• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

GER Soul Manipulation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nierre said:
fra.
Click to expand...
Ok but read my response to that…..or the original post. The entire case against it was very lacking in a lot of ways that I’ve addressed already
Shadyboi0 said:
seconded. also the “Whoever controls the arrow will dominate the souls of all life” sounds a little Hyperbole imo
Click to expand...
I don’t think that the extent to which he can manipulate souls is important, since all that matters is that he should have at least the same abilities as chariot requiem, although it’s implied in multiple ways to be superior
 
ZillerBucko said:
0 evidence of this, and there is evidence that he does have it as I will explain below

different situation, who cares if in that specific situation requiem refers to the stand itself, I am talking about a situation where it refers to not chariot requiem, and it is relevant because it is a statement of "dominating souls" and what you sent is not any kind of countering statement or anything
it is quite clearly, in this situation, not referring to the stand itself when it is said that requiem controls souls due to the fact that after it ends the sentence and then says "in this stand's case" as a separate term, but I didn't need to explain this (I hope)
and even following this random logic of yours, in that situation there is actually not anything to suggest he was referring to the stand itself when he said requiem. "This is the riddle of requiem" could just as easily be saying that because "it" is a requiem stand, it can control souls. I have no idea why you would make a point like this but whatever, there's your explanation

if the logic is invalid then actually prove it, you saying it doesn't make it true
and saying he only has one ability doesn't make it true either. you have the burden of proof here, since the statements are evidence, and now you're trying to discredit evidence using a complete lack of evidence yourself.
give some kind of evidence that he only has one ability, but if you don't, then there's absolutely no way you should have even considered bringing up a point like this

If the arrow were to be used by someone with the power, then that person would dominate the souls of all life!"
"the power to dominate souls?...." "...if any of you are able to obtain it, you will be able to control what lies beyond" (referring to complete control of the arrow, obviously if it is a fraction then common sense tells us that something with complete control over it would also be able to control the fraction of it, so in a way, chariot requiem's feat is also GER's feat, since GER is using the full capabilities of the arrow.

specifically shows that requiem stands in general have soul manipulation
there is absolutely nothing here that's up for debate
when polnareff is talking about beyond, we know that GER should have more abilities than just soul manipulation, so there is absolutely nothing contradictory about having the extra power of reverting actions to 0. absolute nothing at all here is problematic
the evidence is overwhelming so, consider changing your vote in the face of solid evidence presented in this well-made crt
Click to expand...
This is what I’m referring to
 
M3X said:
The OP is wrong. GER doesn't have soul manipulation and never used it. There's no reason to agree with the OP.
Click to expand...
That’s cool but I expect you’re plotting an actual argument for your next message? Saying it’s wrong doesn’t make it wrong so
 
TyranoDoom30 said:
Yeah, sorry, but i disagree FRA
Click to expand...
The fact that people are disagreeing with the useless and invalid counter arguments makes me lose a bit of patience and I feel as though nobody has even read the original post. Sorry but I’m going to have to ask you to, instead of continuing this dumb fra train, give reasoning as to why you disagree so that I may explain to you specifically why it is incorrect, since clearly disproving the counterarguments of the people you are agreeing with are not enough to stop you from agreeing with them
Shadyboi0 said:
this is weird to me.
Click to expand...
Apologies for not getting to this sooner
It’s just due to the statements that Giorno had gone beyond the power of the arrow and that he has complete control of requiem, unlike Polnareff. Polnareff also stated something to the affect that whoever had complete control would be able to go beyond the power of chariot requiem’s soul swapping. Luckily the exact statements are in the original post so you can check those out if you wish. But at the very least, GER should be able to replicate chariot requiem’s soul manipulation and ability to control stands and whatnot
 
Also thinking back
The ability to control the souls of “all life” wouldn’t be much of a hyperbole either given that we don’t even know the extent of the range of chariot’s soul swap, and the fact that GER already has multiversal range already
And chariot has that thing about “the souls of other worlds” but that’s a thing for another time, I don’t even understand that whole thing myself, but whatever it doesn’t have anything to do with this thread
 
If I were gonna go full matpat mode then you could argue that the coroner that killed Diavolo the 2nd time was being affected by some sort of soul manipulation…..this is just my speculation though so
Don’t mind me
 
Still waiting for an actual argument. To recap, here’s what I’ve seen so far.

