- 39,691
- 15,627
About High 6-B/6-A Excalibur, right? Because i feel same about that.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
in Fate/Zero when she destroyed Caster's elder form narration described it as "scorching every atom" to stop his Eldritch form from regeneratingDragonEmperor23 said:Where does it attacking atoms come from?
It would be inconsistent because is a beam of light that should either atomize or vaporize, not bothIapitus The Impaler said:Why would that be inconsistent?
I think that you are confusing it with subatomic destruction.DMB 1 said:Excalibur atomizing should be considered hax, or else that feat would end up being High 6-B to High 6-A.
Something not being mentioned doesn't mean it is contradicted. It is uncontradicted so far as I knowRin The Dragon Empress said:Well if it's only stated once then it's somewhat inconsistent. If there's more statements of atomization then it should be legit.
We already agreed that Excalibur is not literally light. Hence why servants aren't FTLEscanor998 said:It would be inconsistent because is a beam of light that should either atomize or vaporize, not both
Vaporization is what she does to the river, and what the baseline effect of that kind of sword is. Atomization is how they directly attack the atoms, and scorching is the direct damage. Its not that hardEscanor998 said:I know, but still it is inconsistent because it says scorching, vaporization and atomization, so we can't use the thing with the higher end just because you like it, also, in most sources it says vaporization, so that should be used
You mean the meteor? Its already been calculated and the results are unimpressive and inapplicable since ULW bypasses durability anywayVeloxt1r0kore said:Anyway we should calculate Pucci Alter destroying Bennu.