Talk:Dust/@comment-27087951-20151017225958/@comment-27087951-20151018173546

I'm not talking about the elemental "X beats Y", anon. I'm just saying, it doesn't make sense.

For starters, redundancy. Fire is already available, so why would there be Lava Dust? That's like making Dirt Dust when there's already Earth Dust. The only practical difference in this show would be that Lava looks more liquid and Fire doesn't. A difference so small it's more of a variation than a truly different element.

2nd: As pointed out in some comments below, while apparently we have "visual confirmation" of it's existence, the scenes used as evidence can easily be given alternate explanations to explain it that do not involve Lava Dust.

3rd: In many videogames and multiple fictional works, if there's a Fire element, there's a Fire spell that looks closer to Lava than actual fire but is still included inside the Fire element. And RWBY was designed to feel like a videogame.

4th: I don't know what's the right word for this....hypocrisy, I think? Anyway, Lava Dust is listed supposedly because we have "Visual Confirmation" of it. But where is Kinetic Dust? Where is Dark Dust, or Gravity Dust? We have seen Weiss and Neo both use Kinetic Dust, and both Ruby and Blake have used Gravity and Dark Dust at different points.

We have Visual Confirmation that is more numerous and more clear regarding Kinetic and Dark and Gravity, than the one they supposedly have of Lava Dust. And yet, Lava Dust is listed, while Kinetic, Dark and Gravity are not. Who the heck came up with that stupid idea? If Kinetic, Dark and Gravity are not listed despite having more Visual Confirmation than Lava, why should Lava be listed?