Powers & Abilities Debunking Literally Every Argument Against Ryokugyu’s Black Blade UPDATE: Remembering The Fallen

Does Ryokugyu Have A Black Blade?


  • Total voters
    230
Admirals copers still didn't show us anything that confirms he has a black blade LMAO :

> Zoro a confirmed swordman was drawn when he was a kid wielding a sword :

> Mihawk a confirmed swordman was drawn when he was a kid wielding a sword :

> Fujitora a confirmed swordman was drawn when he was a kid wielding a sword :

> Oops Aramaki was drawn when he was a kid wielding a club :

Basically, you have nothing but headcanons and cope when copers thought Kizaru was sighing and not panting against Rayleigh LMAO :





:shame::shame:
 
Exactly if twerkbull was one of them he wouldn't be df merchant first of all he would also flex with it use it in combat
What swordsman of that caliber would embarrass himself this way for example relying on ugly broccoli form instead of using his so called kokuto to block this:milaugh:
yamato gobblers still think this hit did something. 0 blood, 0 visible damage, immediately stands back up. "b-b-b-but he said it was strong haki!" not strong enough gtfo. yamato was LOW DIFFED.
Post automatically merged:

Maybe the one stopped by Vista :milaugh:




But no, Is the AdvCoC cheap shot by the daughter of Kaido the problem :milaugh:
"Hey Vista, I'm busy doing something more important than dueling you. Fuck off before I kill you"

"Ho Ho! That would be advantageous for both of us! I'm going to fuck off now and stand around watching the war next to jobbers!"
 
yamato gobblers still think this hit did something. 0 blood, 0 visible damage, immediately stands back up. "b-b-b-but he said it was strong haki!" not strong enough gtfo. yamato was LOW DIFFED.
A nameless attack from base yamato was acknowledged by GB. Then due to momo asking yamato not to interfere , she did not fight GB. Stop the cap lmfao.
 
yamato gobblers still think this hit did something. 0 blood, 0 visible damage, immediately stands back up. "b-b-b-but he said it was strong haki!" not strong enough gtfo. yamato was LOW DIFFED.
Post automatically merged:


"Hey Vista, I'm busy doing something more important than dueling you. Fuck off before I kill you"

"Ho Ho! That would be advantageous for both of us! I'm going to fuck off now and stand around watching the war next to jobbers!"
Blood scaling is dumb af. Do you also believe basic Sentomaru palm strikes >> WSG because the former made Kizaru bleed while the latter didn’t?
 
yamato gobblers still think this hit did something. 0 blood, 0 visible damage, immediately stands back up. "b-b-b-but he said it was strong haki!" not strong enough gtfo. yamato was LOW DIFFED.
It's not about the damage but allowing himself to be hit eating dirt in his broccoli form. This is the trash you place with greatest swordsmen lol what good is a kokuto if you can't use it to defend yourself from likes of yamato.
"He is hiding his swordsmanship, he was sneak attacked"
So many lame excuses for overrated bum
 
None of that is proof.

This is proof of a black blade.



That is evidence. You don't have evidence.

Since I provided evidence weapon can be difficult than what they appeared to be claiming GB weapon is a black blade off its appearance is not evidence it's a black blade.
If it being a Black Blade isn't enough evidence for it being a Black Blade then that's on y'all not us. We'll continue with the facts and y'all can continue living your fantasy where Greenbull's sword is somehow wooden.
 
It's not about the damage but allowing himself to be hit eating dirt in his broccoli form. This is the trash you place with greatest swordsmen lol what good is a kokuto if you can't use it to defend yourself from likes of yamato.
"He is hiding his swordsmanship, he was sneak attacked"
So many lame excuses for overrated bum
Yamato failed to deal any substantial damage to him. Then he restrained her with his Devil Fruit abilities.

ALL of them were lucky he didn't just impale them with his branches and absorb their life force like he did with the Beast Pirates and Raizo. He clearly didn't need his swordsmanship to deal with them and him taking a hit doesn't take away from the fact they couldn't beat him without him even drawing his blade.

What makes things worse, is that he's a marine. They're all around fighters. You do realize that every single one of the Admirals can use a sword right? Kizaru, Kuzan and Akainu are also swordsman. Just like Greenbull is a swordsman that doesn't need it to put you down lmao.
 
If it being a Black Blade isn't enough evidence for it being a Black Blade then that's on y'all not us. We'll continue with the facts and y'all can continue living your fantasy where Greenbull's sword is somehow wooden.
The state of this topic since the day the volume dropped, and more so after the VCs/official coloring:



And obv. only on this issue. On the rest of the manga no lol.

Greenbull? Overrated? Lol
Probably the most underrated character compared to his fits.
 
Um, no?

First of all, Cracker is a craftsman. Like, in the very panel which you provided as your set of "evidence" when it comes to questioning the legitimacy of Ryo's black blade, Cracker explained that it was red jam which his biscuit soldier was spitting out before. So the image of his biscuit swords are not only replicas of his real sword, they're meant to resemble his real sword as much as possible because Cracker is the type of person who insists on keeping the smallest bits of detail in his creations.
Post automatically merged:



Oh, you even gave the reason to why Cracker's swords look that identical.

Bolded part is the one where it's supposed to show your flaw of comparison by bringing up two different characters and their entire motives to what they're acting like. Cracker isn't GB, so how does it matter?



How about you simply WAIT till the manga reveals his actual in-depth character, his flashback (if there's a flashback) or when he draws his weapon against the opponent who's gonna beat him?

Also, I mean, he uses a wooden sword as a kid and so it means he uses one as an adult? That's not a reason. Besides, we've already seen how Oda draws wooden swords. Look up at the recent chapters for example.
I have no problem waiting until GB use his weapon to see what it is. Maybe you should tell that to the people who continue to claim GB weapon is a black blade based on its appearance only.

