Who said he was using it consistently Lmfaoo is that what you downplayers arguments have come to? When luffy unlock coc pre time skip was he using it all the time? Lmfaoo stop the bs oda literally used the same description of the technique to show haki and you guys still try to hate on zoro. Lol it’s ok we’ll continue to enjoy the shit outta wano while you guys get a stroke reading the zoro greatness
Powers & Abilities General CoA Discussion - Basic & Advanced
- Thread starter Gol D. Roger
- Start date
No one needed to say that he used it consistently, because he was consistently cutting steel throughout the pre timeskip following his fight against Daz. Even further, he would have been using that ability at the very least during times when he was facing overwhelming strength and needed to be at his best, unless you’re saying that during those times he would have held back on his attacks.
“YoU guYS TrY To hAte on zORo,” except he’s tied with Nami as my second favorite character. I’m just not a fanboy that’ll sit here and say that Zoro was using haki, or advanced haki, before the timeskip as far back as Alabasta, nor will I say that he can use advanced CoA now because he has shown zero indicators of it.
“YoU guYS TrY To hAte on zORo,” except he’s tied with Nami as my second favorite character. I’m just not a fanboy that’ll sit here and say that Zoro was using haki, or advanced haki, before the timeskip as far back as Alabasta, nor will I say that he can use advanced CoA now because he has shown zero indicators of it.
This is irrelevant and not even addressing the point. First you should concede on the initial claim... Hyo equated the ability to cut nothing and everything to Haki and hence what Zoro did in Alabasta is also Haki. Once you concede on this fact then you can bring up all the hypotheticals you want.
Now addressing your argument, you would have to prove that Zoro was applying the ability which he used to cut steel to cut logia users like Enel and Aokiji. Can you prove that it was the case?
Now addressing your argument, you would have to prove that Zoro was applying the ability which he used to cut steel to cut logia users like Enel and Aokiji. Can you prove that it was the case?
Lmao it is addressing the point. It is an actual refutation of the point.
You say (falsely) that Zoro cutting steel in Alabasta is an example of Zoro using haki because of Hyo. Which means that every time from that point forward that Zoro cut steel, like when he cut the train and when he cut Kuma, he was using haki. Which means that Zoro was not only aware of the ability, but could freely control it. Which means that when Zoro faced Enel and Aokiji and Kizaru he had the ability to harm them, and ample opportunity as neither of the aforementioned enemies considered him as a threat thus wouldn’t have defended against him because of that, and yet Zoro could not do a single thing against them.
There are two conclusions. Either Zoro had the ability to use haki, to him known as cutting steel, and purposefully did not use it despite knowing that the ability makes him stronger and despite the overwhelming threat of the enemy he faced, or alternatively he did not have haki.
The former conclusion is stupid, and the suggestion that Zoro wouldn’t be trying as hard as he could in those instances by purposefully not using an ability that he had control over that made him stronger is asinine.
The latter conclusion, the one that actually makes sense to people not obsessed with overrating Zoro, is that he did not have haki at any point until he was taught.
Zoro did not use haki in Alabasta because he did not have it.
You say (falsely) that Zoro cutting steel in Alabasta is an example of Zoro using haki because of Hyo. Which means that every time from that point forward that Zoro cut steel, like when he cut the train and when he cut Kuma, he was using haki. Which means that Zoro was not only aware of the ability, but could freely control it. Which means that when Zoro faced Enel and Aokiji and Kizaru he had the ability to harm them, and ample opportunity as neither of the aforementioned enemies considered him as a threat thus wouldn’t have defended against him because of that, and yet Zoro could not do a single thing against them.
There are two conclusions. Either Zoro had the ability to use haki, to him known as cutting steel, and purposefully did not use it despite knowing that the ability makes him stronger and despite the overwhelming threat of the enemy he faced, or alternatively he did not have haki.
The former conclusion is stupid, and the suggestion that Zoro wouldn’t be trying as hard as he could in those instances by purposefully not using an ability that he had control over that made him stronger is asinine.
The latter conclusion, the one that actually makes sense to people not obsessed with overrating Zoro, is that he did not have haki at any point until he was taught.
Zoro did not use haki in Alabasta because he did not have it.
It can't be a refutation to the point because the point is a manga fact...like literally a manga fact.
Hyo equates what Zoro did to Haki, did he not?
That's the manga fact which you didn't address.
Were they steel?
The rest before this is as invalid as this statement itself.
Seems you just have a problem with conceding when you are wrong. The manga claims that what Zoro did then was haki. Anything else you feel about it is irrelevant. It is not like it is something inferred or implied ..it is literally written word for word.
So are you right and the manga is wrong?
Hyo equates what Zoro did to Haki, did he not?
That's the manga fact which you didn't address.
Were they steel?
The rest before this is as invalid as this statement itself.
Seems you just have a problem with conceding when you are wrong. The manga claims that what Zoro did then was haki. Anything else you feel about it is irrelevant. It is not like it is something inferred or implied ..it is literally written word for word.
So are you right and the manga is wrong?
No, he does not equate Zoro cutting Daz to haki. The quote does not reference a haki technique that Zoro used in Alabasta.
But since you want to talk about the quote, fine.
It is actually a refutation to the point. Hyou explaining the basics of swordsmanship for samurai in Wano does not mean that Zoro had ever used haki, as he did not use the capability of it, as proven in the instances in which he didn’t harm people that he would have otherwise harmed had he actually had the capability to.
It is not a manga fact. It is you and others trying to retroactively assign abilities that did not come into play until much later to prop up a character you like.
Ok, so you choose the embarrassing admission that you think Zoro would have held back using a technique that makes him stronger, and by the actual statement does not solely apply to steel to begin with, despite the overall threat of the person he was facing.
