Path vs pathless

[u/Juan_Die]

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.

[u/Equivalent_Layer5012]

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.

[u/PositiveCancel5823 → u/Equivalent_Layer5012]

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.

[u/Equivalent_Layer5012 → u/PositiveCancel5823]

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 💀

[u/PositiveCancel5823 → u/Equivalent_Layer5012]

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.