Kienzan's Durability Negation?

[SwordLegendz01]

Literally the second comment on the post.

And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption"

Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then.

In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying.

Your example has nothing to do with this. Why? It's comparing how the Sword of Hope sliced through Fusion Zamasu and the Kienzan tried to slice through Cell. Again, your example is more about sword users like Trunks here, you said "It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then." Do we see that here? It just passes through. Then, unlike what you said here "In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying." yes, that's how swords work. I've given other characters who use it and are both formed by energy, but the Sword of Hope is never stated to be the same as the Kienzan.

You're not doing that, tho? You actual justification wants to prove it as a ultimate defense on the point, as I read:
Nothing of the whole sentence is actually proving it by itself. Just move that line to the part where you are ACTUALLY arguing about the battle power thing.

Oh my gosh. It's just a note, not a justification.

 

[Gamin_Yoon23]

Agree with the thread

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

We only treat precision strikes or sharpness/penetration strikes as durability negation if it cuts things on an molecular/atomic level or smaller scale (All the way up to spatial level). I would agree with Kienzen having durability negation if there was proof if it cutting things on that level of precision. A very sharp buzzsaw, or the very tip of a sword are indeed very sharp to the point of being able to harm large sized characters with significantly higher durability ratings than the attacker, but not enough to be qualified as durability negation. Durability negation basically implies that it attacks and damages someone as if their durability stat is 0.

 

[SwordLegendz01]

We only treat precision strikes or sharpness/penetration strikes as durability negation if it cuts things on an molecular/atomic level or smaller scale (All the way up to spatial level). I would agree with Kienzen having durability negation if there was proof if it cutting things on that level of precision. A very sharp buzzsaw, or the very tip of a sword are indeed very sharp to the point of being able to harm large sized characters with significantly higher durability ratings than the attacker, but not enough to be qualified as durability negation. Durability negation basically implies that it attacks and damages someone as if their durability stat is 0.

Calling Kienzan a “one-hit kill technique” explicitly implies that durability is irrelevant to the outcome if it lands. Dragon Ball does not describe its abilities in molecular or atomic terms, but Kienzan is portrayed as a trump card that works on opponents vastly stronger than the user. Functionally, that is durability negation, even if the series does not explain it using modern physics-based terminology.

"Even though Krillin may not be able to match Goku or Vegeta in strength, he has the Kienzan, a one-hit kill technique"

We even have several scans, such as Piccolo Jr. claiming he would destroy Goku at the “atomic” level, or Future Trunks atomizing Mecha Frieza, yet these are generally treated as flowery language because no guidebooks or consistent statements reinforce that interpretation. In contrast, Kienzan has been repeatedly described with the same phrasing, sometimes with slightly expanded explanations, but always with the same meaning. At least it clearly states it doesn't depend on the user's strength/battle power, when compared to how Ki was able to reduce frieza to atomic level that counts as a difference in battle power/raw power.

「なんでも切れる」 (nandemo kireru)
→ “can cut anything”
This is not merely “sharpness,” but an absolute conceptual property.

通用する相手が自分より強い
→ effective against opponents far stronger than the user
This directly contradicts normal durability scaling in Dragon Ball, which is typically based on Ki / UES.

切り札的必殺技 (trump-card move)
→ used as a decisive finisher, not ordinary damage.

The phrase “a one-hit kill technique” narratively and functionally means that if the attack cleanly connects, the target’s durability is irrelevant to the final result (death or dismemberment). In powerscaling terms, the outcome is treated as if durability does not exist. Thus, yes, the statement implies an effect equivalent to durability = 0 in terms of results, not mechanism.

This is fundamentally different from the buzzsaw or sword analogy. A sword still depends on the user’s strength and durability scaling, especially in Dragon Ball, where Future Trunks and other Ki-sword users clearly scale their cutting power to their Battle Power via Ki (UES).

"unique property" (特性) of "cutting through anything, independent of Battle Power".
"property of being able to 'cut anything', [which is] somewhat unique in the world of Dragon Ball"
"It is very effective because the potential for damage is not related to the strength of the user."

Kienzan, however:

• is explicitly treated as a 切り札 (trump card)
• works on vastly stronger opponents
• is never described as failing because the target is “too durable”

If Cell’s neck had truly been "too durable", the Kienzan should shatter into pieces upon contact, not just pierce through and then shatter, because if it shatters or fails to cut in the first place, it's a matter of hardness and sharpness. But again, the Cell scene is never explained at all, it's all just assumptions. Unlike swords, Kienzan is not driven by the user applying more force or “pushing deeper,” as seen with Future Trunks’ Sword of Hope cleaving Fusion Zamasu. At no point is Sword of Hope stated to function the same way as Kienzan, despite both being made of pure energy.

This shows that the limiting factors are not durability, but rather:

• whether the attack lands
• whether the opponent dodges or counters it

Its well-established slowness further supports these outcomes.

 

[Greatsage13th]

I agree with the op

 

[Huesito88]

We even have several scans, such as Piccolo Jr. claiming he would destroy Goku at the “atomic” level, or Future Trunks atomizing Mecha Frieza, yet these are generally treated as flowery language because no guidebooks or consistent statements reinforce that interpretation. In contrast, Kienzan has been repeatedly described with the same phrasing, sometimes with slightly expanded explanations, but always with the same meaning.

Just going to point out whether flowery or not (As the future trunks one is actually in the profile outright, but I've seen people actual not think of it as valid anymore for good reasons in the discussions, but that's besides the point here) those are treated as via raw power difference rather than a Haxy property of the technique

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Just going to point out whether flowery or not (As the future trunks one is actually in the profile outright, but I've seen people actual not think of it as valid anymore for good reasons in the discussions, but that's besides the point here) those are treated as via raw power difference rather than a Haxy property of the technique

That's what I mean, we don't consider it as matter hax (atomic level) but rather because of the difference in raw power, because there isn't enough evidence or many statements that say he actually reduced Frieza to atomic level

 

[Apex_Predator_GX]

Durability negation basically implies that it attacks and damages someone as if their durability stat is 0.

Interesting.

 

[Apex_Predator_GX]

Btw, OP looks fine to me.

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Calling Kienzan a “one-hit kill technique” explicitly implies that durability is irrelevant to the outcome if it lands. Dragon Ball does not describe its abilities in molecular or atomic terms, but Kienzan is portrayed as a trump card that works on opponents vastly stronger than the user. Functionally, that is durability negation, even if the series does not explain it using modern physics-based terminology.


We even have several scans, such as Piccolo Jr. claiming he would destroy Goku at the “atomic” level, or Future Trunks atomizing Mecha Frieza, yet these are generally treated as flowery language because no guidebooks or consistent statements reinforce that interpretation. In contrast, Kienzan has been repeatedly described with the same phrasing, sometimes with slightly expanded explanations, but always with the same meaning. At least it clearly states it doesn't depend on the user's strength/battle power, when compared to how Ki was able to reduce frieza to atomic level that counts as a difference in battle power/raw power.


The phrase “a one-hit kill technique” narratively and functionally means that if the attack cleanly connects, the target’s durability is irrelevant to the final result (death or dismemberment). In powerscaling terms, the outcome is treated as if durability does not exist. Thus, yes, the statement implies an effect equivalent to durability = 0 in terms of results, not mechanism.

