[Zanreo] Never mind!

[Zanreo]

His reply was surprising after everything that had happened - but if this had happened earlier, it might have made a bit more sense

(Back again (at least for now) after an over a year-long hiatus/break, and trying some puzzles again! Some of you might remember this one (and I kept the title too) - it's a puzzle I made before leaving that never got finished and presumably removed for being inactive for too long. I decided to rework it a bit (including leaving out parts that honestly were kinda irrelevant) and hopefully improve it)

[Earnest]

Surprising = it went again the common sense? It wnet against what normally would have been replied by anyone in the same situation?
Dis he reply to a question? Social media relevant?

Earlier = a little bit earlier? Earlier than something else? A day earlier? A year earlier? Did something relevant happen before? Was the surprising reply in delay with respect to an event? Are social/politics events relevant?

[Zanreo]

Surprising = it went again the common sense? yes It wnet against what normally would have been replied by anyone in the same situation? In the same situation, most likely, yes
Dis he reply to a question? Not question exactly Social media relevant? no

Earlier = a little bit earlier? Earlier than something else? yes A day earlier? more than this A year earlier? hard to say Did something relevant happen before? yes Was the surprising reply in delay with respect to an event? If you mean if it was surprising considering the something that had happened, yesAre social/politics events relevant? no

[trebor]

Is one of the following the case?: If he had replied sooner, the reply would’ve made more sense? If the thing that had happened had happened sooner his reply would’ve made more sense? If the whole sequence of the question (for lack of a better term), the thing happening, and his response had happened earlier, his reply would’ve made more sense?

Time period relevant? Was relevant information accrued during the interval between the “question” and his reply? If so, by him? By the poser of the question? By a third party?

Instead of the initial thing being a question, was it a: statement? Poll? Survey? Event? Action committed by someone(s)? Was his response oral? Written? A reflexive action? Politics relevant?

Is the time period relevant? Is the delay in replying because he was unaware the “question” had been posed? Because it took that long for it to reach him? Are the professions of any involved parties relevant?

[Zanreo]

Is one of the following the case?: If he had replied sooner, the reply would’ve made more sense? technically yes but there would be more to it than just the reply If the thing that had happened had happened sooner his reply would’ve made more sense?no If the whole sequence of the question (for lack of a better term), the thing happening, and his response had happened earlier, his reply would’ve made more sense? no

Time period relevant? no Was relevant information accrued during the interval between the “question” and his reply? no If so, by him? By the poser of the question? By a third party?

Instead of the initial thing being a question, was it a: statement? for the "question"/thing that was replied to itself, this is closest Poll? Survey? Event? Action committed by someone(s)? Was his response oral? yes Written? A reflexive action? Politics relevant? no to rest

Is the time period relevant? you already asked but no Is the delay in replying FA because he was unaware the “question” had been posed? no Because it took that long for it to reach him? see earlier Are the professions of any involved parties relevant? I'd say... yes-ish, possibly?

[Earnest]

Did the whole thing result in him making a prediction of the event? Does the reply seem offensive? Counterintuitive? Not beneficial to himself? (Kind of masokist). Did he reply peivately? To a public? Relevant?
Relevant the reason why the event did not happen before? Was it his will? Was the event under his control?
Was the event: natural catastrophy? Something concerning his personal life? Someone dying? Technology? Something he had not intention to do? Elections?

Did he cover a position of power (e.g. head of a state)? Was him famous? Did he relevantly work in: food? Sport? Entertainment? Politics? Finance? Health care?
Does the reply : his personal life? War? Health (his? Of others?)? Religion? Technology?

[Zanreo]

Did the whole thing result in him making a prediction of the event? no, and the "event" had already happened Does the reply seem offensive?there's better words for it Counterintuitive?yes Not beneficial to himself? yes (Kind of masokist). Did he reply peivately? To a public? yes Relevant? no, in that it would make just as little sense if it was a private reply
Relevant the reason why the event did not happen before? the event did happen before Was it his will? Was the event under his control? 
Was the event: natural catastrophy? Something concerning his personal life? Someone dying? part of it, yes, no to rest Technology? Something he had not intention to do? Elections?

Did he cover a position of power (e.g. head of a state)? yesWas him famous?In one context, not really Did he relevantly work in: food? Sport? Entertainment? Politics? Finance? Health care? 
Does the reply : his personal life? War? Health (his? Of others?)? Religion? Technology?) none of these

[trebor]

Is the time period relevant? (Just kidding.)

But seriously...if I've got the timeline right, there was a statement made. Then something happened. Then this guy replied to the statement. All good so far? And "the happening" and his reply were more than a day apart, and possibly up to a year? Would you call the time between the statement and the reply a delay? If he had replied before the thing, would the thing still have happened? (Can we call him Ryan?)

Does the thing involve the death of a non-human animal? Of one human? Two? More? Were the people who died known personally by Ryan? Was their death a news story? Is it relevant how they died? Had he killed them? Is he otherwise a criminal? Did he say something incriminating?

Whoever wound up dead, were they the one(s) who made the statement?

[Zanreo]

But seriously...if I've got the timeline right, there was a statement made. Then something happened. Then this guy replied to the statement. All good so far? no, and just to clear up some confusion I'll say the "event" was the first thing to happen And "the happening" and his reply were more than a day apart, and possibly up to a year?yes Would you call the time between the statement and the reply a delay? no, the reply was right after the statement was made If he had replied before the thing, would the thing still have happened? most likely (Can we call him Ryan?) sure why not

Does the thing involve the death of a non-human animal? not animal... Of one human? Two? More? not "human" exactly, but there were more than 2 Were the people who died known personally by Ryan? some of them certainly were at least Was their death a news story? not relevantly Is it relevant how they died? yes! Had he killed them? no Is he otherwise a criminal? well.. he would be considered this in some way/to some but irrel Did he say something incriminating? no

Whoever wound up dead, were they the one(s) who made the statement the very same ones to die? No

[Earnest]

So the event happened and he made a counterintuitive statement which would have made sense had the event happened a lot before right? (As if: rhe statement was counterintuitive because the event took plave the day before. Had it happened 1 year before the whole situation would have made sense); was him replying to a question that he made to himself (retorical question for instance)? Did he suggest a peace with someone? Not to kill someone? Not to take some measure against something/someone? Is health care relevant? Medicine?

Did people expect other words: e.g. words of comfort? Words of reassurance?
Neither humans nor animals died? Maybe some cell? Embryo? Not yet born fetus (e.g. of people condamned to death penalty)? (Assuming that a living being had died) did they die: for natural causes? They were killed/murdered with weapons? They were poisoned? For a natural catastrophy? Others?

So is some commemoration relevant? Is religion relevant? He was the head of a state right?

Would the common sense have suggested: some measure to be undertaken? Something to be destroyed? Someone to be paid back? Insured? Protected? Compensated? Taxes to be decreased? Medicines to be provided? Something to be put off the market? Something to be banned? An intervention in order for the deed not to happen again?

[Zanreo]

So the event happened and he made a counterintuitive statement yes which would have made sense had the event happened a lot before right? not before...(As if: rhe statement was counterintuitive because the event took plave the day before. Had it happened 1 year before the whole situation would have made sense) no; was him replying to a question that he made to himself (retorical question for instance)? no Did he suggest a peace with someone? Not to kill someone? Not to take some measure against something/someone? this-ish, no to rest Is health care relevant? Medicine?

Did people expect other words: probably e.g. words of comfort? Words of reassurance? not this exactly
Neither humans nor animals died? yes Maybe some cell? Embryo? Not yet born fetus (e.g. of people condamned to death penalty)? but not this(Assuming that a living being had died) did they die: for natural causes? They were killed/murdered with weapons? this They were poisoned? For a natural catastrophy? Others?

So is some commemoration relevant? no Is religion relevant? no He was the head of a state right? you could call it that, yeah

Would the common sense have suggested: some measure to be undertaken? this Something to be destroyed? possibly Someone to be paid back? Insured? Protected? Compensated? Taxes to be decreased? Medicines to be provided? Something to be put off the market? Something to be banned? An intervention in order for the deed not to happen again? and probably this too

[Earnest]

Had some fictional charachter been killed? Maybe no one died but people believed so? Do someone die in fact? Were there responsibles? Were responsibles taken? Was a security leak spotted? Did some living being die? Aliens? Potential human beings? Sperm counts?

Measures = on technology? Limiting privacy? On personal lives? Searches? Limiting access to buildings? To certain info? To certain places? Airports? Planes?

