Legacy story snippet from Handelabra stream

In the Handelabra Steam today, we had two guests: Christopher and Peter.  During the chat, grysqrl asked a question that many of us have asked previously, but this time Christopher answered it! 

It's generally believed that the Legacy powers are passed on to the firstborn, but we didn't know if this is because each Paul Parsons only had one child or if they had several children but only the first had powers.  This issue was raised.  The answer: "Some of the Paul Parsons had younger siblings, but none of them had any powers." 

When Silverleaf queried how the genetics "know" the firstborn is first, Christopher answered: "Magic genetics.  NOT ACTUALLY MAGIC."

Just thought I should share that with everyone who wasn't in the stream, as it's a detail I've been curious about for ages.  :)

Thanks for posting this.

Couple of other bits and pieces from the stream/chat

On the Kickstarter

So if you expected the puzzles to last a month, does that mean the Kickstarter was meant to kick off a month later than it is?

12:11GTGChristopher: Richard, we would launch it pretty much when you all made it happen. The power is yours!

On Ra's death scene

sonicblade95: (Paraphrasing) My heart was torn when Ra died.

GTGChristopher: @sonicblade95 I'm sorry for any caused pain. That said, Ra would be pleased to know that he dealt damage on his way out.

Huh. @GTGChristopher, Did Dr Blake Washington die when Ra died?

Yes.

Poor Blake Washington

Yeah, but if Blake never bit the bullet, Thiago would never get his chance! Silver Lines and such

I was hoping Dr. Blake Washingtn got to pass the torch(staff) off and get a new lease on life. 

I'm sure I've seen that bit about the Parsons family before, but can't think of where.

It does sound kind of familiar. Might be confabulating, though.

And a good reason to regret missing this stream. Darnit. :(

If only it was passed down by the mother it wouldn’t need to be “magic” to know who was first born… Unfortunately, that’s clearly not the case.
Ahh, matriarchal lines just make everything so much easier. Is it too late to gender swap Legacy?

How does the DNA distinguish between ova, exactly? I mean the woman has all the eggs she'll ever have when she is born, and each one just gets some final preparations done just before release (usually singly once a month from puberty). AFAIK, the egg "chosen" is random, and the vast majority of them will pass out of the body unfertilised.

So either all the ova are Legacy ova (otherwise you risk losing that special one through periods before the conception, or getting a non-Legacy one for the first birth) or they all are (in which case any subsequent children would also be Legacies). There would have to be something else going on.

It's estimated that about 1/4 of pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion (i.e. miscarriage), many without the woman even knowing she's pregnant. That's also a significant risk for our little Legacy foetus assuming there can be only one. And there are other risks during pregnancy. So it doesn't make sense for the Legacy genetics to be "assigned" or "activated" at conception, because not all conceptions result in birth. And that wouldn't explain the "first conception only" status either, because what's to stop Baby Legacy's new little sister getting exactly the same?

I suppose there could be something about the birth process itself that triggers the latent power potential that all Legacy offspring would have to have in order for this whole thing to work, like the baby's blood mixing with the mother's (which doesn't happen during pregnancy unless something's gone horribly wrong, but does happen at birth). That blood mixing could leave the mother with, I dunno, a special anti-Legacy factor or something which suppresses Legacy powers in subsequent offspring. That's a bit of a stretch, but plausible I guess. My question here though is: why?

I think I'd just prefer that powers attributed to "Science!" which then have to be further qualified by "MAGIC Science!" when they don't make any sense according to our knowledge of how things like genetics actually work just be attributed to Magic in the first place.

when they don't make any sense according to our knowledge of how things like genetics actually work

I feel like you are going to be very disappointed with almost all comic (and science fiction) versions of science in that case!

Comics.

Sorry.

It’s certainly possible that there could be different influences within the womb that could change with birth order. There’s theories such as the fraternal birth order effect which suggest there are differences within the womb that could influence such things.

This could also work for a male within the idea of a purely monogamous coupling that has never paired up with anyone else previously, which considering the ever so wholesome American dream image of Legacy I could see as believable. Which also gives me an amusing idea of an alternative lothario Legacy leaving little super powered babies about the place.

Sure it’s all walking a very fine line of implausible, but that’s what fiction does. Suspension of disbelief is about finding an internally consistent logical basis within the setting more than lining it up to hard facts from our reality.

