yes the ML did, but at the time the MC found that intriguing since a command has never worked on the MC before. the second time in that area with the 2nd ML, the MC and the ML had already started forming a bond. they have a connection in that moment that is being forced apart. Hence the 2nd ML’s command causing the MC to drop when it never even worked prior to that interaction.
I mean I understand what you’re saying but it doesn’t negate that the author doesn’t even follow their own established narrative lore and simply just wants things to happens as they choose. Why even present the first duel with the 2nd ML in that case. Just have the ML and MC meet some other way and especially not in a way that’s makes zero sense of the ML “winning” against the undefeated MC if he’s only going to cheat and it be ignored that he cheated and doesn’t even actually deserve the MC’s attention because he didn’t so fairly like everyone else who had attempted before. It’s bad writing.
they did mention that he cheated. honestly i’m that critical of a reader to argue if its bad writing or not. i’m here for funsies.
I mean I am too for the most part just here for fun but at no point does the author / character acknowledge the cheating to win. It’s even worse then that ML duels 2nd ML and promptly loses to him making ML ‘s initial win even more egregious. Sorry I just dislike inconsistent writing takes me completely out of the fantasy.
I’m confused what makes the ML special didn’t he literally cheat during his and MC’s first duel by using a “command” why does he get a pass but the 2nd ML isn’t allowed the same leniency? Plus as a 1st year he wouldn’t even allowed in the 2nd year arena as well so why are all these world building established rules said to the audience and then moments later thrown out.