Has Modern Dragon Ball made the Dragon Ball World too small?

[TheMikado]

While this is not directly related to the 28 mortal planet issue circulating, (Personally I have little issue with it) it does beg a wider question.

Modern Dragon Ball consists of not only of Super, but the movies, Jaco, DB minus, etc. In a weird way it expands the universe greatly while simultaneously limiting its possibilities.

Allow me to explain:
The original Dragon Ball manga was a narrative of exploring unknown places. It was adventure based.
It culminated in Goku winning over the greatest threat to the Earth.
Rather than stay at this level Toriyama expanded out into the universe. It opened new levels and new worlds and implied an infinite possibility.
When we meet Frieza he is the ruler and strongest in the universe. Thus closing the door on the possibility of stronger beings. Or at least so we thought.
We are then introduced to Trunks, who both surprises us with SSJ as well as again opening the possibility that time travel is possible in the Dragon Ball universe.
We begin to imagine infinite and alternate timelines due to the possibility.
Further in the Boo saga we get a real introduction to both otherworld and the demon realm and the land of the kaioshin. Implying beings from other worlds can still pose a challenge.

Modern Dragon Ball has introduced a number of concept. The Galactic police, the Galaxy King, Gods of Destruction, Angels, Zen'o God of everything and the 12 universes, Time rings. However in opening these worlds its simultaneously closed the door behind them.

We know the finite number of universes and in this arc 7 of them will be destroyed. ( We are all assuming and banking on them being restored)
We know there are not infinite timelines and only 5 different timelines exist.
We know there is nothing above Zen'o and there is nothing above the Super Dragonballs.

While it has certainly expanded the scope of what we KNOW. It has greatly diminished the scope of what is POSSIBLE.

Is this a boon to the series or not? My personal feelings on this have been consistent.
Modern Dragon Ball rises far to quickly in its hierarchy and concepts while failing to expand outward before moving to an expanded concept.
For instance I feel the concept of Universe 6 and the other universes should have been expanded more before moving to the tournament of power.
Things such as Dragon Ball Minus and Jaco certainly help in that horizontal exploration and I am thankful for them. Enjoyment of them aside.

So what are the thoughts on this. Has Modern Dragon Ball put unnecessary limits on what is in the Dragon Ball Universe? Should the narrative be taking a more horizontal approach similar to an adventure story rather than the vertical approach of continually shooting up the hierarchy ladder. It should be said there is nothing wrong with the vertical approach itself but as with all ladders there comes a time when you reach the top. So the question also becomes if we are already there, where should we go from here?

[sintzu]

Things that we imagined possible have now been shut down so yes, it has. We've always wondered what else was out there in U7 but now that's been answered with no one.

The main issue I have with introducing 6 new universes at once is not only them not developing these characters but also killing each universe' potential by having them be nobodies so what we thought to offer endless posibilities in BOG has been killed in these universes. U6 has Hit and U11 has the pride troopers so they're a bit better off but not by much. It remains to be seen what they do with the other 4.

[DragonBallFoodie]

As this thread's context refers to the DB World, I think that maybe the world has become too small. The contrast can be seen: early DB made its world look wide and open, filled with all sorts of incredible adventures and sights. Then the appearance of aliens and gods from other realms (and timelines) made the world look small.



I would not say however the world had become too small, but I can't deny that thanks to DB's characteristic escalating power scale there's not many opponents for Goku and the Z-Fighters to fight.

DB - Goku was fighting other martial arts warriors and demons

DBZ - he was fighting alien beings, killer androids, a genetic freak and a pink candy-eating demon.

(DBGT - he was fighting evil god dragons, though this is confirmed to be another timeline)

DBS - he's been fighting gods of destruction, beings from other universes (including one notable time-manipulator), his own evil alternate self. This series is ongoing though, so hopefully things aren't really done.


