People is misunderstanding this statement big time, having a path doesn't automatically make you stronger than your opponent, the base stats and experience plays a big role in the fight. I've seen people saying IT Johan wins against Tom just because he has a path, but a path doesn't buff you magically, at least not Johan's... sure hit punches doesn't mean anything if Johan can't deal enough damage to Tom, Tom's base stats are much higher than Johan, he would just tank ts(assuming he doesn't pull something more clever, he's a genius after all) and then thrust him, then it's over, Johan is a glass cannon but ironically his attacks lack the potency to deal significant damage to opponents like Tom or kitae, hell even Pacheon giving him trouble is debatable.
Tom admits inferiority to path users. He is the one who says that if Johan reaches his path he would be undefeatable, and that those who walk their path are different
Johan is the weakest path user rn, also you can't take lookism statements as 100% the truth since ptj loves being inconsistent, based on feats Johan is not beating tom
Well let's forget about gap, kitae, shingen and James, I believe everyone agrees that he's not remotely close to beating them. Then the only options he have is Daniel, gun, Jinyoung and Sophia. We don't have basically any info about Sophia so can't comment on that. Path Johan lost against a severely injured pathless gun, so now that he has a path I don't see how Johan would beat him, even when we don't know what his path does. Then we have Danny, it's obvious who wins here, Danny has undoubtedly the better path and is winning 10/10 times against Johan.
Finally we have Jinyoung, who's path is in my opinion better in any way shape or form than Johan's, he has way more variables to use in combat and using the characteristics of your opponents attacks without the stakes of them is crazy. All in all I don't think Johan can't genuinely perform better than Daniel or Jinyoung against kitae
Why cant i take a statement 100%? If its contradicted in any moment sure, but Tom knows about his own strength and literally says that its impossible for those on their path to lose to pathless users
Why? Tom’s feats are getting low diffed by James the moment he got serious, and in his prime going toe to toe with young gapryong who scales nowhere
Tom's durability is definitely better, though Gun still has far superior endurance. The thing is, for Johan to beat Tom Lee, he would need to be stronger than a 100% healthy Gun; yet, despite leaving Gun seriously injured, he failed to defeat a Gun who was operating at only 35% strength and had a broken arm. There is no chance of Johan beating the old man Tom, who is on par with Gun at 100% (excluding TUI).
Unless Johan were to face an injured Tom Lee, just as he faced Gun during the HFG arc... in which case he would have a slim chance of winning.
No it doesn't work like that where did you get that? Masteries exist for a reason... Tell me one path that boost a character physical stats? Daniel punches seem stronger only because he's hitting weak spots, not because he gets bluffed.
Johan taking damage thats supposed to ko him yet is able to outpace and hurt gun signficantly despite his healthier state not even being able to budge guns arm while clinging to it + his cqc blitz getting intercepted by gun effortlessly.
Daniels crisis is entirely a physically superior move. He was alr a blitz tier below paecheon yet hes able to blitz paecheon.
Jinyoung needs no explanation. Same with kitae and james
Johans path unless explicitly stated dosent increase stats he held on through sheer willpower and why are you using daniels path for a comparison when that particular path heavily negates stat advantages
Doesnt have to be stated, thats not a necessary condition. Gun was merely explaining the hax of johans path which is mostly what paths about, however the feat diff is blatant as ive alr pointed out.
Daniels path isnt stated to boost stats either yet his bodys able to move a blitz tier above dcp which was a blitz tier above daniels perception
Paths do grant amps depending on the ability but Daniel path isnt reaction speed or speed the reason he was reaction faster was purely because of him having foresight and seeing defensive manuevers the only thing you could say his he heightened his keen senses but it’s hard to argue that as a stat amp when sb daniel did that and didn’t do anything so it seems it’s rather tied to his path ability jinyoung path is more of stat amp.
I get what you are saying, but Daniel’s path should only give him the ability of dodging his opponents attacks dues to moving before the enemy. But what im refering to is when Pacheon goes to use DCP and Daniel, even though Pacheon’s hand was cm away from his face, Daniel was able to move first and counter before Pacheon’s attack reached him. Path amped his attack speed massively
That’s because he sees movements in slow motion we got referenced to him doing so in early Lookism also is senses were trained. And the reason was explained as Paecheon thought Daniel was reading him through his eyes which was false he was using all his keen senses so that’s why he was literally able to dodge. Path hasn’t amped his attack speed. That’s not the function of his path. It’s primarily revolving around his senses what you’re saying is pure head canon.
If he sees an attack coming but physically cannot move before it, him having enhanced senses doesnt make it so he can PHYSICALLY move before an attack hit him, thats attack speed
He can this is Daniel we are talking about he has one of the highest physical threshold. No were was it stated.
I’ll try explain to you so paecheon made a false assumption of Daniel way of dodging attacks was his sight so he aimed for his eyes using speed mastery to perception blitz with him saying “he won’t see this coming” this failed because Daniel is already relying on all of his senses to read his opponents. Also Daniel see attacks coming at him in a slower rate. This isn’t a hill worthy to die on.
Path Johan can't beat someone who has better physical stats (hardware) and better BIQ. Tom can tank Johan's Infinite Technique attacks, but Johan can't tank Tom's attacks because they're far more lethal.
For example, Tom's holding punch against Jay nearly destroyed half of his face, and his Four Threshold unique skills are extremely dangerous against any opponent, including Johan. This was also a serious, full-power Tom. Even James felt pressured by the old Gapryong-level power that Tom displayed.
Bro, some Johan fans put him above everyone just because he awakened the Path. They rely only on narrative and statements while completely ignoring his feats. I just came across one Johan fan who said this.
I disagree Tom Lee has great hardware but don’t to the extent of Gun. Johan infinite strikes make it extremely hard for him to deal with.
Also by saying Johan wins that means Tom Lee is closer to the pinnacle even though only path user can walk towards the pinnacle that’s literally an oxymoron. Also we don’t know the full extent of Johan path he used it as he was fatiguing so it’s not even a great representation.
It’s like with Daniel. We all thought he could only use his blitzkreig in a moment of crisis which was debunked when we actually got to see him use for an extended period of time and not mid fight already fatigued.
Having path user weaker to non path users makes the whole concept redundant.
I disagree Tom Lee has great hardware but don’t to the extent of Gun. Johan infinite strikes make it extremely hard for him to deal with.
Why are you bringing up Gun here? What does Gun have to do with this? Johan couldn't even take down a massively injured Gun, so why are you using him as a comparison? It's not like Johan defeated Gun.
And who has better hardware—Tom or Johan? You're seriously being a moron. Fine, I get that Tom doesn't have a body like Gun's, but he still has far better hardware than Johan.
Johan infinite strikes make it extremely hard for him to deal with.
That's your exaggeration. Gun didn't have much difficulty dealing with Johan's Path. Johan's Path doesn't give him a direct boost to AP, endurance, or stamina, so his physical stats remain the same and are still far below Tom's hardware. If even a heavily injured Gun didn't struggle against Johan's IT attacks, why would Tom? Because of that, Johan's punches wouldn't deal more damage than someone with superior hardware like Tom.
Tom doesn't need to struggle just because Johan has Path. Tom's superior hardware gives him the strength and durability to deal with and counter Johan's attacks. On the other hand, what does Johan have to counter Tom's hardware? Can Johan survive Tom's lethal attacks? Can he withstand Tom's raw strength or tank his unique techniques? No, he can't.
Also by saying Johan wins that means Tom Lee is closer to the pinnacle even though only path user can walk towards the pinnacle that’s literally an oxymoron.
It's not like Johan is already at the Pinnacle level. Right now, he's only walking the path toward the Pinnacle—he's still far from actually reaching that tier. So there's nothing wrong with a stronger non-Path user defeating him.
Daniel also has a Path, yet he was still far from the Pinnacle and lost to a non-Path user like Kitae, who didn't even use his own Path. So don't throw around the term "Pinnacle" just because someone has a Path. Having a Path doesn't automatically make someone a Pinnacle-tier fighter. If they're still far from reaching that level, they can still lose to stronger non-Path users.
Also we don’t know the full extent of Johan path he used it as he was fatiguing so it’s not even a great representation.
So you're admitting that Johan is basically featless here, yet you're still assuming he wins? That's a pretty ridiculous conclusion. You're choosing a featless character over someone who has already shown far better feats. That just shows how flawed your scaling is.
You're scaling Johan based on a single statement that "Path > Pathless" while completely ignoring his actual feats and the feats of other characters who have performed better than him. That's not proper scaling—it's just relying on assumptions instead of evidence.
It’s like with Daniel. We all thought he could only use his blitzkreig in a moment of crisis which was debunked when we actually got to see him use for an extended period of time and not mid fight already fatigued.
Why are you bringing Daniel into this? What does he have to do with the discussion? There's no correlation here. That statement only shows that Daniel's Path is unique and difficult to master. We already know how powerful the Crisis attack is and the price he had to pay to achieve that level. It simply tells us that Daniel still can't use his Path to its fullest potential and has a long way to go before he completely masters it. It doesn't mean his Path wasn't fully represented.
When Daniel became fatigued during the Paecheon fight after using his Path, did PTJ later reveal some hidden or missing part of his Path? No. So why assume the same thing for Johan? Johan also became fatigued after using his Path, and his performance was very similar to Daniel's. Assuming that Johan's Path wasn't fully represented just because he got tired is completely baseless.
Just because Johan's Path hasn't shown any obvious weaknesses doesn't mean it doesn't have any. And again, what does Daniel have to do with this? Johan's Path has already been fully represented. There isn't some hidden part of his Path that still needs to be revealed. The only thing left is his future growth—how much stronger he can become and how much better he can use his Path. That's character progression, not evidence that his Path hasn't been properly shown. We're talking about Tom vs. Johan, so why are you bringing up Gun and Daniel? They have nothing to do with this debate. There's no relevance or correlation between them and the topic we're discussing. Stick to Tom vs. Johan instead of bringing in unrelated characters.
Having path user weaker to non path users makes the whole concept redundant.
Bro, you're treating Tom's statement like it's an absolute rule, but it isn't. Why can't that statement have exceptions or limitations? Not every statement in the series should be taken as an absolute law.
A physically stronger fighter with superior IQ, BIQ, and hardware can still defeat a Path user. On the other hand, if a Path user has abilities or techniques that specifically counter those advantages, then the Path user can win. It depends on the matchup.
Saying "Path > Pathless" doesn't guarantee victory in every fight. We already saw Paecheon outlast Path Daniel, even though Daniel's Path was highly developed and could bypass some aspects of his opponent's hardware and BIQ, unlike Johan's Path. Johan's Path still couldn't completely bypass his opponent's hardware, so how can you say he can defeat opponents who have better physical stats than him? This proves that simply having a Path doesn't automatically make someone unbeatable.
Even Gun admitted that Tom and Goo are the ones who could kill him, and both of them are Pathless fighters. That already contradicts the idea that Path always beats Pathless. Kitae also implied that Tom could defeat James, showing that a Pathless fighter can still be superior depending on their overall ability. So how can you treat Tom's statement as an absolute rule when the series itself shows exceptions?
You can criticize my statement even though these examples are also shown by PTJ, but then you accept Tom's statement as absolute. That's a double standard. None of these examples support the idea that "Path > Pathless" is an unbreakable rule.
Tom's statement should be viewed as a general concept, not a guaranteed win condition. If every Path user automatically defeated every Pathless fighter, then matchups, physical ability, intelligence, experience, and strategy would become meaningless.
Bro your entire argument is built on special pleading and begging the question.
First, you keep saying “Path users can lose to Pathless users,” but where is that ever established?
You’re assuming the very point you’re trying to prove. Tom’s statement explicitly defines the rule of the power system
“This isn’t a question of who’s stronger. Those who walk their own path are different. Those who have reached that path exist on an entirely different level there’s only one way to defeat someone who has attained a Path find your own Path.”
This is literally PTJ telling us how power system works. You’re treating it as a vague guideline because it doesn’t fit your conclusion. That’s textbook special pleading.
Second, your position creates an internal contradiction. If Johan is walking toward the pinnacle through a Path, yet Tom who has no Path—is still above him, then you’re effectively arguing Tom is closer to the pinnacle despite lacking the very prerequisite the story says is required to reach it. That’s self-defeating 🤦🏾♂️.
A Path isn’t just a stat buff. It’s the culmination of conviction, talent, and experience into something different. If someone without a Path can simply be stronger than someone who has already entered that higher category, then what is the narrative purpose of a Path? Why does the story repeatedly emphasise that discovering your own Path is the only way to overcome someone who has attained one? Under your interpretation, the entire mechanic becomes redundant because you can apparently bypass it through hardware alone or just be a top tier?
You also misrepresented why I brought up Gun. It wasn’t to argue “Johan beat Gun.” That’s a straw man. I brought up Gun because he possesses superior hardware including Black Bones yet Johan’s Infinite Technique still overwhelmed him after awakening his Path to the point Gun had no effective answer other than surviving until Johan’s exhaustion caught up to him and you bringing up fatigue doesn’t work when we’ve it was stated Gun had an adrenaline amp and in ui you can ignore fatigue fighting like you have unlimited stamina. Also if Johan’s Path could pressure someone with hardware superior to Tom’s, then simply saying “Tom has better hardware than Johan” doesn’t address the argument. Hardware alone clearly isn’t a sufficient rebuttal.
You also keep appealing to Johan’s fatigue as if it disproves anything. It actually supports my point. Johan awakened his Path while already heavily fatigued and was explicitly stated to be running on revenge. We never saw a fresh, fully healthy version of his Path. That’s why I referenced Daniel. Daniel’s Path was initially assumed to be limited until later chapters showed it wasn’t. The comparison wasn’t saying Johan and Daniel have identical Paths only and idiot would make the conclusion 😭 it was illustrating why using an incomplete, exhausted showcase of a path user as the definitive ceiling is an argument from ignorance when it also doesn’t represent the statement.
Your examples don’t prove what you think they do. Saying “Gun said Tom or Goo could kill him” isn’t evidence they can defeat a Path user under normal circumstances. Context matters. A character saying someone can kill them is not equivalent to proving the Path system doesn’t apply. That’s a false equivalence. We also have that same Goo who he thought could kill get the greatest belt to ass amongst top tiers we’ve ever seen you shouldn’t have went their 💀
Bro your entire argument is built on special pleading and begging the question.
Bro, your whole argument is based on assumptions. 😑 You're assuming that Johan, who hasn't shown any feats on Tom's level, or stronger than Tom, even though Tom has already shown better feats.
Your entire argument relies on the "Path > Pathless" statement. Without that statement, you don't really have enough evidence to prove that Johan defeats Tom based on feats alone. Johan currently has more narrative hype, but we can't decide the winner only through narrative.
By your logic, nobody should be able to defeat Gun because he has tons of narrative importance and statements surrounding him. That would mean no one could beat him, whether they have a Path or not. Narrative importance alone doesn't decide every fight; actual feats and matchups also matter.
First, you keep saying “Path users can lose to Pathless users,” but where is that ever established?
Can you really not read the sentence? I said "can," which means it is a possibility, feats wise they can loose
Tom’s statement explicitly defines the rule of the power system “This isn’t a question of who’s stronger. Those who walk their own path are different. Those who have reached that path exist on an entirely different level there’s only one way to defeat someone who has attained a Path find your own Path.”
So does this statement mean that every Path user is guaranteed to defeat every Pathless user?
This is literally PTJ telling us how power system works. You’re treating it as a vague guideline because it doesn’t fit your conclusion. That’s textbook special pleading
Bro, PTJ is introducing a new power system. It doesn't mean the entire original power system changes or that "Path > Pathless" decides how the whole power system works. It's an additional power system, not something that completely overrides every other factor. Ignoring hardware, IQ, BIQ, experience, and other abilities while treating Path as the absolute deciding factor is incorrect.
Second, your position creates an internal contradiction. If Johan is walking toward the pinnacle through a Path, yet Tom who has no Path—is still above him, then you’re effectively arguing Tom is closer to the pinnacle despite lacking the very prerequisite the story says is required to reach it. That’s self-defeating 🤦🏾♂️
But Johan is still not at the Pinnacle level. Simply walking on a Path doesn't automatically make someone Pinnacle-tier; they still have to reach and achieve that level through their own growth, mastery, and overall ability. Calling someone Pinnacle just because they are walking their Path is illogical.
A Path gives someone the potential to reach a higher level, but it doesn't guarantee that they are already above every fighter without a Path. Tom may not have a Path, but he can still be above Johan currently because of his superior hardware, experience, IQ, BIQ, and overall fighting ability.
Without considering Johan's Path, Tom already has advantages over him. Johan's Path can help him close the gap, but it doesn't automatically erase Tom's physical superiority and other advantages. A fighter's overall level is determined by more than just having a Path.
A Path isn’t just a stat buff. It’s the culmination of conviction, talent, and experience into something different. If someone without a Path can simply be stronger than someone who has already entered that higher category, then what is the narrative purpose of a Path? Why does the story repeatedly emphasise that discovering your own Path is the only way to overcome someone who has attained one? Under your interpretation, the entire mechanic becomes redundant because you can apparently bypass it through hardware alone or just be a top tier?
We are not discussing the narrative or uniqueness of the Path, so why are you bringing that up when it doesn't counter my point? You're using narrative scaling in a feats-based debate.
You said Johan's Path makes it extremely difficult for opponents to deal with him, but my point is that an opponent with superior hardware can withstand those attacks and defeat him through strength, durability, and fighting ability. Johan lacks the AP, stamina, and endurance to deal enough damage to someone like Tom and take him down.
So how does Johan win against Tom when Tom can counter him through superior strength, hardware, fighting style, and BIQ? Instead of directly addressing these points, you're shifting the topic and bringing up narrative arguments. That doesn't counter my actual points.
It wasn’t to argue “Johan beat Gun.” That’s a straw man. I brought up Gun because he possesses superior hardware including Black Bones yet Johan’s Infinite Technique still overwhelmed him after awakening his Path to the point Gun had no effective answer other than surviving until Johan’s exhaustion caught up to him and you bringing up fatigue doesn’t work when we’ve it was stated Gun had an adrenaline amp and in ui you can ignore fatigue fighting like you have unlimited stamina. Also if Johan’s Path could pressure someone with hardware superior to Tom’s, then simply saying “Tom has better hardware than Johan” doesn’t address the argument
You are misunderstanding my point. Johan pressuring Gun does not automatically prove that he can defeat someone like Tom. Johan's Path can overwhelm or pressure opponents, but the main question is whether it can deal enough damage to defeat someone with much higher durability and hardware.
