Super's canon in the series

[Missy0124]

Now that super is done with no sign of return as of late i think we should talk about it's canon in the series.


I Am first going to use the argument that most people who agree with me use which is the simple fact that super features anime only characters and elements like gregory as a example.


If we going off of statements for it's canonization the same logic should make the movies in their own timeline.

If we are going off a in universe level of thinking gt and dragon ball heroes should also be canon with that same thought process


If we using the logic that toriyama approved it and that makes it canon then every other officially licensed and studio approved product should be canon as well.

 

[Zamasu_Chan]

Huh?

 

[Epsilon_R]

Nani?

 

[Missy0124]

Zamasu Cha

What do you not understand in terms of what i was saying.

 

[Ionliosite]

Super is a canonical sequel to DB Kai, that's the reason Gregory appears.

I honestly don't get how this site can accept Super as canon while saying Kai isn't, because Super is a sequel to Kai...

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

DBZ Kai is not canon to Super, and Gregory's appearance has no relevance. He is a minor character that has never advanced any plot. The difference is that GT and the DBZ Anime has many movie characters appearing and characters from other movies appearing in the other movies. And Toriyama himself said the Anime adaptation, movies, and GT are part of an extended universe. Also, it's getting really tiresome that the OP keeps getting canonicities mixed up. Also, we go by the Super Anime as the canon sequel to the Dragon Ball Manga. It's been discussed multiple times that the movies are prototypes for Super and the Manga was originally meant to be an advertisement for the Anime.

@AKM Sama probably has a lot more to say on the matter.

 

[Missy0124]

DarkDragonMedeus


What continuities did i confuse and gregory's appearance does have relevance as he is a anime only character and gt is determined non canon by a few cameos among other things so why should super apply any differently.


I Disagree with super as a whole being canon to the manga due to the aforementioned reasons i have stated before like anime only things appearing in the series.

Kai is simple adaption of z and there is no statement saying that it is canon and the only reason why they used kai for flashbacks is the simple fact that it is the only hd footage toei has.

May you provide a scan or a article saying that a extended universe is a thing as i have debated super being non canon many times and never heard of toriyama ever mentioning a extended universe the closest i know of is time in where he said the movies are set in there own timeline.

Aside from gt with the hell scene everyone uses to say gt is non canon cause of cooler appearing what other cases are there the time pikkon was stated to be on his way to fight bio-broly but mind you this scene as of my knowledsge has only been said in the dub.

If super is canon then there should be no filler correct then why is the copy vegeta arc a thing.

Gregory is not the only anime only character in super there is bardock's crew and tarble to name a few more examples.


Ionliosite

You have any articles or any proof aside from your word that kai is canon to super.

 

[AKM sama]

What is the purpose of this thread?

The true canon of DB goes like this:

- DB manga written by Akira Toriyama.

- The script for DBS written by Akira Toriyama (which means DBS anime/manga)

Since we know nothing about the script and it's adapted in two different ways, both are canon to the original story in their own way.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Agreed with AKM Sama. Also, the existence of "Anime only characters" has no relevance about a series canon; it's more about the context. Gregory is a minor character whose existence neither contributes nor contradicts anything regarding plot. So him appearing in Super doesn't make Super non-canon nor does it make the Anime canon. Filler doesn't automatically make it non-canon; filler that's often added in Manga to Anime adaptations is usually non canon, but even original canon manga can have content described as "Filler". Filler is just a fancy word for side quest, which Copy Vegeta may not be important to plot, but he's still technically part of the canon. "Filler has often been used for RPGs where you have to do certain tasks before you can get into the main quest.

Also, Bardock isn't the best example; he was always a canon character, we just don't know much about his story in the original manga. But the Broly movie recently made it and it differs greatly from the Toei Verse version. Tarble is now technically a canon character given his recent mention, but "Yo Son Goku and his Friends Return" is not. Bardock's gang are also canon characters now, but it's just we only recently met the canon incarnations. I recall they've yet to actually meet him as far as Super and the Broly movie are concerned.

And that's not at all the sole reason GT is non-canon to the original Manga. GT is non-canon for many reasons, but is a canon sequel to the original DBZ Anime. And the primary reason why it's non-canon now is Toriyama himself confirming it's non-canon. I forgot where the article was, but there was an article explaining the Anime adaptations, movies, and GT are all part of an alternate continuity made back in 2013. GT is called "The Grand Story side" due to it being considered the most important non-canon work. "Story side", "alternate reality", or "parallel universe" are all common TV Tropes of an author calling a work non-canon. And it's not solely because of Cooler appearing in GT, but rather many other movie and filler characters appearing in other movies and fillers throughout the Animation. And the Z Fighters outright recognizing them defeated villains.

It's different in Super's case, when ever a character who was originally Anime only appears, they appear to be either on the sidelines not referencing any incidents from the Anime. Or are introduced as new characters. There's also a big difference between non-canon characters and non-canon versions of canon characters. Super is the primary canon regardless of Anime or Manga; but their are two canons technically speaking. The two movies BoG and RoF are non-canon and neither are GT or Kai.

 

[Missy0124]

AKM sama

We have no context to how descriptive the notes are which is important considering the fact we are treating it as canon.

How can we dictate a canon we have no idea of the context for.

Toriyama does not write super he writes footnotes that toei and toyotaro follow and adapt into their own stories.

If you read the op and you could probably figure out the purpose of the thread.

DarkDragonMedeus

The importance of a character means nothing when we are talking about canon.

Can you find a article of a creditable source that states toriyama mentioned the existence of extended universe.

GT Was never stated non canon it was stated to be a grand side story.

There is no in universe context or author statements saying the tarble mentioned is a different version as such you are just making assumptions.

Cooler was on the sidelines for the entirety of the super 17 arc and was only just a cameo and was relatively unimportant to the plot of that arc so what makes him any different from the gregory cameo in the bog arc.

Actually the broly movie simply adapted from minus's interpretation of bardock and added very little to his established character from that manga.

Filler is not a fancy word for side quests it is actually arcs or content added by the anime studios to fill up time until the manga is ahead of them in terms of production.

 

[AKM sama]

I still don't get the purpose of this thread. The fact is no matter how you slice it, Toriyama wrote the story of DBS, and since we don't know what he wrote, we consider both versions of his story canon.

Toriyama did not write GT, Movies, Heroes, etc. therefore they are not canon. Simple.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Toriyama also did nothing with GT but animate it. Had no involvement in the plot or story. Also as I said above, "Grand Side Story" is just a fancy way of saying it's the Ultimate Non-canon work. Authors often use "Side Story" as a synonym for different canons.

@AKM Sama, the OP has had a history of making threads that made no sense. I think we should just close the thread.

 

[Missy0124]

AKM sama


Simplistically put this thread was made to question the current canon that the wiki implements

Toriyama does write super directly so the claim that he writes it is false.


He did approve of and monitor the first part of gt and designed a number of character designs for the show as well.


DarkDragonMedeus


Side Story does not equal non canon a canon example of a side story can be found in the boss rabbit portion of the pilaf arc.


You have a source to the claim you made on there being a extended universe.

How does my threads make zero sense i would love to see a explanation as to why.

You never addressed my points on tarble among other things.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

In this thread people are talking about "Grand Side Story" as meaning outside the main timeline. He would have called it "Sequel" if it was truly canon. Not side story. this page mentions common definitions for alternate universe or side story. The spinoff where Yamcha becomes to protagonists was also called a "Side Story" based on the exact same context as GT.

And no, Bardock's version in the movie differs greatly from the original Toei version. Such as the fact that Gine never appeared in the original and it was assumed Fasha was Goku's mother. They also made Broly the same age as Vegeta instead of Goku's age. And Bardock himself sent Goku to protect humanity rather than him being forced there against Bardock's will by King Vegeta. I actually did explain the Tarble stuff, if you scrolled up. Broly is older in Super than he was in Toei.

Also, filler is a common word used in general purposes; not just added content from manga to anime. In video games and movies, the content parts that have nothing to do with the main plot are often referred to as fillers. It is possible for fillers to be canon or non-canon and as said above, even original manga parts can have content described as "Filer". This is the actual definition of the word filler, not something exclusive.

Fasha and other characters are based on their non-canon Toei versions and we've yet to make their canon versions which were introduced after their non-canon versions. There is nothing contradicted in the scaling for that continuity. The continuities are separate and we just gave you multiple explanations.

 

[Missy0124]

DarkDragonMedeus


It matters none on how other people interpret a statement.

Alternative universe is not the same as a side story as like i said side stories can be canon

I Never said bardock is the same character in minus as he is in the father of goku special.

I Actually said the broly movie added very little to minus's interpretation of the character.


You did not explain tarble being mentioned you simply assumed it is a different version without any evidence.

I Am using filler in it's literal meaning as i explained before so it matters none on how other people use the term.

Actually bardock sent goku to earth cause of the fact he had a hunch freeza was coming to kill them so no he did not sent goku to earth to defend it.

I Simply mentioned bardock's crew due to the fact they appear in the super manga which contradicts the notion of them being non canon and it also contradicts the scaling and profile fasha has on the site.

Goku was not sent to earth against bardock's will in the toei anime in fact bardock cared none for his offspring in the toei anime.

Vegeta's age compared to goku was not elaborated on in canon so the fact they made broly the same age contradicts nothing.