Talk:One Piece novel Law

Canon
Just like the "official" anime and movies thus far, this official novel, not by Oda, is non-canon. --Klobis (talk) 07:26, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

Yeah definitely not canon. SeaTerror (talk) 07:32, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

According to Rhavkin, "We treat the magazine novels as canon". How is that possible? We should not be unreasonable. --Klobis (talk) 11:00, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

Novel Law and Novel Ace are different products. Do not mistake it. --Klobis (talk) 11:13, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

Released on official source that was approved by Oda before, does not contradict and even add to confirmed origin stated by Oda in an SBS,=. No reason to believe it's not canon other then the writer, and again, like Ace's novel, doesn't mean it's not canon. Rhavkin (talk) 12:37, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Rhavkin. OishiLover75 (talk) 13:50, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

We've used all the info in OP Magazine so far as canon, I think novel Law can be considered canon too. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 15:12, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

Oda approved of all the movies and specials. Therefore they're canon too obviously. SeaTerror (talk) 17:29, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

Strong World is canon. And no one saying everything Oda approve of is canon, so get some perspective. I only talked about the magazine, and Kaido concurred. Rhavkin (talk) 17:37, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

It isn't because it doesn't fit anywhere. Oda never stated any of the magazine stuff was canon. Plus he didn't even do it himself anyway. SeaTerror (talk) 18:10, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

Oda stated before the magazine is official. Do you have any source that say he changed his mind? Rhavkin (talk) 18:46, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

Official doesn't mean canon. It was an official release. SeaTerror (talk) 19:23, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

So are you also going to delete the information about the Charlotte Family? Rhavkin (talk) 19:55, June 19, 2019 (UTC)

Do not change the subject. The info in magazine are based on the manga by Oda. The novel is Sakagami's work. NOT by Oda. Anime, movies, games are non-canon since they are not by Oda.

You said  Released on official source that was approved by Oda before, does not contradict and even add to confirmed origin stated by Oda . Then you think Zoro's past in the official anime Episode 135 is canon? Please think calmly. By the way, Strong World is non-canon in this wiki. --Klobis (talk) 07:30, June 20, 2019 (UTC)

Please keep in mind. Unlike novel Ace, there is no statement about Oda's involvement in novel Law. In other words, there is no difference between the novel and filler scenes of anime. Kaido, you said We've used all the info in OP Magazine so far as canon, but do you think One Piece Art NUE, which is in magazine volume 6, is canon? --Klobis (talk) 03:07, June 21, 2019 (UTC)

I agree with the fact that the novel, especially the Dero Dero no Mi and its user, should be treated as non-canon. There is no reason why the content of Law's novel should be considered canon until Oda says or shows otherwise. As Klobis stated, the magazine info are based on the manga story, and Oda's involvement in Ace's novel was confirmed but this novel has no confirmation so far of being official canon.--37.233.77.249 10:18, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

First of all: https://www.updatifynetwork.com/2019/01/one-piece-novel-law-will-return-to-chapter-2.html

Now, as for NUE, until we'll get the actual magazine, we don't know what is said about it so if it talks about the event and not the plot, your point is irrelevant. Rhavkin (talk) 10:27, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

What is the website? There is no reliable source, and it must be Japanese since it is Japanese product. Do you really think a fandom site can be used as a source? --Klobis (talk) 13:40, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

At least I found something that support my claim. Did you? Rhavkin (talk) 13:48, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

A blog news website. What a reliable source. SeaTerror (talk) 19:17, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


 * A negative response from SeaTerror. What a surprising comment. Rhavkin (talk) 19:31, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

It is Probatio diabolica. Do not say unproductive things. I'm sorry but a brog can be written by anyone. What we need is official statements. Rhavkin, think twice please. All canon DF users are manga characters by Oda, and non-canon users are the rest. It is simple. You know Strong World is not canon now, right? --Klobis (talk) 22:49, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

Fine, lets get back to the main topic. Yes, I re-read some of the wiki pages and SW isn't considered canon, so that was a bad example. The main problem is that this discussion should have been held long ago, when information about the novel started showing up, because now its hard to find those official statements in retrospect. However, I still say that we can't automatically say that only what comes from Oda is canon. Oda has many joke characters and SBS DF that aren't canon, and there are characters and DF designed and created by Oda for movies and fillers.