“GER has never been confirmed to have used soul manipulation, therfore he isn’t able to”

Not a real argument since statements exist to prove things that don’t have a feat. The statements say he has soul manipulation, saying it’s not true doesn’t make it not true.

“GER going beyond means he got a new ability, not soul manipulation”

There’s no evidence to counter the statements that say he should have soul manipulation, there’s no reason he can’t have a new ability and not keep soul manipulation when there’s still tons of statements that whoever uses the arrow gets soul manipulation + unknown new ability. Not a real argument.

I would bring up everything else said but in honesty I have no idea what the arguments even are for because they’re so bad that they imply absolutely nothing in their favor. (And I’ve already addressed every piece of that complete nonsense earlier on) I would appreciate it if somebody on the opposition actually said anything that made the tiniest bit of sense so that this could turn into an actual debate instead of this complete and absolute tragedy of an argument.
 
It's possible that others may feel the same way, but for my part personally I am discouraged to be part of an active conversation here given the bad way things are structured. If something is correct, you don't need to overly elaborate the why of it, nor do things need to be separated in parts with titles with explanations of what they mean aside from what common sense makes one know what they mean, nor do so many recaps are needed. That without mentioning how part of the logic used is flatout wrong.
ZillertheBucko said:
0 evidence of this, and there is evidence that he does have it as I will explain below
Click to expand...
This is a reply to me saying that Soul Manip isn't an ability GER got, as in it didn't show nor was said to have it. One can't do the whole "put all the facts together and reach a conclusion" if I appeal to GER not having that and get replied that, because of the other evidence, what I say is wrong. I didn't ignore all the other "evidence" in a way that I need to be reminded of it, I simply said 1 point. There was a necessity to bring up the other "evidence" here to validate things up.
ZillertheBucko said:
different situation, who cares if in that specific situation requiem refers to the stand itself, I am talking about a situation where it refers to not chariot requiem, and it is relevant because it is a statement of "dominating souls" and what you sent is not any kind of countering statement or anything
it is quite clearly, in this situation, not referring to the stand itself when it is said that requiem controls souls due to the fact that after it ends the sentence and then says "in this stand's case" as a separate term, but I didn't need to explain this (I hope)
and even following this random logic of yours, in that situation there is actually not anything to suggest he was referring to the stand itself when he said requiem. "This is the riddle of requiem" could just as easily be saying that because "it" is a requiem stand, it can control souls. I have no idea why you would make a point like this but whatever, there's your explanation
Click to expand...
Even the link you give refers to the Stand's name as Requiem, there is no evidence that Requiem in this cases refers to "what all Requiem Stands can do" rather than "what Requiem (this Stand) can do", nor is this some "random logic" I have, it's common sense, Chariot Requiem was referred to as Requiem twice in the image I linked and in the second time it was due to some exclusive ability Chariot Requiem has and GER explicitly can't have.
ZillertheBucko said:
if the logic is invalid then actually prove it, you saying it doesn't make it true
and saying he only has one ability doesn't make it true either. you have the burden of proof here, since the statements are evidence, and now you're trying to discredit evidence using a complete lack of evidence yourself.
give some kind of evidence that he only has one ability, but if you don't, then there's absolutely no way you should have even considered bringing up a point like this
Click to expand...
Anyone can point out logic being wrong based on what they believe & evaluate, they're not required to "prove it" if it's too fundamental as that would be like telling someone why disagree with, for example, 2 + 2 not being 5; It can technicaly be further elaborated, but common decency demands no one to do so. This goes over to what you were saying to other users too. I disagreed with the logic of some things here, you have a different opinion, and that's that, I'm not gonna actively try to say the same things with the same words or with new words, you don't have something to expect from me or the users who disagreed in regards to how they did so on the logic used.

