my top 20 list:
1.Gol D Roger
2.Edward Newgate
3.Monkey D Dragon
4.Shanks
5.Akainu Sakuzaki
6.Marshall D Teach
7.Kaido
8.Charlotte LinLin
9.Kizaru Borsalino
10.Aojiji Kuzan
11.Monkey D Garp
12.Sengoku
13.Donquixote Doflamingo
14.Dracule Mihawk
15.Silvers Rayleigh
16.Eneru
17.Ben Beckmann
18.Marco
19.Bartholomew Kuma
20.High tier vice admirals e.g. Onigumo,Momonga etc. (some may be admirals now)
honourable mentions:
Other Yonko first mates,Magellan,Luffy,Zoro,Vista,Ace,Jozu,other WB commanders,Law,Kidd,X-Drake,lil oars jr,Jimbei,Ivankov,Hancock,Crocodile,most BB pirates and probably lots of other new world pirates
my top 20^^
@Rinnemaki - You're the one who don't see my point. Who is stronger between a naked man with a sword, and an armored knight with both a sword and a shield? If the naked man challenges this knight to a duel, then the latter has to throw away everything except the sword for it to be a fair fight. He doesn't attack enemies with his armor, nor does he use his shield as a weapon, but that doesn't mean they're not there when he's fighting.
We have barely seen shanks fight, yet alone go all out. To assume his swordsmanship is his only strength is ridiculous. While mihawk is only known for his swordsmanship, shanks is recognized for his incredible haki, for which we havent even seen his full Strength in yet. Therefore shanks>mihawk
We've seen him fight 3 times. Twice against top tiers and once to save Luffy. Twice he has used a sword (with Haki imbued) and once he has used Haoshoku Haki. This proves that he is a swordsman due to his dependence upon his swordsmanship. And even if he can use other fighting styles they are weaker than his swordsmanship, which means he wouldn't even use them in the first place when fighting the likes of Mihawk and other top tiers. You clearly never comprehended my point. Haki is a part of swordsmanship, Mihawk also has incredible Haki based upon hype and the fact he taught Zoro to a similar extent that Rayleigh taught Luffy, meaning his knowledge and skill with Haki is also immense. To assume Shanks can use anything other than a Sword to top tier level is ridiculous.
Ps. Mihawk has one of the strongest swords in "Yoru" while shanks has some random sabre. Although the sword doesn't implicate strength I'm sure it factors in somewhere.
Just because we do not know the name of Shanks sword doesn't mean it's a normal sword. It could be one of the O'Wazomono's (same class and tier as Yoru). I never even consider Yoru anyways. A child carrying Yoru would still be weak, just like a top tier swordsman without a sword would still be very powerful.
1/2. Monkey D. Luffy and Gol D. Roger
3/4. Trafalgar Law and Edward Newgate
5/6. Eustass Kidd and Shiki
7. Monkey D. Dragon
8/9. Smoker and Monkey D. Garp
10. Silvers Rayleigh or Roronoa Zoro
Haki is not a fighting style, it's a supplement. If Shanks has no other fighting style that are better than his swordsmanship, he will be weaker than Mihawk. Therefore Mihawk>Shanks.
