Submitted by Mike on Fri, 08/29/2003 - 21:42
Posted in
I'm just trying to confirm what the difference between a mutant and a meta-human is. From what I here, a mutant is born with his or her abilities, while a meta-human gained their abilities through some form or another. With that logic
A character like Zailash would be a mutant
But a character like Gabriel would be a meta-human (trying to remember... she gained her power through a meterorite, right?)
What I'm wondering is: A) is what I said above true, and B) does that rule aply to legends, and C) would the proposed bills by the senate be for everybody with special powers, even though it only states meta-humans in the titles? I'm guessing that it does apply to everybody with special powers, but I just want to make sure.
Thanks in advance :D
- Login to post comments
Post to Twitter
Meta-humans vs. mutants
The way I understand it, Meta-Human is the broad, catch-all phrase that includes everyone. Lash would qualify as both a meta and a mutant under this scheme.
So yes. Both the Layman's and Douglass' bills would apply to everyone. Though naturally, I think all of our charecters would have varying opinions on the two main bills being proposed. :)
Meta-humans vs. mutants
Actually, I would be inclined to say that it's possible to be a mutant without being a meta-human. Someone born with a genetic abnormality such as webbed toes or fingers, dwarfism, etc would be considered a mutant. Indeed, these are called genetic mutations in this current day and age.
To my mind, the term 'meta-human' refers to anyone who is 'greater' than human - hence the term 'meta'. :) So anyone with any sort of gift or power that marks them as something other than what most would consider a normal human would be classed as a meta-human. This gift or power may be genetic in nature (ie they were born with it) or it may be due to external influence (for instance, radioactive spider bites ;) ).
This is why I've been using the term meta-human as opposed to mutant. A mutant could be someone without meta powers... whereas a meta could be considered a genetic mutant or not depending on how they acquired their powers.
Meta-humans vs. mutants
Funny you should mention him. I was going to use him as an example, but decided to use characters from the game 8O
So, under what you say Heather, the proposed bills would not neccessarily apply to mutants, just to "meta-humans" which could be regular humans or mutants with special powers. Okay, that makes sense, but what about a mutant who has no special powers but has a mutation that makes him a danger or at least stand out?
Like... say sombody has a hand that was mutated to be sharp like a blade (or something like that :oops: ). Even though he is not a meta-human per say, would he have to register under the bills?
Or am I just complicating things way out of proportion :wink: ?
Meta-humans vs. mutants
Personally, I'd consider somebody with a genetic mutation that gave them a hand that was sharp like a blade to be a meta-human. They may not be able to fly or do other hoopy things, but it is beyond the 'normal' level of mutation (as exampled by webbed fingers, dwarfism, extra kidneys, pointy ears - I know people with all of these). Such a mutation effectively gives them a weapon of which they cannot be disarmed (without extreme measures).
Outside influence doesn't necessarily mean that a person becomes a meta, either. It's possible to fall into a vat of goop and emerge without meta abilities, but still stand out from the crowd due to disfigurement.
So, not all metas are created equal, but for the purposes of Layman's proposed bill I would be inclined to say that it would be worded to encompass the standard 'reasonable man' test - a tenet of most law. Would a 'reasonable man' consider a mutation or an effect of any outside influence to cause the person affected to be considered 'more' than human? If they are born with or gain an ability or function which a non-affected person can't duplicate naturally, and which puts them above other humans (as opposed to just different), then they would be a meta.
Meta-humans vs. mutants
Douglass' bill would be the more likely one to include the reasonable man test. By the way Dave has explained the Layman bill (and I interpret what's been said), everyone who goes off the suppression drug has to register. Then screened for chances of becoming a meta.
Actually, as I type this (yes, I'm doing stream of conciousness posting), neither bill would include any such test. That would be left to the interpretation of the enforcing agency. Of course, whether or not the standard is looser or harsher would depend on the particular administration. It might be possible to interpret both bills as including all 'mutants' (using Heather's definitions) as being covered.
Meta-humans vs. mutants
Ok i've had some thoughts on this whole Meta Human/ Mutant debate and I thought I'd put them up here for people to look over
First I’ll define some terms
Meta-Human: - Any individual who possesses preternatural abilities
Mutant: - A Meta-human whose abilities are present at birth or become active at a defined developmental stage e.g. puberty
Altered Human: - A Meta-human whose abilities become active as a result of a defined environmental event. E.g. Radioactive spider bite
In all known cases Meta-human ability occurs as a result of the active expression of a single gene complex. The activation of this complex results in slight but detectable changes in brain chemistry and structure. These alterations being most active when an individual’s abilities are in use. This is true even in individual with apparently ‘passive’ abilities e.g. preternatural strength or agility in these cases the brain activity changes as the Meta-human exceeds normal human limits.
The requirement for active expression of the gene complex explains the differences between ‘Mutants’ and ‘altered humans’ however altered humans in one generation can give rise to mutants in the next.
The gene complex is present in it’s inactive form in 95%+ of the normal human population. Hence the term Mutant is somewhat incorrect.
Though the complex shows some variation in structure these changes cannot account for the wide range of abilities expressed by Meta humans nor do they account for the apparent correlation between triggering event and expressed abilities in altered humans.
The MSA ‘vaccine’ and the MRA drug both act on the changes in brain structure and chemistry they suppress these changes and in doing so suppress a meta-human’s abilities. Either the drug or the vaccine cannot suppress purely physiological changes.
Except for certain cases where a meta human’s abilities are required to support physiological changes both the vaccine and drug are relatively safe though there are some side effects resulting from tinkering with brain function.
There are no further genetic variations associated with Met-Human activity though various agencies continue to research the matter
Non Human Meta’s possess similar neural structures. In other biological beings the exact make up of these structures may be different but the results are the same. In artificial constructs that exceed known physical law analogus structures appear either by design or chance. However in both biological and mechanical systems preternatural abilities only appear in sentient entities.
Meta-humans vs. mutants
Okay, thanks for clearing that all up guys, it's somthing i've been wondering about for a while :D
(oh, and a special thanks to you, Robin, for suggesting I use internet explorer rather than AOL when I'm posting cause it's much easier to post now :!: )