Whats wrong with using unrealistic armor in fantasy?
Delete this right away. I haven't given you permission to post my waifu.
>All those unprotected thighs
Good thing I'm specialized in Piercing damage
>>48031379
>pantyhose
>plate armor
It doesn't even work. Plate armor will just tear it into pieces in like 5 minutes of walking.
>>48031379
Playing GURPS so hit locations are a bitch.
>>48031379
People with Aspergers who feel like they need to point out obvious things on an anonymous imageboard to feel more educated and intellectually superior.
>>48031379
Nothing really, so long as it matches the overall aesthetic and tone of the setting.
>>48031483
People who complain about realistic armor in /tg/ are on par with people who complain about giant robots being unrealistic in /m/.
>>48031379
> Whats wrong
If you like realistic games and stuff, they're pretty stupid.
If you don't mind realism in whacky fantasy settings, they can look pretty cool (or hot or whatever else).
>>48031379
Whats wrong with using realistic armor in fantasy?
>>48031379
It causes harm to autists.
>>48031637
It's like a difference between reading Conan and Drizzt novels.
>>48031379
The a difference between unrealistic and impractical anon, no need to conflate the two.
>>48031821
unrealistic armour is impractical, that's why it's unrealistic. When you're a medieval /his/ autist like me you'll see.
>>48031443
>It doesn't even work. Plate armor will just tear it into pieces in like 5 minutes of walking.
lmao lad you know that they wore padding under the plate right?
>>48031965
If anon's talking about the op, then there isn't any padding being worn there.
>>48031379
Unrealistic is fine. Its unpractical where I don't like it as much.
I don't hate it like the memeposters do, I just find it stupid.
>>48032039
Then what is that red stuff between the panty hose and the plate?
>>48031415
Classical warfare must trigger you into a stupor
>>48032113
Clearly it's skin tight latex.
You have to deal with prudes and nofun autists.
This bit?
>>48031379
because its sexist and racist and it makes me feel bad!
>>48032196
Again, why is that important in a fantasy setting? While some might lean more towards the realistic appearance, there is nothing inherently-wrong with more unrealistic armor, just as there is nothing wrong with having no, low, or high amounts of magic in a setting.
>>48031379
blue one looks good and realistic to me.
>>48031415
begone barbarians
>>48031379
>Because nerds try so fucking hard to seem normal they complain about things normal people couldn't give a fuck.
>Because losers who can't accept that they're losers playing a fucking rpg adopt a the trendiness of complaining about every other player's design choice with regards to characters to take their mind off the fact that their character is bland or in most cases surprisingly empty, BUT LOOK AT ME I HAVE REAL ARMOR ON HA!
>Because the really misogynistic people in the hobby, feminists in particular, love looking at pretty women and thinking about how to kill them, but are looking for a socially acceptable outlet for it.
>Because suspension of disbelief fags funnel impotent anger from other facets of life at things in the game, regardless of flavor.
>Because fictional sluts are BAAAAAAAAAD!
>Because people who've never touched a Red Sonja comic think she just traipses about Hyborea taking tit shots every time and has never once been stabbed in an exposed spot despite it happening every other issue.
>Because it makes fatties cry tears of mayonnaise.
>Because autism makes people insufferable no matter how hard you try to be accepting.
>Because creatures that fly and breathe fire are real.
>>48032391
>there is nothing inherently-wrong with more unrealistic armor, just as there is nothing wrong with having no, low, or high amounts of magic in a setting.
This is true, but ONLY if they actually have a reason for and behind this, that makes sense in the context, and can be also used as an explanation as to why they are not using the more practical and realistic armor instead.
tldr, its because many (but not all) pieces of media that use unrealistic armor don't have the internal consistency to properly use or handle said armor
>>48031379
To be honest thighs are the hardest part of the body to cover with armor, and among the least likely to be hit unless you are like, fighting gnomes or something. Shields will provide adequate protection for a fraction of the weight.
Armor priority for most of history seems to be a nice shield, followed by head and upper body, with limbs and lower body as an afterthought. Sure getting punched in the dick sucks, but so does being weighed down by heavy shit or having your mobility impeded by poor articulation. Most blows are going to be aimed at the upper body, and the ones that aren't can be blocked by the shield. Tactical skirts suited the Greeks and Romans just fine.
If you want to talk about unrealistic things in fantasy, oversized weapons, back scabbards, dual wieldin, and a consistent lack of shields and helmets are much worse.
>Fantasy
>Not having everyone wear fashionable clothes enchanted to be able to withstand and cushion from forces far greater than any material could possibly do.
>Not using this as an excuse for /fa/ to be the most important thing in setting.
