"Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

[TKA]

You don't prefer Toriyama's manga, then. Good to know.

There aren't enough facepalms in the world. Look, dude, these "gotcha" type posts with no substance in them should be left for twitter or youtube. I'm putting you on my ignore list so I don't have to keep engaging with you.

[AnimeNation101]

Toyotarou along with Nozawa will be interviewed in the Jan 2019 issue of Davinci (already released in Japan).

https://mobile.twitter.com/TOYOTARO_Vju ... 2108305408

Someone will probably be working to translate the DB section soon.

The way toyotaro talks about broly... makes me think he’ll appear sooner than later in the manga , with something non related to the movie ..
Good vibes toyo , always spreading the message of keep on improving

Toyotarou is a good person with good intentions. He's very humble too. His manga continues to sell well and I'm glad for it, it's one of the very few things I still enjoy left about DB. He makes the best out of something that was bad to begin with.

He's someone whom I can accept carrying on the mantle of DB. Not one-time artists like Lee or purely gag artists like Ooshi.

Ooshi isn’t a purely gag artist. She drew and and created the story of the manga for Yo Son Goku and Friends Return and Dragon Ball: Episode of Bardock.

And i enjoyed both. Plus, her art is a thumbs up to me. They’re really wasting her talent having her stuck on Dragon Ball SD. I’m not even asking for her to replace Toyo. I just want them to take Lee and Ooshi and have them do spin off mini manga for some of the other characters in DB to flesh them out while the main manga is busy doing other things. And then maybe later the anime can create ova’s based of the spin off mini manga.

[prince212]

I frankly think that the ending of the manga was handled extremely poorly. We’re supposed to buy this idea that #17’s wish was his way of sticking it to the Zen-Ohs, except that really doesn’t work when you realize that there is absolutely nothing preventing the little psychopaths from just wiping everything out all over again. What exactly did #17’s wish accomplish? It just doesn’t make any sense.

Zenos are showed like dangerous kids if upset , give them his toys and they can be manipulated easy .

Glad in the manga they weren’t in the picture every minute .
17 wish is the same in both mediums, it has the sense of always in this series , save lifes .
17 explanations about the change in his original wish of a boat are kinda “unfunny gags” in both mediums , don’t wanna remember a18 reaction.

Ooshi isn’t a purely gag artist. She drew and and created the story of the manga for Yo Son Goku and Friends Return and Dragon Ball: Episode of Bardock.

And i enjoyed both. Plus, her art is a thumbs up to me. They’re really wasting her talent having her stuck on Dragon Ball SD. I’m not even asking for her to replace Toyo. I just want them to take Lee and Ooshi and have them do spin off mini manga for some of the other characters in DB to flesh them out while the main manga is busy doing other things. And then maybe later the anime can create ova’s based of the spin off mini manga.

Agree with that , episode of bardock was great , give me more of that , she did great and was worthed for an animated version . That’s canon for me , just joking, but I Will love if they explore more of a bardock timeliner , better than those who suggest janemba or things like that for the next .

[Miracles]

Vegeta all of the sudden doing it too can also be seen as a contradiction, there's no hint or foreshadowing that he could do it until he did, and with the kind of character he is, there's no reason he'd train to create a technique like that, so either we're having a difficult/somewhat difficult move Vegeta decided to make while training, making no sense with the character, or just a move he could make up on the fly, making sense with that scene, so 17 doing it isn't any worse than when Vegeta did it.

Well Vegeta did use a self exploding technique in the Majin Buu arc. So him using it in the TOP as a last ditch effort again is fine. It's just random for 17 to try to do it too and then saying he got lucky afterwards. Krillin even states "You didn't detonate!" What are the fans suppose to think? Does this mean 17 tried to self destruct thinking he had a bomb in his body? Or does it mean that it's TOEI's subtle way of saying he no longer has a bomb in him through Krillin's statement?

I will admit, it's not a proven fact that TOEI contradicted the story with the self sacrifice attempt of 17. I jumped the gun in saying so and I apologize for starting a little debate. However it sure is bad writing from TOEI without any explanation on what happened in that instance with 17. So it leaves the audience wondering.

[Marlowe89]

You coming to the conclusion that #17 inventing his own self-destruction technique as "headcanon" is ridiculous

Me coming to that conclusion is exactly what it sounds like, because that's exactly what it is.