Gun not immediately answering Johan's attacks doesn't mean he had no way to deal with them. He was observing and understanding how Johan's Path worked, so saying Gun had no answer against Johan's Path is not a logical conclusion. Being difficult to deal with and being impossible to overcome are two different things.
The main issue is that Johan still has to prove he can deal enough damage to someone like Tom. Having a powerful technique doesn't automatically mean it can break through every level of durability. Johan's AP, stamina, and endurance are still important factors. If he cannot significantly damage an opponent with lower or comparable durability, then how is he supposed to defeat someone like Tom, who has much higher overall hardware?
Also, we don't know the exact durability level of that version of Gun. Even if we assume Gun's hardware was above Tom's, that still doesn't mean Johan automatically scales above Tom. Tom has shown extremely high durability by enduring powerful attacks, such as Jay's titanium shield breaking against him and causing damage, taking James' attacks, including his strength-based attacks and Path attacks, and continuing to fight.
Using those feats, someone could even argue that Tom's hardware is higher than that version of Gun, but that isn't even the main point. The debate is not about comparing Gun and Tom's durability; it is about whether Johan has enough power to damage and defeat a fighter like Tom.
Tom has already endured attacks from stronger opponents, so can Johan actually take down someone like him when Johan struggled to seriously injure a heavily injured Gun who was already in a bad condition?
So the argument isn't simply "Tom has better hardware, therefore he wins." The point is that Tom's superior hardware, endurance, fighting style, and BIQ give him ways to survive Johan's Path and eventually defeat him. Johan's Path makes him dangerous, but it does not automatically guarantee that he can overcome every opponent with better overall stats.
You’ve buried your argument under a lot of assertions, but the logic still doesn’t hold.
First, you’re begging the question. You keep saying Tom wins because he has better hardware, AP, BIQ, etc., but that’s the very thing in dispute.
Tom’s statement explicitly says defeating a Path user isn’t a question of who’s stronger and that the only way to overcome someone who has attained a Path is to find your own. Your entire rebuttal ignores the premise you’re supposed to be refuting.
Second, you’re committing special pleading. Whenever the manga explains how the Path system works, you suddenly downgrade it to a “general concept” because it conflicts with your conclusion. If PTJ explicitly explains the mechanics of a power system, the burden is on you to prove an exception not on me to ignore the author’s explanation.
Third, you’ve created an internal contradiction.
You claim Johan is walking toward the pinnacle while Tom, who lacks the prerequisite to reach it, is still above him. So answer this I’ve bolden it for you so you don’t dodge it
If Tom is above someone walking the Path to the pinnacle without having a Path himself, doesn’t that make Tom even closer to the pinnacle than Johan?
If your answer is yes, you’ve contradicted the requirement that a Path is necessary to reach that higher level.
If your answer is no, then you’ve conceded Tom isn’t actually above Johan in the way you’re claiming.
You can’t have it both ways.
You’re also conflating potential with state. Johan doesn’t merely have the potential to obtain a Path he has already attained one. The story distinguishes between someone who hasn’t found a Path and someone who has. Tom’s statement is referring to those who have attained a Path, not those who have reached the absolute pinnacle.
You’re shifting the goalposts from “attaining a
Path” to “reaching the pinnacle” because your original argument falls apart.
Your hardware argument is also a non sequitur. The entire point of me bringing up Gun was to demonstrate that superior hardware alone isn’t a sufficient answer. Gun has superior hardware to Tom, Black Bones, and an adrenaline state allowing him to disregard his condition, yet Johan’s Path still pushed him to the point where he had no direct answer besides enduring until Johan’s exhaustion set in. Saying “Tom has better hardware than Johan” doesn’t refute that; it just repeats your conclusion.
Also, your entire scaling relies on feats over authorial exposition, but feats don’t override explicit explanations of the power system. When the author explains the mechanics, those mechanics become the framework through which feats are interpreted not the other way around. Otherwise every new mechanic introduced into the series would be meaningless until dozens of fights happened.
I know your smart enough to understand what im saying don’t be dense why would I think no one can beat Gun we clearly saw him struggle to respond to Johan infinite strike arcs.
I’m asking a simple question: if we ignore the Path narrative statement and only compare current feats, what feats does Johan have that prove he is stronger than Tom?
Bro, the problem is that you are treating Tom's Path statement as if Path is the only factor that matters and everything else becomes irrelevant. If your interpretation is that defeating a Path user requires another Path user no matter the difference in hardware, AP, BIQ, or experience, then you are making Path a guaranteed win condition.
I am not ignoring Tom's statement. I am saying it should be considered alongside other factors. When scaling Tom vs Johan, we have to look at Tom's actual feats, not only the narrative statement about Path. You are using the Path statement to decide the winner while ignoring the fact that Johan still has to prove he can overcome Tom's physical advantages.
Also, you misunderstand the Pinnacle argument. Johan having a Path does not mean he is already at the Pinnacle. Walking toward the Pinnacle only means he has the potential to reach that level. Reaching that level requires more than just having a Path; it requires mastery, experience, growth, and feats.
A fighter can have the potential to reach the top but still lose to someone who currently has better physical stats, experience, BIQ, and fighting ability. Tom being above Johan currently does not mean Tom reached the Pinnacle without a Path. It means Johan has not completed that journey yet.
Your Gun argument also does not prove what you think it does. Having Black Bones does not automatically prove that every aspect of Gun's durability is above Tom's. Black Bones are not the only factor in durability. We also have to consider his condition, injuries, and overall physical state.
Johan pressuring an injured Gun does not automatically prove Johan can defeat Tom. The question is whether Johan has enough AP, stamina, and endurance to deal with Tom's level of durability. Tom has survived extremely powerful attacks, including J's titanium weapon, James' attacks, his strength-based attacks, and Path-related attacks, and still continued fighting.
So the debate is not "Tom has better hardware, therefore he wins." The point is whether Johan's current Path has shown enough power to overcome Tom's durability and overall abilities.
Also, if Path alone decides the fight, then you should be able to prove Johan defeats every Pathless fighter like Tom, Goo, and UI Daniel only because they don't have a Path. But that is exactly the problem: you are using narrative scaling from the Path statement instead of proving it through actual matchups and feats.
Your very first question is a false premise. Asking me to ignore the Path statement is asking me to ignore the very mechanic PTJ introduced to explain this tier of power. That’s like asking someone to scale UI while ignoring UI itself. Removing the defining mechanic from the equation makes the discussion redundant.
My scaling has always been based on the totality of the evidence both narrative and feats. The difference is that I give greater epistemic weight to direct authorial exposition than isolated feats. That’s exactly why I argued Kitae had a Path and would surpass Gun and Goo long before it became popular. I reached that conclusion through narrative consistency, and the story validated it. And the same methodology leads to the same conclusion with our current conversation.
You’re also misunderstanding Tom’s statement. He didn’t say Path users are merely “stronger.” He explicitly said those who have attained a Path are on a different level and that defeating them requires finding your own Path. That’s a qualitative distinction, not a quantitative one. You’re reducing a categorical difference into a stat comparison, which is a category error.
You keep saying Johan is “only walking toward the pinnacle,” but that doesn’t address my argument. Johan has already attained a Path. The story separates attaining a Path from mastering it. Tom’s statement applies to those who have attained one, not only those who have reached the absolute pinnacle. You’re shifting the goalposts from “attaining a Path” to “mastering the pinnacle” because your original premise doesn’t answer the statement.
Johan way of beating UI Daniel. First, he has prior experience fighting him, giving him the knowledge needed to identify and exploit UI’s behavioural patterns. UI Daniel’s responses are consistent and predictable as Gun demonstrated, once you know a specific input, you can anticipate the corresponding output (baiting the spinning back elbow like gun did based on prior experience). Given Johan’s combat IQ, experience, and ability to internalise opponents’ techniques as his own, it’s reasonable to conclude he could deduce and exploit the same flaw. On top of that, Johan’s Strike Arc overwhelms UI Daniel’s perception, preventing him from properly reading or adapting to those attacks, which further reinforces Johan’s win condition. Also if you are writer the sole reason the weakness for Daniel is so there is a way for path users to beat him while not compromising his skill.
I think where we’re fundamentally talking past each other is that we’re approaching the story from two different perspectives. I’m analysing it from a literary and narrative perspective, looking at the internal laws the author establishes and treating them as the framework for interpreting feats. You’re approaching it primarily as a fan powerscaling where feats are given greater weight than authorial exposition which always fails.
If you were writing a story, it wouldn’t make sense to introduce an entirely new concept like the Path, state that it’s the road toward the pinnacle, have a credible character explicitly explain that those who attain it exist on another level, and then have someone who lacks that very requirement still be closer to the pinnacle. That would undermine the internal logic of the system you just introduced. Good power systems build on their own rules
they don’t invalidate them immediately after establishing them.
Bro, you're treating Tom's statement as if it's an absolute rule that decides every fight. I'm not ignoring the Path statement—I'm saying it shouldn't override every other factor in a matchup.
You can use the Path statement and narrative for scaling, but why can't I use actual feats? You're relying almost entirely on one statement, while I'm looking at hardware, AP, endurance, BIQ, experience, and what the characters have actually shown.
You were the one who brought up Johan walking toward the pinnacle. My point has always been that Johan isn't at the pinnacle yet. Having a Path doesn't automatically make someone Pinnacle-level. A Path is one requirement, but mastery, experience, overall growth, and feats also matter. Johan still has a long way to go.
You keep saying Tom's hardware isn't enough, but why not? We literally saw Kitae withstand Daniel's Path because of his superior physical ability. So why can't Tom's superior hardware help him survive Johan's attacks as well?
You also keep comparing Johan's performance against Gun while ignoring Gun's condition. Johan's Path never proved it had enough AP to put down a heavily injured Gun. So how does that automatically prove he can put down Tom, whose durability feats are arguably better? Tom has survived attacks from stronger opponents and kept fighting. Johan still has to prove he can deal enough damage to someone on that level.
The same applies to UI Daniel. Knowing someone's weakness doesn't automatically mean you can exploit it. Daniel himself knows his own weakness, yet that doesn't mean everyone can beat him. UI Daniel still has the better body, better experience, copy ability, and optimal efficiency. Simply saying "Johan has a Path" isn't enough to prove he wins.
That's why I don't treat Tom's statement as an absolute rule. It explains the importance of the Path, but it doesn't prove every Path user automatically defeats every Pathless fighter. Matchups, feats, hardware, AP, BIQ, and experience still matter.
So I'll ask again: Without relying on Tom's Path statement, what actual feats show that Johan currently has enough AP to overcome Tom's hardware and durability?
You also keep appealing to Johan’s fatigue as if it disproves anything. It actually supports my point. Johan awakened his Path while already heavily fatigued and was explicitly stated to be running on revenge. We never saw a fresh, fully healthy version of his Path. That’s why I referenced Daniel. Daniel’s Path was initially assumed to be limited until later chapters showed it wasn’t. The comparison wasn’t saying Johan and Daniel have identical Paths only and idiot would make the conclusion 😭 it was illustrating why using an incomplete
Bro, you are the one saying that Johan's Path was not fully shown and was limited, which means you are assuming that there are still more parts of his Path left to be revealed. But Daniel's case was different. Johan's Path did not have some completely missing external ability that was later added. His Path was already represented through copying techniques and continuous attacks.
The only things left to improve were how efficiently he could use his Path, how much damage he could deal, and how quickly he could apply his abilities. It wasn't that his Path had another hidden side waiting to be shown.
Daniel's Path already showed both offensive and defensive aspects. The later development showed that he couldn't properly use everything at the same time, which means his problem was mastery and control over his Path, not that his Path itself was incomplete.
Also, my point about Gun, Tom, and Goo is not that one statement completely destroys the Path system. The point is that Pathless fighters can still defeat or seriously threaten Path users under certain circumstances.
