• 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.
It doesn't matter. Natsu can't burn something he's never been shown to burn. You can say he can burn a attacks with sub atomic hax because he's burnt a existence erasure move.
 
I will be unavailable so this is probably my last message here Sowyƒÿó

he Don't have absorbed these but powernull them and in my case, he didn't really have absorbed flame who "bypass Dura" via another destructive effect
 
Rin The Dragon Empress said:
That's typically the rule. It goes by statements over feats, the Burden of Proof is on you to prove he can do that
Not for hax. If someone does not have resistance to hax, then they're going to be effected by it. Goku would be effected by conceptual manipulation, Polnareff can't move in time stop, etc.
 
That's not how it works. It's a NLF to assume that natsu can eat any form of Fire that has FAR deadlier properties than any other flame he's capable eating, especially when he's shown to struggle eating other types of flames without exhausting himself
 
Back
Top