Oda drew what a kid using a wooden sword for training looks like. That's different than an admiral with a powerful wood DF power.

Cracker biscuit sword didn't look like a sword made from a biscuit. It looks like a real metal sword. Compared to his shields that look like shields made from biscuits.

Lol, again:



"In this case It's proof only if It's called a BB"
Are those real metal swords or biscuits?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Biscuits.



:pepehawk:

You are arguing a bunch of hypotheticals that couldn't possibly be proven until maybe (but probably not) revealed much later in the story to argue against the current evidence that is actually present.

Everything so far points to it being a Black Blade. The examples you provide as to why it might not be a black Blade aren't convincing.

The only real example of a weapon not being what it appears to be is Who's Who's comically small dagger. It fits with him being a former secret agent that would have used trickery to one up opponents. Funny thing is, Who's Who is using it exactly as he would use a sword anyway because his Rokushiki skill set allows him to have greater range than whatever he is physically wielding. Like Rokushiki makes Zoro think of Kaku as a four blade swordsman because Kaku can just flat out use his limbs as blades.

Fujitora's cane was always going to obviously be a cane sword. Cane swords are famous, Fujitora has a samurai aesthetic and his entire character design is based on Shintaro Katsu's portrayal of the famous fictional blind swordsman Zatoichi. The actual subversive creative decision would have been to make Fujitora's cane just a cane.

The Fujitora example is especially dangerous for you to use because his entire character is an homage to an actor's portrayal of a fictional swordsman.... Which is what Aramaki's character is as well. Aramaki's character not being a swordsman with a sword would again be like Fujitora's cane not being a sword. It ruins the obvious cultural homage.

Cracker's "fake" swords are functionally just swords. Swords not made out of metal, sure but they are functionally swords that are exact replicas of a metal sword anyway.

That last one with Cracker really kills the entire thought process because there can just functionally be non-metal swords that act exactly like swords. Pump enough haki into it and it is a Black Blade.

All your other arguments are "what if" arguments against "what is" arguments.

What if?: "What if it's made out of wood? What if Greenbull is mocking samurai? What if Greenbull just has a fake one cause he is insecure?"

What is?: "Greenbull is carrying a sword, a blade if you will. It is black in colour in all drawn media, a black blade if you will. Chances are, it is probably a Black Blade."

You are literally just inventing stuff with the "what if?" arguments.

Hey, what if Greenbull's sword was actually made of the bones of his dead former Cipher Pol agent girlfriend who died while she had her Rokushiki activated thus giving her bones the properties of steel thus allowing her bones to be melted down and reforged into a blade for Aramaki to smite his enemies with? What a what if, huh?

See, I can pull fanfiction out of my arse too. Now try arguing against Aramaki's thematically unique girlfriend metal bone sword. :kayneshrug:
Your fanbase argument is GB weapon is a black blade because it's look like a black blade and because it looks like black blade it is a black blade. You can't use a weapon that hasn't been confirmed to be a black blade as confirmation it is a black blade. Especially when weapons exist in the manga that are different than what they appear to be and when the manga hasn't confirm it's a black blade like it did with Mihawk and Ryuma's black blades.

What do you mean everything we have so far points to the weapon being a black blade? The only thing we have that supports the weapon being a black blade is its appearance. Everything else supports it not being a black blade.

All three examples I provided are great examples why we shouldn't automatically assume it's a black blade. Cracker weapons are the best example. He scenes proved how it's possible for a df user to use their df power to create weapons from their DF that are identical in appearance too real weapons.

My what if arguments are still better than your fanbase telling me memes are proof GB has black blades. Seriously, memes. Not manga facts like characters telling us their weapon is a black blade. You should probably be more concerned about that.

At least my fanfiction is plausible. I guess believing a character with wood df power using their power to create a wood weapon is a stretch when you're blinded by your agenda. It's not like it's possible to create weapons out of wood or real wood weapons exist. Oh wait, there are.


If it being a Black Blade isn't enough evidence for it being a Black Blade then that's on y'all not us. We'll continue with the facts and y'all can continue living your fantasy where Greenbull's sword is somehow wooden.

This is fact a weapon is a black blade.


Here's another example.

The manga tells us it a black blade. This is the way Oda lets us know a character has a black blade.

You only have speculation.
 
If it being a Black Blade isn't enough evidence for it being a Black Blade then that's on y'all not us. We'll continue with the facts and y'all can continue living your fantasy where Greenbull's sword is somehow wooden.
The funny thing is, Greenbull's sword being made out of wood isn't even a legitimate argument to counter it being a sword. Weapons are named for their function, not their material.

Take a mace. A mace is a melee weapon with a weighted head designed primarily to inflict blunt force trauma.

A mace can be made entirely out of wood, entirely out of metal, have a wooden handle with a metal head or a wooden handle with a stone head. As long as the function is the same and it can perform said function then it doesn't matter what it is made out of, it is still a mace.

Same with bows. They can be made of wood or carbon fibre. Cultures with limited access to wood had to get creative with materials like animal horn and sinew. Regardless of what they are made out of, they are ranged weapons designed to fire arrows. Again, bows are named for their function, not for what they are made out of.

Meanwhile in One Piece, you have a man that can make biscuit as hard as steel and then precisely recreate his metal sword using biscuit equal in strength to steel. He then uses that weapon exactly like his metal sword because it is functionally the same.

That isn't a "fake" sword, that is just straight up a sword.

If biscuits can be sharp enough and strong enough to be used as swords in this universe, then so can wood. It would still be a sword.
 
Top