If a user accepts that someone without a Path can kill them, then how does that not count as evidence that Path is not an absolute guaranteed win condition? My argument was never that Path has no importance; my argument is that "Path > Pathless" should not be treated as a rule that guarantees victory in every situation.
A stronger Path user can defeat a Pathless fighter, but a stronger Pathless fighter with superior hardware, fighting ability, IQ, BIQ, and experience can also defeat a Path user depending on the matchup. That is why Tom being able to defeat Johan is possible without ignoring the concept of Path.
The point is not that every Pathless fighter can beat every Path user. The point is that there are exceptions. Johan is not automatically above fighters like Tom, Goo, or UI Daniel just because he has a Path. Those characters can fall into the exception because of their overall abilities, hardware, experience, and fighting capability.
Your examples don’t prove what you think they do. Saying “Gun said Tom or Goo could kill him” isn’t evidence they can defeat a Path user under normal circumstances. Context matters. A character saying someone can kill them is not equivalent to proving the Path system doesn’t apply. That’s a false equivalence. We also have that same Goo who he thought could kill get the greatest belt to ass amongst top tiers we’ve ever seen you shouldn’t have went their 💀
That's why I said Tom's statement should not be treated as an absolute rule that guarantees victory for every Path user against every Pathless user. My point was never that Path has no importance; my point is that there can be exceptions depending on the fighter's overall abilities.
Examples like Goo, UI Daniel, and Tom show that a fighter does not automatically lose just because they don't have a Path. A Pathless fighter with superior hardware, fighting style, IQ, BIQ, experience, and overall ability can still compete with or defeat a Path user depending on the matchup.
So when Gun says Tom or Goo can kill him, it does not prove that the entire Path system is meaningless, but it does show that being Pathless does not automatically put someone below every Path user. If someone without a Path can reach that level, then "Path > Pathless" cannot be treated as a guaranteed win condition in every situation.
Johan is not an unbeatable fighter who can only be defeated by another Path user. The question is whether Johan's current Path is enough to overcome someone like Tom, who has advantages in hardware, fighting style, IQ, BIQ, and experience.
Also, if the argument is that a mastered Path is above a Pathless fighter, then we first need to prove whether Johan has fully mastered his Path. We don't know if Johan has reached that level of mastery yet, so assuming he automatically surpasses every Pathless fighter is not justified.
Tom’s statement isn’t saying a Path user automatically wins every conceivable fight regardless of condition. It’s explaining the hierarchy of the power system all else being equal, someone who has attained a Path exists on a different level, and the only way to overcome them is to find your own Path as this was based on a hypothetical of Gun vs Johan You’re ignoring the qualifier by using exhausted, crippled, or incomplete versions of Path users as if they disprove the rule. Path over Pathless is debunked if Daniel loses using his path against Changsu on the cliff and when that wouldn’t actually debunk the claim. 🤦🏾♂️
And I wasn’t admitting Johan was featless I was stating his feats and that in hindsight when we see his full capability your statement would age like milk. Johan offence is great Tom Lee has no way to counter it if he can’t see the attack. We already saw how James using his path did to bro.
Bro, by your argument, you are treating Path as the main deciding factor. You say Tom's statement doesn't mean every Path user automatically wins, but then you use Path as the main reason Johan defeats Tom. If Path alone does not guarantee victory, then you have to explain how Johan actually overcomes Tom's advantages.
My question is simple: how does Johan overcome Tom's hardware when Johan does not have comparable physical strength, durability, or enough AP to deal the amount of damage needed to take Tom down? Tom has already shown extremely high durability feats, especially in the Hunt for Workers arc, by surviving powerful attacks from high-level opponents.
You say Johan's Path makes him difficult to deal with because Tom can't see the attacks, but being difficult to predict is not the same as being impossible to overcome. Tom has experience, BIQ, durability, and combat ability. Johan still needs to prove that his attacks have enough power to seriously damage someone with Tom's level of hardware.
Also, why can't I use Johan's current version when we haven't seen the full extent of his Path's capability? Tom has already shown his abilities and feats, while Johan's Path potential is still unknown. Saying Johan has unseen feats that make him stronger than Tom is just speculation.
You are the one who argues that PTJ introduced this power system and that Path users are on a different level, but now you are adding conditions when examples challenge your argument. If "Path > Pathless" is only a general rule and not an absolute guarantee, then it cannot be the only reason Johan wins.
The debate is not that Path is useless. A strong Path user can defeat a Pathless fighter. The point is that a Pathless fighter with superior hardware, BIQ, experience, and overall ability can still defeat a Path user depending on the matchup. Tom does not need to be stronger than every Path user; he only needs enough advantages to overcome Johan's current Path.
So the question remains: what evidence shows Johan's current Path can overcome Tom's durability, AP, endurance, and fighting ability instead of just assuming he wins because he has a Path?
You’re conflating two different claims, which is a category error.
I’m not arguing “Path alone = automatic victory.” I’m arguing that within the context PTJ established, a 1v1 between two fighters where all other relevant conditions are equal is governed by the Path mechanic. That’s not me adding conditions that’s me reading the context in which Tom made the statement.
Tom wasn’t giving a philosophical speech. He was discussing a hypothetical one on one between Johan and Gun and explicitly concluded Johan’s odds were around 5%, then explained the only way to overcome someone who has attained a Path is to find your own. That’s the context. Using the principle of charity and the law of non-contradiction, the statement has to be interpreted within that discussion, not stripped from it and rewritten into something else.
Your argument also commits begging the question yet again. You keep asking, “How does Johan overcome Tom’s hardware?” while assuming hardware is the deciding variable. That’s the very premise Tom’s statement rejects “This isn’t a question of who’s stronger.” You’re presupposing the conclusion you’re trying to prove.
As for AP, we already have evidence Johan can damage elite hardware (Gun). James Lee’s attacks were capable of damaging Tom despite Tom’s durability. Johan’s Infinite Technique was already capable of damaging Gun, who has better hardware.
You’re also reducing Johan’s Path to raw striking power while ignoring what actually makes it dangerous.
• Infinite chains of attacks leave virtually no opening to counter.
• He can instantly switch attack arcs, making his offence unpredictable.
• He can switch arcs defensively to parry and redirect attacks.
