? I didn’t say that tho
All I said is I don’t think they need a deep history with each other
You did say that and you just said it again.
If they don't have any history with each other then they have no narrative reason to fight each other.
Obviously if they fight it’d be more than just because. I never claimed to knowing what could lead to it if it happened outside of them just making moves against the opposition.
If luffy, Blackbeard, kid, and law fight admirals I I think shanks should too
I gotta give it to the ZKK peddlers, at least they gave way more narratively compelling arguments than "making moves". Lol.
Also, why are Blackbeard, Kidd and Law going to fight Admirals? Moreover, why does them hypothetically fighting Admirals automatically mean Shanks is going to?
- Luffy doesn’t need to fight akainu after kizaru
- The revolutionaries focus isn’t the marines but the world government. Sabo and dragon should either fight cipher pol or holy knights people connected to their goals
Shanks doesn't need to fight any Admiral full stop. What are they doing that puts them in Shanks way? What have they done that would make a fight with Shanks narratively fulfilling?
Luffy has Akainu gutting his brother and a potentially thematic showdown of Luffy's idealistic freedom vs Akainu's brutal totalitarianism.
The Marines are enforcers for the World Government and again, there could be something between Sabo's/Dragon's ideals and Akainu's. Also Sabo avenging Ace.
The feck has Shanks got thematically or narratively over Luffy or Sabo?