Is There Any Difference In Power Between Vegetto & Gogeta Anymore?

[Surai]

You’ll have to provide the page or source on that because I do not recall reading that “dumb thing” anywhere in the Daizenshuu 7. As for the entry on Potara fusion> Fusion dance, Herms’ tweet which I linked has the source.

Daizenshuus are the most reliable sources there are for pre-BoG era after the manga, and often support/back up claims made in it. There is very little room for dispute on this.

Page 98. I’m French so I have the French version of the book, I don’t know what the English version says but here’s the exact sentence :

"À partir de sa forme initiale il peut se transformer en Super Saiyen, mais il n’acquiert pas plus de puissance pour autant."

Which basically means he can turn SSJ but doesn’t become stronger if he does so.

Now I don’t know whether it’s just a mistranslation, but that’s not the only example anyway. Daizenshuu books are full of statements that contradict the manga, it’s a known fact. And I have a hard time believing that every time something stupid has been stated in those books, it was just a translation issue.

Akira Toriyama and the manga itself are the only reliable sources when it comes to Dragon Ball (Super being a different case). Daizenshuu books aren’t canon, Toriyama’s name was just used to sell those books. It’s purely commercial.

Don’t get me wrong, they’re overall pretty nice. But they shouldn’t be used as a source in a debate regarding the manga.

By the way, Herms’ tweet just confirms there’s no real answer in the manga. Daizenshuu books + magazines just gave their own interpretation, not a canon answer on the matter.

[Darkprince410]

It's been retconned so that they are equally powerful.

There's uncertainty there, as while Herms' translation of it suggests that they're the same strength wise, other translations from equally reputable sources say it has nothing to do with power itself, and instead that the two techniques for fusing are just both equally dependable.

The phrase that was used to compare them is 「いずれ劣らぬ最強最後の切札だ」. 最強最後 means "most powerful & final."

Power/strength is 100% involved. Idk what other translators said that it had nothing to do with power but those translators are blatantly wrong.

No, as in nothing to do with power as far as the two producing equally powerful fighters. It does address power, but just that the two techniques are the Z Senshi's "strongest weapons" and equally dependable.

[Surai]

No, as in nothing to do with power as far as the two producing equally powerful fighters. It does address power, but just that the two techniques are the Z Senshi's "strongest weapons" and equally dependable.

Hum I don’t know, seems far fetched to me. Plus the two techniques are not equally dependable, Potara fusion lasts way longer and can’t fail unlike the dance.

[Darkprince410]

No, as in nothing to do with power as far as the two producing equally powerful fighters. It does address power, but just that the two techniques are the Z Senshi's "strongest weapons" and equally dependable.

Hum I don’t know, seems far fetched to me. Plus the two techniques are not equally dependable, Potara fusion lasts way longer and can’t fail unlike the dance.

Except we've seen that the Potara fusion can be undone prematurely if the fusion's strength is too great (i.e. the case with Vegetto during his fight with Zamasu), while the same didn't seem to be the case with Gogeta, so there's that trade off.

[Surai]

Except we've seen that the Potara fusion can be undone prematurely if the fusion's strength is too great (i.e. the case with Vegetto during his fight with Zamasu), while the same didn't seem to be the case with Gogeta, so there's that trade off.

I doubt it’s an issue related to Potara fusion, I think Gogeta would have defused as well and the fusion would have been even shorter (logically twice as short, since the normal duration of this fusion is twice as short as the Potara fusion’s duration).

It just didn’t happen in DBS Broly because Goku and Vegeta got much stronger after Black Goku arc so they have a much better control over SSJB. There’s no real way to know but that’s my take on it anyway.

[Rakurai]

No, as in nothing to do with power as far as the two producing equally powerful fighters. It does address power, but just that the two techniques are the Z Senshi's "strongest weapons" and equally dependable.

... and that is case of, in Herms' own words, " if you're a master of origami, you might be able to twist that into some shape that doesn’t spell Gogeta=Vegetto."

The Japanese in this case is not supposed to be that ambiguous, it's as clear cut as can be.

「いずれ劣らぬ最強最後の切札だ」

いずれ劣らぬ = equally matched

最強最後 = most powerful and final

切札 = trump card, secret weapon, ace up one's sleeve, etc.

So when you put it all together, they are "equally-matched, the most powerful and final trump cards." The key word is いずれ劣らぬ, which tells us that neither one is superior than the other. Modified adjectives in this case are strength and last resort-ness since the two adjectives were brought up.

