• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Giving Toneri a Second Chance (Obito Style)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Arc7Kuroi

Arc7Kuroi

16,993
22,811
Introduction
So, AKM made this thread way back when which ended up removing the 5-C+ Toneri moon split calc that everyone and their mother knows. I've never found the reasons all that compelling for removing it, and imo the arguments made at best fall under equal interpretation or appeals to ignorance. I'll explain why below, although whether this feat comes back or not is rather inconsequential as it holds no weight in the current scaling, I just wanted to do this for forever (and @Wrath_Of_Itachi and @AlexSoloVaAlFuturo will stop eating my ass about it).

Toneri Big Sword Cut
The main argument of the AKM thread is that, after the moon is cut we see later scenes in which the moon is a lot closer together than the actual showing of the feat portrays, and therefore the split separation from the actual showing of the feat is an outlier/inconsistent visual.

One supporting piece of evidence AKM uses is that the width of the Toneri sword is comparable to the split separation. Well that's cool and all but the moon isnt even fully split here yet. One might be tempted to point to this scan and say "but oh it is". It isn't. 1) the moon hasnt split apart yet in that scan, 2) the sword emits light (so when youre that far away from the blade you cannot actually see where the physical blade ends and it turns to just the light emitted from the sword, think of a bubble of light around a lit city at night), and 3) if we assume the blade is only ~Bijuu width you'd have to argue the moon is like the size of a small island (which I'm going to dismiss in a joking matter, because I don't think anyone is arguing the Naruto moon is like a mountain in size). So, this point is bunk, but lets look at the others.

The only other argument is just that the image of the actual feat is an outlier; however, there were some responses to the counter arguments. The counter argument that I believe held the most weight was the moon can be closer together in later scenes because the Tenseigan could have moved the pieces back together. Now the opposition from the AKM thread supporters was "prove it can do that" or "that's just an assumption", but let's break that down a bit. The issue is over the claim the Tenseigan did/didn't move the moon halves closer together. Claiming it did do that is indeed an assumption, just as claiming that it didn't do that is also an assumption. So, in a vacuum the it did or didn't move the halves back together are both assumptions. In this vacuum, we are dealing with a case of equal interpretation, since in this vacuum neither claim is better than the other. So, let's evaluate which claim has more support if any.

We know the Tenseigan can move the moon for starters. The biggest plot point of the movie is that the Tenseigan is moving the moon into earth. So, the Tenseigan can certainly move the moon, and from that it more than logically follows that the Tenseigan CAN move the moon back together. Now, I've heard in response to this "just because the Tenseigan can move the moon doesn't mean it can move the halves". That is entirely an argument from ignorance, the notion that because it isn't spoonfed to us that the Tenseigan can move two semispherical halves of the moon so it can't is the pinnacle of ignorance. We are told and shown the Tenseigan can move the moon, it can move the halves of the moon back. That shouldn't even be a surprise that an Otsutsuki derivative (derivative from Hamura) ability has weird powers that can move objects, we have a plethora of precedence for that in series, and obviously the Tenseigan has moved the moon in the movie itself. So, why was this point brushed aside? The opposing side claimed that this didn't prove that the Tenseigan actually moved the halves back together and therefore its an outlier. However, I object, we can make claims based on likelihoods and not just concrete, absolute certainty. That's what we do with most things in general in powerscaling. So, when looking at the situation and the two claims (the Tenseigan did/didn't move the halves back), you have two conclusions you can draw: 1) the Tenseigan likely moved the halves back together such that it could more easily slam the whole moon into the planet or 2) the Tenseigan likely didn't move the halves back together and the movie is just inconsistent.

I obviously support conclusion 1. Not only is it the only conclusion that follows that doesn't create a needless contradiction, there's no reason to discredit the assumption. Why would the animators draw key attention to a scene that has the entire intention of displaying Toneri's power if it's just wrong? You can't reconcile it without assuming the animators are just stupid and don't know how to properly portray what they are animating. I believe most people will see eye to eye with me on this, if this thread is any indicator of how we should treat sizes. The majority of staff agree that scenes in which "large sizes" (in this case the intentional depiction of Toneri's feat) are the focal point are better than scenes in which "smaller sizes objects" (in this case the peeps chatting) are the focal point.

Conclusion
The Toneri moon split (5-C+ one) should be re-added to the verse page because there is no reason to assume the intentional depiction of the feat is an outlier is an assumption that is superior to assuming the Tenseigan moved the halves back together. Curious to hear the thoughts of the masses.

