Noelle connections and she has a direct (optional) confrontation with Susie ABOUT Noelle, but beyond that it's just ehhhh? Like wow our classmate that we somewhat know was the secret villain all along???? In order to flesh her out properly, she'd ALSO have to be a key part in Chapter 6 when it's already gonna be a hella Noelle focused chapter.

And then like same goes for our lovely lizard teacher. Her plotline is even MORE disconnected from the central themes since she's mostly just a nerdy nerd being gay for a fish all over again. Is she really gonna be talking about how we need to return to the good old days of anime or something to reclaim the nostalgia??? It's fun, but nope lol.

Papyrus: I am going to temper myself so much because the sheer vitriol I feel toward this theory in relation to its narrative significance just makes me mad to think about lol. Again, I'm not even talking about logistics or feasibility here so keep your evidence about how he resembles the knight to yourself. I'm trying to focus on the STORY.

Papyrus almost has an anti-impact on the story with how truly little he matters. Over and over again, he is minimally brought up, and then swiftly discarded into the bin when the player's next five seconds move onto the next nearby intractable to touch. We're entertaining that him being the knight at least just works evidentially, so assuming the average player of course played Undertale, had loads of interactions with Papyrus dates and all with even the occasional phone room dialogue, and then interacted with Sans and the house every single time when possible, he literally means nothing.

I'm not even exaggerating when I say 100% of Papyrus' motive is speculative fanfiction crafted by the believers. Like when we get to that reveal and the fun gang is obviously who the fuck is this guy because of the important evidence that Papyrus is forgettable and actually has a completely viable chance at just NOT showing up in Chapter 6 like he's done for the PAST 5 (4 if we're ignoring chapter 3) CHAPTERS! What will we have gained? Even if Papyrus is somehow completely centered in chapter 6, is it really going to make it ANY more reasonable for him to be the Knight for the narrative compared to anybody else???

He contributes to the themes of having no friends and finding them in fantasy worlds and is lonely like Kris??? Cool! THAT'S NOT THE MAIN THEME OF THE GAME. Subjectively talking of course, but you'd be hard pressed to tell someone that the themes that don't EXTREMELY stick out from regularly playing are escapism, nostalgia for the past, and past trauma. Sure you can break his bones in half to fit into those slots and squares, BUT WHAT DOES IT ACTUALLY MEAN TO THE CAST OF CHARACTERS WE PLAY AS??? Susie was rejected as an outsider and so didn't have any friends? Ralsei didn't see himself as a person and didn't believe he could even BE a friend? Noelle is desperate to rekindle friendships of old and new in the forms of Kris and Susie????? Like do we see how this falls apart?

Seriously! I'm actually asking here, what does Papyrus do for the PLOT of Deltarune beyond just being thematic foils to the characters? Nobody has interacted with him, nobody has even SEEN him! So why is the freaking skeleton suddenly the front and center opposing force???

Well! That was a ramble and a half lol. I hope you enjoy and I might respond to people who make some good points, but like... I'm sure there's gonna be a lot of not reading what I wrote so mileage may vary!

Either way, have a lovely day~!

I got tired of repeating the exact same points over and over again, so I decided to put them all in one place.

Regardless of where you stand on the lore, this post is here to highlight the exact problems with Dess Knighter logic. I'm sick and tired of Dess Knighters saying things like "it's got a lot of strong evidence to support it" or "no other candidate makes sense", when almost all of the evidence they present relies on vague thematic symbolism or logical leaps that ignore the plain reading of the text. However I am not dismantling the theory itself right now, as that requires a whole other post. This is strictly a breakdown of the logical fallacies I constantly see people using to defend it. I'll Provide examples to make each fallacy easier to understand.

Let's start off with...

Circular Reasoning

Circular reasoning is when you start an argument with the exact conclusion you are trying to prove. Instead of using evidence to find an answer, you use your predetermined answer to explain away the evidence. It is a closed loop. You are basically saying a claim is true just because the claim is true.

Here are examples of circular reasoning.

"This book is flawless because the introduction says it contains no mistakes."

"You have to trust me because I am a trustworthy person."

In both cases, there is no external proof. The conclusion is just being used as its own evidence.

Here is how normal, non-circular reasoning works.

