X-23 and Kirika are not versions of each other

#1 Posted by CATPANEXE (9366 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

Kirika is the daughter of Logan aka Weapon X, the Age Of Apocalypse's version
of 616 Earths Wolverine, and Mariko Yashida, while Laura Kinney aka X-23 is the cloned
daughter of 616 Wolverine and Sarah Kinney if all else, Kirika is technically X-23's alternate
reality sister, but not version of her. Kirika is no more X-23 than she is Daken, despite likenesses
in appearance.

#2 Posted by k2 (473 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

Laura Kinney/X-23 is not the 'cloned daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney'. The latter was a surrogate mother, and contributed no DNA. Laura is a strict clone of Wolverine, with a few modifications. These differences are slight and stem from damaged areas of Wolverine's DNA (as the blood sample used to create Laura from was flawed). Dr. Sarah Kinney had to repair these gene sequences to the best of her abilities.

On the topic of Kirika and X-23, I agree that they are not one and the same.

#3 Posted by ReVamp (22561 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@k2 said:

                    Laura Kinney/X-23 is not the 'cloned daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney'. The latter was a surrogate mother, and contributed no DNA. Laura is a strict clone of Wolverine, with a few modifications. These differences are slight and stem from damaged areas of Wolverine's DNA (as the blood sample used to create Laura from was flawed). Dr. Sarah Kinney had to repair these gene sequences to the best of her abilities. On the topic of Kirika and X-23, I agree that they are not one and the same.

As said above, X-23 is a CLONE of wolverine. Not a cloned daughter. So at best kirika is an alternate reality "niece" of X, even though in technicalities, she isn't. They have no correlation.

#4 Posted by fodigg (4510 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

Yeah, I don't see much similarity even visually.

Any parallels that can be drawn between the two characters is basically just "young female wolverine" and "wolverine's estranged daughter" which are very broad-stroke archetypes.

#5 Posted by CATPANEXE (9366 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@k2: @ReVamp:
I'm aware of this, and was aware that you all were aware of it hence I didn't feel the need to add the subtleties of the
relationship between Laura, Wolverine and Sarah Kinney as it wasn't pertinent to the case..
(I considered for a moment I would have a user narf me for it but didn't really care.)

But to the issue itself, their not, yet, on both bio pages (I've deleted it on Kirika's, but I'm sure that won't hold), their they are
listed as alternate reality versions of each other.

#6 Edited by Gambler (80655 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

Just to play devils advocate, the manner in which they are connected to Wolverine doesn't discount the fact that she is the AoA counterpart of X-23. She's Wolverine's daughter with a different backstory (like all the AoA counterparts).

Moderator

#7 Posted by Gambler (80655 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

She was even called X-23...

Moderator

#8 Edited by CATPANEXE (9366 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@Gambler:
the problem there is Kirika's mother. This makes her genetically a different person, hence, 616 X-23's "could have been" sisters alternate reality counterpart, but not X-23's
actually. It would be like saying that an alternate reality version of Daken is an alternate reality version of Wolverine to say they are. Being female, related to Wolverine (Weapon X in AoA if we're being concise, Wolverine AoA is someone else entirely), and having claws and similar powers, doesn't actually make them the same person, even it does make fanon happy?

A better way to put it is this I think:
If I or you have a daughter, and someone goes back in time and makes a change that effects our past and present, resulting in us having a daughter with someone else,
both daughters would not be the same person.

#9 Posted by Morgaine_de_Bourbon (2075 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@k2 said:

Laura Kinney/X-23 is not the 'cloned daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney'. The latter was a surrogate mother, and contributed no DNA. Laura is a strict clone of Wolverine, with a few modifications. These differences are slight and stem from damaged areas of Wolverine's DNA (as the blood sample used to create Laura from was flawed). Dr. Sarah Kinney had to repair these gene sequences to the best of her abilities. On the topic of Kirika and X-23, I agree that they are not one and the same.

Christopher Yost and Craig Kyle (her creators) have said themselves that genetically speaking, X-23 is akin to a sister of Wolverine more than a clone.

