"Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

[theherodjl]

Isn't it just absurd that 7-3 can make a permanent copy of Moro's strength in the first place? I mean, WTF? Its possible to treat the Ki of God-tier beings like its memory that can be stored at whoever's leisure? All 7-3 even did was touch Moro's neck, he didn't absorb Moro's Ki nor did Moro give him Ki like with the other mook that Goku fought.
Its an extremely convenient way for Moro to get strong again...and its utterly terrible. The design also doesn't do much other than to signify that Moro ripped off Cell's look and dramatic entrance of the Super Perfect form.

[Dragon Wukong]

Isn't it just absurd that 7-3 can make a permanent copy of Moro's strength in the first place? I mean, WTF? Its possible to treat the Ki of God-tier beings like its memory that can be stored at whoever's leisure? All 7-3 even did was touch Moro's neck, he didn't absorb Moro's Ki nor did Moro give him Ki like with the other mook that Goku fought.
Its an extremely convenient way for Moro to get strong again...and its utterly terrible. The design also doesn't do much other than to signify that Moro ripped off Cell's look and dramatic entrance of the Super Perfect form.

It's not really that out of place. The strength of any given fighter is in their cells, if Gero's creation of Cell is any indication. Seven-Three's abilities don't seem that far-fetched in comparison. We also don't know the exact mechanics of how Seven-Three's powers work. He could absorb a bit of their ki, or part of their cells, who knows?

[DiscountDabi]

Wait a second, why isn’t Moro Dead? He’s only survived this long because of the energy he’s absorbed. With Vegeta striping away Moro’s Energy, he shouldn’t have any left and should have died.

Man these plot holes.

It's not a plot hole, Moro made a backup copy of his energy within 7-3, which is why he "fused" with him. Not only did he get his energy back, he also got 7-3's energy and ability.

I’m referring to before, but I can assume that he had a few years left on his own energy, assuming he uses the energy he absorbs before his own so I guess its not an issue.

The real issue is that Goku and Vegeta should have gotten the energy Moro stole back, and if the next chapter hinges on them being out of power it will be a plot hole proper.

[Matches Malone]

The real issue is that Goku and Vegeta should have gotten the energy Moro stole back, and if the next chapter hinges on them being out of power it will be a plot hole proper.

Vegeta was told on Yardrat about the ability of healing, so maybe that'll come into play instead.

[Lord Beerus]

But that's not what happened.

There are scenes where Vegeta unequivocally expresses remorse for past misdeeds well after already being revived for becoming the "good guy". There are scenes where he not only doesn't hesitate to make up for prior atrocities, but even openly explains his act of atonement (like when he resurrected the Earthlings). There are even scenes of heavy introspection on Vegeta's part. It's all right there at the end of the Boo arc, so anyone claiming that this isn't an extension of that role is already arguing on logically shaky ground.

Vegeta carries baggage, even post-redemption. That's absolutely in-character, but he's also not the kind of person to just bring it up unless the situation prompts that kind of reaction. This is why his "story convenience" in the current arc is a necessity - characters, especially characters like Vegeta, don't bring up long-held grievances out of nowhere. They do so in response to specific stimuli.

Character development is quite literally dictated by the story, the circumstances of the plot, and the character's motivation in that story. Characterization without the story's facilitation is just as narratively out-of-place, vapid and as pointless as story without any characterization; we're not reading RP bios here.

The main problem is we never actually see Vegeta feel he's carrying baggage from his past deeds after the Majin Boo arc or prior to going back on Namek during the Galactic Patrol Prisoner arc. I'd like to be wrong about this and for you to point out the scenes where Vegeta showed remorse for his past misdeeds post Majin Boo arc and pre Galactic Patrol Prisoner arc, because I'm drawing a blank on that.

But even if there are scenes like that, Dragon Ball in general doesn't follow up on them in any complete manner because the vast majority of the people that Vegeta senselessly murdered are still dead. The extension of his evil deeds weren't just based on what he did on Earth and Namek. And if that is how Vegeta views his past misdeeds in a general sense, then that is the most insincere and close-minded kind of atonement you can have.

It also doesn't help that redemption in Dragon Ball is very easy when you have a literal reset button (three of them in fact!) at your disposal to reverse any damage you've done. Seriously, if Vegeta wanted to atone for his past, the devices he needs to do that were literally under his nose for years. And Vegeta, nor any of the other cast, entertain the idea at any point because everyone moved on. It sounds fucked up, but that's what happened.

Yeah, how about that? I actually wouldn't have minded some of your ideas. I don't agree with disqualifying Vegeta from the God ritual, but I think even your best hypothetical examples illustrate why Super as a whole (and not necessarily the Moro arc in particular) often failed to capitalize on opportunities that could have further explored Vegeta's character.

As much as I thoroughly disagree with the prospect of Vegeta's progression coming "too late", I'd nonetheless say better late than never. We're talking about a character who received major development in every arc of the original series.

Having Vegeta stagnate is a disservice to Vegeta.

The sad thing is that there was potential for Vegeta to have this kind of commentary and have it make sense from a in-universe perspective. But the problem is that this kind of character development needed to planned out for it to work in any sense. To be fair though, this kind character exploration was doomed from the start when Battle Of Gods became a thing.

The last real chance to explore Vegeta's past in any kind of depth was Resurrection F, and Toriyama did nothing with Vegeta's character in that movie. And I honestly think that says everything you need to know about how much there is left to explore with Vegeta's character in an organic fashion if even the creator of the character can't think of any way to breath new life in the character, even when he's up against a villain who he shares the most interesting dynamic and history with (Freeza).

I, too, don't like characters to stagnate, but there's a right way and wrong way to add more depth to a character. Toyotaro chose the worst possible way to do it. But to be brutally honest, I don't think there is anything left you can do to Vegeta in terms of development. His character arc climaxed in the Majin Boo arc, with Battle Of Gods serving a decent continuation and GT being the definitive epilogue.

[Dragon Wukong]

The main problem is we never actually see Vegeta feel he's carrying baggage from his past deeds after the Majin Boo arc or prior to going back on Namek during the Galactic Patrol Prisoner arc. I'd like to be wrong about this and for you to point out the scenes where Vegeta showed remorse for his past misdeeds post Majin Boo arc and pre Galactic Patrol Prisoner arc, because I'm drawing a blank on that.

But even if there are scenes like that, Dragon Ball in general doesn't follow up on them in any complete manner because the vast majority of the people that Vegeta senselessly murdered are still dead. The extension of his evil deeds weren't just based on what he did on Earth and Namek. And if that is how Vegeta views his past misdeeds in a general sense, then that is the most insincere and close-minded kind of atonement you can have.

It also doesn't help that redemption in Dragon Ball is very easy when you have a literal reset button (three of them in fact!) at your disposal to reverse any damage you've done. Seriously, if Vegeta wanted to atone for his past, the devices he needs to do that were literally under his nose for years. And Vegeta, nor any of the other cast, entertain the idea at any point because everyone moved on. It sounds fucked up, but that's what happened.

We don't need to see Vegeta carry his baggage in situations where it wouldn't be relevant, we only need to get the impression that he's changed/is changing, which the manga Future Trunks arc did pretty well two arcs back. The main thing that matters is we see this side of his character when it's relevant.

The sad thing is that there was potential for Vegeta to have this kind of commentary and have it make sense from a in-universe perspective. But the problem is that this kind of character development needed to planned out for it to work in any sense. To be fair though, this kind character exploration was doomed from the start when Battle Of Gods became a thing.

The last real chance to explore Vegeta's past in any kind of depth was Resurrection F, and Toriyama did nothing with Vegeta's character in that movie. And I honestly think that says everything you need to know about how much there is left to explore with Vegeta's character in an organic fashion if even the creator of the character can't think of any way to breath new life in the character, even when he's up against a villain who he shares the most interesting dynamic and history with (Freeza).

I, too, don't like characters to stagnate, but there's a right way and wrong way to add more depth to a character. Toyotaro chose the worst possible way to do it. But to be brutally honest, I don't think there is anything left you can do to Vegeta in terms of development. His character arc climaxed in the Majin Boo arc, with Battle Of Gods serving a decent continuation and GT being the definitive epilogue.

Ultimately I have to agree with the statement that saying there's a point where it's too late to explore a character is just plain wrong tbh. You may as well argue no other character from the past should appear then, since no one else bar Gohan and 17 have gotten development since DBZ.

You're also ignoring how Vegeta was explored somewhat in the Future Trunks arc, particularly where again he abandoned his pride to fuse with Goku after hearing Trunks talk about how Bulma was planning on coming to the past to see him again, which looking back could also be read as another form of atonement for him, foregoing his pride to try and save an otherwise doomed timeline on an Earth that's beyond saving. Toyotaro hasn't been ignoring Vegeta as a character and choosing just now to expand on who he is deep down, he's been doing that.

[emperior]

So Vegeta arrives on Namek, remembers what he did to their people, feels guilty and tries to redeem himself.
I see nothing wrong with this. It’s not too sudden or too late. It’s just that the situation was perfect for Toyotaro to bring up that event and to do something with it.
Sure, Vegeta already kind of got similar development in Buu arc but this feels like a nice extension of that.

Now, would Toriyama ever write something like this? I doubt so. He most likely even forgot about all that stuff.

[The Undying]

The main problem is we never actually see Vegeta feel he's carrying baggage from his past deeds after the Majin Boo arc or prior to going back on Namek during the Galactic Patrol Prisoner arc.

Why exactly is that a problem? Why do we need to see Vegeta carrying baggage in story arcs that have little to no relation to that baggage? That doesn't make sense.

The examples I've cited happened within the Boo arc, and frankly, that's all we need. The proof is in the pudding - we know Vegeta can feel remorse because the original manga demonstrably had Vegeta feeling remorse, with zero indication that it just went away.

Seriously, if Vegeta wanted to atone for his past, the devices he needs to do that were literally under his nose for years. And Vegeta, nor any of the other cast, entertain the idea at any point because everyone moved on. 

I think you're getting way too ingrained in real life hypotheticals with this argument. These are fictional characters in a fictional story; context and circumstance both make all the difference.

Vegeta doesn't express guilt for his past misdeeds in Super's previous arcs precisely because those arcs barely have an in-story relation to them. Resurrection 'F' comes the closest, but even there, Vegeta is never directly confronted by the people he's committed genocide towards. The Galactic Patrol arc, in contrast, does have that relation. Do you see the distinction here? Nobody (and certainly not Vegeta) discusses their internal baggage unprompted. It makes sense for the characters to do so only when the situation provokes it.

It's why you don't have Vegeta randomly popping out of the blue in previous story arcs to announce that he plans to resurrect those he exterminated in the past because that'd be fucking awful writing and wouldn't jive narratively as it's not relevant to the ongoing events. Writers have to make these things work with the story, and what's happening currently with the Namekians provides an opportunity for Toyotaro to further elaborate on the subject of Vegeta's prior atrocities. It's no more complicated than that.

I've said this before, but for him to not address it in this arc would have been much worse than what we actually got.

To be fair though, this kind character exploration was doomed from the start when Battle Of Gods became a thing.

Battle of Gods doesn't really have anything to do with it. Even if Vegeta was objectively considered righteous by some all-knowing, all-seeing cosmic entity, that doesn't mean Vegeta personally feels like he's corrected all of his wrongs. In fact, that in itself likely contributes to his righteousness.

[Kinokima]

Besides the Super Dragon Balls can the other Dragon Balls even wish back that many people from so long ago?

Sometimes I am confused about what the Dragon Balls can and cannot do.

[Super Saiyan Turlast x4]

About Moro revealing that 7-3 had access to his "combat abilities" instead of his magic only.

Wasn't that always supposed to be the point of 7-3's copy ability? That once he grabbed you, he gained access to all of your abilities? Shimorekka even said his ability negated any training Gohan and Piccolo did.

This makes it sound like Moro had to decide to give him more than his magical abilities. This would also explain why 7-3 got stomped so easily by #17 despite switching to Moro.

[Miracles]

It's really no big deal. Vegeta feeling guilt over his atrocities was highlighted earlier in the arc with him apologizing to the Namekians. Him brazenly reaffirming that he is prepared for consequences now is understandable and expected. Just more proof that he has changed for the better. Which was the point of the narration. It put to rest any doubts about Vegeta's character. He is truly reborn.

I'll tell you what's a big deal...Moro's new design. How his character is completely wrecked because a minion took his place as the villain. lol

About Moro revealing that 7-3 had access to his "combat abilities" instead of his magic only.

Wasn't that always supposed to be the point of 7-3's copy ability? That once he grabbed you, he gained access to all of your abilities? Shimorekka even said his ability negated any training Gohan and Piccolo did.

This makes it sound like Moro had to decide to give him more than his magical abilities. This would also explain why 7-3 got stomped so easily by #17 despite switching to Moro.

You are right. 7-3 copied not only techniques but battle power.

[Lord Beerus]

We don't need to see Vegeta carry his baggage in situations where it wouldn't be relevant, we only need to get the impression that he's changed/is changing, which the manga Future Trunks arc did pretty well two arcs back. The main thing that matters is we see this side of his character when it's relevant.

If the point of further character exploration for Vegeta concerned viewing himself in a negative light while contemplating the horrible he's done in the past, you have to build this up over the course of the story. You can drop this shit in the middle of of an arc out of convenience because it will feel forced. Why not have Vegeta and Piccolo interact with one another and talk about what happened on Namek? Or during the Resurrection F arc/movie, have Freeza and Vegeta talk about their history together?

Ultimately I have to agree with the statement that saying there's a point where it's too late to explore a character is just plain wrong tbh. You may as well argue no other character from the past should appear then, since no one else bar Gohan and 17 have gotten development since DBZ.

You're also ignoring how Vegeta was explored somewhat in the Future Trunks arc, particularly where again he abandoned his pride to fuse with Goku after hearing Trunks talk about how Bulma was planning on coming to the past to see him again, which looking back could also be read as another form of atonement for him, foregoing his pride to try and save an otherwise doomed timeline on an Earth that's beyond saving. Toyotaro hasn't been ignoring Vegeta as a character and choosing just now to expand on who he is deep down, he's been doing that.

Again, this kind of commentary from Vegeta could have work if a lot of modern wasn't written in a vacuum, the lives that Vegeta wanted to make up fro weren't already brought back to life and the Namekian themselves not really holding any grudges against Vegeta for the terrible shit he did. And even then there's no consideration made for all of the life he destroyed as a space pirate. It's like if a serial arsonist burned down a whole town and decides to atone for it by building one store.

The shit with Vegeta abandoning his pride to fuse with Goku after hearing what happened to Bulma in the Future Trunks arc would have been a great character moment, if it wasn't already done more than 20 years ago. Everything about Vegeta's "character development" in modern Dragon Ball has just been retreads of shit we already know.

Why exactly is that a problem? Why do we need to see Vegeta carrying baggage in story arcs that have little to no relation to that baggage? That doesn't make sense.

The examples I've cited happened within the Boo arc, and frankly, that's all we need. The proof is in the pudding - we know Vegeta can feel remorse because the original manga demonstrably had Vegeta feeling remorse, with zero indication that it just went away.

Show, don't tell.

Use Battle Of Gods as an avenue to discuss Vegeta's morality given the circumstances of the Super Saiyan God ritual, then follow up that in Resurrection F have by Vegeta confront Freeza regarding what he did for Freeza while under his rule and contemplate all the lives he senselessly took away, then have Vegeta use the Tournament Of Power as chance to atone for his past, especially with Freeza being alive again serving as a burning reminder of his past life.

Or if you don't want to do any of that, give Vegeta mini-arc that focuses on being a introspective commentary of his life.

Just something substantial to work off of beyond the endgame of a character arc.

Again, you're getting way too ingrained in real life hypotheticals. These are fictional characters in a fictional story; context and circumstance both make all the difference.

Vegeta doesn't openly express any guilt for his past misdeeds in Super's previous arcs precisely because those arcs barely have an in-story relation to them. Resurrection 'F' comes the closest, but even there, Vegeta is never directly confronted by the people he's committed genocide towards. The Galactic Patrol arc does have that relation. Do you see the distinction here? Nobody (and certainly not Vegeta) discusses their internal baggage unprompted. It makes sense for the characters to do so only when their circumstances allow it.

It's why you don't have Vegeta randomly popping out of the blue in previous story arcs to announce that he plans to resurrect those he exterminated in the past because that'd be fucking awful writing and wouldn't jive narratively as it's not relevant to the ongoing events. Writers have to make these things work with the story, and what's happening currently with the Namekians provides an opportunity for Toyotaro/Toriyama to further elaborate on the subject of Vegeta's prior atrocities. It's no more complicated than that.

I've said this before, but for him to not address it in this arc would have been much worse than what we actually got.

Namek was just one of the many cases where Vegeta villainy resulted in mass casualties. This is where the problem with Vegeta's current self commentary stems from. There are many lives out there that suffered because of Vegeta being a piece of shit. The buck doesn't, nor shouldn't it, stop at one planet. And the whole excuse of that it would have been jarring for Vegeta to bring up his past misdeeds in arcs that didn't concern them, doesn't add up when you take into consideration that there were two separate story arcs that feature Vegeta confronting (and teaming up with) the very person he worked for when he was a mass murdering space pirate.

The Resurrection F arc/movie and the Universal Survival arc were golden opportunities to naturally delve into Vegeta's past without feeling out of left-field, and Toriyama, Toei and Toyotaro never pick up on that. The Universal Survival arc was the bigger offender of wasting this opportunity. Freeza is less antagonistic, which could have allowed conversations between Vegeta and Freeza to flow more naturally, which could lead to them talking about their history and Vegeta contemplating how many lives he killed while under Freeza's thumb, then that segues into Vegeta wanting to win the Tournament Of Power and use the Super Dragon Ball to resurrect all the lives he killed while working for Freeza, and washing his hand clean of his history with the tyrant.

Even if that hypothetical scenario doesn't work out in-universe, at the very least, the foundation for continuing Vegeta's atonement in a broader sense is there so you have something to work off if you want to pick it up for a later arc.

Battle of Gods doesn't really have anything to do with it. Even if Vegeta was objectively considered righteous by some all-knowing, all-seeing cosmic entity, that doesn't mean Vegeta personally feels like he's corrected all of his wrongs. In fact, that in itself likely contributes to his righteousness.

If Vegeta personally doesn't feel like a he's righteous person, he should have a said something prior to taking part in the Super Saiyan God ritual. Imagine how interesting it would have been if Vegeta questioned whether he could take part in the Super Saiyan God ritual considering all the terrible things he's done in the past and whether he can consider himself a righteous person.

But Vegeta takes part in the Super Saiyan God ritual, no questions asked, and the only follow up comment made by him is that he will become the next Super Saiyan God. So at that stage, he knows he's a good person, otherwise he wouldn't have said that.

[The Undying]

Show, don't tell.

Tomato, tomahto.

It's not even about "showing vs. telling" at this point, it's about whether Vegeta's behavior in this arc has precedence. It does. It exists. You don't have to consistently explore this one aspect of Vegeta's character in every single story arc to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, he still harbors some internal grief deep down that would largely go unaddressed until the situation calls for it.

And the whole excuse of that it would have been jarring for Vegeta to bring up his past misdeeds in arcs that didn't concern them

That's not an excuse in any capacity. Those arcs didn't concern Vegeta's mass murder, so they're wholly irrelevant to the question of whether he sentimentally held on to those actions in particular.

Like I said, Freeza in Resurrection 'F' was the closest Vegeta came to getting some vague reminder of his past, but even that encounter was hardly as direct as coming face-to-face with the same people he slaughtered years ago. Those are two totally different situations, guy. I myself wouldn't have minded the subject to have been broached in the film, but it's hardly as necessary as it is in this current dilemma with the Namekians.

Again, it's just very surprising to me that this distinction even needs to be stated by some of us. Why is that? I would assume a circumstantial difference like this one to be so incredibly obvious that to reject it outright makes me suspect there must be some other underlying problem with this character going on.

If Vegeta personally doesn't feel like a he's righteous person, he should have a said something prior to taking part in the Super Saiyan God ritual.

Why? Vegeta already knows that other people may consider him righteous. He knows that he might qualify for the ritual. He's clearly less certain of Enma, but his opinions on external viewpoints of this nature have very little to do with how he personally assesses his own brand of atonement.

He participated in the God ritual to stop Beerus. That's it.

[Koitsukai]

So Vegeta arrives on Namek, remembers what he did to their people, feels guilty and tries to redeem himself.
I see nothing wrong with this. It’s not too sudden or too late. It’s just that the situation was perfect for Toyotaro to bring up that event and to do something with it.
Sure, Vegeta already kind of got similar development in Buu arc but this feels like a nice extension of that.

Now, would Toriyama ever write something like this? I doubt so. He most likely even forgot about all that stuff.

I'd add that he didn't just land on Namek and thought to himself "hey, I've been a dick last time I was here, let's fix that" and that was it. He was talking to Moro and the goat just force-grabbed a kid and tried to eat him right on Vegeta's face.

[Kinokima]

Like I said, Freeza in Resurrection 'F' was the closest Vegeta came to getting some vague reminder of his past, but even that encounter was hardly as direct as coming face-to-face with the same people he slaughtered years ago. Those are two totally different situations, guy. I myself wouldn't have minded the subject to have been broached in the film, but it's hardly as necessary as it is in this current dilemma with the Namekians.

I’m not really sure I agree with the argument that Vegeta’s past crimes would have been better brought up with Freeza than the Namekians

For the record it does kind of annoy me that Vegeta’s past relationship with Freeza was brushed over in Super. In the anime they just added some dumb joke that Vegeta didn’t want to hold Freeza’s hand. But that’s over now and I see no point crying over spilled milk.

But Vegeta has always hated being under Freeza. And I kind of doubt he ever thought of himself specifically like Freeza.

In this arc Vegeta feels remorse for someone he specifically hurt. It’s not just about comparing himself to Moro. It’s about wanting to help someone he hurt in the past.


The other argument is that Vegeta killed a lot of people so why specifically care now about the Namekians. Well that’s true too but as I’ve already said he slaughtered the Namekians on screen. We know he committed other crimes but in reality we know nothing about them. I am assuming Toyo chose the Namekians because he wanted to bring back the specific crime the audience is aware of. Vegeta might have a lot of focus this arc but this arc also isn’t just about Vegeta’s past. And again the parts about Vegeta past are relatively small moments. This is something easier to do with Namekians a race and crime the audience are familiar with then creating a whole new alien race that Vegeta hurt in the past.

The bottom line is Vegeta is confronted with the Namekians who he hurt who were being massacred again and as someone who is good now that troubles him.


As for the hell/villain line it’s just one line that is being blown way out of proportion by some. Vegeta is a good guy now who was deemed good by Porunga and by the God Ritual. But when going to hell your entire life is judged, not just who you are now. But in the end no one is judging Vegeta except Vegeta. I think it’s more important that while he may not see himself as worthy he still wants to do good.

[batistabus]

I'm glad this chapter has spurred so much thoughtful discussion.

As for Moro73's design, it's growing on me. It's still Old Moro > Young Moro > Moro73 for me, but I just compare this to Boohan or Bootenks.

Isn't it just absurd that 7-3 can make a permanent copy of Moro's strength in the first place? I mean, WTF? Its possible to treat the Ki of God-tier beings like its memory that can be stored at whoever's leisure? All 7-3 even did was touch Moro's neck, he didn't absorb Moro's Ki nor did Moro give him Ki like with the other mook that Goku fought.
Its an extremely convenient way for Moro to get strong again...and its utterly terrible. The design also doesn't do much other than to signify that Moro ripped off Cell's look and dramatic entrance of the Super Perfect form.

I understand this complaint. I really do.

However, Dragon Ball is, in its essence, Journey to the West. Eastern culture meets Western culture. From the beginning of the series, East is represented by Goku. A hick, strong, naive, slightly magical, and very mysterious. West is represented by Bulma. A city girl, utilizes technology that equals or surpasses magic, resourceful, cynical, slightly dainty, and slightly vein. I could go into more examples of how these differences manifest throughout the series (battle powers, Artificial Humans, etc.). While Goku could beat up Bulma, they both bring different abilities to the table.

Seven-three is an Artificial Human. If we are to accept escalations of "Eastern" power in the series (Gods of Destruction, strength above gods, magic), then we should also accept escalations of "Western" technological power (time travel, unlimited energy, perfect copying).

[Lord Beerus]

Tomato, tomahto.

It's not even about "showing vs. telling" at this point, it's about whether Vegeta's behavior in this arc has precedence. It does. It exists. You don't have to consistently explore this one aspect of Vegeta's character in every single story arc to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, he still harbors some internal grief deep down that would largely go unaddressed until the situation calls for it.

I'm sorry, but that's bad writing if that's the case. It's the Bojack Horseman situation I alluded to earlier: a sudden display of guilt and remorse that wasn't initiated by the character, but by circumstances the character didn't account for. You can't sell me the idea of Vegeta's atoning for his past sins stemming from just what he did on Namek. That's horseshit. Especially if you take into consideration all the pre-Dragon Ball content like the Bardock TV special and Dragon Ball Minus where we see a young Vegeta is already a genocidal space pirate.

That's not an excuse in any capacity. Those arcs didn't concern Vegeta's mass murder, so they're wholly irrelevant to the question of whether he sentimentally held on to those actions in particular.

And the Galactic Patrol Prisoner arc does such a T-E-R-R-I-B-L-E job at exploring Vegeta's past that it may not have bothered. Like, of all the planets for Vegeta to revisit, Namek is actually the worst because all the Namekians that Vegeta's murdered were brought back to life, so the atonement feels hollow. It feels more like giving reparations to descendants of slaves. It also doesn't help that one of Vegeta's allies is from the same race he committed mass murder against.

Like I said, Freeza in Resurrection 'F' was the closest Vegeta came to getting some vague reminder of his past, but even that encounter was hardly as direct as coming face-to-face with the same people he slaughtered years ago. Those are two totally different situations, guy. I myself wouldn't have minded the subject to have been broached in the film, but it's hardly as necessary as it is in this current dilemma with the Namekians.

The issue is that the Namekian aren't the only planet in danger. Namek was basically a pit stop for the narrative as Moro consumes the life of many other planets after that. This could have been a great opportunity for Vegeta to contemplate all the lives he senselessly murdered and extend his atonement beyond just one race.

Again, it's just very surprising to me that this distinction even needs to be stated by some of us. Why is that? I would assume a circumstantial difference like this one to be so incredibly obvious that to reject it outright makes me suspect there must be some other underlying problem with this character going on.

The circumstances of Vegeta being a space pirate and being involved in the plot he was stem from working with for Freeza. So when Vegeta confronts Freeza again like he does in the Resurrection F arc/movie and the Universal Survival arc, he's confronting his villainous past just as much as he would be going talking to a Namekian.

Why? Vegeta already knows that other people may consider him righteous. He knows that he might qualify for the ritual. He's clearly less certain of Enma, but his opinions on external viewpoints of this nature have very little to do with how he personally assesses his own brand of atonement.

He participated in the God ritual to stop Beerus. That's it.

Exactly! That's the point I'm trying make: Vegeta being self aware that he's more of a good person than he thinks. He already knows he's a morally right at heart. He's not a fucking villain.

[Dragon Wukong]

And the Galactic Patrol Prisoner arc does such a T-E-R-R-I-B-L-E job at exploring Vegeta's past that it may not have bothered. Like, of all the planets for Vegeta to revisit, Namek is actually the worst because all the Namekians that Vegeta's murdered were brought back to life, so the atonement feels hollow. It feels more like giving reparations to descendants of slaves. It also doesn't help that one of Vegeta's allies is from the same race he committed mass murder against.

The Namekians Vegeta murdered were never suggested to have been brought back to life. It's specifically noted that the ones he killed DIDN'T come back.

Exactly! That's the point I'm trying make: Vegeta being self aware that he's more of a good person than he thinks. He already knows he's a morally right at heart. He's not a fucking villain.

Vegeta can consider himself morally right at heart now, but that won't necessarily negate how he views his past actions. He can know he's good now and still call himself a "villain" over his past actions. It needs to be stated again, he isn't calling himself some badass villain or trying to suggest that he's still evil in some way. It's just a way to say he's done villainous things in the past throughout his life.

[LoganForkHands73]

Tomato, tomahto.

It's not even about "showing vs. telling" at this point, it's about whether Vegeta's behavior in this arc has precedence. It does. It exists. You don't have to consistently explore this one aspect of Vegeta's character in every single story arc to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, he still harbors some internal grief deep down that would largely go unaddressed until the situation calls for it.

I'm sorry, but that's bad writing if that's the case. It's the Bojack Horseman situation I alluded to earlier: a sudden display of guilt and remorse that wasn't initiated by the character, but by circumstances the character didn't account for. You can't sell me the idea of Vegeta's atoning for his past sins stemming from just what he did on Namek. That's horseshit. Especially if you take into consideration all the pre-Dragon Ball content like the Bardock TV special and Dragon Ball Minus where we see a young Vegeta is already a genocidal space pirate.

That's not an excuse in any capacity. Those arcs didn't concern Vegeta's mass murder, so they're wholly irrelevant to the question of whether he sentimentally held on to those actions in particular.

And the Galactic Patrol Prisoner arc does such a T-E-R-R-I-B-L-E job at exploring Vegeta's past that it may not have bothered. Like, of all the planets for Vegeta to revisit, Namek is actually the worst because all the Namekians that Vegeta's murdered were brought back to life, so the atonement feels hollow. It feels more like giving reparations to descendants of slaves. It also doesn't help that one of Vegeta's allies is from the same race he committed mass murder against.

Like I said, Freeza in Resurrection 'F' was the closest Vegeta came to getting some vague reminder of his past, but even that encounter was hardly as direct as coming face-to-face with the same people he slaughtered years ago. Those are two totally different situations, guy. I myself wouldn't have minded the subject to have been broached in the film, but it's hardly as necessary as it is in this current dilemma with the Namekians.

The issue is that the Namekian aren't the only planet in danger. Namek was basically a pit stop for the narrative as Moro consumes the life of many other planets after that. This could have been a great opportunity for Vegeta to contemplate all the lives he senselessly murdered and extend his atonement beyond just one race.

Again, it's just very surprising to me that this distinction even needs to be stated by some of us. Why is that? I would assume a circumstantial difference like this one to be so incredibly obvious that to reject it outright makes me suspect there must be some other underlying problem with this character going on.

The circumstances of Vegeta being a space pirate and being involved in the plot he was stem from working with for Freeza. So when Vegeta confronts Freeza again like he does in the Resurrection F arc/movie and the Universal Survival arc, he's confronting his villainous past just as much as he would be going talking to a Namekian.

Why? Vegeta already knows that other people may consider him righteous. He knows that he might qualify for the ritual. He's clearly less certain of Enma, but his opinions on external viewpoints of this nature have very little to do with how he personally assesses his own brand of atonement.

He participated in the God ritual to stop Beerus. That's it.

Exactly! That's the point I'm trying make: Vegeta being self aware that he's more of a good person than he thinks. He already knows he's a morally right at heart. He's not a fucking villain.

Dude, the whole point was that the Namekians killed by Vegeta didn't come back. He wasn't one of "Frieza's men" when he killed them. His slaughter of the whole village was probably his most heinous onscreen moment - he did it with zero provocation, zero remorse and ultimately zero consequences, and that was when he was starting to become a protagonist. There's been talk of "show, don't tell", and ultimately his killing of the Namekians is one of our only points of reference for Vegeta's past brutality as a space pirate. In the manga at least, everything else about his past crimes was just told to us, barring a scene of him eating some dead aliens with Nappa. He personally didn't even kill a single Earthling during his debut arc. The Namekians serve as a broad symbol representing all of Vegeta's past sins - their deaths just so happened to be the ones we saw in full horrific, graphic detail.

I think the way it's been handled has been pretty realistic, all things considered. Vegeta was quietly furious with Frieza and while they could have gotten a bit more baggage out of it, him manhandling Frieza so coolly and efficiently, as if to prove to himself that Frieza means absolutely nothing to him anymore, was the one part of the movie I adore. The scenes of Vegeta preparing to finish Frieza and Moro are essentially identical, but compare the context behind them: in Resurrection 'F', Vegeta is barely given time to process the situation. From his perspective, his old boss has just randomly come back to life. Between training on Beerus's planet and actually meeting Frieza again, basically nothing happened in between that would emotionally affect Vegeta. Now, with Moro, he's spent months training specifically to face him and has witnessed him slaughter countless Namekians. That would understandably rattle Vegeta a bit more than a random encounter with Frieza. It brings to mind real documentary footage of antisemitic informers from Nazi Germany who got their neighbours arrested on suspicion of being Jewish being forced to confront the fact that they got innocent people killed decades later. The guilt is visceral.

Another thing about the Frieza comparison is that Vegeta wasn't made evil by Frieza. The vast majority of his sadistic actions in his life were entirely his own volition. He can't blame Frieza for his past as a mass-murdering space pirate, because he would have been one with or without him.

As for the Super Saiyan God ritual, I don't think Vegeta even said anything about it either way. He seemed quite embarrassed at the idea that he would be classed as a pure-hearted Saiyan, but as always in Dragon Ball, "pure-hearted" is a very broad term that doesn't really indicate anything about a person's moral character. Personally, I think it's quite powerful that even when the universe itself is telling him he's good enough, Vegeta still can't quite believe it himself - would you, in Vegeta's shoes, knowing all the horrible shit you've done and the generally flawed person you still are? That shows depth of character.

[Lord Beerus]

The Namekians Vegeta murdered were never suggested to have been brought back to life. It's specifically noted that the ones he killed DIDN'T come back.

I just re-read the manga to clarify and you're right. But this just makes the atonement even more fucking half-arsed because, as I've said before, the Dragon Balls were right there to used for several years if Vegeta wanted to make amends with the people he murdered. This is why I don't like this "atonement", it doesn't feel genuine to begin with. It all happens out of circumstance rather than the character himself being pro-active. If the plot never called for Namek to be involved this would have never been a thing to begin with.

Vegeta can consider himself morally right at heart now, but that won't necessarily negate how he views his past actions. He can know he's good now and still call himself a "villain" over his past actions. It needs to be stated again, he isn't calling himself some badass villain or trying to suggest that he's still evil in some way. It's just a way to say he's done villainous things in the past throughout his life.

The issue is that a significant part of Vegeta's character development was not allowing the past to define his future. He decided to step off that broken pedestal and try to be decent person. He's moved on from the piece of shit that he was. That doesn't mean his history should be forgotten but that also doesn't mean it should define who he is now. Because who he is now is person that goes out out of his protect his family and friends, and even extends his empathy to whole other universes.

I've said before and I'll say it again: this angle with Vegeta's continuous atonement for his past life could have worked and could have been great. It was just HORRIBLY handled. And it's even entirely Toyotaro's fault. Modern Dragon Ball in general has not done a good job with developing the original cast (outside of maybe Freeza and #17), as most of the cast have either retread previous development or just stagnated.