- 78
- 38
- Thread starter
- #121
Hmm, if it's the former, then it seems I'll have to drop the immortal demon point. If it's the latter, my point is proven.
You think we have any particular way to prove this other than semantic disputes?
-
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.
Mushuko Tensei High-Tier AP CTR
- Thread starter Godslayermeli
- Start date
You think we have any particular way to prove this other than semantic disputes?
Zabazab
Any/All- 6,925
- 10,283
Rudeus believes with certainty Badigadi will return from dust, and fears he could "fast-track" his regeneration by gathering up his remaining flesh instead of taking the lengthy process of restoring his whole body. Also, his destruction by the King Dragon Blade and by the Ringus Sea explosion are both described as "annihilation."
- 78
- 38
- Thread starter
- #123
I believe there still exists a distinction, being in the latter, his regeneration is stated to have halted. Furthermore, I do not take Rudeus to be a reliable speaker for immortal demon properties, as, he simply is not fully aware as to how they function.