Just assume she's always doing that

Yep. This is totally one of the reasons why I don't care for comics.

Handwaving away scientific inaccuracies/implausibilities bugs the hell out of me. Just call it magic in the first place and stop pretending it's science, damn it.

You need a heavy dose of Suspension of Disbelief. It'll help with the headaches. It's doctor recomended and kid approved!

It's sufficiently advanced science.

I do recall a previous conversation on the whole "only the first-born gets the Legacy powers" thing and I remember it ended up with an increasingly silly series of what-ifs, wherein we theorised what might happen if a Legacy had twins or something - would the first twin get the powers, or would they both? What if there were more than twins? What if they were octuplets or something? Well I suppose they would be...nonuplets or whatever the word is, given the recent themes leading up to the Oblivaeon reveal, but anyway... :D

The League of Legacy

Flux capacitors.

My question is what happens when someone steals Parsons genetic material in order to make the world's most powerful super baby?

My personal theory? Citizen Dawn gets Expatriette instead.

I vaguely remember someone bringing up the idea of Legacy being twins for the generation that had the American Civil War, because symbolism.

I had that idea, myself, as part of my vague incipient Sentinels RPG campaign idea.  The basic idea was "several generations back, the Parsons legacy had twins.  One of the twins inherited the Legacy power, the other inherited something else.  They aren't Legacy, and don't become Legacy. . . but several descendents of that line, sparked by envy, have discovered that dangerous methods could awaken power within themselves."

Didn't Cristopher allude to a future splitting of the Legacy line recently?

Does that mean the magic genetics get it wrong about the whole "only the first-born" thing?

Could easily be twins.

Yes, twins seem like the most plausible story reason for this splitting.  The allusion was during the recent AMA:  "There is a notable split in the Parsons line in the distant-but-not-terribly-distant future...  I am not talking about the split of the timelines with the SC:RPG and Tactics. I am talking of a split in the Legacy line."

But we all know that in Sentinels nothing happens simultaneously… so technically there is still only one first-born. 

I can't recall exact posts, but my recollection of a conversation about all of this years ago on the message boards left the strong implication that eventual iterations of twins (or more) born from Legacy lines will give all of humanity low-level superpowers by the future of Galactic Strike Force, hence the term "metahumanity".

Meanwhile, in my group's own continuity, the "first born" rule got mucked about with by the current Legacy concieving a child whilst on an unstable parallel dimension - she got twisted "inverted" versions of Legacy powers (mostly predicated on destroying things, rather than strengthening herself), and Pauline still got Legacy powers as expected.

What if the first born was conjoined twins who were able to be surgically seperated?

This is kind of bold statemrnt to make if you ask me , I mean even if it 's it's your opinion does not mean other can't say something about it

Eh, Silverleaf is entitled to her opinion, just as anyone else is. I mean, I enjoy comics but I agree that sometimes things get too handwavey for my taste.

I feel like it's a slippery slope to "All superheroes are magic. Also, based on our current understanding of the universe, basically all sci-fi as well."

I'll make your slopes slippery

Foote, you already do. ;)

I didn't say they couldn't.

Other opinions are awesome. Doesn't mean I have to agree with them, or that I shouldn't express my opinion because someone might not agree wth me.

Pretty much all superheroes are either magic or science fiction though.

My one issue with calling everything we think isn't science as magic is:  How much of science don't we understand?  Do we know how gravity works?  What about magentic fields?  Or why neutrinos disappear when they're moving slower than a certain speed?  Should we call all of that magic, too?

My problem is with things that are contrary to what we do know of science, because comics.

I mean the genre's full of stuff that writers try to explain with science that they give every impression of knowing nothing about (or not caring about enough to get right). I'd much rather no reason was given for the superpowers the X-Men have than entirely failing to understand what we know about how mutation actually works. Even "a wizard did it" would be better than that.

Of course it's completely understandable that a comic writer isn't going to get a degree in genetics just to make their writing more scientifically accurate, but it wouldn't take much to do a basic check that what you've written isn't complete nonsense, or failing that, just don't write about stuff you don't have a decent amount of knowledge of!

Non-comic example: Jurassic Park. I just can't enjoy that movie because there's a huge glaring error in the method they used to obtain the dinosaur DNA - the amber that the mosquitos were trapped in was formed millions of years before those dinosaurs lived, so there's no way that they could have fed on dinosaur blood. (Incidentally, all those dinosaurs were actually from the Cretaceous period rather than the Jurassic, but that's another problem.) A tiny bit of "is this even a sensible idea?" research would have nipped that one in the bud right away. If they hadn't have invoked science to explain how they did it, I would not have cared.

Good points.  I suspect, however, that a great many books and comics would be more boring if they explained everything fantastical in them as magic instead of science on the edge of probability! (or despite the impossibility in some cases. )

Huh.  Are you sure its Legacy-specific, and not just a broader proliferation and activation of metahuman genes?  Legacy isn't the only genetic superhuman in SOTM, after all.

Mind, it sounds kind of odd, even if it doesn't directly contradict the lore from GSF I saw.  You usually don't envision universal superhumanity as looking like your typical space opera setting.  I mean, it could simply be that that the average human has a certain baseline array of "powers" that aren't even perceived as such, and don't hugely matter compared to the available tech level; and that while you can get superior genetic powers from luck or enhancement, this doesn't stand out compared with all the other ways you can get great power ( "So your strong enough to throw a building into orbit.  Doesn't mean you can eat a photon torpedo." ).

I agree with both of these points, but frankly I side more with the entertainment side of the medium. If a topic is something you’re more passionate about, it’s much easier to see the problems in other things because of your attention to detail. For some people, the problems are enough to make you hate it; some people see it and don’t care as long as they find value in it.

One of my favorite examples of this situation came from the Matrix, where Morpheus explains that humans are used as batteries. The human body couldn’t generate enough energy to power the entire system, let alone everything else it supposedly powered. Earlier versions of the script explained that humans were being used as a giant neural network, and while it was more scientifically feasible in context, most people seeing early drafts just didn’t get it. The change allowed them to glance over a detail that mattered less to the overall story they wanted to tell and get into the real point of the story they wanted to tell.

Personally, I understand the complaint, but it comes down to whether it matters enough to detract from the experience. And I guess in the examples above, it just doesn’t for me.

Oh, yeah, we can pick at science errors in fiction all day and not make a dent in the pile that’s accumulated over the history of literature. At this point, while I think it’s kind of fun to explain the scientific accuracies and issues with “Gravity” to lay people, I am more than willing to give it a pass for the fact that it’s a good story and fun to watch.

I’m with Silverleaf in that it’s getting ridiculous how many writers use the words “genetic,” “quantum,” and “nanotech” (among others) when they really just want magic things to happen. However, in those cases, I just kind of let my brain fuzz while Morpheus explains whatever it is, take it as part of the world-building, and move on to the story. Let’s skip the ridiculous frog DNA thing and get to the dinosaur island bit!

…now, when the kids save the day because they are the only ones who figure out the computer menu that asks “DO YOU WANT TO SAVE THE DAY? (Y/N)” is when that movie broke for me. That was just lazy writing. It’s in the book, too!

A remark :

The most interesting thing with Legacy's "genetics" is that it's the kind of genetics that was valid in ancient Europa, under the name "primogeniture" : the first born inherits all. Like in a Monarchy. And seeing that Legacies inherit "magic" powers, it would even be a Divine Right Monarchy, like we had in France (did you know our kings officially had magic powers, like the ability to heal some diseases by laying hand, Aragorn like ?)

Funny for the greatest american hero, isn't it ?

About "bad" science : yes, it irritates me too to see some scientific principles being used badly, with the risk to give a wrong idea of how science works / what science "knows" to the audience. However, being compeltely scientifically accurate only works for some stories. This is not a problem in itself. It becomes one when the theories in the work of art are absurd deformations of science, and taken as "truths" by the audience. Like gravity and biology in an infamous episode of Doctor Who ( a good episode with awful science).

In the case of Legacy though, it is obvious that the power transmission doesn't work according to the laws of genetics ( though it's probably more a sign that there is more to it than genetics, rather than a handwave). But "genetic", outside of its scientific meaning, is often just used in common parlance to say "inherited from parents".

