Remove ads

Firebird, a Worm AU/Xover?

Reader mode
Metroidvania said:
Meanwhile, Lisa's going to have to do some further scouting, and some potential career re-alignment, and see if she wants to risk putting herself underneath the Phoenix's wing in order to keep away from the snake coiled around her ankles..
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It never ended well for those who manipulated the Phoenix. Why should Lisa be immune? Even when Lisa gets out of Coil's thumb, what guarantee do we have she won't be the next one wanting to use Taylor's precog power? With her own Sherlock thing going, she might just get the words to say that convince Taylor. Again, I'm still waiting for the mind punch.


As for Pan Pan, didn't know what to say. Though, the next time the three meet or just Taylor and Amy meet without Vicky may be....bad.
 
Noxturne90 said:
Amy does talk like this has happened before. But what we don't see is how often it has happened before. It could be fairly rare to uncommon, or the other way around. But I'm tempted to believe it err's on the side of the first and not the second.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Actually we do have an idea:

Interlude 2.X Victoria said:
"You want to talk about principles, Glory Girl?" Amy asked, in the most sarcastic tone she could manage, "This is the sixth – sixth! – time you've nearly killed someone. That I know about!"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
chibipoe said:
It's old enough that it would have been around right as Scion showed up, since it aired in like 1982, which means production was underway before that. So, I could see it having a short life and falling into fringe cult following(much like it is now).

The fact that I'm old enough to have seen it first run still surprises me from time to time.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Same here.
 
jerkface said:
You are free to dislike anything.

You are not free to call anything you dislike "fanon", though.

With respect to "the context", you're talking about the words of Assault -- the guy whose only major canon characteristic is that likes to tease girls via mockery.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I thought the only thing I was calling fanon was her bouts brutality being an extremely common thing? And nothing else?
 
Last edited:
Noxturne90 said:
I thought the only thing I was calling fanon was her bouts brutality being an extremely common thing? And nothing else?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What you objected to, and try to call "fanon", is the characterization of Victoria as someone who became known for using inappropriate brutality.

However, that characterization is compatible with canon.

Thus, you are trying to label something you dislike about canon as "fanon".

That's not okay.

Hope that's clear enough.
 
jerkface said:
What you objected to, and try to call "fanon", is the characterization of Victoria as someone who became known for using inappropriate brutality.

However, that characterization is compatible with canon.

Thus, you are trying to label something you dislike about canon as "fanon".

That's not okay.

Hope that's clear enough.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ah. I see.

I suppose it's my fault then, for not making my stance more clear. I mean to object to her bouts of brutality being extremely common-place to the point that it happens ever other time she goes out. Tge whole "Manslaughter Barbie" as I said. I apologize for any misconceptions.

I do acknowledge her that she has been and is brutal, and has fought brutally to the point of being excessive. And has Landcollecter pointed out, we do have a framing for how many times it has happened in that Amy says six, albeit that she knows of. Which is 5 too many if in a almost any span of time, but is not the rampant case of it that I was talking about.
 
thesevenwielder said:
I wonder. With all the bitching aimed at Danny, does anybody actually have any better ideas than him?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well not signing your kid away for one thing, if this was a hundred years in the past Danny would be signing her into a institution.
His idea is to hand her off to strangers, because he has NO IDEA of how to talk to Taylor or how to be a father. There would be less bitching about him is signing her into a government program and telling everything he knows about his kid who already said no.

If this is a example of Danny's fathering no wonder so many Taylor's treat him like a mushroom.
 
Noxturne90 said:
Ah. I see.

I suppose it's my fault then, for not making my stance more clear. I mean to object to her bouts of brutality being extremely common-place to the point that it happens ever other time she goes out. Tge whole "Manslaughter Barbie" as I said. I apologize for any misconceptions.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I suspect landcollector's quote has punctured your misconception, so hopefully you can acknowledge the facts of canon and we can all move on.

Noxturne90 said:
I do acknowledge her that she has been and is brutal, and has fought brutally to the point of being excessive. And has Landcollecter pointed out, we do have a framing for how many times it has happened in that Amy says six, albeit that she knows of. Which is 5 too many if in a almost any span of time, but is not the rampant case of it that I was talking about.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We have American cities currently rioting over fewer than six cases of violent brutality.

I think you're grossly understating. As was mentioned previously, even just fucking one horse will get you an unkind nickname for life.

But you seem to acknowledge that she is in fact someone who does perform acts of brutality more often than necessary, so I'm not sure why you're holding forth on the idea that her characterization can't include such, and why it's too awful that a character might make fun of her about it in a story.
 
Maybe I'm just too tired to properly make the argument I wish to in order to clarify what I am trying to say.

For now, if we are agreeing to leave it be, then I will for now. But I would like to perhaps come back to it later after I've had some sleep and can make my proper argument.
 
jerkface said:
I suspect landcollector's quote has punctured your misconception, so hopefully you can acknowledge the facts of canon and we can all move on.

We have American cities currently rioting over fewer than six cases of violent brutality.

I think you're grossly understating. As was mentioned previously, even just fucking one horse will get you an unkind nickname for life.

But you seem to acknowledge that she is in fact someone who does perform acts of brutality more often than necessary, so I'm not sure why you're holding forth on the idea that her characterization can't include such, and why it's too awful that a character might make fun of her about it in a story.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
......OK he's saying that he dislikes the overly large number of brutalitys(far beyond canon) that many fics day happen for no reason other than to make Glory girl look bad. He never said she wasn't brutal at all and the way your saying misconceptions makes you come off as an ass who can't understand or refuses to understand.
 
Dopplerdee said:
......OK he's saying that he dislikes the overly large number of brutalitys(far beyond canon) that many fics day happen for no reason other than to make Glory girl look bad. He never said she wasn't brutal at all and the way your saying misconceptions makes you come off as an ass who can't understand or refuses to understand.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
He said that depicting her canon personality was "fanon".

If correcting erroneous statements like that makes me an asshole, well, you've decided to post in a very asshole-friendly place.
 
Want I should try talking to him?"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
While I associate this more as a Briticism and it's technically incorrect by the rules of grammar, it's apparently common enough slang and something I use semi-regularly myself, having been heavily influenced by my English Mum.
 
I might be missing something here, but from the PRT side- is it really that good of a move to conscript someone who clearly does not want to be there into the wards program? I can't see Danny being the only parent who has gone through something like this, especially given the traumatic nature of trigger events; having a ward who doesn't want to be part of the team seems recipie for disaster.

I'm not saying that the PRT should just roll over here, but having someone who they can call on as a independent in a serious situation has to be much better than someone internal that actively resents the leadership, and (with the way teenagers tend to make bad decisions on emotional issues) may even start acting out against the PRT leadership's wishes to the harm of the group just to push back. An internal sabeteour with superpowers could cause a lot of damage - just look at what someone could do during the middle of an operation or patrol - pick a fight and cause massive PR problems, or refuse to take action publicly and call them out to the youth guard or other organizations as them endangering you.

I guess what I'm trying to get to is that the heavy handed recruitment only works if you have something to hold over the person, like Juvie or manslaughter (Shadow Stalker) or assault or aiding and abetting (Assault/Madcap) charges. For someone like Sirin, Piggot might not like her destabilizing the area, but if she can't get a willing member, she should rationally leave Sirin alone until something changes: Oh hey there, you needed backup again? The Wards always have it so you aren't out in these situations. Oh hey, you need medical/legal expenses? The Wards get that free. You got targeted by a rival thinker? We can help shield you from that.

The PRT, while as a group might not be SHIELD or some other scarily competent organization, they have kept together for what, 30 years? There's got to be some sort of standard way of handling this that won't regularly blow up in their face.
 
Yojorocks said:
I might be missing something here, but from the PRT side- is it really that good of a move to conscript someone who clearly does not want to be there into the wards program? I can't see Danny being the only parent who has gone through something like this, especially given the traumatic nature of trigger events; having a ward who doesn't want to be part of the team seems recipie for disaster.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
"Worked great when we conscripted Shadow Stalker."

But seriously, you do have a good point -- although there are also good reasons for the PRT to try to get as many people on their side as possible, including problem kids. Maybe especially problem kids.

Yojorocks said:
For someone like Sirin, Piggot might not like her destabilizing the area, but if she can't get a willing member, she should rationally leave Sirin alone until something changes: Oh hey there, you needed backup again? The Wards always have it so you aren't out in these situations. Oh hey, you need medical/legal expenses? The Wards get that free. You got targeted by a rival thinker? We can help shield you from that.

The PRT, while as a group might not be SHIELD or some other scarily competent organization, they have kept together for what, 30 years? There's got to be some sort of standard way of handling this that won't regularly blow up in their face.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, but maybe their standard way is to get the kid on their team ASAP, and then use the softer tactics once she's official.

This might be for several reasons:
- Keeping her alive: villains don't kill Wards due to retaliation from the Protectorate; independent heroes might fare a lot worse in terms of life expectancy.
- Keeping her alive: having no backup or overwatch means she might bleed out and die even if the villains don't intentionally kill her.
- Keeping her out of the line of fire: independent heroes are not coordinated with Protectorate / PRT activities, so they can't cooperate well during a fire-fight. Glory Girl at the bank was an instance of this.
- Keeping her alive during an Endbringer fight, and having a team with whom she can work during same.

It might also be their policy to try to get new kids to train with their Wards teams as a post-recruitment recruitment tactic -- yes, double-word intentional. Being on a team can tend to bias you towards that team.
 
Franklymydear said:
I wonder how it would go if Taylor explained to Danny that if she gets forced into the Wards she'll just keep doing what she wants which will result in the PRT attempting to arrest her. I mean, he's not being portrayed as so stupid as to want her in prison.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

"Dad if you don't let me keep sneaking out to fight superpowered people at night unsupported, then the group that you would have me join to stop that Might actually stop me from doing that!"

Tragic.

Taylor lied about the bullying.
Taylor lied about Emma.
Taylor lied about her powers.
Taylor lied about sneaking out.
Taylor lied again about sneaking out.

Taylor is Danny's kid, Just because I could beat up my Mom by the time I was 15 does not mean I did not have to listen to her. Taylor is pretty clearly being an ass in this case. Especially as she has no reason to not join the wards.
 
At this point, I'm sick of the bitching about and arguing over it, and just want to see how @chibipoe handles it before the inevitable complaining that it should have been done differently. Of course, that'll give my scroll wheel even more of a workout, but I don't think anyone's presented a new option for the situation in a while.
 
Okay, my cpu is functioning once more, so let's see what... oh my, that's a lot of alerts.... wtf? A mod presence? WTF happened while I was power-cycling?
 
Also, I'm all for discussions, but really, in my thread, please remain civil. :)
 
I hate opening this can of worms again, but...

While it's true canon shows us that GG has gotten carried away a total of six times. We don't have a metric on how far apart those six times are. Were they all close together? Recent occurrences? Stretched over the past year? The issue I, and Noxturne90 have with fanon representation of her is that these six incidents over an unknown span of time have been conflated into(by some vocal detractors) into evidence that GG beats the living hell out of everyone every time she goes out.

Note, here, Assault is remarking on the fact that she's known for being a nuisance as far as property damage is concerned. Given my timeline, we're anywhere from 4 or 5 of those incidents right now, since we know when #6 occurred.
 
Last edited:
chibipoe said:
I hate opening this can of worms again, but...

While it's true canon shows us that GG has gotten carried away a total of six times. We don't have a metric on how far apart those six times are. Were they all close together? Recent occurrences? Stretched over the past year? The issue I, and Noxturne90 have with fanon representation of her is that these six incidents over an unknown span of time have been conflated into(by some vocal detractors) into evidence that GG beats the living hell out of everyone every time she goes out.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
True. My guess is that is that they happened over a couple year timespan.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top