I think the difference between the two is about the same that the difference between Luffy and Zoro will be because Zoro has to surpass Mihawk and due to Roger not being alive anymore, the one waiting for Luffy is Shanks, he also got the hat from Roger and than passed it down to Luffy
I think that was a pretty good analogy, actually it wouldn't depend all that on the one with the sword because he had real ppl irl in mind where ppl are much more equal in skill and strength than in OP, and it works because Mihawk is the one with the sword and that is what he has, it's main trait, the one with the armor is Shanks but in a sword fight he renounces his other abilities to have a fair fight with Mihawk
I know there are some who insist on Shanks being a swordsman even though his greatest feat is Haki when he was with WB, yes he does use his sword but on the other hand the only thing WB used before he fought for real at MF is the exact same thing as Shanks ... his weapon and a fraction of his Haki, before WB went all out noone knew what he could do, it's the same with Shanks he has only used his sword because he never actually fought
he only ever blocked 1 strike from his opponent, and that is exactly the same thing we saw WB do before we saw him go all out, to block Shanks' strike he didn't use his DF or anything, it was JUST 1 strike so he simply blocked it with his weapon
and once we saw his powers for real it became clear his main trait isnt his weapon
with Shanks we have never come near the stage where WB was at MF
the thing most hyped about shanks is his Haki, ''the daily duels'' don't actually prove anything about him being a swordsman, he uses a sword yes but it's not his main weapon, Haki is, most likely
Mihawk might be the worlds best swordsman but that means noone is better as him at wielding a sword, if you gave a sword to Dragon, Mihawk would still dominate in the sword skill area but Dragon would overall still be stronger than him
and last but not least the goal for Zoro is Mihawk, the goal for Luffy is Shanks, it would only be logical for the character Zoro has to surpass to be a swordsman and in turn it would make no sense if the counterpart for Luffy was a swordsman
I'm really impressed to see someone spends so much time listing characters from strongest to weakest. It takes so much effort of thinking, analyzing, guessing, assuming. Also, you gotta consider their positions and how they achieved them.
why do in the ''all time list'' so many ppl put Dragon so low on the list, in the previous, most likely he is (power wise) the ''Garp'' of this generation and in the next generation the spot will be taken by Luffy, they have much different roles yes but they are grandfather->father->son I think it is completely logical to assume that he is about prime Garp's level and that Luffy just won't ever be all that stronger than him, he will surpass him yes but I don't think he will ever be much above prime Garp or Dragon
imo, in their prime the power difference between these ppl would be minimal: Gol D Roger, Gol D Ace, Monkey D Garp, Monkey D Dragon and Monkey D Luffy
I think that was a pretty good analogy, actually it wouldn't depend all that on the one with the sword because he had real ppl irl in mind where ppl are much more equal in skill and strength than in OP, and it works because Mihawk is the one with the sword and that is what he has, it's main trait, the one with the armor is Shanks but in a sword fight he renounces his other abilities to have a fair fight with Mihawk
It's not a good analogy since Mihawk also has Haki. And this analogy stems from the ignorance of Mihawk having Haki. Also going by this analogy it further supports my points later.
I know there are some who insist on Shanks being a swordsman even though his greatest feat is Haki when he was with WB, yes he does use his sword but on the other hand the only thing WB used before he fought for real at MF is the exact same thing as Shanks ... his weapon and a fraction of his Haki, before WB went all out noone knew what he could do, it's the same with Shanks he has only used his sword because he never actually fought
Shanks Haki feats aren't that great. He's just shown us how strong top tier Haki is. NOTHING more... Mihawk is within that tier and clearly has the same level of BH and KH. HH doesn't make a difference when somebody is of comparable strength.
Shanks is a swordsman. Check out his Jolly Roger:
You must be registered for see images
And him fighting top tiers with a sword (clearly his weapon of choice -> Strongest fighting style -> SWORDSMAN -> He can only challenge Mihawk with a sword, otherwise he's f*cked.)
You must be registered for see images
You must be registered for see images
he only ever blocked 1 strike from his opponent, and that is exactly the same thing we saw WB do before we saw him go all out, to block Shanks' strike he didn't use his DF or anything, it was JUST 1 strike so he simply blocked it with his weapon
The analogy as I already stated is wrong. But going by this statement it can also be used against what you just said, Whitebeard didn't use the Gura Gura no Mi in order to have a better "fight" with Shanks. So I fail to see how your statement is a pro Shanks statement in the first place.
and once we saw his powers for real it became clear his main trait isnt his weapon
with Shanks we have never come near the stage where WB was at MF
Same can be said for Mihawk. But you'll probably think I'm an idiot for saying that right? Well that's what I think when someone mentions the possibility of Shanks having other combat skills which surpass his swordsmanship. If you think so ; provide evidence. Without it your entire argument is irrelevant.