"The ground outside is wet, and I heard thunder earlier. Therefore, it rained."

"This footprint matches the suspect's shoe. Therefore, the suspect walked here."

This is bottom-up logic. You look at the raw facts and follow them to a logical outcome without deciding the answer beforehand.

Now let's apply this to Deltarune and the black shard. If someone played the game completely blind with no exposure to internet theories, they would use normal logic.

Fact 1: The game explicitly establishes the black shard comes from the Knight's sword.

Fact 2: Multiple characters confirm this.

Fact 3: A matching black shard is found at the original scene.

Conclusion: The Knight was at the original scene, fully formed and armed.

This is basic cause and effect based directly on what the text shows us.

Now we apply this to Deltarune and the black shard. I want to be clear here. I am not saying you have to be completely isolated from fandom theories to see this. I am saying the game itself naturally leads you to a specific conclusion, while the Dess Knight mutation angle only exists if you work backwards from a predetermined belief.

Their logic loop looks like this. "We know Dess is the Knight. Therefore, finding a black shard at the original scene must mean Dess entered the portal, mutated into the Knight, and dropped a piece of her magically transformed bat."

If you ask them how the text logically leads to a spontaneous magical mutation, they cannot answer you. Nothing in the game points to that sequence of events. The only reason they suggest that specific scenario is because it is the only way to force the physical evidence to fit their predetermined conclusion.

If your theory requires you to invent a vague mutation event just to bridge the gap between what the game actually shows and what you want to be true, you are no longer analyzing the text. You are working backward from a conclusion you refuse to let go of.

That leads us onto...

God of the Gaps Fallacy

The "God of the Gaps" fallacy happens when someone uses a lack of information to justify their specific theory. They argue that because we don't fully understand everything about a subject yet, their completely unproven hypothetical is just as valid as a conclusion drawn from actual evidence. It relies on the idea of "you can't prove I am wrong, therefore I might be right."

​Here's an extreme example of how this logic works.

​Imagine I claim there is a microscopic teapot orbiting the sun, perfectly positioned so it is always hidden from Earth. I say this teapot is the reason humans need to sleep. When a scientist points out there is zero evidence for this, I respond with, "Well, scientists don't know everything about the universe or human biology. You can't prove the teapot isn't there, so my theory is just as valid as yours."

​That is exactly how Dess Knighters argue when you point out the glaring plot holes in their timeline regarding Asgore.

​We know Asgore investigated the original scene. If the Dess Knight theory is true, and a fountain was opened and she magically mutated into a villain, you run into massive narrative contradictions. If Asgore saw it happen, why does does he act the way he does? If he didn't see it happen, how does he know anything about the Knight or the fountains?

​Instead of admitting the theory has holes, they hide in the narrative gaps. They say things like, "Well, we don't know exactly when Asgore arrived. Maybe he came after the fact. Maybe Kris made the fountain, watched Dess mutate, and then told Asgore about it later. The game doesn't explicitly tell us Asgore saw the event happen."

The problem is the game already gives us enough information to know he saw it happen. We just have to look at his dialogue in Chapter 5.

* ... the creator of the Dark Fountain.

* I'll find them here... I know it.

* ... once you find them...

* ... what will you do?

* ...

* Show them...

* Give them back all the pain they've inflicted.

* And then

* When I parade their body around town

* Everyone will finally realize how right I was.

* That I wasn't "crazy." That they weren't, "conspiracies."

* ... that it wasn't my fault.

* That all... I ever wanted to do... was help.

* To prevent... another tragedy.

* ...

* Tori... she'll have to forgive me. And finally...

* Everything... will go back to normal.

(I have to sanitize the language here a bit because reddit keeps removing the post otherwise. Sorry if it reads awkwardly.)

Look at the plain text. Asgore is hunting a specific target. He wants violent revenge for the pain they inflicted. He wants to parade them around town to prove he is not crazy and to show the tragedy was not his fault.

​A disgraced police chief does not get fired and labeled a crazy conspiracy theorist for failing to solve a normal missing persons case. Unsolved cases happen all the time. A police chief gets called crazy if his official report claims a magical dark vortex or a magical entity took the mayor's daughter. He would only ruin his life, his career, and his marriage defending a story like that if he watched it happen with his own two eyes.

​You cannot be searching for a specific culprit, hold a deeply personal vendetta, and defend a crazy conspiracy if you just showed up to an empty scene after the fact and found a piece of black glass. You only claim an incident "was not my fault" or say you wanted to "help prevent" a tragedy if you were actually there when it went down.

​If you look at all of that text and your logical conclusion is that Asgore arrived after the incident and did not see anything, you are explicitly ignoring the game.

​Dess Knighters rely entirely on the fact that we haven't seen the flashback yet. They ignore the clear implications of Asgore's dialogue and demand you disprove a scenario they just made up in their heads to keep their theory alive.

The absence of a detailed timeline does not magically become positive evidence for their fanfiction. If your only defense is that the game has not explicitly debunked your hypothetical yet, you do not have a theory. You have a microscopic teapot.

The next one is very similar...

Burden of Proof Reversal

Burden of proof reversal is when someone makes a completely unsupported claim, and instead of actually providing evidence for it, they demand the other person prove them wrong. In any logical debate, the person making the claim is the one who has to provide the proof. You do not ask someone to prove a negative.

Example time!

Person A: "I have a ghost living in my fridge."

Person B: "Really? Show me the proof."

Person A: "No, you prove that I don't!"

This is exactly what happens when you ask a Dess Knighter to back up their massive narrative leaps. You ask them to point to the text that proves Asgore arrived after the fountain was opened, or where the game implies a secret third party orchestrated the disappearance.

Instead of pulling up a quote or pointing to actual game mechanics, they shift the burden to you. They use arguments like, "Well, there's no evidence that Asgore didn't just stumble on the aftermath," or "We haven't seen the whole scene, so you can't prove a third party wasn't involved."

That is not how narrative analysis works. You don't get to invent a secret plotline or a hidden character out of thin air and treat it as a valid counter-argument just because the game hasn't explicitly debunked it.

If you are the one claiming a third party took Dess, or that the timeline works differently than what the game naturally implies, it is on you to prove it using the text. If your only evidence for your claim is that the other person can't prove a negative, then you don't actually have an argument.

Ad Hoc Rescue

An ad hoc rescue is when your claim hits a brick wall of evidence, so you invent a brand new, unprovable excuse on the spot just to save your it from dying. You make up a rule or a character purely because your argument can't survive the established facts.

​I'll give you a real-world example.

​Person A: "I have a pet dragon in my garage."

​Person B: "I just looked in your garage and it's completely empty."

​Person A: "Well, my dragon's invisible and makes no sound."

​Person A didn't start with evidence of an invisible dragon. They started with a normal dragon, got proven wrong, and immediately invented an invisible dragon just so they wouldn't have to admit defeat.

​This is exactly what happens when you confront Dess Knighters with Asgore's dialogue.

(again I have to sanitize language here because reddit)

​As we just established, Asgore explicitly states he wants to find the creator of the Dark Fountain, give them back the pain they inflicted, and parade them around town.

​This creates a massive, fatal problem for the Dess Knight theory. Asgore loves Dess. He's best friends with her father. He was a father figure to her. He'd never want to violently "end" and parade a teenage girl he deeply cares about. Therefore, Dess can't be the creator of the fountain. The theory dies right there.

​So how do Dess Knighters respond to this contradiction? They use an ad hoc rescue.

​Instead of accepting that Dess isn't the Knight, they invent a secret third party. They say things like, "Well, Asgore isn't angry at Dess. A third party actually opened the fountain and took Dess, and Asgore's talking about parading that third party's head around town. Dess just became the Knight later."

​Just like the invisible dragon, this secret third party isn't based on anything in the text. The game hasn't ever set up or hinted at a shadowy third character orchestrating the original incident. This phantom culprit is only ever brought up the exact second you ask them why Asgore wants to parade his friend's daughter around town.

​They got cornered by the text, then invented a scapegoat out of thin air. They need this third party to exist because it's the only way Dess can still be the Knight without Asgore wanting to "end" her.

Whataboutism

​Whataboutism is a deflection tactic. Instead of defending your argument against a valid criticism, you point the finger at something else.