Agree: Shadow, Mitch, M3X, KLOL, Clover, Tracer
Neutral: DDM (leaning agree), DT (doesnt agree or disagree or seem that interested in the actual thread), Lephyr (fine with the calc being likely/possibly), Griffon, KT (fine with possibly), Damage (fine with possibly)
Disagree: Deagonx
 
Last edited:
Arc trying talk no jutsu VSBW:

bee-movie-lawyer-tantrum.gif
 
I think adding it back is fine but I'll wait for more input. Though I think standard inconsistency of size when things of this magnitude happens is a given.
 
"Claiming it did do that is indeed an assumption, just as claiming that it didn't do that is also an assumption. So, in a vacuum the it did or didn't move the halves back together are both assumptions."

I like simple solutions. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence but also, correlation does not imply causation. Therefore, we do nothing. 🗿
 
(and @Wrath_Of_Itachi and @AlexSoloVaAlFuturo will stop eating my ass about it).
Click to expand...

Wrath.png


The main argument of the AKM thread is that, after the moon is cut we see later scenes in which the moon is a lot closer together than the actual showing of the feat portrays, and therefore the split separation from the actual showing of the feat is an outlier/inconsistent visual.
Click to expand...

If these scenes are intended to display the destruction of Toneri's attack, as in they're close up and focus on specifically the destruction raised, then that could call into question the validity of the previous scene. But if these are just fullscope, faraway shots of the moon itself that don't specifically focus on the destruction caused by Toneri's attack, then we should always default, or at the very least most of the time hold the scene which specifically focuses on the destruction, and such would have greater details about specificities like width, in higher regards as evidence when compared to multiple shots which don't focus on the destruction in particular, but rather just focuses on everything going on in that act.

The previous will always be more inline with what the creator wanted compared to the opposite.

One supporting piece of evidence AKM uses is that the width of the Toneri sword is comparable to the split separation. Well that's cool and all but the moon isnt even fully split here yet. One might be tempted to point to this scan and say "but oh it is". It isn't. 1) the moon hasnt split apart yet in that scan, 2) the sword emits light (so when youre that far away from the blade you cannot actually see where the physical blade ends and it turns to just the light emitted from the sword, think of a bubble of light around a lit city at night), and 3) if we assume the blade is only ~Bijuu width you'd have to argue the moon is like the size of a small island (which I'm going to dismiss in a joking matter, because I don't think anyone is arguing the Naruto moon is like a mountain in size). So, this point is bunk, but lets look at the others.
Click to expand...

I'm not entirely sure on what you mean by "the width of the Toneri sword is comparable to the split separation" in that scan, but yeah, during that specific scene the moon wasn't split, it's only when the blade travels back up and deactives, we visually see the moon split in half.

I'd personally say that when Toneri's blade reaches the top of the moon, he's split the moon in half, we just don't visually see a massive change during that split, it's only when Toneri deactives his blade that the moon starts having large visual changes of splitting going on. But it's also possible that when Toneri deactives his sword, that's when he's fully split the moon in half. It's basically up to interpretation tbh.

Small Country level moon split via some random Spacebattles calc > Island level moon.

The only other argument is just that the image of the actual feat is an outlier; however, there were some responses to the counter arguments. The counter argument that I believe held the most weight was the moon can be closer together in later scenes because the Tenseigan could have moved the pieces back together. Now the opposition from the AKM thread supporters was "prove it can do that" or "that's just an assumption", but let's break that down a bit. The issue is over the claim the Tenseigan did/didn't move the moon halves closer together. Claiming it did do that is indeed an assumption, just as claiming that it didn't do that is also an assumption. So, in a vacuum the it did or didn't move the halves back together are both assumptions. In this vacuum, we are dealing with a case of equal interpretation, since in this vacuum neither claim is better than the other. So, let's evaluate which claim has more support if any.
Click to expand...

If people argue that we should hold scenes which don't directly focus on the specifics of the destruction caused by an attack, such as the width of destruction caused, as more important than scenes which actually do focus on those specifics just because there's a difference in the amount of scans, just shows a level of dishonesty. The quality of information will always trump the quantity of information, if we have fives scans which are blurry as shit, don't focus on specifically the destruction, are faraway shots which are innately less detailed etc. And only one scan which is close up, specifically focuses on the destruction and is clear in detail, we absolutely should hold the scan that's of higher quality and specificity in a greater light compared to the plurality of dookie ass scans. That's no brainer.