Because Shanks strongest combat techniques are swordsmanship techniques ; if he uses anything weaker he'd lose to Mihawk for certain , no debate, no argument, one sided battle.
the thing most hyped about shanks is his Haki, ''the daily duels'' don't actually prove anything about him being a swordsman, he uses a sword yes but it's not his main weapon, Haki is, most likely
I've never even bothered to refer to the duels Mihawk and Shanks had. And I'm pretty sure it was one singular duel, not multiple duels. Haki simply supplements everything. It supplements Luffys main weapon (appendages) or Zoros main weapon (Swords. Does this mean he isn't a swordsman anymore? )Because following your statements and using the same logic you demonstrate, he isn't. If you still think Zoro is a swordsman you might want to rethink your entire Haki argument. Especially as Haki is only one part of strength. Both Mihawk and Shanks have Haki, think of it like this:
1+1=2 right?
one of the "1"'s is Haki. The other 1 is other combat aspects. Haki is a part of someone strength. It does not give Shanks an edge.
And no. Haki itself is not a fighting style since it's in any fighting style.
Mihawk might be the worlds best swordsman but that means noone is better as him at wielding a sword, if you gave a sword to Dragon, Mihawk would still dominate in the sword skill area but Dragon would overall still be stronger than him
Not best... Strongest+Best+Greatest. Noone is better than Mihawk at wielding a sword. That means Shanks is inferior (as he wields a sword as his weapon of choice and as his primary/only combat style). Dragon doesn't have sword? And even Dragon being stronger than Mihawk or Shanks is debatable as we've seen very little of all three characters.
and last but not least the goal for Zoro is Mihawk, the goal for Luffy is Shanks, it would only be logical for the character Zoro has to surpass to be a swordsman and in turn it would make no sense if the counterpart for Luffy was a swordsman
The goal for Luffy is One Piece. Does Zoro have to surpass Shanks or Mihawk in order to get the title of "strongest person to use a sword"?(simply put ; Shanks is a person who uses a sword, Mihawks title implies his superiority)
It's not a good analogy since Mihawk also has Haki. And this analogy stems from the ignorance of Mihawk having Haki. Also going by this analogy it further supports my points later.
actually it is since Mihawk's main trait is swordsmanship but we don't know that about shanks, most assume he has other powers up his sleeve
Shanks Haki feats aren't that great. He's just shown us how strong top tier Haki is. NOTHING more... Mihawk is within that tier and clearly has the same level of BH and KH. HH doesn't make a difference when somebody is of comparable strength.
actually what he did with Haki was, by pre TS haki levels shown to us, quite extreme and was much more highlihted than him having a sword
And him fighting top tiers with a sword (clearly his weapon of choice -> Strongest fighting style -> SWORDSMAN -> He can only challenge Mihawk with a sword, otherwise he's f*cked.)
my point was that WB (before a real fight) only ever used his weapon ... the exact same thing Shanks has been doing ... noone here would argue that WB's main trait was his weapon so why would shanks using a sword twice be proof that he is primarily a swordsman
The analogy as I already stated is wrong. But going by this statement it can also be used against what you just said, Whitebeard didn't use the Gura Gura no Mi in order to have a better "fight" with Shanks. So I fail to see how your statement is a pro Shanks statement in the first place.
you only say it's wrong because you are convinced that swordsmanship is Shanks' main trait just because he used the sword twice, the argument against that I already wrote above ...
