All posts by Love Robin
A victim, not a villain. Some see her as a monster and feel that makes her qualify.
An infobox should be like a drive through window. All of the info is there in a "drive by" fomat
Hmm. A point, please. Juggernaut is a Tank. He is not necessarily an "army".
And that, I believe is an important word we've been overlooking: Army.
Armies are often 'squads'. An ensemble team of individuals each with particular responsibilities and skills. You have Leaders (implying at least one strategist or Plan-guy), Tech-guy, Demolitionist, Medic, etc.
I'm not suggesting that an OMA *needs* to be all of them, to have all their skills, but should be adept enough to show multiple skills. Multiple skills of an army in one man. Juggernaut hardly ever displays any strategy beyond "my one punch will knock down a whole line of guys" or "I'll run them over". In contrast, even before the Super Soldier Serum, Steve Rogers displayed the ability to problem solve, strategize, and think-outside-the-box. Cap can literally take on entire armies, but he will think his way around them before he does.
Again, not suggesting any one OMA display ALL of these traits, but they should be a "Swiss Army Knife of skills".
I think that is a case not normally encountered enough times for this to apply to them as a Category.
(normal) Humans v (normal) humans, yes.
Skrulls v Skrulls, yes
Kree v Kree, yes
Inhumans v Inhumans… maybe; mainly because there do not seem to be a "normal" Inhuman as their powers are all so singularly distinct
Also, I think that any metas with the power of "multiplicity" or "self-replication"—like Jamie Maddrox (Legion?) or Wego(s)—while *literally* OMAs is not the spirit of a Category meant for a single-body individual vs a squad of individuals. IMO
At any rate, questions like this with speedsters is a major reason why I seek to exclude *any* powers or dependency on tech or devices. That's not to say they can't have them in any particular skirmishes, only that they've proven OMA even without. A squad of soldiers facing Captain America know they are likely to get trounced whether or not he has his shield…
"One individual *proven* capable of overpowering a huge number of opponents without overly relying on weapons and devices but skills and powers alone to defeat them."
I'm still not sanguine about having/using powers. A speedster vs normals should not count as there is no conceivable way normals could counter them. The normals should have reasonable chances, no matter how unlikely, to prevail against *one individual*.
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.
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…
Personally, I think a "One Man Army" or "Army of One" should *only* be a normal human. Meta and Super humans already have high expectations expected of them. Superman is so strong and fast that he is capable of sweeping all opposition shy of anything less than opposite sides of the globe at the same time. Let's face it: Superman doesn't need the help of the Justice League, the JL needs *his* help.
So, I say, Non-Meta/Super/Ultra/Mutant HUMAN or whatever is normal for their race/species (terrestrial or alien). Superman, et al, not applicable. Spiderman, not applicable. Super-Skrull, not applicable.
Batman, yes. Punisher, yes. Doc Savage (a hero, but here as an example), yes. Kim Possible (also a hero, but you get the idea), yes.
OMA should also not depend on artificial advantages *to BE the OMA*… like Ironman needs the armor while Hawkeye doesn't need his bow and arrows, etc.
So, we're being asked to believe that the Spino *understood* that humans were inside the plane?? I could accept if it attacked *the plane*, thinking it was another creature which had attacked it. But that humans *inside* were the reason it was hurt? With no previous experience to inform it so? Like a dog after taking many rides in cars has a better chance of understanding humans were inside a car that hit it….
I'm more inclined to believe the spino got a taste for Human and followed similar scents. IMO, a much more believable scenario than it reasoned enough to understand humans were inside controlling the thing that hurt it.
If you cannot see the captioning: "That was incredible. No fur, claws, horns, antlers, or nothin'… just soft and pink."
Not all Mental Illnesses are Psychotic or Psychopathic.
</p><p>It is also unclear—to *me*—that GoD meant to wipe out humanity. He was attacked by magic—his GIFT to mankind, which *every* human was instilled with—and took it back. Repealed it. That mankind were not able to survive that action may have been unintentional and unavoidable, if not unexpected.</p><p>
</p><p>IMO, GoD was not *villainous* much less GoL.</p><p>
</p><p>Look, no child likes or appreciates parental discipline when slapped down for their rebellious actions. Now, *we* as humans may consider GoL's response as too much, and even GoL apparently did not fully agree with it, but I don't see it as "evil".</p>
</p>
Unless a character is an agent for the death of ALL life in the Universe, family, children especially, is essentially a measure of Immortality. "Even if *I* may die, my legacy will live on in them".
To safeguard family (includes the mother of progeny) thus fits into even Pure Evil.
Of course, a measure of "how dare anyone touch anything of mine" could be confused as "caring"…
So unless PEs can ONLY be "Death of the Universe" types, I move that Care of Family can be a moderating conditional. Mind you, *I* have Antagonists and Villains in my stories who don't care about their children (although one has special feelings for only one of his daughters, but does include sexual desires for her) which I might call Pure Evil while still caring for their family.
As one put it: "There is a difference between not liking one's brother, and not caring when some asshole tosses him off a building."
The issue with manga/animé, and Japanese storytelling in general, is they are often *Tales of Morality*. That what is apparent is not always what *is*. They are not always as clear-cut as Western stories which usually have clearly set black and white Good vs Evil. The entire spectrum of what is good and what is bad gets explored.
So trying to assign a blanket to cover all Japanese (and Asian) franchises will be difficult.
To me, "No votes" = Nay
In the case of a tie, I think 1 week should be enough of an extension to accept NEW VOTES. Meaning, not the same users, not sockpuppets. And of course, registered user accounts.
Should a tie persist, then after a review of the status of users who already cast votes (if currently blocked, their vote is voided), then I suggest THE LAST VALID VOTE CAST at time of deadline be counted twice (tie breaker).
Late, but I agree
As long as category:Pure Evil Proposals is a *temporary* one, like "stub" et al, I agree.
I've long been saying that "we're not TVT" but by using so many of their trope names and decisions here, we confuse people. And let me caveat that when I say "tvt trope names" I mean some of their more tailor-made and tvt specific ones, like "red oni, blue oni". That is almost purely a TVT-created label.
Some labels are virtually "public domain". For example when we had "Complete Monster", my issue was not with that label as it is a fairly wide-spread statement, but as soon as Pure Evil was proposed, I endorsed it as a distancing from tvt.
Anyway… I agree with this continuing to divorce us from TVTropes