• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Eminiteable

He/Him
7,401
6,631
Introduction:
the purpose of this content revision thread is to define on the wiki the ability to create black blades with Armament Haki.

How they function and their limitations:
According to Zoro's Vivre card it states this:
From this statement we gather that it's a different application than regular standard Haki from the term "the Haki" rather than just "He acquired Haki after abstaining from alcohol during his training". Plus, it says "the exception of Shusui" it can't be regular haki as Shusui was unable to cut through Monet the logia, telling us it isn't standard haki and instead a variation. We also learn that this type of Haki creates black blades which cannot be damaged, meaning it grants Invulnerability to the sword.

Edit; since the ability invulnerability needs more definite prerequisites for it to be applied, meaning instead of the ability invulnerability this will be counted as "At least 6-B" durability like @XDragnoir suggested.

This actually follows with what we learn in the story, just without direct confirmation that it's invulnerability, as Mihawk tells Zoro that any blade can be turned into a black blade just like Yoru and that if Zoro had this ability back in east blue his swords wouldn't have shattered even against Mihawk.

Since we've established permanent and non-permanent black blades are essentially the same, we can look at what is said about the permanent Blades; Yoru is a sword with unparalleled hardness, The same is said about Ryuma's blade. This tells us they're supposed to be treated as indestructibly hard/durable.

Currently there are no anti-feats, we even have a good idea of just how durable they are since against Big Mom's and Kaido's combined attack Zoro's swords which he turned into black blades were completely unharmed, yet, he himself was severely injured and had 30 of his bones broken.

I want to mention that this ability does come with limits, like I said above this ability is only ever shown to be applicable to blades as Zoro himself has still been damaged despite his blades being fine.

This also can't be applied to any other armament haki user as they have plenty of antifeats;
  • Against other haki users, for example a proficient armament haki user had their armament infused weapon broken by another armament infused weapon.
  • And even against non-haki users, where their defenses will be bypassed by attacks too strong to defend against or if they hit something with durability so high it breaks their armament infused weapon.
Put simply characters who are stated to be able to use this application of Armament Haki are capable of making their swords invulnerable granting their swords "At least 6-B" durability, this however wouldn't apply to the swordsman's regular body.

Defining what proficiency of Haki this falls under on the Haki page:
By default this would have to be at least classified as a Proficient Armament Haki feat as simply applying regular koka beyond the user's body on to weapons, attire, and projectiles is at such a level.

Considering that this application of Haki is already a superior version than a proficient application, and that a possessing this application of Haki is notable even to someone who has mastered Armament Haki completely, I believe this application should fall under the Advanced proficiency on the haki page.

Another thing is we currently accept making permanent black blade (Ryuma's and Mihawk's) as an application of advanced armament, yet, as Mihawk says any blade can be turned into a black blade just like Mihawk's and that's what he taught Zoro; to our knowledge making one permanent is "Forged" through battle and it isn't suggested to be some higher level than the non-permanent version.

Which profiles this effects:
This wouldn't effect characters who have shown to use armament haki on bladed weapons as there's no way to distinguish what they're doing is the same as a black blade user, we would need statements of their ability to directly do this, these are the only profiles who have been stated/shown to have black blade haki:
  • Roronoa Zoro's profile as he learned black blade Haki directly from Mihawk and in Wano is hinted he could turn Enma into a permanent one.
  • Dracule Mihawk's profile and his sword Yoru's profile on the meito page.
  • Ryuma's profile and his sword Shusui's profile on the meito page.
  • Vista's profile since his vivre card tells us he has mastered armament haki and is capable of turning his blades into black blades.
Extra:
In Zoro's recent vivre card it's revealed that his new sword Enma is a cursed sword, the likely from it's profile on the meito page needs to be removed.
 
Last edited:
Put simply characters who are stated to be able to use this application of Armament Haki are capable of making their swords invulnerable, this however wouldn't apply to the swordsman's regular body.