I sometimes wonder how far Goku can go and how many barriers he can break, fictionally speaking. Still, DBS has had to raise the power level of its supporting cast (Tien, Krillin, Master Roshi), most notably Frieza, who is scheming somewhere on how to take down Goku and the Gods. It sounds like an alternate solution that might help: instead of introducing new more powerful opponents, try bringing back the old opponents and make them more powerful too.

[ABED]

Sure, the more knowledgeable/familiar you are with the world, the smaller it seems. If you could teleport wherever you want, things would seem really small.

I think some put too much emphasis on the world building instead of story. That goes for writers and fans.

[TheMikado]

Sure, the more knowledgeable/familiar you are with the world, the smaller it seems. If you could teleport wherever you want, things would seem really small.

That said, I think some put too much emphasis on the world building instead of story.

I don’t think that’s fair to say. Some people prefer the story and some appreciate the world building. For instance I just read Jurassic Park the book and the world building was fantastic.
However the story particularly the ending was unbelievably awful. So much so that if the movie didn’t exist I would have left the book with a bad taste in my mouth. Actually that’s a perfect example of where the world building for exceeds the story and for some people one holds more weight then the other. Personally the lore and world building is my favorite aspect of the series which I’ve said several times over. It’s also why seeing limitations or seeming retcons of previous information is such a disappointment for me. I would like an expansion rather than a contraction.

Let me give you an example of hypothetical lore building:

The origins of he Saiyans
Hypothetically lore 1)
A demon realm scientist, seeking to create a being of unlimited power and fueled by pure rage created he Saiyan race and life forms with the intention of spreading havoc throughout the universe. It’s why Saiyans seem to have unlimited power, transformations, Zenkais, ability to mate with other races, etc.

Hypothetical lore 2.
Saiyans evolved naturally from apes. There are only about 100 Saiyans left in the multiverse between universe 6&7.

One bit of lore caps the number of Saiyans othet there while one adds lore to make the power and possibly of Saiyan hybrids seem almost limitless and anything possible. As stated my preference is to see what can be done with the lore and I like to see and expand. The story is always secondary to the world building for me personally even though the story is a close third following characterization for me.

[ABED]

I think it's very fair. I read comments where people care more about the continuity and canon and the mythology, etc. than about the story on its own merits. Lore is interesting to a point. Too much detail and it confuses things and is beside the point. Does the story emotionally engage you or make you laugh? That's way more important to me and I think most people than if the story "fully" explores the concepts it sets up. Concepts are relatively easy, what isn't easy and what I find way more interesting is getting caught up in a story. Do the characters do or say something unexpected? Does the story turn a trope on its head? Do the characters say something that catches me off guard? Is the dialog fun to listen to? Does the story move well or is it too slow? Those are the things I'm interested in, not if we fully explore every nook and cranny of every concept that is introduced. Doing so would likely cause the story to drag severely.

Do you really want the origin of the Saiyan race to be lore (1)?

[TheMikado]

I think it's very fair. I read comments where people care more about the continuity and canon and the mythology, etc. than about the story on its own merits. Lore is interesting to a point. Too much detail and it confuses things and is beside the point. Does the story emotionally engage you or make you laugh? That's way more important to me and I think most people than if the story "fully" explores the concepts it sets up. Concepts are relatively easy, what isn't easy and what I find way more interesting is getting caught up in a story. Do the characters do or say something unexpected? Does the story turn a trope on its head? Do the characters say something that catches me off guard? Is the dialog fun to listen to? Does the story move well or is it too slow? Those are the things I'm interested in, not if we fully explore every nook and cranny of every concept that is introduced. Doing so would likely cause the story to drag severely.

Do you really want the origin of the Saiyan race to be lore (1)?

Taking a preference of story over lore is 100% opinion. There are numerous literary examples going both ways. They best pieces typically uses execute both well. Things like Tolkien or Harry Potter, but also things like Magic or D&D where he lore is primary.