My problem is with things that are contrary to what we do know of science

To continue my “slippery slope” theme, it’s only a small step from here to “Hang on, House’s department isn’t a real department. Also when they show the hospital, it’s actually a university. And I looked it up, and House isn’t even a real person - couldn’t they do basic research? It’s all totally inaccurate!”

I very much disagree with this. There is a massive gulf between 'this contradicts pretty much everything we know about genetics' and 'this is fiction' that is far too large to be bridged by the slippery slope fallacy.

My point is - we already know that this is in a fictional universe. We accept the fact that there are people who don't exist in our world, locations and ideas and groups and events that have never happened in reality. Why is it such a jump to then assume that there are scientific laws that are different to our own?

Because most of the laws are presented as the same. It's not a whole new set of physics where we would understand that nothing is the same, it's a set where only certain things change and everything else is otherwise unchanged. If Genetics work differently there, is Gregor Mendel hailed as a the father of genetics or is he a bastard who tried to take over the world with an army of peas that had laser eyes?

Also, the slippery slope fallacy is a fallacy. It cannot bridge anything.

Have you been reading my pea breeding notes?

No, but I felt it was a thing you would try.

attempts to look innocent

Because most of the laws are presented as the same. It’s not a whole new set of physics where we would understand that nothing is the same, it’s a set where only certain things change and everything else is otherwise unchanged.

Right, but again: most fiction is like this! The film “Titanic” has a BUNCH of historically accurate stuff, and then some historically inaccurate stuff (the Rose/Jack relationship) mixed in. That’s how most fiction works - a lot of it is correct, and parts of it are made up. Why would science be any different?

The thing is that a lot of made up stuff is at least somewhat plausible and doesn't contradict known scientific principles. Like Rose and Jack and Doctor House don't require genetics or physics to work differently than they do in the real world.

I am a lot less rigorous about this than Silverleaf, but I can see her point. 

I’m in the camp that when I read/watch fiction I’ll assume everything works how I understand it to work in the real world. Until it shows me otherwise, then I’ll assume that part doesn’t work how I understand it. I certainly do not need an explanation of how the force works or why ships make noise in space. (There’s no air in space!)

Sentinel Comics is a world where time travel and cross over between Multiverse happen, individuals have developed various superhuman powers, an a super cosmic being is coming to destroy it all. I’m willing to accept science may work differently in the multiverse even if the only reason is because its cool.

I mean I spent the past week reading Kaiju novels. Square cube law, anyone? I know it pretty much makes kaiju impossible in the real world, and I can live with that. I can totally understand why someone else would not have the same amount of suspension of disbelief that I do, and I'm okay with that. Heck, there are even people who just don't like fiction.

For me, it just seems obvious that the Legacy lineage are a kind of avatar of the United States of America, and gain new powers as the US gains new powers. Why can they fly? Because the Wright Brothers invented aeroplanes. Why is Paul Parsons VII nigh-invulnerable? Because America is the greatest superpower. Why does Felicia have an Atomic Glare? Because of ICBMs, or laser-guided bombs.

Calling their power source "genetic" just seems odd.

I am not saying you are wrong or right just stating that is a bold statement

saying something is an opinion is no excuse to just say whatever you want with no feedback from others if think think otherwsie so not sure what your point is

That Silverleaf wasn't making a bold statement, just stating her opinion. 

An opinion can be bold, it can be courageous, wandering the Internet day or night, looking for topics that need its assistance.

Many years ago, a science fiction author (I've forgotten who now; I  #$%^&ing hate get old.) had a story that couldn't be told because recent advances in science had invalidated a critical plot point. About a year later, he decided to write the story anyhow, but started it off with two of the characters discussing the fact that Pi was exactly 3. Having thereby established that it wasn't our universe, the other "scientific inaccuracies" became meaningless.

I hereby propose that in the Sentinels Multiverse, Pi equals 3.

There. All better.

Well, Pi used to equal three, but the Lemon Meringue was really delicious.

So Pi now equals 2.

Sorry for that.

I have strong opinions and express them. You can express your opinions too! Everyone can!

I mean really, if I didn't have a strong opinion I probably wouldn't have bothered posting.

I'm pretty sure I didn't say that people weren't allowed to give feedback. Feel free.

I reserve the right to ignore the kind of feedback that tells me I shouldn't express my opinion on something though.