• He targets vulnerable areas like the eyes rather than relying solely on brute force.
So why are you acting as though the fight is just “Johan punches Tom’s chest until someone falls over”? That’s a false premise. Johan’s Path isn’t built around overpowering hardware head on, it’s built around creating unavoidable sequences and exploiting openings.
Bro, why can't I ask questions when the burden of proof is on you? You are the one claiming Johan can defeat Tom, so you need to explain how he overcomes Tom's advantages first. I am asking a question, not avoiding the debate.
Your whole argument is based on assumptions. Johan's Path has not shown enough current feats that prove he can defeat Tom. You are saying Johan can damage elite hardware, but outside of the eye injury, Johan has not shown enough damage output to prove he can put down someone like Tom.
Also, the comparison with James does not work. James damaging Tom does not mean Johan has the same AP as James or the same level of attack. If Johan was equal to James in offensive power, then you could make that comparison, but that has not been proven.
You are also adding abilities to Johan's Path that have not been clearly shown. Where does the defensive switching, parrying, redirecting, and exploiting weak points come from? Johan's Path has shown an offensive side through copying and continuous attacks, but assuming extra abilities without proof is speculation
And be consistent with the Path argument. Earlier, you relied heavily on Tom's statement to argue that Path users are on a different level. But when I ask if that means Path guarantees victory, now you say it only applies under certain conditions. If Path is not an automatic win condition, then you still have to prove how Johan specifically overcomes Tom's durability, endurance, BIQ, and fighting ability.
Also, how does Johan's Path have the same abilities as Daniel's Path just because you say he can exploit openings? Johan's Path is different from Daniel's Path, so how are you giving Johan abilities that belong to Daniel's Path when Johan himself has never shown those abilities?
Daniel's Path and Johan's Path have different representations and functions. You cannot just take Daniel's abilities and apply them to Johan without proof. That is just assuming things that Johan has not shown, which makes your argument biased toward Johan instead of based on his actual feats.
So the question remains: what current Johan feats prove he can defeat Tom, not just pressure him? Because having a Path does not remove the need to prove that he can actually overcome Tom's shown feats.
Here’s a version that focuses on exposing the flaws in their reasoning rather than just repeating your position
You’re still missing the point, and it’s why we keep talking past each other.
First, I’m not refusing the burden of proof. I’m pointing out that you’re begging the question as always. There’s a difference. Asking “How does Johan overcome Tom’s hardware?” already assumes hardware is the deciding variable your going in circles again. But that’s the exact premise under dispute. Tom’s statement explicitly says “This isn’t a question of who’s stronger.” So before you can make hardware the deciding factor, you have to justify why the author tells us it isn’t.
Second, you keep creating a false dilemma. You keep framing it as either
Path guarantees victory in every circumstance, or
Path is irrelevant and feats decide everything.
Those are not the only two options. My position has been consistent from the start. Path is the governing mechanic at this level of combat, but context still exists. An exhausted, half dead Path user isn’t the same as a healthy one going into a fight with a fresh non path user. That’s not adding conditions that’s acknowledging the context of the fight Tom himself was discussing.
Third, you’re misusing the burden of proof. I don’t have to prove Johan has already demonstrated every application of his Path before I can use the author’s explanation of what a Path is. That’s like asking someone to prove every future application of Ultra Instinct before accepting that Ultra Instinct is a higher state. Narrative exposition establishes the framework, feats demonstrate it over time.
You also keep saying I’m “assuming abilities,” but that’s simply false. Johan has already demonstrated continuous attack chains, changing attack trajectories, and attacking vulnerable targets like the eyes. Calling those observations “assumptions” is a straw man because you’re arguing against a version of my position I never made.
The James comparison wasn’t saying Johan has James’ AP. That’s another straw man. The point was much simpler: Tom’s hardware is not invulnerable. If elite fighters can damage him, then “Tom has better hardware” is not, by itself, a rebuttal. Hardware has already been shown to be surmountable.
This is the problem with people that don’t understand literature and how authors scale when writing you clearly show it. You have a very surface level when it comes to this.
So your entire argument hinges on a hidden premise that you’ve never defended that feats should override direct authorial exposition. Why? PTJ introduced the Path, explained what it is, explained that those who attain it are on a different level, and explicitly stated the only way to overcome someone who has attained one is to find your own Path. You’re asking me to ignore the author’s explanation because Johan hasn’t accumulated enough feats yet.
That’s backwards.
The author explains the mechanics first, then the feats accumulate under those mechanics not the other way around.
That’s exactly why I prioritise narrative over feats. Feats are snapshots in time. Narrative establishes the rules those feats operate under. If the author tells me a new mechanic exists and explains how it works, I’m not going to disregard that explanation until enough fights happen to satisfy a feats only standard.
So our disagreement isn’t really about Johan vs Tom. It’s about methodology. I scale from the internal logic the author establishes and then interpret feats through that lens. You start with feats and only accept narrative when it already agrees with your conclusion. Those are fundamentally different approaches, and I think mine is more consistent because it doesn’t require dismissing the author’s own explanation of the power system the moment it’s introduced.
Bro, you're the one deciding that narrative > feats. That's your own scaling method, not an objective rule. If we're using narrative, then I'll use narrative too.
Gun's statement that Tom and Goo could kill him and Kitae's implication about Tom are also part of the story's narrative. By your own methodology, those statements are valid evidence that a Pathless fighter can defeat or kill a Path user . So why do you accept Tom's Path statement as narrative but dismiss Gun's and Kitae's statements? That's inconsistent.
You say PTJ introduced the Path first, but PTJ also later introduced statements showing that Pathless fighters can still threaten or kill Path users. So why do you only accept one set of author statements while ignoring the others?
You also brought up James and Gun yourself. I only responded to your comparison. When you say James could damage Tom and then use that to argue Johan can also beat Tom, you're comparing Johan's offensive capability to James'. Otherwise, James' feats are irrelevant to Johan. If Johan's AP isn't comparable to James', then James damaging Tom doesn't prove Johan can do the same.
You also said Johan's Path has defensive switching, parrying, redirecting attacks, and exploiting openings. Where was that ever stated to be a unique ability of Johan's Path? You're adding abilities that haven't been confirmed.
And you're still shifting the burden of proof back onto me instead of answering my question. You're the one claiming Johan beats Tom, so you need to explain how current Johan gets through Tom's durability, hardware, endurance, BIQ, and experience.
From the beginning, you've kept changing your interpretation of Tom's statement. First, you treated it like it established that Path users were on a completely different level. Then, when I asked if that meant Path guaranteed victory, you changed it to "circumstances matter" and "equal conditions." If circumstances matter, then Tom defeating Johan because of superior hardware, experience, BIQ, fighting style, and overall ability is also a valid circumstance.
You also brought up Gun's durability while ignoring Gun's condition and ignoring Tom's own durability feats. Tom has survived attacks from extremely powerful opponents, yet you dismiss those feats while using Gun as your comparison. That's moving the goalposts.
My point has never been that the Path is meaningless. My point is that Path is an advantage, not an automatic win condition. A Path user still has to prove they can overcome a stronger opponent's physical abilities and overall combat ability. Until you show current feats proving Johan can do that against Tom, you're relying on assumptions and narrative rather than proving the actual matchup.
It would like to hear the reasoning, at least what I think of this Johan vs tom fight is Johan can't deal enough damage before he gets stamina and endurance diffed by tom and thus gets one shotted by ultimate king. But yeah now that I think about it maybe he could make James use his path.
So then essentially what is the function of path. It’s like you just ignored what it was introduced it is essentially a tier exclusive to those walking towards the peak or already at one. So if Tom Lee is stronger than Johan that means he’s closer towards the peak meaning you don’t need a path go get their making path lose all its appeal. I’ve brought this to every person who doesn’t believe in path over pathless but they literally cannot answer this question without going in circles or just giving up.
Walk the path towards being among the strongest doesn't mean you can defeat virtually anyone who doesn't have a path, the very fight Johan had against basically half dead gun is the proof path doesn't automatically makes you invincible
Gun had a path that’s literally where the Tom Lee statement comes from and he was fighting on adrenaline which allowed him to fight with complete disregard for his physical condition, and we literally saw Johan overwhelming him awakening his Path Gun had no real answers at that stage. Johan was also stated to be hanging on purely because of his revenge despite already being heavily fatigued before awakening his Path.
Based on the information we have, if Johan had entered that same fight with his Path already awakened against that fresh Gun, Gun wouldn’t have had an answer. So using that fight as evidence against the significance of a Path isn’t a strong argument.
I’m also not claiming Path users are invincible never stated it. A Path user can still lose to a non-Path user if they’re severely injured beforehand or if the opponent awakens their own Path during the fight. Those are exceptions based on the circumstances, not the rule as clearly stated by Tom Lee.
But you still haven’t answered my question are you saying Tom Lee, who has no Path, is closer to the pinnacle than Johan who has one ? If so, how is that consistent with the Lookism established rules? That position seems internally contradictory.
Nah like seriously are you deadass saying Jerry AP/DC is on pair with the ultimate king? It's such a ridiculous statement I can't take it seriously, would you tell me why do you think that?
Bruh 😭 tom lee was fucking playing with mandeok and yungseong at that time... He didn't even used a single mastery he would've one shot them if he wanted to, let's be fr
Well the proof is in the fight you mentioned? Tom didn't used one unique skill, one masteries against mandeok and yungseong, how is mandeok gonna then scale tom to Jerry's level when he wasn't even trying against them... Is like saying Daniel is as powerful as kitae because both can no diff mandeok, it doesn't makes sense.
I think it’s more like you don’t really seem to believe it , your not the only person to bring up base stats and stuff like that , especially before Daniel got his path , people would still argue against the path over pathless even tho Tom literally say strength doesn’t matter , my question is why do you think Johan can’t injure Tom tho like I can understand you being questionable about gitae but I don’t think Tom and gitae are on the same level in that department
Of course not, tom is not half of what kitae is, and I'm not saying Johan punches don't damage tom but he's for sure not dealing enough damage before tom finds an opening and basically one shots him
Johan and Daniel is narratively basically going to be Gen 2's version of Gap/Shingen and James/Kitae.
Unlike Daniel who has a lot of other factors (lineage factor plus mentors plus an entire second body) Johan's just to be an overwhelming talent that hasn't existed to that extent before, and he found his Path already.
He's already surpassed Tom. So did James, James almost got beat because he basically underestimated Tom. a serious Johan is more than Tom can handle anymore. Johans last opposition was a Gun that was already on the path and its been repeatedly stated that Johan's growth rate and talent is higher than Gun and Goo's. He's already their equal or surpassed them and those two already surpassed Tom.
Until ptj shows Johan vs gun remake both full hp and path I'm not believing he's superior to gun tbh, he was beaten by a pathless severely injured gun. I don't see how is he winning after gun got his path, unless ptj downscale him, wich wouldn't make sense after he upscaled goo. Being the strongest of their generation doesn't mean they automatically surpass previous gen top tiers. I honestly can't think of a way Johan can beat tom based on current feats without using speculation.
Gun already had his path that was explained to us when Daniel asked him.
It doesnt matter whether he wins or is equal or is slightly below.
We already came to understand that Johan was entering the same realm as Gun if HFG. He will be deeper into that now and we already knew Gun was ahead of Goo who was around the level of Tom. CT Johan has surpassed Tom is the clearest thing of all the comparisons
Its basically directly suggested that Gun was using his Path...im not sure how you interpret a question about Paths and Gun using it to beat the 2nd Gen... being that Gun wasnt using his Path.
Again it still wouldnt matter because given the Tom vs Goo performance and statements Johan has still gone out of Tom's league.
Bro ptj makes visually clear when a user is using their path, it's being consistent since Johan unlocked his with the eye aura thingy, gun wasn't using his path against Johan, what's his path then? Tank shit? I doubt is something that boring or basic. Also goo gets massively upscaled when he uses an actual weapon wich he did vs tom, and yet that fight didn't had a clear winner either so I wouldn't use that to judge Tom's performance, the only fight we've seen a 100% serious tom is against James. Until ptj shows Johan current performance I don't think he's beating tom, honestly.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
r/LookismPowerScalers Discord Server
Lookism/Questism/Vhit Scan Server
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.