>>48032731
>fantasy
>not resolving every single conflict with reality altering magic so everything is done in less than 2 seconds
>>48031379
Nothing I'm guessing, I think it looks stupid as fuck but its not like I'm picking character portraits for others and nobody is picking a portrait for my character. I mean in most traditional games you don't even see the characters, you interrupt an image of them based on a description. So unless you or someone else adds unnecessary details like "her tits spill over the top of her metal bikini" or "she's completely indistinguishable from a man because of full plate" its not "wrong" who defines their character by what they wear anyway?
>>48032731
>not just having proper armor glamored to lood /fa/ as fuck
>not just having /fa/ armor
Its like you want to be fucked by an antimagic field!
Also
>not just being a magic landsknecht
>>48032731
>fashionable clothes
>not just solving everything in your bathrobe
wizard life
>>48031379
Nothing.
it makes autists and femishits mad
>>48032906
>it makes autists and femishits mad
And that is bad why? They'll just find another reason to get mad anyway.
Are there any currently published settings where the default assumption is nudity unless your character specifically spends lots of money on heavy armor or fancy clothes?
Like I know Tékumel had an Aztec aesthetic complete with loincloths for everybody and metal being too rare for suits of armor, but are there any that people actually play these days? Heck even the latest edition of barbarians of Lemuria makes chainmail bikinis something you have to waste a boon on.
>>48032981
true, some people are just never pleased
>>48032981
Well that's the thing, there is nothing wrong with it at all, this is a thinly veiled troll thread.
...But it could be a thinly veiled cheesecake thread if you want.
It might become troublesome if you are playing with picky people, some players or GMs might take advantage of certain features on someones armor be it for benefit or detriment, and some might choose to focus their attacks on unprotected body parts
>>48031379
They should have more feminine version of the standard plate armor skirt that they lift up for cooling showing off as much as they are in that picture. Win more-win.
I love bikini armor.
Fuck the haters.
>>48031379
Nothing, if it fits the setting then its perfectly ok.
>>48031379
Who the fuck said there is anything wrong with it?
>>48034509
With magical healing bikini armor is all you need. Or it's underarmor.
>>48036460
With disguise magic available bikini armor discourages strip or grope searches to check if you're wearing a disguise.
>>48031379
Nothing in and of itself. But it can get annoying when the reason is less "because it looks cool" than "because it makes my pee-pee hard". Or there are cases where it's SO utterly unrealistic you can't ignore it, e.g. a breastplate which does not cover the chest. Like in Luminous Arc 2 where for some reason they felt the need to give Roland's armor a plunging neckline so it exposed his pubescent man-cleavage.
>>48031443
I think the pantyhose you're buying is too cheap or else you're buying them a size too small.
>>48031379
Absolutely nothing and let no one tell you otherwise.
Unless you're playing a grounded, more reality based campaign there should be no problem with titty plate and mini skirts.
>>48031379
>It's an "autists pretend to care about verisimilitude in a setting that unironically has magic" episode
>These people will likely give me a (You) saying "B-B-B-B-BUT DAS DIFFFFEREENNNT" instead of just admitting that they don't like things that set off their spergbrains
lmfao
>>48032391
It is inherently misleading
Being misleading is a willful obstruction of the truth
Obscuring the truth is the ethical equivalent of lying
Lying is ethically unsound i.e. wrong
Therefore including unrealistic armour is wrong
So yeah, it is inerently wrong to include unrealistic armour. Get wrekt you 90 IQ anime cretin, I am simultaneously laughing and spitting at you in disgust
>>48036958
Magic does not instantly and automatically equal a complete lack of verisimilitude. Most of the time, magic has clear rules and limitations and is not freely available to the entire setting. The fact that people in the setting (Whatever the setting may be) cannot just snap their fingers and get literally anything they want at any given moment is proof of that.
The idea that something is perfectly functional because magic exists in the setting is completely illogical.
There's an entire extra step between "magic exists in the setting" and "This thing is not a stupid liability". That step being "The magic of the setting is being applied to make this thing not a liability."
It's a very important step that isn't always possible within the rules of the setting, and if you ignore it, then it's a still a liability.
Magic simply existing does not mean that a chainmail thong can do anything other than chafe. It has to actually be enchanted to do that.
>>48037052
>"B-B-B-B--BUT DAS DIFFEREREENNNTTT"
L M F A O
GUARANTEED
Who even gives a fuck about this shit in the first place? Every player is going to imagine the gameworld according to their own vision anyway. You're literally sperging out over how somebody visualizes your game.
>>48037191
I think you're on the wrong board.
Not caring is how you end up with casual, boring shit.
>>48037191
You might as well just be playing freeform if you let players dictate what is and is not in the setting and what is and is not magic'd.
