No, this is an alternate reality where The Saint is a reincarnated person and Rachel is not on her second life. In the other story, during Rachel's first life The Saint was not a reincarnated person. It was only on Rachel's second life that The Saint that appeared at the school was someone with knowledge of the game (everyone comments on how they feel something is off about Ana when they meet her, even Ana's best friend from the first run wanted nothing to do with her).If this story really does end at the beginning of the other story I shudder to think how Rachel gets manipulated so badly. She seems entirely normal here and this conversation, if Rachel takes it at face value, should alleviate all of her fears.
I'm starting to think the "Villainess" tag doesn't refer to her.
Do we know that for a fact? Anna here behaves like she did in Rachel's first life, yet we do know from the flashback last chapter that the reincarnatress inside her and the Anna of the main story are the same person, including her crush on the guy reborn as the cook, so for all I know this might just be the depiction of Rachel's first life with Anna and everyone's reactions to her being different being caused by Rachel and the changes to the story and Anna's memories of her previous life being more vague here for some reason.In the other story, during Rachel's first life The Saint was not a reincarnated person. It was only on Rachel's second life that The Saint that appeared at the school was someone with knowledge of the game
No, everyone seems to believe there is something "off" about second life Anna. Even her best friend from the previous run (braids and glasses girl) wanted to avoid her. Rachel is not even sure if that's just her being paranoid, since she admits it herself that she never bothered to speak with Anna, but she still has her doubts that the current Anna may be someone like her (she thinks she kept her memories from the first run, she knows nothing about other world reincarnation). This goes way further than Rachel being a nice person now and everyone ignoring Anna, since even the prince has been on alert from the moment he met Anna for the first time.Do we know that for a fact? Anna here behaves like she did in Rachel's first life, yet we do know from the flashback last chapter that the reincarnatress inside her and the Anna of the main story are the same person, including her crush on the guy reborn as the cook, so for all I know this might just be the depiction of Rachel's first life with Anna and everyone's reactions to her being different being caused by Rachel and the changes to the story and Anna's memories of her previous life being more vague here for some reason.
Well in the previous world they all started to shun Rachel and become besties with Anna.No, everyone seems to believe there is something "off" about second life Anna. Even her best friend from the previous run (braids and glasses girl) wanted to avoid her. Rachel is not even sure if that's just her being paranoid, since she admits it herself that she never bothered to speak with Anna, but she still has her doubts that the current Anna may be someone like her (she thinks she kept her memories from the first run, she knows nothing about other world reincarnation). This goes way further than Rachel being a nice person now and everyone ignoring Anna, since even the prince has been on alert from the moment he met Anna for the first time.
I disagree completely. Rachel has been established multiple times in the main series as an unreliable narrator. Unreliable narrators being unreliable is the opposite of a retcon; it's logical storytelling and progression. Rachel being evil would make her later personality incongruent. People don't change that drastically that quickly and completely in real life. Finally, in the very third chapter of the main series, her maid said that Rachel was not a bad person, and that was explicitly part of the original timeline where Rachel was a villainess, after Rachel was banished. Something set up that early on is again the opposite of a retcon.You know, one thing that I hate no matter what are retcons and this story as well as the main one aretrying hard to retcon the villainess character so she is not evil.
Hate that.
I would agree with you if it was just Rachel that said she had a bad personality but at the start the way other people react to her and her fear of how they would treat her when going back to school also demonstrate that it was not just something from her head.I disagree completely. Rachel has been established multiple times in the main series as an unreliable narrator. Unreliable narrators being unreliable is the opposite of a retcon; it's logical storytelling and progression. Rachel being evil would make her later personality incongruent. People don't change that drastically that quickly and completely in real life. Finally, in the very third chapter of the main series, her maid said that Rachel was not a bad person, and that was explicitly part of the original timeline where Rachel was a villainess, after Rachel was banished. Something set up that early on is again the opposite of a retcon.
Before claiming something is a retcon, especially this frequently corroborated, you should check the facts of the story first.
I don't know what is to come, didn't read, but based off this story so far and the other it feels like the power of compassion is what reverts time but also awakens her past life memories fully. That is how it feels it is going to go to me.No, this is an alternate reality where The Saint is a reincarnated person and Rachel is not on her second life. In the other story, during Rachel's first life The Saint was not a reincarnated person. It was only on Rachel's second life that The Saint that appeared at the school was someone with knowledge of the game (everyone comments on how they feel something is off about Ana when they meet her, even Ana's best friend from the first run wanted nothing to do with her).