does dragonball have a definitive canon

[Goku da Silva]

My "personal canon" is just until the end of Freeza arc, after that it just down the hill...

[SSJgogeto]

does dragonball have a definitive canon

I think this site has an interesting answer about that question. Take this with a grain of salt, though.

[granddragoonknight]

does dragonball have a definitive canon

I think this site has an interesting answer to that question. Take this with a grain of salt, though.

I do and I did I don't look at canon as only the manga I look at all of it belonging to the same franchise and series regardless of its manga, anime, video game, etc. since realistically Toriyama is like the George Lucas of anime I was thinking of treating canon like StarWars do since Toriyama was heavily inspired by Starwars past and present and will be in the future. so I'll look at canon like this

84 manga/86 anime: original three-star wars films

2015-current super: prequel films

96-97 GT (my fav): extended verse

13 movies: extra extended verse

video games (online heroes xenoverse kakarot fighterz etc): Kotor realm/Kotor sequels

dragonball evolution (for a lot of fans): Disney verse

[precita]

The rule of thumb is anything you don't like isn't canon.

[Cursed Lemon]

I think it's not unreasonable to assert that for something to be canon, it has to sit within the context of the mainline story. GT is "canon" because it built off of and references things that happened in DB/DBZ. The Z movies, meanwhile, are not canon because no one in the main story talk has ever talked about Bojack, Tullece, Janemba, etc.

This assumes that there is a main story "trunk" off of which branches other smaller storylines that don't weave themselves back in. If you have a series where there are multiple stories of comparable scope, then you've got different story universes instead of a central canon.

[Sikat]

does dragonball have a definitive canon

Click my signature link.

[granddragoonknight]

does dragonball have a definitive canon

Click my signature link.

well its one continuity of dbz

[Hellspawn28]

It doesn't have one, but that does not mean everything fits in the same continuity. I consider the original manga, Super, DB Movie 1-4, DBZ Movie 1-13, and GT to be in their own continuity. Super already created plot holes by having it be set 10 years before Goku meets Uub because Goku said that Buu was their strongest opponent that they have fought and there was peace on Earth for a decade. Not to mention, Goku has seen Bluma and Vegeta 5 years earlier. I decide to accept Super as its own thing and not apart from the original story.

[Grimlock]

There shouldn't be any confusion about that, considering "canonicity" and "continuity" are two different concepts, two words with different meanings. There is no canon, and obviously some stories don't take place in the same continuity as others (Toriyama's "different dimension" idea should be enough to set them apart).

Goku said that Buu was their strongest opponent that they have fought and there was peace on Earth for a decade.

May you provide a source for both statements? I've just read the manga and couldn't find anything about it.

Not to mention, Goku has seen Bluma and Vegeta 5 years earlier

We can still solve that, though. The last time Goku saw Bulma (as far as we're concerned, on-screen) was in Dragon Ball Super Broly - AGE 780. I don't read the manga, but I don't remember seeing Bulma even appearing in Moro saga. Bulma still hasn't appeared in Granolah saga (as far as I can tell).

We can still assume Bulma rounded it up. It's not exactly five years, but rather they didn't see each other for four years and X months. We can only hope Toyotaro will remember this and finish Granolah saga without making Goku and Bulma see each other and then proceed to do the long-awaited timeskip.

[Koitsukai]

We can still solve that, though. The last time Goku saw Bulma (as far as we're concerned, on-screen) was in Dragon Ball Super Broly - AGE 780. I don't read the manga, but I don't remember seeing Bulma even appearing in Moro saga. Bulma still hasn't appeared in Granolah saga (as far as I can tell).

We can still assume Bulma rounded it up. It's not exactly five years, but rather they didn't see each other for four years and X months. We can only hope Toyotaro will remember this and finish Granolah saga without making Goku and Bulma see each other and then proceed to do the long-awaited timeskip.

Actually, Bulma shows up in this arc, 3 chapters ago, she and Chichi introduce the saiyans to the Heeters at Capsule Corp. I'm not sure how far are we from EoZ, but I remember people saying that Granola having only 3 years to live matches EoZ.

In any case, it can always be Bulma hyperbolizing, so even if Goku stays away from Capsule Corp for 3 years, it shouldn't drive anybody mad if Bulma said 5. They can always make those 3 years be 4 years or close, and 4 and 5 years of absence are pretty much the same.

[Grimlock]

Is that so!? Then oh well... All hope is lost.

I don't know about Granolah's age, but we are indeed in AGE 781 (even ignoring Shenlong's summonings and some other details, we can't place it any time before that. Since Moro saga was already taking place at the end of AGE 780 and I remember there being a timeskip of months between it and this saga). We're merely three years away from the tournament.

That's actually a pretty big round up to make. I honestly don't think that works.

[granddragoonknight]

It doesn't have one, but that does not mean everything fits in the same continuity. I consider the original manga, Super, DB Movie 1-4, DBZ Movie 1-13, and GT to be in their own continuity. Super already created plot holes by having it be set 10 years before Goku meets Uub because Goku said that Buu was their strongest opponent that they have fought and there was peace on Earth for a decade. Not to mention, Goku has seen Bluma and Vegeta 5 years earlier. I decide to accept Super as its own thing and not apart from the original story.

i would agree

[Kaboom]

This assumes that there is a main story "trunk" off of which branches other smaller storylines that don't weave themselves back in. If you have a series where there are multiple stories of comparable scope, then you've got different story universes instead of a central canon.

This is the way I've thought of it (and have been analogizing it to others) for quite some time now. Dragon Ball continuity isn't a straight line, it's a big tree, where the story of the original manga is the trunk and everything else is just a branch splitting off from it at some point or another. The full-blown sequel series like GT, DBO, and both versions of Super are larger and sturdier branches than the others, but still just branches nonetheless, dependent on the trunk and not equivalent to or a substitute for it.

Even the recent trend of assuming "Super is the one true canon continuation" doesn't mean much when there's TWO distinct and concurrent versions of it. Before that could work, the folks in charge would have to commit to telling everyone that only ONE particular version of Super is the "real" one, and the other would be discounted. And I don't see that happening anytime soon.

[Shineman]

I mentioned this before a couple of times, but yeah, it would be easier to consider every aspect of Dragon Ball as "canon". Anything officially created by the right holders of the franchise is canon.

From there, you can separate the many aspect of the canon via continuities. You have the main continuity (manga), and anything that's officially declared as part of the main continuity will be seen as an extension of such. Anything else that isn't stated or simply don't fit will form their own continuities (i.e. most Dragon Ball films, original stories from video games, etc.).

Less of a headache and more ideal. More or less similar to what Cursed Lemon and Kaboom from above discussing: an tree that form many branches as they're all "canon".

[Grimlock]

The full-blown sequel series like GT, DBO, and both versions of Super are larger and sturdier branches than the others, but still just branches nonetheless, dependent on the trunk and not equivalent to or a substitute for it.

I think the nature of the "trunk/branches" (i.e. to analyze some materials) should also play a role in this:

It's not like Dragon Ball GT is really a sequel to the trunk you know. Dragon Ball GT has an appearance of Cooler. So I'd say inside the visible trunk you know well, there is another trunk (the other dimension), that's what gives origin to this branch that is Dragon Ball GT.

Sometimes I see people saying each movie takes place in its own dimension but I have yet to see any official confirmation about that. As far as I can tell, it's simpler to think that in this other trunk, all the movies take place. Accordingly to what was happening in the series, and making adjustments where needed.

Dragon Ball Online is, at the moment, the only full-blown sequel to the visible trunk (as Dragon Ball Super is actually a midquel. Though it raises some questions: is there a branch for Dragon Ball Super? In theory, it should be in the trunk, along with the rest of the events of the anime (?) manga (?). And what about Movie 14 and Movie 15?). So you can't go wrong here, it's the only branch of the visible trunk.

Even the recent trend of assuming "Super is the one true canon continuation" doesn't mean much when there's TWO distinct and concurrent versions of it. Before that could work, the folks in charge would have to commit to telling everyone that only ONE particular version of Super is the "real" one, and the other would be discounted. And I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Exactly. The lack of canon is why you see some people using the anime as their source, others using the manga as their source, and a few like me peacefully using the movies as their source.

So, we have three continuities here, which one actually occurred? No official finger is pointing at one of them, so... Where's the canon? Like I said in my previous post, people most of the time (angrily) says "Toriyama is the only thing that counts!111!11", so shouldn't the movies take precedent over retellings? Why do people say something like that but then proceed to consider the retellings? It's... weird how things are.

[SSJgogeto]

does dragonball have a definitive canon

I think this site has an interesting answer to that question. Take this with a grain of salt, though.

I do and I did I don't look at canon as only the manga I look at all of it belonging to the same franchise and series regardless of its manga, anime, video game, etc. since realistically Toriyama is like the George Lucas of anime I was thinking of treating canon like StarWars do since Toriyama was heavily inspired by Starwars past and present and will be in the future. so I'll look at canon like this

84 manga/86 anime: original three-star wars films

2015-current super: prequel films

96-97 GT (my fav): extended verse

13 movies: extra extended verse

video games (online heroes xenoverse kakarot fighterz etc): Kotor realm/Kotor sequels

dragonball evolution (for a lot of fans): Disney verse

I get what you're saying, but I don't know if it will work like that. You see, franchises usually are structurally different; Dragon Ball is not like things like Marvel, Star Wars or Harry Potter. Besides, unlike DB, as far as I know Star Wars have a canon.

However, even if Star Wars have a canon, I don't know if how much George Lucas is involved in it. On the other had, in DB Toriyama usually have some kind of involvement even in things who aren't in the mAIn COntINUitY. He did the designs for the old Broly, GT and even games like DBO, who honestly I don't know if it's "canon" anymore.

[granddragoonknight]

I think this site has an interesting answer to that question. Take this with a grain of salt, though.

I do and I did I don't look at canon as only the manga I look at all of it belonging to the same franchise and series regardless of its manga, anime, video game, etc. since realistically Toriyama is like the George Lucas of anime I was thinking of treating canon like StarWars do since Toriyama was heavily inspired by Starwars past and present and will be in the future. so I'll look at canon like this

84 manga/86 anime: original three-star wars films

2015-current super: prequel films

96-97 GT (my fav): extended verse

13 movies: extra extended verse

video games (online heroes xenoverse kakarot fighterz etc): Kotor realm/Kotor sequels

dragonball evolution (for a lot of fans): Disney verse

I get what you're saying, but I don't know if it will work like that. You see, franchises usually are structurally different; Dragon Ball is not like things like Marvel, Star Wars or Harry Potter. Besides, unlike DB, as far as I know Star Wars have a canon.

However, even if Star Wars have a canon, I don't know if how much George Lucas is involved in it. On the other had, in DB Toriyama usually have some kind of involvement even in things who aren't in the mAIn COntINUitY. He did the designs for the old Broly, GT and even games like DBO, who honestly I don't know if it's "canon" anymore.

they are if they all belong to the same franchise

[pepd]

Well, you did ask about a "definitive canon" without specifying more. If you are dissatisfied with "franchise" "official" or "continuity", and want to talk about "canon" outside a context that implies a specific continuity (like a specific-continuity thread) without being just wrong, you could just use "Toei-canon", "GT-canon", "anime-canon" or whatever you want to include.

[MajinPopo]

I like to think that the introduction of the Time Patrol in ancillary stuff, and the Kai of Time, creates the perfect opportunity to justify all the weird offshoots of DB, as well as plotholes.

Everything happens across the timelines. GT. Movies. Whatever. They're all canonical. They just aren't necessarily in continuity with the baseline "prime" events written by Toriyama.

Time travel can honestly be one of the biggest boons or the biggest detriments to a franchise. In this case, it's a boon, since it makes sorting various continuities much easier, and prevents endless arguments of "X isn't canon!"