Things that grind your gears

[ProtoTrunks76]

I'm unsure what any of that proves.

To quote another user on this site...
"~'Yamcha sucks because he got killed by a Saibaman! hurr-de-durr'~

So, does Goku suck because he was one-shot by Radditz?
Does Vegeta suck because he was utterly curb-stomped by Zarbon AND Recoome?
Does Cell suck because he was nearly cornered by #16?
Does Master Roshi suck because he couldn't dodge Chi Chi's helmet-blade thing?
Does King Kai suck because he was no match for the likes of the Saiyans?
Does Trunks suck because he did worse against a Cell Jr that Piccolo did?
Does Gohan suck because he couldn't even beat Dabura?

....didn't think so."

I dont know how ur comparison correlates with Yamcha and Saibaman case. Also, almost everyone you stated is vastly stronger than Saibaman. I think you just drawing blank points

Nope; I just hate when people are quick to say that a character sucks because of one particular moment in the series.

Not to mention that people often overlook the character's "downs" out of bias, and act all surprised when, for example, their supposedly "indestructible" Goku shows a simple moment of weakness and card it as bullshit. Lest we forget, Yamcha actually did beat him, but was cocky and lowers his guard. So, what I'm not a fan of is when another character does the same thing, and it's suddenly different.

[rereboy]

I'm unsure what any of that proves.

To quote another user on this site...
"~'Yamcha sucks because he got killed by a Saibaman! hurr-de-durr'~

So, does Goku suck because he was one-shot by Radditz?
Does Vegeta suck because he was utterly curb-stomped by Zarbon AND Recoome?
Does Cell suck because he was nearly cornered by #16?
Does Master Roshi suck because he couldn't dodge Chi Chi's helmet-blade thing?
Does King Kai suck because he was no match for the likes of the Saiyans?
Does Trunks suck because he did worse against a Cell Jr that Piccolo did?
Does Gohan suck because he couldn't even beat Dabura?

....didn't think so."

I dont know how ur comparison correlates with Yamcha and Saibaman case. Also, almost everyone you stated is vastly stronger than Saibaman. I think you just drawing blank points

A Saibaman is as strong as Raditz, as stated in the series. Goku was one-shot by Radditz and had his kid kidnapped while he was in the ground gasping for air. In comparison, Yamcha's performance against the Saibaman was much more impressive.

The thing about Yamcha's power (and the power of other characters) is just the timing and that's due to the writing. He's just always one step behind in comparison to the current situation. For all intents and purposes, the Yamcha that fought the Saibaman would have been an absolute beast if he was like that during the fight with Raditz, but he is written to get to levels of power like that only when they are already pretty irrelevant for the current situation.

[DragonBallKing]

To quote another user on this site...
"~'Yamcha sucks because he got killed by a Saibaman! hurr-de-durr'~

So, does Goku suck because he was one-shot by Radditz?
Does Vegeta suck because he was utterly curb-stomped by Zarbon AND Recoome?
Does Cell suck because he was nearly cornered by #16?
Does Master Roshi suck because he couldn't dodge Chi Chi's helmet-blade thing?
Does King Kai suck because he was no match for the likes of the Saiyans?
Does Trunks suck because he did worse against a Cell Jr that Piccolo did?
Does Gohan suck because he couldn't even beat Dabura?

....didn't think so."

I dont know how ur comparison correlates with Yamcha and Saibaman case. Also, almost everyone you stated is vastly stronger than Saibaman. I think you just drawing blank points

A Saibaman is as strong as Raditz, as stated in the series. Goku was one-shot by Radditz and had his kid kidnapped while he was in the ground gasping for air. In comparison, Yamcha's performance against the Saibaman was much more impressive.

The thing about Yamcha's power (and the power of other characters) is just the timing and that's due to the writing. He's just always one step behind in comparison to the current situation. For all intents and purposes, the Yamcha that fought the Saibaman would have been an absolute beast if he was like that during the fight with Raditz, but he is written to get to levels of power like that only when they are already pretty irrelevant for the current situation.

I never understood why getting killed by a cheap shot suicide bomber makes you the the butt end of jokes, but getting your shit recked multiple times in the same arc like Vegeta makes you a badass.

[ABED]

You are dropping all sorts of context. They aren't criticizing him for that one moment. They are making fun of him for the cumulative effect of always losing. Yes, Goku was one shotted by a vastly superior opponent, but he has also defeated Freeza, Piccolo, Piccolo Daimao, Tao Pai Pai. Vegeta in comparison is one step behind Goku in terms of power. Yamcha was left behind decades prior.

Yamcha actually did beat him

When?

[Kanassa]

I never understood why getting killed by a cheap shot suicide bomber makes you the the butt end of jokes, but getting your shit recked multiple times in the same arc like Vegeta makes you a badass.

It's all about execution of the scene.

[Kanassa]

People calling still frames, animation.

[ProtoTrunks76]

Yamcha was left behind decades prior.

So was every other non-alien character; Tien included.

Yamcha actually did beat him

When?

Yes, Yamcha actually did beat the Saibaman. The damn thing was just a sore loser, and took him down with him. Also, power levels are utter bullshit, but it's not like people will really understand that

[rereboy]

They are making fun of him for the cumulative effect of always losing.

Sure, but I'm not certain they really understand that that's purely a choice of how the writting chose to use him. Yamcha is basically not used for anything more than a "measuring stick" and the fact that he and the others only get to use the same kind of training that Goku uses after he's already done with it and has moved on (Kami's training, Kaio's training, etc) is also just a choice of the writing that reflects that. We can make fun of the character for it but going out of one's way to make fun of him doesn't make much sense. For all practical effects, Yamcha's personality and attributes are nothing specially ridiculous and he has power equivalent to a demi-god and could not only destroy the Earth but could also defeat a large amount of heroes and villains from various franchises.

[ABED]

It was a life and death battle. It didn't matter whether he defeated him in fair fight. They were fighting for survival and Yamcha didn't survive, so no, he didn't win.

Tenshinhan not only won the Tenkaichi Budokai, he's helped out plenty of times.

That's purely a choice of the writing.

It's all a choice of the writing. I have zero idea what you are getting at with this statement. I don't really make fun of him but I can see why. The guy never wins. Okay, he won the Budokai prelims, but little else.

[rereboy]

It's all a choice of the writing. I have zero idea what you are getting at with this statement.

I edited my previous comment to make it clearer.

My point is that they aren't actually making fun of the character himself, they are making fun of the role the writing always chooses for him.

If I make fun of Vegeta because he's always going on about his pride, or about Goku for not being the sharpest tool in the box, then I would be actually making fun of their character, of how they are, act, and so on.

If I make fun of Yamcha because he's always used as a measuring stick, then, in truth, I'm not making fun of the character itself, but the role the writing always chooses for him.

You mentioned Tenshinhan but in truth, Yamcha, as a character, is no more ridiculous than Tenshinhan as a character. The real difference is merely that Tenshinhan was used for more than only being a measuring stick.

[Kanassa]

Has Yamcha ever really been a measuring stick? The purpose of his defeats have never been to show the power of his opponent His defeat at Tien's hands was to show how ruthless he was. The Saibaman was to act as a reminder that this was a life or death situation. Vegeta is more of a measuring stick since his defeats actually are a show of power. When Vegeta loses it's there to make the audience go "Oh shit, this guy's strong", never with Yamcha.

[ABED]

He's not used as a measuring stick. He's used as cannon fodder. Goku's the measuring stick. When Goku loses a fight, you know the enemy is strong.

Yes, him losing isn't a personality trait, but it is a character trait. He can't beat anyone of merit. I fail to see how it's worse to laugh at a character for essentially being little more than a punching bag than if I laughed at a character for their personality traits.

[rereboy]

Has Yamcha ever really been a measuring stick?

That's all he has ever been. A tool to measure strength and build up other characters and tension. The audience knows that Yamcha is strong after he shows up and we are then informed that he has been training and improving on most of the occasions.

After proving to be someone that could take on Goku in the first arc:

- He loses to Jackie Chun to build him up and Goku.
- He loses to the Mummy to build up the Mummy and then Goku.
- He loses to Tenshinhan to build him up and Goku.
- He loses to Shen (Kami) to build him up.
- He loses to the Saibamen to build up how dangerous they can be and to build up the tension.
- He loses to #20 to demonstrate exactly the same kind of thing that his death facing the Saibamen demonstrated.

In short, Yamcha is always used for this kind of role.

[ABED]

That's all he has ever been. A tool to measure strength and build up other characters and tension.

How is defeating a guy that doesn't win an effective way to build up other characters? Yamcha's a jobber, not a measuring stick.

20 nearly killing Yamcha didn't really build up 20's strength, it simply showed how dangerous they were. They will brutally kill people, including our heroes. Fortunately, yamcha wasn't killed, but not for lack of trying.

[rereboy]

He's not used as a measuring stick. He's used as cannon fodder. Goku's the measuring stick.

