Powers & Abilities Debunking Literally Every Argument Against Ryokugyu’s Black Blade UPDATE: Remembering The Fallen
- Thread starter Elder Lee Hung
- Start date
maybe he is a FS expert
The fact Mihawk told Zoro that he is not allowed to drink until he mastered the feat of turning his blade black, yet we see Zoro drinking, means that CoA is an integral piece to it. Also judging the fact Ryuo (aka breath of all things) is the essential ingredient of a swordsman capable to cut everything and nothing.
Doesn't mean CoA is the only thing that is relevant. iirc some secondary source even questioned if Haki alone is even enough for forging a black blade.
But it may be more complex than "you need strong enough ACoC which everyone else lacked".
But one thing is clear. What Greenbull carries indistinguishably looks like a Kokuto. That's why it went so viral. Because people can tell the difference between a Kokuto and a sheath. I don't know what Oda is cooking, but the design had intent. Being the lazy artist that he is, sacrificing details, he's not the type of guy to mistakingly add more paint than necessary and with such precision to outline the black color of the blade's cutting edge, separated by a white line reminiscent of a hamon, on top of having it piercing through Greenbull's pants as to make it clear that the blade is missing the sheath.
Doesn't mean CoA is the only thing that is relevant. iirc some secondary source even questioned if Haki alone is even enough for forging a black blade.
But it may be more complex than "you need strong enough ACoC which everyone else lacked".
But one thing is clear. What Greenbull carries indistinguishably looks like a Kokuto. That's why it went so viral. Because people can tell the difference between a Kokuto and a sheath. I don't know what Oda is cooking, but the design had intent. Being the lazy artist that he is, sacrificing details, he's not the type of guy to mistakingly add more paint than necessary and with such precision to outline the black color of the blade's cutting edge, separated by a white line reminiscent of a hamon, on top of having it piercing through Greenbull's pants as to make it clear that the blade is missing the sheath.
All of your examples easily fail because the comparisons have no roots. Garp and Aokiji have a past, therefore Aokiji adopted some of his fighting style. Mihawk will not throw his sword down and fight like Garp because...
he....
... has no history with Garp. Until such a thing is established there's no reason to believe it. When a mf shows that from their first appearance then yes, it can be assumed unless proven otherwise.
Also it's weird that you glaze the admirals and slander Garp but hey
he....
... has no history with Garp. Until such a thing is established there's no reason to believe it. When a mf shows that from their first appearance then yes, it can be assumed unless proven otherwise.
Also it's weird that you glaze the admirals and slander Garp but hey
Aokiji debuted and showed the hand to hand skills to beat the monster trio easily. He appeared before Garp, who the fuck is going to say "no, no one taught that guy."
Especially after we also saw Kizaru's hand to hand skill. The original trio are the best trained and the highest level of skill within the world government.
Especially after we also saw Kizaru's hand to hand skill. The original trio are the best trained and the highest level of skill within the world government.
This is just hindsight. No one reading the scene at the time is impressed by anything he did h2h, what was highlighted more than anything is Kuzans DF. Even the Garp connection didn´t even inherently mean anything, plenty of marines know Garp personally, and to my memory, it wasn´t even made clear Garp specifically trained him in pre TS We saw multiple fights with Kuzan where he didn´t use his haki at all(WB, Jozu, Doffy, The BBP and even offscreened Cracker)
They migth be the most well trained, but his introduction was bascially all about his powers: him freezing Robin, him freezing Luffy, him freezing an entire Ocean.
And at MF he didn't throw a single punch, ever.
If you or I were caught saying he was a brawler Garp style, let alone on Garp's level, we would have been clowned mercilessly.
And at MF he didn't throw a single punch, ever.
If you or I were caught saying he was a brawler Garp style, let alone on Garp's level, we would have been clowned mercilessly.
UPDATE: OFFICIAL VOLUME COLORING 12/02/2024!!!!!
UPDATE: CONFIRMED IN VIVRE CARD 09/04/2024!
Hello everyone,
Welcome to the most TLDR post of your entire life. Today I wanted to take a minute to address a topic that is weirdly controversial on WorstGen: the idea that Ryokugyu has a black blade.
Now sure, this is not a 100% confirmed idea yet, but it is 99.9% likely to be the case as of the making of this thread, and all of the arguments I’ve seen online denying this idea are riddled with errors in logic.
I did a troll post on this in the past but this thread will be my serious attempt to prove the point and convince any doubters that this is in fact the case. Let us not waste any time:
The Case
Before I start debunking arguments, I think it is best to establish the actual argument itself. I’m going to approach this topic like I’m trying to convince someone who has never read One Piece before.
Firstly, what is a black blade?
A black blade is when a sword becomes permanently black across many battles. Turning a sword black increases it’s strength grade by one rank. It is also implied that you can train to achieve one:
Black blades have multiple special characteristics, one of which is extreme hardness/durability:
And that’s it! That is literally all we know about black blades so far. Now I’ve seen some online propagate a myth based on this quote here:
That conqueror’s Haki is required to turn a blade black as conqueror’s Haki was what Zoro needed to tame Enma. However, this is not confirmed to be the case for a few reasons:
1. Zoro was completely oblivious to the fact that he had CoC prior to Wano, and you would think Mihawk would’ve mentioned this if this is what is required to turn a sword black. But Mihawk never mentions this to Zoro apparently, despite specifically training Zoro to turn his swords black.
