• 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.

Itachi's sword upgrade

I don't see this as necessarily being the case if such a function isn't actually demonstrated. I don't share this assumption.
Just for consistency sake, do you hold the position that an objectively solid object, that's stated to be a solid object, could, by its sheer constitution, interact with other solid objects, or do you hold the position that would be illogical assumption to make?.

I'm asking because if you believe the former then your logical contentions with Totsuka Blade would fall apart since both examples have their interactive capabilities contingent on their composition, with the solid object being made of matter, and Totsuka Blade being made of spiritual energy.

Where is the NPI coming from? The reasoning above?
Yeah, a spiritual object, by its very nature, can interact with other spiritual objects because both exist on the same fundamental level as each other, similar how a physical object can interact with another physical object since both objects are material/physical in nature.
 
Come on, it's a sword that seals whatever it pierces, no where does it neg durability

Infact, it was specifically noted that they couldn't simply cut through kidomaru's webs

main-qimg-4649e3d4985d052a37ecd569a3c7928f-lq


Then itachi went after the bones while Sasuke used enton on the webs, so no, there isn't anything like durability negation here.

When itachi stabbed orochimaru, he assumed it was just a regular sword, until it started sealing him, THAT'S when he knew what it was. The totsuka is a powerful blade that seals what it pierces, it doesn't negate durability

It being a spirit weapon in Naruto does not in any case mean it directly attacks souls or what not, there is literally an entire array of techniques that are based off spiritual manipulation known as YIN RELEASE.

This is a real reach to try and claim durability negation. Its a sword that seals what it pierces
 
Last edited:
Come on, it's a sword that seals whatever it pierces, no where does it neg durability

Infact, it was specifically noted that they couldn't simply cut through kidomaru's webs

main-qimg-4649e3d4985d052a37ecd569a3c7928f-lq


Then itachi went after the bones while Sasuke used enton on the webs, so no, there isn't anything like durability negation here.

When itachi stabbed orochimaru, he assumed it was just a regular sword, until it started sealing him, THAT'S when he knew what it was. The totsuka is a powerful blade that seals what it pierces, it doesn't negate durability

It being a spirit weapon in Naruto does not in any case mean it directly attacks souls or what not, there is literally an entire array of techniques that are based off spiritual manipulation known as YIN RELEASE.

This is a real reach to try and claim durability negation. Its a sword that seals what it pierces
Sasuke made that statment that a blade cant cut it. He had no knowledge on the totska blade. Also itachi dident want to accedently hit kabuto with that big ass sword and seal him. He was trying to ultimately undo the reanimation.
 
I don't see this as necessarily being the case if such a function isn't actually demonstrated. I don't share this assumption.


Where is the NPI coming from? The reasoning above?
the sword directly interacts with Nagato's soul which is why it's able to trap him inside it.
 
the sword directly interacts with Nagato's soul which is why it's able to trap him inside it.

It didn't interact with an intangible soul though; it had to strike Nagato's physical body. There's no knowing if it would work if the sword was waved through a soul by itself.
 
It didn't interact with an intangible soul though; it had to strike Nagato's physical body. There's no knowing if it would work if the sword was waved through a soul by itself.
souls dont suddenly become physical once they inside a body, otherwise we wouldn't need to separate souls from bodies in the first place.

thats also avoiding the larger context, it didnt have to strike nagato's body because of a limitation of the power, it had to strike nagato's body because his soul was connected with that vessel. in the same way 90% of the rest of fiction needs to first target the physical targer. ( not effect a physical body but just target an area of effect) where the soul is connected to get the desired outcome. otherwise people could just randomly attack a homeless person on the street and hope and pray their arch rival from across the globe gets his soul injured.
 
Last edited:
Damage, you literally don't know if it had to damage his physical body to interact with his soul, that's you extrapolating an assumption from the events we're given, that's not a known, concrete fact, it's entirely your interpretation. It's entirely as probable, if not even more so that since the sword does, by its very nature, interact with both the physical and spiritual, the consequence of that would be the sword physically damaging Nagato if he's attacked with the sword, alongside it damaging his soul.

If Nagato existed purely as an intangible soul, than the Totsuka Blade would most likely interact with him since it's also a spiritual object, y'all aren't addressing this argument in any actual, meaningful manner, y'all are only obfuscating away from the question by asserting inherent weaknesses that aren't even provable, or are inherently counter intuitive to the very nature of the sword itself.
 
Damage, you literally don't know if it had to damage his physical body to interact with his soul, that's you extrapolating an assumption from the events we're given, that's not a known, concrete fact, it's entirely your interpretation. It's entirely as possible, if not even more so that since the sword does, by its very nature, interact with both the physical and spiritual, the consequence of that would be the sword physically damaging Nagato if he's attacked with the sword, alongside it damaging his soul.

If Nagato exist purely as an intangible soul, than the Totsuka Blade would most likely interact with it since it's also a spiritual object, y'all aren't addressing this argument in any actual, meaningful manner, y'all are only obfuscating the question by asserting inherent weaknesses that aren't even provable, or are inherently counter intuitive to the very nature of the sword itself.

