Manga 'retcons'(?)

[Grimlock]

Yeah, you're right that they're two separate sentences.
I don't think this was the case in Z so in that sense you're right, this seems a retcon.

Far from being a retcon. That information is one that cannot be taken into consideration whatsoever or you'll find yourself in the "headcanon" zone with your own new years in order to "fit" that information (and even then, I think there will still be problems).

I think you're being a bit unfair here. In Super there are 3 sagas that have been skipped in the manga for marketing reasons, but are still part of the story.
And now we're having the Moro saga in the manga, so even not counting the unadapted stories it would be 2 tournaments & 2 sagas with plot, like in Dragon Ball.

If by "three sagas have been skipped" you include Movie 15, then no. I won't give credit to Dragon Ball Super because it wasn't that series that came up with that "story". The same goes to Movie 14. What we see in Dragon Ball Super are merely retellings of something else, not original works. The movies were branded as Dragon Ball Z stuff, therefore they are "Z material". That makes only Universe 6 saga, Future Trunks saga and Universe Survival saga as a legit Dragon Ball Super material.

I won't consider Moro saga and Dragon Ball Super Broly because it's manga and movie-only respectively, so far. They're not the "main media" for a general audience. I'm sticking to the original anime run, which is from 2016 to 2018 - Universe 6 saga to Universe Survival saga. The same circumstance I'm considering for Dragon Ball, just its anime.

And the ToP, despite being a tournament, can't be compared to one in terms of how things develop. It's was a battle royale.

I didn't watch in its entirely but from all I saw, it didn't really feel like a battle royale at all. Do characters even disturb other fights? Does Goku fires a Kamehameha at his opponent, his opponent dodges it and it hits one or other characters, for example? I don't remember seeing anything like that, and well, for a battle royale with a lot of characters involved, things like that should have been pretty common to see. It seemed a very organized "simultaneous fights" rather than a proper battle royale.

[MechaTrunks]

I didn't watch in its entirely but from all I saw, it didn't really feel like a battle royale at all. Do characters even disturb other fights? Does Goku fires a Kamehameha at his opponent, his opponent dodges it and it hits one or other characters, for example? I don't remember seeing anything like that, and well, for a battle royale with a lot of characters involved, things like that should have been pretty common to see. It seemed a very organized "simultaneous fights" rather than a proper battle royale.

Well, in the anime that's true, but I'm speaking of the canon story and that's the manga (which is supervised by Toriyama himself).

PD: Even if the movies were marketed as Z, their story is clearly part of the Super sagas of the series. They were just labelled as DBZ because they were testing the waters.
But I'm not saying you're wrong either, since in the end they were DBZ films.
The only point where I disagree is in considering the anime the main canon. The canon is what's written by Toriyama and in that sense, both the manga and the movies are much more canon than the anime.

[Xeogran]

Do characters even disturb other fights?

It happened, but very rarely. I remember Ribrianne eliminating an opponent that Piccolo was fighting.

[Grimlock]

The only point where I disagree is in considering the anime the main canon. The canon is what's written by Toriyama and in that sense, both the manga and the movies are much more canon than the anime.

Except I'm not even referring in the slightest to canonicity. Please reread it and then answer it again. And there's no canon in this franchise. No one established that it's just what Toriyama writes what counts. Not to mention that this supposed "rule" that just what the author does is canonical is totally meaningless nowadays.

It happened, but very rarely. I remember Ribrianne eliminating an opponent that Piccolo was fighting.

"Very rarely"? Well, that's very bad. If that's the case then it's really not that much different from what we've seen.

[MechaTrunks]

Except I'm not even referring in the slightest to canonicity. Please reread it and then answer it again. And there's no canon in this franchise. No one established that it's just what Toriyama writes what counts. Not to mention that this supposed "rule" that just what the author does is canonical is totally meaningless nowadays.

The canon is what the author of the series (or the person he delegates the series to) writes, I don't see why this is meaningless now.
Game of Thrones canon is the books, not the TV series for example, even when 99% of the people that knows about GoT has done it through the TV series and not the books.

Regards!

[Dragon Wukong]

No, but I do remember some incoherent stuff popping up, such as:

• The relatively "harmless" kid Vegeta with bangs.

• The major one "one day passes in the present, one day passes in the future" (this one simply destroys everything we know about AGES and cannot, under any circumstances, be considered. Unless you want a completely broken timeline, of course).

• That Trunks explains he knows Taiyo-ken because Gohan taught him, even though Gohan most certainly didn't know about that technique.

And, in a way, Toyotaro using Toei's Yadorat kinda contradicts Dragon Ball Online, as they don't have such appearance in there. He should have sticked with just Dragon Ball Online's design.

Kid Vegeta with bangs was also being used by the anime, along with the "one day passes in the present, one passes in the future" deal, which I don't think actually contradicts anything in canonical material? The last two just don't even matter. Gohan could've taught Trunks the Taiyo-ken at any given point, and Toyotaro used both Yardrat designs so both depictions make sense, you could say only the DBO-design Yardrats chose to migrate to Earth.

[Grimlock]

Kid Vegeta with bangs was also being used by the anime,

As it should be. Ever since kid Vegeta's debut, he has always appeared with bangs in the anime. So Toei is just being coherent with its continuity. The manga is another story. If the manga is "closer to Toriyama" as you people like to say it, shouldn't it have depicted kid Vegeta without the bangs? Just like Movie 14 (that was released years before the manga started) and Dragon Ball Super Broly establish?

along with the "one day passes in the present, one passes in the future" deal, which I don't think actually contradicts anything in canonical material?

I don't remember Bulma saying anything like that in the anime. And yes, it contradicts everything even in this material that doesn't exist.

Gohan could've taught Trunks the Taiyo-ken at any given point

No, you can't teach to someone something you don't know yourself. Learn it first, teach it later.

[Dragon Wukong]

As it should be. Ever since kid Vegeta's debut, he has always appeared with bangs in the anime. So Toei is just being coherent with its continuity. The manga is another story. If the manga is "closer to Toriyama" as you people like to say it, shouldn't it have depicted kid Vegeta without the bangs? Just like Movie 14 (that was released years before the manga started) and Dragon Ball Super Broly establish?

I don't remember Bulma saying anything like that in the anime. And yes, it contradicts everything even in this material that doesn't exist.

No, you can't teach to someone something you don't know yourself. Learn it first, teach it later.

The kid Vegeta thing I just chalk up to being ambiguous about which design should be used. Kid Vegeta without bangs appeared a grand total of 1 time in BoG before DBS Broly. Until then any sight of Kid Vegeta in videogames and filler and whatnot used the previous design. Kinda like how Bardock's "Father of Goku" design was used for everything until DBS Broly (even tho Minus came out years ago).

And in the anime, we see time passing in the future as time passes in the present in the FT arc through various scenes.

Taiyoken thing was my mistake, I misread it. But hey if 50 other people can know Tenshinhan's move, I don't see why Future Gohan and therefore Trunks wouldn't also learn it.

[Grimlock]

The kid Vegeta thing I just chalk up to being ambiguous about which design should be used. Kid Vegeta without bangs appeared a grand total of 1 time in BoG before DBS Broly. Until then any sight of Kid Vegeta in videogames and filler and whatnot used the previous design. Kinda like how Bardock's "Father of Goku" design was used for everything until DBS Broly (even tho Minus came out years ago).

I don't know what's ambiguous about it. I forgot about Dragon Ball Minus (which was also released prior to Toyotaro's manga), so thanks for reminding me. Vegeta without bangs appears wherever Toriyama is involved. Vegeta with bangs only appears in the anime. If Toyotaro is meant to be closer to "wherever Toriyama is involved", Vegeta without bangs is what we should have seen in Toyotaro's manga. Anyway, like I said, it's a "relatively harmless" issue (but an issue nonetheless).

And in the anime, we see time passing in the future as time passes in the present in the FT arc through various scenes.

Well, yeah, obviously. But the difference in time is already there. Time is passing, but not the same way between those two timelines. The three-year difference is still there, which is why Trunks makes a seventeen-year travel, instead of the original one, twenty-year travel.

But if you're saying something more specific like "getting dusk in both timelines at the same time", I don't remember seeing anything remotely like that. What scenes do you have in mind that hint to that being the case?

if 50 other people can know Tenshinhan's move, I don't see why Future Gohan and therefore Trunks wouldn't also learn it.

I see why. Because ever since Gohan was born, Taiyo-ken was used twice (as far as I remember), one by Goku against Vegeta, in which case Gohan was not present, and the other by Kuririn against Dodoria. In which case the situation and context doesn't allow Gohan to learn it.

The problem isn't Trunks knowing the technique. The problem is that out of those "50 other people", the only one could have taught it to Trunks prior to his time travellings is the exactly the one who doesn't even know it.

[Koitsukai]

But there is nothing preventing Gohan learning the technique off-screen. I mean, it's not genki dama, and it's not Nam either.

[Dragon Wukong]

I don't know what's ambiguous about it. I forgot about Dragon Ball Minus (which was also released prior to Toyotaro's manga), so thanks for reminding me. Vegeta without bangs appears wherever Toriyama is involved. Vegeta with bangs only appears in the anime. If Toyotaro is meant to be closer to "wherever Toriyama is involved", Vegeta without bangs is what we should have seen in Toyotaro's manga. Anyway, like I said, it's a "relatively harmless" issue (but an issue nonetheless).

Because at that point in time, "wherever Toriyama is involved" had only been a single time, bangless Kid Vegeta had only appeared once.

Well, yeah, obviously. But the difference in time is already there. Time is passing, but not the same way between those two timelines. The three-year difference is still there, which is why Trunks makes a seventeen-year travel, instead of the original one, twenty-year travel.

But if you're saying something more specific like "getting dusk in both timelines at the same time", I don't remember seeing anything remotely like that. What scenes do you have in mind that hint to that being the case?

I assumed "a day passes in the future for every day in the present" is just another way of saying that time passes concurrently in the future with the moment he went to in the past. You don't need "getting dusk in both timelines at the same time" for that statement to be true, yknow?

I see why. Because ever since Gohan was born, Taiyo-ken was used twice (as far as I remember), one by Goku against Vegeta, in which case Gohan was not present, and the other by Kuririn against Dodoria. In which case the situation and context doesn't allow Gohan to learn it.

The problem isn't Trunks knowing the technique. The problem is that out of those "50 other people", the only one could have taught it to Trunks prior to his time travellings is the exactly the one who doesn't even know it.

You're forgetting when Cell used it. I'm preeeetty sure Krillin and Goku just copied it from Tenshinhan, we never see them get taught it, or train for it, and it seems like it'd be a relatively simple technique to learn. I wouldn't be surprised if Gohan did just get the hang on Namek after seeing Krillin do it.

[Grimlock]

But there is nothing preventing Gohan learning the technique off-screen.

Most certainly. We can all make our own assumptions/"headcanon" to easily explain that Gohan somehow knew it and taught it to Trunks. However, I'm not taking into consideration any assumption/"headcanon". Going solely by what the series told or showed us, or in this case, the lack thereof.

Because at that point in time, "wherever Toriyama is involved" had only been a single time, bangless Kid Vegeta had only appeared once.

He appears as such in Dragon Ball Z: Battle of Gods (2013) and Dragon Ball Minus (2014), that makes it twice.

I assumed "a day passes in the future for every day in the present" is just another way of saying that time passes concurrently in the future with the moment he went to in the past. You don't need "getting dusk in both timelines at the same time" for that statement to be true, yknow?

Be that as it may, once we acknowledge that "a day passes in the future for every day in the present" is a thing, it automatically means that it has been always like this. Time have always passed concurrently amongst timelines, and that's where the problem lies. Because if it's been always like that, then how in the present three years passes (AGE 764 to AGE 767) while in the future around just eight months had passed?

You're forgetting when Cell used it.

When did Cell use it?

[Dbzk1999]

When did Cell use it?

He uses it twice. Once to escape from Piccolo and the others. The other right before he absorbs 18

[Grimlock]

And was Trunks nearby in any of those occasions?

[Dbzk1999]

And was Trunks nearby in any of those occasions?

He was there for both. He was one of the people Cell blinded with it in both occasions (the second in particular was to keep him from interfering in Cell absorbing 18)

[Grimlock]

I see. Well, it just goes to show how this issue could've been easily avoided if Toyotaro had paid just a bit more attention. He could have just said that Trunks learned the technique at some point while he was in the past.

But he specifically made Trunks to say he learned it from Gohan. Making it, without assumptions/"headcanon", a mistake.



By the way, even Goku is surprised to see that Trunks knows it, my reaction exactly. I'm not the only one seeing what's wrong here.

[MechaTrunks]

I see. Well, it just goes to show how this issue could've been easily avoided if Toyotaro had paid just a bit more attention. He could have just said that Trunks learned the technique at some point while he was in the past.

But he specifically made Trunks to say he learned it from Gohan. Making it, without assumptions/"headcanon", a mistake.



By the way, even Goku is surprised to see that Trunks knows it, my reaction exactly. I'm not the only one seeing what's wrong here.

The tayoken is an easy technique that both Goku and Krilin learned on their own. Why wouldn't future Gohan be able to learn it when he absolutely knew that the technique existed because he saw Krilin using it in Namek, and how useful it is when you want to hide from stronger oponents that can't sense kis?

Regards!

[Grimlock]

The tayoken is an easy technique that both Goku and Krilin learned on their own.

Alright, I went to check the full history of this and you're all halfway correct.

Tenshinhan uses Taiyo-ken twice before anyone else could imitate it. The first time he blinded everyone (it's already a bit of a stretch to think someone can learn a technique while blinded, let alone when you're running for your life from a pink behemoth while protecting a kid but anyway). The second time he uses it was against Goku, but the latter was wearing sunglasses, blinding everyone else. Goku literally saw the technique so that he could learn/practice it, it was not "on his own".

Kuririn first uses Taiyo-ken against Dodoria, despite being blinded or not being present all the times the technique was used previously. But if Kuririn can use it despite all odds against him, then probably Gohan somehow learned it when Kuririn used it even though he was busy saving his and Dende's lives. But the fact we don't even get to see Gohan using the technique does make it hard to believe that's the case.

[SSJgogeto]

the "one day passes in the present, one passes in the future" deal, which I don't think actually contradicts anything in canonical material?

Well, yes and no. If you don't consider the retcon in the manga and use the data from Daizenshuu then yes, it contradicts some things. But if you only take the manga in consideration then it probably doesn't contradict anything.

[Dragon Wukong]

the "one day passes in the present, one passes in the future" deal, which I don't think actually contradicts anything in canonical material?

Well, yes and no. If you don't consider the retcon in the manga and use the data from Daizenshuu then yes, it contradicts some things. But if you only take the manga in consideration then it probably doesn't contradict anything.

I don't consider contradicting the Daizenshuu a retcon necessarily. Daizenshuu includes non-canon material anyhow. Only if stuff in the manga itself is contradicted would I consider it a retcon.