>>48037250
>Conflating visual aspects of a non-visual medium with actionable activities
Here's your (You)
>>48037273
>Allowing subpar protection to count as full protection "because magic" even though there's no magic involved mechanically
>>48037273
>Not having the world react appropriately to clear shows of wealth such as glamoured armor
I don't know about you, but I think NPCs act differently towards someone wearing gear that is literally worth a fortune than they act towards someone wearing normal gear.
>>48037309
>because skill
>because magic
>because [insert handwavium word here]
This is why people mock spergs. You literally do not understand that when you use a handwavium word that justifies whatever you want it to, you can replace it and there will be functionally no difference.
Neverminding the fact that you are STILL caring about how someone visualizes the game, a thing that is by definition just in your brain.
Fucking spergs, man.
>>48037419
If the character doesn't have skill, magic, or handwavium, then they don't have it and shouldn't be wearing stupid shit. You can cry all you want, but you don't get handwavium unless you've actually gotten it in chargen or play.
How a character appears in the game fucking matters. People will not treat someone in normal armor the same as someone wearing strange, outlandish, and seemingly impractical (Or worthless) armor. Making sure that everyone is on the same page keeps that clear and prevents problems.
>>48033186
>not kirk-knight-of-throns.jpg
missed opportunity
>>48036958
>>48037191
>2+2=7 I guarantee I will get a (You) stating "B-B-B-BUT MAAAATH" instead of admitting that their autist brains can't understand my simple logic.
>But anon 2+2=4
>L M F A O GUARANTEED
I don't care as long as it looks cool.
If a player brings masturbation material, however, it becomes a problem. Please do that at home, not at my table.
I think it really depends on what genre you're trying to emulate. If your game is rooted in anime tropes and what not, yeah it doesn't really matter what everyone is wearing because in a lot of anime that shit doesn't matter. If you're going for more of a "like reality unless noted" deal, then you'll generally want things to lean realistic to lend some weight to your setting and the events.And sometimes it looks cool, can't we have fun sometimes?
I personally prefer fantastic designs that could still reasonably work.
Because it's just one more thing pathetic neckbeard fatasses use as an excuse to turn the game into one more session of rubbing their miniscule dicks.
>>48031379
You breeder fucks never want to play fair, that's what's wrong. If women get unrealistic armor than god dammit men should too.
>>48038536
thats no falchion
thats a Messer
THIS is a falchion
>>48031379
I wanted to draw such character with arms raised up. He was poking his eyes with his shoulderpads, and that was painful.
>>48039165
It looks like it is almost as tall as the fellow wielding it. Isn't that a bit long for a messer?
>>48039299
OVersized KriegsMesser then.
Certainly not a Falchion, which were 1 handed axeswords.
>>48031379
Because it looks fucking retarded. People who wear such armor should receive massive debuffs to their armor rating, as the only thing that should result from such idiocy is the death of the wearer.
>But muh fantasy rules
Bullshit. Even fantastical fiction should have some kind of consistency with reality so SOD isn't destroyed. It doesn't matter if their armor is magically enchanted so it actually protects them, it still looks completely retarded given that it quite obviously would not be worn in war.
>>48039341
It also seems to be missing the little third bar on the crossguard that is so typical of messers. I do agree it is certainly not a falchion though
>>48031379
Erotic armor triggers me.
Clunky "lol how do i move" armor is ok.
>>48032692
Thighs get hit all the fucking time. It's only with a very large shield that they are protected. They also aren't hard to protect unless you're a drooling moron. Even thick padding, let alone crude splinting, will go a long way.
>>48031379
Depends on the setting. And if said armor is magical.
>>48039104
>Looks away from the bulge.
How does that man see!?
>>48031379
There is nothing wrong with most of the armor in this picture.
If you want to see retarded armor look at D&D shit like this.
>>48039437
It's the shoulder spikes that really make it intolerable.
>>48031379
If you're playing a serious, semi-plausible game, then bikini armor has little place. If you're playing a less serious game, then go for it.
Good settings have character design that fits the feel and internal logic of the setting.
Desperately holding onto the hard absolute concepts of 'realism' vs 'un-realism' is fucking stupid, if you're making a dark setting of hard men making hard decisions while hard then you need to have internally consistent armour design otherwise it stands out as comical and brings the whole feel away from the goal of muh seriousness.
On the other hand if it's a happy go lucky high fantasy fap-bait weeb setting with the internal logic of a schizophrenic then who gives a shit besides idiots who just can't help but want to shove their entry level knowledge into others faces.
>>48039437
Is bad design because it doesn't fit the game.
>>48031379
From what I've heard of the LN the op's image is from then it fits perfectly and makes sense. It's tournament armour for pompous noblewomen.
t. Arms and armour austist
>>48039394
through the eyeholes, of course!