For the record, I asked a couple of my native Japanese colleagues to read the Shonen Jump passage and tell me who they think is stronger afterwards. Their reaction was "Eh? Doesn't this say they are supposed to be equal to each other?"

Herms knows what's up. I know what's up. My colleagues also know what's up. You can choose to believe some other alternative interpretation but only if you're "a master of origami."

[Rakurai]

Page 98. I’m French so I have the French version of the book, I don’t know what the English version says but here’s the exact sentence :

"À partir de sa forme initiale il peut se transformer en Super Saiyen, mais il n’acquiert pas plus de puissance pour autant."

Which basically means he can turn SSJ but doesn’t become stronger if he does so.

Now I don’t know whether it’s just a mistranslation, but that’s not the only example anyway. Daizenshuu books are full of statements that contradict the manga, it’s a known fact. And I have a hard time believing that every time something stupid has been stated in those books, it was just a translation issue.

Akira Toriyama and the manga itself are the only reliable sources when it comes to Dragon Ball (Super being a different case). Daizenshuu books aren’t canon, Toriyama’s name was just used to sell those books. It’s purely commercial.

Don’t get me wrong, they’re overall pretty nice. But they shouldn’t be used as a source in a debate regarding the manga.

By the way, Herms’ tweet just confirms there’s no real answer in the manga. Daizenshuu books + magazines just gave their own interpretation, not a canon answer on the matter.

I'm sorry but I find that passage to be completely ridiculous. If that is supposed to be the French translation of Daizenshuu 7, then it's absolutely wrong.

There is no English version of the Daizenshuu 7, but no worries cause I have scanned copies of the original Japanese version here:

Spoiler:

Passage of Vegetto

And I can assure you that there is nothing that says the same as what you wrote above (as far as me putting the French into Google Translate goes, you'll have to forgive me for that). Here's Herms' translation btw (because I can't be bothered to translate the entire passage when there's already a good enough version below):

Vegetto
An individual formed through Vegeta and Goku merging together
History:In order to oppose Majin Buu, who had displayed overwhelming power by absorbing Gotenks and Piccolo, Goku tried to merge with Gohan using the Potara which he received from the Elder Kaioshin, but Gohan himself ended up being absorbed. As Goku tried in vain to think of something, Vegeta appeared. Goku pleaded that they merge, and so Vegetto was born. Achieving a power-up so great that he can make disparaging remarks about Majin Buu, he demonstrates his strength. He displays overwhelming strength, and even after being turned into a candy ball, his attack power remains the same. By attacking in his small candy ball state and piercing through Buu’s mouth, he drives Buu to the wall. Then when he entered Buu’s body, he split back into Goku and Vegeta, even though this was supposedly impossible. Afterwards, the two never became Vegetto again.
First Appearance: 503
Special Characteristics: Being a combination of two Saiyans, his appearance hasn’t changed all that much, and feels like a combination of Goku’s face and Vegeta’s hairstyle. He has both Vegeta’s coolheaded battle strategies and Goku’s pure fighting sense, and there can be no doubt that his strength measures even greater than that of a [Super] Saiyan 3. He is capable of transforming from his normal state into a Super Saiyan form. He has certain Special Characteristics: , including that his strength doesn’t change even if his shape does. He was born only once, and battled Majin Buu (Daizenshuu 2, p.113).
Techniques:ki blade, barrier, etc
Battles: He squares off against Majin Buu, who had absorbed Gohan and Piccolo, and demonstrates overwhelming strength.
Anime: In the original story, after Goku and Vegeta merge they transform into Super Vegetto straight away. However, in the anime version a fierce battle unfolds between Buu and normal Vegetto as well. Furthermore, after transforming into Super Vegetto, he uses Vegeta’s Big Bang Attack against Buu. Incidentally, merged characters such as Vegetto are performed by having both voice actors perform at the same time. This was the original creator’s idea.

The bold seems to be what is closest in regard to what you're claiming. However, this and the previous sentences are both independent clauses/separate sentences. Note that the word 'shape' (形) is used in the original Japanese, not 変身 or 姿 as is typical of describing transformations; this is a clear reference to the time when Vegetto was turned into a candy, as was referenced in the italicized above. Your French translation seems to have combined those two sentences together, and if that's the case, then it's absolutely wrong when compared to the original Japanese.

