Steven UnIVerse: 4shadowing

[theNater]

Bismuth probably wasn't just bubbled, she was inside Lion's mane, which is sort of its own pocket dimension and wouldn't be affected.

It's also likely that Lapis was inside of Pearl's gem, since that's where she seems to have stored the mirror (and, therefore, Lapis was incidentally protected by Rose's shield.)

In Buddy's Book, we see a lion that is probably Lion, but not pink. So his mane wouldn't have been available for storage space at the end of the war.

In Same Old World, Lapis' recounting of events shows a burst in the sky, presumably the corruption weapon, before she is picked up by Pearl.

[theNater]

So I've been mulling over a new theory, and I wanted to see if anybody here wanted to weigh in.

I suspect that flight is a standard Gem power, just one that most Gems don't know how to activate. We know that a Gem's gem can certainly lift itself off the ground, as this is a standard part of the reforming process. But we've also seen several Gems exhibit various behaviors that I suspect are other uses of this ability:

Lapis: While she always has her wings out to fly, she is apparently able to accelerate and maneuver in space, where there is no air to push against.

Sapphire: In Keystone Motel, she rises off the ground to place herself on the bed without apparent effort. Similarly, she floats down to the ground after jumping off the sky arena in The Answer.

Peridot: Her ability to generate significant lift by finger-helicopter is...suspect. But she could be generating lift with her gem, and just think it's the fingers doing the work.

Amethyst: She occasionally hovers and/or changes direction while shapeshifted. This is very noticeable in Beach Party, when she hovers as a baseball bat and some sort of racket.

Ruby(aka Eyeball): During Bubbled, she sticks to Steven's bubble, as if attracted to it by gravity. But Steven is not similarly pulled towards her, as Newton's Third law suggests. So it seems she's somehow flying herself towards the bubble to simulate gravity.

Steven: His floating powers may be a poorly controlled flight ability. Also note that in Bubbled, he spends most of the time floating in the bubble, but "falls" to the outside when he needs to run, apparently doing the same thing Ruby is doing to stay "grounded".


What do you folks think?

[LaZodiac]

Eeh, possibly.

Also hey the latest four episodes came out. No one really noticed or cared. They are alright, had some good episodes and some bad, but overall nothing happened beyond further cementing that the Crystal Gems are, outright, lying to Steven about Rose and Pink's history.

[Draconi Redfir]

i find the most recent stevenbomb can be pretty well summed up by what this guy says. It's hyped up as this big thing that holds all the important lore awnsers, but then you get a whole bunch of interesting stuff happening offscreen, too much time with the townies, and then you wait another six months.

[Aquillion]

What do you folks think?

I think Peridot explains this during their first visit to the moon. Gems are designed to adapt to a wide variety of planets, so their gravity is artificial and not real (hence why Steven, who has a physical body, can moon-jump on the moon and they can't.)

I think all the examples you gave fall into the rubric of gems being able to cheat their simulated gravity to an extent; a gem's only real weight is their gem itself (which means that if you can find a way to trick your artificial gravity, you only need enough lift to keep it in the air.) However, I don't think this means they can just fly on a whim.

[endoperez]

So I've been mulling over a new theory, and I wanted to see if anybody here wanted to weigh in.

I suspect that flight is a standard Gem power, just one that most Gems don't know how to activate. We know that a Gem's gem can certainly lift itself off the ground, as this is a standard part of the reforming process. But we've also seen several Gems exhibit various behaviors that I suspect are other uses of this ability:

Lapis: While she always has her wings out to fly, she is apparently able to accelerate and maneuver in space, where there is no air to push against.

Sapphire: In Keystone Motel, she rises off the ground to place herself on the bed without apparent effort. Similarly, she floats down to the ground after jumping off the sky arena in The Answer.

Peridot: Her ability to generate significant lift by finger-helicopter is...suspect. But she could be generating lift with her gem, and just think it's the fingers doing the work.

Amethyst: She occasionally hovers and/or changes direction while shapeshifted. This is very noticeable in Beach Party, when she hovers as a baseball bat and some sort of racket.

