Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 10 of 18 1 2 8 9 10 11 12 17 18
Joined: Mar 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2020
Ah right. Never found that in the game so it hasn't penetrated my consciousness. Yeah, pretty blatant double standard. Should go either way. Give the women pants or give the men skirts like Hector is wearing.

Joined: Dec 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
I don't consider the Gith armor to be trashy -- it's just a weird mix. It's space fantasy top, Hopilite on the bottom. My guess as to why is that the writers have gone for Gith culture = Ancient Spartan culture. People keep saying Roman centurion but I'm seeing Greek:

[Linked Image from 1.bp.blogspot.com]

[Linked Image from comicvine1.cbsistatic.com]

Definitely what I also envision for the Gith.


Originally Posted by Kadajko
@KillerRabbit

We talking about this one though, not the Gith armor:

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

That armor's clearly not finished - look at the boots. That one's not in the game yet if I remember correctly.

In OP, Half Plate +1 was pictured. I can't remember if that's in the game/wearable either. Is it?

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Gith should go into battle completely naked and will themselves some armour


Optimistically Apocalyptic
Joined: May 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
Originally Posted by AvatarOfSHODAN
That armor's clearly not finished - look at the boots.

Maybe yes maybe not, wouldn't say clearly.

Originally Posted by AvatarOfSHODAN
In OP, Half Plate +1 was pictured. I can't remember if that's in the game/wearable either. Is it?

Not sure, haven't found it myself.

Joined: Jul 2009
I
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
I
Joined: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Originally Posted by Starlights
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
@Starlights To be straight with you i'm not a fan of the centurion style armors. A girl has to buy me dinner first to glimpse at my quads. If anything I prefer Aragon and Boromirs style from Lord of the rings. Assuming you want to be on the realistic-ish side of things. I'm partial to frontline fighting but if i had to pick mage attire I'd roll with maybe jedi/sith robes. Swotor has a very nice selection of variations. I lean towards modest attire regardless.

ok, fair enough for both examples. The roman armor example is an idea to stay protected while having agility. Perhaps, if I go to the other extreme that I don't like and find ridiculous, is something like this for both male/female:

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

That looks like a coke can; adventuring with that for days doesn't work out for me.

Ok so with this armor it would depend on the game itself. In realistic leaning game setting this armor is problematic. The armor would be slow with rigid and limited movement. Double plated in some area's is foolish.The weak points of this armor is the armpit and the back of the knee. The plated neck means he wont turn fast and the double plated shoulders means his range is shorter than it looks. He is a dead man in a realistic game.

In a free full fantasy setting this armor is amazing. I'll just anime magic the things. I have zero problems with this. In fact I prefer it. At least I have a larger variety of things to wear. More fun for me. Fun is a priority for me after all. However I believe, in some things at least, a middle ground can be fun. Even more so than extremes.

If we are talking just purely about looks, I think it looks great.

And yet that is how actual armor looks like.
As for being slow with rigid movement....
[video:youtube]
[/video]

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
A thing with armour is, you don't wear it all day everyday.

You wear it to a riot, arena fight, or battle, and then you change back into your own clothes or workwear. So those naked germans mentioned earlier would put clothes on after the fighting, and the KiSA would take off the armour and just wear the underlying hose and gambeson or whatever.

My point is, a lot of the more extreme armours look daft if they are all your character is ever wearing regardless of what they are doing - for fights that intimidating perv armour is great, but the shopkeeper would maybe refuse to serve you (think of poor Arron, he'd be left talking to your posing pouch!), and your character would get some horrid chafeing if they tried sleeping in it!

Joined: May 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
That armor video is amazing.

Joined: Jan 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jan 2021
I think we're playing with words muddy a bit the thread.

Simple:
Spartan Armor AND/OR centurion/roman armor, yes good - but it wasn't really the point.

But in game, for women I see legs and for the same armor on men I see full padding, why ? Is it sexist ?

Trying to rationalise that with some example where "it's okay to see legs for men too, it doesn't make them any less badass and it's more practical when walking for days as adventurer and bla .." is what, for one, I used as an attempt to make my point.

if you pull that pic with that cleric and the blue dress half naked, that is just another example to convey the point that yep it's possible on men too.


Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud. After a bit, you realize the pig enjoys it.
Joined: Jan 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jan 2021
That video with the armor is a joke. Was that aluminum ? C'mon doing a back flip ?

Watch this guy here and try imagining the guy doing a back flip once he's done dressing ...


[video:youtube]
[/video]

But again, we are moving away from the topic

Last edited by Starlights; 10/01/21 10:18 PM.

