Ok I admit this question is mostly for admins but it's still open for anyone, obviously . I feel there should be some more clarification on what constitutes a One Man Army. One of the basic rules is that they have to take down 4 or more people at once to qualify. Though I also added that some villains like Te Ka who are giant cosmic monsters can prove they are capable enough without actually taking on that number of foes. But what about trained, human hitmen like Anton Chigurh who was seen only ever taking down three people at once? I'd like to gather some thoughts.
ALL POSTS
Oh, and OMA needs to be distinct and apart from being a Tank, which *can* be Meta/Super. Juggernaut is a Tank but not an OMA…
I can't really agree with that. There are characters like Injustice's Aquaman that are like these abnormal/meta human type of characters that tend to rely on armies to win their battles and not be able to solo people on their own.
And I don't think them having access to AI should not make them count either. Like sure, they're using some kind of weapon or power to defeat enemies, but the same thing can be said for meta humans and deities that do rely on these gimmick abilities like the Flash or Mxyzptlk (take away their powers and they're just ordinary people). Or Star Wars characters like Grievous and Durge that rely on weapons to defeat large group of enemies.
With Shockwave on this, I feel it should just be taking on several opponents to the point they do decent against as just normal people would simply be a strategic individual which has a separate category. They two categories can overlap but not always. Brainiac has with skill taken over and overthrown worlds, Darkseid has done similar while also fighting large groups by himself and Juggernaut regularly fought groups of superheroes and on occasion a hero (Hulk) who has fought off the entire army. Then there are others who are "normal" like Koba and Joker in some versions who exploit both physical and strategic means to take one multiple people. There are several types but regardless of which type they are shown taking on multiple people either at the same time or in a very short timespan without others fighting with them,
Not always. A superhuman character can be an OMA if they are able to take down a fellow superhuman without an army (ex. Savitar from Arrowverse)
Alright guys so what's the consensus?
I think the category's fine the way it is, so long as the villain is capable of taking on multiple enemies by himself, whether it'd be pure strength, power, weaponry or just natural, skilled talent.
So what is the diff between wearing a power/mecha suit/armor and a gunstar with Death Blossom™?
My vote is still that the OMA needs to be inherent to the *character* more than anything they possess elevating them to it. Without any of his armors (even by remote), Tony Stark may still be rich and a genius, but he's not an OMA (nor a Tank), while anyone wearing the armors will be. Hell, *I* could be an OMA in one of his armors…
Captain America will always be an OMA (yes, thanks to a serum, but that serum is now a part of him… he can't hang it in a closet when he goes to bed) and will be so without his shield, just nearly anything he can lay his hands on… or not.
(Edited by Love Robin)
Being a one-man army isn't all just about strength inherited from you but as well as the talents you possess that allow you to defeat groups of enemies. Tony isn't a one-man army simply just because the suit he wears augments his strength and durability but because he knows what he's doing when wearing his armor and often knows how to defeat his enemies all at once. The same can be said for other characters like Green Lantern. You don't just become a one-man army from picking up these weapons, you actually have to be competent and know what you're doing with them. Characters like Batman and Joker also tend to fall under this because they often plan their attacks on how they'll defeat their enemies.
It needs to be explicited shown that they can defeat multiple opponents at a rapid rate, I just got into a debate on Voldemort - who has sheer power far capable of taking out entire nations if he wanted.. however he's apparently completely unable to use his potential due to psychological restraints (fear): if so then we mustn't allow loopholes to exist by saying "a character with *potential* to defeat many opponents counts" - they must be shown to do so.. otherwise we're going to end up with One-Man Army for any character that is beyond street-level (as even characters capable of building-class feats are by definition going to have *potential* to defeat massive amounts of enemies).
Alright everyone how shall we re word the definition?
What do you think?