This is fundamentally different from the buzzsaw or sword analogy. A sword still depends on the user’s strength and durability scaling, especially in Dragon Ball, where Future Trunks and other Ki-sword users clearly scale their cutting power to their Battle Power via Ki (UES).


Kienzan, however:

If Cell’s neck had truly been "too durable", the Kienzan should shatter into pieces upon contact, not just pierce through and then shatter, because if it shatters or fails to cut in the first place, it's a matter of hardness and sharpness. But again, the Cell scene is never explained at all, it's all just assumptions. Unlike swords, Kienzan is not driven by the user applying more force or “pushing deeper,” as seen with Future Trunks’ Sword of Hope cleaving Fusion Zamasu. At no point is Sword of Hope stated to function the same way as Kienzan, despite both being made of pure energy.

This shows that the limiting factors are not durability, but rather:

Its well-established slowness further supports these outcomes.

Bump

 

[SwordLegendz01]

bump

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Calling Kienzan a “one-hit kill technique” explicitly implies that durability is irrelevant to the outcome if it lands. Dragon Ball does not describe its abilities in molecular or atomic terms, but Kienzan is portrayed as a trump card that works on opponents vastly stronger than the user. Functionally, that is durability negation, even if the series does not explain it using modern physics-based terminology.


We even have several scans, such as Piccolo Jr. claiming he would destroy Goku at the “atomic” level, or Future Trunks atomizing Mecha Frieza, yet these are generally treated as flowery language because no guidebooks or consistent statements reinforce that interpretation. In contrast, Kienzan has been repeatedly described with the same phrasing, sometimes with slightly expanded explanations, but always with the same meaning. At least it clearly states it doesn't depend on the user's strength/battle power, when compared to how Ki was able to reduce frieza to atomic level that counts as a difference in battle power/raw power.


The phrase “a one-hit kill technique” narratively and functionally means that if the attack cleanly connects, the target’s durability is irrelevant to the final result (death or dismemberment). In powerscaling terms, the outcome is treated as if durability does not exist. Thus, yes, the statement implies an effect equivalent to durability = 0 in terms of results, not mechanism.

This is fundamentally different from the buzzsaw or sword analogy. A sword still depends on the user’s strength and durability scaling, especially in Dragon Ball, where Future Trunks and other Ki-sword users clearly scale their cutting power to their Battle Power via Ki (UES).


Kienzan, however:

If Cell’s neck had truly been "too durable", the Kienzan should shatter into pieces upon contact, not just pierce through and then shatter, because if it shatters or fails to cut in the first place, it's a matter of hardness and sharpness. But again, the Cell scene is never explained at all, it's all just assumptions. Unlike swords, Kienzan is not driven by the user applying more force or “pushing deeper,” as seen with Future Trunks’ Sword of Hope cleaving Fusion Zamasu. At no point is Sword of Hope stated to function the same way as Kienzan, despite both being made of pure energy.

This shows that the limiting factors are not durability, but rather:

Its well-established slowness further supports these outcomes.

Bump

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Kienzan (気円斬), Krillin’s signature technique, is consistently depicted as an energy-based attack capable of instantly cutting through its target, being described as able to cut through “anything” and “everything,” independent of the user’s Battle Power. Unlike conventional energy attacks that rely on power differences, Kienzan functions through its extreme energy-slicing properties that ignore the target’s physical durability.

In its various appearances, Kienzan has been shown to injure or threaten characters statistically far superior to Krillin. This establishes that the effectiveness of the Kienzan is not determined by the user’s AP, but rather by the inherent cutting mechanism of the technique itself.

It is often questioned why, in certain cases like Cell and Jiren, the target was not sliced cleanly in half despite being hit or nearly hit by the Kienzan. However, this does not automatically negate the technique’s Durability Negation property.

In Cell’s case, the Kienzan should still be able to cut his body effectively, but Cell may have been able to endure it due to his extreme regeneration. In other words, Cell is not “immune” to the Kienzan; he is simply capable of recovering after being damaged. This would not be a failure of penetration, but rather a case of surviving post-injury. But then again, such assumptions may not be fully acceptable here, especially since we also see the Kienzan shatter after passing through Cell’s neck. Considering that specific instance, it may not be unreasonable to assume that Cell possesses something that allowed him to withstand it.

Meanwhile, Jiren’s case is different in context. Jiren is explicitly shown reacting seriously to the Kienzan, attempting to read its movement and exploit a weakness or momentum point within the technique. This indicates that the attack is considered dangerous even by someone operating on a far higher power level. The absence of Jiren being cleanly bisected is not evidence that the Kienzan failed to ignore his durability; rather, it suggests that the attack did not strike him in an optimal manner. On the other hand, we have already seen Goku destroy Krillin’s Kienzan with his energy blast, even though Kienzan could penetrate Cell Max's energy attack, iwhich implies that he was also targeting a weak point of the disc similar to what Jiren did. Additionally, Kienzan does have weaknesses such as when it is launched from a great distance or used without proper strategy which is why it is often portrayed as a surprise attack, either relying on its attack speed or because the disc eventually slows down.

The most consistent interpretation is that Jiren did not “tank” the Kienzan through sheer durability, but instead read its timing and looked for openings to avoid it or to secure momentum. Within the context of the Tournament of Power, Jiren heavily relies on efficiency of movement, instant reactions, and battlefield control. Avoiding the Kienzan is far more rational than attempting to tank an energy slice that mechanically does not rely on Battle Power differences.



Note:


Additional Evidence:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Agree: @CelestialVortex01 @LuffyRuffy46307 @JustANormalPerson01 @Nullflowerblush @Ednaxel2 @Killerdrone123 @LordGriffin1000 @Vietthai96 @UnoRebaixadO @Dereck03 @Gamin_Yoon23 @Greatsage13th @Apex_Predator_GX

Don't agree: @Eden_Warlock99 @Kachon123 @Monkey_Dunno @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @AmonInChains @Damage3245

Bump, I agree

 

[UnoRebaixadO]

Well, I still think the arguments and evidence in favor are better.

 

[DivineAura44]

Another DB thread with clear evidence only to be shut down because the statements are "flowery language," it feels like 2021. I'm home.

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Another DB thread with clear evidence only to be shut down because the statements are "flowery language," it feels like 2021. I'm home.

Can I say that you agree with the thread?

 

[DivineAura44]

Can I say that you agree with the thread?

Yeah.

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Kienzan (気円斬), Krillin’s signature technique, is consistently depicted as an energy-based attack capable of instantly cutting through its target, being described as able to cut through “anything” and “everything,” independent of the user’s Battle Power. Unlike conventional energy attacks that rely on power differences, Kienzan functions through its extreme energy-slicing properties that ignore the target’s physical durability.

In its various appearances, Kienzan has been shown to injure or threaten characters statistically far superior to Krillin. This establishes that the effectiveness of the Kienzan is not determined by the user’s AP, but rather by the inherent cutting mechanism of the technique itself.

It is often questioned why, in certain cases like Cell and Jiren, the target was not sliced cleanly in half despite being hit or nearly hit by the Kienzan. However, this does not automatically negate the technique’s Durability Negation property.

In Cell’s case, the Kienzan should still be able to cut his body effectively, but Cell may have been able to endure it due to his extreme regeneration. In other words, Cell is not “immune” to the Kienzan; he is simply capable of recovering after being damaged. This would not be a failure of penetration, but rather a case of surviving post-injury. But then again, such assumptions may not be fully acceptable here, especially since we also see the Kienzan shatter after passing through Cell’s neck. Considering that specific instance, it may not be unreasonable to assume that Cell possesses something that allowed him to withstand it.

