1832 réponses à ce sujet

[ticoteco246]

If there reasoning they've had is the same as the one I've argued for in earlier comment, then I see this armor as hot mess only in a sense that the Dalish/elves don't know much about being effective heavy-armor warriors.... which, based on their physique and preference for ranged combat, they aren't.

 

Good point, might just be a "Dalish elves are really not the type to have heavy warriors and therefore their armour is designed for quick movement" thing. (On a side note, always found it funny that my 2H warrior Lavellan was a hunter. Why and how did she learn to swing around that great big sword? The world will never know)

[midnight tea]

Are we back to realism debate again? If dragon shoot fireball at you die. I know Cass is strong but no amount of armor would help her to take all damage from dragon for 15 min.

 

Not if you have enchantments that protect you against fire. And we know those exist in Thedas. Within the rules of the world being pretty much fireproof (even if temporarily) is possible.

 

Also - I don't think Cass has ever single-handedly defeated a dragon. Even when she was fighting dragons that attacked previous Divine, she had help form mages, who probably cast barriers at her at near all times - just like my mage in team does when we fight a dragon.

 

And before anyone goes into another extreme and starts saying "well then, since magic exists then anything is possible!". Not in Thedas it is - magic can bend rules of reality to a significant degree, but it's well-established that it can't warp them entirely, at all times. At least, not in modern Thedas (no idea how it was pre-Veil).

[Han Shot First]

Good point, might just be a "Dalish elves are really not the type to have heavy warriors and therefore their armour is designed for quick movement" thing. (On a side note, always found it funny that my 2H warrior Lavellan was a hunter. Why and how did she learn to swing around that great big sword? The world will never know)

 

I think the main issue with the Dalish is not necessarily the female warriors were wearing so little clothing in DA:O, but that their male counterparts were heavily armored up in comparison.

[midnight tea]

Good point, might just be a "Dalish elves are really not the type to have heavy warriors and therefore their armour is designed for quick movement" thing. (On a side note, always found it funny that my 2H warrior Lavellan was a hunter. Why and how did she learn to swing around that great big sword? The world will never know)

 

Yeah, I actually plan to run a PT with a 2H elf wielding a gigantic axe, simply because it looks HILARIOUS The shaft of the axe is almost as thick as my female Lavellan's arm!

 

Anyway, I think that Dalish warriors may only wield the title of hunters, but are probably more dedicated to protecting the hunting party - or maybe luring large animals or bandits away from them and holding them off for a moment. In any case, I can't ever see an elf be as effective tank or warrior as others, simply because of their physique - unless they use their natural assets, like speed and good reflexes, which is why their armor might need to be lighter.

[o Ventus]

Seriously, english is not problem we have.

 

I'm fairly certain it is when you don't respond with good English.

 

 

 

 

I simply disagree with your points and say why I do so while making arguments and even put some proves on those, but you seem to want dismiss them without bringing much counter-argument or prove otherwise.

 

I've refuted every single point you've made to me thus far.

 

 

 

I recommend you feminist movements, since I don't think you really side with your points, you are just using them as counter-argument. Since if you were you should realise there is quite big inequality that you bring up as women are not allowed to show their boobs when men can show their muscles that are as sexualised as boobs. I really think you should became feminist and bring stop to this inequality.

 

Of course I'm using them as counter-arguments. That is how one argues counter to someone else.

 

Also, what? "Quite big inequality" because women can't go topless outside. Oooh those poor and oppressed women.

 

There is no inequality at play here. At this point it's not even a matter of opinion, you're just flat-out wrong. Nudity, in regards to both men and women, is illegal when out in public. It wouldn't be a crime that can be carried out to both genders if there were inequality. Feminism, at least its modern incarnations in the 3rd and 4th wave, is a disease that poisons otherwise normal and enjoyable things.

[eyezonlyii]

https://youtu.be/k4Vfzoueslw

 

Wonder Woman has something to say

[o Ventus]

My take is that would not actually be molded to the wearer's physique, similar to how the muscle cuirass is not precisely molded to it's wearers. The inside basically would be indistinguishable from your standard breasplate, and the other features are only cosmetic details on the outside.

 

Not unlike this ancient Carthaginian breastplate:

 

snip

 

There are plenty of protrusions and cosmetic features on the outside, but the inside would look like the inside of of any other breastplate from the era.

 

I specifically said medieval knights (the closest real-world analogue to the player and the player's party in DA). In real life, their armor actually would be tailored to fit the wearer, since there was a relatively small number of knights that it wouldn't have been terribly prohibitive in terms of cost.

