Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-28171999-20190208002539/@comment-26018514-20190310071233

Occam's razor; The simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

What we know is that there are 3 instances where aura was explained, and all of them had almost everyone in the same room, answering fans, thus the fact that seemingly contradictory information was provided yet no-one ever said anything about ret-conning anything means either everyone did a complete 180 and are lying or the facts as we know them continue to be true.

We also know from Monty's explanation of Yang's semblance comparing it to gauges from a fighting game that they are more than capable of making things more complicated than a shield on a switch, and things can and already do have multiple stages.

We further saw Ren demonstrate external manipulation of his aura, which already proves such complexity, you think some plebian non-combatant can do that with inactive aura? It's an active application.

The simplest explanation is there are inactive applications of that manipulation too, and that complexity makes all 3 statements true.

1. Aura defends things passively

2. Aura can be "activated" to protect things differently, in a more efficient manner, this would still technically be "passive" just as enchanted equipment in games come in both passive and charge using varieties.

3. Aura can be manipulated in more advanced "active" methods.