Meanwhile, Jiren’s case is different in context. Jiren is explicitly shown reacting seriously to the Kienzan, attempting to read its movement and exploit a weakness or momentum point within the technique. This indicates that the attack is considered dangerous even by someone operating on a far higher power level. The absence of Jiren being cleanly bisected is not evidence that the Kienzan failed to ignore his durability; rather, it suggests that the attack did not strike him in an optimal manner. On the other hand, we have already seen Goku destroy Krillin’s Kienzan with his energy blast, even though Kienzan could penetrate Cell Max's energy attack, iwhich implies that he was also targeting a weak point of the disc similar to what Jiren did. Additionally, Kienzan does have weaknesses such as when it is launched from a great distance or used without proper strategy which is why it is often portrayed as a surprise attack, either relying on its attack speed or because the disc eventually slows down.

The most consistent interpretation is that Jiren did not “tank” the Kienzan through sheer durability, but instead read its timing and looked for openings to avoid it or to secure momentum. Within the context of the Tournament of Power, Jiren heavily relies on efficiency of movement, instant reactions, and battlefield control. Avoiding the Kienzan is far more rational than attempting to tank an energy slice that mechanically does not rely on Battle Power differences.



Note:


Additional Evidence:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Agree: @CelestialVortex01 @LuffyRuffy46307 @JustANormalPerson01 @Nullflowerblush @Ednaxel2 @Killerdrone123 @LordGriffin1000 @Vietthai96 @UnoRebaixadO @Dereck03 @Gamin_Yoon23 @Greatsage13th @Apex_Predator_GX @DivineAura44

Don't agree: @Eden_Warlock99 @Kachon123 @Monkey_Dunno @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @AmonInChains @Damage3245

Bump.

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Bump

 

[Omegabronic]

Is the movie prioritised over the DBS Manga, or are they both used?

Cause there's a moment where Krillin's Kienzan just bounces off of his wing, still dealt damage though.

Wait... if we have, in the manga main canon, a moment where Durability prevented Kienzan from passing through... why is it still a debate? If it ignored durability it should have just sliced the wing, and all on its path, of, no?

Like... regardless of the statements... this seems like a clear contradiction to it negating durability

 

[Eden_Warlock99]

It never failed in the Daima canon!

 

[Muteki616]

Anyway, tbf, the statement is pretty straight-forward. At least this can be applied to Manga, cause most inconsistencies came from Anime

Idk where Durability Reduction came from, nowhere stated Kianza have the ability to reduce target's durability. Also in DB, stats are heavily depends on Ki level, so no way a Ki technique can reduce durability without reduce other stats as well, because if you want to reduce durability, you need to reduce Ki, but reduce Ki lead to other stats reduction. But nowhere in both manga and anime suggested this

Also idk where sword comparison came from. We see many instances of Trunks amplified with sword with Ki, people just block it if they are comparable to Trunks. Characters like Vegito and Black can even make Ki Sword yet nothing similar to that of Kienzan came from them

For anime i could see Limited Durability Negation, as it seems like Kienzan can neg dura up to a certain power level difference, well this is just my proposal, anyone can discuss this

Agreed.

 

[SwordLegendz01]

After checking profiles one by one—around 30–50 of them, maybe more at random—I found this. There may still be others, but this is what I was able to identify:

• Durability Negation (The Gigant Sword's sharpness allows it to cut out any material)
• Durability Negation (After MHX's training with MHXA, her swords aren't just EX, it became XEX, an EX Noble Phantasm beyond EX Noble Phantasm, which gave her ability to cut through everything as long as they're made out of matter, cutting even temple body of Astarte Origin which dwarfs countless stars and possibly at the size of galaxy
• Limited Durability Negation (Through sensing the "Breath" of their desired target they're able to cut objects or people they otherwise couldn't through power alone. It's effectiveness begins to lessen against objects or opponent's with durability that far exceeds the limit of this ability)
• Vibration Manipulation, Radiation Manipulation, & Durability Negation (High Vibration Nails can emit high-frequency vibrations that shed high-frequency radiation which allows him to cut any material just by touching it)
• Durability Negation (With Spell That Slashes Almost Anything: Reelseiden, she can can effortlessly slash through anything she can visualize slashing through)

They have justifications that treat it as a property similar to the Kienzan, with some even openly acknowledging its weaknesses, yet it is still accepted as Durability Negation.

As for the Kienzan itself, despite the very popular scene where it fails to work on Perfect Cell, that scene is never actually explained—why can I say this? Because the dialogue afterward reaffirms that the Kienzan can cut opponents far stronger than its user, with Krillin explicitly citing Frieza as an example.

The same applies to Cell Max. However, we accept that the Kienzan was able to affect Cell Max, as I explained in the OP notes, and through this, Krillin also received a “far higher” rating via the Kienzan on his profile (DBS: Super Hero key).

Not only in the case of Cell in DBZ: Tree of Might, it was stated that the opponent deflected the Kienzan by utilizing the momentum generated from "spinning his body at high speed", but in the same scan it was also stated that it could cut through anything which makes it very clear that this is another conclusion or "what if" if the Kienzan hits his body.

Furthermore, it is stated repeatedly and very clearly that it can

• “cut anything and everything”
• “does not depend on the user’s Battle Power”
• “described as a unique property within the Dragon Ball world”
• “a one-hit kill technique”

Why, then, is this equated to weapons made from external materials, when the Kienzan is clearly formed from internal energy? But setting that aside, we also have sword users like Future Trunks, who should logically be treated the same as the Kienzan, yet they are not described as

“cut anything & unique property.”

I am not directly comparing it to a sword here, but it should be noted that several examples already accepted on the wiki originate from swords.

The most illogical statement being treated as mere Attack Potency is

“does not depend on the user’s Battle Power.”

This is how Ki, as a UES, functions. When the Kienzan is used, there is never a moment where the opponent—or anyone else—senses a power increase in Krillin himself, unlike what happens when techniques such as the Kamehameha or the Special Beam Cannon are used.

 

[UnoRebaixadO]

After checking profiles one by one—around 30–50 of them, maybe more at random—I found this. There may still be others, but this is what I was able to identify:

They have justifications that treat it as a property similar to the Kienzan, with some even openly acknowledging its weaknesses, yet it is still accepted as Durability Negation.

As for the Kienzan itself, despite the very popular scene where it fails to work on Perfect Cell, that scene is never actually explained—why can I say this? Because the dialogue afterward reaffirms that the Kienzan can cut opponents far stronger than its user, with Krillin explicitly citing Frieza as an example.

The same applies to Cell Max. However, we accept that the Kienzan was able to affect Cell Max, as I explained in the OP notes, and through this, Krillin also received a “far higher” rating via the Kienzan on his profile (DBS: Super Hero key).

Not only in the case of Cell in DBZ: Tree of Might, it was stated that the opponent deflected the Kienzan by utilizing the momentum generated from "spinning his body at high speed", but in the same scan it was also stated that it could cut through anything which makes it very clear that this is another conclusion or "what if" if the Kienzan hits his body.

Furthermore, it is stated repeatedly and very clearly that it can

Why, then, is this equated to weapons made from external materials, when the Kienzan is clearly formed from internal energy? But setting that aside, we also have sword users like Future Trunks, who should logically be treated the same as the Kienzan, yet they are not described as

I am not directly comparing it to a sword here, but it should be noted that several examples already accepted on the wiki originate from swords.

The most illogical statement being treated as mere Attack Potency is

This is how Ki, as a UES, functions. When the Kienzan is used, there is never a moment where the opponent—or anyone else—senses a power increase in Krillin himself, unlike what happens when techniques such as the Kamehameha or the Special Beam Cannon are used.

It seems consistent with Kienzan, I agree.

 

[Godernet]

Hmm, I'm kind of neutral at the moment because it's cutting. "independent of one's power level" is a solid statement in favor of it. Because even cutting attacks need a certain power and speed to penetrate things of higher durability, and this statement kinda implies that what makes Kienzan special is a bit more removed from the conventional properties that power level would grant the users (enhanced speed, ofc enhanced power, the disk having the durability to sustain slamming into these far, far stronger individuals especially when we know in dragon ball, smaller power gaps than the one between Krillin and Frieza would block out the energy entirely or break the persons arm who tried to attack.)

I could see the use of a possibly/likely limited Dura Neg specifically for the manga version of Kienzan, off of that statement and the consistency throughout Manga Z of Kienzan letting someone so far out of their league its not even funny, has the potential to unalive far stronger individuals.

In a verse where Ki gaps far smaller than Krillin vs a Main Z Villain, it leads to completely no-selling attacks.

However, since a lot of the additional evidence is pretty flowery statements, and it does have some anti-feats against being a full "ignore all durability" type of Dura Neg, with those antifeats being more pronounced in the Anime with Cell (And yeah, I don't really buy that regen argument, Kienzan collapsed and explodes after hitting Cells neck in a scene meant to portray how he far surpasses Semi-Perfect Cell, it wasn't a regen speed showcase), I don't buy into a solid Dura Neg rating or giving it limited dura neg without the possibly or likely.

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Hmm, I'm kind of neutral at the moment because it's cutting. "independent of one's power level" is a solid statement in favor of it. Because even cutting attacks need a certain power and speed to penetrate things of higher durability, and this statement kinda implies that what makes Kienzan special is a bit more removed from the conventional properties that power level would grant the users (enhanced speed, ofc enhanced power, the disk having the durability to sustain slamming into these far, far stronger individuals especially when we know in dragon ball, smaller power gaps than the one between Krillin and Frieza would block out the energy entirely or break the persons arm who tried to attack.)

I could see the use of a possibly/likely limited Dura Neg specifically for the manga version of Kienzan, off of that statement and the consistency throughout Manga Z of Kienzan letting someone so far out of their league its not even funny, has the potential to unalive far stronger individuals.

In a verse where Ki gaps far smaller than Krillin vs a Main Z Villain, it leads to completely no-selling attacks.

However, since a lot of the additional evidence is pretty flowery statements, and it does have some anti-feats against being a full "ignore all durability" type of Dura Neg, with those antifeats being more pronounced in the Anime with Cell (And yeah, I don't really buy that regen argument, Kienzan collapsed and explodes after hitting Cells neck in a scene meant to portray how he far surpasses Semi-Perfect Cell, it wasn't a regen speed showcase), I don't buy into a solid Dura Neg rating or giving it limited dura neg without the possibly or likely.

Maybe I should fix it a bit OP, I rewrote it here regarding Cell in the Z Anime, it was reconfirmed by Krillin that Kienzan actually works on someone stronger than him where Frieza is an example he said.

After checking profiles one by one—around 30–50 of them, maybe more at random—I found this. There may still be others, but this is what I was able to identify:

They have justifications that treat it as a property similar to the Kienzan, with some even openly acknowledging its weaknesses, yet it is still accepted as Durability Negation.

As for the Kienzan itself, despite the very popular scene where it fails to work on Perfect Cell, that scene is never actually explained—why can I say this? Because the dialogue afterward reaffirms that the Kienzan can cut opponents far stronger than its user, with Krillin explicitly citing Frieza as an example.

The same applies to Cell Max. However, we accept that the Kienzan was able to affect Cell Max, as I explained in the OP notes, and through this, Krillin also received a “far higher” rating via the Kienzan on his profile (DBS: Super Hero key).

Not only in the case of Cell in DBZ: Tree of Might, it was stated that the opponent deflected the Kienzan by utilizing the momentum generated from "spinning his body at high speed", but in the same scan it was also stated that it could cut through anything which makes it very clear that this is another conclusion or "what if" if the Kienzan hits his body.

Furthermore, it is stated repeatedly and very clearly that it can

Why, then, is this equated to weapons made from external materials, when the Kienzan is clearly formed from internal energy? But setting that aside, we also have sword users like Future Trunks, who should logically be treated the same as the Kienzan, yet they are not described as

I am not directly comparing it to a sword here, but it should be noted that several examples already accepted on the wiki originate from swords.

The most illogical statement being treated as mere Attack Potency is

This is how Ki, as a UES, functions. When the Kienzan is used, there is never a moment where the opponent—or anyone else—senses a power increase in Krillin himself, unlike what happens when techniques such as the Kamehameha or the Special Beam Cannon are used.

It also has several statements, such as the most striking ones I've bolded, that distinguish it as a property within the DB world:

• “cut anything and everything”
• “does not depend on the user’s Battle Power”
• “described as a unique property within the Dragon Ball world”
• “a one-hit kill technique”

And, I've highlighted some justifications for the love of some of the profiles I've used as comparisons, even though some of them have weaknesses or mention weaknesses, they're still acceptable Durability Negation

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Kienzan (気円斬), Krillin’s signature technique, is consistently depicted as an energy-based attack capable of instantly cutting through its target, being described as able to cut through “anything” and “everything,” independent of the user’s Battle Power. Unlike conventional energy attacks that rely on power differences, Kienzan functions through its extreme energy-slicing properties that ignore the target’s physical durability.

In its various appearances, Kienzan has been shown to injure or threaten characters statistically far superior to Krillin. This establishes that the effectiveness of the Kienzan is not determined by the user’s AP, but rather by the inherent cutting mechanism of the technique itself.

It is often questioned why, in certain cases like Cell and Jiren, the target was not sliced cleanly in half despite being hit or nearly hit by the Kienzan. However, this does not automatically negate the technique’s Durability Negation property.

In Cell's case, Kienzan should still have been able to effectively cut through his body, but it shattered upon entering without any explanation. The subsequent dialogue, instead of saying Cell was "too durable," asserts that Kienzan can cut through opponents far stronger than its wielder, with Krillin explicitly citing Frieza as an example. However, logically, if a sword or other sharp object can't affect something, it can't penetrate it, and it requires extra power. If it didn't work on Cell, Kienzan wouldn't have moved forward.

The same goes for Cell Max. However, we accept that Kienzan is capable of affecting Cell Max, as I explained in the OP notes, and through this, Krillin also receives a "far higher" rating through Kienzan in his profile (DBS: Super Hero key).

Not only in the case of Cell in DBZ: Tree of Might, it is mentioned that the opponent deflects the Kienzan by using the momentum generated from "spinning his body at high speed", but in the same footage it is also mentioned that the Kienzan can cut through anything, which makes it clear that this is another conclusion or "what if" if the Kienzan hits his body.