2. Enma is not a normal blade, it is a “cursed” blade that most swordsmen can’t wield because it drains their Haki.
So from this, the reasonable assumption is that some blades require CoC to tame (Enma) not all (or else Mihawk probably should have mentioned this to Zoro). Mihawk’s explanation very much makes it seem like the only two components to turning the average blade black are
1. CoA
2. Time
There is likely more to black blades but this is the knowledge that we have at the present.
So!
Why do gigabrains say that Ryokugyu has a black blade?
Firstly, Ryokugyu’s blade looks exactly like other black blades we’ve seen:
When Oda draws Katanas and other sword blades, he does not intentionally blacken the entire sword unless Haki is specifically being used. Some brief examples:
As we can see, Ryokugyu’s sword quite clearly appears to be a black blade in comparison to blades that are not black.
Secondly, Ryokugyu and Fujitora both seem to specialize in specific types of Haki, Fujitora with CoO and Ryokugyu with CoA:
Thirdly, Ryokugyu’s presence as the final antagonist of Wano subtextually completes both of Wano’s themes of monsters and swordsman:
(Wano’s theme about monsters is represented by all of the Zoan users present in the arc, Ryokugyu completes this theme by showing a “monster” form that is a Logia instead of a Zoan)
(Wano’s obvious swordsman theme is completed by Ryokugyu who shows up as a black blade user, the only one present in the arc)
And these are the three big reasons why it is highly likely (99.9% exactly) that Ryokugyu actually does have a black blade.
EDIT: Now, post Chapter 1091, there is much more evidence that Ryokugyu has a black blade because of the hype given to Kuzan and Borsalino. Click on the following post for the full argument:
So now let’s actually debunk some arguments as to why Ryokugyu doesn’t actually have a black blade.
“It’s not a black blade, it is a wooden sword or some other color sword.”
1. This is not what Oda draws wooden swords as looking like, this is:
Now if you think this is a wooden blade that Ryokugyu turned black, that’s fine but this sword looks nothing like an un-blackened wooden sword.
2. I know Oda likes to mislead his audience a lot, but specifically coloring Ryokugyu’s sword in the exact same way that he colors black blades, but secretly intending for the sword to actually be a different color with literally no explanation…that would be just far too weird to actually believe. You can basically just make up any argument you want with no basis or validity, and Ryokugyu’s sword being green or some other color is one of these baseless arguments.
“It is a black blade, but Ryokugyu didn’t turn it black, somebody else did”
This argument is at least halfway there, it acknowledges that Ryokugyu does in fact have a black blade, but then tries to downplay him by saying that someone else is actually responsible.
What’s interesting is that Ryokugyu’s sword appears to be a sheatheless grasscutter katana, which is a straight-bladed katana rather than a curved one:
Which would certainly imply that this blade has belonged to him for a long time since it matches up with his forest theme. But this argument is ultimately just like the argument above, it’s just baseless assumptions with no evidence from the manga backing it.
“Ryokugyu is not a swordsman”
Let’s set aside the fact that turning a blade black being related to “how much of a swordsman someone is” is an assumption unto itself.
So this is a really weird argument for me, because we have literally no idea what Ryokugyu’s swordsmanship abilities look like. People have assumed his level of swordsmanship based on the fact that he never once reached for his sword during the brief stint we saw from him.
But what’s really weird with this..and I mean really weird…is the fact that people are applying the exact opposite logic to Ryokugyu that they apply to other characters.
King shows up with a sword on his hip, and immediately almost the entire fandom in unison declared him a swordsman and assumed he would have some kind of fight with Zoro.
Fujitora shows up with a sword, and immediately agenda posters set out to label him as a swordsman to declare him weaker than Mihawk.
Gandhi has a sword with him and people have labeled Gandhi as a swordsman.
But Ryokugyu shows up with a sword very clearly drawn on his hip, and yet all of the sudden there are sword fans who think this is not enough to declare someone a swordsman? Where did this level of skepticism come from all of the sudden? The sheer mention of bisento’s in the same class as swords was enough for many Zoro fans to label Whitebeard a swordsman, but Ryokugyu carrying a sword on his hip is suddenly not enough to confirm him as a swordsman?
In my head, I have labeled this phenomenon “the black blade effect.” Essentially, if Ryokugyu would’ve showed up with a sword on his hip that was clearly not a black blade, agenda posters would’ve immediately declared him a swordsman who is weaker than Mihawk,
But when Ryokugyu shows up with an obviously black blade, the opposite happens. “It can’t be a black blade because Ryokugyu is not a swordsman.”
“Fujitora/Zatoichi is more of a swordsman than Ryokugyu/Yoshio Harada. If any Admiral was going to achieve a black blade, it is Fujitora.”
So this argument is an extension of the assumption I talked about above. We have literally no idea to what extent Ryokugyu (or Fujitora for that matter) is a swordsman. So to assume his swordsmanship level based on the fact that he has simply never touched his blade and Fujitora has is fallacious.
But another point I wanted to make here:
Yoshio Harada is well known for playing rebels.
Ryokugyu is a hardcore World Government extremist.
Yoshio Harada and Ryokugyu are extreme opposites, and assuming Ryokugyu’s abilities based on Yoshio Harada is extremely flawed lol.
