Goku Black's Acausality (Type 1) Issue

[Voidnether]

I honestly don't know whether this should go or not, but Acausality (Type 1) is defined that when you try to kill someone in the past, they wouldn't be affected as they're immune as in they don't exist in the past anymore even though the past timeline obviously is still there.

In the case of Zamasu, from what I've read is just that Time Ring prevents Zamasu from being killed given the moment Beerus erased Zamasu across the past, present and future and that it created a branching timeline where Zamasu was never destroyed by Beerus.

The justification and the Imgur description contradicts each other, as the justification here states that; "With Time Ring he is immune to changes in history, allowing him to survive Beerus erasing Present Zamasu from existence" however the Imgur description explains the otherwise; "Dragon Ball Super [Episode 67] - All of this essentially means that the Time Ring, which protected Goku Black from being erased by Beerus in the past, resolved the paradox by splitting the timeline into a new one in which Goku Black was not destroyed. The Green Time Rings were created because changing history produced a separate world. Since Goku Black was protected by the Time Ring, additional Time Rings were consequently formed."

The same justification also explains that Beerus is able to erase Zamasu from the past, present and future but the very end of the justification states that Beerus is able to do this without splitting the timeline, in which Zamasu managed to survive by splitting the timeline in which Zamasu is never destroyed by Beerus anyway.

Sure, Beerus manages to erase Zamasu without splitting the timeline, but then again Zamasu literally survived by splitting the timeline in which he was never erased..

Anyways, given we know Beerus has the capability to erase Zamasu from the entire timeline which comprises of the past, present and future and that Zamasu is able to survive this by creating a branching timeline through the Time Ring, I believe this shouldn't be Acausality (Type 1) as it's not the case where Zamasu doesn't exist in the past but he still exists within the present and future since the only thing that differentiates Acausality (Type 1) and Acausality (Type 2) would be that Acausality (Type 1) users don't exist in the past, whilst Acausality (Type 2) don't exist in the past and future with Acausality (Type 4) users being outside the timeline entirely cause they operate on irregular causality (and that in DB, you'd have to be outside the timeline for this anyway with how causality and time works in the verse).

My proposal would be to remove Type 1 entirely, Type 4 could stay given Zamasu created a new timeline in which he isn't destroyed by Beerus in which again, the same character who has the capability to EE someone covering a timeline.

I don't know if Type 3 would work in a limited sense since it's just Time Ring creating a whole timeline in which Zamasu isn't erased, but I think Type 4 covers this already I feel like.

Note: I might've left out the stuff where Dragon Ball solves paradoxes entirely but if that's the verse's mechanism and not Black Goku itself as an individual, I don't think it should be warranted either way from what I could comprehend (other than Type 1 being a decorative ability, if you already have Type 4 which is staying) or at the same time I believe I could've just misunderstood the entire thing, but honestly the explanations isn't really that blatant since it's not something like "Beerus destroyed Zamasu in the past, but Zamasu still remains on the present/future timeline"

EDIT: About the paradox one, I believe it's more of like "splitting the timeline into a new one in which Goku Black was not destroyed." hence resolving the paradox, but I still don't think this would be Type 1 tbh

Voting Section & Count​

• Agree;
• Neutral;
• Disagree; JustANormalPerson01, Hecky2222, Mbpoops, ProfectusInfinity, Shar122, Robo432343

 

[JustANormalPerson01]

Acausality type 1 isn't that "users don't exist in the past", but that they are unaffected by the changes made on the past:

Type 1: Time Paradox Immunity: Characters with this type of Acausality are rendered immune to changes in the past and standard temporal paradoxes, but remain just as vulnerable in the present and can be affected by normal Causality Manipulation and similar abilities.

So I disagree. Black Goku is immune to the changes on the past because, when a change on the past tries to affect him (something normally impossible by Dragon Ball standards, only possible by GoDs Hakai), instead of dying, the timeline diverges into two timelines, one of which keeps him alive and other of which kills him. So he is actually rendered immune to changes in the past, which is all Acausality type 1 is about.

 

[Voidnether]

Acausality type 1 isn't that "users don't exist in the past", but that they are unaffected by the changes made on the past:

So I disagree. Black Goku is immune to the changes on the past because, when a change on the past tries to affect him (something normally impossible by Dragon Ball standards, only possible by GoDs Hakai), instead of dying, the timeline diverges into two timelines, one of which keeps him alive and other of which kills him. So he is actually rendered immune to changes in the past, which is all Acausality type 1 is about.

Yeah but like Acausality (Type 1) doesn't work like the bolded text I quoted above.

There's a staff thread back in September 2024 for this especially about the unaffected by changes made in the past, which is like treated as Immunity here so it's functionally "they don't exist in the past" regardless with how the page itself mentioned immune and immunity.

I feel like if the case is that it just diverged into two timelines, in which the other keeps him alive and the other kills him, it's not Type 1 from my perspective, maybe you can argue this to be like Immortality or whatever (other than Type 4) but from what I've seen, it's not. Unless you wanted to say that the timeline that kills him is basically nonexistent (so Beerus never actually erased Zamasu), and that the entire paradoxes thing would make it so that the timeline after the paradox would be the timeline where Zamasu existed, but I don't see those on the scans tbf

 

[JustANormalPerson01]

There's a staff thread back in September 2024 for this especially about the unaffected by changes made in the past, which is like treated as Immunity here so it's functionally "they don't exist in the past" regardless with how the page itself mentioned immune and immunity.

Is that reflected in the Acausality page in some manner? What matters when dealing with abilities are the descriptions and qualifiers brought on the page of the ability in question, not what a 2 years old thread that may be outdated says.

As long as the page does not mention anything about not existing in the past being a necessary condition for Acausality type 1, then that CRT you brought up is meaningless. Not to mention that Goku Black is not the only character which lists Acausality type 1 from being unaffected by time sheningans. Sol Badguy (an example of acausality type 1 in the Acausality page) and JORGE JOESTARS Kars are the first examples I could think of that also list it because of that. Nowhere stated they don't exist in the past at all

I feel like if the case is that it just diverged into two timelines, in which the other keeps him alive and the other kills him, it's not Type 1 from my perspective, maybe you can argue this to be like Immortality or whatever (other than Type 4) but from what I've seen, it's not. Unless you wanted to say that the timeline that kills him is basically nonexistent (so Beerus never actually erased Zamasu), and that the entire paradoxes thing would make it so that the timeline after the paradox would be the timeline where Zamasu existed, but I don't see those on the scans tbf

1. Beerus kills Zamas in the past

2. Zamas is killed across all spacetime

3. Future Zamas (Goku Black) is kept alive because Time Ring prevented his death diverging the timeline where he is killed into a new one

4. When characters travel back to the future Goku Black is, effectively, unaffected by the change in the past

That's the most straightforward case of Acausality type 1: Goku Black is rendered immune to changes in the past because when they are made the Time Ring diverges the time so Goku Black is rendered unaffected.

So, I disagree with you.

This isn't immortality type 4: Goku Black isn't resurrected, he just doesn't die at all. Another timeline following the events where he might've died is created instead

 

[Hecky2222]

Essentially, I agree with @JustANormalPerson01 here

 

[CastoriceTheFifth]

Oh Nether. You're gonna get a stern lecture when you open Discord again.

 

[Mbpoops]

Time ring bruhhhh

 

[Mbpoops]

Disagree. Dragon ball, especially zamasu and goku black, have the most blatant type 1 acausality

 

[ProfectusInfinity]

Disagree with the thread based on JustANormalPerson01's reasons.

 

[Shar122]

Pretty much NormalPerson summed it up pretty well.
I disagree with this.

 

[Robo432343]

disagree for @Shar122 reasons

 

[Vietthai96]

I think you are confusing Black with Time Ring, Time Ring protected Black from Beerus' erasure by diverging timeline, countering God's ability that works on different logic of space-time which affects something across all of time while not splitting the timeline. Time Ring ability isn't acausality Type 1, but due to its protection, Black was protected from his past-self getting erased; thus, he has Acausality Type 1 via Time Ring

 

[Voidnether]

I think you are confusing Black with Time Ring, Time Ring protected Black from Beerus' erasure by diverging timeline, countering God's ability that works on different logic of space-time which affects something across all of time while not splitting the timeline. Time Ring ability isn't acausality Type 1, but due to its protection, Black was protected from his past-self getting erased; thus, he has Acausality Type 1 via Time Ring

Yeah, but the same justification had Beerus being able to erase Black Goku from the timeline entirely (past-present-future).

I don't get why there'd even be a past self, if Beerus was capable of erasing Black Goku from the timeline entirely and that Black Goku countered this by splitting the timeline. Isn't Acausality (Type 1) given if this specific character tried to kill the character who has Acausality (Type 1) by destroying the past, but said Acausality (Type 1) isn't affected cause he simply doesn't exist in the past anyway?

Like, why would there even be his past-self in the first place if you know, this is the same Beerus who also erased the present and future Black Goku in question? That's all, like Time Ring is what allows Black Goku to evade this + split the timeline too

 

[Mbpoops]

Yeah, but the same justification had Beerus being able to erase Black Goku from the timeline entirely (past-present-future).

I don't get why there'd even be a past self, if Beerus was capable of erasing Black Goku from the timeline entirely and that Black Goku countered this by splitting the timeline. Isn't Acausality (Type 1) given if this specific character tried to kill the character who has Acausality (Type 1) by destroying the past, but said Acausality (Type 1) isn't affected cause he simply doesn't exist in the past anyway?

Like, why would there even be his past-self in the first place if you know, this is the same Beerus who also erased the present and future Black Goku in question? That's all, like Time Ring is what allows Black Goku to evade this + split the timeline too

there is no longer a "past" goku black he got erased but because of the time ring essensially splitting the timeline when the past goku black was erased he still exists

 

[Voidnether]

Is that reflected in the Acausality page in some manner? What matters when dealing with abilities are the descriptions and qualifiers brought on the page of the ability in question, not what a 2 years old thread that may be outdated says.

As long as the page does not mention anything about not existing in the past being a necessary condition for Acausality type 1, then that CRT you brought up is meaningless. Not to mention that Goku Black is not the only character which lists Acausality type 1 from being unaffected by time sheningans. Sol Badguy (an example of acausality type 1 in the Acausality page) and JORGE JOESTARS Kars are the first examples I could think of that also list it because of that. Nowhere stated they don't exist in the past at all

1. Beerus kills Zamas in the past

2. Zamas is killed across all spacetime

3. Future Zamas (Goku Black) is kept alive because Time Ring prevented his death diverging the timeline where he is killed into a new one

4. When characters travel back to the future Goku Black is, effectively, unaffected by the change in the past

That's the most straightforward case of Acausality type 1: Goku Black is rendered immune to changes in the past because when they are made the Time Ring diverges the time so Goku Black is rendered unaffected.

So, I disagree with you.

This isn't immortality type 4: Goku Black isn't resurrected, he just doesn't die at all. Another timeline following the events where he might've died is created instead

Yeah uh Black Goku is just the first case that was brought up to my attention, had it been Sonic or Novel Kars then I would've done them first instead of this one. Wasn't the justification itself for the ability clearly stated that Beerus erased the Present Zamasu instead of the past Zamasu? Like you know, nothing on the justification clearly implies that cause Beerus killed Zamasu in the past, hence Beerus killed the present and future Zamasu (which is the opposite of what Acausality Type 1 is), like Time Ring here from what I've seen just nullified what Beerus does and shouldn't Number 4 be the past instead of the future given we're arguing Type 1 instead of Type 2 here?

Anyways it's like as simple as this, unless like someone could convince me that it was Past Zamasu who was getting erased, and then the Present nor the Future Zamasu isn't affected, then yeah Type 1 works but other than that imo, I'm not really convinced either way tbh

But like c'mon, if Beerus erased all versions of Zamasu in a singular timeline whether it be his past, present and future versions and that he managed to diverge a timeline into two where this happened and he died, then the latter where this never happened = hence he didn't die even if the Time Ring itself gets duplicated by this, idk. I still don't see Acausality (Type 1) here especially when the present and future versions also get erased, the past being erased hence the present and future versions are gone is like the opposite of Type 1 either way

 

[Voidnether]

there is no longer a "past" goku black he got erased but because of the time ring essensially splitting the timeline when the past goku black was erased he still exists

My point here is that if Beerus was capable of erasing his existence across the whole timeline, by the same logic the present and future Goku Black wouldn't exist and this is the case here, Acausality Type 1 requires the present and future Zamasu to still exist, just his past that's nonexistent (in which that he doesn't have any past anymore, hence going to the past doesn't kill his present and future versions) even if the past as a timeline itself still existed

 

[Voidnether]

Alright, since anyone here says Acausality (Type 1) is very blatant, what would the justification be outlining the descriptions on the Acausality (Type 1) page entirely?
Exclude Acausality (Type 4), because I have given the justification prior here which was Zamasu's existence entirely not constrained by a singular timeline which contains the regular causality

• Acausality (Types 1 & 4; With Time Ring he is immune to changes in history, allowing him to survive Beerus erasing Present Zamasu from existence. Despite Beerus' capability of erasing existence across space-time without splitting the timeline)

Because clearly this doesn't work for Acausality (Type 1), immune to changes in history here is because Zamasu would just diverge the timeline and make a new one where he doesn't get erased by Beerus whilst the other one, he still gets erased and dies to Beerus, plus the latter explicitly mentions Present Zamasu and that Beerus had the capability to erase someone off the timeline without diverging the timeline (which we know it ended up diverging the timeline = reason Zamasu survived)

 

[CastoriceTheFifth]

Oh Nether. You're gonna get a stern lecture when you open Discord again.

He did indeed get a stern lecture on Discord by Honkai supporters.

Nether did concede to Acausality Type 1 but wanted this as the justification
"Beerus erased the Past Zamasu using Hakai, but Present Zamasu is able to survive the destruction through the Time Ring as Present Zamasu himself stated that whatever happens in the past, won't have any effect on his current self"

 

[ChoursDropoff]

this shouldn't be Acausality (Type 1) as it's not the case where Zamasu doesn't exist in the past but he still exists within the present and future since the only thing that differentiates Acausality (Type 1)

This ain’t it man. Acausality type 1 is simply being immune to changes happening in the past. It has nothing to do with existing in the past.

I’m going to have to hard disagree.

 

[Mbpoops]

This ain’t it man. Acausality type 1 is simply being immune to changes happening in the past. It has nothing to do with existing in the past.

I’m going to have to hard disagree.

We talked to him off site he conceded

 

[Voidnether]

This ain’t it man. Acausality type 1 is simply being immune to changes happening in the past. It has nothing to do with existing in the past.

I’m going to have to hard disagree.

I mean functionally Acausality (Type 1) is the case where you just don't have a past anymore, no? Don't think I have seen a case where they still have a past, but their present version is just not affected in any way even if their past self is killed (instead of them lacking the past itself)

 

[Mbpoops]

I mean functionally Acausality (Type 1) is the case where you just don't have a past anymore, no? Don't think I have seen a case where they still have a past, but their present version is just not affected in any way even if their past self is killed (instead of them lacking the past itself)

having no past is acausality type 2. acausality type 1 is just unaffected by changes in the past

 

[Vietthai96]

Aca 2 requires you to have no past and no future, not just no past only

 

[Apex_Predator_GX]

Yeah, Acausality can get pretty confusing