Meanwhile, Jiren’s case is different in context. Jiren is explicitly shown reacting seriously to the Kienzan, attempting to read its movement and exploit a weakness or momentum point within the technique. This indicates that the attack is considered dangerous even by someone operating on a far higher power level. The absence of Jiren being cleanly bisected is not evidence that the Kienzan failed to ignore his durability; rather, it suggests that the attack did not strike him in an optimal manner. On the other hand, we have already seen Goku destroy Krillin’s Kienzan with his energy blast, even though Kienzan could penetrate Cell Max's energy attack, which implies that he was also targeting a weak point of the disc similar to what Jiren did. Additionally, Kienzan does have weaknesses such as when it is launched from a great distance or used without proper strategy which is why it is often portrayed as a surprise attack, either relying on its attack speed or because the disc eventually slows down.

The most consistent interpretation is that Jiren did not “tank” the Kienzan through sheer durability, but instead read its timing and looked for openings to avoid it or to secure momentum. Avoiding the Kienzan is far more rational than attempting to tank an energy slice that mechanically does not rely on Battle Power differences.

The most illogical statement being treated as mere Attack Potency is

This is how Ki, as a UES, functions. When the Kienzan is used, there is never a moment where the opponent or anyone else senses a power increase in Krillin himself, unlike what happens when techniques such as the Kamehameha or the Special Beam Cannon are used.

It also has several statements, such as the most striking ones I've bolded, that distinguish it as a property within the DB world:

Where some of these statements are not owned by sword users or anyone who has the same properties as Kiezan as something used to cut in the DB world which makes it clear that Kienzan is not something to be taken lightly. If they were the same thing Kienzan should not need to be made something like this or at least assume all properties in the DB world are the same as Kienzan but in fact it is not like that.

Justification:


Note:


Additional Evidence:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Some of the accepted profiles have similar properties as Kienzan:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Agree: @CelestialVortex01 @LuffyRuffy46307 @JustANormalPerson01 @Nullflowerblush @Ednaxel2 @Killerdrone123 @LordGriffin1000 @Vietthai96 @UnoRebaixadO @Dereck03 @Gamin_Yoon23 @Greatsage13th @Apex_Predator_GX @DivineAura44 @Muteki616

Don't agree: @Eden_Warlock99 @Kachon123 @Monkey_Dunno @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @AmonInChains @Damage3245

Bump

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Kienzan (気円斬), Krillin’s signature technique, is consistently depicted as an energy-based attack capable of instantly cutting through its target, being described as able to cut through “anything” and “everything”, independent of the user’s Battle Power. Unlike conventional energy attacks that rely on power differences, Kienzan functions through its extreme energy-slicing properties that ignore the target’s physical durability.

In its various appearances, Kienzan has been shown to injure or threaten characters statistically far superior to Krillin. This establishes that the effectiveness of the Kienzan is not determined by the user’s AP, but rather by the inherent cutting mechanism of the technique itself.

It is often questioned why, in certain cases like Cell and Jiren, the target was not sliced cleanly in half despite being hit or nearly hit by the Kienzan. However, this does not automatically negate the technique’s Durability Negation property.

In Cell's case, Kienzan should still have been able to effectively cut through his body, but it shattered upon entering without any explanation. The subsequent dialogue, instead of saying Cell was "too durable," asserts that Kienzan can cut through opponents far stronger than its wielder, with Krillin explicitly citing Frieza as an example. However, logically, if a sword or other sharp object can't affect something, it can't penetrate it, and it requires extra power. If it didn't work on Cell, Kienzan wouldn't have moved forward.

The same goes for Cell Max. However, we accept that Kienzan is capable of affecting Cell Max, as I explained in the OP notes, and through this, Krillin also receives a "far higher" rating through Kienzan in his profile (DBS: Super Hero key).

Not only in the case of Cell in DBZ: Tree of Might, it is mentioned that the opponent deflects the Kienzan by using the momentum generated from "spinning his body at high speed", but in the same footage it is also mentioned that the Kienzan can cut through anything, which makes it clear that this is another conclusion or "what if" if the Kienzan hits his body. In the manga, almost the same thing happens where the opponent is able to deflect the Kienzan by using the momentum by "rotating his body at high speed" but the other end result if the opponent does not do that is shown where it can still injure him even though they are much stronger.

Meanwhile, Jiren’s case is different in context. Jiren is explicitly shown reacting seriously to the Kienzan, attempting to read its movement and exploit a weakness or momentum point within the technique. This indicates that the attack is considered dangerous even by someone operating on a far higher power level. The absence of Jiren being cleanly bisected is not evidence that the Kienzan failed to ignore his durability; rather, it suggests that the attack did not strike him in an optimal manner. On the other hand, we have already seen Goku destroy Krillin’s Kienzan with his energy blast, even though Kienzan could penetrate Cell Max's energy attack, which implies that he was also targeting a weak point of the disc similar to what Jiren did. Additionally, Kienzan does have weaknesses such as when it is launched from a great distance or used without proper strategy which is why it is often portrayed as a surprise attack, either relying on its attack speed or because the disc eventually slows down.

The most consistent interpretation is that Jiren did not “tank” the Kienzan through sheer durability, but instead read its timing and looked for openings to avoid it or to secure momentum. Avoiding the Kienzan is far more rational than attempting to tank an energy slice that mechanically does not rely on Battle Power differences.

The most illogical statement being treated as mere Attack Potency is

This is how Ki, as a UES, functions. When the Kienzan is used, there is never a moment where the opponent or anyone else senses a power increase in Krillin himself, unlike what happens when techniques such as the Kamehameha or the Special Beam Cannon are used.

Additionally, there are several statements that are stated repeatedly that should not be flowery language, such as the most striking one that I have bolded, which distinguishes it as a property in the DB world:

Where some of these statements are not owned by sword users or anyone who has the same properties as Kiezan as something used to cut in the DB world which makes it clear that Kienzan is not something to be taken lightly. If they were the same thing Kienzan should not need to be made something like this or at least assume all properties in the DB world are the same as Kienzan but in fact it is not like that.

Justification:


Note:


Additional Evidence:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Some of the accepted profiles have similar properties as Kienzan:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Agree: @CelestialVortex01 @LuffyRuffy46307 @JustANormalPerson01 @Nullflowerblush @Ednaxel2 @Killerdrone123 @LordGriffin1000 @Vietthai96 @UnoRebaixadO @Dereck03 @Gamin_Yoon23 @Greatsage13th @Apex_Predator_GX @DivineAura44 @Muteki616 @Godernet (Likely/Possibly)

Don't agree: @Eden_Warlock99 @Kachon123 @Monkey_Dunno @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @AmonInChains @Damage3245

Bump

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Bump

Bump

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

I can agree with this but parts of you're arguments aren't to solid in my opinion

You know Cell's regeneration abilities aren't that fast right?... We've seen when he's actually damaged and he never regenerated that fast, plus you can't even explain what just happened when you literally say "it may not be unreasonable to assume that Cell possesses something that allowed him to withstand it.". So what is it? Did he regenerate or did he use "something" to withstand it?

I could just as well say when that spark/light effect happened on hit, that was the disc deflecting off to the side and give him resistance to durability negation (that specific form). Basically it's a terrible scene to try and justify, you'd be better off saying due to how it's depiction, it's unknown what just happened.

Jiren wasn't "serious", he reacted the same way he did when he charged at Goku and punched him. That standard look on his face. We've seen a serious Jiren and that wasn't it, especially trying to argue he reacted like that because it was "dangerous" to him is weird because he's shown blocking that Goku's punches despite we know that Goku at that time couldn't do much to him which is why he tried to ring out him!

