The question of “Why Did William Afton Kill Kids?” is central to the lore of Five Nights at Freddy’s (FNAF). It’s almost universally accepted that William Afton is the villain responsible for the tragic events within the Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza universe. But what if this widely held belief is not the complete picture? This theory proposes a controversial alternative: William Afton might not be the primary killer of the children. Instead, the blame could potentially lie with another, often overlooked character: The Puppet.
The Case for Afton’s Innocence (Or at Least, Complicity)
It seems counterintuitive to suggest Afton isn’t the killer, given his established villainous role later in the series as Springtrap and beyond. However, examining his actions through a different lens reveals some intriguing points. Consider the lengths Afton goes to in ensuring the safety of Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza. He implements a robust security system, fills the establishment with cameras, and is wary of past employees. This level of security seems excessive for someone who is actively trying to harm children within his establishment.
The original theorist posits that Afton’s extreme security measures stem from a dark origin: he obtained the restaurant after a child’s death on the premises (implied to be the Puppet’s origin). Driven by guilt and a desire to prevent history from repeating itself and potentially losing his business again, Afton becomes hyper-vigilant about child safety. This perspective paints Afton not as a proactive child killer, but as someone desperately trying to control a situation that is spiraling out of control, perhaps even due to another entity’s actions.
The Puppet: A More Likely Suspect?
The Puppet’s origins are shrouded in tragedy. Dying outside of Fredbear’s, yearning for the joy of a birthday party, the Puppet possesses a unique motive. The theory highlights that the Puppet was crying before the purple man (often associated with Afton but not explicitly confirmed as him in every instance) arrives. This detail could suggest the purple man’s involvement in the Puppet’s initial demise, but not necessarily the later murders.
The Puppet’s abilities are also noteworthy. It doesn’t need to be hired, can access restricted areas like safe rooms (“It’s always thinking… And it can go anywhere”), and crucially, seems to have a specific target number of victims: five. The theorist points out the presence of six children at the party the Puppet observes, implying the need for five additional children to align with the classic missing children incident.
Furthermore, the Puppet is heavily implied to be present at both the original Fredbear’s location and the FNAF 2 location. Choosing the Spring Bonnie suit over Fredbear for its actions makes sense if the goal is to blend in at “Fredbear and Friends,” and avoid facial recognition. As an animatronic entity, the Puppet wouldn’t breathe, thus avoiding triggering springlocks, and wouldn’t be subject to human law enforcement.
Reinterpreting the Animatronics and the Safe Room Incident
The theory reinterprets the animatronics’ behavior as a consequence of Afton’s attempts to enhance security. After the initial murders (attributed to the Puppet), Afton reprograms the animatronics’ night mode to patrol for suspicious individuals, inadvertently leading them to attack night guards. This shifts the animatronics’ aggression from revenge-driven to security protocol gone wrong.
The iconic scene of the Puppet placing masks on the children is also re-examined. This action explains why the animatronics are haunted and why they are often depicted with masks, connecting the children’s spirits to the animatronic suits. Their “aggressive stares” at adults are not necessarily attacks, but the limited control the children have over the animatronics, only being able to influence head direction.
Finally, the theory offers a different perspective on the safe room incident. When confronted by the children, Afton, realizing the devastating consequences and perhaps the true orchestrator of the tragedy, attempts to trap the Puppet by wearing the Spring Bonnie suit. His plan backfires tragically, leading to his springlock failure.
Conclusion: A Tragic Villain, Not a Mastermind?
This alternative theory doesn’t absolve William Afton of all guilt. He still murders the Puppet initially, a “Hamartia” or tragic mistake that sets off a chain of horrific events. He is a tragic figure, caught in a web of consequences stemming from his past actions and perhaps misdirected attempts at control.
While the dominant narrative firmly places William Afton as the definitive child killer, this theory provides a compelling counter-argument, suggesting the Puppet may be the more direct instigator of the missing children incident. It invites a deeper exploration of FNAF lore and challenges the conventional understanding of “Why did William Afton kill kids?” by proposing a more nuanced and complex answer.
