Talk:Zoan

Ancient Zoan
It was also implied that the Ancient Zoan users are physically stronger than normal Zoans;[9] the two known users have certainly shown size and destructive powers far more powerful than an average Zoan-class user"It was also implied that the Ancient Zoan users are physically stronger than normal Zoans;[9] the two known users have certainly shown size and destructive powers far more powerful than an average Zoan-class user"

I am uneasy with the above statement.

How exactly was it implied that Ancient Zoans are superior. How have the 2 known users shown SIze and destructive power "far more powerful" than average Zoan class usders. To explain more on the second one, we must not consider the power dispalyed by the Zoan user as the fruit alone. The feats that Drake and Jack pulled off, with their Zoan fruit, are also dependent on the ZOan user's physical strength. Rob Lucci explained that Zoans increase the physical stats of their owners and are that Zoan users are the best in close combat. If Zoro for example ate the Gorilla devil furit, and sliced a mountain, you can't use it as an indicataion that The Gorilla devil fruit is "far more powerful" than other average Zoan Devil fruits. The user of that fruit was already cpable of cutting mountains with or without his DF.

A clamity like Jack destroying severl buildings, something he should be able to do caasually with his Zoan Devil fruit, doesn't mean that his Zoan devil fruit is more powerful at all than other Devil fruits.

We do not know enough about X-Drake's abilities without his Devil fruit, to judge how powerful his Devil fruit made him. If X-Drake, for example had eaten a Crocodile Zoan, there is no guarantee he couldn't have pulled it off.

Ancient Zoans are certainly rarer, but I feel it is premature to say they are more powerful. Emp3r0r.Lance (talk) 21:17, June 12, 2016 (UTC)

Carnivorous and Ancient Zoan Strength
The tidbits on Carnivorous and Ancient Zoans being stronger/better adapted for combat than regular Zoans should be removed, as since we have no direct way of confirming it it is very speculatory. Many herbivorous animals in the real world are very powerful such as bison and rhinos, to name a few. Not to mention all the Impel Down guards are herbivorous Zoans. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 22:55, June 12, 2016 (UTC)

All of them?

22:59, June 12, 2016 (UTC)

The reference says Chopper said it. SeaTerror (talk) 23:40, June 12, 2016 (UTC)

Chopper only says they become more aggresive. The rest is speculation. I'm not even sure we should consider carnivorous a "sub-class", though. It seemed more like just "Zoans that are carnivorous" than a separate type. 20:39, July 24, 2016 (UTC)

What Kage said. 20:43, July 24, 2016 (UTC)

I agree with what Kage suggested. 17:54, August 25, 2016 (UTC)

Yeah Kage is right. Saying Ancient/Carnivorous are stronger and etc is speculation. An Ankylosaurus (if such a devil fruit where to exist it would be both ancient zoan/herbivore) could be just as deadly as a Tyrannosaurus Rex. 20:12, September 10, 2016 (UTC)

Mythical naming
I'm posting it here because it concerns some Zoan, but in fact it is a discussion that would go for each fruit article. I see the mythical Zoan fruits are being listed as if their name was "X X no Mi, Model: Y" (X X Fruit, Model: Y), but they are actually named "X X no Mi, Genjushu Model: Y" (X X Fruit, Mythical Model: Y).

Catarina Devon's fruit was named  イヌイヌの実 幻獣種モデル九尾の狐 on chapter 925 and Marco's fruit was named トリトリの実 幻獣種モデル "不死鳥" on Vivre Card.

The "Mythical" bit is part of those fruits names and is ommited in their articles. Gorenja (talk) 12:17, December 1, 2018 (UTC)

Just pointing out that we also have Hito Hito no Mi, Model: Daibutsu(ヒトヒトの実 モデル：大仏) and that one doesn't have "genjūshu"(幻獣種)-part in its name, as seen here. --JouXIII (talk) 13:22, December 1, 2018 (UTC)


 * You are right, maybe adding the Mythical/Ancient bits to the name of the fruit was something Oda decided later on as every of those named after Marineford carry such in their names (including the newly revealed ancient models of Dragon Dragon fruit). I would guess we'll probably have Sengoku's fruit being changed next time (Vivre Card, most likely), but regardless of it I still propose the others have those particles included in their names as they are named like that. As it stands now, except for Sengoku, we are using shortened made up versions of those fruits names. - Gorenja (talk) 18:08, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

Ancient and Mythical are subtypes of the Zoan class, just like the Carnivorous Zoans from Water 7/Enies Lobby. Drake's fruit was referred to as an ancient Zoan on Sabaody. It's not part of the actual name, merely a classification based on the type of creature into which the user can transform. 19:19, January 3, 2019 (UTC)
 * That's like saying we shouldn't include the "Model X", because it's a sub-class of the Ushiushi no Mi or whatever fruit. The full names as presented in the manga include the 幻獣種, it's on equal levels of importance as "Model". • Seelentau 愛 議 21:39, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

Sengoku's Vivre Card has come out and does name it as ヒトヒトの実 幻獣種 モデル："大仏"

So now we have:


 * Devon: イヌイヌの実 幻獣種 モデル 九尾の狐 (Chapter 925)
 * Marco: トリトリの実 幻獣種 モデル "不死鳥" (Vivre Card)
 * Sengoku: ヒトヒトの実 幻獣種 モデル "大仏" (Vivre Card)


 * Drake: リュウリュウの実 古代種 モデル アロサウルス (Chapter 929)
 * Page One: リュウリュウの実 古代種 モデル スピノサウルス (Chapter 929)
 * King: リュウリュウの実 古代種 モデル プテラノドン (Chapter 930)


 * Orochi was introduced as 動物系 幻獣種 ヘビヘビの実 (モデル 八岐大蛇) in Chapter 933.
 * Sengoku was initially introduced as 動物系 幻獣種 ヒトヒトの実 モデル "大仏" SBS Volume 60.

So all of the relevant Devil Fruits include ancient/mythical in their names, either before or after the base name of the fruit. The mythical model / ancient model format is more common and should be used be for consistency. 45.56.153.234 03:47, March 2, 2019 (UTC)

I would support using the full names in their intros and infoboxes. Don't think we should change the page titles, though, that would be a real mouthful. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 05:59, March 2, 2019 (UTC)

Orochi's infobox with the the longer label shows that it's just specifying the classification. Should not be considered part of the actual name. 09:26, March 2, 2019 (UTC)