Ruby(aka Eyeball): During Bubbled, she sticks to Steven's bubble, as if attracted to it by gravity. But Steven is not similarly pulled towards her, as Newton's Third law suggests. So it seems she's somehow flying herself towards the bubble to simulate gravity.

Steven: His floating powers may be a poorly controlled flight ability. Also note that in Bubbled, he spends most of the time floating in the bubble, but "falls" to the outside when he needs to run, apparently doing the same thing Ruby is doing to stay "grounded".


What do you folks think?

I have to disagree with your theory. Most of these are standard animation tricks or visual tropes.

Using wings to fly - if a character has wings, it can fly, no matter whether the wings are big enough or strong enough to actually lift the character into the air. This isn't absolutely true, but it's a much-used visual shorthand that marks a character as someone who can fly. Sometimes wings are used to imply something else - angel wings for innocence, bat wings for being evil or demonic, etc.

Sapphire - she doesn't have legs. Her skirt is seemingly a solid geode. That's a beautiful design for the character, but since she has no legs, that makes it hard to make her walk in a believable way. To make the design work, they made her float.

Peridot - the finger-copter was introduced in a comedic chase scene where she had just ran up a wall, denying physics. Peridot was later a literal Wile E. Coyote stand-in in a comedic episode where physics were constantly defied. The flew away in situations where she must escape for the plot to work - and none of the gems could fly at that point, so it was an easy way to explain her off-screen escape.

Amethyst - Amethyst and Jasper occassionally stay high up in the air, sometimes in preparation for an attack, sometimes they start spinning in place before dashing towards some direction, sometimes Amethyst even floats in place or re-orients herself while she's shape-changed into a baseball bat or some other inanimate object. These are typical animation tricks, often seen in cartoons to emphasize an action or for comedic value.

Various space and/or gravity oddities - they look good.

I agree that the in-universe explanation is likely to be "it's gem magic, in space!", but they're in the show to enable animation tricks. There's no need to read too much into them. They might make for an interesting piece of fanfiction, because the different medium gives it a different context and focus, though, and it would make sense.
Steven's floating powers, on the other hand, are clearly shown and stated to be something special. Steven's floating powers are more important in the context of the story we're being told.

[Rater202]

Eeh, possibly.

Also hey the latest four episodes came out. No one really noticed or cared. They are alright, had some good episodes and some bad, but overall nothing happened beyond further cementing that the Crystal Gems are, outright, lying to Steven about Rose and Pink's history.

Or maybe they don't know the truth themselves?

I mean, do we have any indication that they personally witnessed the kill?

[DigoDragon]

Peridot: Her ability to generate significant lift by finger-helicopter is...suspect. But she could be generating lift with her gem, and just think it's the fingers doing the work.

Do note that this ability was when she had the "limb enhancers", as Era 2 gems lack many of the powers that Era 1 gems have. The copter ability was accomplished through the tech she wore.

Also hey the latest four episodes came out. No one really noticed or cared. They are alright, had some good episodes and some bad, but overall nothing happened beyond further cementing that the Crystal Gems are, outright, lying to Steven about Rose and Pink's history.

Oh I'm sure we noticed. But as you said, "nothing happened", so there's probably not much to talk about.

I don't think the gems are lying to Steven. I think it is more they don't know all the details themselves. We know Rose kept things even from Pearl, her closest ally and friend. And even the version that most gems remember has flaws in the story (pun not intended), as The Trial had pointed out.

I mean, do we have any indication that they personally witnessed the kill?

I think Eyeball was the only gem said to have seen the event.

[LaZodiac]

Oh I'm sure we noticed. But as you said, "nothing happened", so there's probably not much to talk about.

I don't think the gems are lying to Steven. I think it is more they don't know all the details themselves. We know Rose kept things even from Pearl, her closest ally and friend. And even the version that most gems remember has flaws in the story (pun not intended), as The Trial had pointed out.

I think Eyeball was the only gem said to have seen the event.

While Eyeball saw it, she also saw something that has to be wrong. Every story we've heard of Pink Diamond's death was that Rose used her sword. A sword that Bismuth notes is incapable of destroying a gem. So something is clearly up, here.

