Board Thread:Speculation House/@comment-31953669-20180124124137/@comment-14909251-20180311040927

BlizzardDragon wrote:

''Why can't you accept the possibility that Cinder is dead? ''You say you only hear one argument that is easily argued against, but that is the same for your argument. Your argument can be easily be debunked. Any other arguments you may have though? Do you work for Rooster Teeth? If not, then you can hardly say my "argument can be easily debunked" as that would require you to prove it wrong, which you can't since it is about a fictional universe in which literal magic exists with you undoubtedly not having knowledge of her canonical fate and I'm not even suggesting something particular exceptional. Your "debunking" wasn't even refuting a single argument. I explained all this earlier in the thread, but she could have been able to break out, slow her descent, and then passed out. That would be completely reasonable as we already saw Raven being able to break out of being frozen, that they're able to basically fly, and her passing out after that ass-whupping would hardly be a stretch.

This isn't about accepting the possibility or not. What is tiresome is seeing people who have no idea how it actually will turn out confidently and arrogantly insisting to everyone that she is definitely dead. Seems to me most saying that are very openly biased towards that as they want her to be dead just because they take the fictional events of the series a little too seriously. No confirmation has been given of her death and she was not visibly killed, which would make her the first named to be killed without immediate in-universe confirmation (Ozpin is a quasi-exception for plot reasons). There is no real reason to kill her off at this stage as it does more harm to the story than any benefit it might provide as well as leaving a major character essentially without any background development.

Going back to Emerald, I think you don't understand what is meant by "pure" here as you seem to be associating it with moral purity. I mean it in the sense it is meant with Ruby. Despite being the lead heroince, she is not exactly the most moral character in the series or the kindest. What makes Ruby pure is that she is more genuine with her emotions. There is no pretense and no deceit in her character, even if she may fib now and then. Emerald is the purest villain because she shows no sign of being two-faced. She lies and steals to survive, but her personality and emotions aren't an artifice or front. It is to say that she still has much of that child-like innocence the other villains lack as they are all more hardened and cynical. I mean, she can't be a villain without being a little hardened and cynical, but with her character you get a sense that her being a villain is largely a coincidence.

The point is her suddenly becoming their main secondary foil in place of Cinder doesn't make a good deal of sense. Given how quickly Tyrian was emasculated in front of us, he doesn't work either. Hazel doesn't as yet have much purpose for it and Watts just isn't that kind of character. None of them really fit the same role in the story as Cinder. They're just random villains the heroes, and more importantly the audience, have no reason to care about or bother about except that they are villains. Who are Watts and Hazel to Team RWBY? Nobody. No one has any real reason to care about them or their interactions with the heroes.