Did Enma have Oden's haki in it?


  • Total voters
    269
Status
Not open for further replies.

MonsterZoro

Bald Spoiler Provider
King went on to tank attacks much stronger than the ones the seraphims tanked so?

It’s almost like Oda retconed some shit and made up the Lunarian bullshit mid way into the arc

The knot… is on the scabbard… not on the sword

And the haki stored in the knot can only be used when the knot is untied… so?

It’s okay monsterzoro-kun I was with you yesterday when the early spoilers were talking about Naruto Chakra seals… Unfortunately this is no longer the truth so I must once again GO WITH THE FACTS
No excuses I already showed you
Proof you just using words not proof
 
I don't care if you consider the movie non canon, countless aspects of it have made their way into the manga and Oda was heavily involved in it's production, just because the story itself is impossible in the timeline doesn't invalidate every single detail.
Wdym "if I consider the movie non canon"? It's de facto non canon, so I don't really get why you believe it's stupid about a moment which holds no weight in comparison to the actual canon source. Joyboy's Haki was many many many times stronger than Shanks and VA barely kept their consciousness. In fact, it proves the Red Movie had another nonsense moment.
 
Wdym "if I consider the movie non canon"? It's de facto non canon, so I don't really get why you believe it's stupid about a moment which holds no weight in comparison to the actual canon source. Joyboy's Haki was many many many times stronger than Shanks and VA barely kept their consciousness. In fact, it proves the Red Movie had another nonsense moment.
Confirmed where?
 
Do we though? Are you talking about Swords? That’s armament… ARMAMENT… Like Armor… It’s outside… Whenever Zoro makes his swords black, he’s adding an OUTSIDE ARMOR on top of his swords… He’s not putting Haki INSIDE the sword, get it?

To me the mere fact that Emeth seemingly CANNOT use Joyboy’s haki means this haki isn’t in him… like literally in him, a part of him… he’s just carrying around a haki bomb from someone else
Not talking about coating, I'm talking about what Luffy learned in Wano where he let his haki flow into objects/living beings, and in those cases damage e.g. kaidou from the inside out. Pretty sure it's considered "armament" as well, but I forget what its name ended up being.

I'm not sure why you said the second thing. Yes, it's clear he essentially just had a remote bomb in him.
 
Not talking about coating, I'm talking about what Luffy learned in Wano where he let his haki flow into objects/living beings, and in those cases damage e.g. kaidou from the inside out. Pretty sure it's considered "armament" as well, but I forget what its name ended up being.

I'm not sure why you said the second thing. Yes, it's clear he essentially just had a remote bomb in him.
But that’s offensive. That’s internal destruction haki

A bit different from like using haki inside your sword or inside you body… haki has some kind of destructive for right? Doesn’t seem like you can “put it inside” something without destroying it…
 
Is it confirmed that Red Movie is canon? So in which part did the plot play out like this? The strawhats were splitted before Wano, so there is no way the whole strawhat crew were present when the events around Tot Musica or so happened. So it happened while in Wano? It isn't possible either. After Wano? Can't be possible, Luffy randomly activated G5 by accident, which is exactly the same moment when Luffy accidentally used G2 on a movie villain in one of the previous movies. It doesn't matter how much Oda supervised this movie. He also supervised One Piece LA, is it canon too?

Also, can you prove that all other movies are canon as well? The only canon thing was the manga part about Shiki. That's it.
 
Is it confirmed that Red Movie is canon? So in which part did the plot play out like this? The strawhats were splitted before Wano, so there is no way the whole strawhat crew were present when the events around Tot Musica or so happened. So it happened while in Wano? It isn't possible either. After Wano? Can't be possible, Luffy randomly activated G5 by accident, which is exactly the same moment when Luffy accidentally used G2 on a movie villain in one of the previous movies. It doesn't matter how much Oda supervised this movie. He also supervised One Piece LA, is it canon too?

Also, can you prove that all other movies are canon as well? The only canon thing was the manga part about Shiki. That's it.
You're the one who said it was "de facto non canon", I never said "it's de facto canon", clown.

I already answered that, just because the story itself and premise are impossible in the timeline doesn't make every single detail of the movie non canon, for example, Figarland family originated from the movie.
 
But that’s offensive. That’s internal destruction haki

A bit different from like using haki inside your sword or inside you body… haki has some kind of destructive for right? Doesn’t seem like you can “put it inside” something without destroying it…
But putting it inside a knot is not putting it inside it and magically doesn't enact a force on the rope...

The greatest CoC explosion we've seen in the manga thus far is also not "offensive" I guess.

Yeah I'm done with this conversation.
 
Is it confirmed that Red Movie is canon? So in which part did the plot play out like this? The strawhats were splitted before Wano, so there is no way the whole strawhat crew were present when the events around Tot Musica or so happened. So it happened while in Wano? It isn't possible either. After Wano? Can't be possible, Luffy randomly activated G5 by accident, which is exactly the same moment when Luffy accidentally used G2 on a movie villain in one of the previous movies. It doesn't matter how much Oda supervised this movie. He also supervised One Piece LA, is it canon too?

Also, can you prove that all other movies are canon as well? The only canon thing was the manga part about Shiki. That's it.
Film Red isn't canon but Uta is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top