[Keltest]

While Eyeball saw it, she also saw something that has to be wrong. Every story we've heard of Pink Diamond's death was that Rose used her sword. A sword that Bismuth notes is incapable of destroying a gem. So something is clearly up, here.

Do we actually know that its incapable of damaging a gem, or just that it wont when used correctly? I think theres a significant difference between the two, because the latter allows Rose to override the normal safeties if she makes a conscious and deliberate choice to do so.

[Devonix]

Do we actually know that its incapable of damaging a gem, or just that it wont when used correctly? I think theres a significant difference between the two, because the latter allows Rose to override the normal safeties if she makes a conscious and deliberate choice to do so.

The creator of a weapon should know it's capabilities. And if the sword could already shatter gems then why would Bismuth make a big deal about making her first weapon capable of shattering gems when she created the breaking point.

[Rater202]

The breaking point isn't a weapon capable of shattering gems(that's most weapons)

It's a weapon that's sole purpose is shattering gems. It's actually rather impractical for anything else.

[DigoDragon]

As I remember it, Bismuth said she created the sword specifically for poofing gems, not shattering. Therefore it is possible that what everyone believed was Rose shattering Pink with her sword was a misunderstanding of the weapon's ability.

[John Cribati]

While Eyeball saw it, she also saw something that has to be wrong. Every story we've heard of Pink Diamond's death was that Rose used her sword. A sword that Bismuth notes is incapable of destroying a gem. So something is clearly up, here.

Not incapable, designed. And the ocerarching theme for most of the protagonists is that they're doing things they weren't designed to do, or learning to overcome them.

Besides, the sword is still a heavy piece of metal. If Amethyst can crack her gem by falling into a rock, I really don't see a way the sword wouldn't crack or break a Gem if it hits hard enough.

Furthermore, she specifically mentioned the sword could cut through the physical form of any gem in one strike- probablyinfused with the ancient equivalent of destabilizer technology- not that you couldn't, say, bash something with the flat and not break it because it's a gem.

[Devonix]

Not incapable, designed. And the ocerarching theme for most of the protagonists is that they're doing things they weren't designed to do, or learning to overcome them.

Besides, the sword is still a heavy piece of metal. If Amethyst can crack her gem by falling into a rock, I really don't see a way the sword wouldn't crack or break a Gem if it hits hard enough.

Furthermore, she specifically mentioned the sword could cut through the physical form of any gem in one strike- probablyinfused with the ancient equivalent of destabilizer technology- not that you couldn't, say, bash something with the flat and not break it because it's a gem.

The line is explicitly Destroying the physical form but " NEVER " the gem. If it wad capable of shattering then that's simply poor writing for that line to be there.

[Keltest]

The line is explicitly Destroying the physical form but " NEVER " the gem. If it wad capable of shattering then that's simply poor writing for that line to be there.

A hammer is meant to drive nails into objects without breaking the nail. That doesn't mean that it cant damage nails, just that it wont when you use it correctly. But if I set out to break some nails with a hammer, then those nails are getting broked.

[John Cribati]

The line is explicitly Destroying the physical form but " NEVER " the gem. If it wad capable of shattering then that's simply poor writing for that line to be there.

I know the series plays fast and loose with physics, but the sword is a hard thing. You can crack or breaj a Gem's gem by hitting it hard enough with a hard thing. Unless you mean to tell me the sword will magically become soft if it comes in contact with a gem, there's no conceivable way you can't break a Gem with it if you hit it hard enough.

[Devonix]

I know the series plays fast and loose with physics, but the sword is a hard thing. You can crack or breaj a Gem's gem by hitting it hard enough with a hard thing. Unless you mean to tell me the sword will magically become soft if it comes in contact with a gem, there's no conceivable way you can't break a Gem with it if you hit it hard enough.

What can and can't break or crack a gem in the show is something they've played fast and loose with. Take amythyst She's been hit by things with far far more force than simply falling on a rock before and not cracked.

Also remember it's a show with essentually magic. The show says that the sword can never shatter a gem. so we have to take that at face value unless proven otherwise.

