Remove ads

Pound the Table | An X-Men Self-Insert

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Reader mode
horngeek said:
A question of clarification- the whole reason you say Mutant and Mutate are different to Master or Mechanist is because they don't necessarily know all the ins and outs of their powers because sometimes they change-

Yeah, this has me scratching my head as well.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Odgorian said:
I think I'm missing something.
Mental states go "negligence" -> "recklessness" -> "knowingly" -> "purposefully."
Master and Machinist got to their level through experience, so law looks at them more harshly — so their default mental state is "negligence." The least severe mental state. What?
Mutant and Mutate, on the other hand, have powers that can change themselves without their user's knowledge — so their default mental state is "knowingly." The penultimate one.

I think something broke during editing.
Quotes:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We've edited it further, because yeah, it still wasn't clear. (and also @Ganurath caught a typo)

"Basically: take the mental state applied to the metahuman, and swap out the necessary mental state for the crime with whatever mental state applies to their M-category. This will make things easier to prove, or harder, depending on what type of metahuman is on trial. If you're a Master, even if the crime would normally require a purposeful mental state, the prosecution only needs to prove negligence to get you on the hook. On the other hand, if you're a Mutant, even if normally the prosecution would only need negligence, now they need to prove the knowingly standard. It's a replacement.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
Between Noa's academic overview of the law (never talk to cops), Dr. Hank McCoy's experience as an activist and protest marcher and so on (never talk to cops), and like Emma Frost also providing guest lectures as a prominent Mutant businesswoman (never talk to cops), I have high hopes for the graduating class of the Xavier Institute.
 
bookwyrm said:
Between Noa's academic overview of the law (never talk to cops), Dr. Hank McCoy's experience as an activist and protest marcher and so on (never talk to cops), and like Emma Frost also providing guest lectures as a prominent Mutant businesswoman (never talk to cops), I have high hopes for the graduating class of the Xavier Institute.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
One of Noa's next seminars is: "So you just got arrested / you just got sued".

The number one rule, stated over and over and over and over and OVER again: Say. Nothing. Without. Your. Lawyer's. Permission!
 
October Daye said:
One of Noa's next seminars is: "So you just got arrested / you just got sued".

The number one rule, stated over and over and over and over and OVER again: Say. Nothing. Without. Your. Lawyer's. Permission!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
She should see if Reed Richards or Forge can make her some almost indestructible business cards that she can hand out to all the future hero's to keep in their pockets when out heroing.
 
Okay, now, I think, I got it. It's not the default state of metahuman on trial, it's the state that prosecutors need to prove. The second clarification makes the idea much more understandable. Thanks!

But then wouldn't becoming Master or Machinist (especially Master, without any minimal requirements) be incredibly dangerous (from the legal point of view)? Prosecution only needing to prove negligence sounds like a recipe for disaster. Then again, I do not have any idea how it would work in practice, so can be easily wrong.
 
Last edited:
Vaermina said:
Hmm, I probably would have gone MAKER instead of MACHINIST.

That way you don't have the jury's arguing whether the chemist who created flubber or the biologist who bred an army of genetically engineered wombats should count. Because they absolutely would.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Maker would cause confusion with the War Machine (Noa would say Iron Man but we know ooc that Tony is Iron Man), since Rhodes doesn't make his own suit.
 
Warmachine375 said:
Is Tony Stark public as Iron Man or does he keep a secret identity of Iron Man being his bodyguard like in the early comics in this story?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The latter, it actually comes up in this chapter- his excuse for the injuries he gets as Iron Man is 'I was testing the gear for Iron Man'.

@October Daye two questions- first, is this legal principle specific to the use of powers to cause harm? And if so, if someone falls under two categories, are their different powers treated differently?

The example I'm thinking of is actually a Saiyan from Dragonball, who's trained in the use of Ki, but also involuntarily turns into a giant, rampaging monkey under certain circumstances. Let's say Son Goku fires off a Kamehameha that hits someone under collateral damage (a learned ability, falling under the Master heading), then in a separate incident turns into an Oozaru and steps on someone. Are these treated differently under this principle? He has Master type superpowers, but also has Mutant-type powers.

…this isn't entirely hypothetical, because he has killed someone in the Oozaru state and didn't know it was him who did it for *years* afterwards. I know Noa herself is another example of 'Mutant but also Master' so I'm curious how this interacts.
 