 

Also, that Carthaginian plate is segmented and connected by hoop links. Medieval armor for knights was made up of solid pieces. A medieval European plate would look like this:

 

[Panda]

I'm fairly certain it is when you don't respond with good English.

 

I've refuted every single point you've made to me thus far.

 

Of course I'm using them as counter-arguments. That is how one counter argues counter to someone else.

 

Also, what? "Quite big inequality" because women can't go topless outside. Oooh those poor and oppressed women.

 

There is no inequality at play here. At this point it's not even a matter of opinion, you're just flat-out wrong. Nudity, in regards to both men and women, is illegal when out in public. It wouldn't be a crime that can be carried out to both genders if there were inequality. Feminism, at least its modern incarnations in the 3rd and 4th wave, is a disease that poisons otherwise normal and enjoyable things.

 

Well then I have to say that it's your problem since I understand your english just fine and don't see much problem with mine.

 

Not really, you have simply said, it's so without having anything to back it up. Can you prove that muscles are seen as sexual as boobs?

 

It's partial nudity when women and men are topless, but it's against only law for women. This is what people have been telling me here you included, but you don't think it's inequality? Personally I don't think it is, because muscles aren't sexualised like boobs, but since you think they are there has to be unequality in this for you, but maybe you just don't care about it?

[midnight tea]

Also, what? "Quite big inequality" because women can't go topless outside. Oooh those poor and oppressed women.

 

There is no inequality at play here. At this point it's not even a matter of opinion, you're just flat-out wrong. Nudity, in regards to both men and women, is illegal when out in public. It wouldn't be a crime that can be carried out to both genders if there were inequality. Feminism, at least its modern incarnations in the 3rd and 4th wave, is a disease that poisons otherwise normal and enjoyable things.

 

The reason that the difference between women being unable to walk topless - even in places where men can, like beaches or swimming pools - compared to men was not supposed to showcase that women are severely oppressed, but that there IS still a difference between how topless man and woman are treated by law and society.

 

Don't make this mistake and make it all about feminism or your narrow idea of it. Too many times it's not "feminism" that poisons fun, but people who start loudly complaining about it, every time not even feminism is mentioned, but something that concerns women and their issues. While I myself try to steer clear from those discussions or not declare myself as anything, too many times I've seen that rather than "rabid feminists" those who are the most hostile and loudest are those who oppose any notion of it.

Heck, I've even been called "rabid feminazi" for such mild 'offenses' as pointing out that someone has misrepresented a research paper they based their opinion on. I've checked it, linked it, pointed out the mistake and asked politely to not to skew what paper actually said - yet I was still met with hostile ridicule for it as well as an angry - and entirely unnecessary - rant.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Googled Fire Emblem, some of it's armors for women do have boob plates. However I don't think Merediths has boob plate since it's modeled more around boobs than making them apart like here are the boobies. But I guess there is no clear guidelines what is boob armor either so there can be some confuse over it too. Like one guy that someone posted pages ago (like 20 pages ago or so) who did video game designs or sth claimed that boob plates should be saved and then called steel bikini armor boob plate armor (that compared to male armor was very sexualised) so I guess there would need to be some kind of consensus what is boob plate too.

 

Though I think we mostly here are on same line.

For me, boobplate armor can be the fused outward indent like this:

http://vignette4.wik...=20090213133437

http://img1.wikia.no...l-Cassandra.png

http://farm8.staticf...72b2dbaa2_o.jpg

 

or in the separate cups like this: 

http://vignette1.wik...=20130507232102

http://vignette4.wik...=20140307080302

http://media.moddb.c...ouncilarmor.png

(you'll notice in these examples that while having cups they don't create a big indent in the center of the chest. They either flatten out by that point or even indent out, thus having cups and serving as practical armor.)

[o Ventus]

The reason that the difference between women being unable to walk topless - even in places where men can, like beaches or swimming pools - compared to men was not supposed to showcase that women are severely oppressed, but that there IS still a difference between how topless man and woman are treated by law and society.

 

Socially speaking, nobody who isn't stuck in the 1950's cares much about about nudity. Not unless the person partaking in the nudity is terrifyingly ugly. The law is the only meaningful arena where it makes a difference. Topless t**ties counts as nudity, topless chiseled pecs and abs don't. It's arbitrary, but it's not the result of some white supremacist capitalist patriarchy that hates women like feminists would claim.

 

 

Don't make this mistake and make it all about feminism or your narrow idea of it.

 

I'm being told to check out feminist sites and activities. How exactly am I the one making it about feminism?

