- Joined
- Sep 3, 2007
- Messages
- 43,333
- Reaction score
- 22,332
- Gender
- Hidden
- Country
-
This is something I have been thinking for a while. Why exactly was ikkaku left behind when the royal guard came? Ikkaku is a bankai user and SS is in a desperate situation. More so, Nimaiya is intimately familiar with the zampakuto of all shinigami apparently. Ichigo did not even have an asauchi and NImaiya still knew perfectly well what was going on with him. It seems like a complete waste to leave behind a bankai user that could actually add to the battle given their current desperate situation.
More so, to add a little more context, isn't it weird that Ikkaku's bankai was so inherently fragile? When we first saw it Eduardo suggested that the inherent fragily behind it was due to the overwhelming power it was releasing. However under that logic ikkaku's bankai has the very distinct quality of being fragile, it is an inherent characteristic of it. That scenario has the implication that ikkaku's bankai would always invariably be a one time event as the end result would necessarily have to be it breaking after using it.
Now, does it add up? Does it make sense that ikkaku's bankai was meant to be used only once and then disappearing if we consider that broken bankai can't be fixed normally? I am thinking that there is something else going on here. I simply don't see how it makes sense for the royals to have left ikkaku behind when SS is so desperately looking for assets. It is entirely possible Nimaiya saw ikkaku's attitude towards his bankai and simply said, "well, this is a lost cause if I ever saw one" however does it make sense to not even test whether he deserves to get his bankai fixed?
So that gets us to the next point, what if his bankai does not need fixing? Nimaiya did not take ikkaku back because there wasn't a need to. Ikkaku's bankai might actually be inherently fragile and based on what we saw taking damage might actually make it stronger so perhaps if taking damage was such an intrinsically important part to it then it must mean there should be some mechanism that allows the bankai in question to be more than a one trick wonder. So perhaps ikkaku's bankai can actually revert to some form which would allow him to use it in battle. Perhaps it did come with an ability that would allow him to restart and fight normally, basically the second bankai in SS that can repair itself.
So the question would be, why did mayuri say the bankai was weaker than before and kon fixed it to whatever extent he could? Simple, ikkaku is not familiar with the capabilities of his bankai because he generally is too much of a moron to even ask his bankai. Ikkaku did not care about using his bankai, he would actually rather die than having people find out about it. So it makes perfect sense he never actually bothered to master it properly. Any thoughts?
More so, to add a little more context, isn't it weird that Ikkaku's bankai was so inherently fragile? When we first saw it Eduardo suggested that the inherent fragily behind it was due to the overwhelming power it was releasing. However under that logic ikkaku's bankai has the very distinct quality of being fragile, it is an inherent characteristic of it. That scenario has the implication that ikkaku's bankai would always invariably be a one time event as the end result would necessarily have to be it breaking after using it.
Now, does it add up? Does it make sense that ikkaku's bankai was meant to be used only once and then disappearing if we consider that broken bankai can't be fixed normally? I am thinking that there is something else going on here. I simply don't see how it makes sense for the royals to have left ikkaku behind when SS is so desperately looking for assets. It is entirely possible Nimaiya saw ikkaku's attitude towards his bankai and simply said, "well, this is a lost cause if I ever saw one" however does it make sense to not even test whether he deserves to get his bankai fixed?
So that gets us to the next point, what if his bankai does not need fixing? Nimaiya did not take ikkaku back because there wasn't a need to. Ikkaku's bankai might actually be inherently fragile and based on what we saw taking damage might actually make it stronger so perhaps if taking damage was such an intrinsically important part to it then it must mean there should be some mechanism that allows the bankai in question to be more than a one trick wonder. So perhaps ikkaku's bankai can actually revert to some form which would allow him to use it in battle. Perhaps it did come with an ability that would allow him to restart and fight normally, basically the second bankai in SS that can repair itself.
So the question would be, why did mayuri say the bankai was weaker than before and kon fixed it to whatever extent he could? Simple, ikkaku is not familiar with the capabilities of his bankai because he generally is too much of a moron to even ask his bankai. Ikkaku did not care about using his bankai, he would actually rather die than having people find out about it. So it makes perfect sense he never actually bothered to master it properly. Any thoughts?