….even though Yoshio Harada frequently played overwhelmingly powerful swordsmen
“Look at what Shanks did to Ryokugyu, a black blade user would never be treated this way”
I feel like I don’t even need to address this one, this argument is sheer 100% speculation with no actual argument being presented.
And that which can be asserted without evidence,
Can also be dismissed without evidence.
“Ryokugyu is an Awakened Logia, there’s no way he’s also a black blade user”
This argument begs the question by building an assumption right into the premise: we have no idea if Ryokugyu is an awakened Logia or not.
But even if Ryokugyu were an Awakened Logia, that would not mean he couldn’t also be a black blade user. From what I gather, this argument is based on two assumptions:
1. That an Awakened Logia/Black Blade user would be too powerful.
…But would they? Would they really?
Look at Luffy for example. Luffy is an Awakened Mythical Zoan (spongebobmock) with all three forms of advanced Haki including AdCoC, but Luffy is still not viewed by the World Government as being a threat on par with Shanks, Mihawk, or Blackbeard.
Katakuri is an Awakened Paramecia user with advanced CoO, but his power level gets dogpiled regularly.
Would the simple idea of any character being both an awakened Logia and a black blade user be too overpowered? I would easily argue no.
2. That Ryokugyu is too young to have achieved both a black blade and Awakening.
So, Awakening only takes about a decade, maybe a little longer as Luffy and Law have shown us. Roughly 12 years in total.
The Black Blade timeframe is still unclear, but I would like to point some facts out about Mihawk:
1. Mihawk likely obtained Yoru way later in his life (late 20s/early 30s), as it’s unlikely Mihawk obtained a supreme Greatsword before he was a WSS contender
2. Mihawk has been fairly inactive for many years now since he has ran out of competition (5 years, perhaps more?) meaning Mihawk achieved the black blade long before the beginning of the series.
So if it takes a decade to Awaken, and let’s say 15 years to achieve a black blade, that would mean it would take roughly 25 years for someone to achieve both a black blade and awakening.
Ryokugyu appears to be in his early 40s (heavy-estimate), meaning he has easily had more than enough time to achieve both awakening and a black blade.
So this argument bites the dust as well.
“The scabbards didn’t comment on Ryokugyu’s black blade, that means he doesn’t have one”
I mean…no. What else do I even need to say here? It’s just another assumption argument that the scabbards would’ve perceived Ryokugyu’s black blade as a more important observation than the fact that he was an enemy from an outside land, which to me seems far contextually more important.
There are many assumptions in this argument:
1. That the scabbards even saw Ryokugyu’s sword given how briefly it was visible on his body
2. That the scabbards would perceive a black blade as a more significant observation than an enemy invader
3. That Oda must draw a dialogue bubble stating something or else it didn’t happen
4. That the scabbards would even care enough about a black blade to vocalize an observation of one to begin with
Just to name a few.
“Ryokugyu was actually using Haki to turn his sword black”
…Come on Lee, you promised this would be a serious thread…
Okay, so we should all be able to agree that Ryokugyu was using his Devil Fruit against the Beasts:
There is absolutely no indication that Ryokugyu used his sword in this scene. So far as we can tell, he exclusively used his Devil Fruit power.
For one to believe he was actively coating a non-black blade in Haki, one would have to believe that Oda chose to have Ryokugyu coat a sword hanging from his hip in Haki for no other reason than to simply confuse readers. Which obviously makes not one ounce of sense.
“Oda would not give a throwaway Admiral a black blade”
So, regardless of what you think of the power level of the Admirals, from Oda’s perspective, there is no such thing as a throwaway Admiral. Oda has only ever designed five of these characters, and each of them have had a lot of thought and effort put into their designs. Oda went out of his way to base these characters off of actors who are loved throughout Japan.
And especially Ryokugyu who fulfills such a unique roll among Admirals:
-From his “fasting” subplot which has yet to be explained
-To the fact that he is the most extreme WG/Celestial Dragon simp in the entire manga
This is definitely not a character who Oda just designed out of the blue for no reason. This is a character Oda has real plans for. Oda even described Ryokugyu as being “really cool” before his reveal, this is definitely not some half-assed character Oda came up with without thought or effort.
“Ryokugyu will fight Sanji, not Zoro. Only Zoro opponents can have black blades”
Assumption. There is no law in One Piece that states this. And there is no guarantee Sanji will fight Ryokugyu to begin with. We have entered the realm of ultra speculation territory where you have to accept several layers of assumption to even engage the premise. But okay, I will play along:
What if Zoro achieves a black blade before fighting Kizaru? To me, the Light Sword Vs Black Blade dichotomy works much better than black blade vs black blade, especially since Zoro is already going to fight Mihawk (probably, assumptions are fun).
I have much more to say on Zoro vs Kizaru and Sanji vs Ryokugyu but this thread isn’t about that (please god don’t make this thread about that).
“Not even Roger, Whitebeard, or Shanks achieved black blades, there is no way Ryokugyu did”
I wanted to end this post by addressing this one last argument. I’m not out to make this thread an Admirals vs Yonko or Admirals vs Pirate King thread, but what I am here to say is this:
The assumption that at Admiral cannot achieve something because a Yonko or a Pirate King did not, at the end of the day, it is just that. An assumption. There is no canonical basis to the idea that any character in One Piece cannot achieve something that Roger or whoever did not, regardless of how your mental tier list plays out.
.
.
.
Phew! If you read this entire thread, I sincerely thank you even if you still disagree with me. These are all of the arguments I can think of for the time being but I’m sure more will arise, and I will edit this post when I see those arguments should they be this flawed.
