Dragon Ball plotholes and your theories!

[matt0044]

If Trunks isn't stated, one could say that Toriyama was just reusing those images.

[Saiga]

Or that Piccolo was picturing their deaths when Cell mentioned them.

[LiamKav]

#17 and #18 end up being the main artificial humans is more like a retcon then a plot hole.

Just to clear something up here...

A retcon is literally retroactive continuity... it is something that has always been assumed to be true, but we are now only just learning. Goku being a Saiyan all along is a retcon, even though Toriyama didn't intend that when he started writing. Likewise, Vegeta being Prince of the Saiyans could be argued to be a retcon, as it's not mentioned for over a year (?) after his first appearence.

Having Trunks call them #19 and #20, and then later on have him pretend that he'd actually said #17 and #18 isn't a retcon. It's a cock-up. As another example, the Dragon Balls actually being invented by an alien is a retcon in and of itself, but the changing of the original origin story isn't really a retcon, more a "let's pretend we never said that" thing.

As for plotholes: Anyone want to explain why characters sometimes develop telepathy and then promptly forget that they have it? I will not accept "muffin button" as a response.

[Herms]

He mention Trunks, sadly: "It would have been good to get the cells of that 'Trunks' kid too, but there were already enough Saiyans."

[Saiga]

I always thought a retcon was when we learned of something that conflicted with past events, so Goku being a Saiyan wouldn't be one when we didn't know what he was to begin with.

As for telepathy, maybe they just didn't find many situations where it would be useful?

@Herms Can't that be the Trunks from his timeline?

[Cold Skin]

@Herms Can't that be the Trunks from his timeline?

That's what I always thought too.
Cell was in development during all of Trunks' history until the boy came back in time, and during all this time, the spying insect was trying to find data.
So I always thought that he meant it didn't bother to collect Trunks' DNA in the alternative reality where he was developping, the insect basically not collecting further data after everyone's death to the cyborgs.
The survivors Gohan and Trunks - and then the only survivor Trunks - were of no interest to it, for being "just other Saiyans" and Cell already being quite developped with Saiyans' cells. It is likely the insect had the same reaction in the main reality too, not collecting Trunks' data when he killed Freezer and Cold.

[Herms]

@Herms Can't that be the Trunks from his timeline?

But then why mention him in connection with Freeza and Cold's death? That's what the top balloon there is about: "[We] were fortunate to obtain Freeza and his father's cells when they came to Earth.". Then the bottom balloon says "It would have been good to get the cells of that 'Trunks' kid too, but there were already enough Saiyans". That's either a really abrupt change of topic, or we're supposed to assume he's talking about Trunks showing up to kill Freeza and Cold when they invaded, as the pictures illustrate. And remember, Trunks isn't born until over 2 years after Freeza's attack in Earth, so the only Trunks who'd be around then would be a time-travelling one.

[Saiga]

Okay, so THIS Cell comes from a timeline that had a Trunks go back and kill Freeza/Cold, but it still somehow turned out similar to Trunks' timeline.

Yeah.

Ooh, I know! That Trunks freaks out that he killed Freeza and Cold and skedaddles before giving them the heart vaccine or warning them about the Androids.

[Gaffer Tape]

I always thought a retcon was when we learned of something that conflicted with past events, so Goku being a Saiyan wouldn't be one when we didn't know what he was to begin with.

Nope. "Retcon" just means "retroactive continuity." It has no judgment in regards to continuity errors or conflicting information. It's just anything that adds to continuity retroactively, and Goku suddenly becoming an alien does fit that definition. If you'd like, though, technically it *does* implicitly contradict the fact that Goku was not written to be an alien before that, even though it doesn't explicitly contradict anything already established in the story.

[Saiga]

I always thought a retcon was when we learned of something that conflicted with past events, so Goku being a Saiyan wouldn't be one when we didn't know what he was to begin with.

Nope. "Retcon" just means "retroactive continuity." It has no judgment in regards to continuity errors or conflicting information. It's just anything that adds to continuity retroactively, and Goku suddenly becoming an alien does fit that definition. If you'd like, though, technically it *does* implicitly contradict the fact that Goku was not written to be an alien before that, even though it doesn't explicitly contradict anything already established in the story.

So Goku showing up with four-year old Gohan is a retcon?

[Gaffer Tape]

No, because there's nothing added retroactively. We see Goku fly away with his new bride. We cut to five years later, and we immediately see Goku with a child. That's in perfect chronology, both in universe and out of universe. Nothing is retroactively added to the story.

As a counter-example, if you're watching a sitcom, for example, and you have a lead character who's, let's say, middle aged and established over several seasons, and, then, at some random point, they introduce that character's grown child who has never been seen, mentioned, or thought of before, that's a retcon. If, however, that child has always been part of the writer's/producer's/creative staff's intents for that character but has just been held back until an appropriate moment has been found, that's not a retcon.

[mister yummy]

OK, here's how I fill the plothole of which androids are mentioned by Trunks.

Trunks goes back in time to the universe we're familiar with, kills Freeza and his father, and tells Goku that in his time, #19 and #20 have been terrorising the earth for eyars. He then returns to his own time.

