What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

[Toxin45]

The way Freeza's being treated in modern DB material reminds me a bit of Dr. Doom. A Sue-like character that always gets his way and, when faced with the prospect of change, the story just glosses over it, gets it over with quickly and the character goes right back to his old ways once he gets back on top.

Probably because they both own their empires.

[Commodore Krevin]

Pilaf's gang isn't an organization. It's not organized at all. It's him and two incompetent lackies. In the Red Ribbon Army arc, Goku's looking for one single DB. It's also Goku alone, whereas before he had Bulma and then others that joined him.

Shrug. In what way is Pilaf's gang not an organization albeit a comically small, disorganized one? What is your criteria?

In what way does Goku looking for the four star ball meaningfully change how the story plays out or the show's dynamics?

Similarly are you arguing that not bringing Bulma along is a radical departure that changes the show?

But that's so general that almost every story falls into that category.

Depends on what exactly you mean. It would describe most Shonen series as I understand the term but I wouldn't say it describes say Batman stories where Batman rarely is implied to get physically stronger to defeat the likes of the Joker.

Do you disagree it accurately describes each arc? Or perhaps feel the differences in each arc play with the described formula?

For one, he's not the big bad. He's one of many antagonists thrown his way. And Goku defeated Buu without learning a new technique. It's one that existed for a while. Toriyama managed to keep the formula fairly fresh. For instance, Goku doesn't defeat Vegeta. Vegeta was defeated by a combined effort of his friends, including even Yajirobe.

No, Mercenary Tao isn't the "big bad" of that arc. He is however the most threatening member of Red Ribbon Army and is the mold from which said later Big Bads will be drawn from.

The spirit bomb obviously was learned earlier, yes of course. But if the definition of constantly trying new and unexplored waters is using the attack used twice before to try and kill the arcs' big bads that seems a low bar almost any series could clear. Which, if that is your argument, that's fine. But I get the sense you and Kunzait_83 are arguing DB was somehow unique in its ever changing nature.

Vegeta was more defeated by Goku plus friends than say compared to Raditz earlier where Goku and Piccolo were more equal in contributions. But I don't claim nothing ever changes or even that Toriyama never plays with the formula. I just don't see that as constantly being new and different as opposed to adding and refining what was already there.

At issue is Goku doesn't necessary learn or grow when he goes up against the Big Bad. He just first and foremost gets stronger. It isn't that getting his ass kicked by Freeza developed his character or otherwise gave him the wherewithal to overcome the tyrant. He, from an admittedly heart wrenching act of seeing his best friend get killed in front of him, just transforms and is powerful enough to square off against him.

And repeating this basic fight, with little change, would qualify as formula if anything does. Which, I stress again, has little connection on if its good storytelling or not. The addition of new ideas and concepts does not improve the quality of a work in of itself nor does sticking to and expanding what works weaken it.

[ABED]

Dragon Ball isn't a superhero story. Comparing DB, a martial arts fantasy, with a superhero/detective story isn't a good comparison.

So because Pilaf spouts orders to 2 incompetent lackies it's fundamentally the same as the Red Ribbon Army?

Similarly are you arguing that not bringing Bulma along is a radical departure that changes the show?

Yes! A one hander is a huge shift from a two hander. Part of the fun of that first arc is how Goku and Bulma play off each other.

You haven't described a formula, you've described most stories where to achieve a goal, the protagonist has to learn or get something to overcome the obstacle to the goal. If your view of what a formula is is so broad that it encompasses almost every story, it's not a formula.

My issue with your analysis is that your bar is so low for claiming things are the same.

[Toxin45]

Dragon Ball isn't a superhero story. Comparing DB, a martial arts fantasy, with a superhero/detective story isn't a good comparison.

So because Pilaf spouts orders to 2 incompetent lackies it's fundamentally the same as the Red Ribbon Army?

Similarly are you arguing that not bringing Bulma along is a radical departure that changes the show?

Yes! A one hander is a huge shift from a two hander. Part of the fun of that first arc is how Goku and Bulma play off each other.

You haven't described a formula, you've described most stories where to achieve a goal, the protagonist has to learn or get something to overcome the obstacle to the goal. If your view of what a formula is is so broad that it encompasses almost every story, it's not a formula.

My issue with your analysis is that your bar is so low for claiming things are the same.

The Formula getting anything new is kinda getting old.

[Hawk9211]

Dragon Ball isn't a superhero story. Comparing DB, a martial arts fantasy, with a superhero/detective story isn't a good comparison.

So because Pilaf spouts orders to 2 incompetent lackies it's fundamentally the same as the Red Ribbon Army?

Similarly are you arguing that not bringing Bulma along is a radical departure that changes the show?

Yes! A one hander is a huge shift from a two hander. Part of the fun of that first arc is how Goku and Bulma play off each other.

You haven't described a formula, you've described most stories where to achieve a goal, the protagonist has to learn or get something to overcome the obstacle to the goal. If your view of what a formula is is so broad that it encompasses almost every story, it's not a formula.

My issue with your analysis is that your bar is so low for claiming things are the same.

The Formula getting anything new is kinda getting old.

Reading through the whole thread I don't know if you're trolling or not.Your whole argument is basically non existent and not even an argument.You're just describing what happened when the thread is why there shouldn't be a recurring villain and presenting your speculation as what toriyama thought.

[Toxin45]

Dragon Ball isn't a superhero story. Comparing DB, a martial arts fantasy, with a superhero/detective story isn't a good comparison.

So because Pilaf spouts orders to 2 incompetent lackies it's fundamentally the same as the Red Ribbon Army?

Yes! A one hander is a huge shift from a two hander. Part of the fun of that first arc is how Goku and Bulma play off each other.

You haven't described a formula, you've described most stories where to achieve a goal, the protagonist has to learn or get something to overcome the obstacle to the goal. If your view of what a formula is is so broad that it encompasses almost every story, it's not a formula.

My issue with your analysis is that your bar is so low for claiming things are the same.

The Formula getting anything new is kinda getting old.

Reading through the whole thread I don't know if you're trolling or not.Your whole argument is basically non existent and not even an argument.You're just describing what happened when the thread is why there shouldn't be a recurring villain and presenting your speculation as what toriyama thought.

Um I didn't make this thread someone else did.

[Hawk9211]

The Formula getting anything new is kinda getting old.

Reading through the whole thread I don't know if you're trolling or not.Your whole argument is basically non existent and not even an argument.You're just describing what happened when the thread is why there shouldn't be a recurring villain and presenting your speculation as what toriyama thought.

Um I didn't make this thread someone else did.

Wut?

[Toxin45]

Reading through the whole thread I don't know if you're trolling or not.Your whole argument is basically non existent and not even an argument.You're just describing what happened when the thread is why there shouldn't be a recurring villain and presenting your speculation as what toriyama thought.

Um I didn't make this thread someone else did.

Wut?

Well at this point Frieza is the only actual recurring villain in the series.

[Commodore Krevin]

Dragon Ball isn't a superhero story. Comparing DB, a martial arts fantasy, with a superhero/detective story isn't a good comparison.

So because Pilaf spouts orders to 2 incompetent lackies it's fundamentally the same as the Red Ribbon Army?

Similarly are you arguing that not bringing Bulma along is a radical departure that changes the show?

Yes! A one hander is a huge shift from a two hander. Part of the fun of that first arc is how Goku and Bulma play off each other.

You haven't described a formula, you've described most stories where to achieve a goal, the protagonist has to learn or get something to overcome the obstacle to the goal. If your view of what a formula is is so broad that it encompasses almost every story, it's not a formula.

My issue with your analysis is that your bar is so low for claiming things are the same.

Simply because DB is a martial arts story doesn't invalidate comparisons to other franchises/series. It simply means DB draws from a different wellspring of culture and tropes. If what I described matches "martial arts fantasy" but not a superhero/detective story than I'm obviously not just describing stories in general.

In terms of non-super powered foes fighting with Goku over possession of a dragonball? I wouldn't call it a clear departure from what had gone before, no.

I would agree Goku is best when he has someone to bounce off of. But that still seems a very low threshold.

Well in DB the goal is accomplished only via getting arbitrarily stronger than the bad guy. Not even learning new skills persay, you just learn techniques which make you or gives you access to "more power". So we're not talking like in say Harry Potter of a broadstroke hero rising to the challenge that's similar in generalities but different in specifics. In almost every encounter it boils down to Goku/Gohan having bigger Ki. Whether we are talking about Mercenary Tao or Freezia.

And formula, by its definition, is something that is supposed to be applicable to other things because everyone is drawing from the same archetypes and starting points. Just like, to use another example, Star Wars draws upon the Hero's Journey and, in general, plays it pretty straight.

Perhaps I am. But to me, it is you who seems to have set the bar too low that almost any movie/book/comic franchise would qualify as constantly treading new water since almost any of them would add new things/people/concepts as time goes by.

Shrug. In both the Pilaf Arc and and Red Ribbon arc he searches the globe for dragon balls getting into adventures and fighting bad guys. He even squares off against an organization, however pathetic Pilaf's gang may be, which desires the dragon balls for themselves. In the context of constantly trying new and unexplored waters, this seems more a refinement of what came before than a clear departure.

Calling an inept little goblin dude and his equally inept dog ninja and spy girl sidekicks an "organization" is HIGHLY stretching the definition of that word. You may as well call the Three Stooges and the Marx Brothers an "organization" by that logic. At best, they're a trio, and an ineffective one at that.

Pilaf and his all of two stooges have a clear and unified face: Pilaf. The Red Ribbon Army, despite having a few notable generals among their ranks, are largely faceless: no one member of the army is substantially more important or dominant to the plot than the others, and all of them serve a role in the ensuing shenanigans.

I don't think I'm overly stretching the word here, no. I fully acknowledge they are a comical, ludicrous organization. But if you feel differently, I am willing to hear your criteria for what is and isn't an organization.

Even Freeza's empire has Freeza himself who effectively acts as the key linchpin and the outwardly obvious root of all its evil. The Red Ribbon Army are less any one person than they are a mass of disparate people: in this regard, they're VERY much unique for Dragon Ball, which has ALWAYS otherwise relied on clear cut singular villains you can put a name and a face to.

And again, lets not forget that Pilaf only shows up at the TAIL END of the first arc in the manga: the Red Ribbon Army are a key and persistent obstacle that Goku must overcome, and they do FAR more to impede Goku every step of the way than Pilaf ever comes close to (anime or manga).

Point being, Pilaf and the Red Ribbon Army are in NO way comparable as villains: both in terms of general effectiveness, impact on the story, as well as just their root fundamental premise (three comically absurd dipshits versus a powerful, organized, and largely faceless militia). About all they really have in common is their motivation: that they both want to seek out the Dragon Balls for global domination. That's it. Everything else about them is hardly all that especially similar.

I am far from certain Pilaf is anymore a face/lynchpin for his gang than Commander Red is for the Red Ribbon Army or that for that matter with him along with Colonel Silver, General Blue ninja Murasaki ect that the Red Ribbon Army is much, if any, more of a faceless militia than Freezia's army. Further I would think Pilaf, and by extension the other two bit adversaries Goku met on his first adventure, is more in line with the idea of an adversary without a clear cut singular villain.

Thirdly, against Goku, the "disparate mass" of the Red Ribbon army did precisely nothing against him. Hell General Blue was the first to even remotely give Goku trouble in a fight. So "FAR more" seems to be stretching things. They fought him more frequently but that would be about it.

All in all this seems a very small peg to hang your hat on that DB was constantly different and new and seems more a refinement/expansion of what had come before.

I would certainly agree the RR have more in common with Freezia's forces. I simply disagree the RR was a completely new concept which radically changed the dynamics of the series.

Congratulations: you just summarized the formula for like at a bare minimum 80% (conservative estimate) of all martial arts narratives ever created. Hero faces overwhelmingly unbeatable opponent, trains, discovers and masters secret deadly technique and/or finds the bad guy's hidden weakness, then eventually beats the unbeatable opponent.

I'll take your word on that. But I would think that would reinforce my case not distract from it.

ABED's 100% right on this: you're being WAY too broad and generalized. By this logic, all adventure narratives are "exactly the same": they all involve good guys going on a journey through strange lands to find a McGuffin, usually before some bad guy does. Everything from Indiana Jones to North By Northwest to Treasure of the Sierra Madre to the original Star Wars to Its a Mad Mad Mad Mad World, by your estimate, are all the exact same story.

To some extent, yes. That's what formula means. Star Wars plot points and beats aren't unique to it but could easily be copied into almost any generic fantasy story with comparisons being made to everything from Harry Potter to NuTrek films. So I do not have the same problem you and Abed seem to have with repeating stories. To tell a good one, a timeless one, its almost impossible not to.

Further we are not just talking about a broadstrokes "Hero's Journey" here. We are talking about the same, specific plot beats being repeated with small variations. Goku gets beaten up or otherwise learns he is outclassed against a foe and will specifically train to become literally and tangibly "stronger" whether its drinking divine water or training under intense gravity. All in order to overpower the Bad Guy with a larger power level. So how is that different from the Joker coming back every week with a new gimmick?

I don't seem to recall Goku having to go on a journey through Freeza or Tao Pai Pai's insides and suddenly get attacked by giant limbs and manifestations of them from within. I also don't remember Piccolo having access to every single one of the characters' martial arts techniques, nor to I recall Nappa and Vegeta being able to absorb other characters and take on their physical attributes, personality quirks, and fighting techniques. Etc.

I guess it comes down to all of that having little impact in how they actually fought and defeated Buu and Cell. I don't deny DB has changed over time or added things over the years. I just don't see how that alone makes it any different from just about any other long runner.

As for Toriyama's work vis-a-vis DB, I find it infectious and fun. Won't deny the more space opera aspects will always be a favorite of mine, having started with "Z", but once I actually watched them I really enjoyed the DB portion. Its a wonderful, whimsical world and in many ways I wish Toriyama spent more time exploring/expanding it then he did. But I know. Genre conventions and all.

[ABED]

Perhaps I am. But to me, it is you who seems to have set the bar too low that almost any movie/book/comic franchise would qualify as constantly treading new water since almost any of them would add new things/people/concepts as time goes by.

Then all we can really say is the line is arbitrary. I still think the differences between the different DB arcs is pretty significant. To dissect your argument line by line would be time consuming and ultimately not worth it, since your argument now is boiling down to "nuh uh, your bar is too low."

Treading new water? Pretty sure you're mixing metaphors, FYI.

[Hawk9211]

Um I didn't make this thread someone else did.

Wut?

Well at this point Frieza is the only actual recurring villain in the series.

But,no one is disputing that.The actual topic is about concept of recurring villain.You nonsensically bring that point,when that’s not what’s being discussed.

[Toxin45]

Wut?

Well at this point Frieza is the only actual recurring villain in the series.

But,no one is disputing that.The actual topic is about concept of recurring villain.You nonsensically bring that point,when that’s not what’s being discussed.

What is wrong with the idea of a. Recurring villain?