Correct me if I misunderstood you, but what you're saying is basically this: "If it didn't came from Oda or with Oda approval, it is not canon, but if it did came from Oda, it might be canon."

Even Oda makes mistakes, not only some characters designs that are mostly fixed in the volume release, but there are many inconsistencies with power and plot, Oda is just one man, so I ask again: Other then "it didn't came from Oda", do anyone have a reason to not consider it canon? Rhavkin (talk) 04:41, June 24, 2019 (UTC)


 * You are right about my saying. If we consider things that does not come from Oda is canon, there must be clear reason from a reliable source. --Klobis (talk) 08:09, June 24, 2019 (UTC)

While I still personally consider Novel Law as canon, with a lack of source on it being "official" like Novel A I will consider it non-canon here. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 20:52, July 5, 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure why this is some big debacle. Oda confirmed that part of Law's backstory from this novel (i.e. how he met Bepo, Shachi, and Penguin) is canon in an SBS. He confirmed that novel A is canon. Art NUE isn't canon, but that is because it is featured artwork from a live event. We don't treat cover stories as canon, so bringing up Art NUE is a null point.

Everything else in the magazine (like the Charlotte family) has been considered canon. I concede that this magazine has some discrepancies with Vivre Card, like Oars' height, but there are no sources contradicting what is written in this novel. I don't understand why, after everything else in the magazines except artwork is canon and after we treated this as canon from the page's creation, Klobis and ST demand that other people argue why it is canon instead of why it isn't. The burden of proof for this novel being non-canon is on you two, and your argument "we don't have a second source to say it is" isn't convincing the majority. I, too, agree with Rhavkin that novel Law is canon. 21:03, July 5, 2019 (UTC)

No that means Oda created the backstory himself, not that the novel is canon. SeaTerror (talk) 21:18, July 5, 2019 (UTC)

It is Sakagami who use Oda's backstory to write the novel. Oda is not the author. --Klobis (talk) 04:57, July 11, 2019 (UTC)
 * Magazine Vol.1 says Tama Tama no Mi is an unknwon type fruit. But if Oda checked it, he could choose the type. It means the DF list page was written by ordinary writers and Oda did not involve the page's contents. Therefore it is wrong that Everything else in the magazine (like the Charlotte family) has been considered canon. If everything in the official magazine is canon, then why isn't everything in the official anime canon? --Klobis (talk) 06:41, July 11, 2019 (UTC)

My thoughts about the issue is that like Kaidou always says we should be a reliable wiki that has confirmed information in it, so until otherwise confirmed cannon or official anything that is not written by Oda shall be considered non-cannon. That is yhe difference between Novel A and Novel Law there is no supporting source that could link Novel Law as cannon unlike Novel A. 08:09, July 11, 2019 (UTC)

This a relevant discussion. In fact, it’ll help us to conclusively decide whether we should consider this novel to be canon or not. Also, is the ‘n’ in ‘novel’ supposed to be non-capitalised? 11:46, July 11, 2019 (UTC)

4:3 non canon. Rhavkin (talk) 08:35, December 17, 2019 (UTC)
 * Says who? Is it so wrong to go easy on this kind of stuff?Awareness Bringer 10:08, December 17, 2019 (UTC)

I'm in favor of this being canon, but majority rules against it. Rhavkin (talk) 11:11, December 17, 2019 (UTC)

I’m also in favor of the novels being canon and will consider them so even if the wiki says there not.(Koopa422 (talk) 14:44, December 17, 2019 (UTC))

It is not consistent with the manga since Law in this novel set sail mano years ago. This is contradiction with him being a supernova two years ago.

79.35.144.160 00:07, July 29, 2020 (UTC)

If this novel is non-canon, can someone provide a section on why it's not canon? Rgilbert27 (talk) 16:43, July 29, 2020 (UTC)


 * It is already explained in the Canon page (in the statement that all novels except Novel A are considered non-canon), and this talk page. Since canon is predominantly a fanmade construct, it's not encyclopedic to have a section like that on the article itself. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 19:41, July 29, 2020 (UTC)


 * This was in One Piece Magazine, the same as Novel A, so can't there be a section on why it's non-canon? Rgilbert27 (talk) 20:55, July 29, 2020 (UTC)


 * Again, this is addressed in the Canon article. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 22:39, July 29, 2020 (UTC)


 * Still should be a section for here. Rgilbert27 (talk) 22:50, July 29, 2020 (UTC)