Same can be said for Mihawk. But you'll probably think I'm an idiot for saying that right? Well that's what I think when someone mentions the possibility of Shanks having other combat skills which surpass his swordsmanship. If you think so ; provide evidence. Without it your entire argument is irrelevant.
no Mihawk has been introduced from the start as the WSS it is clear that he is primarily a swordsman, just as it is clear with Zoro, but saying that Shanks is primarily a swordsman at this point would be just like saying that WB's main trait was his weapon because he used it against Shanks, because noone knew about the Gzra Gura at that point
also I gotta say the implied sarcasm in the bolded is actually more offensive to me than if you would have said I'm an idiot
Because Shanks strongest combat techniques are swordsmanship techniques ; if he uses anything weaker he'd lose to Mihawk for certain , no debate, no argument, one sided battle.
that is exactly the same as if I would have said back pre MF that WB's strongest attacks were with his weapon, if he uses anything weaker he'd lose to Mihawk for certain, no debate, no argumenr, one sided battle
I've never even bothered to refer to the duels Mihawk and Shanks had. And I'm pretty sure it was one singular duel, not multiple duels. Haki simply supplements everything. It supplements Luffys main weapon (appendages) or Zoros main weapon (Swords. Does this mean he isn't a swordsman anymore? )Because following your statements and using the same logic you demonstrate, he isn't. If you still think Zoro is a swordsman you might want to rethink your entire Haki argument. Especially as Haki is only one part of strength. Both Mihawk and Shanks have Haki, think of it like this:
1+1=2 right?
one of the "1"'s is Haki. The other 1 is other combat aspects. Haki is a part of someone strength. It does not give Shanks an edge.
it doesn't? it looks more and more every day that strong haki>strong DF, the strength of haki does matter and how much do you wanna bet that HH wont just end up feinting pointless fodder because that would be useless and not worthy of the reaction at MF, Shanks hurt matter with his haki and THAT was pre TS where the haki levels were much weaker than now (not because they were actually weaker in power but because of the Haki incosistency in the time of pre TS to post TS)
And no. Haki itself is not a fighting style since it's in any fighting style.
Shanks' biggest hype isn't about his swords armament haki but about his King's Haki, we hav no idea yet what id really does but I think it is a separate thing from swordsmanship
Not best... Strongest+Best+Greatest. Noone is better than Mihawk at wielding a sword. That means Shanks is inferior (as he wields a sword as his weapon of choice and as his primary/only combat style). Dragon doesn't have sword? And even Dragon being stronger than Mihawk or Shanks is debatable as we've seen very little of all three characters.
most ppl agree Dragon is stonger so let's assume he is, just because someone has a sword does not mean they can't defeat a superior swordsman because NOTHING has EVER defined Shanks as primarily only a swordsman since sword is neither his greatest feat nor his greatest hype ... HH is!
The goal for Luffy is One Piece. Does Zoro have to surpass Shanks or Mihawk in order to get the title of "strongest person to use a sword"?(simply put ; Shanks is a person who uses a sword, Mihawks title implies his superiority)
you still fail to see that just because someone has a sword it doesn't mean they are primarily only a swrordsman, that at this point is just ridiculous
WB had a weapon too snd I am prepared to bet he wasn't the best in the world at wielding it but he can still be stronger than someone else who is superior than him at wielding a weapon (I am pretty sure as far as weapon skills go Vista would outmatch him ... is Vista stronger? ... NO)
why do in the ''all time list'' so many ppl put Dragon so low on the list, in the previous, most likely he is (power wise) the ''Garp'' of this generation and in the next generation the spot will be taken by Luffy, they have much different roles yes but they are grandfather->father->son I think it is completely logical to assume that he is about prime Garp's level and that Luffy just won't ever be all that stronger than him, he will surpass him yes but I don't think he will ever be much above prime Garp or Dragon
imo, in their prime the power difference between these ppl would be minimal: Gol D Roger, Gol D Ace, Monkey D Garp, Monkey D Dragon and Monkey D Luffy
He was weaker than old and sick Whitebeard. If Dragon really was as strong or stronger than prime Garp, then that means old and sick WB is stronger than prime Garp, which doesn't sound good at all. So yeah, Luffy will be good deal stronger than his family.
The power difference between these people would probably be minimal with the latter generation being stronger: Luffy, Ace, Roger/WB.
