Sauron vs. Ganondorf (Twilight Princess)

Started by BloodRain21 pages
BloodRain Knight of Retribution

You say he leant back, which is a claim, something you have to prove. I mean, do we see him do this?

Ahh exactly, two different scenes. One using more power, one using far less. Only conclusion matches quotes, that Link got tougher.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by BloodRain
You say he leant back, which is a claim, something you have to prove. I mean, do we see him do this?

Ahh exactly, two different scenes. One using more power, one using far less. Only conclusion matches quotes, that Link got tougher.

No, that isn't the only conclusion. You have to prove his durability improved.

The Scenario Greater Sci-Fi combatant
Originally posted by quanchi112
That doesn't mean it adds to his durability. That's the point.

So you do accept that the Triforce of Courage gives Link powers?

Anyway, Ganon steps on Sauron.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by The Scenario
So you do accept that the Triforce of Courage gives Link powers?

Anyway, Ganon steps on Sauron.

It gives him courage.

Tk holds him and the mace kills him.

BloodRain Knight of Retribution

"You say he leant back, which is a claim, something you have to prove. I mean, do we see him do this?"

Yeah, no hiding this time Quan.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by BloodRain
"You say he leant back, which is a claim, something you have to prove. I mean, do we see him do this?"

Yeah, no hiding this time Quan.

I said it is a possibility but either way we don't know.

BloodRain Knight of Retribution

Which means you don't have anything to actually counter or say that he did not take the force.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by BloodRain
Which means you don't have anything to actually counter or say that he did not take the force.
Speculation either way.

BloodRain Knight of Retribution

There we go, finally. Assuming the scene is false for no reason is merely speculation.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by BloodRain
There we go, finally. Assuming the scene is false for no reason is merely speculation.
I didn't say that I just said it is speculation.

BloodRain Knight of Retribution

Yes, and you're always against speculating. So there's no reason for you to assume a made up reason in an attempt to discredit this feat.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by BloodRain
Yes, and you're always against speculating. So there's no reason for you to assume a made up reason in an attempt to discredit this feat.
It is speculation both ways.

BloodRain Knight of Retribution

Wait, your counter argument is simply admitting that any counter argument you have would be speculating?

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by BloodRain
Wait, your counter argument is simply admitting that any counter argument you have would be speculating?
All arguments are speculation.

BloodRain Knight of Retribution

Meaning you're either forfeiting or accepting you have no counter claims.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by BloodRain
Meaning you're either forfeiting or accepting you have no counter claims.
Neither side can definitively say.

BloodRain Knight of Retribution

Interesting. You're admitting you can't, while I'm citing visual facts.

So if you'd like, we can both note nothing of speculating. But then what are we left with when taking the scene at face value? This;

Link was downed by a mooks attack, then tanked the bossed attack.

The single, non-speculative, conclusion we can draw is that Link is the changing factor in some way. That he is definitely tougher.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by BloodRain
Interesting. You're admitting you can't, while I'm citing visual facts.

So if you'd like, we can both note nothing of speculating. But then what are we left with when taking the scene at face value? This;

Link was downed by a mooks attack, then tanked the bossed attack.

The single, non-speculative, conclusion we can draw is that Link is the changing factor in some way. That he is definitely tougher.

No, it is proof that it is a separate incident. If you claim his durability was amped prove it. Nothing is ever cited to prove this bogus claim of yours.

BloodRain Knight of Retribution

Hah, claim? What claim? All I'm doing is stating that both incedents happened, one after the other. And given that the most recent feats are important, this means a changed happened. I don't even need to 'guess' what made the change and the result still stands;

Link is durable enough to tank the bosses strikes.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by BloodRain
Hah, claim? What claim? All I'm doing is stating that both incedents happened, one after the other. And given that the most recent feats are important, this means a changed happened. I don't even need to 'guess' what made the change and the result still stands;

Link is durable enough to tank the bosses strikes.

One time he could tank the attacks one time he failed to without being ko'd. It all counts. You need to prove a durability amp.