Agree, both are assumptions since both are never expanded upon in the movie itself, we don't actually know, we can only make claims from possibilities, that's it.

We know the Tenseigan can move the moon for starters. The biggest plot point of the movie is that the Tenseigan is moving the moon into earth. So, the Tenseigan can certainly move the moon, and from that it more than logically follows that the Tenseigan CAN move the moon back together. Now, I've heard in response to this "just because the Tenseigan can move the moon doesn't mean it can move the halves". That is entirely an argument from ignorance, the notion that because it isn't spoonfed to us that the Tenseigan can move two semispherical halves of the moon so it can't is the pinnacle of ignorance. We are told and shown the Tenseigan can move the moon, it can move the halves of the moon back. That shouldn't even be a surprise that an Otsutsuki derivative (derivative from Hamura) ability has weird powers that can move objects, we have a plethora of precedence for that in series, and obviously the Tenseigan has moved the moon in the movie itself. So, why was this point brushed aside? The opposing side claimed that this didn't prove that the Tenseigan actually moved the halves back together and therefore its an outlier. However, I object, we can make claims based on likelihoods and not just concrete, absolute certainty. That's what we do with most things in general in powerscaling. So, when looking at the situation and the two claims (the Tenseigan did/didn't move the halves back), you have two conclusions you can draw: 1) the Tenseigan likely moved the halves back together such that it could more easily slam the whole moon into the planet or 2) the Tenseigan likely didn't move the halves back together and the movie is just inconsistent.
Click to expand...

Do... do people actually make the argument that "just because the Tenseigan can move the moon, it doesn't mean it can move the halves"?. I'm actually dumbfounded at the reasoning, unless we're directly told or heavily implied that the moon needs to be completely whole for the ability to work, we shouldn't assume it would. If the ability allows Toneri to move the moon, we assume it can move the moon, regardless of how fragmented said moon is. That's just making needless assumptions for the sake of downplaying the feat.

It doesn't even need to prove anything tbh, it just doesn't need to disprove the possibility of the Tenseigan being capable of manipulating the halves of the moon. If the possibility exists, and has evidence of being true, then we can deductively reason that Toneri moved, or has the capabilities of moving the halves together. If people disagree, then they're disagreeing with fundamental logical axioms like deductive and inductive reasoning.

I obviously support conclusion 1. Not only is it the only conclusion that follows that doesn't create a needless contradiction, there's no reason to discredit the assumption. Why would the animators draw key attention to a scene that has the entire intention of displaying Toneri's power if it's just wrong? You can't reconcile it without assuming the animators are just stupid and don't know how to properly portray what they are animating. I believe most people will see eye to eye with me on this, if this thread is any indicator of how we should treat sizes. The majority of staff agree that scenes in which "large sizes" (in this case the intentional depiction of Toneri's feat) are the focal point are better than scenes in which "smaller sizes objects" (in this case the peeps chatting) are the focal point.
Click to expand...

Agree, i'm in favor of conclusion 1, there's seemingly more evidence which supports the interpretation compared to the opposition in my opinion.

Also, i'm so tired of nerds on the internet acting like they're somehow more knowledgeable about the portrayals of these scenes than the animators themselves. It just isn't with Naruto in specific either, it's all of fiction. It's just how some people on this site, and people on other platforms act like they're more knowledgeable than the people animating/drawing the piece of fiction. News flash, you aren't. You're some nerd who debates about fictional characters to a bunch of teenagers and young adults, you're a goober, through and through.
 
Last edited:
I'll give this a detailed examination later tonight, but but to be up front right now I'm leaning towards disagreeing after a brief look.

I'll just say this for now:

You can't reconcile it without assuming the animators are just stupid and don't know how to properly portray what they are animating.
Click to expand...

There isn't a requirement to assume the animators are stupid, just that they aren't flawless. If animators and artists were perfect, then there would never be any artistic mistakes in any medium in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Damage3245 said:
There isn't a requirement to assume the animators are stupid, just that they aren't flawless. If animators and artists were perfect, then there would never be any artifistic mistakes in any medium in the first place.
Click to expand...
I vehemently disagree. We aren’t talking about a feat that was shown for a second. There was heavy emphasis put upon the scene, it lingered for a few seconds. It’s a pivotal scene, let’s not be dishonest and claim that all of it was a mistake.
 
@Arc7Kuroi Nobody is acting like the animators spilled ink over the frame and made a "mistake" in the sense that they had no idea what they were doing. Rather that the scene is inconsistent with everything else that was going on, and is an outlier. Heavy emphasis or not, if it is an outlier then it's outlier.