I didn't claim that the prospect of 17 inventing his own self-destruction technique is headcanon because he didn't have a precedent to do so (my case about him learning Vegeta's technique was a separate point), I'm saying it's headcanon because it wasn't implied period. The anime never mentions that 17 invented a self-destruction move; only that he can self-destruct and that it's not the same technique as Vegeta's.

Again, I'm not disputing that 17 can create new techniques. That doesn't stop it from being an obvious rationalization.

I'm well aware that #17's case in the Super anime is quite unique. I'm just making the point that such a moment happening in Dragon Ball has foundation. That is not to infer that the moment in particular is wholly consistent with Toriyama's story. But I'm merely making the statement that, with the nature of Dragon Ball's writing, #17 surviving his own self-destruction is not out of norm with how characters can cheat death in the most egregious manner.

Then we fundamentally disagree on what qualifies as a narrative precedent/foundation.

If you concede that 17's case is a staple unique to Toei's writing, and you also concede that these moments aren't consistent with Toriyama's story, then yes, I would fully contend that it's out of the norm. Characters miraculously coming back from death's door is a generic shounen trope that's at the absolute best only tangentially related to what I'm talking about, which is why it's a tangent. Cell's bullshit excuse for surviving his self-destruction doesn't even touch 17's utterly preposterous instance of blowing himself up and simultaneously not blowing himself up. The former is a poorly thought-out handwave, but the latter is totally incomprehensible.

Anyway, I don't have the stamina, patience, or time to keep engaging in this back-and-forth. It's not even the most egregious example of Toei's inconsistencies, let alone Toriyama's, and I think I've already made enough of a case for what the anime was alluding to at this point.

[Lukmendes]

I frankly think that the ending of the manga was handled extremely poorly. We’re supposed to buy this idea that #17’s wish was his way of sticking it to the Zen-Ohs, except that really doesn’t work when you realize that there is absolutely nothing preventing the little psychopaths from just wiping everything out all over again. What exactly did #17’s wish accomplish? It just doesn’t make any sense.

I mean, if that wish was forbidden, then Grand Priest would have said that's not he should be asking, since after all 17 asks him first, and he says it's okay, he also smiled when 17 made it, and promoted universe 7 itself, so Zenos are okay with it.

Well Vegeta did use a self exploding technique in the Majin Buu arc. So him using it in the TOP as a last ditch effort again is fine.

I was talking about the first time Vegeta used it back in Boo saga, again, no real foreshadowing for the move or whatever, he just did it, and Vegeta using it in ToP was retarded, he was beating the living shit out of Toppo, even destroyed a Hakai attack with a punch, then Vegeta decided to use an attack that wastes a lot of ki so Toppo wouldn't be able to Hakai on it, when he has no need to worry about it to begin with since he was casualy destroying or dodging them? Yeah...

It's just random for 17 to try to do it too and then saying he got lucky afterwards. Krillin even states "You didn't detonate!" What are the fans suppose to think? Does this mean 17 tried to self destruct thinking he had a bomb in his body? Or does it mean that it's TOEI's subtle way of saying he no longer has a bomb in him through Krillin's statement?

I will admit, it's not a proven fact that TOEI contradicted the story with the self sacrifice attempt of 17. I jumped the gun in saying so and I apologize for starting a little debate. However it sure is bad writing from TOEI without any explanation on what happened in that instance with 17. So it leaves the audience wondering.

The Krillin comment is just one of the many, many Captain Obvious audience comments (In one case Beerus even says "He started talking."), if they were going for a "17 tried to use the bomb within him and failed" thing, then they'd just say it, or at least mention the bomb; and yeah, the explanation they went for it was bad with the whole "I was lucky" shit, but hey, it'd DB, moves can end up being less deadly than before, it happened with Mafuba lol.

[WittyUsername]

I frankly think that the ending of the manga was handled extremely poorly. We’re supposed to buy this idea that #17’s wish was his way of sticking it to the Zen-Ohs, except that really doesn’t work when you realize that there is absolutely nothing preventing the little psychopaths from just wiping everything out all over again. What exactly did #17’s wish accomplish? It just doesn’t make any sense.

I mean, if that wish was forbidden, then Grand Priest would have said that's not he should be asking, since after all 17 asks him first, and he says it's okay, he also smiled when 17 made it, and promoted universe 7 itself, so Zenos are okay with it.

Which means that #17’s whole stated reason for the wish (an act of defiance against the Zen-Ohs) was all for nothing.

Also, are we sure Universe 7 was promoted? I know the Grant Priest mentioned that they moved up a rank, but that could’ve meant that the other six universes that were previously erased were also brought back.

[Lukmendes]

Which means that #17’s whole stated reason for the wish (an act of defiance against the Zen-Ohs) was all for nothing.

It'd be all for nothing only if he tried it and it didn't work or if they erased the universes again, neither which were done, ultimately Zeno wanted most universes gone but 17's wish made it so they were returned, them being okay with it doesn't mean he failed.

Also, are we sure Universe 7 was promoted? I know the Grant Priest mentioned that they moved up a rank, but that could’ve meant that the other six universes that were previously erased were also brought back.

Yeah that's the promotion I meant, since Grand Priest says that U7 went from being the second worst universe to being the third worst, and the other 6 universes weren't brought back, since the narrator says later that life in the 12 universes went back to normal.

[batistabus]

Well volume 3 already showed us that he’s capable to do that kind of awesome covers http://www.kanzenshuu.com/manga/spin-of ... er/vol-03/
So I guess he’s long ago able to draw nice “posters” , I think it’s more a matter of time available to do them than a matter of training or “taking classes “ , of course he’s improving, mainly because of his will to do so and the practice .
Now he has an opportunity to shine exploiting the new arc unseen in an anime version , always more exciting to read than a re-telling with different approach....

I'm more specifically referring to the art style he used for this image (higher resolution below):

Spoiler:

As far as I'm aware, this is the first time we've seen a drawing by Toyotaro that isn't in his typical Toriyama-esque style. The fact that he's experimenting like this makes me think he's being introduced to new methods. I'll admit that I'm extrapolating a lot from a single image, but if Shueisha is aware of the criticism online, building on Toyotaro's ability would be in their best interest.

Also, are we sure Universe 7 was promoted? I know the Grant Priest mentioned that they moved up a rank, but that could’ve meant that the other six universes that were previously erased were also brought back.

Spoiler:

To me, it seems pretty clear that Universe 7 was elevated because of the wish.

[Lord Beerus]

Me coming to that conclusion is exactly what it sounds like, because that's exactly what it is.

I didn't claim that the prospect of 17 inventing his own self-destruction technique is headcanon because he didn't have a precedent to do so (my case about him learning Vegeta's technique was a separate point), I'm saying it's headcanon because it wasn't implied period. The anime never mentions that 17 invented a self-destruction move; only that he can self-destruct and that it's not the same technique as Vegeta's.

Again, I'm not disputing that 17 can create new techniques. That doesn't stop it from being an obvious rationalization.

And my response to that is that for you to come the conclusion is absurd because the story never:

a. Distinctly stated that organic self-destruction techniques are limited to a handful of characters

b. Provided any kind of narrative precedent/foundation leading up to the moments where characters who could self-destructed organically eventually did so

Your rebuttal that because the story never implied that #17 had the ability to organic self destruct making it "headcanon" is baseless and unfounded because Dragon Ball has never provided build up to those kind of moments. Dragon Ball doesn't always pull the reader to the side and stated or even implied that this character has the ability to organically self-destruct. Doing that kind of thing is awful writing. Because having the ability to self-destruct at will is usually an ability that kept a secret for the purpose of dramatic effect. The situation with #16, #17 and #18 was indeed a unique case because the story flat out tell us that Gero designed them with bombs planted inside them. But we never had the previous knowledge to knowing the likes the Saibamen, Chaozu, Cell, Vegeta or Majin Boo has the ability to self-destruct/blow themselves up. So it really puzzles me that now it has suddenly become an issue.

If you concede that 17's case is a staple unique to Toei's writing, and you also concede that these moments aren't consistent with Toriyama's story, then yes, I would fully contend that it's out of the norm. Characters miraculously coming back from death's door is a generic shounen trope that's at the absolute best only tangentially related to what I'm talking about, which is why it's a tangent. Cell's bullshit excuse for surviving his self-destruction doesn't even touch 17's utterly preposterous instance of blowing himself up and simultaneously not blowing himself up. The former is a poorly thought-out handwave, but the latter is totally incomprehensible.

My argument boiled down to Toei following suit with regards to Dragon Ball doing unbelievable shit regarding the circumstances of character living or die, which so happens to includes where character blow themselves up but are still in one piece. Is it ridiculous? Yes. I'm fully aware of that. But it's not as if Dragon Ball doesn't already have a twisted perception of life and death works.

I'm just saying that Toei exploited that part of Dragon Ball's original narrative context to apply that in a scenario where a character self-destruct but is miraculously alive. I'm not expecting you to believe. I'm just saying that this kind of unbelievable shit has some precedent because Dragon Ball already provided a scenario where a character should be dead but isn't (Hence why I mentioned that situation where Goku was killed by King Piccolo but came back to life in the next chapter with no explanation).

Toei just decide to take that ridiculous context to put it into a more extreme narrative scenario. That's all.

Anyway, I don't have the stamina, patience, or time to keep engaging in this back-and-forth.

This is just a friendly debate. Don't treat this like you're not taking part in the Tournament Of Power.

It's not even the most egregious example of Toei's inconsistencies, let alone Toriyama's, and I think I've already made enough of a case for what the anime was alluding to at this point.

I'm well of this and I've already made enough of a point to know what I believe the anime was alluding to. So we'll agree to dis

[Marlowe89]

Your rebuttal that because the story never implied that #17 had the ability to organic self destruct making it "headcanon" is baseless and unfounded because Dragon Ball has never provided build up to those kind of moments.

Again, headcanon isn't contingent on build-up. I literally don't know how else I can elaborate on this concept in a manner conducive to helping you understand what a post-rationalization is.

I'm saying your argument rests on the assumption that 17 must have invented a new self-destruction technique other than the one he was already established to have in the original story. Your points about him using ki and not being entirely artificial don't automatically presuppose that he substituted a move with the same kind of move, and your point about Vegeta's explosion being some basic technique anyone can do is further negated by the anime's Tournament of Power alluding to 17's self-destruction being a different move altogether.

My argument boiled down to Toei following suit with regards to Dragon Ball doing unbelievable shit regarding the circumstances of character living or die, which so happens to includes where character blow themselves up but are still in one piece.

I know what it boils down to. I'm saying I don't agree.

What you're doing is generalizing a specific example to one VASTLY larger category in an attempt to conflate it with things the manga has done before, but see, you could do that with almost anything. It's a pretty trivial deflection from my point. I wasn't making a broad argument about life and death scenarios, I was talking about 17's scenario.

This is just a friendly debate.

Hardly. This is a discussion that, from my perspective, is going around in circles because you either can't or aren't willing to understand what I'm trying to get across.

On principle, I don't like having to postulate things that the story doesn't imply to make certain incongruities work. That's really all there is to it, so I think we should agree to disagree at this point.

[PFM18]

Hardly. This is a discussion that, from my perspective, is going around in circles because you either can't or aren't willing to understand what I'm trying to get across.

How does that make it any less of a friendly debate?

[Lord Beerus]

Again, headcanon isn't contingent on build-up. I literally don't know how else I can elaborate on this concept in a manner conducive to helping you understand what a post-rationalization is.

I'm saying your argument rests on the assumption that 17 must have invented a new self-destruction technique other than the one he was already established to have in the original story. Your points about him using ki and not being entirely artificial don't automatically presuppose that he substituted a move with the same kind of move, and your point about Vegeta's explosion being some basic technique anyone can do is further negated by the anime's Tournament of Power alluding to 17's self-destruction being a different move altogether.

And you throwing around the word "headcanon" as part of your counterargument isn't doing you any favours. You've literally provided no context as to why #17 couldn't have development a manual self destruction technique beyond "He never saw it happen" and "The story didn't indicate that he could do such a thing" Both of which are counterarguments that hold next to no foundation given how Dragon Ball never originally provided any subtext to the Saibamen, Chaozu, or Cell having the ability to manually implode and how you don't have to be exposed to certain techniques to develop them.

I know what it boils down to. I'm saying I don't agree.

What you're doing is generalizing a specific example to one VASTLY larger category in an attempt to conflate it with things the manga has done before, but see, you could do that with almost anything. It's a pretty trivial deflection from my point. I wasn't making a broad argument about life and death scenarios, I was talking about 17's scenario.

I mentioned the King Piccolo/Goku scenario because I feel it's supportive of the scenario with #17 -- in regards to him being in circumstance where he should be dead but isn't.

I understand if you don't agree.

Hardly. This is a discussion that, from my perspective, is going around in circles because you either can't or aren't willing to understand what I'm trying to get across.