That makes no sense. If he was presented as cannon fodder, his defeats would have no impact at all. It would be like the villain defeating a normal person. That's not the objective. They have impact because Yamcha is introduced as strong when he shows up and we are then told that he has improved. It only loses efficiency because the writing repeats this role for him way too often.

How is defeating a guy that doesn't win an effective way to build up other characters? Yamcha's a jobber, not a measuring stick.

Not surprisingly, it loses efficiency and impact after repeating the same role for Yamcha many times. But that's only because it was repeated many times.

20 nearly killing Yamcha didn't really build up 20's strength, it simply showed how dangerous they were. They will brutally kill people, including our heroes. Fortunately, yamcha wasn't killed, but not for lack of trying.

As I said, "a tool to measure strength and build up other characters and tension".

[ABED]

He's not used as a measuring stick. He's used as cannon fodder. Goku's the measuring stick.

That makes no sense. If he was presented as cannon fodder, his defeats would have no impact at all. It would be like the villain defeating a normal person. That's not the objective. They have impact because Yamcha is introduced as strong when he shows up and we are then told that he has improved. It only loses efficiency because the writing repeats this role for him way too often.

Yamcha's defeat didn't prove much at all. If he constantly loses, what does that prove to the audience? If Goku loses, it really means something. Which defeat do you think meant more, Yamcha losing to Mummy or Goku beating beat up by Raditz? Your final sentence undercuts your argument. Yamcha's not an effective measuring stick because he always loses and he fell so far behind.

Yamcha is definitely cannon fodder. He loses so often and he has no real impact on the story. He's expendable.

As I said, "a tool to measure strength and build up other characters and tension".

Not a great measure considering the level of strength the heroes were supposed to be up against. The Ginyu Force could've done that. Which is a better demonstration of the cyborg's power, defeating the Super Saiyans or defeating Yamcha?

[rereboy]

If he constantly loses, what does that prove to the audience?

It proves that the writing has relied on that role for him way too often.

Which doesn't change the fact that his defeats are meant to be different than the villain defeating a person with normal power, for example. In other words, they have the objective of using Yamcha as a tool to measure strength and build up other characters and tension.

And the problem is that the writing not only does that to Yamcha too often but that's pretty much all he is used for. Other characters are also used as measuring sticks but the writing does more than that with them.

So, in short, by making fun of Yamcha because of this, imo, we aren't even making fun of his character himself, but how he was used by the writing.

Yamcha is definitely cannon fodder. He loses so often and he has no real impact on the story. He's expendable.

We start to feel no impact because it's repeated too often. But I'm talking about what his role was and what he was meant to do. If it wasn't successful after a while that's a different issue and one that doesn't really concern his character but, once again, the role that the writing chose for him.

[ABED]

If he constantly loses, what does that prove to the audience?

It proves that the writing has relied on that role for him way too often.

Which doesn't change the fact that his defeats are meant to be different than the villain defeating a person with normal power, for example. In other words, they have the objective of using Yamcha as a tool to measure strength and build up other characters and tension.

And the problem is that the writing not only does that to Yamcha too often but that's pretty much all he is used for. Other characters are also used as measuring sticks but the writing does more than that with them.

So, in short, by making fun of Yamcha because of this, imo, we aren't even making fun of his character himself, but how he was used by the writing.

Ergo, he's not an effective measuring stick, and if all he's used for is to be a punching bag, he's cannon fodder.

If it wasn't successful after a while that's a different issue and one that doesn't really concern his character but, once again, the role that the writing chose for him.

Not really a different issue. Writer's intent doesn't really matter in this case. I'm not even convinced Toriyama meant for Yamcha to be used as "measuring stick" and failed. He's in no way a standard anyone's used to measure anyone else against. He's a stepping stone at best. Defeating someone like Goku or Vegeta truly means something. Defeating Yamcha stopped being an effective way to show an opponent's strength VERY early on.

[Kanassa]

After proving to be someone that could take on Goku in the first arc:

He never proved he could take Goku on. He proved he could take a tired and hungry Goku on.

[rereboy]

After proving to be someone that could take on Goku in the first arc:

He never proved he could take Goku on. He proved he could take a tired and hungry Goku on.

Yamcha was presented as strong enough to be able to fight Goku and even perhaps get the upper hand if Goku is not in perfect condition (aka hungry), but ultimately not strong enough to defeat him. In other words, he is presented as strong, even if not as strong as Goku. That's what I mean by "being able to take him on."