So no, Daizenshuu 7 hasn't said any 'dumb thing.' They are still considered the most essential sources to the world of DB, pre-BoG era, having been approved by Toriyama and released by Shueisha.

[Surai]

Page 98. I’m French so I have the French version of the book, I don’t know what the English version says but here’s the exact sentence :

"À partir de sa forme initiale il peut se transformer en Super Saiyen, mais il n’acquiert pas plus de puissance pour autant."

Which basically means he can turn SSJ but doesn’t become stronger if he does so.

Now I don’t know whether it’s just a mistranslation, but that’s not the only example anyway. Daizenshuu books are full of statements that contradict the manga, it’s a known fact. And I have a hard time believing that every time something stupid has been stated in those books, it was just a translation issue.

Akira Toriyama and the manga itself are the only reliable sources when it comes to Dragon Ball (Super being a different case). Daizenshuu books aren’t canon, Toriyama’s name was just used to sell those books. It’s purely commercial.

Don’t get me wrong, they’re overall pretty nice. But they shouldn’t be used as a source in a debate regarding the manga.

By the way, Herms’ tweet just confirms there’s no real answer in the manga. Daizenshuu books + magazines just gave their own interpretation, not a canon answer on the matter.

I'm sorry but I find that passage to be completely ridiculous. If that is supposed to be the French translation of Daizenshuu 7, then it's absolutely wrong.

There is no English version of the Daizenshuu 7, but no worries cause I have scanned copies of the original Japanese version here:

Spoiler:

Passage of Vegetto

And I can assure you that there is nothing that says the same as what you wrote above (as far as me putting the French into Google Translate goes, you'll have to forgive me for that). Here's Herms' translation btw (because I can't be bothered to translate the entire passage when there's already a good enough version below):

Vegetto
An individual formed through Vegeta and Goku merging together
History:In order to oppose Majin Buu, who had displayed overwhelming power by absorbing Gotenks and Piccolo, Goku tried to merge with Gohan using the Potara which he received from the Elder Kaioshin, but Gohan himself ended up being absorbed. As Goku tried in vain to think of something, Vegeta appeared. Goku pleaded that they merge, and so Vegetto was born. Achieving a power-up so great that he can make disparaging remarks about Majin Buu, he demonstrates his strength. He displays overwhelming strength, and even after being turned into a candy ball, his attack power remains the same. By attacking in his small candy ball state and piercing through Buu’s mouth, he drives Buu to the wall. Then when he entered Buu’s body, he split back into Goku and Vegeta, even though this was supposedly impossible. Afterwards, the two never became Vegetto again.
First Appearance: 503
Special Characteristics: Being a combination of two Saiyans, his appearance hasn’t changed all that much, and feels like a combination of Goku’s face and Vegeta’s hairstyle. He has both Vegeta’s coolheaded battle strategies and Goku’s pure fighting sense, and there can be no doubt that his strength measures even greater than that of a [Super] Saiyan 3. He is capable of transforming from his normal state into a Super Saiyan form. He has certain Special Characteristics: , including that his strength doesn’t change even if his shape does. He was born only once, and battled Majin Buu (Daizenshuu 2, p.113).
Techniques:ki blade, barrier, etc
Battles: He squares off against Majin Buu, who had absorbed Gohan and Piccolo, and demonstrates overwhelming strength.
Anime: In the original story, after Goku and Vegeta merge they transform into Super Vegetto straight away. However, in the anime version a fierce battle unfolds between Buu and normal Vegetto as well. Furthermore, after transforming into Super Vegetto, he uses Vegeta’s Big Bang Attack against Buu. Incidentally, merged characters such as Vegetto are performed by having both voice actors perform at the same time. This was the original creator’s idea.

The bold seems to be what is closest in regard to what you're claiming. However, this and the previous sentences are both independent clauses/separate sentences. Note that the word 'shape' (形) is used in the original Japanese, not 変身 or 姿 as is typical of describing transformations; this is a clear reference to the time when Vegetto was turned into a candy, as was referenced in the italicized above. Your French translation seems to have combined those two sentences together, and if that's the case, then it's absolutely wrong when compared to the original Japanese.

So no, Daizenshuu 7 hasn't said any 'dumb thing.' They are still considered the most essential sources to the world of DB, pre-BoG era, having been approved by Toriyama and released by Shueisha.