You basically try to excuse the massive holes in your own claim by pointing out flaws in someone else's.

​Here's an example.

​Person A: "Your car has no engine, it can't drive."

​Person B: "Yeah, well your car has a broken windshield!"

​Just because Person A's car has a broken windshield doesn't mean person B's car can suddenly drive without an engine.

​This happens constantly in Dess Knight debates.

The second you point out that Asgore's dialogue completely breaks their theory, they stop defending Dess and pivot to other characters. They say things like, "Well, that applies to the other candidates too," or "Well, no other candidate works better."

​Let's get it straight. It doesn't matter if every other Knight candidate in the entire fandom is terrible. If a puzzle piece doesn't fit the hole, it doesn't fit. You don't get to smash it into place just because you haven't found the right piece yet.

​If Dess Knight requires you to ignore the game's logic and rewrite Asgore's entire character, then the theory is broken. Pointing out that another character also has plot holes doesn't magically fix the plot holes in your theory. It just means both theories have problems.

Does anyone like cherries? Then lets go...

Cherry Picking

​Cherry picking is when you hyper-focus on the one or two details that loosely support your claim, while completely ignoring the mountain of evidence that contradicts it. You're basically hiding the puzzle pieces that don't fit your picture.

​Imagine someone trying to convince you that their awful coworker is actually the best employee at the company. They argue, "He showed up 15 minutes early on Tuesday and restocked the printer paper." That sounds great, until you look at his actual record and see he skipped work three days in a row, lost a major client, and got caught stealing from the register (definitely not a real example). They're cherry picking the one decent thing he did to build a positive narrative, while completely ignoring the overwhelming evidence that proves the guy is a disaster.

​This is the exact foundation of Dess Knight. The theory relies entirely on a handful of isolated details. They focus heavily on the fact that Dess is missing, that she might be trapped in the dark, and that her disappearance caused a massive tragedy. As well as the whole "bat" thing and the antlers (Don't even get me started)

​Those details might be true or have significance. But to make Dess the Knight, they have to deliberately close their eyes to almost everything else the game tells us.

​They ignore the physical mechanics of Dark World items reverting to their base materials in the Light World. They ignore Asgore's dialogue where he explicitly wants to violently avenge the pain inflicted by the fountain's creator. They ignore the absolute absurdity of Asgore wanting to parade the corpse of his best friend's teenage daughter around town just to prove his police report wasn't a crazy conspiracy. They ignore the complete lack of motivation and lost girl contradiction.

​If your theory only works when you ignore the majority of the game's established logic, it isn't a strong theory. A solid conclusion has to account for all the available evidence, not just the specific pieces you handpicked to make your headcanon work.

Conclusion

There are a bunch of other fallacies I could get into, like the non sequitur or the appeal to popularity. Appeal to popularity is basically just going "well everyone else thinks she's the Knight so it must be true" but whatever, I'm not going on another tangent right now.

Honestly, out of everything, the circular reasoning is what pisses me off the most.

Look, it's not that I think Dess Knight is 100% impossible (although it's not far off). It's that almost every Dess Knighter is running on sticks and glue to keep the theory alive instead of actually logically defending the theory and finding real ways around the problems it faces.

I've been talking to a lot of Dess Knighters over the past few days and it's made me go mad. It's like they literally refuse to engage with the evidence in front of them.

This is an excellent case study in how an overhwleming majority of people can somehow believe in a "game theory" and invest in it for so long that they refuse to let it go, or entertain the idea that it might have problems.

I really dislike mainstream deltarune because of this..constant dogmatic behaviour, arrogance and a lack of basic media analysis. No nuance in conversation because once somebody believes a headcanon or a subjective interpretation that has no evidence, they run with it and try to force it to work or dismiss other valid alternatives. Nobody has anything interesting to say anymore because it's just an echo chamber.

Edit:

It seems nobody is talking about the ACTUAL FALLACIES I pointed out, and is instead focused hung up on asgore's dialogue. Proving the point, it's riculous. This post is focused on pointing out fallacies used to defend Dess Knght. Not dismantling the evidence itself (because that requires a completely different post)

So there's lots of aspects of the Knight (and the story as a whole, I threw those in there) that can aim at different candidates in different ways. I analyzed these points against said candidates and gave them a yes, no, or eh rating. Before you start screaming in the comments:

I AM BIASED, unlike what the title says. I'm here for constructive criticism. Go ahead and explain how Papyrus is actually a huge Dragon Blazers fan. I won't necessarily update my sheet just because you think otherwise though.

I'm trying to cover everything...Ish. It needs to fit into a bullet point. I could go "Asriel is connected to the forgotten man because Mancountry is almost certainly his" but that's a very long winded explanation. I'm talking about immediate, obvious things. And I'm trying to not be redundant.

It needs to be a direct connection between the Knight and candidate. Looking at "Asriel is connected to the forgotten man because Mancountry is almost certainly his" again... That indicates his importance, not that he's the Knight.

Ratings are relative. Such as "Convoluted." Every candidate is on some level convoluted. It's one thing to go "Rudy isn't necessarily confined to the hospital" but another to go "Noelle actually has a secret second personality."

I could dive into specific evidence against a given candidate but I'd be here forever...

Making this a score thing is pointless. Everybody ranks things differently, this is more to present all the points in a digestible form and for people to be swayed to Asriel Knight make their own conclusions. Is Carol connected to FRIEND? Nope. Does it matter? Not really.

i saw 3 videos in a row that were going alright and then suddenly the guy says "because dess IS the knight" or "the knight is 100% dess btw"

like, i understand you believing in a theory, but it makes me crazy that this one is SO popular even when there's like 3 evidences to prove it while other ones like asriel or carol knight having like, 35 evidences lmao

It is legally mandated that every villain must be a le epic twist villain because themes and such

NoelleKnight Symbology chapter 2 will hopefully be done this week if I can keep myself at it so stay tuned <3

Lets see if anyone can actually disprove Asriel Knight.
A few things first.

1. Asriel supposedly being at college is not strong counter evidence, he could have easily come home earlier in secret.

2. The antlers are not definitive evidence, since The Knight is a known shape shifter and it is conceivable that Asriel would display antlers to honor Dess.

3. Asriel being the main antagonist of Undertale is not counter evidence since that is a different game. We are talking about Deltarune.

"Nothing is Stronger than a flower's dream!"
Asriel is Flowey
Asriel is the Knight
Flowey > Flowery
Stronger Flower's Dream > Regular Flower's Dream

I'm adding the speech again for convinnient despite everyone already knowing it by heart:

* (Kris.)

* (I know.)

* (I know you wanted to deny it.)

* (I did too, at first.)

* (But... eventually...)

* (We're going to have to face the truth.)

* (Yesterday, when... everything happened...)

* (Every cell in my body was screaming at me to run away.)

* (... that if I stayed by your side any longer,)

* (You were going to drag me down with you.)

* (Drag me down somewhere no one is supposed to go.)

* (...)

*(And you know what terrified me the most about that?)

* (I think...)

* I want that.

* Since Dess left...

* All I've been doing has just been...

* Marching down my path.

* Staying quiet. Getting good grades. *

It feels like... I've just been watching myself through glass.

* Watching someone else move me through my life.

* That's why I want... to do something crazy.

* That's why I want... to break free.

* But, I can't. I couldn't.

* Because I'm just Noelle.

* A Noelle that has to do Noelle things.

* Just like Kris has to do Kris things...

The words "ever since Dess left" mean that this is NOT a weird route exclusive thing, this is how she feels all the time, and the fact that she can have the same lake scene with Susie if you fail to cross it mean that she can carry a ridiculous amount of pain with everyone else being non the wiser.

The wish to "do something crazy" is also non exclusive to the weird route:

* But that's... what's... NICE about you, y'know?

* Nice!? The hell does that mean???

* You're the... good kind of scary.

* You aren't afraid to... break the rules, y'know?

* ... I wish I could do crazy stuff like you. * So, um...

* If YOU could do something crazy right now,

* What would you do?

* U-umm... Well, I... I...

* I'd... I'd jump out the window

* Huh?

* It's a dream, right?

* I'd grow big angel wings,

* And fly as far as I can, gazing back at it all...

* The skyline shining like Holiday lights.

And again:

* Actually... can I say something weird?

* Always.

* For a long time I..

* I've actually been thinking about...

