Trunks, A Mary Sue?

[Rocketman]

I like how people think a character can't be a Sue just because the story gives a reason.

The story that exists to present the Sue says that the Sue TOTES HAS REASONS GUIZ "well gee, the story is a nonbiased hrblgrbl therefore obv no sue"

[ABED]

I like how people think a character can't be a Sue just because the story gives a reason.

The story that exists to present the Sue says that the Sue TOTES HAS REASONS GUIZ "well gee, the story is a nonbiased hrblgrbl therefore obv no sue"

I'm sorry but I have a hard time understanding your point.

[TKA]

I like how people think a character can't be a Sue just because the story gives a reason.

The story that exists to present the Sue says that the Sue TOTES HAS REASONS GUIZ "well gee, the story is a nonbiased hrblgrbl therefore obv no sue"

It just so happens that the show portrays him as being fallible, out of his league and prone to making rash, ill-thought-out decisions.

What a weird coinkidink

[Rocketman]

It just so happens that the show portrays him as being fallible, out of his league and prone to making rash, ill-thought-out decisions.

What a weird coinkidink

After his introduction, which is the only relevant part to any Suedom discussion.

[ABED]

It just so happens that the show portrays him as being fallible, out of his league and prone to making rash, ill-thought-out decisions.

What a weird coinkidink

After his introduction, which is the only relevant part to any Suedom discussion.

Says who? One of the things I don't like about the term is that it's purely a juvenile put down. Good writers use archetypes all the time and then subvert expectations, so why does only the intro matter to the discussion?

[Saiga]

No, a Sue is about far more than their introduction. A Sue isn't a character that is only special when introduced, then immediately falls behind or has flaws pointed out.

I really like Blade's post about how Bulma's introduction is closer to being a Sue's than Trunks' is. It's quite true - Trunks' so called Mary Sue traits are a lot of things that aren't even out of place in Dragon Ball's universe.

Also, while everyone harps on about his so called "unique" / "unusual" hair colour, that's a straight up lie. His hair isn't unique at all - he's got the same hair colour as his mother, and it'd only be unique for a species he's not part of. Saiyan/Earthling hybrids are not pure Saiyans, and Dragon Ball already established Earthlings having such hair colour.

I'd say he's closer to Yajirobe rather than Yamcha of the Android arc. Very similar introductions as well, showing off with a sword in their introduction but still being inferior to Goku.

On the topic of Bulma/Vegeta - skimmed the thread so I'm not quite sure how it got to that discussion, but I'd say it's one of the most believable relationships of Dragon Ball. Only Gohan/Videl would beat it, arguably. And this is only made so much clearer in "EU" material which shows more of their interactions as a couple.

[Gaffer Tape]

After his introduction, which is the only relevant part to any Suedom discussion.

You do realize what you're saying is, "Only the aspects that support my position are relevant to the discussion," right? Because I have NEVER heard that only the introduction counts when defining a Mary Sue, and that all Mary Sue traits disappear immediately afterwards. I doubt the term would even exist or have been widely noticed if that was the case.

[Kid Buu]

I'd say he's closer to Yajirobe rather than Yamcha of the Android arc. Very similar introductions as well, showing off with a sword in their introduction but still being inferior to Goku..

I don't like his debut either

However, I do like Yajirobe while not being a big fan of Trunks. My main problem with Trunks is how he is poorly defined. Take away external factors (from the future, son of Vegeta, enemy of Androids), then who is he? For example, if you do the same thing with Goku, he's still the happy go lucky, naive, childlike individual. Trunks is just bland

However, I'm going to refrain from calling him a Mary Sue since I've grown to dislike that term. It feels like a cheap way for a person to say why they don't like said character.

[ABED]

I'd say he's closer to Yajirobe rather than Yamcha of the Android arc. Very similar introductions as well, showing off with a sword in their introduction but still being inferior to Goku..

I don't like his debut either

However, I do like Yajirobe while not being a big fan of Trunks. My main problem with Trunks is how he is poorly defined. Take away external factors (from the future, son of Vegeta, enemy of Androids), then who is he? For example, if you do the same thing with Goku, he's still the happy go lucky, naive, childlike individual. Trunks is just bland

However, I'm going to refrain from calling him a Mary Sue since I've grown to dislike that term. It feels like a cheap way for a person to say why they don't like said character.

What exactly are you looking for as far as personality? I'd say polite and earnest is a fine personality. What exactly does Gohan have?

I fully agree about your last point. I think too many people read TVtropes.com

[Rocketman]

You do realize what you're saying is, "Only the aspects that support my position are relevant to the discussion," right? Because I have NEVER heard that only the introduction counts when defining a Mary Sue

Because it doesn't. Trunks is not a Sue.

However, if you want to see where Trunks might possibly be considered a Sue, you look at his intro in isolation, because it hits all the beats perfectly.

[ABED]

He's not overly idealized, even in his introduction.

[some_weirdGuy]

My immediate though when I saw the thread title was just to try out a mary sue test on him and just see how things went. ((it's more impartial than arguing nebulous terms like what 'overly idealised' is ))

I used the first one that came up (http://www.springhole.net/writing/marysue.htm)
and He scored about 120 odd in my run*, where the test cuts off at the highest category being '50+' 'undeniably a sue'. XD

So yeah, I mean that's pretty damningly high (it includes his whole time in the series from appearance to departure, since seems the current argument is 'trunks when he first appeared vs trunks overall', so even with those later traits, which indeed fell into the 'de-sue-ifiers' section of the test, he was still a very high scorer).

((*some of the questions are stuff like 'do they have a skill you personally find cool' or whatever, since we don't know toriyama's thoughts on this I did it a second run through where I tried to match the 'general consensus' most people seem have of those things about trunks, and he ended up at 140 odd for his score ))


Though I guess for the sake of argument we could have those who believe he's a sue and those who are arguing that he's not all do the test - without purposely being dishonest - and just see how much variance there is, and what particular elements they may have marked differently.
For instance Q11 "Does your character have a gadget, weapon, or power that can rival that of a canon character? Is it for all intents and purposes identical to the one used by the canon character - and the canon character's gadget/weapon/power is supposed to be one-of-a-kind or extremely rare?"
Does trunks having super saiyan count for that? I said yes, but maybe others disagree))

[SingleFringe&Sparks]

Just as the title says, do you think that's true? I don't, for the reason that Mary Sue's are usually some writer surrogate, and overly idealized. Trunks isn't, he usually messes up, and a tragic past doesn't automatically make a character a Mary Sue. It's yet another term that gets abused. Damn you TVtrope.com!

I really hate how more recently this term is being thrown around far out of its actual specific original context these days. I have never seen anything in the story that suggested Trunks didnt earn what he wanted, or was contradictingly plot-immune to anything particularly. Trunks is a great character. He is a great protagonist and is rarely overshadowing the franchise cast nor does he romance with anyone for the sake of his intervension's unlikely hood. Hes not even that much of a plot-device because nothing in the arc besides his prologue and his passive views on vegeta ever really focus on him specifically.

In conclusion I say that label for him is debunked.

For instance Q11 "Does your character have a gadget, weapon, or power that can rival that of a canon character? Is it for all intents and purposes identical to the one used by the canon character - and the canon character's gadget/weapon/power is supposed to be one-of-a-kind or extremely rare?"
Does trunks having super saiyan count for that? I said yes, but maybe others disagree))

I really hate this test, its no worse than a defeatable lie-dectector. Its bias and too abstract to really relate the character who has the symptom to the context of it. These questions can make any character look like a sue if all you're asked is just these ambiguous comparisons.

I like how people think a character can't be a Sue just because the story gives a reason.

Ridiculous. The story is the greater influence over the characters; they can be pushed into the trope if the story allows it or directs them into it. Doesn't mean they're a Sue if it doesnt contrast the story itself. With that logic, every protagonist must be a Sue then.

[Attitudefan]

Though I guess for the sake of argument we could have those who believe he's a sue and those who are arguing that he's not all do the test - without purposely being dishonest - and just see how much variance there is, and what particular elements they may have marked differently.
For instance Q11 "Does your character have a gadget, weapon, or power that can rival that of a canon character? Is it for all intents and purposes identical to the one used by the canon character - and the canon character's gadget/weapon/power is supposed to be one-of-a-kind or extremely rare?"
Does trunks having super saiyan count for that? I said yes, but maybe others disagree))

Well, his sword was a deciding factor in killing Freeza and Cold along with his transformation. How? It defeated Freeza and served as a distraction against Cold. I think the sword + SSJ counts.


If anyone is a Sue, it would be Gohan. In a sense, he is the perfect child, but also tough and keeps up with the main cast of fighters who have trained longer and harder.

[SingleFringe&Sparks]

Well, his sword was a deciding factor in killing Freeza and Cold along with his transformation. How? It defeated Freeza and served as a distraction against Cold. I think the sword + SSJ counts.

But his sword wasnt a necessity nor was it or super Saiyan specifically created just to beat Freeza, its just what was used to kill him.

If anyone is a Sue, it would be Gohan. In a sense, he is the perfect child, but also tough and keeps up with the main cast of fighters who have trained longer and harder.

If anything, my definition is that Gohan is a Sue simply for his hidden power and all the handouts or bypasses he gets for surpassing the lead characters that all work harder than him. Hes never actually killed, he always gets the most free punches on the villains (filler or not) his OP boosts have no recoil, all the characters hyped it up as something specific to him which is exclusive to him as well, he was given the title of the strongest character simply because of his sitting-on-my-ass-for-24-hours power up and rage boosts, hes stronger than Goku despite doing nothing, hes stronger than Vegeta who has a life-time of more experience in battle than he does, his rage boost somehow surpassed cell despite him being himself + humans + 17 & 18... Gohan is basically a canon fanfic character.

[dbzfan7]

Hes never actually killed

Kid Boo kills Gohan when he blows up Earth.

As for Trunks I'd say his opening felt pretty sueish, but after that, not really.

Hmm...maybe Gohan should be put to the sue test?

[Attitudefan]

Hmm...maybe Gohan should be put to the sue test?

I think he should. It surprises me that Trunks was thought of being a Sue over Gohan (or really anybody else over Gohan is shocking).

[Kid Buu]

Considering people say Trunks and Gohan's roles in this arc are similar to that of a Mary Sue, I'm surprised people here haven't started referring to the Cell Arc as the "Fan Fiction" arc.

[SingleFringe&Sparks]

He's never actually killed

Kid Boo kills Gohan when he blows up Earth.

As for Trunks I'd say his opening felt pretty sueish, but after that, not really.

Hmm...maybe Gohan should be put to the sue test?

I purposely didnt include that, he was killed while unconcious. That doesnt count. Hes never killed in battle by a villain or targeted to be killed. Instead they always Krillin.

For Trunks, I'd say his only sueish moment was just his debut - but it doesn't make him a Sue. Akira Toriyama balanced him out right after. The way they introduce characters in the series has always been like that. The 15-minutes of invicibility for badassary. Though they made him seem stronger than he was and he easily killed a well-established villain he has no relations with; with simple ease. Him holding the Super Death ball with one hand.....Sueish behaviour I admit. Goku couldn't even do that.

[TheGmGoken]

He's never actually killed

Kid Boo kills Gohan when he blows up Earth.

As for Trunks I'd say his opening felt pretty sueish, but after that, not really.

Hmm...maybe Gohan should be put to the sue test?

I purposely didnt include that, he was killed while unconcious. That doesnt count. Hes never killed in battle by a villain or targeted to be killed. Instead they always Krillin.

For Trunks, I'd say his only sueish moment was just his debut. That was horrible imo. They made him seem stronger than he was and he easily killed a well-established villain he has no relations with; with simple ease. Him holding the Super Death ball with one hand.....Sueish behaviour I admit. Goku couldn't even do that.

Filler only. In the manga Freeze was legit caught off guard.