[Keltest]

What can and can't break or crack a gem in the show is something they've played fast and loose with. Take amythyst She's been hit by things with far far more force than simply falling on a rock before and not cracked.

Also remember it's a show with essentually magic. The show says that the sword can never shatter a gem. so we have to take that at face value unless proven otherwise.

the show has also said that the sword has shattered a gem. So which do we take at face value?

[Devonix]

the show has also said that the sword has shattered a gem. So which do we take at face value?

The show didn't say that the sword shattered a gem. What happens is that one character in the show said that they saw someone with a sword shatter Pink Diamond And then had another character say that the sword owned by the person believed to have shattered Diamond was incapable of doing that.

[Keltest]

The show didn't say that the sword shattered a gem. What happens is that one character in the show said that they saw someone with a sword shatter Pink Diamond And then had another character say that the sword owned by the person believed to have shattered Diamond was incapable of doing that.

Now youre moving the goalposts. You asked for a reason to doubt Bismuth. I gave you one, and now youre saying that Bismuth's word overrides that of other characters because... reasons, I guess.

[Devonix]

Now youre moving the goalposts. You asked for a reason to doubt Bismuth. I gave you one, and now youre saying that Bismuth's word overrides that of other characters because... reasons, I guess.

What I'm trying to say that the entire bismuth story makes no sense in the narritive if Rose's sword could shatter Pink. Is it possible that it could. Yes. But that means that they created a story with no purpose.

[Keltest]

What I'm trying to say that the entire bismuth story makes no sense in the narritive if Rose's sword could shatter Pink. Is it possible that it could. Yes. But that means that they created a story with no purpose.

In what way does it not make sense? Its not like Bismuth invented the concept of shattering gems for the war. It was certainly possible even before she started inventing tools to do it quickly and efficiently.

[Rater202]

Bismuth made Roe's sword,

Bismuth explicitly stated that Rose's sword could dispell a gems form but not shatter them.

Bismuth, being the one who forged the sword, is an expert on the sword.

For Rose to have shattered Pink with her sword, Bismuth would have had to have been wrong about her creation's abillities.

narratively speaking, the point of Bismuth describing Rose's sword so is to cast doubt on later claims thatRose shattered Pink, as all of those claims indicate that it was done with a sword that can't shatter gems.

If Bismuth was wrong about the sword shattering gems and rose used it to shatter Pink, then there would have been absolutely no point to having Bismuth claim that the sword couldn't shatter gems or the resulting doubt onehether or not Rose really did it.

It'd be a shaggy dog story.

[Devonix]

In what way does it not make sense? Its not like Bismuth invented the concept of shattering gems for the war. It was certainly possible even before she started inventing tools to do it quickly and efficiently.

Because it makes no sense to have a scene who's only purpose is to have a weapon creator explicitly stated that this weapon can't do something and then ask the audience to treat it as not super important information.

What other purpose does the scene serve if her sword had the capacity to shatter?

Since the shattering got brought up by eyeball everything related to the story has made it more and more likely that not only didn't she shatter pink with her sword. But that she's likely not shattered at all.

[Keltest]

Bismuth made Roe's sword,

Bismuth explicitly stated that Rose's sword could dispell a gems form but not shatter them.

Bismuth, being the one who forged the sword, is an expert on the sword.

For Rose to have shattered Pink with her sword, Bismuth would have had to have been wrong about her creation's abillities.

narratively speaking, the point of Bismuth describing Rose's sword so is to cast doubt on later claims thatRose shattered Pink, as all of those claims indicate that it was done with a sword that can't shatter gems.

If Bismuth was wrong about the sword shattering gems and rose used it to shatter Pink, then there would have been absolutely no point to having Bismuth claim that the sword couldn't shatter gems or the resulting doubt onehether or not Rose really did it.

It'd be a shaggy dog story.

Two problems with that.

The first is that Rose could have shattered Pink Diamond in any other number of ways. She didn't need to use a sword, or her sword. She could have used a big rock, or shapeshifted her hand into a pickaxe, or anything. Hitting immobile objects really hard isn't a particularly insurmountable task, so saying that this specific item couldn't do it does little to cast doubt on her ability to do so. Which brings me to the second problem.

Rose's character is fairly well established at this point. She came into conflict with Bismuth specifically because she doesn't want to shatter gems. She wanted to avoid it badly enough that she poofed and bubbled one of her closest companions rather than let it come to that. There is still plenty of narrative support for the idea that Rose didn't actually shatter Pink Diamond, or that there was more going on than the surviving Crystal Gems know about. Frankly, I would say her actions towards Bismuth are significantly more supportive of that than Bismuth's line about the sword. You don't need to say "she literally couldn't have done it" to establish that the story as presented is probably false.

Because it makes no sense to have a scene who's only purpose is to have a weapon creator explicitly stated that this weapon can't do something and then ask the audience to treat it as not super important information.

What other purpose does the scene serve if her sword had the capacity to shatter?

Since the shattering got brought up by eyeball everything related to the story has made it more and more likely that not only didn't she shatter pink with her sword. But that she's likely not shattered at all.

It helps establish Rose's character. She's a warrior who's weapon will not permanently damage her opponents. It casts doubt on Eyeball's account because of the measures Rose went to in order to avoid doing exactly that.

[Draconi Redfir]

The first is that Rose could have shattered Pink Diamond in any other number of ways. She didn't need to use a sword, or her sword. She could have used a big rock, or shapeshifted her hand into a pickaxe, or anything. Hitting immobile objects really hard isn't a particularly insurmountable task, so saying that this specific item couldn't do it does little to cast doubt on her ability to do so. Which brings me to the second problem.

To quote blue Diamond. "IT WAS A SWORD!"

so A sword was definitely involved. it's possible that Rose used someone else's sword? But the whole point of the trial was to establish that no one seems to know for sure, how Rose was even able to GET to an undefended pink diamond is up to debate, if it was even Rose at all.

[Devonix]

You can doubt anything any character says unless you were directly seeing it. What matters is why the show runner has a scene in a specific place.

For me narrative reasoning trumps individual character believe ability.

You can have a character that lies in every scene they have ever been in. But if it makes sense for the writer to have what they are saying in this one scene be true I'm likely to believe it. Even with minimal in Universe evidence.

Though that last bit is entirely personal.

[Rater202]

Two problems with that.

The first is that Rose could have shattered Pink Diamond in any other number of ways. She didn't need to use a sword, or her sword. She could have used a big rock, or shapeshifted her hand into a pickaxe, or anything. Hitting immobile objects really hard isn't a particularly insurmountable task, so saying that this specific item couldn't do it does little to cast doubt on her ability to do so. Which brings me to the second problem.

Rose's character is fairly well established at this point. She came into conflict with Bismuth specifically because she doesn't want to shatter gems. She wanted to avoid it badly enough that she poofed and bubbled one of her closest companions rather than let it come to that. There is still plenty of narrative support for the idea that Rose didn't actually shatter Pink Diamond, or that there was more going on than the surviving Crystal Gems know about. Frankly, I would say her actions towards Bismuth are significantly more supportive of that than Bismuth's line about the sword. You don't need to say "she literally couldn't have done it" to establish that the story as presented is probably false.



It helps establish Rose's character. She's a warrior who's weapon will not permanently damage her opponents. It casts doubt on Eyeball's account because of the measures Rose went to in order to avoid doing exactly that.

I'm not saying that Rose dind't shatter Pink.

But literally everyone who describes the event describes her as having shattered Pink with the sword that explicitly can't chatter gems.

If the Sword was used to Shatter Pink, then there's no point in Bismuth having said that the Sword can't shatter gems or the resulting doubt that Bismuth's claims put on the official story.

Meaning either 1: Rose didn't shatter Pink

2: Rose shattered Pink under differant circumstances than what Eyeball testified to.

[Devonix]

To quote blue Diamond. "IT WAS A SWORD!"

so A sword was definitely involved. it's possible that Rose used someone else's sword? But the whole point of the trial was to establish that no one seems to know for sure, how Rose was even able to GET to an undefended pink diamond is up to debate, if it was even Rose at all.

Blue diamond only has second hand info though. Hopefully we'll see what actually happened this coming season.