Nobody is being dishonest here. I think you honestly believe it to be valid just as I honestly think that it shouldn't be valid.

I've asked AKM for his input as the person who made the previous thread on it.
 
Damage3245 said:
if it is an outlier then it's outlier.
Click to expand...
A mighty “if” indeed and a rather black and white way to perceive the situation. That of which I don’t believe is a healthy mindset when trying to provide as much as an objective conclusion as possible.
 
Arc7Kuroi said:
A mighty “if” indeed and a rather black and white way to perceive the situation. That of which I don’t believe is a healthy mindset when trying to provide as much as an objective conclusion as possible.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I'll wait to see what AKM says, and I'll keep an open mind.
 
Since we talking about inconsistent sizes there was another thread about the same problem happening with One Piece which in comparison is much worse because the calc uses a bunch of scans to reach a size that is inconsistently portrayed tons of times. And this wouldnt even be an outlier, that Naruto already scales higher than what that calc gets anyways.
 
Suigetsuhyugs said:
Since we talking about inconsistent sizes there was another thread about the same problem happening with One Piece which in comparison is much worse because the calc uses a bunch of scans to reach a size that is inconsistently portrayed tons of times. And this wouldnt even be an outlier, that Naruto already scales higher than what that calc gets anyways.
Click to expand...
Dude, stop derailing this into One Piece.

I swear I've seen you do this exact same thing on another thread.

No more discussion about One Piece on this thread period, or I will delete the posts.
 
Arc7Kuroi said:
1) the Tenseigan likely moved the halves back together such that it could more easily slam the whole moon into the planet or 2) the Tenseigan likely didn't move the halves back together and the movie is just inconsistent.

I obviously support conclusion 1. Not only is it the only conclusion that follows that doesn't create a needless contradiction, there's no reason to discredit the assumption. Why would the animators draw key attention to a scene that has the entire intention of displaying Toneri's power if it's just wrong?
Click to expand...
I disagree with this reasoning, and thus, the thread at large. The scene wasn't really "wrong" in the sense that it still accomplished showing us what it was meant to show. The distance between the two halves was not the focal point of what they were trying to display, and at that scale it would be very challenging to meaningfully represent the split without exaggerating it just a bit. I feel that the "contradictory" scans take priority here, but even if they didn't, I would strongly prefer option 2. Coming up with headcanon to resolve an inconsistency that allows a feat to stay more powerful than it seems to be is not a good approach, IMO.

So, count me as a disagree here.

As an aside:

Arc7Kuroi said:
let’s not be dishonest and claim that all of it was a mistake.
Click to expand...

You come off very poorly here accusing someone of being dishonest just for coming to a different conclusion than you.
 
Deagonx said:
The distance between the two halves was not the focal point of what they were trying to display, and at that scale it would be very challenging to meaningfully represent the split without exaggerating it just a bit
Click to expand...
Considering we get a scene specifically of the moon moving apart I heavily disagree. If they just wanted to show the sword split they would’ve stopped the scene after the sword disappeared. But no they lingered on the scene specifically showing the separation after the split.
 
I never agreed with the feats removal to begin with, so I’m absolutely fine with continuing to use the feat

I always believed the shot in which the split actually happened was the one we should be using
 
Even if the Teseigan didnt make the halves get back together the moon at the end of the movie was whole again so if it was teseigan or just natural because of gravity the moon was getting back together again so the size inconsistence after the feat happened it's because the moon was going back to its place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TFO
Considering how fast the halves move apart from each other and then stop, it’s likely Toneri stops them (Because his plan, duh) but if they didn’t escape the GBE of the Moon, they’d logically be pulled back together over time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Deceived3596
  • Locked
Toneri's Magnum Sword
Replies
17
Views
1K
UchihaSlayer96
UchihaSlayer96
Nierre
  • Locked
"The Last" Hinata's AP (Downgrade) #3254616
2 3 4
Replies
132
Views
5K
Lonkitt
Lonkitt
Arc7Kuroi
  • Locked
Toneri's Moon Split The Last (time I do this)
Replies
21
Views
2K
Arc7Kuroi
Arc7Kuroi
AppleLord
Toneri Ootsutsuki AP Downgrade CRT
2
Replies
54
Views
3K
Stryker861
Stryker861
Her4cl3s14
5-B Naruto (Verse) Update
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
Tom4t0GG789
Tom4t0GG789
Back
Top