• 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.

One Piece: Combined Attacks but we're removing them.

KingTempest said:
they don't care bro
Click to expand...
Too bad I do


Ironic. The start of this was "this is held by ducktape and sticks" and somehow the Oars "debunk" is even worse.
I don't even disagree with the entire CRT, just the portion that's being contradicted by nothing and somehow some of you still see the reason in it to call agrees.
Let's round up the arguments for and against Oars/Luffy's multiplier.
For:
  • Chopper, one of the first crewmates, is calling a weakness ONLY AFTER WITNESSING HIS CAPTAIN'S ABILITY
  • Everybody who called it knew Luffy longer. Chopper, Nami and Usopp.
  • The more reliable translation and anime (which ya'll suddenly love as secondary canon) say it's to cut down his Power/"Offensive power" in half. Not "capabilities", not his stats.
  • The one who called it didn't do it after seeing Oars Knee, Punch, body slam the crew, but only after being aware of Luffy's power and witnessing an attack requiring BOTH ARMS
  • Chopper has no reason to even disable the fake arm. Oars can still wash the crew with his legs along and he's proven that. The entire purpose of that was again to "cut his offensive power in half" for HIS ARMS.

Against:
- "We don't know if by offense they meant over-all abilities or just that attack."
The one who called it didn't do it after seeing Oars Knee, Punch, body slam the crew, but only after being aware of Luffy's power and witnessing an attack requiring BOTH ARMS
Click to expand...

- "How come we never see this mentioned ever again" the sheer amount of things we don't see mentioned twice or AT ALL after an outside source does it would cripple so many verses it's redundant. This is intentionally too strict.

- "Does Chopper know how Luffy's ablity works?" this is asking if he knows how rubber works. Enel is the only character who ever questioned that shit and that's because he lives in the sky.
"he has your shadow. He can stretch like rubber and use all your moves." If Usopp and Nami are aware of that, how tf would the DOCTOR, the guy who's likely worked on Luffy's body dozens of times and witnessed him fight just as much, not be aware of how his ability works?
Click to expand...
 
Damage3245 said:
Which characters would be affected, assuming we kept the multiplier just for the Bazooka moves?
Click to expand...
Affected as in having the multiplier removed?
Everybody who makes no sense.
Characters two-handing a single weapon. Characters who clearly throw their entire body into the attack. Characters who just have no backing for "more=multiplied"
 
SnookB said:
Too bad I do


Ironic. The start of this was "this is held by ducktape and sticks" and somehow the Oars "debunk" is even worse.
I don't even disagree with the entire CRT, just the portion that's being contradicted by nothing and somehow some of you still see the reason in it to call agrees.
Let's round up the arguments for and against Oars/Luffy's multiplier.
For:
  • Chopper, one of the first crewmates, is calling a weakness ONLY AFTER WITNESSING HIS CAPTAIN'S ABILITY
  • Everybody who called it knew Luffy longer. Chopper, Nami and Usopp.
  • The more reliable translation and anime (which ya'll suddenly love as secondary canon) say it's to cut down his Power/"Offensive power" in half. Not "capabilities", not his stats.
  • The one who called it didn't do it after seeing Oars Knee, Punch, body slam the crew, but only after being aware of Luffy's power and witnessing an attack requiring BOTH ARMS
  • Chopper has no reason to even disable the fake arm. Oars can still wash the crew with his legs along and he's proven that. The entire purpose of that was again to "cut his offensive power in half" for HIS ARMS.
Click to expand...
I would like to point a few flaws in this.
For the first bullet-point, Chopper isn't just calling out the weakness after witnessing Oar's using Luffy's moves but after trying to figure out the original cost of Oar's death. Which he realized had to do with frostbite and also cause the arm they were targeting was a replacement arm and not the original. It seems more like it's a weakness cause this arm isn't built for the body than because it'd mean Oar can't use Gum Gum Bazooka anymore.

For the third bullet-point, what makes it a more valid assumption to assume a multiplier instead of the opposite? Chopper's words are pretty broad, so it could also be taken as that all of Oar's attacks are only half as effective with one arm, and in that case, we could also assume a .5 multiplier to Oar's base power if he were to lose his arm.

For the fourth bullet-point, Choppers reasoning for when he called out Oar's weakness has nothing to do with Oar showcasing Gum-Gum Bazooka. The reason why Chopper called out the weakness when he did was cause he'd finished up figuring out how Oar died.

For the fifth bullet-point, you're ignoring how Chopper mentioned that all the attacks the Straw-Hats had landed before then had weakened Oar's body. The idea here is that the more damage they deal to Oar, the less damage he can deal to them in return. Not to mention, if Oar has one less arm, it does limit the types of attack that Oar can throw and allows for more openings in damaging the rest of him. I think there is plenty of reasons to get rid of one of Oar's arms that doesn't equate to just one attack of many that Oar posseses.
 
Duedate8898 said:
Chopper isn't just calling out the weakness after witnessing Oar's using Luffy's moves but after trying to figure out the original cost of Oar's death.
Click to expand...
No, he was initially trying to figure out a "weakness" at all. The false arm just so happened to be that.

Duedate8898 said:
Oar's attacks are only half as effective with one arm
Click to expand...
Duedate8898 said:
The idea here is that the more damage they deal to Oar, the less damage he can deal to them in return. Not to mention, if Oar has one less arm, it does limit the types of attack that Oar can throw and allows for more openings in damaging the rest of him.
Click to expand...
They aren't. He one-shot Zoro with a knee and was wiping the floor with everyone even without the two-armed attacks. The point is, he'll continue nearly one-shotting them regardless. 2 reliable sources say "halve the power/offensive power". We're over this "it could mean his overall stats" nonsense because it could have been worded in a way that fits that.
What does figuring out how he died help with? Nobody there is going to give him frostbite. He figured out how he died after he'd assessed his weakness.

"One less arm and more body damage means he hits less hard." Still hard enough to one-shot Zoro without using stretching based attacks.
 
SnookB said:
No, he was initially trying to figure out a "weakness" at all. The false arm just so happened to be that.
Click to expand...
Direct quote from Chopper: "I was looking for the cause of Oar's death 500 years ago!"
SnookB said:
They aren't. He one-shot Zoro with a knee and was wiping the floor with everyone even without the two-armed attacks. The point is, he'll continue nearly one-shotting them regardless. 2 reliable sources say "halve the power/offensive power". We're over this "it could mean his overall stats" nonsense because it could have been worded in a way that fits that.
What does figuring out how he died help with? Nobody there is going to give him frostbite. He figured out how he died after he'd assessed his weakness.

"One less arm and more body damage means he hits less hard." Still hard enough to one-shot Zoro without using stretching based attacks.
Click to expand...
Don't see how him one-shotting Zoro with a knee, or ******** on all the Straw-Hats generally retracts from the idea of trying to weaken him in whatever way possible. Cause following you're logic, there is no point at all taking out his arm so why would Chopper mention it in the first place?

And in the case of the two reliable sources saying halve the power/offensive power, that doesn't make the statement any less broad. You're taking a broad statement and turning its meaning into something hyper-specific. Cause I can just as easily say what you're saying is nonsense because it would've been worded in a way that fits the idea that Chopper was specifying Gum-Gum Bazooka when he doesn't even name the technique when shouting to everyone else .

And figuring how how he died helps with figuring out potential ways to take him down now. Cause what Chopper extrapolated from figuring out how Oars died was that his arm wasn't his original arm so it was a weak-point on his new body.
 
KingTempest said:
How does a statement that says "the attack power will be halved" become broad
Click to expand...
When you have multiple means of attacking. Oars can throw punches, kicks, and his general weight around. Going with what Snook is arguing, only one of his attacks would be halved instead of all his attack power. Tell me how the statement, "the attack power will be halved" equates to only one attack.
 
Duedate8898 said:
When you have multiple means of attacking. Oars can throw punches, kicks, and his general weight around. Going with what Snook is arguing, only one of his attacks would be halved instead of all his attack power. Tell me how the statement, "the attack power will be halved" equates to only one attack.
Click to expand...
This is the issue.
You have a blatant statement and you're trying to yank unfounded and non-supported interpretations into it.

Why would he talk about kicks or general weight when he's removing his arm.
Does taking off your arm split your weight in half?
Does taking off your arm make your kicks half as strong?

Occam's Razor, the 2 techniques he used before this statement, the literal final move that Oars used before he was purified which faltered because he lacked an arm, and quite frankly common sense (no diss from that message) all point to
"Removing 1 arm when he has 2 arms means that his total strength that he can muster with his arms will be multiplied by 1/2, or halved, like the statement says"
 
GodlyCharmander said:
We don't, it's stupid.
Click to expand...
Let me go over your points against Pound Ho then.
GodlyCharmander said:
This is the easiest to address because it's quite literally just a naming for the attack, the closer it is to Zoro's current max strength, the higher the number is. It acts only as a support evidence, and it does not prove definitely that any limb multipliers are in place.
Click to expand...
True, it is supportive evidence for Chopper's direct statement. But "just a naming for the attack" is far from a good point, you can read the page we have for multipliers and nothing there says the statement can't come from the attack/amp/whatever name (and in this case the name isn't even the main proof it's the support evidence for a statement).
GodlyCharmander said:
Furthermore, the pound cannon value cannot be used to prove one multiplier but at the same time ignoring the fact that Post Timeskip Zoro's Pound Cannon is multiplied by a factor of 10. (Even less going by the additional evidence's logic). We don't consider the latter, thus, we cannot consider the former. It's either linear or not, there is no in-between. I believe I can safely say this evidence, even as a support, is not really useful for proving number of limbs are a factor in strength. Same can be said about the additional evidence which rely on the same logic.
Click to expand...
It can because we aren't talking about power levels here to begin with, the number itself he calls a 1 hand attack could be 1, 10, 18 or whatever, what matters is that it needs to be half of the 2 hands version (and 1/3 of the 3 hand... Wait, 3 limbs) cause the gap between them needs to be consistent and that's it, the sheer fact Zoro doesn't change the name as he gets stronger during pre TS already means to us that it shouldn't be used to argue "this Zoro is = this other Zoro" or "weaker than this other" or "10x that one" based on the amount of pounds itself
GodlyCharmander said:
There is no "It wouldn't work to measure strength linearly between the keys, but it can be measured linearly for individual limbs." That is the worst case of double standards I've seen in the last 24 hours.
Click to expand...
This has pretty much been addressed above, but really? How is that even a double standards? "You can't allow for an attack to be 2x stronger when used twice at the same time and then not allow for an attack with a different name to be 10x because of its name and that alone"
 
KillerH said:
If hands are straight, in terms of its total force yes it is correct. In terms of damage it is not exactly twice because it is done on 2 different spots.

If hands are not straight in the first place and focus at one point then 1 hand is not half of 2 hand whether it is total force done or damage. You can approximate it as twice but not exactly twice.
Click to expand...
Exactly
 
XDragnoir said:
Let me go over your points against Pound Ho then.

True, it is supportive evidence for Chopper's direct statement. But "just a naming for the attack" is far from a good point, you can read the page we have for multipliers and nothing there says the statement can't come from the attack/amp/whatever name (and in this case the name isn't even the main proof it's the support evidence for a statement).

It can because we aren't talking about power levels here to begin with, the number itself he calls a 1 hand attack could be 1, 10, 18 or whatever, what matters is that it needs to be half of the 2 hands version (and 1/3 of the 3 hand... Wait, 3 limbs) cause the gap between them needs to be consistent and that's it, the sheer fact Zoro doesn't change the name as he gets stronger during pre TS already means to us that it shouldn't be used to argue "this Zoro is = this other Zoro" or "weaker than this other" or "10x that one" based on the amount of pounds itself

This has pretty much been addressed above, but really? How is that even a double standards? "You can't allow for an attack to be 2x stronger when used twice at the same time and then not allow for an attack with a different name to be 10x because of its name and that alone"
Click to expand...

You cannot use linearity for one instance but ignore it for other instance. And it's the same god damn attack, it's just 10x greater in value.

"108 Pound Ho is 3x 36 Pound Ho, but 1080 Pound Ho is not 10x 108 Pound Ho",

Absolutely stupid. Also, no, my counter is perfectly usable. It's literally just a name for an attack.
"But the multiplier page-", shut up. The name of techniques are not sufficient proof for a multiplier, especially if the numbers of the technique doesn't represent the character strength. Hop off.
 
GodlyCharmander said:
You cannot use linearity for one instance but ignore it for other instance. And it's the same god damn attack, it's just 10x greater in value.

"108 Pound Ho is 3x 36 Pound Ho, but 1080 Pound Ho is not 10x 108 Pound Ho",

Absolutely stupid. Also, no, my counter is perfectly usable. It's literally just a name for an attack.
"But the multiplier page-", shut up. The name of techniques are not sufficient proof for a multiplier, especially if the numbers of the technique doesn't represent the character strength. Hop off.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's kinda like assuming Machvise and Bryndi World's multipliers in their attacks are genuine.

Still think Bazooka multiplier is valid tho
 
Using the name of the attacks alone as proof and/or as primary argument is very much a naming fallacy. Furthermore, I agree with Charmander’s assessment on the implications that has for 108 to 1080 as far as consistency goes. You can’t use their naming to support the multiplier but then disregard it when it’s inconvenient.

Just to clarify I’m speaking solely on the name of the attack, if there’s further context/a different argument for why it’s a multiplier then my statement wouldn’t really apply.
 
Arc7Kuroi said:
Using the name of the attacks alone as proof and/or as primary argument is very much a naming fallacy. Furthermore, I agree with Charmander’s assessment on the implications that has for 108 to 1080 as far as consistency goes. You can’t use their naming to support the multiplier but then disregard it when it’s inconvenient.
Click to expand...
This.

Otherwise we gotta assume the same for Machvise and World.
 
I don't think pound ho is a linear increase with zoro strengh, like zoro can get stronger and still use the 36 pound hou
Like 36>72>108 is linear relative to zoro effort in the technique so even If zoro gets stronger it can still follow this line
But about the 1080 pound hou just shows zoro power increase since the timeskip
So its not inconsistent, if zoro used a 36 pound hou and later used a 720 pound hou that just means he held back enough for it to be 10x weaker than his normal pound hou and 20x weaker than the attack he used
However since zoro dropped the 36>72>108 chain and only uses 360>720>1080 them there won't be any huge problem in scaling
 
Romeu08 said:
I don't think pound ho is a linear increase with zoro strengh, like zoro can get stronger and still use the 36 pound hou
Like 36>72>108 is linear relative to zoro effort in the technique so even If zoro gets stronger it can still follow this line
But about the 1080 pound hou just shows zoro power increase since the timeskip
So its not inconsistent, if zoro used a 36 pound hou and later used a 720 pound hou that just means he held back enough for it to be 10x weaker than his normal pound hou and 20x weaker than the attack he used
However since zoro dropped the 36>72>108 chain and only uses 360>720>1080 them there won't be any huge problem in scaling
Click to expand...
Do you not see the logical holes in this? By your very own admission, 36>72>108 can just denote the attacks being stronger but not being a quantifiable multiplier, just as you concede that 1080 doesn’t have to be a 10x difference to his 108.
 
Anyways should we tally votes at this point?
I'm fairly certain those who believe in the multipliers and those who don't won't change their opinions after 233 comments.
 
Arc7Kuroi said:
Do you not see the logical holes in this? By your very own admission, 36>72>108 can just denote the attacks being stronger but not being a quantifiable multiplier, just as you concede that 1080 doesn’t have to be a 10x difference to his 108.
Click to expand...
I just said that it is a multiplier tho?
I said that zoro getting stronger does not mean the ammount of pound hou increases
If zoro used 36 pound hou now instead of 360 it would mean that he is holding back in his strengh since his normal one now is is 360 pound hou
So its is a quantifiable multiplier since the start and end of the chain is consistently 3x and its supported by other things
Its just that he can keep using 360 pound hou even as his strengh increase and it would follow the normal pound hou chain quantifiably
 
Arc7Kuroi said:
, just as you concede that 1080 doesn’t have to be a 10x difference to his 108.
Click to expand...
I said that if currency zoro used a 36 pound hou It would be 10x weaker than his normal attacks
Like treat base zoro as 100
If he uses 36ph his attack will be 10 but If he uses 1080 his attack will be 300
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

KingTempest
  • Locked
One Piece: Further Gear 5th Ability Addition
2
Replies
68
Views
4K
KingTempest
KingTempest
That_moron2
Boa Hancock Downgrade
2 3
Replies
94
Views
4K
That_moron2
That_moron2
LordTracer
  • Locked
One Piece: Post-Timeskip Luffy Reformatting
Replies
7
Views
2K
LordTracer
LordTracer
Ryuga21
Zoro and Law curse resistance
Replies
5
Views
760
Duedate8898
Duedate8898
Eseseso
  • Locked
Pre-TS Base Luffy revision.
Replies
26
Views
2K
LordGriffin1000
LordGriffin1000
Back
Top