Are you fucking kidding me OP?
I don't like thing.
Don't pretend you are somehow superior for liking fapbait thing.
There's nothing wrong with it as long as it's part of a consistent aesthetic. The only time I get annoyed is when I see men in realistic armour and women in chainmail bikinis.
I want more bare chested dudes in plate codpieces and shit. We get some of them, but nowhere near enough.
I'm not at all against sexualised character designs in and of themselves, I think the arguments that it's a bad thing are bollocks, but it's about having your world feel consistent and whole. If it's an attempt at a gritty and realistic setting, no chainmail bikinis. If you're doing an over the top ridiculous fantasy world, do what the fuck ever, but don't be lazy with the character designs not designed to appeal to the straight male demographic. Chicks and gays deserve hotties too.
>>48037487
Plus, short of invisible magic armor, anywhere their armor doesn't cover is a valid target for those attacks that target unarmored locations.
>>48039733
>>48037487
These principles only apply in a setting where realistic and 'authentic' takes the priority over narrative, theme and style.
This is not always the case. If a setting as a whole operates in a style over substance fashion, then your arguments no longer apply, because you're ignoring that the fundamental laws of the world you're criticizing are fundamentally different from the ones you're basing your argument on.
It's like the whole 'mecha are unrealistic' thing. Yes, by the laws of the real world, they are. Therefore, if a setting is all about Mecha and their role as the ultimate war machine, obviously it does not operate under the same set of laws as the real world, thus making such critique pointless. You're arguing against the premise, which is pointless.
>>48031379
Depends on the setting. If you're going for a realistic approach, it's retarded.
If you're going for a pulp feel, then bikini chainmail is part of the charm.
If you're going for fantasy, you can wear whatever the fuck you want because lol magic.
And sometimes, you just want fapping bait.
>>48031379
Nothing wrong mate.
Is this armour realistic /tg/ ?
>>48039851
Knight a best. Onion knight would be fine too if her skirt was longer.
>>48039899
The fuck is an onion knight?
>>48039978
https://www.quora.com/Final-Fantasy-video-game-franchise-What-is-the-origin-of-the-title-Onion-Knight
It's probably a metaphorbecause onions have layers
>>48039978
>>48039993
The Dark Souls version makes more sense
>>48031379
>Whats wrong with using unrealistic armor in fantasy?
Nothing at all.
Keyword: F A N T A S Y
But for all the autists who fall for this bait thread; armor was far less popular in history than films make it out to be. For the average person armor was either too expensive, too heavy or impractical.
>>48032516
Bronze armor was heavy as fuck, so they reduce it to minimum.
They used shields like any other reasonable human being.
>>48032692
This man is correct.
>>48031465
>impaling damage to your groin
>>48031379
depends on the setting.
Also, why does "unrealistic" armor always mean "sexy Halloween costume". Give me some Warcraft-tier shoulders and a huge sword every once in a while.
>>48036981
That's some butthurt right there
>>48042024
>>48040042
That dude would go deaf from 1 blow to the head
>>48031379
Nothing.
It's fantasy.
>>48032731
>/fa/ntasy rpg
Oh god, I want to play this so bad.
its a matter of tone
in a lighthearted high fantasy game there's nothing wrong with it
but if you're going for any form of serious fantasy, especially the low magic kind so you just can't magically ignore the consequences of every action, it becomes silly or downright detrimental to the tone
>>48032391
Even a fantasy setting needs internal consistency. If it lacks that, it becomes retarded make believe, like most anime, and stops being engaging for anyone who is not mentally retarded.
So if armour is actually worn to deflect attacks, it needs to be realistic according to the physics of the setting, which are usually "our" physics. Therefore, cheesecake armour is as retarded as the people who like it.
>OP makes dumb Millionth "muh boobplate" thread
>101 replies, 33 images ommited.
Fuuck
>>48039769
>And sometimes, you just want fapping bait.
autists do. That's why no respectable medium uses fetish armour.
I mean I like my women in armour as much as the next guy, but it really depends on why they dress like so.
I mean, if they really don't care about armour then sure, they can wear a frilly dress to combat as long as it's not too disruptive, but the silly part comes from why they look like that, or basically why anyone in this setting would just fight in a metal bikini.
And the answer to that is probably waifubait or something, and that's weak.
They can dress in clothes with bracers and metal boots, yeah but don't call that full-plate armour.
>>48031379
Most of those armours honestly wouldn't be that bad with some proper faulds added.
>>48039896
The first one is boob-fitting. Armors are not boob-fitting, it is higly impractical (plus if you have breasts that big you just refrain from fighting all together).
The other ones are okay I believe.