Did he decide not to take precautions? Because maybe it would have be of impediment to something else? It would have provoked something else bad to happen? Are terrorist attacks relevant? Hackers?

Had it happened before maybe no reactions would have been expected because there was a dictature (no possibility of replyinig?)...

[Zanreo]

Had some fictional charachter been killed? yes! Maybe no one died but people believed so? Do someone die in fact? yes, the fictional characters mentioned Were there responsibles? Were responsibles taken? you mean responsibilities? no Was a security leak spotted? no Did some living being die? Aliens? this Potential human beings? Sperm counts?

Measures = on technology? Limiting privacy? On personal lives? Searches? Limiting access to buildings? To certain info? To certain places? Airports? Planes? not these

Did he decide not to take precautions? yes Because maybe it would have be of impediment to something else? It would have provoked something else bad to happen? Are terrorist attacks relevant? Hackers? but none of these

Had it happened before maybe no reactions would have been expected because there was a dictature (no possibility of replyinig?)... no, and it had happened before

[Zanreo]

Possible hint/slight clarification: the "event" was not just one event, but several counts of the same thing

[trebor]

Were the fictional characters human? Zombies? Other animals? Insects? Plants? Birds? Does whatever species they were exist IRL too?

Does Ryan exist IRL? In the work of fiction? Is a specific work of fiction relevant? If so, is it a book? Movie? TV show? Play? Song? Poem? Myth? Is he the creator of it? Is he a politician?

[Earnest]

To avoid confusion: is the head of the state a fictional charachter as well? Or is him a real life person speaking about fictional charachters dying?
And earlier = years before? In a specific time span? In war times?

Kick ass relevant? Super heroes involved? Did child watch the programs/comics/fictions in which the fictional characheters died? Did they die cruently? Is technology relevant (e.g. Iron Man exploits technology. Maybe the head of the state took "old style" precautions which do not make sense to contrast such advanced technology)?

Are the fictional charachters dying in a cruel way? Are they famous? Do they provoke damages to the citizens in dying (e.g. they fight with each other)? Do they istigate people to make bad actions? Are billboards relevant?

Counterintuitive statement he made is: "we need more fictional charachters" ? Did he spoke about surveillance? About possible methods to avoid such deaths? To increase/promote such deaths? To protect citizens? To incentivate super heroes to come into town? To find less cruel ways for the fictional charachters to die?

[Zanreo]

trebor:
Were the fictional characters human? Zombies? Other animals? Insects? Plants? Birds? Neither of theseDoes whatever species they were exist IRL too? No

Does Ryan exist IRL? No In the work of fiction? Yes! Is a specific work of fiction relevant? Yes (but you don't have to guess the specific one, and I can say it's pretty obscure, you just have to guess something that happened in it) If so, is it a book? Movie? TV show? thisPlay? Song? Poem? Myth? Is he the creator of it? so no Is he a politician?

Earnest:
To avoid confusion: is the head of the state a fictional charachter as well? yesOr is him a real life person speaking about fictional charachters dying? no
And earlier = years before? in-unverse, unknown but likely not years In a specific time span? In war times?

Kick ass relevant? no Super heroes involved? Yes, one heroDid child watch the programs/comics/fictions in which the fictional characheters died? Well, the show was made for kids, so most likely Did they die cruently? Yes-ish Is technology relevant (e.g. Iron Man exploits technology. Maybe the head of the state took "old style" precautions which do not make sense to contrast such advanced technology)? Not this

Are the fictional charachters dying in a cruel way? Yes-ishAre they famous? no Do they provoke damages to the citizens in dying (e.g. they fight with each other)? Their deaths aren't what cause the damage if that's what you're asking, but some of them did cause damage in some way Do they istigate people to make bad actions? Some of them did Are billboards relevant? no

Counterintuitive statement he made is: "we need more fictional charachters" ? Did he spoke about surveillance? About possible methods to avoid such deaths? To increase/promote such deaths? To protect citizens? To incentivate super heroes to come into town? To find less cruel ways for the fictional charachters to die? none of these

[Earnest]

Earlier = before a relevant threaten to humanity? Several counts of the same thing ( = a negative thing?) = several explosions? Several hacked computers? Several times the hero did not appear/was defeated? Several times murders were commited and special signs were left? Several times something happened to the hero? Before the hero revealed himself to be untrustable? Before the hero saved humanity several times (e.g. the head of the state stated that there was need for more military force and for restrictions to more severe restrictions to population?)

