Board Thread:Manga Discussion/@comment-39718735-20200516000645/@comment-39718735-20200827172857

Calebeto wrote: Before anything else, sorry if I got a bit carried away, I believe everyone should be polite in discussions like this one and I didn't answer properly. I gotta say I'm more open about the ambiguity of the situation: even then, there are still several problems:

"Some of you have gained stand abilities after being struck with this arrow. Is that right?" "Diavolo has been using this arrow"... Polnareff is generalizing once again. They didn't gain stand abilities with that kind of arrow specificially. However Giorno's comment is on point (I've never seen any one mentioning it before) and Polnareff's comment may only refer to the process of gaining a stand with an arrow, since he doesn't have to explain that arrow is truly different. Giorno already did that for him.

You haven't rebutted my main point: Polnareff has no way to know whether other arrows would be able to awaken a Requiem or not. He never stabbed neither his nor another stand with another arrow to say that arrow is different.

Yet it may be said he deduced it since it has a different design, that's a stretch cause he has no way to know so. He even says Requiems are designed to control the minds of people... and then you have GER that has nothing to do with that power.

It may be certain to say he was convinced that arrow was special though, he never attempted to ask them whether they have one on their own or if they had access to another arrow... no, come to the Colliseum and I'll lend you my special arrow. That's all.

You show a photo with all the arrows and the beetle one... yet there's one that's covered by all the other arrows and is not visible.Although Pucci and Polnareff's arrows being the same one may not be that much of a stretch (Pucci giving it to DIO, then Polnareff finding it is feasible), you just affirmated it as totally true and I wanted to see whether that was mentioned anywhere.

However I gotta give you credit for showing how ambiguous the situation is... perhaps that arrow is indeed that special. It can be said that's the theory with the least amount of assumptions (instead of having to come up with explanations about Black Sabbath, and maybe even while Polnareff's words are sorta ambiguous they may be rather directed to the audience).

I gotta agree with another user of this wiki Kingasdfg, we'd go for the explanations with the least amount of assumptions, and as much as I disliked it at the beginning that theory does that. The least amount of "fanon explanations" we add the least probabilities for that theory to be wrong.

Perhaps it's special cause it was the last one created, after the others the creator made that one trying to do a better one, perhaps BtD is like it is cause it's made with a "beta" version of the final arrow.