Quote:
Originally Posted by Otaku
This discussion may potentially be veering too far off topic. I think they actually could be made quite relevant though, so tbrock1031, I'll let you choose whether to pursue it here. Part of this thread has been trying to get a working game world out of this blended and revised Marvel history and characters. One can have the "soap opera" style antics actually prove relevant and be ignored, appropriately reacted to or overreacted to by the background characters (let alone featured ones). Similarly, oversimplified ideals and unintentional hypocrisy. All of this could I think manifest as a wide variety of Disadvantages. Frankly I quite fancy the usual Social Stigma prescribed to "mutants" in the MU be allowed to represent those that hate/fear mutants and those sick of what so many have done in the name of "mutant kind": not the obvious acts of super-villainy, but the little things like "Hi, because we homo superior can't trust you homo sapiens to handle things, we've formed a "mutants only" paramilitary strike force that operates in secret that will police our own and spread unity between our two kinds... again, by being "mutants only". Tootles!"
|
In the Reboot, I haven't prescribed any Social Stigmas to mutants as yet. Should they have SS(Minority Group)? Perhaps, but the only one to have it so far is Scarlet Witch, and she's not just a mutant but a Gypsy.
I've also, if you read the X-Men entry back in... oh, I'll find the post later ... you'll see that the (original five) X-Men are operating in public rather than secret, are attending college at ESU, and have offered membership to Spider-Man, who is distinctly not a mutant (he's remaining a 'reserve' member, though). ;) The Reboot!X-Men aren't quite so "mutants only", though mutants still dominate the title.
The Xavier Institute for Gifted Youngsters still has a limited enrollment, albeit more in the "hundred students" than "fifteen students", but the requirements for enrollment are now "superhuman" rather than "mutant". The fact that most super-powered teenagers are mutants still means that 95% of the student body are mutants or second-generation supers rather than mutates. (They also offer adult enrollment for those who just developed powers.) Xavier's also went public as a "Mutant High".
And then there's the bigots like Gyrich (Director of SHIELD), who clearly have Intolerance.
Still, this brings me to a question that needs to be answered:
"Mutants" are those with an active X-gene which grants them powers. "Mutates" are those who were modified in some other manner to grant powers.
What's a good term for second- or third-generation folks who have the same powers as their mutate forebears? They lack the X-gene, so "mutant" doesn't seem to fit, but nor are they really "mutates", as they inherited their powers.
A few second-generation examples from the comics:
Siryn, Theresa Rourke Cassidy, daughter of Sean Cassidy/Banshee. Both father and daughter have the X-gene, so both are considered mutants. Same with Nightcrawler and his biological mother, Mystique.
Franklin Richards, son of Reed Richards/Mr. Fantastic and Susan Storm Richards/Invisible Woman. Parents are mutates, but Franklin's powers (in all of his incarnations) are vastly different than either parent. Furthermore, Franklin has been shown to have the X-gene, so he counts as a mutant.
Spider-Girl, May Parker II, daughter of Peter Parker/Spider-Man and Mary Jane Watson-Parker (most notably the M2 timeline/imprint, but from what I hear the pre-teen version has been reinstated back into the mainstream universe). Powers identical to her father, who is not a mutant. No X-gene involved.