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud. After a bit, you realize the pig enjoys it.
Joined: Dec 2020
N
stranger
Offline
stranger
N
Joined: Dec 2020
I'm pretty certain the lack of pants for the female armor versions is just those pieces being incomplete, hence why they aren't accessibly normally. If they are really like that, it's a joke though.

Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Universe
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Universe
@Ixal yeah no. You are not immovable in armor, true. The point is you are slower. A decently trained swordsman would kill him. Combat is more intense than light exercise. You will want you perception to match your reaction as much as possible. If you can move well in full plate armor then you don't need it. The whole point of armor is to take a blow and be able to continue. Thing is a wide variety of weapons exists of different penetration and weight excluding tech like guns. If you are talking history then it's a moot point.

@Starlights Who said anything about impossible? It is wholeheartedly less baddass. Why not just let men wear pants? Perverts. Why on gods relatively green earth are you all fighting to remove pants? You all talk about sexism but instead of advocating to give Laezel some pants, which not a single person in this 8 page topic is against from what I can tell, you want to remove men pants?

Its crazy. You all agree its a feminine style, but "you don't mind". Yeah because you aren't dudes. You want dudes to look a certain way. Sounds sexist to me. You have become your own enemy. How does it feel?

Equality my ass. When the tables are turned you do the same thing. Perverts.

Hahaha

Joined: Jul 2009
I
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
I
Joined: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by Starlights
That video with the armor is a joke. Was that aluminum ? C'mon doing a back flip ?

Watch this guy here and try imagining the guy doing a back flip once he's done dressing ...


[video:youtube]
[/video]

But again, we are moving away from the topic

No, that was real plate armor. You will find several videos like this on youtube. It is a very common misconception that plate armor made you slow and you could hardly move in it which obviously was not the case.
Here a compilation:

(If someone knows from where the first snipped is from I would be grateful)

@Aishaddai
No, totally wrong. Decently trained swordman are the normal opponents people in plate armor were fighting and the armor gave them a huge advantage. They are in no means slower than a lighter armed swordman (being unarmored was basically suicide) and had a very small area of where their armor can be penetrated. Basically a sword is useless against plate armor.

Last edited by Ixal; 10/01/21 11:02 PM.
Joined: May 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
You all talk about sexism but instead of advocating to give Laezel some pants, which not a single person in this 8 page topic is against from what I can tell, you want to remove men pants?

I don't understand how hard is it to understand that some of us just want it to be the SAME, with panths, without pants, completely irrelevant, just make it the same for both sexes.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Its crazy. You all agree its a feminine style, but "you don't mind". Yeah because you aren't dudes.

I am a male if you must know.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
You want dudes to look a certain way.

No, not a certain way, just the same, which way it is, masculine or feminine, bare or covered is irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Sounds sexist to me. You have become your own enemy. How does it feel?

How in the fck is wanting armors to be same for both sexes sexist? lmao

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Equality my ass. When the tables are turned you do the same thing. Perverts.

Yes, doing the SAME thing is equality. And how is that perverted?

Last edited by Kadajko; 10/01/21 11:02 PM.
Joined: Jul 2009
I
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
I
Joined: Jul 2009
As for sexual dimorphism, one of the two armors below was made for a woman. Can you tell which one?


[Linked Image from images1.bonhams.com]
[Linked Image from rct.uk]

Joined: May 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
Originally Posted by Ixal
one of the two armors below was made for a woman. Can you tell which one?

No, I can't tell, I am no armor expert, I can only guess it's the first one because it's narrower.

Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Universe
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Universe
@Kadajko Oh wow you're serious. I think you already know the answer you just don't like it. Men and Women are not the same. They are not interchangeable. They are complimentary. They are different. Each with pro's and con's. They don't compete for the same things. Men are in line with strength, women are in line with finesse. Strength is not better than finesse and finesse is not better than strength. They are simply different. They can accomplish similar things in different ways. In some situations, strength is more deadly. In others, finesse is more deadly.

A man normally has enough masculinity and testosterone for 2 people. A woman normally has enough feminity and estrogen for 2 people. Together, guess what happens. I know certain groups have been trying to push other stuff. That's their business. You are free to believe what you want. I can verify this through biology, psychology, chemistry, history, medicine, genetics, religion, philosophy, spirituality, and hell even certain math subgenres and advanced physics. Though I'll probably get banned. Hell even typing this response will probably get me banned. lol oh well. It does not matter really.

Equality is a joke because how can two different things be equal. It's a power play for subjugation.

@Ixal No I'm right. Get your nose out of Europe's butt. Speed is only relative to your opponent. As much as Europe likes you to believe, you are not a walking invincible fortress. Plate armor has weaknesses. The joints and heat exhaustion. By the time the simpletons of those days realized this and tried to fix it guns were in production. The reason joints were a weakness was so you could actually have a range of motion. You could not protect those spots. You literally had to struggle to protect your armpits, the back of your knees, the tendons on your arm near your bicep, etc.

Joined: Jul 2009
I
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
I
Joined: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
@Ixal No I'm right. Get your nose out of Europe's butt. Speed is only relative to your opponent. As much as Europe likes you to believe, you are not a walking invincible fortress. Plate armor has weaknesses. The joints and heat exhaustion. By the time the simpletons of those days realized this and tried to fix it guns were in production. The reason joints were a weakness was so you could actually have a range of motion. You could not protect those spots. You literally had to struggle to protect your armpits, the back of your knees, the tendons on your arm near your bicep, etc.

Please learn your history. Yes, joints were a weak point of plate armor, relative to the rest. They were still protected by mail, sometimes even plate, making them impervious to swords. You would have better luck with a dagger. A less armored combatant would have 0 advantages over someone in plate because 1. plate armor is not slow, especially comapred to other forms of armor and 2. it provides a gigantic advantage over people with lesser armor or even no armor (= suicide). The idea how the agile master swashbuckler having an advantage over combatants in plate armor is a hollywood myth (Syrio Forel from GoT for example). The same way it is a myth that plate armor meant you couldn't be agile what you seem to believe. See the videos, and no those are not aluminium replicas but real plate armor.
Plate armor was bulletproof by the way for quite a long time and it took more than a century of firearm development until plate armor could not keep up any more.

Last edited by Ixal; 11/01/21 12:11 AM.
Joined: Mar 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2020
I'm not a scholar of this stuff so I could be wrong but isn't it right that rapiers and the like developed as a response to armor? That it made sense to try and poke your way into the helmet or under the armpits than bash your way through the armor?

Same goes for flanges on maces? Designed to crush the breastplate so the knight couldn't breathe?

Joined: May 2016
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: May 2016
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Men and Women are not the same. They are not interchangeable.

No shit? lol

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
They are complimentary. They are different.

In reproduction, yeah.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Each with pro's and con's.

Each individual has pro's and con's, regardless of their sex.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
They don't compete for the same things.

Depends on what that thing is. If it's breast feeding a child then no, if it's something both can do, both can compete in that area.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Men are in line with strength, women are in line with finesse.

Depends on the individual, regardless of their sex.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
A man normally has enough masculinity and testosterone for 2 people. A woman normally has enough feminity and estrogen for 2 people.

And sometimes men have less testosterone and more estrogen and women have more testosterone and less estrogen. But that is not an end all be all when it comes to developing certain characteristics and attitudes.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Together, guess what happens.

When mommy and daddy love each other very much? A baby.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
I know certain groups have been trying to push other stuff. That's their business.

Yeah, I'm not a part of any group.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
I can verify this through biology, psychology, chemistry, history, medicine, genetics, religion, philosophy, spirituality, and hell even certain math subgenres and advanced physics.

Science is the word you are looking for. Science is good yes, though you won't be able to debunk what I said here with science.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Hell even typing this response will probably get me banned.

Nah, you'll be fine.

Originally Posted by Aishaddai
Equality is a joke because how can two different things be equal.

There is a man who is a soldier and one who is a doctor and one who is a programmer, they are so different, mentally and physically, how can they be equal?

Last edited by Kadajko; 11/01/21 12:27 AM.
Joined: Jul 2009
I
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
I
Joined: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
I'm not a scholar of this stuff so I could be wrong but isn't it right that rapiers and the like developed as a response to armor? That it made sense to try and poke your way into the helmet or under the armpits than bash your way through the armor?

Same goes for flanges on maces? Designed to crush the breastplate so the knight couldn't breathe?
Not the rapier, that was a weapon for civilians and not intended to fight against armor, but yes, plate armor prompted the development of weapons to defeat them, either by strong blunt force like with maces or by having a pointed weapon with a lot of leverage like halberds, polaxes and warhammers.
Also small weapons like daggers were effective once the enemy way immobilized. Swords were generally not effective against plate, being more a generalist weapon which lacked the features to defeat plate armor. Thus while glorified they became backup weapons.

Page 10 of 18 1 2 8 9 10 11 12 17 18

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5