[Question] Does this confirm
- Thread starter SMX
- Start date
Don't know if being serious. If that confirms Ace had haki, it'll also confirm Ace defeated BB and Ace had a bottle of rum :sdo:
Ace should have had haki tho, second ship commander and a new world veteran. It's just that haki wasn't a fully developed concept when Ace was alive. Ace vs Smoker shouldn't have played out that way if Ace had haki, and then when BB grabbed/hit Ace on Banero Island, he wouldn't have said something like "it's been long since someone hit Ace".
Ace should have had haki tho, second ship commander and a new world veteran. It's just that haki wasn't a fully developed concept when Ace was alive. Ace vs Smoker shouldn't have played out that way if Ace had haki, and then when BB grabbed/hit Ace on Banero Island, he wouldn't have said something like "it's been long since someone hit Ace".
Rikudou Tobi
Active member
This pretty much covered it but I do like the collectibles though. I'm sure Ace got hit by Jinbei and maybe other logias but the Haki concept wasn't clarified as much as it is now.
I'm almost certain that the novel will give him buso haki
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
Rikudou Tobi
Active member
Well he's been a logia for the longest time even when he entered the new world, so he could not have buso haki but just extreme control over his devil fruit to bypass buso haki attacks (depending on the level) and decent cqc skills when devil fruit powers are ineffective.
Crocodile was that way and Moriah back in the day was like that too. Even Doffy relied more on his extensive control over his devil fruit more than he did haki, so it's not impossible for Ace.
chopstickchakra
Active member
He did have Conq haki and buy all reason he should have it and a lack of showing isn't evidence he didn't have it.
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
When it comes to discussing manga, lack of feats displaying an ability does mean that you didn't have it until you're shown having it.
chopstickchakra
Active member
Not necessarily when there are implications within the manga that a character of that caliber should have it, there's conflicting indications so neither can truly be used as proof for their case.
On a side note, why does Ace's hand look so webbed in that figure?
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
By this logic, I can go around saying Luffy has Shigan because he uses Geppou and Soru and its within his caliber.
Until a character shows that they can use an ability, they can't use it.
Uzumaki Macho
Active member
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
X Drake has displayed Haki, try again.
Yup. If they ain't shown it, I'm not attributing it to them. It's likely he does, just like Kaido is likely to, but without feats, can't use in battles or say "Yeah, he 100% has it." Pretty simple.
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
Yeah, considering that Oda told his editor during Kuma's first appearance "This guy will separate the Strawhats" and it came to fruition 8 years later, it's highly unlikely he didn't know Haki was going to be the thing that would counter one of the earliest powers ever displayed, especially since Haki was shown all the way back in Skypeia and even the first chapter. It was dropped by name in the original Japanese text when Teach commented on Luffy's bounty, and talked about during the Water 7 Saga when Shanks used Haoshoku on WB's ship.
Ace had multiple cases where using Busoshoku Haki was needed, and he didn't. Compared to him having zero instances of Buso, and there being viable explanation to how he'd survive in the NW without it, there's more case that he didn't use Buso than the case that he did.
Last edited:
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
Be that as it may, we've still seen Ace fight two Logias, and NOT use any Haki despite needing to. The argument that Oda didn't have Haki fleshed out and that's why Ace has no feats with it don't hold up.
Rikudou Tobi
Active member
Tbh he wouldn't be killed by akainu if he did. And being a yonkou commander with a 550 million bounty, really makes me doubt it too.
chopstickchakra
Active member
You understand proof right? Yes you can say that and use those as a reason as to why you think that but their not proof which is the same thing I've said the whole time about Ace's haki I'm not claiming it as proof he had it but using reasons as to why he should be recognized with it. Luffy didn't show G4 during FI does that mean he couldn't use it then? Lack of showing isn't proof of lacking, it's just a reason to assume it's lacking. Ace's non use is a good reason to assume he didn't have it but it's not proof that he didn't.