Making their swords extremely difficult to break does not necessarily mean making them totally invulnerable to any amount of force. To assume so would be a bit of an NLF.
 
Making their swords extremely difficult to break does not necessarily mean making them totally invulnerable to any amount of force. To assume so would be a bit of an NLF.
I'm aware, but the vivre card states "they cannot be damaged", this alongside the fact that the swords that have permanently been changed have unparalleled hardness, the alternative is we give the listed characters above "At least 6-B" durability for when applying that haki onto their swords but in the verse's setting that's still practically invulnerability (Just harder to define on the profiles)
 
I'm aware, but the vivre card states "they cannot be damaged".
That's an NLF, if we check the examples the invulnerability page gives none of them are from something like that, it's normally a defensive application of hax.

I think the best it could give is "at least" 6B to all black blades, scaling to Yoru.
 
I'm aware, but the vivre card states "they cannot be damaged".
That seems like a reference to what Mihawk was saying, where blades won't be nicked / damaged during combat thanks to the Armament Haki protecting them. Not being damaged in combat (which seems reasonable) doesn't mean they're immune to all force.
 
That seems like a reference to what Mihawk was saying, where blades won't be nicked / damaged during combat thanks to the Armament Haki protecting them. Not being damaged in combat (which seems reasonable) doesn't mean they're immune to all force.
I edited my post.

Does invulnerability apply to all force up to High 3-A and beyond if so I understand and agree defining it as invulnerability is wrong, but considering these terms are on the profile "though one should be careful not to apply No Limits Fallacy." and "necessitating the use of things like Durability Negation to get through. Others have more conditional invulnerability" seems to imply to me it doesn't.
 
where blades won't be nicked / damaged during combat thanks to the Armament Haki protecting them. Not being damaged in combat (which seems reasonable) doesn't mean they're immune to all force.
I covered this in the OP;
  1. Mihawk states Zoro's fodder swords wouldn't have broken against Mihawk's slash.
  2. Enma and Kitetsu are untouched despite taking the brute force of the Hakai from Kaido and Big Mom
  3. All Black blades being stated to have unparalleled hardness
This is consistently stating/showing they're immune to all force (in the verse).
 
Y’all tried to apply NLF to an ability in the wiki with limits? Come on now.

Obviously dura neg or higher dimensionality shuts it off, and many more abilities. But calling it NLF when there are clear limits to the broad ability is just wrong.

Emin good job, you get an agree from me.
 
Y’all tried to apply NLF to an ability in the wiki with limits? Come on now.

Obviously dura neg or higher dimensionality shuts it off, and many more abilities. But calling it NLF when there are clear limits to the broad ability is just wrong.

Emin good job, you get an agree from me.
If the limit of the invulnerability is higher AP than the user it simply isn't invulnerability, it's just durability.
 
That's the point of Invulnerability
Idk if Invulnerability is tied to how much AP you can prove it could block (for example, if an attack with 0 Mystery but H3A AP would harm a Servant or not) but i know of at least two hax defenses that were limited to their best AP/Dura feats until they got feats or statement to put them at tiers 2 or 1, so i am sure an unparalleled hardness statement isn't going to allow a 6B sword to block a H6A attack
 
I actually agree limited invulnerability should be added . . . . to Supreme King Haki . . as the manga presents it.

Armament? Nope. The OP is def reaching here.
 
Idk if Invulnerability is tied to how much AP you can prove it could block (for example, if an attack with 0 Mystery but H3A AP would harm a Servant or not) but i know of at least two hax defenses that were limited to their best AP/Dura feats until they got feats or statement to put them at tiers 2 or 1, so i am sure an unparalleled hardness statement isn't going to allow a 6B sword to block a H6A attack
It's other statements than that (the main one that says they can't be damaged) plus the main gist of invulnerability is that it's AP based
 
I agree with At least 6B for obvious reasons, btw Tempest, can you @ Mitch and Damage? And maybe Ant as well.
 
So is somebody who knows how to edit properly willing to apply this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top