3 years later an entirely different Trunks from yet another timeline goes back to the universe we're familiar with to help fight the androids. In his time, #17 and #18 have been terrorising the Earth.

-----

Tapion's sword could have been given to Future Trunks in an entirely different way than it was given to Present Trunks. We have no way of knowing.

----

Roshi's story about the origin of the Dragonballs could be just a rumor he heard. Afterall, how many people have met God and know the truth? Roshi's met one of those people, but why would they have talked about the Dragonballs?

---

Dr. Frappe could have been Dr. Gero's assistant, or even just a collaberator on #8

---

Goku and Chi-Chi's first date could have happened offscreen during the Red Ribbon Army Saga, or even between the first use of the Dragonballs and when Goku goes to Roshi's island.

I can't think of any more plot holes atm.

[Saiga]

OK, here's how I fill the plothole of which androids are mentioned by Trunks.

Trunks goes back in time to the universe we're familiar with, kills Freeza and his father, and tells Goku that in his time, #19 and #20 have been terrorising the earth for eyars. He then returns to his own time.

3 years later an entirely different Trunks from yet another timeline goes back to the universe we're familiar with to help fight the androids. In his time, #17 and #18 have been terrorising the Earth.

I really like this theory.

[Bussani]

I don't want to come off as dismissive, but doesn't that idea answer one question by creating a bunch more? Where would the extra timeline come from? Why would it have different androids? Why would its Trunks end up in the timeline we're familiar with, and where did the other Trunks go?

I guess those questions are less plot-holey, though...

[Saiga]

I don't want to come off as dismissive, but doesn't that idea answer one question by creating a bunch more? Where would the extra timeline come from? Why would it have different androids? Why would its Trunks end up in the timeline we're familiar with, and where did the other Trunks go?

I guess those questions are less plot-holey, though...

New Trunks was travelling through time to a different timeline and Old Trunks was travelling to our timeline when the two literally bumped into each other and got knocked astray into the opposite timelines.

[mister yummy]

When the first Trunks went back again, he endedu p in yet anothe timeline. Meanwhile, the second trunks, the first time he went back, also ended up in YET ANOTHER timeline. They both end up in the prime universe for the same reason Cell ends up there, whatever that may be.

[Daimakku]

Was it ever explained by Android 17 and 18 are more aggressive in Future Trunks' timeline than the main series' timeline? Or why Android 16 exists in this timeline but not in Future Trunk's timeline?

How come Future Trunks didn't just visit Second/New Namek and wish back the Z-Fighters by summoning Porunga? It seems like the logical thing to do to me. Then maybe train in the Hyperbolic Time Chamber until they're all powerful enough to take on the androids. Or hell, maybe Porunga might just be strong enough to wish for the androids to disappear..?

[Bussani]

Was it ever explained by Android 17 and 18 are more aggressive in Future Trunks' timeline than the main series' timeline? Or why Android 16 exists in this timeline but not in Future Trunk's timeline?

Not really. Fans come up with all sorts of theories. It seems like #19 and #20 didn't exist in Trunks's timeline (at least to his knowledge), so maybe Gero worked on #17 and #18 more exclusively in that timeline and programmed them to be that way.

How come Future Trunks didn't just visit Second/New Namek and wish back the Z-Fighters by summoning Porunga? It seems like the logical thing to do to me. Then maybe train in the Hyperbolic Time Chamber until they're all powerful enough to take on the androids. Or hell, maybe Porunga might just be strong enough to wish for the androids to disappear..?

No one knew where New Namek was.

[Daimakku]

Was it ever explained by Android 17 and 18 are more aggressive in Future Trunks' timeline than the main series' timeline? Or why Android 16 exists in this timeline but not in Future Trunk's timeline?

Not really. Fans come up with all sorts of theories. It seems like #19 and #20 didn't exist in Trunks's timeline (at least to his knowledge), so maybe Gero worked on #17 and #18 more exclusively in that timeline and programmed them to be that way.

How come Future Trunks didn't just visit Second/New Namek and wish back the Z-Fighters by summoning Porunga? It seems like the logical thing to do to me. Then maybe train in the Hyperbolic Time Chamber until they're all powerful enough to take on the androids. Or hell, maybe Porunga might just be strong enough to wish for the androids to disappear..?

No one knew where New Namek was.

I see. Knowing Bulma's genius, I don't think finding New Namek would've been a problem, but I guess you can excuse that by saying they barely had technology available since the androids destroyed most of Capsule Corp. or something.

I just saw episode 98 of DBZK the other day, when Trunks was supposed to go back to the past to tell others that he successfully destroyed the androids. Did he really go back to the past, or was that just a trap to lure Cell into trying to take Trunks' Time Machine and then he'll be able to destroy Cell by bringing him to himself?
I don't recall Trunks going back to the past in the regular Z series. Or was that just something that happened off camera?

[PhoenixEX]

It's not like Akira Toriyama was a Quantum Physics expert, haha. Obviously there were going to be erros and plot holes. It's nice to see them being pointed out though, i'm sure it gives us all more to think about.