Search results

If Zoro didn't get shambled out of the attack, a comparison could def be made to conclude he has superior endurance.

Correct And that's where your post should have ended. As it literally didn't. I'm not making that claim, you're essentially making the inverse of that claim. Burden of proof lies on you. Not me.

Not only did you compare them, you used Luffy getting knocked out in a completely different situation and Zoro not getting knocked out in a completely different situation as "proof," and keep running to the oversimplification of damage taken. I've been pretty clear here. Damage taken is not the...

You missed the point. It's actually you who are oversimplifying it, ignoring every single factor (clean vs blocked, potency, location). That's the point of those examples, they're oversimplifications to expose your reasoning which is oversimplified to begin with. Again you're comparing a block...

Because that's not the problem here, if you simply said Zoro has the best endurance feat on the rooftop, no issues. But instead you are the one who decided to compare the two situations as proof for Zoro's superior endurance, when the comparison doesn't even begin to make sense. Already gave...

And the only way to tell is if both were put in the same situation. As it stands, there is no means for comparison. I don't think Luffy could block hakai like Zoro did, because his defense isn't as effective, endurance isn't even the biggest factor there. (But if you transferred the damage Zoro...

Dude, one attack landed, the other was blocked. The comparison fails at the most basic level, let alone when factoring in everything else (placement, reinforcement, attack potency, lethality etc.) This is like wearing a bullet proof vest, taking bullets to the gut, breaking a couple ribs but...

Comparison doesn't make any sense. Luffy took Ragnarok square, he got hit by it clean. Zoro briefly blocked hakai and the force of the attack shredded him. The attack never landed on Zoro. Apples to oranges.