Now, the argument on the way he struck them could be valid seeing as it looks like he doesn't punch it at an angle that would cut him (top and bottom). However arguing Jiren's reaction was serious as support that they were dangerous to him isn't good given that reaction isn't special.

As for Goku and Cell Max, it's blatantly obvious Goku blew his Ki blasts up on contact with the discs to destroy them, meanwhile Cell didn't. This is something shown in the verse a lot, several characters ki attacks detonate on contact while others push and blow up after.. Cell's is a good showing that it can cut through stuff but Goku isn't capable of being compared to Jiren because one was physical strikes that shattered them while the other was just detonation on the disc.

Logical but not based on comparison to Goku's method in my opinion.

Despite this, I think durability negation can be justified because of the statements, specifically the ones that say it has a "unique property". This phrasing sets it aside from other flowery language because its telling us it has some special mechanic and you can see it in the scans the OP, I'll explain.

Notice that against Frieza it cuts through his tail and keeps going and it cuts Nappa's cheek and keeps going. However, look when it cuts the rock after Nappa avoids it and when Jiren throws it at the rock and it cuts. It's clear that when it hits an object with a greater surface area, it severes the entire object in question despite not remotely covering the the entire are. This shows a unique property when it cuts so one can see that using the statements that it can cut through anything + it saying independent of battle power and has a unique property that displays more of itself when coming into contact with larger targets.

Overall I think it's got some valid justification and do agree with having durability negation but I don't know all the instances of the move being used so I can't say if my later interpretation (regarding the object size) or the statements provided are heavily contradicted. I'll try and keep tabs on the thread but you can put me down on agreeing for now.

Anyway, tbf, the statement is pretty straight-forward. At least this can be applied to Manga, cause most inconsistencies came from Anime

Idk where Durability Reduction came from, nowhere stated Kianza have the ability to reduce target's durability. Also in DB, stats are heavily depends on Ki level, so no way a Ki technique can reduce durability without reduce other stats as well, because if you want to reduce durability, you need to reduce Ki, but reduce Ki lead to other stats reduction. But nowhere in both manga and anime suggested this

Also idk where sword comparison came from. We see many instances of Trunks amplified with sword with Ki, people just block it if they are comparable to Trunks. Characters like Vegito and Black can even make Ki Sword yet nothing similar to that of Kienzan came from them

For anime i could see Limited Durability Negation, as it seems like Kienzan can neg dura up to a certain power level difference, well this is just my proposal, anyone can discuss this

Pretty much same thoughts

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Pretty much same thoughts

Counted, thank you

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Bump

 

[Anonymous_Learner]

that's 3 staff agreements, this can just go through, right?

 

[StarShooter80]

that's 3 staff agreements, this can just go through, right?

4 agrees for a full rating, 1 agree for likely/possibly, 3 disagrees

 

[Anonymous_Learner]

4 agrees for a full rating, 1 agree for likely/possibly, 3 disagrees

sooooooooooooo....the agree outvote the disagreees, i'm still a bit confused

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

that's 3 staff agreements, this can just go through, right?

sooooooooooooo....the agree outvote the disagreees, i'm still a bit confused

Discussion Rules:

If a disagreement arises between staff members during the evaluation of a content revision thread, it is important to seek the input and guidance of additional staff members in order to reach a fair and unbiased decision. This may involve seeking the opinion of higher-ranked staff members, or consulting with staff members who possess specific expertise or knowledge related to the revision in question. The final decision on the approval of a content revision should be based on a thorough and unbiased evaluation of the suggested changes and their impact on a verse.

If staff don't unanimously agree on a thread's validity, all parties involved should work in good faith towards a respectable conclusion, based on a variety of factors such as the vote difference, age of the thread, and likelihood of other staff coming along to evaluate it, coming to a compromise or seeking more input if necessary.

Translation: Is not as simple as "well we got the minimum votes so". It'd be way better to have a much firmer conclusion.

If it was just a matter of getting the minimum amount of votes, before Godernet or I voted, the opposition could've locked the thread and deemed it entirely rejected as they had majority vote. (Edit: I zoned out, the thread had exactly same amount of votes for both sides)

So, in the spirit of getting as much a firm conclusion as possible, tagging extra staff: @FinePoint @Reiner04 @LordTracer @Armorchompy

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Kienzan (気円斬), Krillin’s signature technique, is consistently depicted as an energy-based attack capable of instantly cutting through its target, being described as able to cut through “anything” and “everything”, independent of the user’s Battle Power. Unlike conventional energy attacks that rely on power differences, Kienzan functions through its extreme energy-slicing properties that ignore the target’s physical durability.

In its various appearances, Kienzan has been shown to injure or threaten characters statistically far superior to Krillin. This establishes that the effectiveness of the Kienzan is not determined by the user’s AP, but rather by the inherent cutting mechanism of the technique itself.

It is often questioned why, in certain cases like Cell and Jiren, the target was not sliced cleanly in half despite being hit or nearly hit by the Kienzan. However, this does not automatically negate the technique’s Durability Negation property.

In Cell's case, Kienzan should still have been able to effectively cut through his body, but it shattered upon entering without any explanation. The subsequent dialogue, instead of saying Cell was "too durable," asserts that Kienzan can cut through opponents far stronger than its wielder, with Krillin explicitly citing Frieza as an example. However, logically, if a sword or other sharp object can't affect something, it can't penetrate it, and it requires extra power. If it didn't work on Cell, Kienzan wouldn't have moved forward.

The same goes for Cell Max. However, we accept that Kienzan is capable of affecting Cell Max, as I explained in the OP notes, and through this, Krillin also receives a "far higher" rating through Kienzan in his profile (DBS: Super Hero key).

Not only in the case of Cell in DBZ: Tree of Might, it is mentioned that the opponent deflects the Kienzan by using the momentum generated from "spinning his body at high speed", but in the same footage it is also mentioned that the Kienzan can cut through anything, which makes it clear that this is another conclusion or "what if" if the Kienzan hits his body. In the manga, almost the same thing happens where the opponent is able to deflect the Kienzan by using the momentum by "rotating his body at high speed" but the other end result if the opponent does not do that is shown where it can still injure him even though they are much stronger.

Meanwhile, Jiren’s case is different in context. Jiren is explicitly shown reacting seriously to the Kienzan, attempting to read its movement and exploit a weakness or momentum point within the technique. This indicates that the attack is considered dangerous even by someone operating on a far higher power level. The absence of Jiren being cleanly bisected is not evidence that the Kienzan failed to ignore his durability; rather, it suggests that the attack did not strike him in an optimal manner. On the other hand, we have already seen Goku destroy Krillin’s Kienzan with his energy blast, even though Kienzan could penetrate Cell Max's energy attack, which implies that he was also targeting a weak point of the disc similar to what Jiren did. Additionally, Kienzan does have weaknesses such as when it is launched from a great distance or used without proper strategy which is why it is often portrayed as a surprise attack, either relying on its attack speed or because the disc eventually slows down.

The most consistent interpretation is that Jiren did not “tank” the Kienzan through sheer durability, but instead read its timing and looked for openings to avoid it or to secure momentum. Avoiding the Kienzan is far more rational than attempting to tank an energy slice that mechanically does not rely on Battle Power differences.

