I know it's hard to determine or really nail down since characters are as old as the writers need them to be, and time passes differently for each character depending on their frequency of use/story developments. But what do we think the approximate ages are for the main line ups of the current X-Books?

Amazing X-Men
Uncanny X-men
X-Men

Uh... I realize it's something of an unorthodox question, but it's kind of required with superheroes/villains: Do we count years spent dead? Not presumed dead, but actually dead? Because one wouldn't THINK they'd age during that period, but no one seems to mention it.

I was thinking something similar, my main reasons for asking were because of the graduation of the JGS kids and Rachel Grey.

Thing is Rachel went to the future and then came back, but they were calling her "kid" then she came from space and she's a teacher...does time travel not count?

I'd say there current physical age is what I'm aiming for though.

I still go by the old Marvel 3-1 rule. For example, Cyclops was 16 in 1963, so he'd be like 32 or 33 now, Kitty was 14 in 1980, so she'd be 25 now, that kind of thing generally works.

Sometimes writers aren't familiar with that rule of thumb themselves and push or pull a character's age away from what makes sense by that logic, but generally it works. Magneto, for example, should be 80 by that rule; but since he was reduced to infancy and then restored to his prime ("that of a man in his 30's") in the late 60's, he should be in his 80's, but physically in his 50's..that sort of thing.

@oldnightcrawler: I've heard of this general rule, but I think characters like New X-Men and there generation have been pretty much put on pause in terms of age. That's why the Wolverine and the X-Men issue kind of struck me as odd since if Pixie was one of the youngest mutants at one point and she's graduating everyone else should be in their 20's, but then there's X-23 who's probably younger then she was 5 years ago

They're whatever age the writers want them to be. Some characters age accordingly and others age slowly. You will go nuts trying to figure it out. I had a friend who tried to create a timeline and it broke his brain.

I always think of their ages like this:

I think Cyclops, Iceman, Angel, Storm, and Emma are all in thier mid 30's to early 40's.

Kitty and Magik are probably in thier mid 20's, Magik's body is younger because of all the years spent in limbo.

Colossus, Nightcrawler, Psylocke and Rogue are probably in their early to mid 30's.

Magneto is at least in his mid 80's by now.

And Wolverine is really, really old.

@cattlebattle: True but for me i'll go....Jubilee and Monet went to school together, Monet went on to X-Factor for years while Jubilee sort of skated by without really aging....then Monet an Jubilee are in X-Men and their the same age...It's like if you pay too much attention your head will explode

^^ Totally what i go by

it's a rule of thumb, and, like I say, not every writer knows/sticks to it. But if we can agree that Pixie was somewhere around 15 ten years ago (2004), then she'd be 18 now, which is old enough to graduate. But, like you say, since she was supposed to be one of the younger students, it does seem like the other New X-men should have already graduated. Unless the JG School also offers university classes, which I guess it totally could..

I like the 3 to 1 rule as well. With some characters like Magneto and Polaris or others like Havok and any telepaths (rachel, jean, emma, monet etc) or those with light and/or energy based powers, healers and shapeshifters and power siphoning (jubilee, dazzler, mystique, husk etc), I like to think that there powers keep them from aging. Magneto and Polaris with magnetism and its healing properties. Shapeshifters can change appearance. Telepaths can hide their's i.e. Rachel with her hound markings. Healers can continue to fight off the ravages of age and disease and even those with light powers could do something similar. I even think of teleporters going to different dimension and bending time and space could keep them from aging.

Anyway that's what I tell myself along with maybe having the X-gene means that you age at a slower rate than normal flatscans, which of course would be another reason for the vain rich and famous to hate mutants lol.

Exactly. Rogue is one character that is an aging anomaly. When first introduced she seems to be and is drawn like a woman who could be in her thirties, then when she joins the X-Men she is referred to as and drawn to look more like a teenager, in her late teens presumably. Now, it would appear that she is close in age to character like Cyclops, who is popularly believed to be in his thirties.

Havok is another good example, when first introduced he is graduating college, and Cyclops is at least 2 years older than him. Though at the time that issue came, Cyclops can't be older than 20. The normal age one would graduate University is roughly 22. So, thats another one thats confusing. Those are just two off the top of my head. I don't think the writers actually put any thought into it since its just fiction.

Yeah, Rogue is drawn like an older woman in her first appearance with the Brotherhood, but by the time she joins the X-men, Mystique is still treating her like she's a child, which is more congruous with the idea that she was indeed still a teenager. If we can assume that means she was 18 or 19 (since, if she was any younger, why would she be on the X-men and not the New Mutants?) in 1983, then she would be 28 or 29 now; 4 or 5 years older than Kitty, but 4 or 5 years younger than Cyclops, both of which sound about right to me.

Good catch that Havok, Polaris, etc, don't really follow this rule as, as I understand it, they were introduced before this rule was really established. I can't help but think it's one of the things that they'd rather people not really notice; that Havok, Polaris, etc, were adults by the time Giant Size X-men started is really all we need to know about them, and to the casual observer they would be around the same age as the original X-men.

It doesn't work like that and only gets more confusing.

Iceman, another one. Is said to be younger two years younger than most of the other X-Men, so this should place him with Havok. However, Havok graduates college like I mentioned, then much later on, after time at least several years have notably passed, when Dr. Doom captures the X-Men and Arcade captures their loved ones, Iceman is called into action from....college. I guess you could argue it was for his Masters degree, lol, but the contents of his dorm room would seem to indicate he is a young man.\

I had a friend who liked to write and he actually tried to make a timeline of the X-Mens births and ages and it just doesn't add up. Even that 3-1 year rule nonsense they made up seems broken. Its better to just write it off that they are fictional characters and you shouldn't worry about it.

you mean The Uncanny X-Men #145 - Kidnapped!(1981)? If Iceman leaves the X-men in Giant-Size X-Men #1 (1975), and you ignore the inconsistencies of the 60's like I suggested, we could assume he's 18 or 19 (old enough to be leaving high school) in '75, meaning that by the 3-1 rule he'd be 20 or 21 by 1981, still young enough to be in university.

Like I say, the rule didn't always exist, so you can't really apply it to stuff that happened in the late 60's/early 70's, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't generally work beyond that.

I agree that the 3-1 rule can't be an actual rule since not all writers seem to follow it, and since it's fiction it shouldn't really matter anyway. But for the sake of answering @koays question of "what do we think the approximate ages are..", it's the easiest, most generally serviceable way to do it.

I don't think about such things. It will just make your head hurt and writers will never confirm it, anyway. In comic land, everyone is in their early to mid 20's! Yay!

But...From Giant Sized X-Men, where you are presuming that he is 18 or 19, a lot more time passes than you suggest. During the Claremont Byrne era, if you read the books in succession, it will make note of how much time passes at times, for instance an event that happened several issues prior will be acknowledged as happening "6 months ago" or "last year". So, time passed a lot faster back in those days, and there is a good amount of years of issues before 1981, so Iceman should be at least in his mid to late twenties. Also, not long before this, during the Dark Phoenix Saga, Cyclops mentions how he is not as sharp in his "older age" although he is more or less being facetious, its still an odd thing to say if he was 22, I had always assumed that he was almost 30 at that point in time, so Iceman would have been in his mid twenties along with the rest of the All New X-Men...except for Colossus, who they at times mention is in his late teens??? Its very confusing, lol.

I agree with your last statement, there. I am just saying that some of it makes no sense sometimes.

Actually, at least until more modern times, I had always though the majority of super heroes are supposed to be in their early 30s. With obvious exceptions like Spider-Man

good point. I guess I always just read those as "earlier.." and "later..", but you're probably right that if you went through and added them all up, it probably wouldn't stand up to the 3-1 rule.

The Colossus thing never seemed incongruous to me since, if we consider him to be 18 in 1975, that makes sense with him being 21 when Wolverine first takes him to a bar in The Uncanny X-Men #183 in 1984. 9 years later he's 3 years older. He would have to be almost as old as the original team if Xavier was thinking of recruiting him at the same time (as revealed in the flashback from The Uncanny X-Men #300), which makes sense with Iceman being in university during those years.

I don't know if them going to the bar had any bearing on his age, as the drinking age in NY was 18 at the time. Colossus' age along with the other All New X-Men was always quite a mystery, when they first join they all appear to be adults in their twenties. Professor X even makes a comment about how they were all recruited at an older age then his original X-Men were on more than one occasion, then, the whole thing about Kitty and Colossus was that they had a significant age difference, if they were only 4 or so years apart, yeah, I could see it being a problem because its illegal, but Kitty acted very mature for his age, so I don't think it would have been as prominent as if they were ten or so years apart..which I always kind of had assumed they were.

I think you're right that they never specify the ages of the Deadly Genesis team. But my assumption that at least Colossus, Nightcrawler, and Storm were around the same age as the original class (based on the flashback in #300) still holds up with that comment from Xavier, since they were recruited 4 years later when the originals themselves were entering young adulthood.

If Kitty met Colossus when she was 14 in 1980 and he was, say, 19 or 20, it doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility that a 14 year old girl would have a crush on an older boy; and if he was 19 or even 20 he might reasonably still be young enough to reciprocate those feelings even while realizing he's too old for them to be appropriate, all of which just seems most likely based on the stories.

I had always assumed Storm and Nightcralwer were a bit older than Colossus, but only by a year or two. Mainly because Storm refers to him as little brother on more than one occasion. As for Kitty and Colossus, I just never saw him being 4 years older than her much of a problem outside of course the legal issue, I just always kind of guessed he was least ten years older than her. Time always moved fast back then (80s), there would be issues that recalled the story arc that just happened as "last winter" and Claremont would always go into very word heavy explanations about how the seasons are changing, or the time of year it is, and within in the course of lets say....15 issues, it would seem like a year or two had passed, making it very hard to determine the age of some of the characters.

i don't know how much it helps, but there was an issue of X-Men Adventures where Storm was still in Africa, at least 6 months to a year before Krakoa... and Jean or Cyclops (can't remember which) commented on Goddess Ororo being a couple of years younger than them. There was also a What If...? Mr Sinister Assembled the X-Men... same thing, Storm was 2 years-ish younger than the Original Class.

I'd always picked Colossus as the youngest of the Second Class... Mostly coz of the irony of having the biggest team member being the youngest of them. As well as the Little Brother/Little Sister thing that Ororo and Peter have. He's younger, so Little Brother... She's smaller, so Little Sister. they're cute when they call each other these names.

I'd pick the Original Class (except Iceman) as being early to mid 30's... with whatever age they are, the Second Class, along with Havok and Polaris (except Wolverine) are 2-4 years younger. Bobby i'd place as the same age as Colossus.

Rogue, Psylocke and Gambit are harder to place. I'd put them at late 20's... possible breaking early 30s. I remember a Gambit age estimate from several years back... possibly during X-Treme X-Men... when he was aged at 23 or 24 can't 100% recall. Years have gone by to put him in the late 20s classification now.. even with 3:1.

Drop Kitty and the New Mutants in the mid to late 20s range. Magik and Rachel here too.

Gen X'ers in the early 20's range

New X-Men late teens to pushing 20 for a couple - like Hellion and Surge.

JGS and Xavier's students... mid to late teens.

Emma's age is easier to guess. She is older than the originals by at least several years. if Cyclops is 33-ish, she is 39-40. She's a bit of a cougar (always has been - see Iceman, Empath...). In Hollywood terms, she's in District Attorney age-range. ("There are only three ages in hollywood: Babe, District Attorney, and Driving Miss Daisy" - to quote Goldi Hawn in First Wives' Club). I'd place Sage in the same age bracket as Emma. She seemed to be somewhat older than the Originals in the "flashback retcon" that made her an X-Agent if not an X-MAN.

@devilsgrin81: Emma isn't 39-40. She was 27 in Grant Morrison's new X-Men. I believe she was said to be 28 later and they showed her celebrating a birthday in one comic. She should be no older than Cyclops.

I'd say Wolverine is 127 going by Marvel's somewhat real world timeline.

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't Cyclops and Spider-Man age mates?

I think you're right that Storm and Nightcrawler were older than Colossus as they and Wolverine certainly all treated Colossus like a younger brother. I think it like, if you consider that they were to be Xavier's original 8 students as was later revealed, Storm would have been the oldest, Beast the next oldest, Colossus the youngest, Iceman the next youngest, and the other 4 were all the same age.

Speaking of the ages of the originals around this time, in Classic X-Men #1 - First Night, set the same day as Giant Size' #1, Banshee and Nightcrawler offer Iceman a beer and he replies that he isn't old enough to drink, further proof I think that he would have been still a teen around this period.

The propriety of a four or five year age difference between Kitty and Colossus may not have been a major issue in real life, but in a comic book for kids, it would have been pretty irresponsible to ignore.

you're right that Claremont is a bit all over the place with how time passes in the early 80's, but I think he's at least a little more consistent with the relative ages. When Kitty joins Excalibur in 1986 it's implied that she's only just become old enough to drive (when Courtney offers to buy her a car), which is still consistent with the 3-1 rule.

Spider-man was 16 in 1962, and Cyclops was 16 in 1963, so, yeah, basically they should be.

I knew I remembered something about them being similar in age! Thanks for the confirmation mate.

you are no doubt right. Ages have been retconed a few times though. He claimed he was 16 when he first became spide-rman but in civil war it was 15. Sue and reed met when reed was in his later 20's and she was like 10. that was retconned to them meeting at the same age, he stayed with her aunt when he was in school and thats how they met.

I figure Iceman and Spider-man are roughly the same age, but he is the youngest member, of the original, so I figure Cyclops is a year or two older?

Brain explode, also I believe Marvel has deaged Spider-man at least once, presumably after "One More Day"....any comfirmation on that?

I will agree that Kitty is one of the only characters whose age kind of meets that 3 to 1 rule.

That even complicates things further. I always thought Iceman was the same age as Havok and Lorna, but, Havok obvious graduates college at some point, and Bobby has graduated from the Xavier institute not long before that, which I assumed happened when he was 17 or 18. So thats strange that he is not old enough to drink at that point.

Its really starting to give me a headache now.

That's from a story from 1986 that was told retroactively, so it almost seems like Claremont was writing that part in to implement the 3-1 retroactively, since, as you point out,

"The X-Men aged way faster than anyone else in the 60s. The first dozen issues or so, they are referred to as teenagers, then within the next several years, they graduate from Xaviers and turn into adults, at the same time, it seems as the rest of the Marvel U doesn't age much"

..so it may have been something he was trying to tidy up in those backups.

I don't know, Claremont seemed to be one of the proprietors of pushing the amount of years that happened within his run on the X-Men. As I mentioned, he would often make references of how much time had passed in between events that seemed to be more according to real time instead of the time in the comic.