To be sure: did it result in something surprising for the audience of the tv show? Also for people in the fiction? Just for people in the fiction (the fictional charachters representing people)?
Was a threaten to human beings imminent? Was it defeated? If so relevant how? Relevant how it became a threaten to people? Through technology?

Hero involved = may I invoke the list? Superman? Batman? Avengers? Marvel hero? Hulk? Spider man? Others? Do they have relevant suoer power? Was the unexpected speech about their powers? About relying on the hero's powers? About not relying on hero's powers? About restrictions to populations? About not trusting to a threaten? About not believing to the existence of the hero?

Did the hero masked his real identity? Relevant? Or maybe he unmasked his identity? If so to all people? Just to a part of then? so that maybe the speech resulted in something unexpected for the most (who did not know his/her true identity)?

[Zanreo]

Earlier = before a relevant threaten to humanity? well, a possible threat to humanity is involved, but... Several counts of the same thing ( = a negative thing?negative for that side, at least) = several explosions? Several hacked computers? Several times the hero did not appear/was defeated? no to these Several times murders were commited yesand special signs were left? but no "special signs" were relevantly left Several times something happened to the hero? OTRT - not "happened to", but... Before the hero revealed himself to be untrustable? Not the best word to use here but OTRT Before the hero saved humanity several times yes(e.g. the head of the state stated that there was need for more military force and for restrictions to more severe restrictions to population?) but he didn't say this

To be sure: did it result in something surprising for the audience of the tv show? mostly this, in the context of the puzzle statement Also for people in the fiction? but the reply was also surprising for someone there Just for people in the fiction (the fictional charachters representing people)?
Was a threaten to human beings imminent? yesWas it defeated? yesIf so relevant how? yesRelevant how it became a threaten to people? not exactly Through technology?

Hero involved = may I invoke the list? Superman? Batman? Avengers? Marvel hero? Hulk? Spider man? Others? None of the ones listed, and much more obscure than that - I can reveal they're an obscure anime hero (but no need to know anything about or guess the character) Do they have relevant suoer power? the specific power(s) is not relevant, just that they used it to attack Was the unexpected speech about their powers? OTRT About relying on the hero's powers? About not relying on hero's powers? bit of a FA here with "relying on" About restrictions to populations? noAbout not trusting to a threaten? can you rephrase this? About not believing to the existence of the hero? Not "not believing" exactly, but...

Did the hero masked his real identity? Relevant? Or maybe he unmasked his identity? If so to all people? Just to a part of then? so that maybe the speech resulted in something unexpected for the most (who did not know his/her true identity)? Well... the show seems to go back and forth on whether others know the hero's identity/hero form or not, but in this case the hero identity is the relevant one being talked about

[Earnest]

Did he believe that the hero had an external help?

[Zanreo]

Did he believe that the hero had an external help? No

[Earnest]

Had the hero too many powers? Did he want to limit the powers of the hero? Did he believe the hero was helpful for humanity? Did the hero fight people who commited the murders? Did the hero commit the murders? Was it evident who commited the murders? Did the head of the state indertake some measure against the hero? To limit the heroe's power? Did he want the hero to carry on what he was doing? Did he meet the hero? Did he want him to help people?

Did police look relevantly for the author/s of the murders? Did he took repevant measures to prevent the murders? Did police arrest some suspect? Relevant how the murders were catried on? With weapons? All in different ways? Through supernatural powers?

[Zanreo]

Had the hero too many powers? ...yes Did he want to limit the powers of the hero? no, because... Did he believe the hero was helpful for humanity? likely, but... Did the hero fight people who commited the murders? no Did the hero commit the murders? yes Was it evident who commited the murders? it was known he killed them Did the head of the state indertake some measure against the hero? To limit the heroe's power? No, he relevantly didn't - and explore this Did he want the hero to carry on what he was doing? No Did he meet the hero? he had met him before at this pointDid he want him to help people? No! Also explore this

Did police look relevantly for the author/s of the murders? noDid he took repevant measures to prevent the murders? no Did police arrest some suspect? no Relevant how the murders were catried on? With weapons? this All in different ways? Through supernatural powers

[Earnest]

So before = before the series of murders made by the hero right?
Death penalty relevant? Did the head fear that the hero's authority overcome police authority? Did the hero promote certain kinds of behavior/politics (e.g. rebellion)? If so against governament? Did people try to relevantly imitate him so that murders increased a lot? Was it difficult to identify true criminals from the murders made by the hero?

