A couple definition topics

[Wanderer]

What kind of cool-sounding name might be given to the Hero power level category above Cosmic (which I'd say can be roughly set at 1000 cp): Ultra ? Mega ? Godlike ? Super-Cosmic ? High-Powered Cosmic ? Fat Crackling Cosmic Power of the Gods ? (maybe this might even warrant a poll)

 

What quick (disdvantage-describing) definition might be used for the attitude/reputation of a superhuman that thinks mutants/psis/superhumans should not be subject to the normal human social contract and/or should be protected by society's persecution and harassment, by (almost) any means necessary, legal or not (for discussion's sake, let's say the threshold point between (anti)hero and villain is whether the character is willing to harm innocents to accomplish the goal). This does not necessarily mean the character thinks superhumans should rule humanity. Mutant/Superhuman Supremacist ? Separatist ? Radical Activist ? Vigilante ? (neutral-sounding label; no "antisocial", "psychopath", or "terrorist"). Your average Magneto or Teragen.

[Haerandir]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

For the former, I might go with Deific, or maybe Paramount. Or Excessive, but I expect that's not what you're looking for...

 

For the latter, I'd almost certainly go with Metahuman Supremacist (or whatever his chosen group is). I know the negative connotations are probably a little stronger than you'd like, but they are proposing that a minority group be granted superior rights under the law to everyone else, and supremacist is probably the only common-use term that implies that effectively. Certainly, that's how others would describe him if they didn't want to use a term that was more pejorative, which would make it an appropriate Reputation. He might consider himself a Metahuman Activist or Liberator, though. Even just a 'Metahumanist'. I definitely think it makes sense to include the name of his chosen group, in any case. He'd want to avoid being confused for a garden-variety terrorist or bigot as much as possible. After all, terrorists and racists are BAD people.

 

I wish I could think of a good way to coin a whole new term for him to use to describe himself. He might even try to avoid labels that describe his views directly. Might just consider himself a visionary.

[nexus]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

He would probably call himself a visionary or idealist. Other would call him, at best, a Supremcist. He's not a Seperatist since that would epouse that humans and not co exist at all or to minimal level. Mal was largely a seperatist at heart (though he clearly thought the Nova state was superior). This character seems to desire that, lets call them metahumans, have none of the limitations of humans of society, but still exist within it and, I assume, enjoy its comforts (technology, companionship, etc). They could not be held responsible for their actions by humans. That would, IMO, make for supremcist even if the group in question didn't "rule" per se.

[Wanderer]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

Supremacist might be a good idea, except for the fact it may give the idea that one wants to dominate humanity, definitely supervillain territory. True, wishing to be in society but not subject to its rules, or putting the welfare of your chosen group above the same rules is a somewhat "superior" position, but there's a definite difference between wishing superhumans to be feudal lords and having the equivalent of diplomatic immunity. I wished for a term that would cover that murky area between antihero and villain, Geryon of the Teragen and Magneto setting up Genosha (by the way, are they Supremacists or Separatists ?) I wished a quick, evocative label one may use again and gain, like Vigilante Mentality.

 

In summation, I'm trying to find a simple, catch-word or -phrase definition for having the broad equivalent of Teragen ideology and MO, in terms of Hero Psychological and Social Disdvantages.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

For one, try Plot Device.... er, I mean \... Cosmic is the best descriptor. Maybe Ultra-Cosmic? Or 'beyond Cosmic'. Or just Upper Tier Cosmic.

 

 

For two.... hrm. I'm thinking something relating to class/caste systems, or maybe Metacentric. Tough question though.

[Gary]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

I always used 'Uber' for the most powerful metahumans.

[nexus]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

That's the thing though. When you are effectively immune to the rules of society you DO dominate it. You just don't have to worry about the responsiblity of such a position. When you can do anything you want to another group, without fear or repercussions, you do dominate them. Even if you don't "rule" them in the formal sense of word. "You Baselines can do anything you want. Until I choose otherwise"

[Wanderer]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

For one' date=' try Plot Device.... er, I mean \... Cosmic is the best descriptor. Maybe Ultra-Cosmic? Or 'beyond Cosmic'. Or just Upper Tier Cosmic. [/quote']

 

Nahh, to get Plot Device status, you need at least 2000 pts., if not more (see: the Examiner, in GC). At 1000 pts, you are still in PC/"combat-beatable" NPC (Silver Surfer, Superman, Quasar, Thor). Plot Device NPC is where you need trickery, special gimmicks or weakness exploitation (Galactus). That's the category above the one we 're dscussing

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

Nahh' date=' to get Plot Device status, you need at least 2000 pts., if not more (see: the Examiner, in GC). At 1000 pts, you are still in PC/"combat-beatable" NPC (Silver Surfer, Superman, Quasar, Thor). Plot Device NPC is where you need trickery, special gimmicks or weakness exploitation (Galactus). That's the category above the one we 're dscussing [/quote']

 

As I was reading it, you were defining Cosmic as ~1000, and 'ultra' as more powerful than that...

 

Right. The middle, between earthshaking and galaxy destroying.

 

Seriously, SS and Supes are the definition of Cosmic. Anyone weaker is 'just' a high powered super. (Ultrahuman?)

[Wanderer]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

That's the thing though. When you are effectively immune to the rules of society you DO dominate it. You just don't have to worry about the responsiblity of such a position. When you can do anything you want to another group' date=' without fear or repercussions, you do dominate them. Even if you don't "rule" them in the formal sense of word. "You Baselines can do anything you want. Until I choose otherwise"[/quote']

 

It is effective domination, in a sense. However, there are significative differences: ruling makes you able to issue an order, and expect to be obeyed. With legal immunity, you have to intimidate everyone in obeying, every time. To make a comparison, cfr. Darth Vader, second-in-command overlord of the tyrannical Empire, and (Dark-Side-sliding) Jedi Anakin Skywalker, empowered to lightsaber-slash/forceTK-crush/forcelightning-fry any annoying native whenever he feels like it. There's a difference. Seeking for arbitrary ruling gives a much more definite "evil" feeling than questing for "licence to kill" (it depends on how you use it: cfr. a diplomat, James Bond, or a gunslinger in Wild West).

[Wanderer]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

As I was reading it, you were defining Cosmic as ~1000, and 'ultra' as more powerful than that...

 

Right. The middle, between earthshaking and galaxy destroying.

 

Seriously, SS and Supes are the definition of Cosmic. Anyone weaker is 'just' a high powered super. (Ultrahuman?)

 

I heartily agree with you, except Hero sets Cosmic at 700, and that's not the right amount for properly doing a decent "true" cosmic super PC/NPC like SS, Supes, or Thor (unless one has much more munchkin-fu than I'm able to visualize, and believe me, I've tried So I was looking for a somewhat cooler semi-official name than "1000 Cosmic".

[nexus]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

It is effective domination' date=' in a sense. However, there are significative differences: ruling makes you able to issue an order, and expect to be obeyed. With legal immunity, you have to intimidate everyone in obeying, every time. To make a comparison, cfr. Darth Vader, second-in-command overlord of the tyrannical Empire, and (Dark-Side-sliding) Jedi Anakin Skywalker, empowered to lightsaber-slash/forceTK-crush/forcelightning-fry any annoying native whenever he feels like it. There's a difference. Seeking for arbitrary ruling gives a much more definite "evil" feeling than questing for "licence to kill" (it depends on how you use it: cfr. a diplomat, James Bond, or a gunslinger in Wild West).[/quote']

 

Well, that's a matter of opinion.

 

And always liked the Term "Omega Class" for exceptionally powerful superhuman beings. Cosmic is good, Demigod, maybe?

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

I heartily agree with you' date=' except Hero sets Cosmic at 700, and that's not the right amount for properly doing a decent "true" cosmic super PC/NPC like SS, Supes, or Thor (unless one has much more munchkin-fu than I'm able to visualize, and believe me, I've tried So I was looking for a somewhat cooler semi-official name than "1000 Cosmic".[/quote']

 

It won't stretch to Pre-Crisis Superman (who is easily 2.5k [going by the 3+k write up in the GNBoRH and turning the 1.1k flight power into a megascale equivalent] [although a bit of munchkin fu can drag that down, it'll still be huge] [okay, there is hideous cheese that can get him down very low, but it's hideous cheese]), but the other two it shouldn't be impossible for.

 

And even Superman has been (is? not sure) at 'mere' cosmic power levels.

[TheEmerged]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

RE: Plot Device Only 2000? My Dr. Destroyer rewrite clocks well over this before perks...

[Haerandir]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

It is effective domination' date=' in a sense. However, there are significative differences: ruling makes you able to issue an order, and expect to be obeyed. With legal immunity, you have to intimidate everyone in obeying, every time. To make a comparison, cfr. Darth Vader, second-in-command overlord of the tyrannical Empire, and (Dark-Side-sliding) Jedi Anakin Skywalker, empowered to lightsaber-slash/forceTK-crush/forcelightning-fry any annoying native whenever he feels like it. There's a difference. Seeking for arbitrary ruling gives a much more definite "evil" feeling than questing for "licence to kill" (it depends on how you use it: cfr. a diplomat, James Bond, or a gunslinger in Wild West).[/quote']

 

I understand that he believes that himself, and that you, who have perfect information about what's going on inside his head, know whether or not he's sincere. I don't think such a fine distinction will be apparent, or meaningful, to the public. Which is why I suggested separating his reputation from his self-image. People don't just react to what other people do and say, they also react to the entire spectrum of their own beliefs, hopes and fears. And those hopes and fears will always include the worst-case scenario as well as the best case. Quite frankly, the worst-case scenario for "metahumans will be granted the right to do whatever they want" is much more compelling than the best case, particularly once it's condensed down to a head shot and a 30-second sound bite.

[Logan D. Hurricanes]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

I think as humans we would definitely need to classify such beings should they exist. I can see countless arguments in congress over such definitions and how they should be applied. Never really sat down and thought about it, though. I would have to start by asking what a "cosmic" level means, exactly. We throw it around a lot here, but we usually still provide examples to define by example. Still, there are definitely questions.

 

For example:

Cosmic Heroes (DC)

-Superman

-Green Lantern

-Martian Manhunter

 

Would the Flash qualify? Points wise, he’s possibly the most expensive character there. (Not counting munchy megascale discounts.) Also, he is the fastest being alive. Anywhere. As fast as he is, though, he is limited to planetary travel (without external aid). Certain common traits of the cosmics are absent. He has no:

*Energy Manipulation/projection

*Top level damage capacity (single attack)

*Top level damage soaking (main defense=avoidance)

*Life support (especially pertaining to space travel)

*Flight

[[While these powers are not the sole definition, of course, they are so common that their absence is a glaring note on their record come cosmic battles.]]

 

Would Wonder Woman qualify? She’s only a step down in terms of power in relation to the others, but she is a step down. And besides, she’s a woman. (Kidding!) And again, that energy manipulation is glaringly absent.

 

More example:

Cosmic Heroes (Mrvl)

-Silver Surfer

-Thor

-Dr. Strange

 

Would Professor X qualify? Points wise, he’s possibly the most expensive character there. (Not counting munchy megascale discounts.) But he does for telepathy what the Flash does for speed. His powers can affect the planet. He’s frighteningly vulnerable, though. He has no:

*Top level damage soaking (Or even mid level!)

*Life support (especially pertaining to space travel)

*Flight

 

Would the Hulk qualify? Points wise, he’s not nearly as expensive as the others, true. But he is the benchmark of all things strong, and those that qualify as stronger are almost always labeled cosmic in and of themselves. He has the damage capacity and damage soaking of the cosmics.

 

Hmm, I had a point here…I guess all I’m trying to say is that I’d like to see a written definition of what entails a cosmic level character. Regarding nomenclature, perhaps then cosmic is a term that should be relegated to the most overwhelmingly powerful: Galactus, for example.

 

Some terms that could be used, in no definite order:

 

Planetary.

Supreme.

Cosmic.

Galactic.

Godlike.

Infinite.

 

Of course there are always the more classical classifications:

 

Class 1, 2, 3 (you see where this is going)

Class A, B, C, etc.

Class Alpha, Beta, Gamma, etc.

 

Or a random adjective based system using

 

Para-, meta-, super-, ultra-, magna-, mega-, omni-

 

This is all personal musings, of course. Make of it what you will. I’m eager for continued discussion on the topic.

[Haerandir]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

Actually, taking another pass at the power level question, I do think there's a lot to be said for the Wildstorms answer: Name the highest class of supers after the first or most powerful member of the type. That's the origin of the "Majestic" class in that universe, after all.

[Ghost Face]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

That's the thing though. When you are effectively immune to the rules of society you DO dominate it. You just don't have to worry about the responsiblity of such a position. When you can do anything you want to another group' date=' without fear or repercussions, you do dominate them. Even if you don't "rule" them in the formal sense of word. "You Baselines can do anything you want. Until I choose otherwise"[/color']

 

I don't think having the ability or power to dominate society means you do dominate it. Someone with that power level may have the attitude of Galactus. He could do his own thing according to his motivations and desires, and if that includes domination, well...

 

I would consider someone more powerful than cosmic, god-like or demi-god.

[nexus]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

I don't think having the ability or power to dominate society means you do dominate it. Someone with that power level may have the attitude of Galactus. He could do his own thing according to his motivations and desires, and if that includes domination, well...

 

No, I didn't mean that a specific being with a high power would dominate society due to their power level if they didn't desire it, but that any group with complete carte blanche to do whatever they want, whenever they want with no repercussions (except I guess what other members of their group choose to impose) as this character believes metahumans should have effectively dominate their society even if some of them do not act on it. If for no other reason than sheer intimidation value. Having superior rights makes you and your group the "masters" of those that don't have such rights not matter how prettily they dress it up. If they abuse that position is up to the individual.

[Wanderer]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

I understand that he believes that himself' date=' and that you, who have perfect information about what's going on inside his head, know whether or not he's sincere. I don't think such a fine distinction will be apparent, or meaningful, to the public. Which is why I suggested separating his reputation from his self-image. People don't just react to what other people do and say, they also react to the entire spectrum of their own beliefs, hopes and fears. And those hopes and fears will always include the worst-case scenario as well as the best case. Quite frankly, the worst-case scenario for "metahumans will be granted the right to do whatever they want" is much more compelling than the best case, particularly once it's condensed down to a head shot and a 30-second sound bite.[/quote']

 

That's why I wholeheartedly agree that distinguishing self-image (AKA Psych Lim) from Reputation/Social Limitation is a good thing. For the latter, well, probably "Mutant Supremacist" is the gentlest label he's going to catch from the public, quickly sliding down to "bigot", "vigilante", and, most likely of all, "terrorist", the first time he's going to use force to affirm his goals. Tha's fine.

 

As regards "self-image", however, I don't think "supremacist" would be appropriate, since it evokes (to me, at least) advocacy of racist "Jim Crow" political oppression and domination of one group on another. The kind of "superhumans should be unbound from human laws" or "mutants should be protected from human persecution and harassment by any means necessary" ideology we're discussing may range from separatism to metahuman "wild west" anarchism to "noblesse oblige" legal immunity, but it evokes rather different mental self-labels: "revolutionary", "crusader", "protector", "freedom fighter", "liberator", "activist", "champion", "advocate", each catches a piece, but it's difficult to sum them up in a cool-sounding catchphrase (like Fearlessly Heroic or Vigilante Mentality) that would sum them up in one Psych Lim or two, and evoke the correct idea of the character's mentality.

 

That's why I summoned the present thread, of course

[Mutant for Hire]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

"Power Gamer"

"Munchkin"

"GM Fiat"

[Wanderer]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

I would have to start by asking what a "cosmic" level means' date=' exactly. [/quote']

 

Ok, I try to pick up the challenge, by starting to examine the features of the classic "cosmic" characters you mention: Superman, Green Lantern (and his marvel clones), Martian Manhunter, Silver Surfer, Thor, Dr. Strange, and the near misses (Flash, WW, Prof. X, Hulk).

 

We have:

 

* Top level Super-Strength (or a Top level VPP)

* Top level Energy Manipulation/Projection and/or Telekinesis

* Top level damage capacity (single attack)

* Top level damage soaking (and healing/regeneration or at least one exotic defense: life support may qualify)

* Strong Enhanced Senses (either super-strong normal ones, or cosmic/mystic/mental awareness)

* Nearly-Total Life Support

* Powerful Movement Powers, always including Flight (paired to at least one of Megascale Flight/Teleportation, EDM, FTL)

* Innate Superpowers (or one all-powerful Focus)

* At least one additional power type among: mentalism, super-speed, metamorphing, matter manipulation, body control/biomanipulation, or improvement of either Sense or Movement Powers to Top level.

* Any or all of the other requirements may be fulfilled through a single VPP

[Haerandir]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

As regards "self-image", however, I don't think "supremacist" would be appropriate, since it evokes (to me, at least) advocacy of racist "Jim Crow" political oppression and domination of one group on another. The kind of "superhumans should be unbound from human laws" or "mutants should be protected from human persecution and harassment by any means necessary" ideology we're discussing may range from separatism to metahuman "wild west" anarchism to "noblesse oblige" legal immunity, but it evokes rather different mental self-labels: "revolutionary", "crusader", "protector", "freedom fighter", "liberator", "activist", "champion", "advocate", each catches a piece, but it's difficult to sum them up in a cool-sounding catchphrase (like Fearlessly Heroic or Vigilante Mentality) that would sum them up in one Psych Lim or two, and evoke the correct idea of the character's mentality.

 

That's why I summoned the present thread, of course

 

Well, obviously he won't think of himself as a supremacist, unless he's cornered by someone with a dictionary and a politcal science textbook. They might be able to get him to concede that, from a certain perspective, in a very limited sense, his views could be construed as 'supremacist', but obviously that's not actually 'accurate' in his opinion. I think your best bet is Psych. Lim.: "Metahuman Rights Visionary". Of course none of those other labels would apply, from his perspective. All of those terms would naturally be inadequate to describe his superior values, even the ones with positive connotations, as they were coined by 'old-style' humans to describe 'old-style' human behavior. "We are the future, Charles, not them!"

 

Sorry, got a little caught up in the Magneto rhetoric for a second, there.

 

In any case, in practical terms, I agree with Nexus as to them actually being a ruling caste, whether they admit it or not (or even realize it). It's pretty clear that anyone with carte blanche to do as they please, and the power to back it up, will effectively become the ruler in any society composed of more restricted individuals. If only because all of their statements and actions would be backed by the implied (or even just perceived) threat of force. If you get right down to it, the Jedi Knights were the true rulers of the Old Republic, for instance. Sure, they said all the right things, and 99.9999% of them were honestly motivated by altruism, and they were pretty tolerant of backtalk, but none of that changes the fact that they called the shots. But, of course, your idealistic visionary seems like the sort who would be impervious to that line of reasoning.

[Wanderer]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

Excellent ideas. I'd rep you, if someone would explain me how

 

Well' date=' obviously he won't think of himself as a supremacist, unless he's cornered by someone with a dictionary and a politcal science textbook. They might be able to get him to concede that, from a certain perspective, in a very limited sense, his views could be construed as 'supremacist', but obviously that's not actually 'accurate' in his opinion. I think your best bet is Psych. Lim.: "Metahuman Rights Visionary". Of course none of those other labels would apply, from his perspective. All of those terms would naturally be inadequate to describe his superior values, even the ones with positive connotations, as they were coined by 'old-style' humans to describe 'old-style' human behavior. "We are the future, Charles, not them!" [/quote']

 

Then I think that we might tentatively settle for Psych Lim: "Metahuman Rights Crusader" (Common); Reputation: "Metahuman Supremacist", Hunted: Human Supremacist Group. Probably also Vigilante Mentality (Common). One or two "heroic" or "noble villain" Psych Lims (Honorable, limited CvK, Protective of Innocents) to rein him in, for an antihero. Probably Hunted: Law Enforcement. Likely, Enraged: when methumans are threatened or harmed (Uncommon). Also likely, Arrogant, Overconfident, and/or Vengeful. And, of course, Distinctive Features: Mutant/Nova/Psi.

 

Sorry, got a little caught up in the Magneto rhetoric for a second, there.

 

I think Magneto citations are *extremely* appropriate here, as he singlehandely created the character type we're discussing, both in the antihero and supervillain versions.

 

In any case, in practical terms, I agree with Nexus as to them actually being a ruling caste, whether they admit it or not (or even realize it). It's pretty clear that anyone with carte blanche to do as they please, and the power to back it up, will effectively become the ruler in any society composed of more restricted individuals. If only because all of their statements and actions would be backed by the implied (or even just perceived) threat of force. If you get right down to it, the Jedi Knights were the true rulers of the Old Republic, for instance. Sure, they said all the right things, and 99.9999% of them were honestly motivated by altruism, and they were pretty tolerant of backtalk, but none of that changes the fact that they called the shots. But, of course, your idealistic visionary seems like the sort who would be impervious to that line of reasoning.

 

Most likely, one such character would ultimately argue that, if it comes to that, setting up a Jedi Knight-like unofficial ruling elite and instilling it a strong "noblesse oblige" sense of duty and responsible behavior would be a quite appropriate solution, and allowing metahumans to blossom their full evolutionary potential is much more important than propping up obsolete and inadequate human notions of democracy, equality and the rule of "monkey" laws, which the sheer pressure of evolution will sweep away anyhow.

[nexus]

Re: A couple definition topics

 

Excellent ideas. I'd rep you, if someone would explain me how

 

Go to the post you wish to rep and click on the "scales" icon in the upper right hand corner of the screen.