The sequence of events:

  • The old man pots the two balls
  • The younger man attacks him just as they are potted
  • The old man dies (or is knocked out or something) in the fight
  • Young man returns to the table and proceeds to pot the rest of his balls

After the old man pots the balls, surely it's still his turn as he scored? Or did the rules of billiards that they were using not necessarily have turns? Or maybe he used the old man's body and made him miss?

Is there any proper answer to this, or is this just a big plot hole that was skipped over?

2 Answers 2


Taking episode 1 of the TV series Death Parade (which is based on Death Billiards) into account, except for the scoring rules and winning condition, the games don't have any other restrictions in the first place.

As revealed in episode 2 of Death Parade, the game is just a means to an end. It is designed so that as the players play the game (under the belief that their lives are at stake), they gradually regain the memory before death and expose their emotions and their true nature as they try to win the game by any means necessary. And the arbiter observes their actions and emotions displayed throughout the game to judge whether they should be reincarnated or sent to void.

Therefore, although his action violates the rules of the game in real life, it is totally valid here for the young man to knock out the old man and "steals" his turn to pocket the rest of the balls.


Sure it was the old man's turn... except he was incapacitated at the time, so he couldn't do anything, which is why the bartender allowed the young man to continue the game. In a normal game of billiards, if a player is knocked out and no one is able to substitute for them, then the game would naturally end. In Death Billiards, however, ending the game was not an option, so the young man decided to take over the old man's turn and finish the game

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .