Why didn't Trunks & Goten have tails?

[Dayspring]

Toriyama may have said that once as a joke or maybe he didn't fully understand it. I don't ever remember reading anything about him having said that, but I don't deny it is possible somewhere he said such a thing.

Taken from the October 12th edition of AskVegettoEX:

Q. Was it ever clarified why Trunks never had a tail like Gohan? - A.P.

A. Sorta kinda... but not in DragonBall. In the first issue of the domestic Shonen Jump (January 2003), a fan asks Toriyama why Goten and Trunks don't have tails, to which Toriyama simply replies:

"It seems that tails are a recessive trait."

What does this mean? One of two things:

1) Toriyama planned this from the start (unlikely), or
2) He forgot about tails by the time he came up with Goten and Trunks, and thus never bothered to explain the details of their tail situation

Which just as easily indicates he forgot and came up with an unnecessary retcon. A fan asks him in late 2002 a question about Dragonball? Please! This is the guy who forgot who Kame-sennin was years earlier than that! "It seems?" sounds like pure "Good question! Why did I do that?! Maybe this caused it..."

As for Bulma never answering Krillin, does it seem plausible that she'd just randomly ignore him? Besides, Yamcha sarcastically answered for him. I think Krillin was asking a rhetorical question there, kind of like "You remembered to cut it off, right?" when he can already clearly see it's not there.

[HP]

People! This is an animated cartoon/comic books: It's FICTION! It's not the real world.
It's not like the DB characters have ever existed. Nor their lives! So you can't really EXPLAIN non-documented events, for Christ's sake...
Genetics?? give me a break..

Well, another thing is; we "like" to imagine "as" it was real, and we "like" to think how life in Goku's home is, how was the Vegeta&Trunks training in the Hyperbolic Chamber, what Goku did during the 7 years in "Heaven".... and merely hypothetical fan-head-fantasy stuff like that. But that's not really *explainable*.

Don't take me wrong, but I think this type of discussion is a bit nonsense (childish).

[Dayspring]

People! This is an animated cartoon/comic books: It's FICTION! It's not the real world.
It's not like the DB characters have ever existed. Nor their lives! So you can't really EXPLAIN non-documented events, for Christ's sake...
Genetics?? give me a break..

Well, another thing is; we "like" to imagine "as" it was real, and we "like" to think how life in Goku's home is, how was the Vegeta&Trunks training in the Hyperbolic Chamber, what Goku did during the 7 years in "Heaven".... and merely hypothetical fan-head-fantasy stuff like that. But that's not really *explainable*.

Don't take me wrong, but I think this type of discussion is a bit nonsense (childish).

If you read the thread you'd have seen it was Toriyama himself that brought up the possibility of genetics. It's bad writing when things are inconsistent just because they are. You're really in the wrong forum if you don't like discussing the story. This place isn't JUST about AMVs and merchandise.

[HP]

I did read the thread, and I had even replied before. I don't care about merchandise and $h!t. I care about Dragon Ball.
If Toriyama came up with that, that is because he "had" to give an answer. It would look a bit pathetic if he just answered: "Well, I forgot the tails."
Plot holes, you know...

But you don't need to be hostile just because there's someone who finds "unnecessary", comments like this:

I studied this stuff in college, and I can tell you the previous poster is correct, the "recessive trait" cannot explain it at all if you understand how genetics work.

come on...

but then Akira says something realistic:

Toriyama may have said that once as a joke or maybe he didn't fully understand it.

Do you know now what I mean? The genetics stuff?
Obviously Akira Toriyama wouldn't have gone that "deep", you know! He wasn't thinking about genetics and accurate scientific explanations, when writting the story. That is it.
These +/- profund explanations are only "fan make up's". Therefore, "unnecessary", pointless discussion. This what I'm saying.


I'm not saying this is a shitty forum. No. I like the forum. I appreciate its creator's effort and dedication. I find interesting info and some good discussions. Just not this one, in my opinion! Obviously I'm not posting to stop the thread. Only stating my thoughts.
I think I'm not disrespecting anyone.
Like someone here said before to me: are we cool?

[Jerseymilk]

Toriyama may have said that once as a joke or maybe he didn't fully understand it. I don't ever remember reading anything about him having said that, but I don't deny it is possible somewhere he said such a thing.

Taken from the October 12th edition of AskVegettoEX:

Q. Was it ever clarified why Trunks never had a tail like Gohan? - A.P.

A. Sorta kinda... but not in DragonBall. In the first issue of the domestic Shonen Jump (January 2003), a fan asks Toriyama why Goten and Trunks don't have tails, to which Toriyama simply replies:

"It seems that tails are a recessive trait."

What does this mean? One of two things:

1) Toriyama planned this from the start (unlikely), or
2) He forgot about tails by the time he came up with Goten and Trunks, and thus never bothered to explain the details of their tail situation

Which just as easily indicates he forgot and came up with an unnecessary retcon. A fan asks him in late 2002 a question about Dragonball? Please! This is the guy who forgot who Kame-sennin was years earlier than that! "It seems?" sounds like pure "Good question! Why did I do that?! Maybe this caused it..."

Dayspring, I didn't post that quote to prove that it was a correct answer. I posted in response to Akira saying that he didn't recall Toriyama ever saying that. I was merely providing the evidence that he did.

[the_abberration]

Using references from DB, DBZ, and DBGT, there are two possible theories.

1) They were born without tails.

If they were, they would have grown them sometime during the Buu Saga. During childhood, Goku and Gohan grow their tails mutiple times. (As a side note, it doesn't seem to grow back when you reach adulthood and lose it. As in the case of Vegita).

It usually takes about a year for it to grow back: Goku lost his during the Pilaf Saga and it grew back during the Tournament Saga. Gohan lost his during his training with Piccolo and it grew back during the fight with Vegita.

Goku starts growing his again after he is turned into a child in GT. (It begins to poke out after the Black Star dragonballs were returned to Earth which was a year after the wish was made).

Also stress may play a factor in their tails growing faster. Their tails just grow to full length, in the first two examples with Goku and Gohan but not in third example. (My theory on why Goku's tail doesn't grow to full length in GT has to due with him having his adult mind at the time so he was less stressed).

With all the stress Goten and Trunks were under during the Fusion training, the time differences when they were in the Room of Spirit and Time, and the stress it takes to acheive SSJ3, an inkling of a tail should have appeared.

2) At some point Kami or Dende removed them:

When Goku was a child, Kami removed his tail so he could put the moon back. Apparently, he was able to so permanently. He could have also done this when Trunks was born. Dende was Kami when Goten was born, so Chi Chi could have had him do it.

Wait. Am I trying to add logic to an anime again? My medication must have worn off again. *Heads of to take my happy pills*

[Mr. Announcer]

Could it really even be recessive? I mean, in order for that to work a human would need to have a recessive tail gene which they don't. Even if a mixing of the traits occurred, the children wouldn't have fully formed tails. The way I see it, the only traits that they could have possibly recieved are the dominant ones and that would mean that all the kids would have to have tails. Okay, applying genetics to the issue is kind of useless in the first place since two completely different species with genes that don't correspond shouldn't be able to reproduce in the first place, or produce fertile offspring.....

[Xyex]

It's amusing how people simply dismiss a direct statement from Toriyama-sama about the series. And yet at the same time they'll use things he had characters say as proof to something. Personally, information directly from him holds more wieght than anything said in the manga. Goten and Trunks were simply born without tails. There was never in instance of a Saiya-jin having both a tail and Super Saiya-jin.

[the_abberration]

It's amusing how people simply dismiss a direct statement from Toriyama-sama about the series. And yet at the same time they'll use things he had characters say as proof to something.

With all due respect. If we didn't have the manga or anime to reference, it would be hard to discuss Dragonball. Also, it is easier for the reader to gain access to the manga or anime to see where the author of a particular post may have gotten his information. I doubt Mr. Toriyama is as accessable.

Lastly, it seems to be common knowledge that Mr. Toriyama has trouble remembering everything he wrote regarding the Dragonball series. So his accounts of why he did something in the manga or anime 20 years ago may contradict what his intentions were at the time he wrote it.

Personally, information directly from him holds more wieght than anything said in the manga.

So if Goku says in the manga (or anime) "It was me who killed my grandfather." And later someone asks Mr. Toriyama "Who killed Goku's father? and he says "Vegita did." I should take his word even though I saw differently?

Goten and Trunks were simply born without tails. There was never in instance of a Saiya-jin having both a tail and Super Saiya-jin.

So, does the Legendary Super Saiya-jin that Vegita talks about count? He was a Super Saiya-jin and he had a tail. Unfortunatly, I can't find an interview where Mr. Toriyama was asked this question so I have to take what he wrote his character to say at face value.

EDIT: You may not want to count this but

[Xyex]

It's amusing how people simply dismiss a direct statement from Toriyama-sama about the series. And yet at the same time they'll use things he had characters say as proof to something.

With all due respect. If we didn't have the manga or anime to reference, it would be hard to discuss Dragonball. Also, it is easier for the reader to gain access to the manga or anime to see where the author of a particular post may have gotten his information. I doubt Mr. Toriyama is as accessable.

Lastly, it seems to be common knowledge that Mr. Toriyama has trouble remembering everything he wrote regarding the Dragonball series. So his accounts of why he did something in the manga or anime 20 years ago may contradict what his intentions were at the time he wrote it.

Yes, he's forgotten things. However, when it's an issue of something that doesn't have an answer, he can't forget that. Therefor the answer he gives is the correct answer.

Personally, information directly from him holds more wieght than anything said in the manga.

So if Goku says in the manga (or anime) "It was me who killed my grandfather." And later someone asks Mr. Toriyama "Who killed Goku's father? and he says "Vegita did." I should take his word even though I saw differently?

You're talking about contradiction of shown material. I'm talking about stated / non-proven material. i.e. Goten/Trunks tails. If Chaotzu or Yamcha was stronger in the Buu Saga. Etc.

Goten and Trunks were simply born without tails. There was never in instance of a Saiya-jin having both a tail and Super Saiya-jin.

So, does the Legendary Super Saiya-jin that Vegita talks about count? He was a Super Saiya-jin and he had a tail. Unfortunatly, I can't find an interview where Mr. Toriyama was asked this question so I have to take what he wrote his character to say at face value.

First of all, if you take what his characters say at face value your head would expload. They're wrong more than they're right. >_>

Secondly, the Super Saiya-jin Vegeta talked about had no tail. That Oozaru from the flash back, ya, that's anime only. Aside from that, he was an Oozaru (what Vegeta thought a Super Saiya-jin would be at the time) not a Super Saiya-jin.

EDIT: You may not want to count this but

GT. Toei. Neither of them count. We are talking about OFFICAL canon material. What Toriyama-sama himself drew. Aside from a concept art that had SSJ3 Goku with a tail he never drew a tailed SSJ. Beyond that, while I like the SSJ4 design, I don't consider it an SSJ level. It's a merger of SSJ and Oozaru which, therefor, follows different rules.

[the_abberration]

Yes, he's forgotten things. However, when it's an issue of something that doesn't have an answer, he can't forget that. Therefore the answer he gives is the correct answer.

True. But I think you missed my point, so I'll try to clarify. When most people post a question in this forum pertaining to Dragonball, they do so with the hopes that they will receive a clear cut answer. However, in most cases that cannot be done.

With that in mind, the people who respond to the post will try to provide an answer based on what they know of the show to help the original poster come to a conclusion that may satisfy him or not. In the end, it's their call.

Now in the case of this post, I assumed the poster of the topic asked this question because it was established in the show that Saiyans and half Saiyans have tails, but Goten and Trunks didn't (which creates a plothole).

In response the question, I (for example) tried to provide a thoery to how this plothole could be explained using actual show references that the OP could go back and look at to either come to same conclusion, or not agree with my opinion.

Now while Mr. Toriyama made a statement to expalin this, in my opinion it leaves doubt, since it would contradict what I as the reader or viewer was lead to believe previously. Example:

Before I responded.

Personally, information directly from him holds more wieght than anything said in the manga.

After I responded.

You're talking about contradiction of shown material. I'm talking about stated / non-proven material. i.e. Goten/Trunks tails. If Chaotzu or Yamcha was stronger in the Buu Saga. Etc.

No, I responded to your direct quote of Personally, information directly from him holds more wieght than anything said in the manga.. The statement was general enough that I thought your intent was that you could not believe what any of the characters say if Mr. Toriyama makes a statement that contradicts it. With your new statement, I now see what you actually intended.

Do you see how a writer can write something that would make the reader come to one conclusion. Then later make a statement that would send the reader in different direction than what was read earlier?

I'm not dismissing what Mr. Toriyama said, but without knowing the context in which he said it (joking or serious), it is hard to determine, if it was his original intent going in or if he was trying to cover up a plothole. In this case, I choose the latter. Here's another example:

First of all, if you take what his characters say at face value your head would expload. They're wrong more than they're right. >_>

Secondly, the Super Saiya-jin Vegeta talked about had no tail. That Oozaru from the flash back, ya, that's anime only. Aside from that, he was an Oozaru (what Vegeta thought a Super Saiya-jin would be at the time) not a Super Saiya-jin.

And as a writer trying to remember a plothole from years back to answer a question on the spot, he could give an answer that may be incorrect as well. Who is to say that after looking back on it he would have come up with a different answer using the source material as a reference?

Now let me ask you, "How did you come to this conclusion?" Did you watch the episode to see it? (I'm assuming you did) Now although he had no tail, Vegita says that 3000 years ago, the Legendary Super Saiya-jin could only reach that form in his transformed state." Do you recall this?

It has been established in the manga and anime that a Saiya-jin cannot transform without their tail, which now leaves a plothole. So if Mr. Toriyama is asked about this and says that because he was the Legendary Super Saiya-jin he could transform without his tail, does that become the real reason? Or is it a convinient way to cover a plothole?

EDIT: I provided the SSJ4 Goku picture in response to your direct statement of there never being an instance of a Super Saiya-jin with a tail. Although you (personally) do not see GT as canon etc., doesn't disclude the fact that if someone who doesn't care about canon were to see GT they would come to a different conclusion.

[Xyex]

First of all, if you take what his characters say at face value your head would expload. They're wrong more than they're right. >_>

Secondly, the Super Saiya-jin Vegeta talked about had no tail. That Oozaru from the flash back, ya, that's anime only. Aside from that, he was an Oozaru (what Vegeta thought a Super Saiya-jin would be at the time) not a Super Saiya-jin.

And as a writer trying to remember a plothole from years back to answer a question on the spot, he could give an answer that may be incorrect as well. Who is to say that after looking back on it he would have come up with a different answer using the source material as a reference?

Now let me ask you, "How did you come to this conclusion?" Did you watch the episode to see it? (I'm assuming you did) Now although he had no tail, Vegita says that 3000 years ago, the Legendary Super Saiya-jin could only reach that form in his transformed state." Do you recall this?

It has been established in the manga and anime that a Saiya-jin cannot transform without their tail, which now leaves a plothole. So if Mr. Toriyama is asked about this and says that because he was the Legendary Super Saiya-jin he could transform without his tail, does that become the real reason? Or is it a convinient way to cover a plothole?

Vegeta states "He could only maintain his status in the transformed state." or something very similar. Up until this point, Oozaru was the only transformation he knew of. Tada! Solved.

[Akira]

HP, with all due respect, why did you even respond to this topic? Just to remind you, -I- did not bring Genetics into this discussion. As has been reminded to us, Toriyama-san made that remark to a kid's question long after the the series had ended and he was no longer working on it.

Next Rocketman explained how dominant and recessive traits worked, and showed how it applied to the topic at hand. I reckon he [Rocketman]mentioned it because Toriyama brought it up as an explanation.

You then put the roll eyes icon in regard to my statement as if I somehow brought up the whole genetics debate and that I was bringing pointless information to the table. The only thing I did was attempt to validate Rocketman's conclusion that it being a "recessive trait" is impossible -IF- you apply real world genetics.

The Abberation kindly explained that talking about Dragonball and reaching conclusions is the point of this particular forum. I would agree that we converse here on such matters.

The only pointless information or post is yours HP. You attempt to slam me and therefore make yourself appear as seeing some "bigger picture" that just isn't there or is outside the focus of this forum.

Please, if you have nothing to add, go elsewhere and allow us to continue discussing things the way we do here. The Abberation, Xyex, Chaos Saiyajin, Dayspring, Jerseymilk and many others always respond and have such interesting things to say. I for one enjoy debating and discussing things with them. If you cannot follow thier example and say something nice and add something valuable to the discussion, then please don't say anything at all.

[Saiya-jin]

I don't know why they don't have tails, if I were a saiyan(which I'm not saying I am), and I had a tail(which I'm not saying I have), I would like to keep it(which I'm not saying I can in the first place), so I would be able to turn into a giant ape and maybe save the day(which I'm not saying I would).

[HP]

Akira, I just quoted you as an example for what I was referring. Don't take it personally. I know It wasn't you who started with the recessive traits discussion. I'm not trying to deviate anything towards who started it, as well!
Was I unpolite to you by any manner? I'm sorry. Am I not welcome to this forum?

[the_abberration]

First off Xyex, you are absolutely correct that the Legendary SSJ (in the picture) did not have a tail in the anime. However,

Up until this point, Oozaru was the only transformation he knew of. Tada! Solved.

No, he is clearly aware of both transformations. Vegita refers to the Legendary SSJ as "The Legendary Super Saiya-jin. If he wasn't a SSJ he would have been refered to as The Legendary Saiya-jin.

Vegeta states "He could only maintain his status in the transformed state."

.
You are again correct. And by your own words have proved my first point, that Vegita was aware of both transformations. The Legendary SSJ could not maintain his status (in humanoid form) so he had to transform to his Oozaru form to maintain it.

Now here is where using information established in the show to reach a conclusion comes into play.

It is said numerous times in the Dragonball series that in order for a Saiya-jin to transform into Oozaru form they need two things. One is to see the moon (or something that emits radiation that exceeds 17 million zeno units per second). The other is their tail (the reaction is set off in a certain gland in the tail).

Therefore the Legendary SSJ would have had a tail. As for the picture it can be easily explained away as neglect on the artist's part that it wasn't included.

Take it or leave it. I can't force you to believe it. But you have the material to reference to see how I came to this conclusion.

Back on topic. If Mr. Toriyama had said during his interview "When Goten and Trunks were both conceived, Goku and Vegeta were both able to attain SSJ status and no longer had their tails. These traits were passed along to their sons." I would have accepted this because:

1) it makes some sense as far a the genetics discussion goes.

2) it would explain why Goten and Trunks do not have tails and are able to reach SSJ so easily at such a young age.

3) it can be backed up with established information in the series.

[Rocketman]

If Mr. Toriyama had said during his interview "When Goten and Trunks were both conceived, Goku and Vegeta were both able to attain SSJ status and no longer had their tails. These traits were passed along to their sons." I would have accepted this because:

1) it makes some sense as far a the genetics discussion goes.

Not really. If you get your arm chopped off, that doesn't change your genes. Likewise, if you work out and hulk up, that doesn't change your genes either.

[the_abberration]

Not really. If you get your arm chopped off, that doesn't change your genes. Likewise, if you work out and hulk up, that doesn't change your genes either.

Yes Rocketman, you are correct on both counts. Cut limbs or a buff body would not be passed genetically.....generally. However, Saiya-jin genectics have to do with the "cells" remembering the body type. Saiya-jin cells are trained to remember the level at which they are most powerfull (i.e. Goku/Vegita at SSJ without tails at the time Goten and Trunks were concieved). Or adapting their body type to become more powerful after servere injury(i.e. Vegita gets beat down by Zarbon, heals, and becomes more powerful than Zarbon).

Cell explained it best: "Even better, now I'm complete without #18. And I've powered up like son Gohan. It must be my Saiyan cells. A boost in power after a brush with death."

In the begining Cell needed #17 and #18 to become perfect. When he was destroyed and came back his Saiyan "cells" remembered his most powerful form and brought him back as that. A "genetic trait" from his Saiyan cells.

In the case of Trunks and Goten however, I believe it worked like this. They were concieved during a period when Goku/Vegita were at their most powerful at that time (SSJ body type without tail). These "cellular" traits would pass to them allowing them to take on the SSJ body type without the tail.

I think there is an "Ask Vegitto EX" question that covered this before. It can probrably explain this a little better than I can. I'll see if I can find it.

[The Mole]

I don't know why they don't have tails, if I were a saiyan(which I'm not saying I am), and I had a tail(which I'm not saying I have), I would like to keep it(which I'm not saying I can in the first place), so I would be able to turn into a giant ape and maybe save the day(which I'm not saying I would).

That explains the little round pod I found in the woods while hiking.

At first I thought about making a punnet square, but I realized that there would be no tail gene from one of the parents (as stated before in the thread).

Then I thought about the time when they were concieved, The Androids arc. That would explain Goten being able to transform, with SSJ Goku's "little warriors" and all. But, it seems to me that Trunks was born before Vegeta transformed for the first time.

So perhaps Trunks was born with a tail. The Briefs family is pretty damn rich, and Bulma knowing what would happen if Trunks looked at the moon, had someone surgically (sp) remove it.

[thought bubble] What if they get the impression that I'm trying to be an ass?[/thought bubble]..........DON'T HURT ME!

[Xyex]

First off Xyex, you are absolutely correct that the Legendary SSJ (in the picture) did not have a tail in the anime. However,

Up until this point, Oozaru was the only transformation he knew of. Tada! Solved.

No, he is clearly aware of both transformations. Vegita refers to the Legendary SSJ as "The Legendary Super Saiya-jin. If he wasn't a SSJ he would have been refered to as The Legendary Saiya-jin.

Vegeta states "He could only maintain his status in the transformed state."

.
You are again correct. And by your own words have proved my first point, that Vegita was aware of both transformations. The Legendary SSJ could not maintain his status (in humanoid form) so he had to transform to his Oozaru form to maintain it.

Now here is where using information established in the show to reach a conclusion comes into play.

It is said numerous times in the Dragonball series that in order for a Saiya-jin to transform into Oozaru form they need two things. One is to see the moon (or something that emits radiation that exceeds 17 million zeno units per second). The other is their tail (the reaction is set off in a certain gland in the tail).

Therefore the Legendary SSJ would have had a tail. As for the picture it can be easily explained away as neglect on the artist's part that it wasn't included.

Take it or leave it. I can't force you to believe it. But you have the material to reference to see how I came to this conclusion.

Actually, Vegeta's not aware of both transformations. Otherwise he wouldn't think that Goku, who is still in his base form, could possibly be a Super Saiya-jin. Consider the reason fo the line in question. He was thinking that Goku was a Super Saiya-jin and reflecting that Legend said he could only maintain that power while in the transformed state.

And then, twice in the battle against Freeza, Vegeta statets that Freeza is fighting a Super Saiya-jin. First himself, after Krillin blasted him, and then Goku, right before Freeza killed him. Obviously he felt that a "Super Saiya-jin" was just an absurdly powerful Saiya-jin. Which both he and Goku were at this point.

He didn't know about the SSJ transformation itself, he believed that it was merely a level of power and that the SSJ of legend was probably around his own power during the Ginyu Force battle but, unlike him, possessed a tail and the ability to trasnform. And that was what made him so powerful. It wasn't until he saw the kind of power Goku had against Recoome that his opinion on the matter changed.

Back on topic. If Mr. Toriyama had said during his interview "When Goten and Trunks were both conceived, Goku and Vegeta were both able to attain SSJ status and no longer had their tails. These traits were passed along to their sons." I would have accepted this because:

1) it makes some sense as far a the genetics discussion goes.

2) it would explain why Goten and Trunks do not have tails and are able to reach SSJ so easily at such a young age.

3) it can be backed up with established information in the series.

Agreed.

Not really. If you get your arm chopped off, that doesn't change your genes. Likewise, if you work out and hulk up, that doesn't change your genes either.

In the real world, sure. But this isn't exactly the real world. the_abberration makes a point in his last post there that I rather agree with. I've always seen Super Saiya-jin as a spontaneous mutation of the Saiya-jin's DNA. An advanced and extreme "Zenkai" if you will (as it is, IIRC, mentioned that it can 'activate' during a fight against a powerful opponent). This would an emotionaly triggered Zenkai as opposed to a physically triggered one.

This 'mutation' would then, of course, be passed along to the next generation. And for a while it's been my thought that one gene was used for these transformations. The gene that allows the Oozaru transformation is the one that mutates for the SSJ form. The mutation is what causes the loss of the tail.