Yes, I figured that out after further investigation. The Japanese version clearly refers to Vegeto’s strength not changing when turned into a candy, the French translators thought it meant his strength doesn’t increase when he turns Super Saiyan. And the same word is used for "shape" and "form" in French so that probably didn’t help. Sorry for using an invalid example.

But that doesn’t change what I said, Daizenshuu books are still full of errors that contradict the manga. And you know like me that Toriyama approving those books don’t make them canon, he just did it for money. What’s happening nowadays with Super and all should be a good sign of Toriyama not caring about his manga being contradicted.

Now if you think an error that contradicts the manga is not a "dumb thing" then I don’t know what it is. It seems that those pejorative terms triggered you somehow since I only used them once and you keep mentioning them with quotation marks so I’m sorry if it bothered you. I didn’t mean to disrespect fans that like those books, I find them quite interesting myself actually, that’s why I have one of them. I just think we shouldn’t give them more credit than they deserve. Toriyama’s words, which means his work (the manga) and what comes from his mouth, are what counts.

But it appears that neither of us will change his opinion on the matter so let’s just agree to disagree.

[Rakurai]

Yes, I figured that out after further investigation. The Japanese version clearly refers to Vegeto’s strength not changing when turned into a candy, the French translators thought it meant his strength doesn’t increase when he turns Super Saiyan. And the same word is used for "shape" and "form" in French so that probably didn’t help. Sorry for using an invalid example.

But that doesn’t change what I said, Daizenshuu books are still full of errors that contradict the manga. And you know like me that Toriyama approving those books don’t make them canon, he just did it for money. What’s happening nowadays with Super and all should be a good sign of Toriyama not caring about his manga being contradicted.

Now if you think an error that contradicts the manga is not a "dumb thing" then I don’t know what it is. It seems that those pejorative terms triggered you somehow since I only used them once and you keep mentioning them with quotation marks so I’m sorry if it bothered you. I didn’t mean to disrespect fans that like those books, I find them quite interesting myself actually, that’s why I have one of them. I just think we shouldn’t give them more credit than they deserve. Toriyama’s words, which means his work (the manga) and what comes from his mouth, are what counts.

But it appears that neither of us will change his opinion on the matter so let’s just agree to disagree.

No worries, I thought it was weird translation. Sorry if I sounded pushy.

It's not up to you or me or other fans to decide what is canon or not, Toriyama both drew the covers and acclaimed the staff for compiling all the information of the DB from his manga as well as the anime. He might as well have done it himself if he wasn't such a lazy PoS in the first place. Note that the Daizenshuus also takes care in separating the two mediums as well as the continuity of the films (I believe 6 covers the films and puts them into separate continuities).

You keep saying the Daizenshuu books are full of errors and contradictions but I would still like to see such an example of that which isn't a mistranslation and is pre-BoG era. You haven't brought any proof aside from something which turned out to be a mistranslation and error in context.

Ofc, given the DB Renaissance that happened since BoG, some of the info that they have is outdated and possibly wrong now. But before that, they were still considered as the best guides next to the manga and anime for learning about and understanding the world of DB.

I am always open to new opinions and perspectives, if only there is solid evidence or a strong compelling argument to back it up. You haven't done that at all yet.

And not even Toriyama's words are absolute. He's said things in interviews that end up being contradicted or not making sense in DBS such as SS2-3 not being used by Goku again. This is the man who admits he keeps forgetting his own works after all.

[Surai]

Yes, I figured that out after further investigation. The Japanese version clearly refers to Vegeto’s strength not changing when turned into a candy, the French translators thought it meant his strength doesn’t increase when he turns Super Saiyan. And the same word is used for "shape" and "form" in French so that probably didn’t help. Sorry for using an invalid example.

But that doesn’t change what I said, Daizenshuu books are still full of errors that contradict the manga. And you know like me that Toriyama approving those books don’t make them canon, he just did it for money. What’s happening nowadays with Super and all should be a good sign of Toriyama not caring about his manga being contradicted.

Now if you think an error that contradicts the manga is not a "dumb thing" then I don’t know what it is. It seems that those pejorative terms triggered you somehow since I only used them once and you keep mentioning them with quotation marks so I’m sorry if it bothered you. I didn’t mean to disrespect fans that like those books, I find them quite interesting myself actually, that’s why I have one of them. I just think we shouldn’t give them more credit than they deserve. Toriyama’s words, which means his work (the manga) and what comes from his mouth, are what counts.

But it appears that neither of us will change his opinion on the matter so let’s just agree to disagree.

