Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Authentic Drow Equipment ingame

Hi , i want ask if the Drow armor and clothing we see in DnD comics and stories that feature Drows will be added ingame , I know there is a leather set of drow armor but that doesnt look like what we commonly see used by drows. They use black skin tight armors with spiderlike ornaments and sometimes it has a lot of body revealing parts. We have no such thing in BG3 even though we see Drows and the Underdark. The New Drizzt video shows some of the armor I'm referring to. Also some drow weapons wouldn't hurt!

I don't know if there's a such thing as 'authentic' drow armor. The aesthetic varies from edition to edition, artist to artist. For what it's worth IMO what Larian has made is a bit unique in the styling, but falls broadly into the general aesthetic-and looks good too. Fingers crossed for some heavier armors though-drow used light chain armor a lot in the books and previous editions-I know chain shirts are pretty rubbish compared to 3rd edition, but some medium armor would be nice to see.

Also, some of the older styles of Drow armour from the older editions were borderline fetish gear. Artists are understandably moving away from that whole aesthetic.

But don't worry; if skin-tight over-sexed revealing 'armour' is what you're after, you can absolutely guarantee that the mod community will have you covered, likely in a half dozen different ways.

I wouldn't mind seeing the Drow armor changed to be more shadowy and fitting to their aesthetic, could even give them the property that if worn in sunlight they will disintegrate in X rounds to match the lore of Drow weapons and Armor doing that in sunlight.
And while I can see good reason to move away from the more fetishy armors of the older edition, there is likely a place for them, in particular if we fight a true drow matriarch or priestess as it would fit into their aesthetic totally, and any male and female fighters directly under their command would likely have the more fancy symbolic and therefor more fetishy armor.

I believe i have seen simmilar topic around here ...
I was called "We demand more sexy armors" ?

Agree, don't need that in the official game. The op lost me at revealing.

Also agreed. Fantasy art and illustration has come a long way since the creation of DnD. And artists these days are moving away from the overly sexy armour styles for good reason.

I'm sure for those who want it, there will be options for that style in the game and in mods... but personally I try to avoid sexy, revealing armour on my fantasy characters as much as possible. My characters are there to fight and look like it - not shake their booty on the battlefield.

I think we will see a lot of good variations of armor after release, not to mention the incredible armor that comes with mods.

Why does skin tight, or showing some skin all of a sudden translate to over sexualized? Seriously, have we become a society of puritans? There is a major difference between form fitting, with some skin showing, and over sexualized. Its ironic if you think about it, the original women's movement was to allow women to dress as they want, and NOT be hidden in layers of clothing, only to be replaced with "anything that doesn't hide everything, look frumpy or show the minimum amount of cleavage is oversexualized.

When the outfits are designed to appeal to the male gaze, then yes, it is very much objectification. It's not ironic at all. Women are still be viewed as objects by the vast majority of gamers and game developers. I don't buy for a second that the vast majority of revealing female outfits in video games are designed with the idea of "Hey, what would a badass woman want to wear in this situation?", more likely "so the girl needs to look sexy, how do we do that?"

take a look at some "empowering" clothing mods for women

(nsfw) https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/categories/60/?BH=2

There's nothing wrong with form fitting and showing curves.

However when it comes to armour, I prefer it practical and realistic, over the concept of "I'm a feminist, let me wear whatever I want". Open revealing cleavage = a clear path for a sword, dagger or arrow straight through the chest. That's just silly on the battlefield. There are vital body areas that should be protected. (I'm also speaking as an SCA combat archer...)
Lae'zel's armour covers her chest and torso, but reveals her legs for freedom of movement. That's fine too - and is similar to how ancient Greek/Roman warriors might have been armoured.

Now if we had "casual" clothes to wear at camp (similar to DA:I - casual clothing when at Skyhold, armour when out adventuring), then people should be able to dress their characters however they want.