As to your question, it’s absurd when Dragon Ball consists of so much lore in itself. We didn’t get stories about friezes empire or detailed stories until later. The history of the saiyans, SSJ, Namekians, SSG. ALL LORE. The idea that we would need a full on story to explain lore in Dragonball is absurd when 90% of what we actually know about it’s universe is lore. No matter how you want to defend it, can cannot deny that lore is a huge part of the franchise and arguably there is more lore than story. The stories that have been covered have only been an extremely small amount in terms of the overall lore of the world. We know nothing of this histories or stories of Buus destruction other than what occurred. Nothing of most of 28 planets other than their existence. Or planet Salada for example. The idea that we would need a story to introduce lore in the Dragonball universe makes no sense when most of what we know about it is told through lore and not shown as stories.

[ABED]

No matter how you want to defend it, can cannot deny that lore is a huge part of the franchise

Yeah, you have 600+ episodes, there's going to be a ton of lore, but ultimately, stories like the Freeza arc weren't about Freeza's empire and how that all worked, it was the story of a tyrant finally getting his comeuppance from a member of the race he dismissed and feared. We got what we needed for that story to work.

Tolkien has TOO much lore in the stories, to the point where it's distracting and even confusing.

There are numerous literary examples going both ways.

Such as?

Magic the Gathering is a game, not a story.

[TheMikado]

No matter how you want to defend it, can cannot deny that lore is a huge part of the franchise

Yeah, you have 600+ episodes, there's going to be a ton of lore, but ultimately, the story wasn't about Freeza's empire and how that all worked, it was the story of a tyrant finally getting his comeuppance from a member of the race he dismissed and feared. We got what we needed for that story to work.

Tolkien has TOO much lore in the stories, to the point where it's distracting and even confusing.

There are numerous literary examples going both ways.

Such as?

Magic the Gathering is a game, not a story.

What the heck?? You ask for examples which is what the Tolkien books are and then immediately dismissed it by saying it has “too much lore” despite being one of the highest selling authors of all time.... like sheesh. It’s clear the world at large does not agree with your opinion what was he entire point. A LARGE amount of people like lore. Just because YOU don’t doesn’t make it true for most people because you say so. The point of magic or DD was to emphasize the idea that lore on its own can and is interesting even without story. That’s the point! Some people like the mythology and some don’t. Generally the best stories do both but don’t both well is not a requirement to be wnjoyable. As depending on where you fall on that spectrum one can make up for the other.

In the case Dragonball I’ve repeated said I found the lore the most interesting part so when the lore and world building seems to place hard limits on that lore I’m just not going to be happy with it because that’s what I like. The idea that story is greater than lore is and continues to be your own opinions.

[JulieYBM]

Why is having a 'small world' a problem when Dragon Ball isn't about listing who won what war or when famine struck? The world is just a backdrop for the characters to exist in an interact with.

[Doctor.]

No, Dragon Ball itself made the Dragon World too small. Super is just going through the same mistakes Toriyama did. The man always lacked creativity when it comes to world building.

[Chuquita]

World building was never Toriyama's strong suit, imo. Oda's worlds islands are full of world building.
Toriyama has stronger choreography though, imo.

[ABED]

Can we get concrete about this? What examples of there in Toriyama's work is there of weak world building and what specific examples can you give of good world building?

What greater value does exploring Freeza's empire bring to DB beyond exposition?

Lore is often abstract and while it's interesting to think about, it's easy to come up with ideas. It's much harder to execute them and come up with a story. And when I say story, I'm including characters as I don't consider story and character separate. It's fun to think of the implications and the lore, I don't mind that Toriyama didn't explore everything. The stories are already quite long, and I'm happy with what I got. If you expanded every bit of lore and every character, the story begins to become unruly and unfocused.

The size of the world feeling like it shrinks is inevitable and I don't necessarily mind it, but I would prefer that they figure out an ending which would give meaning to it all because after a certain point, you've reached the top.

[TheMikado]

I think it’s interesting that we have two different opinions, one is that Toriyama was good at world building and the other is that he never was good at it.

I actually feel that Toriyama was actually quite skilled at world and lore building. The issue is after deviating from the original adventure formula his world building became much more vertical in structure. For instance when space is introduced we don’t have space aliens vowing earth in the main manga on a regular basis, further when we go to out into space we only visit one planet. Even in Trunks timeline we are introduced to the concept of time travel but the main no other timelines are visited or explored despite the narrative allowing such.