The same thing you're objecting to applies exactly to what you're saying; you don't know that it being a "spiritual object" means that it would interact with an intangible soul.

And I wasn't asserting a weakness; I just said "There's no knowing if it would work if the sword was waved through a soul by itself."

Allow me to ammend my "It had to strike Nagato's body" to "It did strike Nagato's body."
 
The same thing you're objecting to applies exactly to what you're saying; you don't know that it being a "spiritual object" means that it would interact with an intangible soul.

And I wasn't asserting a weakness; I just said "There's no knowing if it would work if the sword was waved through a soul by itself."

Allow me to ammend my "It had to strike Nagato's body" to "It did strike Nagato's body."
No, it doesn't exactly apply to what i'm saying since my argument has actual precedence while yours doesn't, objects which have the same fundamental constitution, by nature, can interact with objects of equal constitution, like a solid object interacting with another solid object. The onus would be on you to disprove the precedence, which you are incapable of doing since it would require you to assert we shouldn't assume physical objects can interact with other physical objects with the same composition because of the lack of direct feats, and (or) statements.

You are, that's the logical consequence of your assertion Damage.

Cool, doesn't disprove anything we are asserting, it's just useless conjecture.
 
a "spiritual object" means that it would interact with an intangible soul.
Souls are by definition not tangible things, they exist within people outside of their physical forms, the entire description of what a soul is hinges on it not being a material thing. sure there some exceptions to this rule but they are exceptions that prove the rule. this argument is the equivalent of saying organs are not physical unless proven.

Definition of a soul: "
"the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal."

Definition of a spirit: "
"the non-physical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul."
 
No, it doesn't exactly apply to what i'm saying since my argument has actual precedence while yours doesn't, objects which have the same fundamental constitution, by nature, can interact with objects of equal constitution, like a solid object interacting with another solid object. The onus would be on you to disprove the precedence, which you are incapable of doing since it would require you to assert we shouldn't assume physical objects can interact with other physical objects with the same composition because of the lack of direct feats, and (or) statements.

You are, that's the logical consequence of your assertion Damage.

Cool, doesn't disprove anything we are asserting, it's just useless conjecture.
That's an assumption on your part that I don't agree with, sorry.
 
Why is this being dragged out guys? Absolutely no reason to try to discount the blade's npi feats and soul manip.
 
Why is this being dragged out guys? Absolutely no reason to try to discount the blade's npi feats and soul manip.
Soul Manipulation, I don't have a problem with.

It's the NPI and Durability Negation that I don't think is explicit.
 
Soul Manipulation, I don't have a problem with.

It's the NPI and Durability Negation that I don't think is explicit.
How can u agree to soul manip but not to npi? The ability to soul manip requires npi,

And I mean cmon we already give Susanoo users npi lmao, why is totska blade being treated differently now?
 
How can u agree to soul manip but not to npi? The ability to soul manip requires npi,

And I mean cmon we already give Susanoo users npi lmao, why is totska blade being treated differently now?
That's not true as far as I understand it. You can manipulate the soul in various ways without physically touching it. One ability does not require the other.
 
That's not true as far as I understand it. You can manipulate the soul in various ways without physically touching it. One ability does not require the other.
But in this instance the sword is targeting the soul itself, sucking it in, that's npi.
 
That's not true as far as I understand it. You can manipulate the soul in various ways without physically touching it. One ability does not require the other.
yes soul manipulation works that way too but the totsuka blade is said to be spiritual anyway and originally in a physical pattern like a yata mirror can enter a solid or an energy pattern for physical attacks
 
If we look at the sum total for totsuka blade and yata mirror, by manipulating the chakra can absorb various nature transformations energy manipulation, lack of any form incorporeality, ability to be in spiritual pattern abstraction, can interact with and absorb spirits non-physical interaction, traps souls in genjutsu soul manipulation?
 
If we look at the sum total for totsuka blade and yata mirror, by manipulating the chakra can absorb various nature transformations energy manipulation, lack of any form incorporeality, ability to be in spiritual pattern abstraction, can interact with and absorb spirits non-physical interaction, traps souls in genjutsu soul manipulation?
1-soul manipulation
2-npı
3-energy manipulation
4-abstraction
5-incorporeality
 
It should still ignore durability to an extent where it was able to seal souls though.
Not necessarily. It can deal physical damage, yet carry a sealing component to it (which is what is straight up shown, no extrapolation needed). So I disagree on it ignoring durability.

Edit: I do agree with NPI, for Deceive's reasons
 
Not necessarily. It can deal physical damage, yet carry a sealing component to it (which is what is straight up shown, no extrapolation needed). So I disagree on it ignoring durability.

Edit: I do agree with NPI, for Deceive's reasons
Wait so do you agree with the op because of decieves reasons or just npi. Npi wasn't originally apart of the proposal but i can add it for sure
 
Back
Top