All the while, lusting over shirtless men like Henry Cavil and Jason Mamoa. But I guess that is ok, isn't it? I am sorry, but that is just hypocritical. Also, political catchphrases belong on twitter and 1st year college sociology classes. No where did the OP say anything about oversexualized armor. Classically, Drow armor is pretty much portrayed as he stated except for images from the maybe past 5 years. You might also want to keep in mind, if it wasn't for talented artists like Boris Vallejo, Frank Frazetta, oh yeah you might also want to associate yourself with Julie Bell's work as well, there would be no D&D games, or a Baldurs Gate to play.

Oh yeah, and also, the majority of those "sexy" driven armor mods, made for the "male gaze" in your words, are made by women. Food for thought

I mean that sounds like the whole formed breast plate for women argument not being practical, when actually they were very practical, and deflected sword strikes better than a flat chested male chest piece. Yeah Vallejo, Frazetta might be a touch much for a RPG game, because they want to appeal to the widest audience. But the whole "male gaze" argument that I see pop up here and there from people, is about as accurate as gamergate.

Not to mention, if any battle hardened warrior fought Lae'zel they would slit her femoral artery on those bare legs, and she would be dead a lot quicker than an arrow to the upper chest if you really want to be realistic. Also, Greek/Romans utilized defensive strategies, with better equipment, you are talking iron vs bronze. They also used phalanx formations like the Testudo formation, as well as the Spartans. How do you think the Spartans held off the Persians for so long at Thermopylae? That is why they won battles (well except for Thermopylae, but that was still a victory if you think about it). Better equipment, better strategy, which included iron shields, formations and a lifetime of training in military tactics. Where most others never had that.

I didn't say anything about formed breast plates for women. I just said women fighters (and men!) SHOULD have a breast plate covering the chest/torso as it is where all your vital organs are. I've heard both sides of the form-fitting breastplate armour argument both in games and SCA, and have met people who use both types of armour on the field.
(Personally speaking, my breastplate for SCA fighting is flat, it was simpler to make that way, and when arrows hit they thud and bounce off. Then again I am an archer and the swordsmen aren't allowed to hit archers with their swords, so I just have to worry about arrows.)

Generally speaking, if my fantasy game character's armour is so skimpy it wouldn't pass a basic SCA armour inspection by looking at it, I pick something that would...


I love Vallejo and Frazetta's art from an art perspective



That's very true.

Drow armor and weapons decay in the sunlight.

Classically, Drow were a race of highly fetishised dominatrix stereotypes who wore literal bondage gear as their 'religious' garb, and were dreamed up by horny male nerds (I don't mean to belittle horniness, malness or nerdiness at all; I'm two of those things... but it is what it is).

Folks can say whatever else they like - that's their very much ignoble root, and moving away from that is only a good thing.

There is definitely such a thing as taking it too far the other way, and Wizards may very well be treading dangerously on what amounts to cultural erasure in their efforts to sanitise their material... and that's not good... but defending the earliest depictions of Drow 'fashion' as some sort of ideal original vision to be recaptured is deeply misguided.

Damn I totally forgot about that, good point!

Woah Woah Woah! I never said skimpy armor when i said revealing. Im not a fan of bikini armors too. Seriously how can i upload an image here? The revealing armors i am am asking for are the ones you seein the Drizzt trailer. its like alight black cuirass with exposed skin in the arms and legs. Also the Matriarch robes look amazing.

PS im not asking for skimpy armor, i just wanted to see some of those cool alien like black leathers/metals tight armor/clothing we see in the comics. :D

Also some drow weapons would be nice!

I know drow weapons are affected by sunlight but doesn't the game take you down to the underdark for awhile? Down there those items would be greatly efficient and it would be immersive to see drow use these items instead of surface ones! Maybe Drow gear gets a buff down in the Underdark and if in the surface , they get a penalty or we get a notice saying they braked down.

The great thing about the original Drow armor, is it varied. You could have more "revealing" armor on Priestesses, to more extensive armor for melee.