And by the way, Zoro only learned Kuma was steel post-fact, which means that he was using slices strong enough to cut steel without actually knowing whether or not he was steel. Stow the “were they steel?” argument.
It’s actually not invalid, at least for people that look at the story with a shred of sense and honesty.
But since you want to talk about the quote, fine.
If you read the actual quote, the entire thing, you’ll see that Hyo prefaced his statement by saying, speaking of haki/ryou:
“We have an ability like that. It is transferred from the user’s body to the sword.”
Here he is specifically referring to haki, and the transfer of it from the body to the sword. For you to transfer haki, you have to already posses it. Zoro did not, and could not have used it, because he didn’t have haki itself.
In the next chapter, Hyou is on Luffy’s back and states that:
“What you outsiders call haki is known as Ryuo here in the Wano country. It focuses on the concept of flow.”
With this, it should be clear that Hyou was talking about the flow of haki, and that there is a distinction between the two parts of his statement.
The other part is a reference to mastery over the sword, willing to sword to do what you wish. If you wish the sword to cut something, it will. If you don’t, it won’t.
These are two separate things. Ryou is haki, which Zoro did not have. The part about the cutting what you want and not cutting what you don’t want, i.e. exerting your will on the blade, is a issue of swordsmanship, which is why Zoro’s teacher referred to it as “the pinnacle of swordsmanship”.
If you think about it, Zoro was taught this swordsmanship technique when he was a kid, when he was neither a master of the blade nor a haki user. It makes sense for him to be taught that, because by learning the latter, exerting your will on the sword, you can then be prepared to better master Ryou when the time comes that you actually have haki and are able to use it.
“We have an ability like that. It is transferred from the user’s body to the sword.”
Here he is specifically referring to haki, and the transfer of it from the body to the sword. For you to transfer haki, you have to already posses it. Zoro did not, and could not have used it, because he didn’t have haki itself.
In the next chapter, Hyou is on Luffy’s back and states that:
“What you outsiders call haki is known as Ryuo here in the Wano country. It focuses on the concept of flow.”
With this, it should be clear that Hyou was talking about the flow of haki, and that there is a distinction between the two parts of his statement.
The other part is a reference to mastery over the sword, willing to sword to do what you wish. If you wish the sword to cut something, it will. If you don’t, it won’t.
These are two separate things. Ryou is haki, which Zoro did not have. The part about the cutting what you want and not cutting what you don’t want, i.e. exerting your will on the blade, is a issue of swordsmanship, which is why Zoro’s teacher referred to it as “the pinnacle of swordsmanship”.
If you think about it, Zoro was taught this swordsmanship technique when he was a kid, when he was neither a master of the blade nor a haki user. It makes sense for him to be taught that, because by learning the latter, exerting your will on the sword, you can then be prepared to better master Ryou when the time comes that you actually have haki and are able to use it.
It is actually a refutation to the point. Hyou explaining the basics of swordsmanship for samurai in Wano does not mean that Zoro had ever used haki, as he did not use the capability of it, as proven in the instances in which he didn’t harm people that he would have otherwise harmed had he actually had the capability to.
It is not a manga fact. It is you and others trying to retroactively assign abilities that did not come into play until much later to prop up a character you like.
Ok, so you choose the embarrassing admission that you think Zoro would have held back using a technique that makes him stronger, and by the actual statement does not solely apply to steel to begin with, despite the overall threat of the person he was facing.
And by the way, Zoro only learned Kuma was steel post-fact, which means that he was using slices strong enough to cut steel without actually knowing whether or not he was steel. Stow the “were they steel?” argument.
It’s actually not invalid, at least for people that look at the story with a shred of sense and honesty.
Did you read what Hyogoro said to Luffy? Exactly what Zoro did in Alabasta. 
I dunno man, clearly the comparison between paper and steel by two characters who have obvious connections to Wano, who both mention the ability to cut what a swordsman wants to cut...obviously they're two different things.
Also gotta ignore Zoro, Ryuma, and Hyogoro mentioning "goken"...all three having connections to Wano..
The reason I bring in Ryuma is because one of the One Piece magazines, published back in May, mentioned that Ryuma's swordsmanship inspired the people of Wano to develop techniques to cut fire and steel, like he was able to do.
...I don't think there's any connection. :laughmoji:
They may be the same explanation, but they are by no means correlated.
In alabasta it was an Up for Zoro to cut steel. And he mastered this UP and managed to cut steel in later sagas. While in Udon, Hyogoro says it's a CoA enhancement.
The most obvious bet is that Zoro didn't use advCoA there, even though you say it was unconscious, it's completely false because Zoro has mastered the breathing technique of things. Perhaps Oda may have entered a similar dialogue because a framework for a perfect explanation of fluid haki is plausible, and he used the basis of a dialogue he had used some 15 years earlier. But as I said, they have no correlation. The funniest thing is that you are seeking consistency with the definition of haki as if it was pre-defined in alabasta.
Don’t be mad at us Zoro bois because we know that him and luffy were using haki pre timeskip and Sanji wasn’t. We’ve told you Sanji was a scrub for years now and now
Is time oda is going to make us collect. Remember how much shit you cake bois where talking before whole cake island😂😂😂year of Sanji right 😂😂
Is time oda is going to make us collect. Remember how much shit you cake bois where talking before whole cake island😂😂😂year of Sanji right 😂😂
Zoro didnt cut Kuma. You should read One Piece. 
Zoro used flow against tree leaves, fact. Dont ignore points that you cant address.
Zoro used flow against tree leaves, fact. Dont ignore points that you cant address.
Actually he didn’t, because he didn’t have haki. He used the breath of all things, which is a swordsmanship technique.
Thank you.