Did the hero kill evil people? People who have committed a crime? People who have committed a crime against him? Is the hero an anti hero (e.g. V for Vendetta) Had he killed before? If so, was it tollerated by authorities? Encouraged by authorities? Did he kill the same kind of people also before? Did he kill people regularly?

Did the hero appear in public? Did he openly say that he committed the murders? Did the hero want to help people? To defeat crime? Did the hero kill people on street? In the night? Did he also kill innocent people? Did he choose who to kill carefully? If not, was he threatening someone (e.g. the head?) in order to obtain something? Did the head want to: capture the hero? Limit his powers? Kill the hero? Make an accordance with the enemies of the hero? Accept hard conditions? Admit the defeat of his nation? Encourage the murders? Stop the murders? Take precautions against the hero? Not take precautions against the hero? Offer himself to the hero to save the nation? Accept the hero's conditions?

Was the speech about the hero direcrly? Indirrctly (e.g. about murders? About news/decisions that could influence the future behavior of the hero?) Did people fear the hero? Trust him? Did the head of the state take precautions against the hero? Did he make the "no-sense" statement in order to attract the hero in a trap? Dis he say he was ready to talk with him?

P.s. is Death Note involved here? So that maybe the head was forced to make counterintuitive statements in order to "confound" Kira.

[Zanreo]

So before = before the series of murders made by the hero right? yes
Death penalty relevant? noDid the head fear that the hero's authority overcome police authority? No Did the hero promote certain kinds of behavior/politics (e.g. rebellion)? If so against governament? no and noDid people try to relevantly imitate him so that murders increased a lot? no Was it difficult to identify true criminals from the murders made by the hero? no

Did the hero kill evil people? yes, and also look at final statement for this paragraph People who have committed a crime? yes, or were planning to People who have committed a crime against him? Is the hero an anti hero (e.g. V for Vendetta) he could be considered one, but probably not intended as oneHad he killed before? yes If so, was it tollerated by authorities? yes Encouraged by authorities? probably Did he kill the same kind of people also before? yesDid he kill people regularly? yes, but with an "ish" for people (to clarify: the "people" he killed were the non-human characters mentioned earlier)

Did the hero appear in public? yes Did he openly say that he committed the murders? It would likely be known he did at least and he didn't try hiding it Did the hero want to help people? yes To defeat crime? yes, though there's more to it than just "crime"Did the hero kill people on street? yes In the night? sometimesDid he also kill innocent people? arguably once (though likely not intended as this), mostly no Did he choose who to kill carefully? usually, after he would find out something If not, was he threatening someone (e.g. the head?) in order to obtain something? noDid the head want to: capture the hero? Limit his powers? Kill the hero? Make an accordance with the enemies of the hero? Accept hard conditions? Admit the defeat of his nation? Encourage the murders? Stop the murders? Take precautions against the hero? Not take precautions against the hero? if you mean during the relevant response in the statement, this and no to restOffer himself to the hero to save the nation? Accept the hero's conditions?

Was the speech about the hero direcrly? noIndirrctly (e.g. about murders? About news/decisions that could influence the future behavior of the hero?) no Did people fear the hero? people in general no, the group of characters that got killed, yes or at least some of themTrust him? opposite of the one beforeDid the head of the state take precautions against the hero? no and this is what's relevant Did he make the "no-sense" statement in order to attract the hero in a trap? noDis he say he was ready to talk with him? no

P.s. is Death Note involved here? no So that maybe the head was forced to make counterintuitive statements in order to "confound" Kira.and nothing like this

[Earnest]

Charachter that got killed = aliens? If so, did they camoufage with people? Did the hero recognize them by something relevant? After having had an interaction with them? E.g. aliens were alergic to somethibg? Did not go through something? Cannot hide themselves completely? (E.g. could not speak human language) were aliens viruses? Parasites (so that to kill them it was necessary to kill the human host also?) Were the series of murders made in a time window of months? Days? Years? Hours? Relevant how the hero killed them? Did he show a power that he had not before? For instance he revealed to be an alien himself? He revealed his origins? He revealed to be the cause of the alien's presence on Earth (are we on Earth?)? He revealed the power to read minds? To destroy the planet?