At the end of the day, I think it is clear that Oda intends for us to see Aramaki as the black blade Admiral. I am 99.9% convinced and I rarely say that when dealing with a sporadic mangaka like Oda. But let me know what you think :)
@SakazOuki @Owl Ki @Vanlax @comrade @Sentinel @Playa4321 @Veku @Plex @ConquistadoR @God Buggy @The White Crane @Kurozumi Wiwi @Chrono @MarineHQ @King7 @kurwa @Extravlad @AkainuTheGrimReaper @Gehrman @Peroroncino @ShishioIsBack @HA001 @Light D Lamperouge @Zenos7 @Warchief Sanji D Goat @Mr. Anderson @VersusPhD @Fleet Leader Fenaker @Trueprodigy @silverfire @Den_Den_Mushi
UPDATE: CONFIRMED IN VIVRE CARD 09/04/2024!
07/10/2023 An Official Figurine Depicts Ryokugyu with a Black Blade
Another Figurine from the same studio:
Yet another figuring from a completely separate figurine studio showing a black blade
Another Figurine from the same studio:
Yet another figuring from a completely separate figurine studio showing a black blade
Welcome to the most TLDR post of your entire life. Today I wanted to take a minute to address a topic that is weirdly controversial on WorstGen: the idea that Ryokugyu has a black blade.
Now sure, this is not a 100% confirmed idea yet, but it is 99.9% likely to be the case as of the making of this thread, and all of the arguments I’ve seen online denying this idea are riddled with errors in logic.
I did a troll post on this in the past but this thread will be my serious attempt to prove the point and convince any doubters that this is in fact the case. Let us not waste any time:
The Case
Before I start debunking arguments, I think it is best to establish the actual argument itself. I’m going to approach this topic like I’m trying to convince someone who has never read One Piece before.
Firstly, what is a black blade?
A black blade is when a sword becomes permanently black across many battles. Turning a sword black increases it’s strength grade by one rank. It is also implied that you can train to achieve one:
Black blades have multiple special characteristics, one of which is extreme hardness/durability:
And that’s it! That is literally all we know about black blades so far. Now I’ve seen some online propagate a myth based on this quote here:
That conqueror’s Haki is required to turn a blade black as conqueror’s Haki was what Zoro needed to tame Enma. However, this is not confirmed to be the case for a few reasons:
1. Zoro was completely oblivious to the fact that he had CoC prior to Wano, and you would think Mihawk would’ve mentioned this if this is what is required to turn a sword black. But Mihawk never mentions this to Zoro apparently, despite specifically training Zoro to turn his swords black.
2. Enma is not a normal blade, it is a “cursed” blade that most swordsmen can’t wield because it drains their Haki.
So from this, the reasonable assumption is that some blades require CoC to tame (Enma) not all (or else Mihawk probably should have mentioned this to Zoro). Mihawk’s explanation very much makes it seem like the only two components to turning the average blade black are
1. CoA
2. Time
There is likely more to black blades but this is the knowledge that we have at the present.
So!
Why do gigabrains say that Ryokugyu has a black blade?
Firstly, Ryokugyu’s blade looks exactly like other black blades we’ve seen:
When Oda draws Katanas and other sword blades, he does not intentionally blacken the entire sword unless Haki is specifically being used. Some brief examples:
As we can see, Ryokugyu’s sword quite clearly appears to be a black blade in comparison to blades that are not black.
Secondly, Ryokugyu and Fujitora both seem to specialize in specific types of Haki, Fujitora with CoO and Ryokugyu with CoA:
Thirdly, Ryokugyu’s presence as the final antagonist of Wano subtextually completes both of Wano’s themes of monsters and swordsman:
(Wano’s theme about monsters is represented by all of the Zoan users present in the arc, Ryokugyu completes this theme by showing a “monster” form that is a Logia instead of a Zoan)
(Wano’s obvious swordsman theme is completed by Ryokugyu who shows up as a black blade user, the only one present in the arc)
And these are the three big reasons why it is highly likely (99.9% exactly) that Ryokugyu actually does have a black blade.
EDIT: Now, post Chapter 1091, there is much more evidence that Ryokugyu has a black blade because of the hype given to Kuzan and Borsalino. Click on the following post for the full argument:
So now let’s actually debunk some arguments as to why Ryokugyu doesn’t actually have a black blade.
“It’s not a black blade, it is a wooden sword or some other color sword.”
1. This is not what Oda draws wooden swords as looking like, this is:
Now if you think this is a wooden blade that Ryokugyu turned black, that’s fine but this sword looks nothing like an un-blackened wooden sword.
2. I know Oda likes to mislead his audience a lot, but specifically coloring Ryokugyu’s sword in the exact same way that he colors black blades, but secretly intending for the sword to actually be a different color with literally no explanation…that would be just far too weird to actually believe. You can basically just make up any argument you want with no basis or validity, and Ryokugyu’s sword being green or some other color is one of these baseless arguments.
“It is a black blade, but Ryokugyu didn’t turn it black, somebody else did”
This argument is at least halfway there, it acknowledges that Ryokugyu does in fact have a black blade, but then tries to downplay him by saying that someone else is actually responsible.
What’s interesting is that Ryokugyu’s sword appears to be a sheatheless grasscutter katana, which is a straight-bladed katana rather than a curved one:
Which would certainly imply that this blade has belonged to him for a long time since it matches up with his forest theme. But this argument is ultimately just like the argument above, it’s just baseless assumptions with no evidence from the manga backing it.
“Ryokugyu is not a swordsman”
Let’s set aside the fact that turning a blade black being related to “how much of a swordsman someone is” is an assumption unto itself.
So this is a really weird argument for me, because we have literally no idea what Ryokugyu’s swordsmanship abilities look like. People have assumed his level of swordsmanship based on the fact that he never once reached for his sword during the brief stint we saw from him.
But what’s really weird with this..and I mean really weird…is the fact that people are applying the exact opposite logic to Ryokugyu that they apply to other characters.
King shows up with a sword on his hip, and immediately almost the entire fandom in unison declared him a swordsman and assumed he would have some kind of fight with Zoro.
Fujitora shows up with a sword, and immediately agenda posters set out to label him as a swordsman to declare him weaker than Mihawk.
Gandhi has a sword with him and people have labeled Gandhi as a swordsman.
But Ryokugyu shows up with a sword very clearly drawn on his hip, and yet all of the sudden there are sword fans who think this is not enough to declare someone a swordsman? Where did this level of skepticism come from all of the sudden? The sheer mention of bisento’s in the same class as swords was enough for many Zoro fans to label Whitebeard a swordsman, but Ryokugyu carrying a sword on his hip is suddenly not enough to confirm him as a swordsman?
In my head, I have labeled this phenomenon “the black blade effect.” Essentially, if Ryokugyu would’ve showed up with a sword on his hip that was clearly not a black blade, agenda posters would’ve immediately declared him a swordsman who is weaker than Mihawk,
But when Ryokugyu shows up with an obviously black blade, the opposite happens. “It can’t be a black blade because Ryokugyu is not a swordsman.”
“Fujitora/Zatoichi is more of a swordsman than Ryokugyu/Yoshio Harada. If any Admiral was going to achieve a black blade, it is Fujitora.”
So this argument is an extension of the assumption I talked about above. We have literally no idea to what extent Ryokugyu (or Fujitora for that matter) is a swordsman. So to assume his swordsmanship level based on the fact that he has simply never touched his blade and Fujitora has is fallacious.
But another point I wanted to make here:
Yoshio Harada is well known for playing rebels.
Ryokugyu is a hardcore World Government extremist.
Yoshio Harada and Ryokugyu are extreme opposites, and assuming Ryokugyu’s abilities based on Yoshio Harada is extremely flawed lol.
….even though Yoshio Harada frequently played overwhelmingly powerful swordsmen
“Look at what Shanks did to Ryokugyu, a black blade user would never be treated this way”
I feel like I don’t even need to address this one, this argument is sheer 100% speculation with no actual argument being presented.
And that which can be asserted without evidence,
Can also be dismissed without evidence.
“Ryokugyu is an Awakened Logia, there’s no way he’s also a black blade user”
This argument begs the question by building an assumption right into the premise: we have no idea if Ryokugyu is an awakened Logia or not.
But even if Ryokugyu were an Awakened Logia, that would not mean he couldn’t also be a black blade user. From what I gather, this argument is based on two assumptions:
1. That an Awakened Logia/Black Blade user would be too powerful.
…But would they? Would they really?
Look at Luffy for example. Luffy is an Awakened Mythical Zoan (spongebobmock) with all three forms of advanced Haki including AdCoC, but Luffy is still not viewed by the World Government as being a threat on par with Shanks, Mihawk, or Blackbeard.
Katakuri is an Awakened Paramecia user with advanced CoO, but his power level gets dogpiled regularly.
Would the simple idea of any character being both an awakened Logia and a black blade user be too overpowered? I would easily argue no.
2. That Ryokugyu is too young to have achieved both a black blade and Awakening.
So, Awakening only takes about a decade, maybe a little longer as Luffy and Law have shown us. Roughly 12 years in total.
The Black Blade timeframe is still unclear, but I would like to point some facts out about Mihawk:
1. Mihawk likely obtained Yoru way later in his life (late 20s/early 30s), as it’s unlikely Mihawk obtained a supreme Greatsword before he was a WSS contender
2. Mihawk has been fairly inactive for many years now since he has ran out of competition (5 years, perhaps more?) meaning Mihawk achieved the black blade long before the beginning of the series.
So if it takes a decade to Awaken, and let’s say 15 years to achieve a black blade, that would mean it would take roughly 25 years for someone to achieve both a black blade and awakening.
Ryokugyu appears to be in his early 40s (heavy-estimate), meaning he has easily had more than enough time to achieve both awakening and a black blade.
So this argument bites the dust as well.
“The scabbards didn’t comment on Ryokugyu’s black blade, that means he doesn’t have one”
I mean…no. What else do I even need to say here? It’s just another assumption argument that the scabbards would’ve perceived Ryokugyu’s black blade as a more important observation than the fact that he was an enemy from an outside land, which to me seems far contextually more important.
There are many assumptions in this argument:
1. That the scabbards even saw Ryokugyu’s sword given how briefly it was visible on his body
2. That the scabbards would perceive a black blade as a more significant observation than an enemy invader
3. That Oda must draw a dialogue bubble stating something or else it didn’t happen
4. That the scabbards would even care enough about a black blade to vocalize an observation of one to begin with
Just to name a few.