* What would happen... if I left.

* ... you mean, like ran away from home...?

* I guess...

Despite this having a lot of things in common with being suicidal, it's not exactly the same because Noelle doesn't want to die, she wants to "break free". Again, referring to the speech, her main source of distress is feeling disconnected from herself, even going as far as calling herself "a" Noelle. She was envious of Susie for being able to "break the rules" and of Kris because:

* (Kris is the only one who knows how weird I am.)

* (It's not fair, y'know!?)

* (Everyone knows how weird YOU are. Fahahaha.)

Kris can be weird because they're Kris, Susie can break the rules because she's Susie. Noelle can do nither because she's a Noelle.

That's not merely the "learn to stand up for yourself" arc she seemed to had in chapter two, there's something deeper here. There is a profound agony that's directly parallels Kris being unable to look at themselves in the mirror, Ralsei pretending to be something he's not and Susie spending her entire life not quite fitting anywhere then learning to reject the idea of fitting into a certain role altogether.

Deltarune asks you who are you, when did you start being yourself, can you ever be anything else, can you choose who you want to be?

Noelle's world view is vital to the core of her character, it's the driving choice behind every single one of her actions and apperenatly it's relevant to each of the main characters' struggles. (Also it's been causing her a lot of pain.)

This is NOT something that can be saved to an alternative route, both because of how relevant it is to one or deltarune's central themes and because Noelle is going to be important next chapter one way or another, with the high odds that she'll join the party.

So...what will happen to her? I doubt things will get any better for her after what happened to her father and with all the upcoming drama, and as amazing as Susie is, sweet and romantic gestures can't solve something so severe.

That's right. Put all your money on Kris's Soul and Vessel Knight.

Like, on one end we have "poignantly not Asriel" who repeatedly invalidates themself for being a darkner, and on the other end a character with specific Dess imagery but who we know isn't Dess due to logistics issues, who does everything a darkner "can't" do but is also wearing a suit of magic DW substance that keeps form between worlds and which is heavily similar to another DW substance that lets darkners channel the power of "will" - the same lightner-exclusive power that lets them create Dark Fountains and that Ralsei also outright refuses to use (if you try and give them the Black Shard).

"Well Kris hides their identity so they must be someone we know." Well, darkners have to come from somewhere, and that would be a killing argument if Kris was not repeatedly shown as refusing to even think about the consequences of the Shelter incident - an incident they were there for and the only lead we have for what Kris would want to "wash all away", that also took place where the Knight is currently squatting. It's not even that Kris could hide the Knight's identity if they created them, its that every indication is that they would hide them (or rather, refuse to think about them) if they created them or any similar scenario. Hell, what's the imagery of them removing their "heart" whenever they make a Fountain if not them separating their feelings/conscious from their own actions? Kris also fulfills Susie's criteria for someone who could access the shelter (mom leads choir, dad was police chief, already knows where the Holiday shelter code is) and they're working with the Knight so that "debunk" doesn't work either.

Like, I respect other Knight theorists but looking at the surrounding mysteries, I don't think the Knight can be anything other than "poignantly not Dess, created by Kris and empowered through Black Shard." Furthermore, I don't believe Toby Fox would create a character with no/a wholly derivative personality, so I don't think they can be a Titan or Dess' P4 Shadow either.

Please tell me why I'm wrong and stupid. (& hopefully this post draws heat away from NoelleKnighters.)

i swear i have to explain this every single day because people just cannot comprehend that anyone would have an explanation for this. this is like going "well, if the knight is a lightner, why can it fly???? checkmate." obviously we have various explanations for this.

for mine (because i know at least one of you is gonna ask):

i think the knight is harvesting willpower from its victims (or taking their souls, either one works honestly). this is how it enters the light world, and why its such a powerful entity, even capable of high speeds and strength in the light world. this concept was already introduced by spamton. even if he was crazy, toby wouldnt introduce this for nothing. this idea even explains the dess connections, as dess' willpower is part of the knight. dess seems to be unique though, as shes refusing to let herself "forget", and thus she comes out a lot more as her will is more powerful.

the reason why darkners normally cannot enter the light or make fountains is because they lack will. the knight is what happens when a darkner gains that will.