How do you explain plot holes within Dragon Ball?

[hleV]

So any idea yet as to why the Daizenshuu lists H4 as a history which has Cell Games?

[Bussani]

So any idea yet as to why the Daizenshuu lists H4 as a history which has Cell Games?

It's always seemed like a mistake to me, but others have put forward the idea that the Cell there came from an unseen History #5...which would probably mean that there was also a History #6 that History #5's Trunks found a shutdown controller in! This theory made me wonder if there was an infinite number of recursive timelines, but personally, I think it overcomplicates things. It's so much easier to just say the Daizenshuu goofed.

That said, I remember Fox made a timeline chart based on everything characters like Cell said in the manga; for example, how Cell said Trunks' DNA could have been added to his make-up along with Freeza and Cold's, which wouldn't make sense unless Cell came from a timeline where Trunks killed Freeza and Cold...which requires another timeline to exist for that Trunks to have come from! It's interesting and worth a read if you can dig it up, but I'm not sure it does the job of explaining where each timeline comes from.

[hleV]

Hmm, doesn't the Daizenshuu imply that there are only 4 different Histories? If they were to show only the Histories which are important to the main History, why would they include H4?

And BTW, which Daizenshuu does that History explanation come from? I see AT's art there so I'd assume it's from the one focusing on the manga rather than anime?

Maybe this discussion should be taken to some existant time travel thread...

[Bussani]

Hmm, doesn't the Daizenshuu imply that there are only 4 different Histories? If they were to show only the Histories which are important to the main History, why would they include H4?

Well, you need History #4 to explain how the Trunks from Cell's timeline was able to defeat the androids. I think they included it because of that, but later guides left History #4 out entirely and left it up to the reader's imagination, so maybe you're right to question why they'd include it!

And BTW, which Daizenshuu does that History explanation come from? I see AT's art there so I'd assume it's from the one focusing on the manga rather than anime?

It's from Daizenshuu 7.

[Piccolo Daimao]

I think I kind of borrowed this from someone else, but here's how I see the Dragon Ball timelines.

When time travel creates paradoxes with the changes it creates, a new timeline is created, instead of erasing the older timeline.

Timeline 1: The original timeline. Son Gokuu defeats Freeza and, sometime later, dies of a heart virus. The Androids activate and kill almost everyone. Trunks travels back in time. [read after reading Timeline 2] After defeating the Androids in Timeline 2, Trunks returns and defeats his Androids with the same approach, probably by using the remote. However, around this time, Cell activates, discovers that the Androids are gone and learns about Trunks’ time machine. Cell kills Trunks and travels back in time with his time machine, creating Timeline 3 with all of his changes [/read after reading Timeline 2].

Timeline 2: Trunks appears and kills Freeza. He warns everyone about the Androids and returns to Timeline 1. He returns from Timeline 1 to help everyone fight the Androids. Somehow, they eventually manage to defeat them, probably by using the remote control to shut them down. Trunks returns to Timeline 1.

Timeline 3: The timeline of the main story. It’s a timeline that has all the changes made by Trunks and Cell respectively. Therefore, it’s basically the same as Timeline 2 until Cell shows up killing people. Eventually, Cell is killed by Gohan and Trunks returns to the future.

Timeline 4: Since Trunks returns from Timeline 3 to a point in time where Cell had yet to kill him (in Timeline 1), and that was necessary for all the changes in Timeline 3 to occur, his return will bring about changes and would create a paradox, which is why, despite the fact that Trunks returns to the future, his return creates yet another timeline, Timeline 4. This timeline is the same as Timeline 1; the only difference is that the Trunks that returned is much stronger and knows all about Cell. So this Trunks uses his own power to kill the Androids and Cell easily.

[hleV]

Could you remind me why exactly did Cell arrive 1 year before Freeza? Was the Time Machine configured that way and Cell only pressed the launch button or Cell pressed random buttons which configured the Time Machine?

[Piccolo Daimao]

Could you remind me why exactly did Cell arrive 1 year before Freeza? Was the Time Machine configured that way and Cell only pressed the launch button or Cell pressed random buttons which configured the Time Machine?

It's a plothole, if you don't want to go through the troubles of making up twisted explanations that weren't revealed to us for some reason. Herms can probably explain it better than me (I think he even made a whole thread on it), but there's quite a bit of time year shenanigans. Trunks originally says that 4 years ago (in his timeline), Gohan was killed by the Androids, but in the special chapter, it's said that it was 3 years. In the same chapter, it's said that Trunks would travel 17 years into the past, but in all other instances, it's 20 years. Cell later says that he wouldn't be completed for 24 years, but this is also quite iffy.

[hleV]

It was a simple question... I'm sure that Cell said that he either pressed random buttons OR just pressed the launch button and went to whatever time the Time Machine was configured to go. I need to know which way was it.

If the TM was set to go back to 1 year prior to Freeza's arrival, I'd explain it like this:

• H3 Trunks arrives to H4;
• obtains the blueprints;
• goes back to H3;
• deals with AHs;
• plans to go back to early H3 and deal with Gero/AHs there as well;
• gets killed by Cell.

[Piccolo Daimao]

It was a simple question... I'm sure that Cell said that he either pressed random buttons OR just pressed the launch button and went to whatever time the Time Machine was configured to go. I need to know which way was it.

I'd still class it as a plothole, since Piccolo doesn't note how strange it is that Cell would travel one year before Freeza's arrival, and just says, "Of course...Trunks must've been planning to tell us that he'd destroyed the Androids in this time..." But why would Trunks head to the past one year before he's even met any of them and they don't even know about the Androids?

Like I said, it's referred to as "three years" rather than "four years" as well, so it's inconsistent.

[hleV]

Piccolo doesn't note how strange it is that Cell would travel one year before Freeza's arrival, and just says, "Of course...Trunks must've been planning to tell us that he'd destroyed the Androids in this time..." But why would Trunks head to the past one year before he's even met any of them and they don't even know about the Androids?

It's about Trunks managing to destroy the AHs. Piccolo thought that Trunks had wanted to go back and tell everyone that he did it and how he did it. Though in reality Trunks may have only intended to destroy the AHs in the past and not necessarily tell anyone about it.

But again, I didn't get the flat out answer to my initial question.

[Piccolo Daimao]

Piccolo doesn't note how strange it is that Cell would travel one year before Freeza's arrival, and just says, "Of course...Trunks must've been planning to tell us that he'd destroyed the Androids in this time..." But why would Trunks head to the past one year before he's even met any of them and they don't even know about the Androids?

It's about Trunks managing to destroy the AHs. Piccolo thought that Trunks had wanted to go back and tell everyone that he did it and how he did it. Though in reality Trunks may have only intended to destroy the AHs in the past and not necessarily tell anyone about it.

But again, I didn't get the flat out answer to my initial question.

I'm not sure whether or not we're on the same page, but if Trunks came back when Freeza arrived and not one year before (or even the year that they were currently in), what reason would Piccolo have to believe that Trunks would've come back to tell a bunch of people that he's a stranger to that he killed two guys that they know nothing of?

And the answer to your initial question is: no, I have no idea why the Daizenshuu lists History 4 as a timeline that has a Cell Games without Trunks. I think the Daizenshuu just made a goof, which is easy to understand when you're dealing with these inconsistent time shenanigans which, apparently, not even Toriyama's model of time travel can escape.

[Bussani]

It was a simple question... I'm sure that Cell said that he either pressed random buttons OR just pressed the launch button and went to whatever time the Time Machine was configured to go. I need to know which way was it.

If the TM was set to go back to 1 year prior to Freeza's arrival, I'd explain it like this:

• H3 Trunks arrives to H4;
• obtains the blueprints;
• goes back to H3;
• deals with AHs;
• plans to go back to early H3 and deal with Gero/AHs there as well;
• gets killed by Cell.

Yes, Cell does say that the time machine's destination was already set, and he just got in and pushed the "go" button or whatever. It's pretty weird that Trunks would want to go that far back, though. I mean, it's farther back than History #3 even exists (if you draw the timelines out Back to the Future style), and either way, he'd just end up creating a new timeline where he's dealt with the androids sooner. It wouldn't change History #3's future, since the whole point of Dragon Ball's time travel is that you can't do that.

Edit: That said, Trunks seems to forget how time travel works, so maybe he was just having a derp moment.

[Piccolo Daimao]

That said, Trunks seems to forget how time travel works, so maybe he was just having a derp moment.

Yeah, I never got that. I know it's probably another case of Toriyama not thinking things through, but when he originally heads to the past, he doesn't tell anyone who he is and later tells Gokuu not to tell Blooma and Vegeta that he's their son, as "I may never be born!" (a la Back to the Future).

But he later says Blooma had told him their plan was to study the Androids (and he even says, in the special chapter, "I think I'm strong enough to beat the Androids now. We don't have to go study them in the past!") so they could figure out a way to defeat the Androids in his time, or bring Gokuu back to their time so he could deal with them there.

And he just happened to...forget? Writing off a character's intelligence or memory like this to explain what is blatantly a plothole is the same problem I have with people simply saying that Kaioushin, a fucking god, is stupid and/or can't sense ki properly due to Toriyama's piss-poor writing throughout the arc (and, perhaps, especially in that portion). Why don't they say that Gohan is stupid as well because he didn't become SS2 against Dabra and Fat Boo? Oh dear god, let's not start that now, forget that last sentence.

[LiamKav]

It might be interesting to see which timelines we actually see (as oppossed to just being told about) in the series. Visually, we at least get these:

1. Normal timeline. All episodes
2. Trunks's timeline. TV special, and at least once in the main series when Trunks has a flashback (flashforward?)
3. Cell's timeline. We see this in the episode where he is killed by Gohan. We know that in that timeline Gero is killed by #17 while he is working on Cell. #17 and #18 then blow up the lab, but embryo Cell survivies. We also see Cell kill (a) Trunks (but not the Trunks from timeline 2) before stealing his time-machine, but I can't remember which episode that is is.
4. I don't think we ever see this one in an episode, but it's the one where Trunks from 3 was going to head back to when he is killed by Cell.

One thing I've never got... does the act of time travel itself create the new timelines, or is it when the time traveller does something? If it's the former, then there should be a timeline created where Trunks only came back once.

Also, how does Trunks manage to time travel back to the same timeline he went to before? Shouldn't the second time travel create another timeline?

(I'd say this is confusing, but I can argue to death about different time travel methods as seen in BttF, Terminator, Star Trek etc. DBZ's makes a certain amount of sense, but there are a couple of things that aren't fully explained.)

[Piccolo Daimao]

(I'd say this is confusing, but I can argue to death about different time travel methods as seen in BttF, Terminator, Star Trek etc. DBZ's makes a certain amount of sense, but there are a couple of things that aren't fully explained.)

The grandfather paradox in Back to the Future makes no sense, Terminator's cause and effect makes a bit more sense but still has some of the flaws of the grandfather, haven't watched Star Trek, Dragon Ball's multiple timelines makes relative sense but suffers from Toriyama's writing, which also stumbles over its own model of time travel.

[LiamKav]

They don't work in the grand scheme of "time travel can't exist because someone would have used it to travel back in time, therefore stopping anyone from developing time travel by themselves, therefore no one could come back in time etc... but BttF is consistent to itself. If you change the past, it doesn't affect the time traveller unless he is actually removed from time, blah blah blah.

All TV shows will break down with their time travel rules eventually, because writers will eventually break them to create drama.

[Beji]

uuugh after an entire week of work I cant even catch up with everything else. but Ill try x.x

why trunks changed his mind and goes back*EDIT* to his time* done edit with the remote.

But this isn't how timelines are created in Dragon Ball! How many times must I say this... This logic applies in Dragon Ball Multiverse, but not in the manga/anime.

Again I am talking about the time traveling part. not the actual decision part. you don't seem to understand. The reason I keep mentioning the decision part is because it is the one part that doesn't fit with the daizenshuu timeline. and I'm not going to bother with it anymore enjoy your theory I could care less.

which yours doesn't answer at all. and you threw a few extra Trunks and Cells, and timelines in the deal

I answer it perfectly. YOU didn't understand my answer. For Cell Games to happen in History #4, there MUST be 2 other Histories. Or else, it's a Daizenshuu error.

lol you don't answer it perfectly but w/e over complicating things to answer a question with guesses as your evidence is far from "perfect". Having there be 2 other histories is an unnecessary possibility in fact there could be 20 other ones!(oh boy!) But there are other scenarios. itr isnt one or the other as you stated.

I was going to answer each part individually, but I think the crux of the matter is this:
If you look carefully at the Daizenshuu chart, you can see a purple line showing Trunks #3 (the Trunks from History #3, if that isn't clear) returning to History #3 from History #4. Directly after that it says that he uses the controller to shut down the androids in History #3. Thus, History #4 is where he got the shut down controller from. If History #1 is caused by Cell #3's arrival, then History #4 can't branch off from History #1, since History #1's very creation was caused by the events in History #4.

This I enjoyed reading and can see as an alternate. But at the same point is almost disappointing if it is true. If this is how it worked it means we read and watched the history of Dragon Ball after two known historys that were only lightly touched upon, the warrior's third attempt of saving the world. Makes it seem watered down to me.

I think it may be another way but to each their own. It leaves the cell thing open this way though which I don't like, I'd rather it be the chart is complete but why Trunks took the remote back to his time in one scenario and not in the other.

The only other thing I would have to ask about which I do not know is where is android 19 in Future Trunk's timeline?(history 2)and why were the androids in History 1 stronger than the ones in history 2? It made me wonder if the Cell from history 2 was weaker then history 1 cell or if I just missed something.

[hleV]

They don't work in the grand scheme of "time travel can't exist because someone would have used it to travel back in time, therefore stopping anyone from developing time travel by themselves, therefore no one could come back in time etc... but BttF is consistent to itself. If you change the past, it doesn't affect the time traveller unless he is actually removed from time, blah blah blah.

In BTTF2, Biff goes to the past to make himself rich, but goes back to the future in which he hasn't made himself rich.

[Saiga]

What exactly did Trunks forget about Time Travel?

[Bussani]

And he just happened to...forget? Writing off a character's intelligence or memory like this to explain what is blatantly a plothole is the same problem I have with people simply saying that Kaioushin, a fucking god, is stupid and/or can't sense ki properly due to Toriyama's piss-poor writing throughout the arc (and, perhaps, especially in that portion). Why don't they say that Gohan is stupid as well because he didn't become SS2 against Dabra and Fat Boo?

I think most people who say things like that do actually know that the out-of-universe answer is, "Toriyama goofed." Sometimes we just like to offer in-universe alternatives.

By the way, I'm not exactly writing off Trunks' intelligence to fix apparent inconsistencies like the ones you mentioned. The part I was thinking about was when Trunks himself suggests that, now that he knows where Gero's lab is, he could go further back in time and stop the androids before they wake up. It takes Gohan questioning what would happen their androids for Trunks to go, "...OH YEAH! The future of that timeline would be saved, but this one would remain the same...!" So Trunks apparently forgetting how things work is right there in the story.

One thing I've never got... does the act of time travel itself create the new timelines, or is it when the time traveller does something? If it's the former, then there should be a timeline created where Trunks only came back once.

Also, how does Trunks manage to time travel back to the same timeline he went to before? Shouldn't the second time travel create another timeline?

Appearing in the past is "doing something", technically. Whether you've interacted with anyone or done anything or not, you now have two versions of history: one where you were in the past, and one where you weren't. Even just being there for a second could lead to differences in the two timelines given enough time, which is what everyone will probably remember as the butterfly-effect.

It's kind of up to you if you think the second time travel would create another timeline or not. In some ways it's easier to assume that every act of time travel splits the timeline. However, so long as you don't travel into your own past, you can't cause a paradox, so splitting it becomes more or less unnecessary in those cases. For example, Trunks can't break time by returning to History #1 three years after his first visit; but if he travelled back and stopped himself from killing Freeza in History #1, that would obviously cause a problem since he'd be altering his own history, so splitting the timeline again there would be necessary.

The grandfather paradox in Back to the Future makes no sense

I can kind of make sense out of it. Changes in the timeline in Back to the Future seem to move at a certain pace, like ripples moving through a pond. It takes time for the changes to make their way to the future, so a time traveller from the future won't be affected right away. If the ripples do manage to "catch up" with them, though, then a universe breaking paradox may occur. We don't really know what would happen since they managed to keep them from happening!

This I enjoyed reading and can see as an alternate. But at the same point is almost disappointing if it is true. If this is how it worked it means we read and watched the history of Dragon Ball after two known historys that were only lightly touched upon, the warrior's third attempt of saving the world. Makes it seem watered down to me.

I suppose so, but it doesn't really bother me.

I think it may be another way but to each their own. It leaves the cell thing open this way though which I don't like, I'd rather it be the chart is complete but why Trunks took the remote back to his time in one scenario and not in the other.

The problem is that they not only have a Cell Game in History #4, but also that line indicating that Trunks left History #4 before Cell left History #3. The two really don't go together well, so we either have to assume that one of them is wrong, or that there are other timelines that aren't mentioned. Like I said to begin with, I find it easiest to just believe they made a mistake with that Cell Game, since it's a kind of easy one to make if you don't draw all this out on a blackboard like Doc. Brown.

As for why Trunks took the remote back in one timeline and not the other, I always thought the best answer was because there wouldn't be a Cell in History #4. In the manga, when Trunks and Gohan are heading to meet Bulma (who'd just found the second time machine), Trunks explains that Bulma made the time machine so they could find a way to defeat the androids in the past. They saved Goku because she was sure with Goku around, something would work out. Trunks goes on to say that he's sure Gero must have had a way to shut the androids down and that he wants to find it. If that's how he was thinking in that moment in time, then if Cell and the second time machine hadn't been around to distract them, might he not have gone back to the remains of Gero's lab and found the blueprints for the controller? Or maybe Bulma, not distracted by the second time machine, could have found out Gero had another lab somewhere and they could have found the blueprints there. With no Cell and a remote to stop the androids, no one would have to use the Room of Spirit and Time, and Trunks would be return to his future much sooner.

That was a long description, but hopefully I made sense.

The only other thing I would have to ask about which I do not know is where is android 19 in Future Trunk's timeline?(history 2)and why were the androids in History 1 stronger than the ones in history 2?

Maybe #19 and #20 didn't exist in Trunks' timeline. It's possible that Trunks or Cell's presence in the past somehow changed history so that they were created. On the other hand, maybe they were also in Trunks' timeline, but Vegeta and the others were able to beat #19 and force Gero to activate #17 and #18, just like in the main timeline. Bulma and Trunks would never know about #19 and #20 since they wouldn't have been there, and everyone who was would be dead.

As for why the androids are stronger in the past, that could also be due to Trunks and Cell somehow altering the course of history, but it's also possible that Trunks was wrong about the future androids' strengths. Maybe he never saw their full power. Future #17 told Future Gohan that he hadn't even used half of his power in their last fight, after all, and Bulma didn't think that Trunks had become much stronger than Gohan had been, so it's a possibility. As always, different fans believe different things, so I'm just trying to lay everything on the table.