• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Dragon Ball Manga - 3-A Buu Aaga

Status
Not open for further replies.
It relies on unofficial translations, generous interpretations and results in a very significant outlier for the series at the time.

The "supporting evidence" is very weak as well. Using the title of a chapter which has no reason to be taken literally... Using Vegeta's statement which means nothing for AP.
How is this an outlier? This is literally narratively based this doesn’t break the narrative in any way

If the title of the chapter and statements fit the same narrative then why would it not be taken literally? Also I thought Hermes translations were universally accepted on this wiki

Even if you severely lowball the time frame this is atleast 3-C or 3-B
 
, . He instantly goes to the kai realm pretty much. So if he didn't, per gokus statement, he would have just destroyed the entire universe in a "poof", just gone.

Yeah the absolute best and most that can be given to buu is 3-A, Goku being explicitly not worried of Kid Buu prior to him IT on their location proves he never had the AP or range to destroy the macrocosm in one shot.

Don’t personally agree with tier three though. 4-B and MFTL+ is all it takes to destroy everything in the universe.
 
Based of context it can be interpertated as explosion in a sense
The context includes:
It can easily be interpreted as one
"Poof" can also be interpreted as "all life forms and all planets disappearing", which is consistent with the above statements.
 
"Poof" can also be interpreted as "all life forms and all planets disappearing", which is consistent with the above statements.
Yeah, it wouldn't make sense narratively nor with the guides if it'd be over a long period of time, only for him to be 4-B, Null
not a counter to anything.
 
Yeah, it wouldn't make sense narratively nor with the guides if it'd be over a long period of time, only for him to be 4-B, Null

not a counter to anything.
When you fall into a certain impression of what the "narrative" is, that starts to taint all other pieces of evidence.

Everyone has different interpretations of what the "Narrative" is. It's not a good idea to rely upon it as an argument.
 
Thank you @Nullflowerblush. It has always been shown and implied that Buu's "destruction of the Universe" is an over-time issue. Vegeta's statement and the chapter title, if you wish to rely on such things, do not contradict that context.
 
Everyone has different interpretations of what the "Narrative" is. It's not a good idea to rely upon it as an argument.
I agree, but if it's something that's well-established by multiple pieces of evidence and guidebooks, and the story itself contextualized by super is implying it, then I think it's clearly swaying our understanding of the story more to tier three than low tier 4.

I agree with you "narrative" arguments suck, but I'm specifically talking baout the story and guides in this context

Thank you @Nullflowerblush. It has always been shown and implied that Buu's "destruction of the Universe" is an over-time issue. Vegeta's statement and the chapter title, if you wish to rely on such things, do not contradict that context.

This contradicts the guides and the story, as cell would be as much of a threat to the universe as Buu would, if this was true.

Infinite stamina, and 4-B AP = Buu and Cell

If it's over time, than they are equal threats to the universe.
 
while not saying this or ever implying this for other people with infinite stamina and enough attack potency to destroy any single celestial body, and the speed to traverse it (i.e. Cell)
Cell's goal was never to go around the universe and blow up planets. Its goal was to spread terror through power.
Why would Cell be described as capable of destroying of the universe if that was never in its agenda?
 
This contradicts the guides
"Destroy the universe", like "destroy the world", can mean a litany of things without proper context. Fortunately, context exists.

This is not like Goku and Beerus, where they are consistently described as being able to erase everything within the universe and reduce the entire structure to an empty void instantaneously. Buu has been consistently described as a planet-destroyer. Pretty sure Beerus even describes Buu as a "planet-buster" in the Super manga, but that is irrelevant.
 
"Guides" are secondary canon at best, or even tertiary canon sometimes. And the information from the manga will always trump them.
 
No it can't (poof is specifically used to make note of how instantenously something happens, and no it's not consistent. The story makes a clear distinction between Buu killing life and destroying individual parts of a place as minuscule as Earth in comparison than destroying the planet itself. The poof statement is completely unrelated to the above.

<Destroys entire cities
<80% and later all of humanity
<10% of the planet itself
<They still don't ever categorize it as him being in the process of destroying the Earth itself of Earth being destroyed

Life, cities and an entire part of the planet to the Earth itself, is like, unfathomably close in scale to life and planets to the entire universe (literally a bigger discrepancy than grains of sand on a beach). This interpretation makes no sense, it's just not how the wording works nor how the story writes things. Buu destroying life and individual planets has nothing to do him with destroying the universe itself.
 
"Destroy the universe", like "destroy the world", can mean a litany of things without proper context. Fortunately, context exists.
Your proof for "Destroying the universe" meaning over time with him being 4-B, which is NOTHING compared to the scale of the universe, is unsupported and lacks evidence.

People in universe think he's gonna do it quickly, the guides think that too.
 
"Guides" are secondary canon at best, or even tertiary canon sometimes. And the information from the manga will always trump them.
The manga doesn't contradict that.

ALSO, they are primary sources of evidence, even if "secondary canon"

that "secondary canon" is uncontradicted and uncontested, and especially with what we know of EML, it's a primary source too.
 
"Guides" are secondary canon at best, or even tertiary canon sometimes. And the information from the manga will always trump them.
Guides can still be used to support the series, Unless supporting it condraict the seires and holds no value than this is irrelevent
 
Thank you @Nullflowerblush. It has always been shown and implied that Buu's "destruction of the Universe" is an over-time issue. Vegeta's statement and the chapter title, if you wish to rely on such things, do not contradict that context.
If you believe the destruction of the Universe is overtime then it’s still tier 3
poof.png
 
Your proof for "Destroying the universe" meaning over time with him being 4-B, which is NOTHING compared to the scale of the universe, is unsupported and lacks evidence.

People in universe think he's gonna do it quickly, the guides think that too.
Yeah 4-B is just wrong, even calling it overtime, the context given in series for the timeframe wouldn't make it anywhere near being lower than 3-B.
 
I Disagree. Unofficial translations are 99% unacceptable imo. You can change one word and create an entirely different kind of feat. The raw japanese would need to back up an unofficial translation if it was to be taken over the official ones.

An example of this would be the common use of the japanese word "Hoshi" 星 to refer to either a planet or star. The english translation of this word can easily turn a planet busting statement into a star busting statement, which is a massive difference to justify on a whim.

There needs to be intense scrutiny with unofficial translations. I'm not totally against them, but it is still 'technically' non-canon. They should only be used in specific situations where we do not have an official english translation, or it is very clear what the statement in japanese is referring to.
 
I Disagree. Unofficial translations are 99% unacceptable imo. You can change one word and create an entirely different kind of feat. The raw japanese would need to back up an unofficial translation if it was to be taken over the official ones.

An example of this would be the common use of the japanese word "Hoshi" 星 to refer to either a planet or star. The english translation of this word can easily turn a planet busting statement into a star busting statement, which is a massive difference to justify.

There needs to be intense scrutiny with unofficial translations. I'm not totally against them, but it is still technically non-canon. They should only be used in specific situations where we do not have an official english translation, or it is very clear what the statement in japanese is refering to.
Herms is accepted on this site, this is not an argument, how about actually contesting the arguments.
 
I Disagree. Unofficial translations are 99% unacceptable imo. You can change one word and create an entirely different kind of feat. The raw japanese would need to back up an unofficial translation if it was to be taken over the official ones.

An example of this would be the common use of the japanese word "Hoshi" 星 to refer to either a planet or star. The english translation of this word can easily turn a planet busting statement into a star busting statement, which is a massive difference to justify.

There needs to be intense scrutiny with unofficial translations. I'm not totally against them, but it is still technically non-canon. They should only be used in specific situations where we do not have an official english translation, or it is very clear what the statement in japanese is refering to.
The poof translation literally comes from Herms (who's been reputed for his translations of DB since like, 2005?) and consistently cross checked to be better than Viz which creates what's equivalent to an English Dub for the manga. Not to mention the wording used being the same as Zeno destroying 6 universes, which the official Crunchyroll subs translated as "Boom" if I'm not mistaken.

The translation's fine.
 
Herms is accepted on this site, this is not an argument, how about actually contesting the arguments.
I am contesting this universally. Herms is non-canon. Is he sometimes right? Yes. Is this a clear scenario for such an exception? No. Unless you can prove the raw japanese was specifically using the term "poof" over any other word.
 
Yeah so in this context, it is actually implying some instant explosion of the universe, not buu going from planet to planet or whatever.
 
Overtime destruction fits his historical modus operandi, not even once do the people who have the most knowledge on him ever state he destroys more than planets at a given time, he took several years to destroy hundreds of planets, this really is taking one statement by Goku and taking it to its highest conclusion as if he were speaking in a non casual matter-of-fact manner to describe Buus capabilities.

2-C is out of the window right off the bat because Goku wasn’t the least bit worried about Buu while in the kaio realm, as shown here

5p93LgZ.png

Which forces to recontextualize Gokus statement to mean the living universe, and if were already having to downgrade the statement because it contradicts one made earlier, that should speak for the validity of the statement itself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top