From BIONICLEsector01

Are we SURE that acid isn't an elemental power.--Toa Wolf 14:25, 18 September 2012 (PDT)

Yes; there are no Toa of Acid. Master Inika (Talk) 15:15, 18 September 2012 (PDT)

Neither are there, natural, Toa of Shadow, but Shadow is an element. However, a Toa -can- control Shadow after being hit by a Shadow Leech, so the argument is still safe. One just has to be careful in the application.

It has been confirmed many times that Acid is not an element. ζω·τωμαναExternal Image

If acid can't be an element because there aren't any toa name 3 toa of the green.--Toa Wolf 12:56, 19 September 2012 (PDT)

The only known Toa of the Green was one who guarded the Makoki Stone before Vezok and Hakann attempted to steal it, and an Alternate Toa of the Green who served the Toa Empire (BIONICLE Legends 4: Legacy of Evil and Dark Mirror, respectively). Master Inika (Talk) 13:17, 19 September 2012 (PDT)

Not 3, but not 0. There are no Toa of Acid, neither are there Matoran or Turaga of Acid. The only non-Toa element (outside the Legendary Powers) is Sand. There are no beings with an elemental power of Acid whatsoever. Why? I'd say ask Greg, but that hasn't been an option for a while now. ζω·τωμαναExternal Image

Why not?--Toa Wolf 07:39, 27 September 2012 (PDT)

This'll sound cheap, but really just because there aren't. It isn't an element because Greg, the story writer, chose to not have it as an element. ζω·τωμαναExternal Image

Howdy howdy. I'd like to draw attention to a notable quote from 2008, here -- [1] --
1a) The generally accepted term now on BZP for Acid is that it is a non-Toa Element. Is this how you see it?
1a) Correct
Others: [2]
4) Basically, I try to avoid using the term element for something that is not a Toa power, because it causes confusion
12. BZP considers Acid a non-Toa element, but BS01 considers it a power because you said back in 2006 that, and I quote, you "don't consider something to be an element unless there has been a Toa of it." Would you say both BZPower and BS01 are correct?
12) How can both be correct?
12. Well, BS01 goes with your old saying that elements can only elements if they are Toa-controlled. And it's just simply easier to understand that way, because many people keep asking you if Acid can be a Toa-controlled element instead of just an element.
12) Makes sense to me
So, I'm seeing this two ways. Either we look at Sand as an example of "an element is what Greg says is an element" and thereby Acid is also an element, or we say that either because the GBs could have made Toa and Matoran of Sand or because an element is something with canon instances of elemental-based control (note that this is tricky to quantify, as Lehvak can summon acid and Kanoka of Freezing can summon ice, and do Makuta use elemental energy when summoning plasma or manipulating extant gravity? -- what's to say that any instances of control over a substance OR summoning said substance are instances of elemental control?), Acid cannot be considered an element.
The main issue with the 2nd option is this:
Could the GBs create Toa of unusual elements, such as Kinetics, Acid, Crystal, Sand, Shadow etc.?
Those are not Toa elements. Whether or not the GBs could make Toa of those elements, it's possible, but they have not done so.
This wording can probably be picked apart as non-definitive, but it seems like his full intent was to say that the GBs could create Matoran and Toa of Kinetics, Acid, Crystal, Sand, and Shadow should they wish -- and this quote is not unlike the one about Toa and Matoran of Sand:
3. So, sand is an element. Does that mean that it works along the same basic lines as every other element we've seen? If they had wanted to, could the Great Beings have made Matoran and Toa of Sand?
3) Yes
The only stable argument I see against Acid as an element is this: we have no instances of KNOWN elemental control in the Matoran Universe nor on Spherus Magna -- again, Greg's word is that Toa of Acid are possible -- and so it IS an element, just not on Spherus Magna or in the MU.
Raidriar (talk) 02:42, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

So if it is an element, but doesn't appear anywhere... is it really an element? We've debated those semantics to death. Greg was asked that a bajillion times, and any reticence on his part was more to avoid making a definitive statement in case the idea was revisited in the future. Sand is an element outside of the MU specifically because of the Element Lord, but is not within. Acid is not an element in either. -- Dorek Talk External Image 03:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

One such problem is this quote: [6]
1) Well, [the Great Beings] knew elements existed, because they made Toa with elemental powers.
There's an overwhelming implication that the elements exist as standalones regardless of whether or not Toa or Element Lords existed for them. Even if we say, for example -- and would probably have to run this by Greg -- the "don't consider something to be an element unless there has been a Toa of it" rule should be rectified to "don't consider something to be an element unless there has been a Toa or Element Lord of it", Greg's worded it so that the elements exist in the universe -- specifically, as fundamental components of it to be discovered -- independent of beings with elemental power over said elements.
Raidriar (talk) 03:46, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
I guess my understanding is that "there is no Toa of it" is shorthand for the specific mechanics; namely that you have to be able to absorb it as well as generate it. Obviously Elements aren't exclusive to Toa (Sand, but also Shadow), but our only example is the Bohrok, and even then, I think that's just the shields. Its status as a Power was the compromise after years of debate.
I should probably refer you to the discussion on the main page which covers a lot of this; essentially, is the possibility of something definitive enough evidence to include here? I feel like this point falls under that lol. -- Dorek Talk External Image 04:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
According to the BEU the Bohrok Shields contain their powers, not the Bohrok themselves. The book literally says this:
Tool carried by the LEHVAK. This shield secreted a special acid that could eat through any substance on MATA NUI (2) in a matter of seconds.
So it's not their elemental power, it's just the power of their shields.--Surel (Talk) 06:45, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Regardless of the nature or source of the power of the Bohrok, the debate over Acid mostly handles Greg's word that he considers it a "non-Toa element" -- though I did consider the Bohrok, of course, in the RSG Discord server:
are bohrok canonically elemental?
I have not looked into source material enough to know whether or not they actually are (because I suspect neither they nor their shields run on Elemental Power), but even with this considered, the parallel between Sand and Acid is highlighted when you recall that there are not Skakdi of Sand, nor Masks of Sand, and Greg says "Sand is not an MU element" -- which sounds like Greg's "Acid is not a Toa element". Whether a Kanoka of Freezing uses Elemental Power to freeze something in solid ice is one thing; whether the ice created is an "element" is another.
Raidriar (talk) 04:40, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Right, so it really is a matter of semantics; "non-Toa element" is what we call a "power", and is just the way we reached a compromise after a bajillion questions to Greg that mostly resulted in non-answers like that. Ignoring Shadow, which is flexible as it is, Sand showed up afterwards and is really the only exception; it doesn't disprove the rule (not even a rule, just a classification), and more pointedly is an example of something that DOES exist and IS explicitly/textually an element, rather than just a hypothetical. -- Dorek Talk External Image 04:59, 14 April 2021 (UTC)