On principle, I don't like having to postulate things that the story doesn't imply to make certain incongruities work. That's really all there is to it, so I think we should agree to disagree at this point.

I understand what you're trying to get across. I just don't simply agree with the opinions you've laid out and offered a counter-argument just like you have to my opinions. Like a debate.

I do agree that this has been a debate that has gone around in circles. So I'm willing to agree to disagree on this and move on.

[prince212]

I'm more specifically referring to the art style he used for this image (higher resolution below):

Spoiler:

As far as I'm aware, this is the first time we've seen a drawing by Toyotaro that isn't in his typical Toriyama-esque style. The fact that he's experimenting like this makes me think he's being introduced to new methods. I'll admit that I'm extrapolating a lot from a single image, but if Shueisha is aware of the criticism online, building on Toyotaro's ability would be in their best interest.

Oh I see what you meant. That one is awesome , thanks for the high resolution .
He did another one non typical toriyama in those vol intros. Vol 4

Spoiler:

It’s not that cool but it’s also a different approach, more a 3D modeling style. ( sorry for the poor quality)

[Shaddy]

I'm not sure what exactly Shueisha is supposedly able to do to make Toyotaro improve. It's not a cut-and-dry issue that they can just say "fix it or you're out" for, like Ian Flynn blowing up Metal Sonic over and over again or something.

The big problem is Toriyama doesn't seem to be holding his supposed successor to a high enough standard; this makes sense given his history of clashing with editors, but it's easy to see that having stricter editors on board was good for Tori, as evidenced by how all-over-the-place the Buu arc got (though I still have more fun with it than Cell but whatever). Toyo's storytelling issues are a beast all their own, but Toriyama always has and still does have dominion over great composition and artwork in manga and he should be making sure Toyotaro knows his weaknesses more than he does currently, especially given that the manga will be far more efficient to produce (hopefully giving him more time making his writing not suck) with how much less drawing he'd actually be doing.

[Miracles]

Toriyama really likes Toyotaro's art. He claims it's the closest to his style, even better than professional animators.
As far as Sheuisha is concerned, how has the Super manga sales been? If they are good I doubt they mind Toyotaro's shortcomings.
I think they have faith in Toriyama and their editor they use to monitor Toyotaro for growth. So the burden is not all on Toyotaro.

[Shaddy]

If that were true (which I'm not certain it is) that'd be kind of terrible. The manga's never going to improve if the people directing and publishing material thinking it's 'good enough'. Toyotaro very clearly needs someone pushing him to be better and if that's not happening, the manga is going to stay rather poor or get worse as it continues.

[prince212]

If that were true (which I'm not certain it is) that'd be kind of terrible. The manga's never going to improve if the people directing and publishing material thinking it's 'good enough'. Toyotaro very clearly needs someone pushing him to be better and if that's not happening, the manga is going to stay rather poor or get worse as it continues.

He’s pushing himself to be better , and that’s most of the times even more important than someone else .
I see improvements, also some things went not so good in top arc. I guess it was his first experience having over 100 guys in a minimum space, he added unnecessary panels once in a while , yes . I’m pretty sure this next arc won’t disappoint the fans that will be looking to his work with objective eyes .
So , yes , he needs some good advisors, but the pressure and pushing part should be coming from himself .
I don’t think is that a big drama the community made last months just because youtubers went all together to point him .
His work is fine , I.m.o more enjoyable than other departments

[Shaddy]

I don't think he's pushing himself to improve at all. The art has basically not changed a single bit since the start, both in terms of composition and style (yadda yadda anatomy and shapes) while the storyline has been pretty bare-bones and incomplete feeling compared to the anime from the start, and made questionable-at-best decisions other times. Very little feels any different in terms of the evolution of the author or his work, especially when compared to the original manga. The closest thing to "improvement" I've seen would be some of the art in the Black arc, but that's very clearly gone away. It might as well have been an accident.

[PFM18]

I don't know, I think he has improved. Although the improvement may be more of an overall trend with peaks/valleys than a linear line of growth, I think the growth is still there, though subtle. This may just be stemming from my hatred for the manga's Zamasu arc and anything will inevitably be an improvement, but I think aside from several hiccups towards the middle portions of the ToP, I think the climax was handled really well and he ultimately did a better job with this arc than the last. I don't see much of an issue with his art, I've always thought it was pretty good. I've been more concerned with his writing and narrative choices. I don't see his messy panel's layout really being developed, though.