 

 

 

Too many times it's not "feminism" that poisons fun, but people who start loudly complaining about it

 

And complaining is a reaction, meaning something had to cause it. People wouldn't complain about feminism if feminism didn't ruin things.

 

 

 

too many times I've seen that rather than "rabid feminists" those who are the most hostile and loudest are those who oppose any notion of it.

 

You must not be looking very hard then. I can show you a laundry list of idiotic and radical feminist hashtags, campaigns, speeches, and monologues, if you so desire.

[midnight tea]

For me, boobplate armor is armor that shows that underneath the armor there are breasts underneath. It can be the fused outward indent like this:

http://vignette4.wik...=20090213133437

http://img1.wikia.no...l-Cassandra.png

http://farm8.staticf...72b2dbaa2_o.jpg

 

or in the separate cups like this: 

http://vignette1.wik...=20130507232102

http://vignette4.wik...=20140307080302

http://media.moddb.c...ouncilarmor.png

(you'll notice in these examples that while having cups they don't create a big indent in the center of the chest. They either flatten out by that point or even indent out, thus having cups and serving as practical armor.)

 

If this is your idea of a "boobplate" is a slight bulge in chest area then I have little against it - as long as it's functional, it's fine in my book.

 

However, in case of second batch I'd like to point out that you're linking 2 designs that are drawn, rather than 3D rendered. I'm not sure that the 2nd armor out of 2nd batch could even be successfully rendered or done more realistically.

[Panda]

For me, boobplate armor can be the fused outward indent like this:
http://vignette4.wik...=20090213133437
http://img1.wikia.no...l-Cassandra.png
http://farm8.staticf...72b2dbaa2_o.jpg
 
or in the separate cups like this: 
http://vignette1.wik...=20130507232102
http://vignette4.wik...=20140307080302
http://media.moddb.c...ouncilarmor.png
(you'll notice in these examples that while having cups they don't create a big indent in the center of the chest. They either flatten out by that point or even indent out, thus having cups and serving as practical armor.)

I guess I see boob plate quite differently then since I don't think first there are it. And ME armor I see similarly as leather.

[Han Shot First]

I specifically said medieval knights (the closest real-world analogue to the player and the player's party in DA). In real life, their armor actually would be tailored to fit the wearer, since there was a relatively small number of knights that it wouldn't have been terribly prohibitive in terms of cost.

 

 

 

 

 

You misunderstand. What I'm saying is that the breastplate wouldn't be molded to reflect the shape of the wearer's actual breasts. That the 'breasts' on the outside of the armor would be purely cosmetic, just as the pecs on a muscled cuirass are purely cosmetic. The inside basically would be indistinguishable from any other breastplate.

[Panda]

Socially speaking, nobody who isn't stuck in the 1950's cares much about about nudity. Not unless the person partaking in the nudity is terrifyingly ugly. The law is the only meaningful arena where it makes a difference. Topless t**ties counts as nudity, topless chiseled pecs and abs don't. It's arbitrary, but it's not the result of some white supremacist capitalist patriarchy that hates women like feminists would claim.
 
 

 
I'm being told to check out feminist sites and activities. How exactly am I the one making it about feminism?
 
 
 

 
And complaining is a reaction, meaning something had to cause it. People wouldn't complain about feminism if feminism didn't ruin things.
 
 
 

 
You must not be looking very hard then. I can show you a laundry list of idiotic and radical feminist hashtags, campaigns, speeches, and monologues, if you so desire.

You have very feminist arguments for someone who claims not to be one : /

[midnight tea]

Socially speaking, nobody who isn't stuck in the 1950's cares much about about nudity. Not unless the person partaking in the nudity is terrifyingly ugly. The law is the only meaningful arena where it makes a difference. Topless t**ties counts as nudity, topless chiseled pecs and abs don't. It's arbitrary, but it's not the result of some white supremacist capitalist patriarchy that hates women like feminists would claim.

 

It's still the result of SOMETHING and - arbitrary as it is - it tells us that there's still a difference between how people perceive female and male chest nonetheless.

 

Also - it's not true that nobody who isn't stuck in 1950 cares much about nudity. If it was like that, we wouldn't see that many arguments against and for it - and no, I'm not talking just about this forum or this particular thread. Nudity wouldn't be used so frequently in controversial advertisements it it wasn't still considered at least somewhat controversial. We wouldn't have so many instances of schools banning certain revealing garments. We wouldn't have people arguing even about something as natural as breastfeeding a hungry baby in public space. Et caetera, et caetera...

 

 

 

 

I'm being told to check out feminist sites and activities. How exactly am I the one making it about feminism?

 

Because instead of checking them, or ignoring them if you chose so, you're immediately launch a rant and deem it all as poison?

 

 

 

And complaining is a reaction, meaning something had to cause it. People wouldn't complain about feminism if feminism didn't ruin things.

 

Maybe feminists complaining is ALSO caused by something, hmmmm??? And if you deem all of their complaining as pointless or exaggerated, what stops other people from deeming your complaining as such?

 

And people complain about LGBT movement too. They complained about anti-slavery movement when it was relevant as well. Not all complaints against movement are legit, just like not all complaints IN the movements (or splinters of those movements) are valid - but maybe, JUST maybe, some of them still are?

 

 

 

 

You must not be looking very hard then. I can show you a laundry list of idiotic and radical feminist hashtags, campaigns, speeches, and monologues, if you so desire.

 

LOL, I can show you laundry list of idiotic and radical anti-feminist (or however you call it) hashtags, campaigns, speeches and monologues as well I think the most hilarious one lately was the 'brouhaha' against Mad Max.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

If this is your idea of a "boobplate" is a slight bulge in chest then I have little against it - as long as it's functional, it's fine in my book.

 

However, in case of second batch I'd like to point out that you're linking 2 designs that are drawn, rather than 3D rendered. I'm not sure that the 2nd armor out of 2nd batch could even be successfully rendered or done more realistically.

Yay!

 

In the game that character you're referring to is from, there is another character with similar armor who had a 3D rendering since she was in a cutscene and it looked fine. 

 

I guess I see boob plate quite differently then since I don't think first there are it. And ME armor I see similarly as leather.

I think that's the main issue with this thread. When people hear the terms, they tend to think of the more common versions which are unfortunately the bad ones. 

[midnight tea]

Yay!

 

In the game that character you're referring to is from, there is another character with similar armor who had a 3D rendering since she was in a cutscene and it looked fine. 

 

I think that's the main issue with this thread. When people hear the terms, they tend to think of the more common versions which are unfortunately the bad ones. 

 

 

As for that design - since I haven't seen it I assume it does look fine. I just know - as someone who does a lot of 2D designing - that not always things that look decent in 2D can be easily translated into 3D or 'realistic' model.

 

 

In any case - since this thread grew so quickly today, I'm afraid that many of my points, statements and positions got naturally diluted throughout fast (and sometimes heated) discussion, so I'd like to use this opportunity to clarify my position.

 

 

"Sexy armors" (or clothing) aren't a problem for me, per se - even armors that underline or expose character's natural assets (so to speak).

To prove it, here - I've drawn those things myself:

 

http://midnighttea7....Tea7/11231&qo=4
http://midnighttea7....ea7/11231&qo=13

http://midnighttea7....ea7/11231&qo=25

 

Not exactly prudish, aren't they?

 

The issue I have is mostly with armors that have design that border on ridiculous and whether they fit the established world. 

 

In Thedas it's been established that more functional armor is preferable to less functional one, as it's a world where natural rules can be bent to a degree with magic - but only to a degree. Some things are possible thanks to runes, barriers and special materials, but not enough to "go wild" with armor design.

And if there are worlds where "going wild" with design is permitted, be it by establishing different physics, appropriate magic or races and cultures that fight in such armors, then so be it. The only issue I'd have in this case is whether armors for different genders are actually at least somewhat equal in 'revealing' design, instead of seeing women being clad in metal bikini (which happens frequently, sadly) and their male counterparts - in full, reasonable armor.

[TheOgre]

Spoiler

I am a fan of this style of armor for my warriors. Always prefer the barbarian / less dense style of armor for my heroes. Knicks and scars preferable to being hidden in plate for both my male/female warriors.

[The Baconer]

Oh lordy is that WoW.

 

Please no.

[TheOgre]

Oh lordy is that WoW.

 

Please no.

 

I can provide dark souls examples if it helps diablo 3, Fire Emblem, Final Fantasy.. Ect.. Pick one your okay with Plenty of examples.

[Grieving Natashina]

Oh lordy is that WoW.

 

Please no.

I got a mild flashback too.  

[TheOgre]

I got a mild flashback too.  

 

I will totally provide uncomfortable screenshots just for you... Muahahaha

[The Baconer]

I can provide dark souls examples if it helps diablo 3, Fire Emblem, Final Fantasy.. Ect.. Pick one your okay with Plenty of examples.

 

Anything that doesn't look like a Frank Franzetta piece.

[Steelcan]

Oh lordy is that WoW.

 

Please no.