- 1,199
- 560
I would like to propose a re-evaluation of Son Goku’s profile, specifically regarding the possible applicability of Immortality Types 2 and 3, based on consistent feats shown throughout the series. This is intended as a discussion rather than a definitive assertion.
Immortality Type 2 (Survival from Otherwise Fatal Injuries)
Goku has repeatedly survived injuries that would normally be fatal, particularly those involving vital organs such as the heart. Notable examples include:
Zamasu piercing Goku’s heart during the Goku Black arc.
Beerus piercing Goku’s chest during their battle while using his God of Destruction power.
Goku being struck through the heart by a laser/energy beam fired by one of Frieza’s subordinates when his guard was lowered.
Hit piercing Goku’s heart during their second confrontation.
Despite the lethality of these attacks, Goku was able to remain alive and recover rather than dying outright. Repeated survival from such critical injuries may be indicative of Immortality Type 2, depending on interpretation.
Immortality Type 3 (Regeneration from Internal Damage)
In several cases, Goku does not merely heal over time, but appears to regenerate internal damage, including damage to vital organs:
After being pierced through the chest by Beerus, Goku’s body regenerated sufficiently for him to continue fighting.
After Zamasu pierced his heart, Goku regenerated moments later, restoring internal damage and resuming combat.
These instances suggest regeneration rather than simple recovery, as vital organs were damaged or pierced and then restored in a short timeframe. While this regeneration is not portrayed as constant or limitless, it may qualify as limited Immortality Type 3 under VSBW standards.
Conclusion
This is my first post, and I am not presenting this as a final conclusion. Rather, I believe these repeated feats—particularly Goku’s regeneration from internal and otherwise fatal injuries—may warrant further discussion or reconsideration regarding the applicability of Immortality Types 2 and/or 3 to his profile.
I welcome clarification or correction if these feats are already addressed elsewhere or interpreted differently under current guidelines.
Agree:
Neutral:
Disagree:
Immortality Type 2 (Survival from Otherwise Fatal Injuries)
Goku has repeatedly survived injuries that would normally be fatal, particularly those involving vital organs such as the heart. Notable examples include:
Zamasu piercing Goku’s heart during the Goku Black arc.
Beerus piercing Goku’s chest during their battle while using his God of Destruction power.
Goku being struck through the heart by a laser/energy beam fired by one of Frieza’s subordinates when his guard was lowered.
Hit piercing Goku’s heart during their second confrontation.
Despite the lethality of these attacks, Goku was able to remain alive and recover rather than dying outright. Repeated survival from such critical injuries may be indicative of Immortality Type 2, depending on interpretation.
Immortality Type 3 (Regeneration from Internal Damage)
In several cases, Goku does not merely heal over time, but appears to regenerate internal damage, including damage to vital organs:
After being pierced through the chest by Beerus, Goku’s body regenerated sufficiently for him to continue fighting.
After Zamasu pierced his heart, Goku regenerated moments later, restoring internal damage and resuming combat.
These instances suggest regeneration rather than simple recovery, as vital organs were damaged or pierced and then restored in a short timeframe. While this regeneration is not portrayed as constant or limitless, it may qualify as limited Immortality Type 3 under VSBW standards.
Conclusion
This is my first post, and I am not presenting this as a final conclusion. Rather, I believe these repeated feats—particularly Goku’s regeneration from internal and otherwise fatal injuries—may warrant further discussion or reconsideration regarding the applicability of Immortality Types 2 and/or 3 to his profile.
I welcome clarification or correction if these feats are already addressed elsewhere or interpreted differently under current guidelines.
Agree:
Neutral:
Disagree:
Last edited: