It's not so much that good guys don't die in Bleach.
It's that Bleach has been on a trend where the villains are being curbstomped.
Yammy? Curbed.
Stark? Curbed.
Ulquiorra? Curbed, but through a power-up, which doesn't make him look quite as bad.
Nnoitra (Arguably the first, that I recall anyway)? The moment the fight turned serious, he was curbed.
The Fullbringers? All curbed (Though really, Kubo set this arc up for this to be the only resolution that could be attained).
Aizen? Curbed (This is probably the worst example, with the hype Aizen had gotten, Ichigo curbstomping him left a bad taste in my mouth).
I don't really care for stories where the heroes ultimately easily curbstomp the villains.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
http://www.mangareader.net/94-790-9/bleach/chapter-336.htmlShe should not have survived.
So what does her homey say she has to do to keep her from dying? Heal up her intestines and abdomen so Rangiku can breathe:
http://www.mangareader.net/94-790-18/bleach/chapter-336.html
The healing essentially works like the "repair" wand thingie is Star Trek: it regenerates the tissues. Essentially, that means you could save anyone as long as their brain stem was still around and you can heal them fast enough before too much cell death occurs to keep up with it.
started out as partly a flashback what with the words and all, then it moved onto the fight between Ichigo and Ginjo (if you want to call it a fight; seems like Kubo left out a bit of a chunk since Ichigo didn't hurt in the last chapter and yet when it showed him first in this one, he had some blood on him. then again it could be Ginjo's).
okay, so Ginjo met Tsukishima when he was kid. interesting, but Tsukishima kinda killed it a bit when he suddenly pulled an Aizen and started acting with visible emotion. rage to be precise, just like Aizen did when Gin turned on him.
Originally posted by FinalAnswer
Where did I say that Bleach and Naruto needed to kill off good characters left and right? That's not very realistic either, considering how powerful the good characters are, but think, for a moment. When was the last time in Naruto that a good guy, not a face heel turn villain, died? Jiraiya? When was the last time a good character in Bleach died?GinNever? It's one thing to have a manga that you need to have suspension of disbelief, but when you have a manga that's fairly violent and geared towards mature audiences, you don't write it like it's My Little Pony. Characters, especially ones that have remained in the manga for a long time, surviving despite the stupid situations they're in (Pain attacking Konoha, Fake Karakura) ruins the plot.Characters should die when the situation demands it. Good guys should have died when Pain attacked Konoha, same with Fake Karakura. To make matters worse, these characters often receive mortal injuries, but they're fine, yet the bad guys take similar, if not lesser injuries, and it's game over. That's stupid, that's little kid material. It's hard to take these manga seriously when they pull stuff like that. Take this arc in Bleach, for example. I correctly guessed everything that would happen. I knew from the get go, nobody good would die (Last minute recanting villains don't count), the fights would generally be curb-stomps for the good guys, yada yada yada. Why? Because that's the Bleach formula. It stagnates. When you've seen countless times how the good guy either stomps on his opponent, or the villain seemingly kills/beats him, yet next chapter shrugs off the attack/heals, it ruins the suspense, since everything's so predictable, not to mention the horrible effect it has on character development, or lack thereof.
tl;dr, leaving all your characters alive forever because plot armor is something I would expect from a children's story, not a manga meant for teenagers/young adults.
👆
What the **** Dadudemon?
Originally posted by dadudemon
I disagree. Nagato was never a bad guy. He was a good guy the entire time."Kill some to save the most and prosper the most" was the theory of both Nagato and Danzo. They were not bad guys, at all. Both realized their approach to how to bring about good was wrong at the end of their lives, sure...but they thought that what they were doing was. Nagato's plan actually wasn't that bad: force the nations to stop fighting to end the cycle of pain through the threat of "nuclear" weapons destroying them all. His plan was basically "M.A.D." MAD just so happens to have been the plan they were using already but in a lesser form: the biju. Was his plan all that different? No. Not at all. His plan was just more direct with the MAD-ness and would force everyone to have to get along.
Bleach: no way that Starrk was a bad guy. Same with Harribel. They were good guys through and through. Ginjo? Still a good guy. He did his whole thing to get Ichigo to his side and get his revenge on SS for their underhanded/evil controlling tactics. Hardly a bad guy. He saw the "light" that Ichigo provided at the end of their fight, sure. He become a "genuine" good guy at that point.
You seem to be misunderstand use of the word good guy. Good guys, in the sense that we're talking about, are those who actively side with the protagonist and against the antagonist. Nagato did not do this until his heel faced turn.
Not that it matters. I can't even say Nagato was a good guy.
"Oh, you love him? Well **** you! Die *****! Peace! My Pain is greater than yours! ROAR!!!!"
And Danzo was deplorable.
As for Bleach: Starrk and Harribel were planning to kill all who opposed Aizen. This included our protagonists, if it ever came to it. Starrk was merely being lazy with his fights. He did show however that he did not care to kill them. Of course, going by Bleach's own words, Both sides are evil.
You can't really say an individual character was evil, even if the side he chose was.
Care to name Stark's evil traits? The only reason he started really trying to kill his opponents is because he didn't want to see any more of his team-mates die (And indeed was disturbed that he was the only one who seemed to give a shit about Barragan's death).
Edit: Not that I am trying to defend dadudemon's interesting choices for characters who are "good guys"...
Originally posted by NemeBro
It's not so much that good guys don't die in Bleach.It's that Bleach has been on a trend where the villains are being curbstomped.
Yammy? Curbed.
Yammy kicked everyone's *ss until two healthy captains came along to save the day. He was hardly curb stomped, however: it took a while and he dished out damage. That's not what a curb stomp is.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Stark? Curbed.
I didn't like this outcome. Why did he have to DIE???? Also, he was hardly curb stomped.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Ulquiorra? Curbed, but through a power-up, which doesn't make him look quite as bad.
Ulq curbed everyone by far until Ichigo got his awakening. It was predicted with a foreshadowy statement about how Ichigo's reiatesu sometimes fluctuated above his own. Not a shocker. However, Ulq was WTF pwning everyone and it was fairly bleak. To be honest, I fully expected Ulq to turn to the good side because it got so bad. It was my favorite defeat of a bad guy from that arc.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Nnoitra (Arguably the first, that I recall anyway)? The moment the fight turned serious, he was curbed.
Kenpachi was on the verge of death. Hardly a curb stomp. Kenpachi had to use a 'cheater' technique that he did not want to use just to stay alive. That's the exact opposite of a curb stomp. In order for it to be a curb stomp, it needs to be something similar to what Kuchiki did to Ichigo the first time they fought: that's a curb stomp, sir.
Originally posted by NemeBro
The Fullbringers? All curbed (Though really, Kubo set this arc up for this to be the only resolution that could be attained).
Not all were curbbed. Ikkaku certainly got his *ss beat. Renji, Hitsugya, and Kenpachi curbed, for sure. Kuchiki, Ichigo, and Ikkaku didn't. Rukia doesn't count because her fight was actually a cute-escapade.
Originally posted by NemeBro
Aizen? Curbed (This is probably the worst example, with the hype Aizen had gotten, Ichigo curbstomping him left a bad taste in my mouth).
Aizen was far from Curbed. He curbed everyone. What was the outcome of that fight? Oh, right, Ichigo lost all of his powers and Aizen is still alive and powerful...he's just locked away. That's not a curb stomp, sir. That's a loss, actually: we all know Aizen gets free.
Originally posted by NemeBro
I don't really care for stories where the heroes ultimately easily curbstomp the villains.
I would agree if you actually used the word "curbstomp" correctly. Almost no one you listed actually curb stomped jack sh*t.
Here's a list of actual curb stomps:
Ichigo versus the 3 lieutenants in h2h when he was rescuing Rukia: they were all curbed.
Kuchiki against Ichigo the first time they fought: Ichigo was curbed.
Renji against Dirty Boots: she was curbed.
Aizen versus Ichigo the first time: Ichigo was curbed.
Aizen versus Gin: Gin was curbed.
Ichigo versus those thugs a few chapters ago: Thugs were curbed.
Kenpachi versus Crazy Father Time: curbed.
Hiyori vs. Gin: Gin curb stomped.
Worn out Ichigo vs. Nnoitra: Curb Stomp (capital letters).
Pre-Bankai Komoura and Tousen vs. Kenpachi: Kenpachi curbstomped.
Vizords vs. the crap ton of Gillians: curb stomp.
So, basically, you're confusing "curb stomped" with "simply losing".
Originally posted by Nephthys
👆What the **** Dadudemon?
Responded to it and r*ped him. He wasn't even on base. 🙂
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
You seem to be misunderstand use of the word good guy. Good guys, in the sense that we're talking about, are those who actively side with the protagonist and against the antagonist. Nagato did not do this until his heel faced turn.
You seem to be confusing "good guy" for "protagonist". Good guys are not necessarily protagonists. Some protagonists are bad guys. Sure, the majority of the time, protagonists are the good guys, but that is not always the case.
The antagonist, especially in manga and anime, is not necessarily evil.
And this:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HeroAntagonist
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Not that it matters. I can't even say Nagato was a good guy.
He most certainly was a good guy. He never stopped being good. He just simply changed the ways that he was going about saving the world and chose to rely on Naruto.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
"Oh, you love him? Well **** you! Die *****! Peace! My Pain is greater than yours! ROAR!!!!".
He never once did that, though.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
And Danzo was deplorable.
He is a shinobi: he was a better shinobi than most characters. His tactics, as a necessity HAVE to be underhanded and dishonorable. However, in the end, what he wanted was the same: prosperity for his country. He felt his methods were the best for everyone.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
As for Bleach: Starrk and Harribel were planning to kill all who opposed Aizen. This included our protagonists, if it ever came to it. Starrk was merely being lazy with his fights. He did show however that he did not care to kill them. Of course, going by Bleach's own words, Both sides are evil.
They vouched for Aizen because they thought he represented someone good. A strength they could rely on. Someone to devote your life to. Boy were they wrong. 🙂 The look on Harribel's face when Aizen slashed her: good times. Not as good as Hitsugaya's face...
But I do agree, somewhat, that war is evil. Shinsui is right.
Originally posted by Nephthys
You're being unusually aggressive today DDM. Y so srs?
Actually, no, I'm not being agressive. I'm being really nice. I have thrice edited my posts to not be so derisive. My last line to Nemebro used to read: "Not only do you not know how curb stomped means, you don't know what opposition means, either."
However, I don't want to be mean to Neme because he's not being a douche about anything (at the moment uhuh ) so there's no reason to escalate it.
I believe you're confusing "aggressive" with "posting a lot". That's not the same thing. Though, it isn't mutually exclusive.
Additionally, I told Aura no less than twice that I was willing to change my mind about things we were talking about: the exact opposite of my usual "never changing" approach to discussions.
Originally posted by Nephthys
I don't think anyone claimed Stark was evil, but he was an antagonist.
This.
That was my point. "Arrancar?!?!?!?!" was asked of me when I chose to include it in a list by FinalAnswer. I explained why it could be okay to include Starrk as a "good guy".
Originally posted by dadudemon
Actually, no, I'm not being agressive. I'm being really nice. I have thrice edited my posts to not be so derisive. My last line to Nemebro used to read: "Not only do you not know how curb stomped means, you don't know what opposition means, either."However, I don't want to be mean to Neme because he's not being a douche about anything (at the moment uhuh ) so there's no reason to escalate it.
I believe you're confusing "aggressive" with "posting a lot". That's not the same thing. Though, it isn't mutually exclusive.
Additionally, I told Aura no less than twice that I was willing to change my mind about things we were talking about: the exact opposite of my usual "never changing" approach to discussions.
Fine, let me rephrase: You're being an unusually large smug cock today DDM. Y so cock?
Originally posted by dadudemon
This.That was my point. "Arrancar?!?!?!?!" was asked of me when I chose to include it in a list by FinalAnswer. I explained why it could be okay to include Starrk as a "good guy".
Not being evil doesn't automatically make you good. Stark wasn't villainous but he wasn't an especially good person either. At least, not from anything I can recall.
Originally posted by Nephthys
Fine, let me rephrase: You're being an unusually large smug cock today DDM. Y so cock?
Please point to where I was being smug. I'm okay with labels but I at least want them to be accurate.
Originally posted by Nephthys
Not being evil doesn't automatically make you good.
You might have a point if I had not already mentioned "gray" type characters.
Originally posted by Nephthys
Stark wasn't villainous but he wasn't an especially good person either. At least, not from anything I can recall.
He was good in that he carred about others and did not desire to harm others. All he wanted was company and friendship. At worst, he's autistic. At best, he's a very altruistic character caught up in his desires for companionship.
Originally posted by dadudemon
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HeroAntagonist
I'm well aware of the Hero Antagonist trope. It does not apply here.
Aizen and his allies were planning to do this. They aren't the heroes. Unless you want to defend their actions?
And no, it just being Aizen's idea isn't a defense. The fact that these guys were loyal means they'd participate in the creation of the Royal Key, which involved killing innocent people. They aren't as guilty as Aizen, but guilty they are.
Originally posted by dadudemon
He most certainly was a good guy. He never stopped being good. He just simply changed the ways that he was going about saving the world and chose to rely on Naruto.He never once did that, though.
He destroyed a village. Not because it was necessary for peace. He did it because Tsunade dare had the nerve to call him on his hypocrisy. If being a good guy consisted of the a person doing what they feel in their hearts is right and then said person proceeds to destroy a city filled with innocent people because someone dares to have a different opinion, then I'd rather be a villain.
He did.
Originally posted by dadudemon
He is a shinobi: he was a better shinobi than most characters. His tactics, as a necessity HAVE to be underhanded and dishonorable. However, in the end, what he wanted was the same: prosperity for his country. He felt his methods were the best for everyone.
Danzo is not a shinobi by his own definition. And I could care less what he felt. Actions define a character and by Danzo's actions, he's not a good guy. The manga makes it clear that Danzo was completely in the wrong. He wanted to bring about world peace by putting himself in charge. Funny, Kira tried to do this and everyone thinks he is a villain.
Originally posted by dadudemon
They vouched for Aizen because they thought he represented someone good. A strength they could rely on. Someone to devote your life to.
And they were gonna help him kill 100,000+ people. Such heroes them Hollows are.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Please point to where I was being smug. I'm okay with labels but I at least want them to be accurate.
Welp.... Pretty much the entire post where you 'raped' FinalAnswer. But if you want specifics:
'And yet, each universe has magical healers that can heal wounds. So your argument is still invalid.
"Good guys of magical hearlers that can heal almost any wound. Bad guys don't. Outcome: good guys may be able to save more of their people than the bad guys...it comes with having powers based on altruism rather than selfishness. What does that teach us boys and girls? Being selfish and mean can result in bad stuff."
😆
On top of that, some of the "bad guys" WERE healed and survived from the Fake Town arc. What now, son? 😄'
Generally when you laugh at someone during a debate and offer them cheeky grins, you're being a smug douchebag. Maybe you just have a different idea of smugness though.
Originally posted by dadudemon
You might have a point if I had not already mentioned "gray" type characters.
And you might have a point if we weren't talking about Good Guys dying.
Originally posted by dadudemon
He was good in that he carred about others and did not desire to harm others. All he wanted was company and friendship. At worst, he's autistic. At best, he's a very altruistic character caught up in his desires for companionship.
His main character trait is apathy. I don't recall him being in any way compassionate about others and as Aura pointed out he was part of a plan to murder an entire town of innocent people.
Originally posted by Nephthys
Welp.... Pretty much the entire post where you 'raped' FinalAnswer. But if you want specifics:'And yet, each universe has magical healers that can heal wounds. So your argument is still invalid.
Fact: each universe has magical healers. That's hardly smug. When you complain about good guys being saved from death and demand that they should have died, then you must support that. The reason they survived or wear revived, in both universes, is due to "magical healers". That's not smug: that's a fact. I didn't even present it smugly. In other words, the demands that they good guys die is not supportable when you disregard that the good goods literally have magical healers (and Nagato used a mass magical healing technique that is bordering on god status). What's ACTUALLY the smug position is this:
"It's one thing to have a manga that you need to have suspension of disbelief, but when you have a manga that's fairly violent and geared towards mature audiences, you don't write it like it's My Little Pony. Characters, especially ones that have remained in the manga for a long time, surviving despite the stupid situations they're in (Pain attacking Konoha, Fake Karakura) ruins the plot. "
Hint: I didn't say that.
Originally posted by Nephthys
"Good guys of magical hearlers that can heal almost any wound. Bad guys don't. Outcome: good guys may be able to save more of their people than the bad guys...it comes with having powers based on altruism rather than selfishness. What does that teach us boys and girls? Being selfish and mean can result in bad stuff.😆
On top of that, some of the "bad guys" WERE healed and survived from the Fake Town arc. What now, son? 😄'
That was intended as humor and for him to get a laugh. Hence the smilie at the end.
He was actually "mad bro" and I was trying to be lighthearted about it.
At the end of the day, that is what the shounen mangas are aiming for: teaching us condescending life lessons (only condescending because we are already adults).
Originally posted by Nephthys
Generally when you laugh at someone during a debate and offer them cheeky grins, you're being a smug douchebag. Maybe you just have a different idea of smugness though.
Here's something smug for you:
When you approach someone's post with the "I'm definitely on my period" attitude, obviously, you'll take that person's post as negatively as possible without considering that there are other interpretations or intentions to the original poster's words. In other words, stop approaching posts like you're on your period and think about other interpretations (positive ones) to posts. Like, "he posted that smilie because he intended that to be humor. Definitely not a serious business post."
Instead, you went the opposite and selected for the "rage" interpretation: "ZOMG! He's LAUGHING at someone in a debate! Let's get him! RAAAAAAWR!"
In the future, you should ask first. You should ask, "dadudemon, are you being a jerk or are you being lighthearted? It looks like you're being a jerk, to me." Then I can clarify. Then we can avoid discussions where I point out why you've got a faulty parser when when reading posts.
Originally posted by Nephthys
And you might have a point if we weren't talking about [b]Good Guys dying.[/B]
That's odd, because that's also my exact reply to what you said here:
"Not being evil doesn't automatically make you good."
But my point was that your point is invalid because I already covered the gray area character placement AND I was focusing on the good guys and what defines one.
So this applies to you:
"Not being evil doesn't automatically make you good."
and
"And you might have a point if we weren't talking about Good Guys dying."
and
"You might have a point if I had not already mentioned "gray" type characters."
Go figure.
Originally posted by Nephthys
His main character trait is apathy. I don't recall him being in any way compassionate about others and as Aura pointed out he was part of a plan to murder an entire town of innocent people.
Incorrect: his main character trait is being with someone. Apathy is his secondary character trait and it is actually a superficial one: it's just for show because he really does care.
And following your commander's orders is hardly a good enough reason to call him "evil". He went because he was ordered and he wanted to avoid fighting. He wanted to have friends that could stand his presense and he found them: so he would do as he's ordered so he can keep his friends. Sounds evil, right? RAWR! 😆
Hint: that last statement was intended to be a smug statement. It was to illicit a laugh about how unserious I think this discussion is. Obviously, it doesn't sound evil. Obviously, Starrk's apathy towards Aizen's actions could seem evil. Obviously, none of us are getting ragy. I hope that helps clarify that this is not serious business like you're trying to make it out to be.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Yammy kicked everyone's *ss until two healthy captains came along to save the day. He was hardly curb stomped, however: it took a while and he dished out damage. That's not what a curb stomp is.
He beat up a few lieutenant level fighters.
Wow so impressive.
Byakuya and Kenpachi were toying with him, Kenny didn't even remove his eyepatch.
Then he gets taken out off-screen in a fight that Kenny calls boring as ****.
So curbed.
I didn't like this outcome. Why did he have to DIE???? Also, he was hardly curb stomped.
Kyoraku didn't even have to use his Bankai. Granted, he is one of the few captains with a legit reason not to use his Bankai.
Ulq curbed everyone by far until Ichigo got his awakening. It was predicted with a foreshadowy statement about how Ichigo's reiatesu sometimes fluctuated above his own. Not a shocker. However, Ulq was WTF pwning everyone and it was fairly bleak. To be honest, I fully expected Ulq to turn to the good side because it got so bad. It was my favorite defeat of a bad guy from that arc.
So random power-up after Ichigo dies that crushes the villain without a fight is your favorite defeat of a bad guy?
And you wonder why people criticise your taste.
Kenpachi was on the verge of death. Hardly a curb stomp. Kenpachi had to use a 'cheater' technique that he did not want to use just to stay alive. That's the exact opposite of a curb stomp. In order for it to be a curb stomp, it needs to be something similar to what Kuchiki did to Ichigo the first time they fought: that's a curb stomp, sir.
Aka the moment Kenny fought seriously.
Kenny, while wounded, tore through Nnoitra like paper the moment he decided to... Use two hands on his sword.
The point being that the difference in power wasn't slight, it was large.
Not all were curbbed. Ikkaku certainly got his *ss beat. Renji, Hitsugya, and Kenpachi curbed, for sure. Kuchiki, Ichigo, and Ikkaku didn't. Rukia doesn't count because her fight was actually a cute-escapade.
Ikkaku punched him into submission by being more lucky than a character who has probability manipulation as a power (Or... Something, the kid wonders if it was some limitation on his power he didn't know was there). It wasn't exactly a particularly difficult fight for Ikkaku.
I have yet to read today's Bleach, so can't say on Ichigo.
Kuchiki didn't though, yeah, had a brainfart and forgot him.
Aizen was far from Curbed. He curbed everyone. What was the outcome of that fight? Oh, right, Ichigo lost all of his powers and Aizen is still alive and powerful...he's just locked away. That's not a curb stomp, sir. That's a loss, actually: we all know Aizen gets free.
Yeah... No. Ichigo made him look like a complete joke, with Aizen only not dying due to retarded reality-warping healing factor.
It's a matter of threat, and Aizen turned into a joke during the Deicide arc.
I would agree if you actually used the word "curbstomp" correctly. Almost no one you listed actually curb stomped jack sh*t.
If you want to play semantics, go somewhere else.
You know perfectly well what I meant. Namely that villains in Bleach get their asses pushed in and get made jokes of.
Among other things.
Edit: I guess what I am saying is that rarely could I find myself to begin to care for the resolutions arcs/villains/whatevers in Bleach are given. They tend to be lame.