The same role and yet most likely so much powerful in comparison @Roronoa-sama
Character Discussion Zoro has the same role as Lucky Roo (combatant)
- Thread starter EmperorKinyagi
- Start date
It was not a weak attempt to mock you. It was a clear attempt to make you understand that you « reach this limits » long ago because that reasoning was bullshit and you know it
There's a canon distinction between "real swords" and "fake swords" in terms of whether they can choose what to cut or not? Indeed, and it would be dishonest to ignore this if we want to fully approach the way this series conceptualize swordsmanship.
Therefore, we can make valid logic reasonings following such distinction:
>If a sword can't choose what to cut, then it isn't a real sword.
>Zoro's swords couldn't choose what to cut before Arabasta, therefore they weren't real swords.
Which metonymically leads to Zoro being a "fake swordsman" as the one choosing isn't literally the sword but the holder.
Obviously I wasn't saying that Zoro wasn't a swordsman before Arabasta nor that "fake swords" aren't technically swords but considering this piece of fact regarding the breath of things and Koshiro opinion on what makes a sword and therefore a swordsman because the choices the sword makes aren't its but their holder's.
Hence the reasoning that, if we want to respect Koshiro's information and take it into consideration, Zoro wasn't a "real swordsman" before Arabasta as he wielded swords who couldn't choose what to cut (since he couldn't). I'm not saying that you must buy it, but the reasoning is absolutely logical from its structure to the factual content of its premises as supported by canon statements and, therefore, a valid approach to how swordsmanship works and is understood in this universe.
So it's not that I'm reaching illogical limits, it's that I'm considering all approaches that can be supported by the information in the canon material because Oda wrote it for a reason, after all.
Base on this logic, Zoro is still not a « real swordsman » because he is unable to cut certain thing, even tho he would wanted to.
For example, until recently he was unable to cut fire even if want to and now he is still unable to cut lightning.
Therefore, base on this logic, Zoro is still a « fake » swordsman even after Alabasta and probably until EOS.
Do you see how illogical this is giving the story which is told to us?
I mean, it was obvious that Kyoshiro’s statement was not meant to be take literally.
For example, until recently he was unable to cut fire even if want to and now he is still unable to cut lightning.
Therefore, base on this logic, Zoro is still a « fake » swordsman even after Alabasta and probably until EOS.
Do you see how illogical this is giving the story which is told to us?
I mean, it was obvious that Kyoshiro’s statement was not meant to be take literally.