Warmachine375 said:
Imagine Noa in a Fairy Godmother costume while Lorna is in her Cinderella costume for a Halloween party.

With Noa singing "Bibidi Babidi Buu!"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So cute.

And once Noa adopts Lorna it really lets her go full Yiddish momma :)

Ooooh, If October Daye doesn't do it in the main story, can someone please write an omake with Noa's family finding out about her adopting Lorna and meeting Lorna for the first time?
 
horngeek said:
The latter, it actually comes up in this chapter- his excuse for the injuries he gets as Iron Man is 'I was testing the gear for Iron Man'.

@October Daye two questions- first, is this legal principle specific to the use of powers to cause harm? And if so, if someone falls under two categories, are their different powers treated differently?

The example I'm thinking of is actually a Saiyan from Dragonball, who's trained in the use of Ki, but also involuntarily turns into a giant, rampaging monkey under certain circumstances. Let's say Son Goku fires off a Kamehameha that hits someone under collateral damage (a learned ability, falling under the Master heading), then in a separate incident turns into an Oozaru and steps on someone. Are these treated differently under this principle? He has Master type superpowers, but also has Mutant-type powers.

…this isn't entirely hypothetical, because he has killed someone in the Oozaru state and didn't know it was him who did it for *years* afterwards. I know Noa herself is another example of 'Mutant but also Master' so I'm curious how this interacts.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
One: yes, this is exclusive to the use of powers or superhero-level tech to cause harm. If Reed Richards shot someone with a normal gun, he'd get the normal standard that tends to accompany such an offense. I won't state which that is, because it can depend (yes, really) on the facts.

But if he used the wooden gun… then he gets the negligence standard.

Now. Two: this is a fucking excellent question, because it runs headlong into one of the things Noa wants to improve! Namely: that the way things are written, no, the standard would not change! Regardless of the fact that an Oozaru wouldn't even be capable of the complex thought requires to use a Master's ki techniques, and has its own inherent biological capacity, the Saiyan would come out of it and… get utterly destroyed because the fact that some of their powers are a Master's learned abilities apply to EVERYTHING they do.

Noa's problem with the current standard is that it doesn't take into account the circumstances. It doesn't have the leeway to take mental incapacity into account, for example. And as a more close to home example, it can't account for when some change in, say, a Mutant Master's inherent powers has a negative effect on their ability to control the magics they Mastered.
 
horngeek said:
The latter, it actually comes up in this chapter- his excuse for the injuries he gets as Iron Man is 'I was testing the gear for Iron Man'.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ah I see, thanks.

That's a valid excuse and that Tony Stark should make a Life Model Decoy of himself as a backup plan in case his alibi may not be enough.

Chaeronea said:
So cute.

And once Noa adopts Lorna it really lets her go full Yiddish momma :)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Cue to a montage of wholesome family moments between Noa and her goddaughter Lorna.

October Daye said:
But if he used the wooden gun… then he gets the negligence standard.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If this infamous incident ever happens, Noa will never let Magneto forget about it for the rest of his life.


View: https://youtu.be/x5-JVvCrGC8?si=y8twyBav-XiOUyNW
 
I was so confused, when you were explaining the constituent parts of the crime, I was like, wondering what the hell this is. Then I remembered the other theories of crime, my country uses the tripartite theory of crime, in addition to being civil law.
I've had to rethink many times to understand what you were saying, but as my hermeneutics professor taught me, interpretation of the law is universal, no matter the law.

EDIT: And it's so nice re-reading the story and managing to properly understand the cases, 2 years of law school is finally paying off, and I'm not even finished with college yet!
 
Last edited:
October Daye said:
One: yes, this is exclusive to the use of powers or superhero-level tech to cause harm. If Reed Richards shot someone with a normal gun, he'd get the normal standard that tends to accompany such an offense. I won't state which that is, because it can depend (yes, really) on the facts.

But if he used the wooden gun… then he gets the negligence standard.

Now. Two: this is a fucking excellent question, because it runs headlong into one of the things Noa wants to improve! Namely: that the way things are written, no, the standard would not change! Regardless of the fact that an Oozaru wouldn't even be capable of the complex thought requires to use a Master's ki techniques, and has its own inherent biological capacity, the Saiyan would come out of it and… get utterly destroyed because the fact that some of their powers are a Master's learned abilities apply to EVERYTHING they do.

Noa's problem with the current standard is that it doesn't take into account the circumstances. It doesn't have the leeway to take mental incapacity into account, for example. And as a more close to home example, it can't account for when some change in, say, a Mutant Master's inherent powers has a negative effect on their ability to control the magics they Mastered.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

One other thing I picked out, I think- in a case where the actions present two possible crimes, one with the Knowing standard and one with the Purposeful standard, wouldn't a mutant or mutate still be at a disadvantage because a prosecutor might press the latter charge, knowing all they need to do is prove the Knowing standard and they get the more severe crime?
 
horngeek said:
One other thing I picked out, I think- in a case where the actions present two possible crimes, one with the Knowing standard and one with the Purposeful standard, wouldn't a mutant or mutate still be at a disadvantage because a prosecutor might press the latter charge, knowing all they need to do is prove the Knowing standard and they get the more severe crime?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Correct.

Are we starting to see why Noa has problems with this approach?

Like. It's not a bad start to seeing metahumans as requiring different standards under the law due to how different they can be from the standard human experience.

But it's only a start, and just barely at that. It creates as many problems as it solves.
 
October Daye said:
Also, I wondered if she would be the only one to recognize hamentaschen. I hoped not!

"Logan."

I'd need to revamp my home office into a bedroom for when Xavier's was on breaks, wouldn't I?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You keep sending me to google with all the names of foods I don't know!

And there's the obligatory Wolverine cameo, you finally sunk that low!

Any chance of her learning about her half-siblings?
 
October Daye said:
One: yes, this is exclusive to the use of powers or superhero-level tech to cause harm. If Reed Richards shot someone with a normal gun, he'd get the normal standard that tends to accompany such an offense. I won't state which that is, because it can depend (yes, really) on the facts.

But if he used the wooden gun… then he gets the negligence standard.

Now. Two: this is a fucking excellent question, because it runs headlong into one of the things Noa wants to improve! Namely: that the way things are written, no, the standard would not change! Regardless of the fact that an Oozaru wouldn't even be capable of the complex thought requires to use a Master's ki techniques, and has its own inherent biological capacity, the Saiyan would come out of it and… get utterly destroyed because the fact that some of their powers are a Master's learned abilities apply to EVERYTHING they do.

Noa's problem with the current standard is that it doesn't take into account the circumstances. It doesn't have the leeway to take mental incapacity into account, for example. And as a more close to home example, it can't account for when some change in, say, a Mutant Master's inherent powers has a negative effect on their ability to control the magics they Mastered.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I am beginning to get a sense for where Noa and Xavier and the X-Men will begin to diverge and lead to the opening chapters. I think Noa will start to successfully wedge out the extenuating circumstances, and almost certainly will have to go against Xavier doing one of his patent-pending "mental massages" not directly but she will run into it with some plaintiffs/defendants I think and it will be a whole thing because legally if no one remembers a crime of passion being committed and there's only the evidence that demonstrates it ever happened what then?
 
To carry on with the Xavier Mind Wipe: would the courts treat that as a Mutant>Knowing or a Masters>Negligence if someone like him 'fucks up'? Ignoring blatant 'Purposeful' examples like an actual memory alteration, how would it default between a Mutate/Mutant whose achieved a Mastery Ala Superior Spiderman for example?

Also, congratulations on the job/apartment/puppers. Hope everything continues swimmingly.

I also would like to state my interest in hearing the rest of Noa's lecture. I feel entertained and educated and have a craving for re-examination of events, and so would quite like to know what went wrong with that case in Noa's eyes.
 
Cecylene said:
I am beginning to get a sense for where Noa and Xavier and the X-Men will begin to diverge and lead to the opening chapters. I think Noa will start to successfully wedge out the extenuating circumstances, and almost certainly will have to go against Xavier doing one of his patent-pending "mental massages" not directly but she will run into it with some plaintiffs/defendants I think and it will be a whole thing because legally if no one remembers a crime of passion being committed and there's only the evidence that demonstrates it ever happened what then?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Oooo, i forgot about those.

Thanks cause I was really struggling to see how they got to chapter 1 from here.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top