It's a rule for Stands to only have "1 ability", regardless of how uses of it may lead to each having more than 1 superpower. Evolved Stands like KQ may have a new one while keeping the old one, but we do not what GER's new abiity is, and it doesn't add in the Soul Manip Chariot Requiem had. Therefore, the point of Stands having 1 ability works against GER having Soul Manip.
ZillertheBucko said:
If the arrow were to be used by someone with the power, then that person would dominate the souls of all life!"
Click to expand...
There are 2 ways to look at this
  • This is Pol's hypothesis as that's what the arrow did to his Stand, w/o knowing that it would do other things to other Stands, or
  • This is what the arrow would do to any Stand out of control, but those that are not out of control gained something else like Giorno, hence the ability Chariot Requiem has is related to how it's out-of-control and Mista and Trish asked if their souls would be switched again and commented that they and nobody knew it but that Giorno had control over his version of Requiem
ZillertheBucko said:
"the power to dominate souls?...." "...if any of you are able to obtain it, you will be able to control what lies beyond" (referring to complete control of the arrow, obviously if it is a fraction then common sense tells us that something with complete control over it would also be able to control the fraction of it, so in a way, chariot requiem's feat is also GER's feat, since GER is using the full capabilities of the arrow.
Click to expand...
There is no proof that they would keep the power Chariot got, the arrow grants powers, at low power Chariot got its and with its real power GER got its, without any reason to have Chariot's too. Pol there saying that "there is something beyond and that that will be controlled" can't be taken as "what's beyond will be controlled+what isn't beyond will be controlled too", that's you warping what he said based on inapplicable logic, as this isn't some RPG where you have an ability, get stronger and get another ability on top of it, this is an item that gives different superpowers to different people, and then different people can re-use it to gain other different superpowers, like Kira did for example.
ZillertheBucko said:
specifically shows that requiem stands in general have soul manipulation
Click to expand...
As said before and as it says there, Requiem is that Stand's name, as such this logically isn't proof of there being a category for those types of Stands and all of them having the same ability.
 
Last edited:
ZillertheBucko said:
I would bring up everything else said but in honesty I have no idea what the arguments even are for because they’re so bad that they imply absolutely nothing in their favor. (And I’ve already addressed every piece of that complete nonsense earlier on) I would appreciate it if somebody on the opposition actually said anything that made the tiniest bit of sense so that this could turn into an actual debate instead of this complete and absolute tragedy of an argument.
Click to expand...
I’d recommend being civil, especially when the entire point of this thread is based on assumption. No, my opinion does not change even after your paragraph about why the OP is apparently “flawless”. So, I remain neutral
 
Eficiente said:
Even the link you give refers to the Stand's name as Requiem, there is no evidence that Requiem in this cases refers to "what all Requiem Stands can do" rather than "what Requiem (this Stand) can do", nor is this some "random logic" I have, it's common sense, Chariot Requiem was referred to as Requiem twice in the image I linked and in the second time it was due to some exclusive ability Chariot Requiem has and GER explicitly can't have.
Click to expand...
yes, GER has also been referred to as requiem before, but if you read the link I gave you will see in the description that it refers to requiem as an "energy", and then the sentence afterwards is referring to the stand itself. It is a very clear example of the fact that any requiem stand should be able to have soul manipulation, as blatantly said in the link. Even if the link refers to the stand's name itself as requiem once, it is made clear each time when they are referring to requiem the stand and requiem the "energy". Take a closer look at the way it is said and it becomes very clear that it's not ambiguous that the link claims that requiem stands can dominate souls.
Eficiente said:
Anyone can point out logic being wrong based on what they believe & evaluate, they're not required to "prove it" if it's too fundamental as that would be like telling someone why disagree with, for example, 2 + 2 not being 5; It can technicaly be further elaborated, but common decency demands no one to do so. This goes over to what you were saying to other users too. I disagreed with the logic of some things here, you have a different opinion, and that's that, I'm not gonna actively try to say the same things with the same words or with new words, you don't have something to expect from me or the users who disagreed in regards to how they did so on the logic used.
Click to expand...
I will probably get nowhere arguing with this then, sure, but I find it to be quite bad practice to simply disagree with something like this and provide 0 argument, it makes it very difficult to try and have a basic debate. That's kinda part of why I hate fra trains too, since it's very easy for people to choose a side without actually proving they know what the argument is and why said argument makes sense
Eficiente said:
It's a rule for Stands to only have "1 ability", regardless of how uses of it may lead to each having more than 1 superpower. Evolved Stands like KQ may have a new one while keeping the old one, but we do not what GER's new abiity is, and it doesn't add in the Soul Manip Chariot Requiem had. Therefore, the point of Stands having 1 ability works against GER having Soul Manip.
Click to expand...
not a real rule, also I present the following examples
star platinum can elongate his fingers, stop time, and draw things perfectly
golden experience itself has the ability to create life, as well as do that life shot thing, + GER's revert to 0 already makes it have multiple abilities + flight
king crimson has precog and time skip
chariot requiem has regen, soul swapping, and the ability to control stands
normal silver chariot can eject its armor and shoot its sword
hierophant green can climb into people, make the web thingy, and emerald splash
and the list goes on, so yeah, never was a real rule at all. The point is not to figure out what GER's "new ability" is (it's rtz), we're just confirming that he has the old one. If it does not add in soul manipulation then that is something you need to make a counterargument to prove, since the statements have been shown to prove soul manipulation
Eficiente said:
There are 2 ways to look at this
  • This is Pol's hypothesis as that's what the arrow did to his Stand, w/o knowing that it would do other things to other Stands, or
  • This is what the arrow would do to any Stand out of control, but those that are not out of control gained something else like Giorno, hence the ability Chariot Requiem has is related to how it's out-of-control and Mista and Trish asked if their souls would be switched again and commented that they and nobody knew it but that Giorno had control over his version of Requiem
Click to expand...
polnareff being wrong wouldn't even matter due to supporting evidence in the form of the chariot requiem stand stat, but regardless, there is no basis for thinking polnareff is wrong unless there's contradicting feats or statements. There is 0 implication for polnareff being wrong, nor is there any narrative reason for why he would be wrong. Polnareff is considered to be more knowledgable on the arrow than most of the characters in the series so it would make no sense is the problem. Yes, it is true that stands who aren't out of control gain another ability, but as for evidence that they don't get rid of the old ability....

"The arrow has the power to dominate souls, and this is one fragment of it"
one fragment of a thing is always a part of the whole thing, or else it would be missing a fragment and wouldn't be the whole thing. That's how it works

"If it were to be used by someone with the power (to control it) , then they would be able to dominate the souls of all life"
I think we can agree that Giorno did control the arrow, so...
Eficiente said:
There is no proof that they would keep the power Chariot got, the arrow grants powers, at low power Chariot got its and with its real power GER got its, without any reason to have Chariot's too. Pol there saying that "there is something beyond and that that will be controlled" can't be taken as "what's beyond will be controlled+what isn't beyond will be controlled too", that's you warping what he said based on inapplicable logic, as this isn't some RPG where you have an ability, get stronger and get another ability on top of it, this is an item that gives different superpowers to different people, and then different people can re-use it to gain other different superpowers, like Kira did for example.
Click to expand...


also reverse burden of proof is taking place since you are making the claim that he lost an ability from chariot requiem, but whatever here's the evidence you asked for and I'm gonna pretend burden of proof was on me for the time being
Eficiente said:
As said before and as it says there, Requiem is that Stand's name, as such this logically isn't proof of there being a category for those types of Stands and all of them having the same ability.
Click to expand...
The word refers to different things at different times, for more info read the original post which discusses this exact line of logic
Tarang123 said:
I’d recommend being civil, especially when the entire point of this thread is based on assumption. No, my opinion does not change even after your paragraph about why the OP is apparently “flawless”. So, I remain neutral
Click to expand...
until the most recent thing from eficiente, there were no real arguments and it was just an fra train which is what I have always considered to be features of a toxic thread on here
it was just a bit annoying is all
 
also one last thing
Eficiente said:
It's possible that others may feel the same way, but for my part personally I am discouraged to be part of an active conversation here given the bad way things are structured. If something is correct, you don't need to overly elaborate the why of it, nor do things need to be separated in parts with titles with explanations of what they mean aside from what common sense makes one know what they mean, nor do so many recaps are needed. That without mentioning how part of the logic used is flatout wrong.
Click to expand...
I respectfully disagree, I believe the structure of the crt is quite good because it sorts the arguments in categories that make it easy to know where to look, and gets straight to the point by showing statement after statement (as well as providing links to them) without spending more than a sentence or so explaining the significance of the statements, but it is up to preference somewhat here I suppose
 
ZillertheBucko said:
yes, GER has also been referred to as requiem before, but if you read the link I gave you will see in the description that it refers to requiem as an "energy", and then the sentence afterwards is referring to the stand itself. It is a very clear example of the fact that any requiem stand should be able to have soul manipulation, as blatantly said in the link. Even if the link refers to the stand's name itself as requiem once, it is made clear each time when they are referring to requiem the stand and requiem the "energy". Take a closer look at the way it is said and it becomes very clear that it's not ambiguous that the link claims that requiem stands can dominate souls.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter how GER has been referred to as Requiem, that's part of its name too. Chariot Requiem is an energy/a Stand energy as said in the description, that's not the same as "Requiem" being a category of sorts GER has to, it's Chariot Requiem's name.

