Controversial Bet Thread: GB Black Blade, Yes or No?
- Thread starter Blazing Lion
- Start date
Why does Mihawk need to steal it from someone? Why can't it just be a weapon an ancient cult gave him because they thought he should have it?
Or some shit idk fk
A) He stole it
B) It was given to him
C) He forged it himself
I'd prefer to think it was given to him. Stolen carries bad implications and if it's forged it requires a history of battle, but if it was given then there are no bad implications and he doesn't require a history of battle. Outside of the possibility that he crafted it himself, the second most logical thing is that it was given to him.
Stolen implies he defeated someone and took it or he's a grave robber like Gecko Moria lol
Or some shit idk fk
A) He stole it
B) It was given to him
C) He forged it himself
I'd prefer to think it was given to him. Stolen carries bad implications and if it's forged it requires a history of battle, but if it was given then there are no bad implications and he doesn't require a history of battle. Outside of the possibility that he crafted it himself, the second most logical thing is that it was given to him.
Stolen implies he defeated someone and took it or he's a grave robber like Gecko Moria lol
I ignore It because he wasn't using the sword, and people that didn't even touch the sword don't make It black because they are not even touching It.
Zoro doesn't make all three swords black when he Is not using them, It's that simple.
Aside from that, we have posted ton of times the second Scan of the sword, still black, before the Scrabbards met Ryo on his way to the flower capital.
Zoro doesn't make all three swords black when he Is not using them, It's that simple.
Aside from that, we have posted ton of times the second Scan of the sword, still black, before the Scrabbards met Ryo on his way to the flower capital.
You choosing to ignore it because it counters your argument. GB was fighting and using blackened haki at the time. Those are facts. The sword was touching his body and he's can effect the environment just by touching it. He was affecting the ground by walking on it
You talking about the scene where we can't even see all of the sword because of his coat. The part we can see is cloaked in shadow. That's not a strong argument.
It is never been this difficult for us to determine whether someone has a black blade. If Oda want to us to know GB has a black blade he would have made it clear.
You talking about the scene where we can't even see all of the sword because of his coat. The part we can see is cloaked in shadow. That's not a strong argument.
It is never been this difficult for us to determine whether someone has a black blade. If Oda want to us to know GB has a black blade he would have made it clear.
No, I chose to counter It becuase it's dumb and totally disproven by the manga.
Swords are black when swordsman use them, simple as that. But I'll wait for scans of Zoro's swords being black while at his hips.
If the sword were white, we would have see It white in contrast to the coat, as always. Spoiler: It wasn't.
And that Is just another proof.
It has never been difficult at all. It's just the sword fans/Admirals haters that kept up this charade since chapter 1053.
The manga has always been crystal clear:
Swords are black when swordsman use them, simple as that. But I'll wait for scans of Zoro's swords being black while at his hips.
If the sword were white, we would have see It white in contrast to the coat, as always. Spoiler: It wasn't.
And that Is just another proof.
It has never been difficult at all. It's just the sword fans/Admirals haters that kept up this charade since chapter 1053.
The manga has always been crystal clear:
Last edited: