- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
- Messages
- 3,814
- Reaction score
- 437
You do realise diamond is a rock too?
@1 No proof that makes a difference.
@2 Look at Madara's Bijuu-sized Katon. By your logic the smaller Katon should've been overwhelmed.
@3 Putting them down as fodders is hardly relevant, and doesn't change what happened.
Now this is just irrelevant; the sword touched a small part of the body, it didn't take the whole torso's durability on by itself, and I'll say again that Kusanagi didn't scratch the surface. Where are you getting that the will make a sliver of difference? The difference between the Raikiri is that it pierced the chakra arms and Kusanagi didn't.
No proof that a corrosive effect adds to the durability.
@1 No proof that makes a difference.
@2 Look at Madara's Bijuu-sized Katon. By your logic the smaller Katon should've been overwhelmed.
@3 Putting them down as fodders is hardly relevant, and doesn't change what happened.
The Kyuubi's Corrosive Bodily Chakra, and Chakra Arms are a bit different. Orochimaru aimed at a moreso stronger point of the body, the chest area (I do believe). Your arms are more-likely to be decapitated rather than your torso, you can classify the parts into Ranks of durability if I may.
Now this is just irrelevant; the sword touched a small part of the body, it didn't take the whole torso's durability on by itself, and I'll say again that Kusanagi didn't scratch the surface. Where are you getting that the will make a sliver of difference? The difference between the Raikiri is that it pierced the chakra arms and Kusanagi didn't.
Plus, the fact that Orochimaru implied that Naruto within his enraged-state possessed a Corrosive (Harmful/Destructive) more-so probably added to the durability of the cloak. Thus, comparing the two can't be done.
No proof that a corrosive effect adds to the durability.