No worries, I thought it was weird translation. Sorry if I sounded pushy.

It's not up to you or me or other fans to decide what is canon or not, Toriyama both drew the covers and acclaimed the staff for compiling all the information of the DB from his manga as well as the anime. He might as well have done it himself if he wasn't such a lazy PoS in the first place. Note that the Daizenshuus also takes care in separating the two mediums as well as the continuity of the films (I believe 6 covers the films and puts them into separate continuities).

You keep saying the Daizenshuu books are full of errors and contradictions but I would still like to see such an example of that which isn't a mistranslation and is pre-BoG era. You haven't brought any proof aside from something which turned out to be a mistranslation and error in context.

Ofc, given the DB Renaissance that happened since BoG, some of the info that they have is outdated and possibly wrong now. But before that, they were still considered as the best guides next to the manga and anime for learning about and understanding the world of DB.

I am always open to new opinions and perspectives, if only there is solid evidence or a strong compelling argument to back it up. You haven't done that at all yet.

And not even Toriyama's words are absolute. He's said things in interviews that end up being contradicted or not making sense in DBS such as SS2-3 not being used by Goku again. This is the man who admits he keeps forgetting his own works after all.

Here you can see some errors they made :

http://jamesanelson45.blogspot.com/2008 ... t.html?m=1

And they’re not the only ones. There’s Ten Shin Han being called "a descendant of aliens", even though nothing in the manga implies this and even Toriyama called him a human in interviews. Or Nappa’s power level being 4000, even though Goku needed Kaioken to take him down because he was too tough (how is it possible if he’s twice as strong as him in his base ?).

It’s not about deciding what is canon or not, this word has a clear definition. Canon = what the creator said and made. It doesn’t only apply to Dragon Ball, it applies to pretty much every work.

Yes, Toriyama himself forgot a lot of stuff and contradicted himself many times, but this is different. He’s the creator, his statements are absolute because he gets to make the rules. It’s his world. If we start questioning him or rejecting his statements, it means we essentially try to appropriate his work, which is not right.

[VegettoEX]

That blog post is rather poorly written and sourced. I would not use that as the basis for a discussion regarding "mistakes" in the Daizenshuu.

Furthermore, neither "introducing new information" nor "battle power I do not agree with" should be classified as "mistakes". For example, the whole point denigrating the categorization of Tenshinhan as a human while also being a descendent of aliens is, to be a bit blunt, made from ignorance regarding the usage of "human" (人間 ningen) throughout the series. (Goku is a human, and Ginyu is a human, and Tenshinhan is a human.)

We did a podcast episode about the topic of "mistakes" in the Daizenshuu back in 2011, which I would encourage anyone interested in the subject to tune into... particularly because Jake/Herms was a part of it, and some of the things that people attribute to the Daizenshuu as "mistakes" are actually just his own mistakes that get passed around! Which we discuss! Right there on the show! Enjoy!

[Surai]

The blog just gave some informations that come from the Daizenshuus. I don’t think that discrediting this blog just to invalidate the errors that have been pointed is the right approach. Unless you can prove their infos are inaccurate, of course.

Introducing a new information is a problem, as it doesn’t come from the manga, which never ever suggested Ten Shin Han comes from an alien race. If we start giving credit to every "new information" that doesn’t appear in the manga then they can basically say everything as long as there’s no way to prove them wrong. It doesn’t work like that. If I write a book that contains infos from the manga and say somewhere in it that Bulma is transsexual, it doesn’t mean it’s true just because Toriyama, who certainly didn’t bother reading it and verifying everything, approved it to get his check.

Thanks for the clarification about the term "ningen". I didn’t know that. It doesn’t make the info about Ten Shin Han accurate, it just shows that it’s not directly invalidated by the manga, which doesn’t change the problem.

Nappa’s 4000 is not just a battle power I don’t agree with. It’s a totally illogical info if we analyze the manga. Not everything needs to be outright stated with words, the context and character’s reactions or statements make some things pretty clear. And Base Goku just can’t be twice as strong as Nappa.

[theherodjl]

Nappa’s 4000 is not just a battle power I don’t agree with. It’s a totally illogical info if we analyze the manga. Not everything needs to be outright stated with words, the context and character’s reactions or statements make some things pretty clear. And Base Goku just can’t be twice as strong as Nappa.

There's nothing illogical about Nappa's PL unless you have your own preconceived notion of how PLs are 'suppose to' work. If anything, Nappa's PL offers us great insight into why PLs were altogether dropped because Nappa & Goku's fight defies the workings of several other fights in which PLs were given. Usually in DB, one fighter who is twice the strength of another fighter may have the clear advantage or even be the victor in a direct battle but that is not always the case. Certain things such as speed, size, endurance, and wits can alter the typical formula of "stronger fighter = winner" depending on how much is present in a fight. Nappa is a big, tough, and endurant bastard who easily withstood everything short of Kaio-ken Goku's strike and Vegeta's subsequent blast so its not surprising that by pushing himself to his limit, he could temporarily match a stronger opponent. Its also worth noting that Goku was still trying to find some satisfaction in the fight and wasn't giving it his best until he absolutely needed to so the 'problem' with Nappa's PL only exists if you want to believe it exists. The manga & guides working together do not actually create any issue/contradiction with it.

[Rakurai]

Here you can see some errors they made :

http://jamesanelson45.blogspot.com/2008 ... t.html?m=1

And they’re not the only ones. There’s Ten Shin Han being called "a descendant of aliens", even though nothing in the manga implies this and even Toriyama called him a human in interviews. Or Nappa’s power level being 4000, even though Goku needed Kaioken to take him down because he was too tough (how is it possible if he’s twice as strong as him in his base ?).

It’s not about deciding what is canon or not, this word has a clear definition. Canon = what the creator said and made. It doesn’t only apply to Dragon Ball, it applies to pretty much every work.

Yes, Toriyama himself forgot a lot of stuff and contradicted himself many times, but this is different. He’s the creator, his statements are absolute because he gets to make the rules. It’s his world. If we start questioning him or rejecting his statements, it means we essentially try to appropriate his work, which is not right.

I'm going to go with VegettoEX here. Disagreement with how power levels are supposed to affect a character's performance does not constitute to an error, especially when interpretation of PLs to a character's feats will vary from user to user. Furthermore, that blog post is as VegettoEX says, poorly written, and not even using the original Japanese Daizenshuus as a base. It even claims to use the "French" Daizenshuu to clear it up, which I just showed had an error in translation, so that makes it even less credible. If you want to present an error, present it as your own argument and pls don't link me somebody else's, that's just sad and poor manners.

Also as VegettoEX said, Tenshinhan is still a human and is presented as one. If Tenshinhan is descended from an alien race, so be it. There is absolutely nothing in the manga that contradicts it and is presented as supplemental information instead. That is not in any way an 'error.'

Do you really want to go here? To begin with, "canon" is not even a proper word, it is a fandom term which stems from the word 'canonical' which does not necessarily mean, to quote you, "what the creator said and made." And it seems that you and I have two different opinions about what constitutes canon and what doesn't. To begin with, in the Japanese side of things the term Shueisha, the official publisher and licensor of DB, typically uses is 正史 which translates to official history or proper history. This is as close to 'canon' as one is ever going to get, and therefore what is ultimately decided as canon should be the content creators, i.e. Shueisha and Toriyama and Toyotarou (Toriyama's successor).

For that matter, other side stories or series like GT and SDBH can also be considered to have have their own 'canon' or continuity. When fans say they are not 'canon,' that just simply means they are not part of this official history or main continuity. Shueisha has deemed the DBS manga as the 'canonical sequel' to the original manga by Toriyama, and therefore it is the canonical sequel irregardless of the fact that Toriyama didn't come out and say it himself.

Questioning him and rejecting him are two different things. The former does not constitute to appropriating his works. If I point out the inconsistency of his words vs his world, such as Goku probably not ever using SS2-3 again, how does that make me one to appropriate his own works? If he says "Cooler is going to play a huge role in the next film' and I don't believe him until I see the film myself, how does that make me appropriate his own works? Like I said again, Toriyama's word is not even absolute, and although it has greater merit than any other person or publisher, he is not the sole owner of the DB IP anymore. Yes we should put faith in his words, but there is nothing wrong with doubting him based on his past actions and acknowledged amnesia of his own world. If Shueisha or Toyotarou one day came out and said "GT will happen after Super" and Toriyama doesn't say anything about the matter, it is acceptable to assume it to be true until Toriyama comes out and says otherwise. It is also acceptable to be skeptical of or reject the statement because of the contradictions between GT and Super.

[Surai]

I'm going to go with VegettoEX here. Disagreement with how power levels are supposed to affect a character's performance does not constitute to an error, especially when interpretation of PLs to a character's feats will vary from user to user. Furthermore, that blog post is as VegettoEX says, poorly written, and not even using the original Japanese Daizenshuus as a base. It even claims to use the "French" Daizenshuu to clear it up, which I just showed had an error in translation, so that makes it even less credible. If you want to present an error, present it as your own argument and pls don't link me somebody else's, that's just sad and poor manners.

Also as VegettoEX said, Tenshinhan is still a human and is presented as one. If Tenshinhan is descended from an alien race, so be it. There is absolutely nothing in the manga that contradicts it and is presented as supplemental information instead. That is not in any way an 'error.'

Do you really want to go here? To begin with, "canon" is not even a proper word, it is a fandom term which stems from the word 'canonical' which does not necessarily mean, to quote you, "what the creator said and made." And it seems that you and I have two different opinions about what constitutes canon and what doesn't. To begin with, in the Japanese side of things the term Shueisha, the official publisher and licensor of DB, typically uses is 正史 which translates to official history or proper history. This is as close to 'canon' as one is ever going to get, and therefore what is ultimately decided as canon should be the content creators, i.e. Shueisha and Toriyama and Toyotarou (Toriyama's successor).

For that matter, other side stories or series like GT and SDBH can also be considered to have have their own 'canon' or continuity. When fans say they are not 'canon,' that just simply means they are not part of this official history or main continuity. Shueisha has deemed the DBS manga as the 'canonical sequel' to the original manga by Toriyama, and therefore it is the canonical sequel irregardless of the fact that Toriyama didn't come out and say it himself.

Questioning him and rejecting him are two different things. The former does not constitute to appropriating his works. If I point out the inconsistency of his words vs his world, such as Goku probably not ever using SS2-3 again, how does that make me one to appropriate his own works? If he says "Cooler is going to play a huge role in the next film' and I don't believe him until I see the film myself, how does that make me appropriate his own works? Like I said again, Toriyama's word is not even absolute, and although it has greater merit than any other person or publisher, he is not the sole owner of the DB IP anymore. Yes we should put faith in his words, but there is nothing wrong with doubting him based on his past actions and acknowledged amnesia of his own world. If Shueisha or Toyotarou one day came out and said "GT will happen after Super" and Toriyama doesn't say anything about the matter, it is acceptable to assume it to be true until Toriyama comes out and says otherwise. It is also acceptable to be skeptical of or reject the statement because of the contradictions between GT and Super.

Although it’s true some things are a matter of interpretation when it comes to power level, the manga is quite clear about what happens when a character is twice as strong as another character. Whether it’s in the Saiyan or Namek saga, every time someone’s power level was even just a little bit higher than someone else’s, it resulted in a curbstomp. Back when numbers were used to define one’s power level, we’ve never ever seen someone being twice as strong as someone else and still having trouble defeating him. Even when Vegeta was more or less as strong as Zarbon (either slightly stronger or weaker, it’s open to interpretation) in their second fight, he was able to wreck him fairly quickly without getting injured. So why should we believe that Base Goku was twice as strong as Nappa if he needed Kaioken ? It goes against the manga’s own logic.

The fact blog used French Daizenshuu is irrelevant if you can’t prove those errors are just mistranslations. Just because the French Daizenshuu mistranslated one sentence, it doesn’t mean everything is mistranslated in it. Claiming repeatedly this blog is "poorly written" (what is this even supposed to mean ?) won’t change anything. Either you can prove these errors are just mistranslations or you can’t, it’s as simple as that. I assume you can’t because neither you nor VegetoEx bothered mentioning every error the blog talked about to explain why they’re not errors, you just arbitrarily criticized the blog instead. And what are the odds of everything being mistranslated ?

Yeah, linking this blog is "sad and poor manners", just like when you linked Herms’ tweets, I guess. You seriously need to chill here. There’s nothing wrong about linking a blog that compiles some errors made in the books. It’s not "sad" or "poor manners". It makes absolutely no sense to complain about that just because it’s doesn’t come from me. Besides it’s not even a question of arguments, it’s about what is said in Daizenshuu. Why would I need to tell it myself if it’s just an objective presentation of what is written in a book ? And I’m frankly a little bit annoyed by the fact you’re trying to take a moral high ground and pretending you’re teaching me some lessons. And calling my posts sad or poor manners just because I gave a link to a blog that compiles some Daizenshuu errors is clearly over the line, especially when you’re the one who lacks manners by disrespecting someone just because of a disagreement about a manga. I didn’t disrespect you so please, try to be respectful or else I will just stop talking with you. I came here to have peaceful, civilized and mature discussions about DB. I’m not interested in participating to a battle of egos and denigrating my interlocutors to "win" a discussion.

If Ten Shin Han is a descendant of aliens, he’s no more human than Goku, he’s an alien. An Earthling, but an alien nonetheless. Now if what said VegettoEX is right, it means the Japanese word for "human" has been used to talk about aliens, like Piccolo or Ginyu. So I assume in this context, it means "being/living being". But this supplemental info about Ten Shin Han’s descendants is not even suggested in the manga so just because a book not even written by Toriyama says it, that doesn’t mean it’s true. It would need to be confirmed by Toriyama. If the guy has a tendency of contradicting himself, why should we even believe something he didn’t state himself ?

DBS is canon because Toriyama decided it was. And he didn’t just let Toei do his thing, it’s his work as well, not just Toei’s work. DBGT is not canon because he decided it wasn’t and it’s not his work, even though he drew some designs and approved it back then, just like he approved Daizenshuu. He even approved Bardock’s movie and used his design for the manga because he found the movie very cool, it didn’t stop him from making his own version of Bardock’s story in DB Minus. Approving =/= stating said thing is canon.

[Grimlock]

DBS is canon because Toriyama decided it was (...) DBGT is not canon because he decided it wasn’t

Source?

Approving =/= stating said thing is canon.

I would like to see said statement, if you don't mind.

[Surai]

DBS is canon because Toriyama decided it was (...) DBGT is not canon because he decided it wasn’t

Source?

Approving =/= stating said thing is canon.

I would like to see said statement, if you don't mind.

https://www.kanzenshuu.com/translations ... ama-intro/

[Grimlock]

I don't see any canon established in there.

It's also missing source for the "DBS is canon because Toriyama decided it was" and the supposed statement of canonicity in "stating said thing is canon".

[Surai]

I don't see any canon established in there.

It's also missing source for the "DBS is canon because Toriyama decided it was" and the supposed statement of canonicity in "stating said thing is canon".

He said DBGT is a side story of the original Dragon Ball, it’s pretty clear. Now I see where you’re going with this but the meaning of a side story depends on the context.
When an anime/manga is not achieved and characters from it are taken to write a completely different story with a different title, it can be canon. Because the story is just told outside of the context of the main story, it’s entirely something else. Now in the case of DBGT, it’s different because DB was over and DBGT’s story takes place just after DB with the exact same characters and with the purpose of narrating the next adventures of Goku and his friends. So if it’s called a side story of the "original Dragon Ball" instead of a sequel, it means it’s not canon.

There’s nothing to say about DBS, really. Toriyama worked on it, he participated in the writing. So yes, if his involvement is that deep, he basically made the story canon so he decided it to be canon. It’s not up for debate.

What statement of canonicity are you talking about ? I said approving a story =/= stating the story is canon. It means a story is not canon just because Toriyama approved it. DBGT + Bardock movie or even Trunks movie are perfect examples.

[Grimlock]

So if it’s called a side story of the "original Dragon Ball" instead of a sequel, it means it’s not canon.

Dragon Ball GT is also called "sequel", though. Anyway, I think we are once again dealing with the "canonicity" and "continuity" difference issue here. Yes, Dragon Ball GT does take place in another continuity in regards to the manga one, but as common knowledge says, something taking place in another continuity doesn't necessarily means it's not canonical in the grand scheme of things (as in "not an event that didn't happen in any way").

But the real problem is the root of all this, and that is the fact that Dragon Ball does not have a canon in the first place. "Everything the author says/does is canon and must disregard everything else" sounds more like a "law" established by a fanbase than actually being something to be religiously followed. No official word states the "original work" can't accept other works done by other official entities or that fans can't do it in their "headcanon". Once again, context must be in play at all times.

There’s nothing to say about DBS, really. Toriyama worked on it, he participated in the writing. So yes, if his involvement is that deep, he basically made the story canon so he decided it to be canon. It’s not up for debate.

Should I give you example of works done by the authors themselves in which do not automatically connect with the "main work"? Then again, I don't think I have to go too far, maybe just saying Neko Majin should be enough to throw that notion through the window.

Curiosity: what say you about Dragon Ball Online?