“Ryokugyu was actually using Haki to turn his sword black”
…Come on Lee, you promised this would be a serious thread…
Okay, so we should all be able to agree that Ryokugyu was using his Devil Fruit against the Beasts:
There is absolutely no indication that Ryokugyu used his sword in this scene. So far as we can tell, he exclusively used his Devil Fruit power.
For one to believe he was actively coating a non-black blade in Haki, one would have to believe that Oda chose to have Ryokugyu coat a sword hanging from his hip in Haki for no other reason than to simply confuse readers. Which obviously makes not one ounce of sense.
“Oda would not give a throwaway Admiral a black blade”
So, regardless of what you think of the power level of the Admirals, from Oda’s perspective, there is no such thing as a throwaway Admiral. Oda has only ever designed five of these characters, and each of them have had a lot of thought and effort put into their designs. Oda went out of his way to base these characters off of actors who are loved throughout Japan.
And especially Ryokugyu who fulfills such a unique roll among Admirals:
-From his “fasting” subplot which has yet to be explained
-To the fact that he is the most extreme WG/Celestial Dragon simp in the entire manga
This is definitely not a character who Oda just designed out of the blue for no reason. This is a character Oda has real plans for. Oda even described Ryokugyu as being “really cool” before his reveal, this is definitely not some half-assed character Oda came up with without thought or effort.
“Ryokugyu will fight Sanji, not Zoro. Only Zoro opponents can have black blades”
Assumption. There is no law in One Piece that states this. And there is no guarantee Sanji will fight Ryokugyu to begin with. We have entered the realm of ultra speculation territory where you have to accept several layers of assumption to even engage the premise. But okay, I will play along:
What if Zoro achieves a black blade before fighting Kizaru? To me, the Light Sword Vs Black Blade dichotomy works much better than black blade vs black blade, especially since Zoro is already going to fight Mihawk (probably, assumptions are fun).
I have much more to say on Zoro vs Kizaru and Sanji vs Ryokugyu but this thread isn’t about that (please god don’t make this thread about that).
“Not even Roger, Whitebeard, or Shanks achieved black blades, there is no way Ryokugyu did”
I wanted to end this post by addressing this one last argument. I’m not out to make this thread an Admirals vs Yonko or Admirals vs Pirate King thread, but what I am here to say is this:
The assumption that at Admiral cannot achieve something because a Yonko or a Pirate King did not, at the end of the day, it is just that. An assumption. There is no canonical basis to the idea that any character in One Piece cannot achieve something that Roger or whoever did not, regardless of how your mental tier list plays out.
“A black blade does not contribute to Ryokugyu’s fighting style, therefore it makes no sense for him to have a black blade”
Another argument based on several flawed assumptions:
1. We have not seen the full extent of Ryokugyu’s fighting style. To assume that swordsmanship does not contribute to Ryokugyu’s fighting style is a huge jumping of the gun.
2. The sheer fact that Oda drew Aramaki with a sword at all is proof that he is capable of fighting with that sword, or else there is no reason for him to carry one at all. This would literally be the first time in the manga that Oda drew a character carrying a weapon when said character has no ability to use said weapon, and that is far too unbelievable. This would once again be Oda communicating false information to his audience for absolutely no reason.
3. You could make this argument about any character who uses hybrid fighting styles. For example, King’s primary threat level is based on his Lunarian genes, and yet King still carries a sword. King has also eaten a Devil Fruit even though his Devil Fruit, sword, and Lunarian genes do not perfectly compliment one another. To assume a character will only use weapons/other fighting attributes that perfectly compliment one another is another huge assumption, and to assume Ryokugyu’s Devil Fruit powers and swordsmanship will not compliment each other is another huge assumption as well.
“Oda will not give Ryokugyu a black blade because Zoro is his favorite character and this makes Zoro less unique”
I’ve never seen it said that Zoro is Oda’s favorite character lol. But let’s assume that he is:
The idea that Oda would “ruin” his favorite character by giving an Admiral a black blade just shows how supremely disconnected Zoro fans are from what Oda is actually thinking lol. In their minds, Oda does not like Zoro for his indomitable willpower, his dedication to his dream, his devotion to Luffy and the Straw Hats, his badassery, or any of Zoro’s other well-known traits…no, Oda only cares about Zoro because he will one day achieve a black blade. Lol
Let’s assume such an obviously stupid argument were true, and Oda only cares about Zoro for this reason.
It is still an assumption to assume that Oda would not ever give any other character a black blade. What about Mihawk and Ryuma? Does the fact that they achieved black blades ruin Zoro for Oda? I would argue clearly not, or else he would’ve never given either character black blades and would’ve only given Zoro one. Other characters having black blades would apparently ruin Zoro, after all.
“Mihawk’s bounty is 3.6 billion. If Kuzan does not have a bounty similar to 3.6 billion, this is confirmation that Ryokugyu doesn’t have a black blade, since the Government would give Kuzan a comparable bounty to Mihawk if Ryokugyu had a black blade”
Okay. So let’s go point by point because this is wrong on several levels.
1. Mihawk’s bounty is because he is the WSS. To act like his bounty is solely based on his black blade is just wrong.
2. Let’s assume Kuzan has a 2 billion berry bounty. Would Kuzan’s lower bounty that Mihawk be solely due to the fact that Mihawk has a black blade and Kuzan doesn’t? Probably not.