#10 Posted by Gambler (80655 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@CATPANEXE: Alternate Reality version do not = same 616 person. They are "alternate reality counterparts" and in the AoA all of the characters are counterparts to their established 616 characters. I'm not sure what a hypothetical sister really has to do with anything or Kirika having a mother. All the AoA characters have extreme variations of their 616 counterparts. AoA X-23 having part of her mother's DNA only means that in this alternate reality X-23 isnt just cloned from Wolverine. Of course she's a different person, they all are. Doesn't change the fact that they are all counterparts to the established character.

Moderator

#11 Edited by CATPANEXE (9366 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@Gambler:
I'm sorry I don't agree with that for reasons already stated. especially the point I brought up about AoA Weapon X and AoA Wolverine.
If what your saying is sound, then both AoA Weapon X and AoA Wolverine are the counterpart of 616 Wolverine, which just doesn't add up.
Your saying that being similar, and/or sharing a codename counts as the same person?
X-23 and Kirika are not the same person with different histories, they are individual from each other.

#12 Edited by Gambler (80655 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@CATPANEXE: We can agree to disagree. But you also have to remember that AoA 10th Anniversary (which is the mini that Kirika appears in) is not the same story or related to the official AoA story. Also the deliberate similarities between X-23 and Kirika speak for themselves. Were as AoA Wolverine sharing the same name and nothing more pretty much makes debating that argument a moot point. Using your logic we can discount the AoA being an alternate reailty with alternate counterparts entirely. Which doesn't make alot of sense since thats its entire purpose....

Moderator

#13 Posted by Gambler (80655 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@CATPANEXE said:

, both daughters would not be the same person.

Like I said, counterpart does not = same person.

Moderator

#14 Edited by CATPANEXE (9366 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@Gambler:
Pretty much can only agree to disagree. I brought it to the table and didn't make the change to X-23's page (noting again they have separate pages) as it's a mods choice here ultimately.
I understand the point your driving home, and the same came to mind when I debated this to myself before making the thread. But the error's I and others pointed out still are there, and I believe it's
still open for debate. Again by your reasoning I could say that 616 Celeste Cuckoo and House Of M Mindee Cuckoo are the same person, yet we know they are not because a little more exists to debate that.
A question though, would it change your view if Kirika ends up being one of the characters from Age Of Apocalypse chosen this year to join 616.

But you also have to remember that AoA 10th Anniversary (which is the mini that Kirika appears in) is not the same story or related to the official AoA story.

Untrue. While I thought something along the same lines, those lines we're erased recently by the current Dark Angel Saga story running in Uncanny X-Men.
Dark Beast confirms Anniversary to have been next page of AoA, and the Dark Angel Saga the current (as well the Exiles adventures were directly tied in as well)
Outside stories like Die By The Sword, AoA has been solidly shown to be ongoing, in the pages of books like X-Man (the first annual I believe?)
Believing otherwise of AoA would be like believing the current volume of Avengers are not related to the previous in 616, for example.

#15 Posted by VanTesla (512 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

Maybe Kirika should vacation in 616 and hangout with Laura? :) That would be interesting and weird.

#16 Posted by cascadeking09 (6656 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@Gambler: Like Wonder Woman and Superwoman

#17 Posted by Gambler (80655 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@CATPANEXE said:

@Gambler:
Pretty much can only agree to disagree. I brought it to the table and didn't make the change to X-23's page (noting again they have separate pages) as it's a mods choice here ultimately.
I understand the point your driving home, and the same came to mind when I debated this to myself before making the thread. But the error's I and others pointed out still are there, and I believe it's
still open for debate. Again by your reasoning I could say that 616 Celeste Cuckoo and House Of M Mindee Cuckoo are the same person, yet we know they are not because a little more exists to debate that.
A question though, would it change your view if Kirika ends up being one of the characters from Age Of Apocalypse chosen this year to join 616.

But you also have to remember that AoA 10th Anniversary (which is the mini that Kirika appears in) is not the same story or related to the official AoA story.
Untrue. While I thought something along the same lines, those lines we're erased recently by the current Dark Angel Saga story running in Uncanny X-Men. Dark Beast confirms Anniversary to have been next page of AoA, and the Dark Angel Saga the current (as well the Exiles adventures were directly tied in as well)

Its a good topic no doubt, and hopefully users continue to bring more opinions to the table. No it wouldn't change my mind if Kirika were brought over to the 616 as it has no baring on the point I was trying to make. She could still exist in the 616 while being the AoA counterpart of X-23. I mean we can all agree that Dark Beast is the counterpart of 616 Beast and he crossed over. Characters like Sugar Man and Holocaust are perfect examples of AoA characters with no 616 counterpart.

You're right about the Dark Angel Saga, thats a nice catch. But again I dont think it changes anything. The point I was going for with that was Kirika originally did not appear in the AoA story. It wasn't until the 10th Anniversary issue that we see her. And I'd question that if at the time the writers knew that several years later it would be retconned into AoA continuity. But thats debatable as well as there are events that one could use in which to support it was.

Moderator

#18 Posted by Gambler (80655 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@cascadeking09 said:

@Gambler: Like Wonder Woman and Superwoman

Exactly.

Moderator

#19 Posted by cascadeking09 (6656 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@Gambler: Most of the crime syndicate is like that. Johnny Quick and Powering aren't the same people as Flash and Green Lantern either.

I honestly don't understand how Laura and Kirika could be sisters if the exact same Wolverine isn't their father.

#20 Posted by k2 (473 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@Morgaine_de_Bourbon said:

@k2 said:
Laura Kinney/X-23 is not the 'cloned daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney'. The latter was a surrogate mother, and contributed no DNA. Laura is a strict clone of Wolverine, with a few modifications. These differences are slight and stem from damaged areas of Wolverine's DNA (as the blood sample used to create Laura from was flawed). Dr. Sarah Kinney had to repair these gene sequences to the best of her abilities. On the topic of Kirika and X-23, I agree that they are not one and the same.
Christopher Yost and Craig Kyle (her creators) have said themselves that genetically speaking, X-23 is akin to a sister of Wolverine more than a clone.

Note how, in my blurb, I state that she is a 'strict clone of Wolverine with a few modifications' and then explained where the differences lie. The chances that Dr. Kinney could have accuratley reproduced the missing gene sequences are slim to none. There are differences, but stating 'cloned daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney' implies that she has DNA from both people.

@CATPANEXE said:

@k2: @ReVamp: I'm aware of this, and was aware that you all were aware of it hence I didn't feel the need to add the subtleties of the relationship between Laura, Wolverine and Sarah Kinney as it wasn't pertinent to the case.. (I considered for a moment I would have a user narf me for it but didn't really care.) But to the issue itself, their not, yet, on both bio pages (I've deleted it on Kirika's, but I'm sure that won't hold), their they are listed as alternate reality versions of each other.

It is pertinent to this case in the sense that the statement 'daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney' implies that bother parents contributed DNA. When we are comparing the AoA character Kirika, we are considering her heritage as well (Wolverine and Mariko Yashida), so we don't want Dr. Kinney's DNA to be compared in that equation. I don't mean to be overly uptight about this, just suggesting that the relationship be clearer in case someone newer to X-23 reads this. No nerd attack intended, hehe :o)

#21 Posted by rokusan23 (146 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

Alternate realities :/ psh. xD

#22 Posted by ReVamp (22561 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@Gambler said:

Just to play devils advocate, the manner in which they are connected to Wolverine doesn't discount the fact that she is the AoA counterpart of X-23. She's Wolverine's daughter with a different backstory (like all the AoA counterparts).

From that perspective wouldn't Wolverine have many different daughters? Like the small Japanese human girl (Cannot recall the name), ShadowCat, Jubilee, Armor etc... they all have at one point had the same relationship as X, the only different being that X shares most of her DNA with Wolverine as a clone. You could argue that some of the other fit more into the "daughter" category than X, who might fit into the "Younger Sister" a bit better?

Though I do have to say that it is undeniable in the Scans that you put up that Marvel INTENDS for them to be counterparts, I do not really accept this since it was, as you said, in the 10 year anniversary.

#23 Posted by Dakens son (433 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@cascadeking09 said:

@Gambler: Most of the crime syndicate is like that. Johnny Quick and Powering aren't the same people as Flash and Green Lantern either. I honestly don't understand how Laura and Kirika could be sisters if the exact same Wolverine isn't their father.

My thoughts exactly,eventhough there are several similarities,the characters are totally different.
The only thing they seemed to have in common is the bloodline and the powers,on top of that Kirika is trained as a samurai,Laura as an a assassin!

