Can the Master Sword cut through Sauron's ring ?

Started by quanchi11221 pages

Originally posted by God Cloth Seiya
Nice cover up.
People on here know and have spoken to the both of us. 🙂

Yeah I know a couple poeple on this forum, and?

So guy222 why are so willing to make spite threads to kill Zelda.

Originally posted by God Cloth Seiya
Yeah I know a couple poeple on this forum, and?

So guy222 why are so willing to make spite threads to kill Zelda.

Continue to make these silly claims for all I care. I am glad you agree the master Sword fails here.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Only canon to the books not the films. That is the point. 🙂 They are different.
Your 'we dont know' was addressed to film Albus.

So yeah, many ways to destroy a Horcrux.

Originally posted by BloodRain
Your 'we dont know' was addressed to film Albus.

So yeah, many ways to destroy a Horcrux.

Her word isn't confirmation for the movies so I win. You're just very biased.

Fiendfyre never destroyed one in the movies and they have greater resistance feats than Ms.

Herping a derp? In reation to her word on the films, you just said 'we don't know'. Which, tbh, is all I need.

Magic + physical destruction, yeah. Lets see.. if something as simple as a death curse can, and strong flames can, and a strong poisonous fang can.. a strong magical sword will be marvellous.

Originally posted by BloodRain
Herping a derp? In reation to her word on the films, you just said 'we don't know'. Which, tbh, is all I need.

Magic + physical destruction, yeah. Lets see.. if something as simple as a death curse can, and strong flames can, and a strong poisonous fang can.. a strong magical sword will be marvellous.

The fact we don't know proves her word isn't law for the films. That is all I need. 😉

Flames never destroyed one in the films. Avada Kedavra destroyed one in the flesh not the same as in an artifact.

Sword wins?

Originally posted by God Cloth Seiya
Sword wins?
No, it definitely loses. The sword failed to destroy the Executioner's sword.

Originally posted by quanchi112
No, it definitely loses. The sword failed to destroy the Executioner's sword.

Originally posted by God Cloth Seiya
Clean up your image.

Originally posted by quanchi112
The fact we don't know proves her word isn't law for the films. That is all I need. 😉

Flames never destroyed one in the films. Avada Kedavra destroyed one in the flesh not the same as in an artifact.

Copying my lines? Flattering. In relation to her word on the films, you just said 'we don't know'. Cant keep ignoring your words here.

Magic + physical destruction, yeah that covers it.

Originally posted by BloodRain
Copying my lines? Flattering. In relation to her word on the films, you just said 'we don't know'. Cant keep ignoring your words here.

Magic + physical destruction, yeah that covers it.

You said her word is law. By saying I don't know I proved it isn't with regards to the films.

Fang destroyed it whereas the flames interacted with the soul escaping just like the waves of water interacted as well earlier in the film. In both cases the Horcruxes were already destroyed, sport.

Again, I asked about her word in relation to the films. You said its uncertain.

No, flames destroyed it.

Originally posted by BloodRain
Again, I asked about her word in relation to the films. You said its uncertain.

No, flames destroyed it.

No, the fang destroyed it. The soul reacted to the fire just like it reacted to the water after the fang destroyed that one as well.

You clearly don't grasp the films. Her word is only law to the books. The movies are entirely different on many different aspects.

I asked a very simple question, one which you replied to. Why are you trying to go back on your word and cover it op with tangents?

Alas it seems the methods to destroying a Horcrux has been stated; You must destroy it on a level where HP magic cannot repair it. E.g the Fiendfyre, AK and Basilisk venom.

Originally posted by BloodRain
I asked a very simple question, one which you replied to. Why are you trying to go back on your word and cover it op with tangents?

Alas it seems the methods to destroying a Horcrux has been stated; You must destroy it on a level where HP magic cannot repair it. E.g the Fiendfyre, AK and Basilisk venom.

I am not going back on my word. You aren't making any sense.

Fiendfyre never destroyed one in the film. The fang already destroyed it. Restating something when I've already explained and backed my reasoning isn't debating. That is your problem with most of the video game debaters. You are t objective you try to argue against something you're ignorant on which is the definition of bias.

..Okay. I asked you about her stating that Albus is gay, and what that means for the film. You replied that we cant say either way.

Still a fact. And again, we have confirmation about how they're destroyed.

Urm, moan more I guess? /shrugs/

Originally posted by BloodRain
..Okay. I asked you about her stating that Albus is gay, and what that means for the film. You replied that we cant say either way.

Still a fact. And again, we have confirmation about how they're destroyed.

Urm, moan more I guess? /shrugs/

Which applies to the books in both. The scenes for the movies were different. Fiendfyre never destroyed one in the films the fang did in the same manner in which it was destroyed earlier with the soul interacting with the water afterwards.

Going by your reasoning the water assisted. 😂

Oh, so theres something to contest this? I mean, we already have the venom and AK to back it up.

Not sure what your water has to do with this..