3. What on earth does Kuzan’s bounty have to do with Ryokugyu’s black blade?
4. It has never been stated that if someone has a bounty below x number, that means they can’t have a black blade. It’s also never been stated that the Government will automatically assign someone a specific minimum bounty if they have a black blade.
UPDATE: Ryokugyu has a confirmed Cross Guild bounty of 3 billion. Which even if Cross Guild bounties are completely 100% accurate, would certainly seem to put him in a comparable bounty range to Mihawk, despite this argument still being invalid.
“The Marines described Mihawk as having stronger swordsmanship than Shanks. This means Shanks is the second strongest swordsman in the One Piece world, and thus Ryokugyu cannot have a black blade because his swordsmanship is weaker than Shanks’ swordsmanship”
This argument is an extension of the “Ryokugyu is not a swordsman” argument I posted above, and there are several hardcore assumptions built into this argument that have never been proven.
1. Most glaringly, the assumption that because the Marines stated that Mihawk is stronger than Shanks, that this means Shanks is the second strongest swordsman. No. Mihawk is well known for his duels with Shanks, they are world-famous events, whereas as far as we know, Mihawk has never fought Aramaki. This line of dialogue is simply a callback to previously existing story events that we know of: that Shanks and Mihawk once regularly fought, and Mihawk surpassed him.
2. Once again, we have the assumption that achieving a black blade is directly proportional to how much of a swordsman someone is, which has never been stated. As stated previously, the two components of forging a black blade are CoA and Time, nothing else. There are swordsman in the world of One Piece (Shanks, Roger, and Rayleigh for example) who do not focus on CoA but rather CoC, which I’ve already discussed above.
3. What’s weird is that the same person presenting this argument also believes that both Roger and Shanks are stronger than Mihawk, so I would like to point out that this argument is not being presented earnestly or in good faith (like most arguments here) and is just a desperate attempt to prove an agenda. “Aramaki can’t be stronger than Shanks because Shanks doesn’t have a black blade, therefore Aramaki doesn’t have a black blade”…but this user already believes non-black blade users are stronger than Mihawk anyway, lol.
“Ryokugyu stole his black blade from Xebec”
Xebec did not have a black blade. This is Xebec’s sword:
Which looks nothing like Aramaki’s Grasscutter.
Miscellaneous
Great Comment from Wiwi:
@BaboonMihawk pointed out in his thread that Aramaki Gennai, the main character from Ronin Gai of which Ryokugyu is based off of, was rumored to be a superb swordsman, but no one had ever seen his sword skill before with the exception of his lover.
This would seem to matchup with Ryokugyu who appears to be a swordsman but has yet to reveal his skill with the blade.
And by drawing Ryokugyu with a black blade, Oda could be referencing Aramaki’s hidden extreme prowess with the blade.
Another argument based on several flawed assumptions:
1. We have not seen the full extent of Ryokugyu’s fighting style. To assume that swordsmanship does not contribute to Ryokugyu’s fighting style is a huge jumping of the gun.
2. The sheer fact that Oda drew Aramaki with a sword at all is proof that he is capable of fighting with that sword, or else there is no reason for him to carry one at all. This would literally be the first time in the manga that Oda drew a character carrying a weapon when said character has no ability to use said weapon, and that is far too unbelievable. This would once again be Oda communicating false information to his audience for absolutely no reason.
3. You could make this argument about any character who uses hybrid fighting styles. For example, King’s primary threat level is based on his Lunarian genes, and yet King still carries a sword. King has also eaten a Devil Fruit even though his Devil Fruit, sword, and Lunarian genes do not perfectly compliment one another. To assume a character will only use weapons/other fighting attributes that perfectly compliment one another is another huge assumption, and to assume Ryokugyu’s Devil Fruit powers and swordsmanship will not compliment each other is another huge assumption as well.
“Oda will not give Ryokugyu a black blade because Zoro is his favorite character and this makes Zoro less unique”
I’ve never seen it said that Zoro is Oda’s favorite character lol. But let’s assume that he is:
The idea that Oda would “ruin” his favorite character by giving an Admiral a black blade just shows how supremely disconnected Zoro fans are from what Oda is actually thinking lol. In their minds, Oda does not like Zoro for his indomitable willpower, his dedication to his dream, his devotion to Luffy and the Straw Hats, his badassery, or any of Zoro’s other well-known traits…no, Oda only cares about Zoro because he will one day achieve a black blade. Lol
Let’s assume such an obviously stupid argument were true, and Oda only cares about Zoro for this reason.
It is still an assumption to assume that Oda would not ever give any other character a black blade. What about Mihawk and Ryuma? Does the fact that they achieved black blades ruin Zoro for Oda? I would argue clearly not, or else he would’ve never given either character black blades and would’ve only given Zoro one. Other characters having black blades would apparently ruin Zoro, after all.
“Mihawk’s bounty is 3.6 billion. If Kuzan does not have a bounty similar to 3.6 billion, this is confirmation that Ryokugyu doesn’t have a black blade, since the Government would give Kuzan a comparable bounty to Mihawk if Ryokugyu had a black blade”
Okay. So let’s go point by point because this is wrong on several levels.
1. Mihawk’s bounty is because he is the WSS. To act like his bounty is solely based on his black blade is just wrong.
2. Let’s assume Kuzan has a 2 billion berry bounty. Would Kuzan’s lower bounty that Mihawk be solely due to the fact that Mihawk has a black blade and Kuzan doesn’t? Probably not.