The most illogical statement being treated as mere Attack Potency is

This is how Ki, as a UES, functions. When the Kienzan is used, there is never a moment where the opponent or anyone else senses a power increase in Krillin himself, unlike what happens when techniques such as the Kamehameha or the Special Beam Cannon are used.

Additionally, there are several statements that are stated repeatedly that should not be flowery language, such as the most striking one that I have bolded, which distinguishes it as a property in the DB world:

Where some of these statements are not owned by sword users or anyone who has the same properties as Kiezan as something used to cut in the DB world which makes it clear that Kienzan is not something to be taken lightly. If they were the same thing Kienzan should not need to be made something like this or at least assume all properties in the DB world are the same as Kienzan but in fact it is not like that.

Justification:


Note:


Additional Evidence:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Some of the accepted profiles have similar properties as Kienzan:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Agree: @CelestialVortex01 @LuffyRuffy46307 @JustANormalPerson01 @Nullflowerblush @Ednaxel2 @Killerdrone123 @LordGriffin1000 @Vietthai96 @UnoRebaixadO @Dereck03 @Gamin_Yoon23 @Greatsage13th @Apex_Predator_GX @DivineAura44 @Muteki616 @Godernet (Likely/Possibly) @LephyrTheRevanchist

Don't agree: @Eden_Warlock99 @Kachon123 @Monkey_Dunno @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @AmonInChains @Damage3245

Bump

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Kienzan (気円斬), Krillin’s signature technique, is consistently depicted as an energy-based attack capable of instantly cutting through its target, being described as able to cut through “anything” and “everything”, independent of the user’s Battle Power. Unlike conventional energy attacks that rely on power differences, Kienzan functions through its extreme energy-slicing properties that ignore the target’s physical durability.

In its various appearances, Kienzan has been shown to injure or threaten characters statistically far superior to Krillin. This establishes that the effectiveness of the Kienzan is not determined by the user’s AP, but rather by the inherent cutting mechanism of the technique itself.

It is often questioned why, in certain cases like Cell and Jiren, the target was not sliced cleanly in half despite being hit or nearly hit by the Kienzan. However, this does not automatically negate the technique’s Durability Negation property.

In Cell's case, Kienzan should still have been able to effectively cut through his body, but it shattered upon entering without any explanation. The subsequent dialogue, instead of saying Cell was "too durable," asserts that Kienzan can cut through opponents far stronger than its wielder, with Krillin explicitly citing Frieza as an example. However, logically, if a sword or other sharp object can't affect something, it can't penetrate it, and it requires extra power. If it didn't work on Cell, Kienzan wouldn't have moved forward.

The same goes for Cell Max. However, we accept that Kienzan is capable of affecting Cell Max, as I explained in the OP notes, and through this, Krillin also receives a "far higher" rating through Kienzan in his profile (DBS: Super Hero key).

Not only in the case of Cell in DBZ: Tree of Might, it is mentioned that the opponent deflects the Kienzan by using the momentum generated from "spinning his body at high speed", but in the same footage it is also mentioned that the Kienzan can cut through anything, which makes it clear that this is another conclusion or "what if" if the Kienzan hits his body. In the manga, almost the same thing happens where the opponent is able to deflect the Kienzan by using the momentum by "rotating his body at high speed" but the other end result if the opponent does not do that is shown where it can still injure him even though they are much stronger.

Meanwhile, Jiren’s case is different in context. Jiren is explicitly shown reacting seriously to the Kienzan, attempting to read its movement and exploit a weakness or momentum point within the technique. This indicates that the attack is considered dangerous even by someone operating on a far higher power level. The absence of Jiren being cleanly bisected is not evidence that the Kienzan failed to ignore his durability; rather, it suggests that the attack did not strike him in an optimal manner. On the other hand, we have already seen Goku destroy Krillin’s Kienzan with his energy blast, even though Kienzan could penetrate Cell Max's energy attack, which implies that he was also targeting a weak point of the disc similar to what Jiren did. Additionally, Kienzan does have weaknesses such as when it is launched from a great distance or used without proper strategy which is why it is often portrayed as a surprise attack, either relying on its attack speed or because the disc eventually slows down.

The most consistent interpretation is that Jiren did not “tank” the Kienzan through sheer durability, but instead read its timing and looked for openings to avoid it or to secure momentum. Avoiding the Kienzan is far more rational than attempting to tank an energy slice that mechanically does not rely on Battle Power differences.

The most illogical statement being treated as mere Attack Potency is

This is how Ki, as a UES, functions. When the Kienzan is used, there is never a moment where the opponent or anyone else senses a power increase in Krillin himself, unlike what happens when techniques such as the Kamehameha or the Special Beam Cannon are used.

Additionally, there are several statements that are stated repeatedly that should not be flowery language, such as the most striking one that I have bolded, which distinguishes it as a property in the DB world:

Where some of these statements are not owned by sword users or anyone who has the same properties as Kiezan as something used to cut in the DB world which makes it clear that Kienzan is not something to be taken lightly. If they were the same thing Kienzan should not need to be made something like this or at least assume all properties in the DB world are the same as Kienzan but in fact it is not like that.

Justification:


Note:


Additional Evidence:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Some of the accepted profiles have similar properties as Kienzan:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Agree: @CelestialVortex01 @LuffyRuffy46307 @JustANormalPerson01 @Nullflowerblush @Ednaxel2 @Killerdrone123 @LordGriffin1000 @Vietthai96 @UnoRebaixadO @Dereck03 @Gamin_Yoon23 @Greatsage13th @Apex_Predator_GX @DivineAura44 @Muteki616 @Godernet (Likely/Possibly) @LephyrTheRevanchist

Don't agree: @Eden_Warlock99 @Kachon123 @Monkey_Dunno @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @AmonInChains @Damage3245 Bump

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Kienzan (気円斬), Krillin’s signature technique, is consistently depicted as an energy-based attack capable of instantly cutting through its target, being described as able to cut through “anything” and “everything”, independent of the user’s Battle Power. Unlike conventional energy attacks that rely on power differences, Kienzan functions through its extreme energy-slicing properties that ignore the target’s physical durability.

In its various appearances, Kienzan has been shown to injure or threaten characters statistically far superior to Krillin. This establishes that the effectiveness of the Kienzan is not determined by the user’s AP, but rather by the inherent cutting mechanism of the technique itself.

It is often questioned why, in certain cases like Cell and Jiren, the target was not sliced cleanly in half despite being hit or nearly hit by the Kienzan. However, this does not automatically negate the technique’s Durability Negation property.

In Cell's case, Kienzan should still have been able to effectively cut through his body, but it shattered upon entering without any explanation. The subsequent dialogue, instead of saying Cell was "too durable," asserts that Kienzan can cut through opponents far stronger than its wielder, with Krillin explicitly citing Frieza as an example. However, logically, if a sword or other sharp object can't affect something, it can't penetrate it, and it requires extra power. If it didn't work on Cell, Kienzan wouldn't have moved forward.

The same goes for Cell Max. However, we accept that Kienzan is capable of affecting Cell Max, as I explained in the OP notes, and through this, Krillin also receives a "far higher" rating through Kienzan in his profile (DBS: Super Hero key).

Not only in the case of Cell in DBZ: Tree of Might, it is mentioned that the opponent deflects the Kienzan by using the momentum generated from "spinning his body at high speed", but in the same footage it is also mentioned that the Kienzan can cut through anything, which makes it clear that this is another conclusion or "what if" if the Kienzan hits his body. In the manga, almost the same thing happens where the opponent is able to deflect the Kienzan by using the momentum by "rotating his body at high speed" but the other end result if the opponent does not do that is shown where it can still injure him even though they are much stronger.