#24 Posted by fesak (6772 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

Comparing this to Spider-Man:
X-23 = Scarlet Spider. Main reality clones of Wolverine and Spider-Man.
Kirika = Spider-Girl. Alternate reality daughters of Wolverine and Spider-Man with 50% genetic material from someone else.
I don't see how anyone would think Spider-Girl is a counterpart of Scarlet Spider, so Kirika isn't a counterpart of X-23 either.

Moderator Online

#25 Edited by Gambler (80655 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@fesak said:

Its easy to believe she's X-23's counterpart because every single character in the 10th Anniversary edition is a counterpart of a 616 character, and there are enough small connections to lead one down to this conclusion. Counterpart doesn't necessarily mean exact duplicate or same character. President Obama is not the same person as Prime Minister David Cameron but they're"Counterparts." 616 X-23 and AoA X-23 aren't the same character but they dont need to be in order to be counterparts. In the AoA X-23 isnt cloned from Logan's DNA, she's fathered by it. But that slight alteration serves more as a connection then a disconnection.

Moderator

#26 Posted by cascadeking09 (6656 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@Dakens son said:

@cascadeking09 said:
@Gambler: Most of the crime syndicate is like that. Johnny Quick and Powering aren't the same people as Flash and Green Lantern either. I honestly don't understand how Laura and Kirika could be sisters if the exact same Wolverine isn't their father.
My thoughts exactly,eventhough there are several similarities,the characters are totally different. The only thing they seemed to have in common is the bloodline and the powers,on top of that Kirika is trained as a samurai,Laura as an a assassin!

yup.

#27 Posted by fesak (6772 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@Gambler said:

@fesak said:
Its easy to believe she's X-23's counterpart because every single character in the 10th Anniversary edition is a counterpart of a 616 character, and there are enough small connections to lead one down to this conclusion. Counterpart doesn't necessarily mean exact duplicate or same character. President Obama is not the same person as Prime Minister David Cameron but they're"Counterparts." 616 X-23 and AoA X-23 aren't the same character but they dont need to be in order to be counterparts. In the AoA X-23 isnt cloned from Logan's DNA, she's fathered by it. But that slight alteration serves more as a connection then a disconnection.

Guess it comes dow to how you define counterpart.
I don't see Spider-Man 2099 as a counterpart to Spider-man either, but many people do.

Moderator Online

#28 Edited by CATPANEXE (9366 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@k2:
I didn't feel attacked by your post in any way. And yes, I agree X-23's genetic relationship to Wolverine is relevant to the issue, but again, felt it better to steer clear from bringing that argument into play here as it isn't the main issue and is already a topic of debate elsewhere on the Vine. But retrospectively and in lieu of what you've said, I should have made it clear as it does matter

@Gambler:
I understand your concept of " counterpart", but still don't agree as the basis for counterpart here seems to be " same codename ", which doesn't equal the same person in a different timeline. Again I point to the case of 616 Wolverine's AoA counterpart being Weapon X, but not being AoA Wolverine, who is a different character. I also understand the point your driving about AoA Anniversary characters intended to have implied mirroring of 616 ones, but digress that I think the point in many of those cases was that the AoA character be in the " title " or " position " of a well known 616, particularly X-Universe one, but not actually be the same character in every case.
I stand on my view here, and state that " counterpart" may be taken more loosely than it should, and I'll elaborate. (the links I'm providing are very important here)
(note that Weapon X AoA's bio is a duplicate of his Handbook entry, and it reflects in it that AoA and AoA Anniversary are a shared reality, one being the present of the other, our own site's AoA story arc page lists them as conjoined as well)

@fesak:
Thanks for bringing up MC2 Spider-Girl.
The Spider-Girl : Mayday Parker of Marvels MC2 timeline/reality, a future offshoot of 616 much in the way that 2099 is, is not the counterpart of Spider-Man, as Spider-Man/Peter Parker, as well as Mary Jane Watson already have counterparts of themselves in the MC2 reality whom are the mother and father of Mayday Parker. Spider-Girl MC2 is not the counterpart of Spider-man from 616, no more than is Spider-Man 2099: Miguel O'Hara, but is the counterpart of Spider-Girl/Venom from the Earth X and related timelines.
I point again to the illustrated Wolverine 616, Wolverine AoA, and Weapon X AoA debacle here.

For the topic at hand I would also use the fact that Spider-Girl 616: Anya Corazan and Spider-Girl MC2 are not counterparts, even though they share the same codename, as well as relative powers and equipment, but, Spider-Girl 2020 is a counterpart of Mayday Parker, not for sharing the namesake, but for being the same person. April Parker from MC2 is counterpart to none of the above, despite having cloned material in her body from Mayday Parker. and sharing the identity and costume of Spider-Girl MC2 at times.

A few more examples I think are important here:

* In the vein of your view Gambler, Charles Lehnsherr was created to be the AoA " counterpart " of 616 Charles Xavier, being that he represents what an AoA version of " Charles " would be, yet we know that Charles AoA is not actually a version of 616 Charles, despite their proxy. Your reasoning would state they are however.

* Identity Wars brought up a few good examples recently, being the story arc that occurs through The Amazing Spider-Man Annual #38, Deadpool Annual # 1, and Incredible Hulks Annual # 1.

In this story, the 616 versions of Spider-man (Parker), Hulk (Banner) and Deadpool (Wade) end up interacting with an alternate dimension.

Peter of 616 meets up with The Amazing Spider, who is in fact his alternate reality version being that The Amazing Spider is that realities version of Peter Parker (except of course
when 616 Peter Parker disguises himself as that realities Amazing Spider. Many of the images in Spider-mans image gallery are misplaced as a result).

Bruce Banner of 616 discovered two distinct alternate reality versions here, on, an alternate reality version of Bruce himself who had become Sorcerer Supreme and
taken on the title of Dr.Strange, and that realities Hulk aspect had been exorcized to Hell becoming The Infernal Hulk. This alternate reality version of Bruce Banner I would
not consider however a version of 616 Dr.Strange.

Lastly, there's Deadpool and Dr.Doom. In this reality 616 Deadpool met someone who seemed identical to himself, but with a green colored costume instead named Death Wish, and they ran into trouble with someone who seemed to be a Dr.Doom counterpart named Death Mask , who looked and acts like 616 Doom but had a red costume with Deadpool styled mask (both featured in Ultimate Marvel Vs. Capcom 3) . As it turns out however, Death Wish was not 616 Deadpool's counterpart as he was not Wade Wilson, but in fact Death Mask is Wades counterpart, as he is Wade Wilson instead. (except of course when 616 Wade Wilson disguises himself as that realities Death Mask. Again, much of this caused image gallery placement confusion, though most of it seems to be repaired. Sometimes it helps to read the stories and/or wait until they've completed rather than jumping the gun on previews?) Death Mask is not an alternate reality version of Dr.Doom, nor is Death Wish a counterpart of Deadpool, and is in fact his own character, despite appearances, titles and placement. This realities Death Mask is also not a counterpart of the Death Mask from Marvel 616 either.
* on a sidenote: Death Wish is actually lacking in a character page/bio on CV for anyong that wants points?)

Taking advantage of similarities resulted in believed counterparts was actually the main storytelling tool used in the Identity Wars story.

* A rather wacky example I can think of is What If? Vol.2 #48, in which musician Keith Richards has 616 Mr.Fantastic's powers and replaces his position as the leader of the Fantastic Four, the other members of the Rolling Stones making up the remainder of the team. Another version of Reed Richards himself is present in this story. While this version of the team does constitute an alternate reality version of the 616 Fantastic Four, as well as one of our own realities Rolling Stones, the Keith Richards featured is not an alternate reality counterpart of 616 Reed Richards, nor the Stones of the rest of the 616 team, despite being a representative of Reed's position in 616.

* A possible weird example lastly, is the considering of Wolverine and Hellverine, both characters present in 616. Hellverine is Wolverines body while being possessed by demons whitest Wolverine's soul
is in Hell, and aspects of his psyche remain and try and ward out the demons from his mind. According to the brass onsite, Hellverine is in fact a separate character, as despite sharing Wolverines body, isn't Wolverine, nor a counterpart of him. ( I have my questions of this actually, and definite contention for the name Hellverine, as it has never been featured in a comic book and is in fact a fan concoction, but again I digress.).

I stand that as there are more details involved in continuity and alternate universe tales, therefore those same details are applicable in the defining and cataloging of said characters instead of a general basis to be made and applied, especially when is the case those factors do exist and should not just be dismissed.