In my opinion Toriyama always did an excellent job of allowing other and more possibilities to exist even if he doesn’t explore them in the main story which is Gokus story.
And I find that to be perfectly fine. The issue as I’ve explained is that where these great possibilities once existed there are now definitive caps on things like the timelines, universes, powers of those inhabitants, and Zeno being he ultimate end cap to everything.

For instance we know the likelihood of a timeline where Vegeta is sent to earth is greatly diminished unless it is one of the 5 timelines. The possibilities of the stories that can occur have been diminished where previously introduced concepts should and would have allowed for infinite possibilities even if unexplored in the main storyline. Now we know there aren’t too many deviations that can actually exist in the Dragonball universe and reality as a whole.

[ABED]

The issue as I’ve explained is that where these great possibilities

My thinking is that they aren't great, they're just possibilities. Execution is what makes something good or bad. There are infinite stories that can be told, so I don't feel cheated when we don't see them.

[Doctor.]

What examples of there in Toriyama's work of weak world building

The fact that he reuses concepts all the time (the God water being used in two arcs; the fact that Karin and Kami, along with Kaio (when he was introduced) and Kaioshin basically have the same job), that he retcons something major once per arc (the God hierarchy is a pretty good example) and that he never gives any depth to his world (the fact that Namek is such a basic, primitive planet but somehow it has space travel technology superior to Earth's is a good example of this; we can assume that it was the atmospheric catastrophe that led to the planet's state, but I don't think the series ever outright says it, so we're left with headcanon).

[ABED]

What examples of there in Toriyama's work of weak world building

The fact that he reuses concepts all the time (the God water being used in two arcs; the fact that Karin and Kami, along with Kaio (when he was introduced) and Kaioshin basically have the same job), that he retcons something major once per arc (the God hierarchy is a pretty good example) and that he never gives any depth to his world (the fact that Namek is such a basic, primitive planet but somehow it has space travel technology superior to Earth's is a good example of this; we can assume that it was the atmospheric catastrophe that led to the planet's state, but I don't think the series ever outright says it, so we're left with headcanon).

We're left to infer the connection, that's not the same thing as making things up in our own minds, and what value would making Namek more complex than it was have added to the story?

I'll grant you the stuff about the hierarchy because we don't know anything and Kami doesn't do anything except create the DB's which was learn is due to his Namekian heritage than a power he has because he's god.

[Doctor.]

We're left to infer the connection, that's not the same thing as making things up in our own minds, and what value would making Namek more complex than it was have added to the story?

I'm not saying he should have made Namek more complex. I gave an example of how a lack of depth and explanation leaves us with seemingly contradicting ideas and we have to tie them together on our own. That's not good world building. An explanation that the spaceship and the floating platforms in some of the houses are remnants of the civilization prior to the cataclysm, or maybe they were wishes on the Dragon Balls, anything would have been fine.

[ABED]

We're left to infer the connection, that's not the same thing as making things up in our own minds, and what value would making Namek more complex than it was have added to the story?

I'm not saying he should have made Namek more complex. I gave an example of how a lack of depth and explanation leaves us with seemingly contradicting ideas and we have to tie them together on our own. That's not good world building. An explanation that the spaceship and the floating platforms in some of the houses are remnants of the civilization prior to the cataclysm, or maybe they were wishes on the Dragon Balls, anything would have been fine.

We got the explanation - the cataclysm destroyed their civilization. I don't even see how this is world building, good or bad. I think you are arguing a lack of coherent narrative.

[Doctor.]

We got the explanation - the cataclysm destroyed their civilization. I don't even see how this is world building, good or bad. I think you are arguing a lack of coherent narrative.

The cataclysm explained why they were such few Namekians left, that's all the story gave us. I'm arguing a lack of coherent world building. You don't go to North Korea and find flying cars among the farmers.