Meanwhile, Jiren’s case is different in context. Jiren is explicitly shown reacting seriously to the Kienzan, attempting to read its movement and exploit a weakness or momentum point within the technique. This indicates that the attack is considered dangerous even by someone operating on a far higher power level. The absence of Jiren being cleanly bisected is not evidence that the Kienzan failed to ignore his durability; rather, it suggests that the attack did not strike him in an optimal manner. On the other hand, we have already seen Goku destroy Krillin’s Kienzan with his energy blast, even though Kienzan could penetrate Cell Max's energy attack, which implies that he was also targeting a weak point of the disc similar to what Jiren did. Additionally, Kienzan does have weaknesses such as when it is launched from a great distance or used without proper strategy which is why it is often portrayed as a surprise attack, either relying on its attack speed or because the disc eventually slows down.

The most consistent interpretation is that Jiren did not “tank” the Kienzan through sheer durability, but instead read its timing and looked for openings to avoid it or to secure momentum. Avoiding the Kienzan is far more rational than attempting to tank an energy slice that mechanically does not rely on Battle Power differences.

The most illogical statement being treated as mere Attack Potency is

This is how Ki, as a UES, functions. When the Kienzan is used, there is never a moment where the opponent or anyone else senses a power increase in Krillin himself, unlike what happens when techniques such as the Kamehameha or the Special Beam Cannon are used.

Additionally, there are several statements that are stated repeatedly that should not be flowery language, such as the most striking one that I have bolded, which distinguishes it as a property in the DB world:

Where some of these statements are not owned by sword users or anyone who has the same properties as Kiezan as something used to cut in the DB world which makes it clear that Kienzan is not something to be taken lightly. If they were the same thing Kienzan should not need to be made something like this or at least assume all properties in the DB world are the same as Kienzan but in fact it is not like that.

Justification:


Note:


Additional Evidence:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Some of the accepted profiles have similar properties as Kienzan:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Agree: @CelestialVortex01 @LuffyRuffy46307 @JustANormalPerson01 @Nullflowerblush @Ednaxel2 @Killerdrone123 @LordGriffin1000 @Vietthai96 @UnoRebaixadO @Dereck03 @Gamin_Yoon23 @Greatsage13th @Apex_Predator_GX @DivineAura44 @Muteki616 @Godernet (Likely/Possibly) @LephyrTheRevanchist

Don't agree: @Eden_Warlock99 @Kachon123 @Monkey_Dunno @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @AmonInChains @Damage3245

Bump

 

[SwordLegendz01]

Kienzan (気円斬), Krillin’s signature technique, is consistently depicted as an energy-based attack capable of instantly cutting through its target, being described as able to cut through “anything” and “everything”, independent of the user’s Battle Power. Unlike conventional energy attacks that rely on power differences, Kienzan functions through its extreme energy-slicing properties that ignore the target’s physical durability.

In its various appearances, Kienzan has been shown to injure or threaten characters statistically far superior to Krillin. This establishes that the effectiveness of the Kienzan is not determined by the user’s AP, but rather by the inherent cutting mechanism of the technique itself.

It is often questioned why, in certain cases like Cell and Jiren, the target was not sliced cleanly in half despite being hit or nearly hit by the Kienzan. However, this does not automatically negate the technique’s Durability Negation property.

In Cell's case, Kienzan should still have been able to effectively cut through his body, but it shattered upon entering without any explanation. The subsequent dialogue, instead of saying Cell was "too durable," asserts that Kienzan can cut through opponents far stronger than its wielder, with Krillin explicitly citing Frieza as an example. However, logically, if a sword or other sharp object can't affect something, it can't penetrate it, and it requires extra power. If it didn't work on Cell, Kienzan wouldn't have moved forward.

The same goes for Cell Max. However, we accept that Kienzan is capable of affecting Cell Max, as I explained in the OP notes, and through this, Krillin also receives a "far higher" rating through Kienzan in his profile (DBS: Super Hero key).

Not only in the case of Cell in DBZ: Tree of Might, it is mentioned that the opponent deflects the Kienzan by using the momentum generated from "spinning his body at high speed", but in the same footage it is also mentioned that the Kienzan can cut through anything, which makes it clear that this is another conclusion or "what if" if the Kienzan hits his body. In the manga, almost the same thing happens where the opponent is able to deflect the Kienzan by using the momentum by "rotating his body at high speed" but the other end result if the opponent does not do that is shown where it can still injure him even though they are much stronger.

Meanwhile, Jiren’s case is different in context. Jiren is explicitly shown reacting seriously to the Kienzan, attempting to read its movement and exploit a weakness or momentum point within the technique. This indicates that the attack is considered dangerous even by someone operating on a far higher power level. The absence of Jiren being cleanly bisected is not evidence that the Kienzan failed to ignore his durability; rather, it suggests that the attack did not strike him in an optimal manner. On the other hand, we have already seen Goku destroy Krillin’s Kienzan with his energy blast, even though Kienzan could penetrate Cell Max's energy attack, which implies that he was also targeting a weak point of the disc similar to what Jiren did. Additionally, Kienzan does have weaknesses such as when it is launched from a great distance or used without proper strategy which is why it is often portrayed as a surprise attack, either relying on its attack speed or because the disc eventually slows down.

The most consistent interpretation is that Jiren did not “tank” the Kienzan through sheer durability, but instead read its timing and looked for openings to avoid it or to secure momentum. Avoiding the Kienzan is far more rational than attempting to tank an energy slice that mechanically does not rely on Battle Power differences.

The most illogical statement being treated as mere Attack Potency is

This is how Ki, as a UES, functions. When the Kienzan is used, there is never a moment where the opponent or anyone else senses a power increase in Krillin himself, unlike what happens when techniques such as the Kamehameha or the Special Beam Cannon are used.

Additionally, there are several statements that are stated repeatedly that should not be flowery language, such as the most striking one that I have bolded, which distinguishes it as a property in the DB world:

Where some of these statements are not owned by sword users or anyone who has the same properties as Kiezan as something used to cut in the DB world which makes it clear that Kienzan is not something to be taken lightly. If they were the same thing Kienzan should not need to be made something like this or at least assume all properties in the DB world are the same as Kienzan but in fact it is not like that.

Justification:


Note:


Additional Evidence:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Some of the accepted profiles have similar properties as Kienzan:

Kienzan's Durability Negation?

Literally the second comment on the post. And? Is it officially stated? It's just an "assumption" Not really. It's not uncommon in fiction that sharpness could only penetrate a bit in the body and couldn't phase then. In this case, by only keep pushing away it just ended up destroying. Your...

vsbattles.com

Agree: @CelestialVortex01 @LuffyRuffy46307 @JustANormalPerson01 @Nullflowerblush @Ednaxel2 @Killerdrone123 @LordGriffin1000 @Vietthai96 @UnoRebaixadO @Dereck03 @Gamin_Yoon23 @Greatsage13th @Apex_Predator_GX @DivineAura44 @Muteki616 @Godernet (Likely/Possibly) @LephyrTheRevanchist

Don't agree: @Eden_Warlock99 @Kachon123 @Monkey_Dunno @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @AmonInChains @Damage3245

Bump
Please, we need to get this done, so I can make another CRT next time.