Thread:The S/@comment-995426-20200124212148/@comment-995426-20200202095212

I am now wondering exactly where to draw the line. It was important to separate human-only mutants from non-animal mutants, but it's proving not quite as simple determining what kinds of mutations can be considered human-only. Hun is a clear example, and Dale seems pretty obvious, too. But what of Ravenwood, for instance? Her mutation is absolutely drastic, and while it is not known to specifically introduce non-human traits, it allows for some extremely nonhuman abilities, above and beyond what can be considered merely superhuman.

So far the category has only the two entries. I thought the impetus for its creation was clear-cut and trivial (which is why I felt confident acting unilaterally), but...now I'm not 100% sure. If you want to delete, reorganize, restructure it or return to the previous status quo for now, I would understand.

As for the original purpose of this thread&mdash;voluntary, involuntary, deliberate and accidental mutants&mdash;I still very much think they are viable category concepts, as they revolves around intent and consent which seems easier to determine than the finer points of distinguishing human-only vs. non-animal mutations.