Would most of the people have thought that the head would have taken precautions against the hero? To limit his powers?

[Zanreo]

Charachter that got killed = aliens? yes If so, did they camoufage with people? yes, they disguised themselves as humans Did the hero recognize them by something relevant? sometimes After having had an interaction with them? often E.g. aliens were alergic to somethibg? but not this Did not go through something? no Cannot hide themselves completely? well, there's one thing that would reveal what they really were/that they're not regular humans (E.g. could not speak human language) but not this were aliens viruses? no Parasites (so that to kill them it was necessary to kill the human host also?) no Were the series of murders made in a time window of months? I assume this or longer but it's unknown how long this time frame was intended to be in-universe Days? Years? could also be a bit over a year, but again, who knows Hours? Relevant how the hero killed them? not really Did he show a power that he had not before? he had the same powers from the start of the series, didn't reveal a "new" one For instance he revealed to be an alien himself? no He revealed his origins? no He revealed to be the cause of the alien's presence on Earth no (are we on Earth?)? yes He revealed the power to read minds? no To destroy the planet? no

Would most of the people have thought that the head would have taken precautions against the hero? yes! To limit his powers? yes

[Earnest]

Relevant that aliens camoufage as humans? Relevant how he recognised aliens? Did he kill them by shooting to them? By poisoning them? Relevant which weapon he used? A weapon that just the hero could use?
Was killing an alien simple as killing a human?
Limit his powers because: of potential damages he could make? Potential power he could gain? Relevant which were his powers? Were they underestimated by people? By the head? War times relevant? Did the head decide not to take precautions against the hero? Relevant the reason why? Was his mind controlled? Was the head an alien? Mind control relevant? Did the head sincerely think that the powers of the hero should not be limited? Or maybe he just stated so but in fact he did limit them?

[Zanreo]

Relevant that aliens camoufage as humans? .not to figuring out the solutionRelevant how he recognised aliens? not really Did he kill them by shooting to them? yes By poisoning them? no Relevant which weapon he used? not really, I can say it's a ray gun A weapon that just the hero could use? it's made for him at least
Was killing an alien simple as killing a human? no
Limit his powers because: of potential damages he could make? Potential power he could gain? his powers were not limited or attempted to beRelevant which were his powers? not specifically what they were, no Were they underestimated by people? no By the head? yes! War times relevant? noDid the head decide not to take precautions against the hero? noRelevant the reason why? yes Was his mind controlled? noWas the head an alien? yes Mind control relevant? Did the head sincerely think that the powers of the hero should not be limited? at least he didn't see a need to do so Or maybe he just stated so but in fact he did limit them? no

[Earnest]

Ok...in my mind I began to think that the hero was the last human survived killing aliens...

So the head was an alien!!! Did the hero know it? Did the hero want to kill him? Did humans know that the head was an alien? Was the Earth controlled by aliens? Were aliens all evil? Was the head aware of the murderers? Did he believe that the hero caused them? Was the final aim of the hero to kill the head?

Were human surprised in a positive way that the head did not take any precaution against the hero? Or did they want him to take precautions? Relevant the reason why the head underestimated the hero's powers? Did aliens think to be better than humans? Did someone give the head false information?

Did the head know the hero's identity? Was the statement precise in that it says that a particular (so not in general but a specific one) precaution would not have been taken? Would the precaution have damaged all humans (e.g. threatening the hero by threatening all humans?) ? Have forced the hero to go to jail? To stop killing? To reveal himself?
Precautions = employ police? Secret agents? Special agents? Employ special measures against humans? Employ alien's powers? Enter houses of humans? More controls of street? Giving less rights to people? Simply searching the hero?

Did the hero hide himself? Have a double identity? Escape from governament? Cooperate with governament? Was the head of the state designated as head from a long time? Was him elected by people? Did he take the power by camoufaging (the alien took tge head's skin...)?

In not taking measures did he hide his identity of alien? Was the hero trying to make him reveal his real nature (e.g. people trusted the head not knowing that he was an alien)?