3. What on earth does Kuzan’s bounty have to do with Ryokugyu’s black blade?
4. It has never been stated that if someone has a bounty below x number, that means they can’t have a black blade. It’s also never been stated that the Government will automatically assign someone a specific minimum bounty if they have a black blade.
UPDATE: Ryokugyu has a confirmed Cross Guild bounty of 3 billion. Which even if Cross Guild bounties are completely 100% accurate, would certainly seem to put him in a comparable bounty range to Mihawk, despite this argument still being invalid.
“The Marines described Mihawk as having stronger swordsmanship than Shanks. This means Shanks is the second strongest swordsman in the One Piece world, and thus Ryokugyu cannot have a black blade because his swordsmanship is weaker than Shanks’ swordsmanship”
This argument is an extension of the “Ryokugyu is not a swordsman” argument I posted above, and there are several hardcore assumptions built into this argument that have never been proven.
1. Most glaringly, the assumption that because the Marines stated that Mihawk is stronger than Shanks, that this means Shanks is the second strongest swordsman. No. Mihawk is well known for his duels with Shanks, they are world-famous events, whereas as far as we know, Mihawk has never fought Aramaki. This line of dialogue is simply a callback to previously existing story events that we know of: that Shanks and Mihawk once regularly fought, and Mihawk surpassed him.
2. Once again, we have the assumption that achieving a black blade is directly proportional to how much of a swordsman someone is, which has never been stated. As stated previously, the two components of forging a black blade are CoA and Time, nothing else. There are swordsman in the world of One Piece (Shanks, Roger, and Rayleigh for example) who do not focus on CoA but rather CoC, which I’ve already discussed above.
3. What’s weird is that the same person presenting this argument also believes that both Roger and Shanks are stronger than Mihawk, so I would like to point out that this argument is not being presented earnestly or in good faith (like most arguments here) and is just a desperate attempt to prove an agenda. “Aramaki can’t be stronger than Shanks because Shanks doesn’t have a black blade, therefore Aramaki doesn’t have a black blade”…but this user already believes non-black blade users are stronger than Mihawk anyway, lol.
“Ryokugyu stole his black blade from Xebec”
Xebec did not have a black blade. This is Xebec’s sword:
Which looks nothing like Aramaki’s Grasscutter.
Miscellaneous
Great Comment from Wiwi:
@BaboonMihawk pointed out in his thread that Aramaki Gennai, the main character from Ronin Gai of which Ryokugyu is based off of, was rumored to be a superb swordsman, but no one had ever seen his sword skill before with the exception of his lover.
This would seem to matchup with Ryokugyu who appears to be a swordsman but has yet to reveal his skill with the blade.
And by drawing Ryokugyu with a black blade, Oda could be referencing Aramaki’s hidden extreme prowess with the blade.
.
.
Phew! If you read this entire thread, I sincerely thank you even if you still disagree with me. These are all of the arguments I can think of for the time being but I’m sure more will arise, and I will edit this post when I see those arguments should they be this flawed.
At the end of the day, I think it is clear that Oda intends for us to see Aramaki as the black blade Admiral. I am 99.9% convinced and I rarely say that when dealing with a sporadic mangaka like Oda. But let me know what you think :)
@SakazOuki @Owl Ki @Vanlax @comrade @Sentinel @Playa4321 @Veku @Plex @ConquistadoR @God Buggy @The White Crane @Kurozumi Wiwi @Chrono @MarineHQ @King7 @kurwa @Extravlad @AkainuTheGrimReaper @Gehrman @Peroroncino @ShishioIsBack @HA001 @Light D Lamperouge @Zenos7 @Warchief Sanji D Goat @Mr. Anderson @VersusPhD @Fleet Leader Fenaker @Trueprodigy @silverfire @Den_Den_Mushi
Nah that’s not how anything works. Aokiji was from the start a fruit-based fighter, him punching like Garp was on literally nobody’s bingo card. And if Kuzan were assumed to be a brawler, literally no one assumed he would be Garp’s equal as a brawler but here we are.
With Ryokugyu and the black blade, there is no reason to assume he wouldn’t achieve one, because achieving a black blade does not require a master who also achieved one so far as we know. The black blade feat isn’t exclusive to just one person, even before Ryokugyu there were at least three black blades that Oda showed/hinted at (Shusui, Yoru, and the conceptual black blade drawn)
It’s like Mihawk said, anyone can achieve a black blade theoretically, so Ryokugyu achieving one is not unbelievable at all.
So this comparison of Kuzan requiring a master to reach Garp’s level doesn’t work because Garp is the only dude to punch like Garp, him reaching Kuzan how to reach that level as well is only needed because Garp invented his own training to begin with.
With Ryokugyu and the black blade, there is no reason to assume he wouldn’t achieve one, because achieving a black blade does not require a master who also achieved one so far as we know. The black blade feat isn’t exclusive to just one person, even before Ryokugyu there were at least three black blades that Oda showed/hinted at (Shusui, Yoru, and the conceptual black blade drawn)
It’s like Mihawk said, anyone can achieve a black blade theoretically, so Ryokugyu achieving one is not unbelievable at all.
So this comparison of Kuzan requiring a master to reach Garp’s level doesn’t work because Garp is the only dude to punch like Garp, him reaching Kuzan how to reach that level as well is only needed because Garp invented his own training to begin with.