I'm kinda tired to go over the rest.
 
Eficiente said:
It doesn't matter how GER has been referred to as Requiem, that's part of its name too. Chariot Requiem is an energy/a Stand energy as said in the description, that's not the same as "Requiem" being a category of sorts GER has to, it's Chariot Requiem's name.

I'm kinda tired to go over the rest.
Click to expand...
DRW001 said:
Statements from Chariot Requiem's stand description

On Chariot Requiem's stand stats it states:

"A stand energy that evolved from Polnareff's Sliver Chariot when it was pierced by the arrow. Due to the decline of Polnareff's stand ability, it has gone out of control. Requiem is an energy that dominates living souls. In this stands's case, it has switched the souls of bodies near each other."

As you can see, it states how SCR has swapped the souls of nearby bodies and also states that 'Requiem' is an energy that dominates living souls. What's interesting here, however, is that the statement specifies 'In this stand's case' before talking about what CR did just recently. Which leads me to believe that the statement 'Requiem is an energy that dominates living souls' is in fact referencing the power of the arrow itself here rather than strictly talking about CR itself, and that statement can therefore be used for any to-be requiem stand that utilizes the arrow.
Click to expand...
drw explains it best here
to put it simply, in that specific example, taking into account no other irrelevant examples, if we just focus on this one statement that actually matters, in said statement it is said that requiem, which is referring not to the stand "requiem" but clearly separates the general term for requiems and the stand requiem
to put it simply, it is a completely undeniable fact that when it says that requiem is an energy that can control souls, it is not referring to the stand chariot requiem, just the energy "requiem", which is in the same description strongly suggested to be something different from the stand itself.
 
bump
to add onto what I said earlier, the main problem is that you assume that the term requiem ALWAYS refers to the stand chariot requiem, when in reality, requiem is used in multiple ways. In this specific example, it is extremely easy to use context clues and know that they the "requiem energy" is not referring to the stand itself. let's remind of every single statement
"requiem is an energy that dominates living souls"
"if any of you obtain the arrow, you will be able to control what lies beyond" as well as dominating souls was "only a fraction of that power", someone with full control would be also able to use soul manipulation
whoever controlled the arrow completely "would be able to dominate the souls of all life"
the statements are very very in-your-face about it
"the arrow has the power to dominate souls" is a complete game over for any kind of counter argument anyways since it is an undeniable fact that the arrow itself bestows soul manipulation, and Giorno, who has full control of the arrow, would be able to control the soul manipulation abilities of the arrow.
It does not matter if the arrow has more than just soul manipulation, we already know this because the arrow is stated to have more than one ability, and soul manipulation is just one of many fragments of its power.

there is no argument you can come up with to discredit any of these pieces of evidence, since all of it is true. GER has soul manipulation and it is very very apparent if you have read the entirety of the original post (unless you have a "that's not how we do things here" argument or something but man that'd suck)
 
Last edited:
I'm neutral aligned on this, however I do think that the mention of souls is notable and that the changes applied should be "possibly applied via dominating souls"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

DRW001
  • Locked
Giorno Profile Rework
Replies
30
Views
3K
Emirp sumitpo
Emirp sumitpo
Dust_Collector
Soul Calibur: Potential AP Changes (Original Timeline)
Replies
19
Views
1K
BlackDarkness679
BlackDarkness679
Overlord775
  • Article
Thunder Mcqueen CRT
Replies
4
Views
570
Overlord775
Overlord775
  • Locked
How'd he get over there man? A CRT for GER's Infinite Speed.
2 3 4
Replies
135
Views
5K
Damage3245
Damage3245
Last chance to make a decent GER match up
Replies
15
Views
2K
WyattR612
Back
Top