So summarizing the head underestimated the hero and stated that he would havo not taken any precaution against him. So what we are left to discover is why he did underestimate the hero? Something else? Which were the precautions?

[Zanreo]

Ok...in my mind I began to think that the hero was the last human survived killing aliens...

So the head was an alien!!! Did the hero know it? yes Did the hero want to kill him? yes Did humans know that the head was an alien? They likely would if they saw him, see note belowWas the Earth controlled by aliens? They tried to Were aliens all evil? most of them, while a few exceptions were shown that's irrelevant here Was the head aware of the murderers? likely, but... Did he believe that the hero caused them? Was the final aim of the hero to kill the head?

I feel there's a FA going around here, so to clarify, he was not the head of the hero's country or pretending to be so

Were human surprised in a positive way that the head did not take any precaution against the hero? they didn't know Or did they want him to take precautions? if they knew what was going on, probably not Relevant the reason why the head underestimated the hero's powers? Probably just didn't think he was a threat Did aliens think to be better than humans? yes Did someone give the head false information? no or unknown

Did the head know the hero's identity? yes Was the statement precise in that it says that a particular (so not in general but a specific one) precaution would not have been taken? no precautions were taken, general or specific Would the precaution have damaged all humans (e.g. threatening the hero by threatening all humans?) not exactly this ? Have forced the hero to go to jail? To stop killing? To reveal himself?
Precautions = employ police? Secret agents? Special agents? Employ special measures against humans? Employ alien's powers? Enter houses of humans? More controls of street? Giving less rights to people? Simply searching the hero? Just that more effort was made into stopping the hero

Did the hero hide himself? no Have a double identity? he had a "normal" and superhero identity Escape from governament? no Cooperate with governament? no Was the head of the state designated as head from a long time? Was him elected by people? Did he take the power by camoufaging (the alien took tge head's skin...)? see FA note

In not taking measures did he hide his identity of alien? Was the hero trying to make him reveal his real nature (e.g. people trusted the head not knowing that he was an alien)? again, see FA note above

So summarizing the head underestimated the hero and stated that he would havo not taken any precaution against him. So what we are left to discover is why he did underestimate the hero? exactly "why" is unknow (this is not the show that makes most sense) Something else? Mostly a thing about "if it had happened earlier", a hint here is keeping in mind this is a TV show Which were the precautions?

[Earnest]

Are flashbacks relevant? Does the audience know that it had happened in the time in which it happened? Timetable clear to the audience?

If it had happened earlier = if the scene of the decision would have appeared before in the show (if so, is the decision, in the time of the show, been taken before the murders or after them? Maybe the scene is put after)? Before in the time of the show? Is rime of the show = time in real life? Was the decision taken at the beginningof an episode? And maybe the series of murders displayed at the end of a previous episode?

[Zanreo]

(welp, sorry for the wait)

Are flashbacks relevant? no Does the audience know that it had happened in the time in which it happened? Timetable clear to the audience? the exact time is unknown, so no

If it had happened earlier = if the scene of the decision would have appeared before in the show this! (if so, is the decision, in the time of the show, been taken before the murders or after them? after Maybe the scene is put after yes)? Before in the time of the show? Is rime of the show = time in real life? unknown Was the decision taken at the beginningof an episode? yes And maybe the series of murders displayed at the end of a previous episode? Kills happened in this episode too, however the kills in this episode aren't the only relevant ones

[Zanreo]

...alright, it's been long enough and the guesses so far have been close enough to the answer, so might as well just post the...

SPOILER
Episode 47 of the (infamously bad) anime series "Chargeman Ken" starts with the leader of the show's alien villains, Maou, making a speech to the others about how they will conquer Earth. One of them raises concerns about this dangerous kid hero called Chargeman Ken (the show's main character), and Maou just replies that there's no need to worry about something insignificant like him. However, Ken is far from "insignificant", as he's killed at least one of them during every episode of the show up until then, and shown himself to be a powerful (and kind of overpowered) fighter, so by this point it seems strange for even the most incompetent villains to reply in this way. As some viewers have pointed out, if this episode was the first episode instead, or if we assume this chronologically happened before the others, it might have made more sense for him not to worry or consider him a threat (yet). (Not that a lot of things make sense in that show anyway...)

[Earnest]

Cool one! Thanks!