@Gambler:
Another way I can think to put it is this

* Say I go back into the past and alter events on a drastic level. Due to this a separate timestream and present is created. Do to the alteration of events, you lead an entirely
different life than the one you know now, and your own mental being is even changed as a result.
Would this person still be you?

* Say I go back into the past and alter events on a drastic level. Due to this a separate timestream and present is created. Do to the alteration of events, you are never born.
Your father has a child with someone other than your mother, but, they choose to name him the same name as you have been given. In fact, this person follows a simliar path as
you in their life and timeline. In fact, they even become a Comicvine member and take on the username Gambler.
Would this person still be you?

* Say that you die (tragic turn of events that no one actually wants, the flag of Comicvine will
fly at half mast forever. Hypothetical like the Schrödinger's cat theory). But someone has found a way to duplicate and steal your identity and claim to be you. They even go as far as to
take your CV account and claim you never perished.
Would this person still be you?

That's all I got for today. ;)

#29 Posted by afgossett (39 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

It seems like some people have a misconception of the term counterpart.

They don't have to be carbon copies or even the same character for that matter for them to be counterparts of one another here are two prime examples.

Ultimate Cable is actually an older version of Wolverine not the son of Cyclops and Maddie Pryor like the 616 version of Cable but they are still counterparts of eachother.

Ultimate Ben Riely is an african american scientist with no spider powers and he's not even a clone but he is the ultimate universes counterpart of 616 Ben Riely.

and like someone else mentioned Super Woman and Wonder Woman both completely different characters but counterparts of eachother.

Now I know my examples were only in the ultimate universe but it's another universe just like AoA. Using this logic it is completely acceptable to think Kirika and X-23 are counterparts, hell some counterparts just share the same name and no other similarities. The fact that X-23 and Kirika are so similar and writers have hinted at them being eachothers counterpart pretty much solidifies it in my book.

#30 Posted by fesak (6772 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@afgossett said:

It seems like some people have a misconception of the term counterpart. They don't have to be carbon copies or even the same character for that matter for them to be counterparts of one another here are two prime examples. Ultimate Cable is actually an older version of Wolverine not the son of Cyclops and Maddie Pryor like the 616 version of Cable but they are still counterparts of eachother. Ultimate Ben Riely is an african american scientist with no spider powers and he's not even a clone but he is the ultimate universes counterpart of 616 Ben Riely. and like someone else mentioned Super Woman and Wonder Woman both completely different characters but counterparts of eachother. Now I know my examples were only in the ultimate universe but it's another universe just like AoA. Using this logic it is completely acceptable to think Kirika and X-23 are counterparts, hell some counterparts just share the same name and no other similarities. The fact that X-23 and Kirika are so similar and writers have hinted at them being eachothers counterpart pretty much solidifies it in my book.

This is very illogical.
If Ultimate Cable is a counterpart of Cable, who, assuming he'll be introduced sometime in the future, will the real Cable/Nathan Summers be a counterpart of?
Same for Ult.Ben Reilly. The real Ben Reilly could still be introduced later.
Which brings me to the point that there is a possibility that they would introduce an actual AoA counterpart of X-23 later on. Maybe not very likely, but it's possible.

Moderator Online

#31 Edited by afgossett (39 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

Yes it is very illogical but the whole idea of an alternate universe with counterparts of pre-existing characters is very illogical. Going by your logic the real Cable/Nathan Summers can't be introduced into the ultimate universe unless he himself is from another completely seperate alternate universe considering the fact that the Cyclops of the ultimate universe is dead and as far as I know there is no ultimate Maddi Pryor. Same could be said with Ben considering that the ultimate universe has already done their little clone saga and none of them were Ben. Although I am glad you made me think of the Ultimate Clone Saga considering there is another counterpart to a 616 character involved Jessica Drew.

She was a female clone of Peter Parker yet she took the name Jessica Drew and even went on to adopt the identity of Spider Woman. She doesn't have the same origin of the 616 Jessica Drew but she is her counterpart none the less. To be someones counterpart does not require them having to be a carbon copy of said character.

Look at the entire 1602 story. All of the characters are counterparts of 616 characters with completely different origins and some even have altered appearances and power sets yet they are counterparts to the mainstream universe characters.

#32 Posted by fesak (6772 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@afgossett said:

Yes it is very illogical but the whole idea of an alternate universe with counterparts of pre-existing characters is very illogical. Going by your logic the real Cable/Nathan Summers can't be introduced into the ultimate universe unless he himself is from another completely seperate alternate universe considering the fact that the Cyclops of the ultimate universe is dead and as far as I know there is no ultimate Maddi Pryor.

Ultimate Cablerine already was from an alternate reality, Earth-2107 and not Earth-1610, so i don't see the problem there. I also don't see how he's a counterpart of Cable and not Wolverine.

@afgossett said:

Although I am glad you made me think of the Ultimate Clone Saga considering there is another counterpart to a 616 character involved Jessica Drew. She was a female clone of Peter Parker yet she took the name Jessica Drew and even went on to adopt the identity of Spider Woman. She doesn't have the same origin of the 616 Jessica Drew but she is her counterpart none the less. To be someones counterpart does not require them having to be a carbon copy of said character.

So if she took the name Julia Carpenter instead of Jessica Drew she would suddenly be a counterpart of Julia instead?
What if she took the names on someone completely unrelated or a new name?

Moderator Online

#33 Edited by afgossett (39 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

Then in theory she would be a counterpart of Julia Carpenter. The writers instead intended for her to be Jessica Drew hence the spider powers, hence her adopting the same identity, hence the writers deciding to name her Jessica Drew.

the only problem with there being a "true" ultimate Cable is that the Scott Summers of the ultimate universe dead and there never was a maddy pryor.

By your logic it's like saying Ultimate Thor isn't a counterpart of the main 616 Thor just because they have different origins and some serious major differences in character.

#34 Edited by afgossett (39 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

The best example. Is ultimate Gah Lak Tus. For pete's sake if a fucking fleet of sentient space ships could be the counterpart to the 616 world devouring Galactus why is it so hard to get that Kirika can't be X-23's? They both share large amounts of Wolverine's DNA and some of their host mother's dna as well. I think you guys are counterparts should be clones or nearly exact copies of their main 616 counterparts when that's the furthest from the truth.

A person or thing holding a position or performing a function that corresponds to that of another person or thing in a different area.

that's the context that counterpart is being used.

sorry if I'm coming off like a snarky douche btw.

#35 Posted by CATPANEXE (9366 posts) - 1 year, 9 months ago - Show Bio

@fesak said:

@afgossett said:
Yes it is very illogical but the whole idea of an alternate universe with counterparts of pre-existing characters is very illogical. Going by your logic the real Cable/Nathan Summers can't be introduced into the ultimate universe unless he himself is from another completely seperate alternate universe considering the fact that the Cyclops of the ultimate universe is dead and as far as I know there is no ultimate Maddi Pryor.
Ultimate Cablerine already was from an alternate reality, Earth-2107 and not Earth-1610, so i don't see the problem there. I also don't see how he's a counterpart of Cable and not Wolverine.

Same here. The thing is that in cases like this, a reader jumps the gun before the final portion of the story is written, or in a worse case, doesn't really read the books at all, then sources it to a bio and makes the call, not the company themselves. A classic case of this in my mind is " Heroes Reborn Hawkeye ". The Heroes Reborn Hawkeye as well is actually Wolverine, claws and all, running around with acting like Hawkeye. For my money that makes the Heroes Reborn character an alternate version of Wolverine, not of Clint Barton, nor of both.

@afgossett:
I could provide an argument to everything you posted, being that I'm knowledgeably " some people " here, but I already addressed all of it before you posted, so refer yourself to it for answers.

#36 Posted by DFChewie (150 posts) - 1 year, 7 months ago - Show Bio

@cascadeking09 said:

@Gambler: Like Wonder Woman and Superwoman

Precisely. When making the Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths movie, writer Dwayne McDuffie established (off-camera) that in an alternate timeline you have two counterparts: one who is you but with a different past, and one who fills the role in that timeline that you fill in yours. Sometimes, they're the same person; see, for example, Wolverine (Earth-616) and Weapon X (AoA). Both are "Hi, I'm and James Howlett" AND "Hi, I'm the scrappy dude with claws who likes Jean Grey and pals around with the X-Men". Sometimes, they're different people: in JL: CoTE, for example, Wonder Woman had two. One was Superwoman, and was the female powerhouse member of the Crime Syndicate. The other, Olympia, was Diana of Themyscira. Incidentally, Superwoman's really name was Mary Batson. She had two counterparts in Wonder Woman's timeline: Wonder Woman, and Mary Marvel, the sister of Captain Marvel.

Following this logic (if we can agree to apply it here; I know it's a whole different company, and probably a whole different Multiverse within that company, but still), then Kirika is definitely X-23's "spiritual counterpart" as she fulfills the same (very basic) role in the AoA timeline that Laura does on Earth-616, but she is not X-23's direct counterpart. Neither Kirika nor Laura have a direct counterpart in each other's worlds due to the changes separating the timelines.

#37 Posted by jordama (4223 posts) - 1 year, 7 months ago - Show Bio

Was Kirika created just to fill the gap that is left by not having X-23 exist?

#38 Posted by cascadeking09 (6656 posts) - 1 year, 6 months ago - Show Bio

@DFChewie said:

@cascadeking09 said:
@Gambler: Like Wonder Woman and Superwoman
Precisely. When making the Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths movie, writer Dwayne McDuffie established (off-camera) that in an alternate timeline you have two counterparts: one who is you but with a different past, and one who fills the role in that timeline that you fill in yours. Sometimes, they're the same person; see, for example, Wolverine (Earth-616) and Weapon X (AoA). Both are "Hi, I'm and James Howlett" AND "Hi, I'm the scrappy dude with claws who likes Jean Grey and pals around with the X-Men". Sometimes, they're different people: in JL: CoTE, for example, Wonder Woman had two. One was Superwoman, and was the female powerhouse member of the Crime Syndicate. The other, Olympia, was Diana of Themyscira. Incidentally, Superwoman's really name was Mary Batson. She had two counterparts in Wonder Woman's timeline: Wonder Woman, and Mary Marvel, the sister of Captain Marvel.
Following this logic (if we can agree to apply it here; I know it's a whole different company, and probably a whole different Multiverse within that company, but still), then Kirika is definitely X-23's "spiritual counterpart" as she fulfills the same (very basic) role in the AoA timeline that Laura does on Earth-616, but she is not X-23's direct counterpart. Neither Kirika nor Laura have a direct counterpart in each other's worlds due to the changes separating the timelines.

You just wrinkled my brain.

#39 Posted by EnSabahNurX (2252 posts) - 1 year, 6 months ago - Show Bio

Well based on marvel vs capcom 3 X-23 and kirika are counterparts XD

#40 Posted by x_29 (2261 posts) - 1 year, 3 months ago - Show Bio

Kirka is the AOA counterpart of X-23. Deal with it Bub. Marvel has even stated it.

#41 Posted by DFChewie (150 posts) - 1 year, 3 months ago - Show Bio

@jordama: Kirika was created specifically to fill the X-23 gap in AoA, yes.

#42 Posted by jordama (4223 posts) - 1 year, 3 months ago - Show Bio

@DFChewie: Then it seems clear that she is the counterpart. End of essay arguments.

#43 Posted by CATPANEXE (9366 posts) - 1 year, 3 months ago - Show Bio

@jordama said:

@DFChewie: Then it seems clear that she is the counterpart. End of essay arguments.

We reached an agreement and ended that months ago. Sorry for posting " essays " of in my thread? Seriously, your frequent need to outwardly dismiss my posts is getting a little irritating.

#44 Posted by jordama (4223 posts) - 1 year, 3 months ago - Show Bio

@CATPANEXE said:

@jordama said:
@DFChewie: Then it seems clear that she is the counterpart. End of essay arguments.
We reached an agreement and ended that months ago. Sorry for posting " essays " of in my thread? Seriously, your frequent need to outwardly dismiss my posts is getting a little irritating.

Sorry I left the Forum a while back and only replied because someone @'d me, and I replied to that user to make the point. And I apologize if I offended you, I didn't think I did anything wrong but perception is reality.

#45 Posted by ReVamp (22561 posts) - 1 year, 3 months ago - Show Bio

lol.

X-23

X-23 is the clone daughter of Wolverine and Sarah Kinney, trained to be the perfect weapon. She has joined the X-Men in an effort to build a new life, defining herself as a person rather than a weapon.

Comment and Save