What should a female breastplate really look like

[Sacred_Path]

Some people really raise alarms over hte msot stupidest of all possible things...

When I have six dudes in plates with helmets and swords running around (very likely due to rock-paper-scissors mechanics of P:E) your wise words will get me far.

 

Personally, when I see people complaining for something to take 2 clicks when it could possibly have been done with 1, I think they're probably borderline autistic, but I wouldn't be so stupid as to deny that they have a point.

So what I'm trying to say is, just because I have been trained how to make fireballs rain from the heavens, doesn't mean I can't learn how to use a sword.

you're preaching to the choir here m8.

[Keyrock]

What I'm basically saying here is that, if you want to dress up your party in a strange and eclectic mix of plate, chainmail, and lingerie, you should be able to do so; provided you're willing to deal with the consequences (i.e. not having any armoring, or less armoring, or getting fined for indecent exposure depending on local laws). And I'm also saying mages should have some form of balanced incentive to forgo armor, otherwise you're just gonna slap some plate on everyone except the rogue and be on your merry way, and the stereotypical robed wizard will become an impractical concept. 

I'm sure there will be robes in the game as well as regular clothing, trousers, tunics, dresses, etc.  If you want to dress any of your characters in that, whether they be mage, fighter, rogue, priest, then I doubt there will be anything to stop you, except the aforementioned lack of protection.  I would imagine mages will likely have to invest skill points in skills to allow them to move in heavier armor types without penalty and/or reduce any spell failure % that such armor imbues.  That's the trade-off, since you could be using those skill points to instead buff out your fireballs or whatnot. 

 

Also, I'm not complaining, what I'm saying, and have been all along, is that the existing armor concepts for PE

 

 

are just fine.

 

Edit:  Okay, maybe I did complain about bikini armor and gargantuan pauldrons, but that's not aimed at PE.

Edited April 13, 2013 by Keyrock

[Elerond]

@Spiritofpower they have told as in updates that there will not be any item use restrictions for classes and that all classes can learn all skills, but classes will differentiate from each other how they can access their soul power, and this accessing reflect their beliefs, upbringing, schooling and etc. things. Some classes have bonuses in some skill and as other classes again have bonuses in different skill, which also reflects how these character have come to be.

 

And game will also have variety of different kinds of equipment and they try make rulesystem such that there is also incentive to use other armors than heaviest that you can find (as it is in IE and other D&D CRPGs usually).

[Ineth]

why is it still important to some to be able to distinguish party member gender at a glance...vs. just race traits, height/stature, and armor/gear?

 

Because every bit of additional differentiation helps, in a party-based isometric RPG where you frequently need to select specific party members.

 

Stature, outfit/gear, race, gender... the more aspects that offer differentiation the better, because:

1. The chance that each party member will have a unique combination of identifying aspects (preventing you from selecting the wrong one), increases with the number of aspects.

    

2. In different situations you will (consciously or subconsciously) think of your characters in different terms, depending on what is going on in the game role-playing wise and what's currently on your mind.

   The game should make it possible to effortlessly identity and select your female dwarf tank, no matter whether you are at the moment thinking "Where is that woman, she just did one of those audible combat-taunts (female voice-over) so she can't have wandered off too far..." or "I need a fighter over here, hmm the human one is occupied so I'll take the dwarf".

Edited April 13, 2013 by Ineth

[Spiritofpower]

you're preaching to the choir here m8.

I figured as much, but I'd honestly rather restate what's already been said than not say it at all.

 

I'm sure there will be robes in the game as well as regular clothing, trousers, tunics, dresses, etc.  If you want to dress any of your characters in that, whether they be mage, fighter, rogue, priest, then I doubt there will be anything to stop you, except the aforementioned lack of protection.  I would imagine mages will likely have to invest skill points in skills to allow them to move in heavier armor types without penalty and/or reduce any spell failure % that such armor imbues.  That's the trade-off, since you could be using those skill points to instead buff out your fireballs or whatnot. 

 

Also, I'm not complaining, what I'm saying, and have been all along, is that the existing armor concepts for PE

*image snip*

are just fine.

 

Edit:  Okay, maybe I did complain about bikini armor and gargantuan pauldrons, but that's not aimed at PE.

Hey, complaining about bikini armor is fine, especially if they present it as being just as effective as full friggin' plate. I'd just like the option to dress up my characters in fanservice-y outfits if I'm willing to deal with the impracticality of them as armor (assuming I don't just put them in said impractical-yet-good-looking gear only when in town or something).

 

Now, for the point about having to invest skill in armor; Yes, it is certainly possible Obsidian will do that. And if they do? Great. Excellent. I am perfectly satisfied. But I'd still like some form of armoring for mages that's independent of actual armor, so that the ones running around in robes and such can take a hit or two. Not saying they should tank hits or anything, but they should at least have some form of protection against damage. And besides that, I don't think armor actually had a whole lot of skill to it in real life; I think it was mostly just conditioning so you wouldn't die of exhaustion/heat in the middle of battle. Of course I'm not sure on this, not having actually worn armor, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone even imply you need specialized training in order to protect yourself with armor. But again, I wouldn't know.

 

However, does a spell-effectiveness reduction when wearing armor make sense? I mean, how I understand it, mages (in this game at least) use incantations to bend arcane forces to their will in order to achieve an effect. Why would wearing armor impede this in any way? I can understand plate impeding movement and general motion, because it did (though not by very much), but why would it impede magic? I mean, if the armor reduces the effectiveness of spellcasting, it should, logically, reduce the effectiveness of incoming spells, right? Anyways, that aside, you do have a point. If Obsidian does it like that, there doesn't need to be a balancing mechanic for armor vs. no armor for mages.

 

@Spiritofpower they have told as in updates that there will not be any item use restrictions for classes and that all classes can learn all skills, but classes will differentiate from each other how they can access their soul power, and this accessing reflect their beliefs, upbringing, schooling and etc. things. Some classes have bonuses in some skill and as other classes again have bonuses in different skill, which also reflects how these character have come to be.

 

And game will also have variety of different kinds of equipment and they try make rulesystem such that there is also incentive to use other armors than heaviest that you can find (as it is in IE and other D&D CRPGs usually).

Excellent. I've been keeping up with the updates, but I didn't quite remember if Obsidian said anything on this matter so I figured it'd be better to err on the side of caution. Certain classes having special abilities and an affinity for certain skills is just fine.

[Tsuga C]

Btw, not to derail too much, but all this talk of cool armor makes me wish I could have a reason to use something like this in the game, because it would be kewl.

Barding for war dogs and favored boar hunting hounds was available to the nobility of the Renaissance, so why not have some in P:E? I'm all for it. An inventory slot for a collar would be nice, too. It'd be easier to do than barding and would offer a lot of possibilities when it comes to enhancing/protecting a familiar or animal companion (FAC). Equip your FAC with a Collar of Protection +3; Regeneration +1; Elemental Resistance 5 and the survivability of your furry/scaly/feathered friend ought to be one less problem for you to worry about at higher levels.

Edited April 13, 2013 by Tsuga C

[Tsuga C]

Got to say old bean, I don't think i'd look particularly good in those leaf/carapace bikini's, bit too hirsute to pull them off.

Nonek was a fuzzy wuzzy;

he thought to conquer the world.

A goblin drew an Epilady,

And Nonek ran off screaming like a girl! 

[Caerdon]

 

 

I never said anything about everyone looking like identical twins.

you're right, that was Caerdon

 

 

Don't put words in my mouth. I was saying the exact opposite: there are so many ways to tell characters apart without having to exaggerate the difference between male and female armor. 

 

 

 

In my opinion aesthetics style which they use in these concepts make female and male character look different from each other, as armor is fitted to fit character's build and they don't need any special aesthetics to make that difference for more noticeable. And for to me this pragmatic aesthetic style what they use in these concepts is better than any what I have seen typical fantasy games.

 

And what comes to seeing character role from his or her gear. As they aim to make it possible build any class to any role in combat it is, so you should put such gear on your character that s/he can most effectively fill that role which you have choosen for him or her.

 

And when speaking about full plates, they should be rare and nearly unique pieces of art and armor, which cost so much that player can acguire at most one or two of them with money and other ones should be rewards of most difficult side quests. And so when your character wears one you will recognize him or her by quick glance always.

 

Thanks a lot for linking those images, I should have thought of using them myself too.

 

They demonstrate impeccably well how easy it is to tell a man and a woman apart from different physique alone, without having to make women wear special "breast plate".

 

 

The point was, I think, if they are all wearing heavy plate/helms or other full-covering armor why is it still important to some to be able to distinguish party member gender at a glance...vs. just race traits, height/stature, and armor/gear? Knowing what gender they are isn't a combat-helpful aspect in a game, AFAIK. What is the rationale for feeling like gender has to be highly distinguishable at all times vs. just knowing which character with the combat potential you want to command right now is the one you want to click on? There's all kinds of ways to know the latter "at a glance" that have nothing to do with rapid gender recognition at all.

Yes, you understood my point perfectly.

[Diagoras]

Since the problem is identifying unique party members in bulky armor, why not have the ones in bulky armor be identified the way soldiers were historically? Painted armor, insignia on their backplate and breastplate, tabards, battle-flags, distinctive helms, etc.

[Spiritofpower]

Since the problem is identifying unique party members in bulky armor, why not have the ones in bulky armor be identified the way soldiers were historically? Painted armor, insignia on their backplate and breastplate, tabards, battle-flags, distinctive helms, etc.

Simple, effective, makes sense...

 

I like it. There could be a system where, depending on what armor they're wearing, you could choose to, say, add custom-designed (think the emblem designing in Halo and the like; You can choose a symbol, background, and various colors) insignia to their armor, have them wear custom-colored tabards (possibly with aforementioned insignia on them), paint their armor...

 

The question is, should this be a free process you can do on the fly, or will you need to go to specialty armor decoration shops to add stuff like this? The first is more convenient, but the second is more immersive and realistic.

[TrashMan]

 

Some people really raise alarms over hte msot stupidest of all possible things...

When I have six dudes in plates with helmets and swords running around (very likely due to rock-paper-scissors mechanics of P:E) your wise words will get me far.

 

Personally, when I see people complaining for something to take 2 clicks when it could possibly have been done with 1, I think they're probably borderline autistic, but I wouldn't be so stupid as to deny that they have a point.

 

But they don't have a point.

"But it could be simpler" is not a proper argument since it can ALWAYS be simpler.

 

And they are talking about altering aesthetics and making artificial alterations just because they can't be bothered to pay attention to their own party.

 

What are the chances that everye will be wearing the same cloths anyway? And same weapons? And be the same gender? And have same colored cloaks and clothes? Same helmets?

 

There are so many ways to tell them apart - discounting the obvious indicators - that it's not even funny.

 

I ran around in many games with all party memebrs DELIBERATELY dressed the same. Same armor, same helm, cloak. Wanted them to look like a crack team of veteran soldiers. Still didn't have problems telling them apart.

Edited April 13, 2013 by TrashMan

[Zitchiock]

 

Since the problem is identifying unique party members in bulky armor, why not have the ones in bulky armor be identified the way soldiers were historically? Painted armor, insignia on their backplate and breastplate, tabards, battle-flags, distinctive helms, etc.

Simple, effective, makes sense...

 

I like it. There could be a system where, depending on what armor they're wearing, you could choose to, say, add custom-designed (think the emblem designing in Halo and the like; You can choose a symbol, background, and various colors) insignia to their armor, have them wear custom-colored tabards (possibly with aforementioned insignia on them), paint their armor...

 

The question is, should this be a free process you can do on the fly, or will you need to go to specialty armor decoration shops to add stuff like this? The first is more convenient, but the second is more immersive and realistic.

I think this is a very good idea. But, as I recall, the IE games didn't focus much on the character avatars in game -- the paper doll was more detailed and the portrait even more so. I liked having some ability to customize my characters (the two color options) and would like this to be expanded a bit. But, overall, this wouldn't be a sticking point for me.

[PrimeJunta]

LTTP but...

 

(1) Support for making the characters easy to identify would be good. It would help both mechanics and the imagination.

(2) Breastplate is breastplate, whatever's in it. I like realistic-looking armor, and P:E is shaping up very nicely in this respect.

(3) I really like the idea of tabards, insignia, painted shields etc. 

(3b) I would add hats, crests, and plumes. We already saw those. Besides plumes rule. I want that golden potato with a feather sticking out of it.

 

I'd like to see tailors that let you easily adjust these major cosmetic aspects of your character. It's fun and should be relatively easy to implement.

 

As to the masculine/feminine aspect, I'm sure different cultures would have different takes on it. Personally I'm hoping they'll bring back millstone collars. 

 

[Jarmo]

Oh this is what I was about earlier, about 1400 posts and eleven threads ago.

Game of Thrones brilliance.

 

Cersei in "armor".

 

Brienne, an actual warrior woman in actual armor.

 

 

Now... obviously Cerseis armor is inferior as such, but it's probably made by more skiller craftsmen and worth more.

Being a queens armor, if it was in PE, it'd probably be filled with protective magics. Maybe not as good as the "real thing", 

but maybe it'd deflect spells better, have healing properties or whatever.

 

I'd like to see both. Ceremonial decorative armors and better protecting ones.

By no means should they have the same stats, but the worse one might not be all horrible.

 

Obviously it'd be all best if one had a complete actual working armor imbued with all the magic protections...

[Sensuki]

Hated the fact that they gave Cersei armor. But then again the showrunners will do anything to modernize the show / appeal to a wider audience *thumbsdown*.

[Lephys]

Why are people concerned with recognizing characters easily

 

... Why are people UN-concerned with it? In that case, why should equipment even look different? A leather vest and steel plate should just look the same. I mean, you can check your inventory if you want to know what someone's wearing. All weapons should use the exact same sword model, even if they aren't swords. Because, it's really not that big of a deal. They'll still all function properly. It's just aesthetics at that point, and we're obviously being overly picky and want the art team to waste their time, u_u

 

They demonstrate impeccably well how easy it is to tell a man and a woman apart from different physique alone, without having to make women wear special "breast plate".

 

Argue the semantics as much as you want... the female concepts you reference are wearing a differently-formed breastplate than the males (along with, I'm sure, slight tweaks to other pieces). I don't see the point in saying "Well, yeah, females have a different physique than males, and the armor should be shaped accordingly, but that doesn't mean the females should get 'special' armor because they're female instead of male!"

 

Your words are challenging themselves to a duel, as we speak.

 

I'm not gonna say "No one" said anything about a "special breast plate" that's even more different than simply being based upon the different proportions of the female torso, but you arbitrarily challenged even those of us (myself included) who were, indeed, saying no such thing, with the same notion.

Edited April 16, 2013 by Lephys

[Jarmo]

Hated the fact that they gave Cersei armor. But then again the showrunners will do anything to modernize the show / appeal to a wider audience *thumbsdown*.

 

I thought it was a great touch. In the shows context, it was obvious it was not a functional armor but a gesture and a decoration to boost morale of the crowds and the women of the court.

[FlintlockJazz]

In regards to the posts stating that you wouldn't wear plate while adventuring, the spanish conquisitors, historical real life adventurers, wore plate while exploring south america. Plate was not that heavy also, there was a reason it became the de facto best choice of armour wanted by everyone.

[centurionofprix]

 

Why are people concerned with recognizing characters easily

 

... Why are people UN-concerned with it? In that case, why should equipment even look different? A leather vest and steel plate should just look the same. I mean, you can check your inventory if you want to know what someone's wearing. All weapons should use the exact same sword model, even if they aren't swords. Because, it's really not that big of a deal. They'll still all function properly. It's just aesthetics at that point, and we're obviously being overly picky and want the art team to waste their time, u_u

 

I guess the point was that there is no need to compromise the setting's aesthetic sensibility to differentiate between male and female characters, because it's sufficiently easy to tell individuals and the sexes apart by body size, colour choices etc. Only using one model for weapons and armour would compromise the aesthetic (as well as making it more difficult to tell characters apart, since these are precisely the sorts of things one uses to do so).

[centurionofprix]

In regards to the posts stating that you wouldn't wear plate while adventuring, the spanish conquisitors, historical real life adventurers, wore plate while exploring south america. Plate was not that heavy also, there was a reason it became the de facto best choice of armour wanted by everyone.

 

Breatplates, but full suits of plate though? There's a difference in terms of convenience, even if plate wasn't restrictive combat.

[centurionofprix]

*in* combat, that is.

[Sensuki]

 

Hated the fact that they gave Cersei armor. But then again the showrunners will do anything to modernize the show / appeal to a wider audience *thumbsdown*.

 

I thought it was a great touch. In the shows context, it was obvious it was not a functional armor but a gesture and a decoration to boost morale of the crowds and the women of the court.

 

I am a traditionalist book fan so that got a massive facepalm from me. No Westerosi woman (excluding some of the Dornish) wears armor in A Song of Ice and Fire besides Brienne of Tarth. Absolutely not Cersei Lannister, as it would be seen as ridicule by the rest of the court.

 

It's almost as bad, but not quite as bad as what they have done to the Robb and Jeyne storyline, which is completely against the GRRM's intentions which are outlined below.

 

Here is the article. Here is the quote:

 

And then there are some things that are just don’t square with history. In some sense I’m trying to respond to that. [For example] the arranged marriage, which you see constantly in the historical fiction and television show, almost always when there’s an arranged marriage, the girl doesn’t want it and rejects it and she runs off with the stable boy instead. This never ****ing happened. It just didn’t. There were thousands, tens of thousand, perhaps hundreds of thousands of arranged marriages in the nobility through the thousand years of Middle Ages and people went through with them. That’s how you did it. It wasn’t questioned. Yeah, occasionally you would want someone else, but you wouldn’t run off with the stable boy.

 

And that’s another of my pet peeves about fantasies. The bad authors adopt the class structures of the Middle Ages; where you had the royalty and then you had the nobility and you had the merchant class and then you have the peasants and so forth. But they don’t’ seem to realize what it actually meant. They have scenes where the spunky peasant girl tells off the pretty prince. The pretty prince would have raped the spunky peasant girl. He would have put her in the stocks and then had garbage thrown at her. You know.

 

I mean, the class structures in places like this had teeth. They had consequences. And people were brought up from their childhood to know their place and to know that duties of their class and the privileges of their class. It was always a source of friction when someone got outside of that thing. And I tried to reflect that.

 

However the TV show is not the books and the showrunners decided they would copy the trend of modernizing several of the 'stronger' female characters (Eowyn in LOTR, Caterina Sforza in The Borgias etc)

 

The Borgias was also guilty of the Stable Boy thing as well

Edited April 16, 2013 by Sensuki

[Elerond]

GRRM works as consultant and producer for the series and has writen some of the episodes, and has said that he himself has instigated most of character changes as series has made him look characters in new light.

 

Cersei Lannister can wear anything what she wants as queen regant, and court would follow her suit, as no-one questions decisions of sovereigns public. So ridicule would be only in back rooms and even then only in circles of highest trust, as we speak sovering that deal death penalty quite open-handed.

 

And if one reads about Caterina Sforza, one would see that The Borgias draws quite accurate picture about her and her resistance against Borgia family. Although in things that historians argue series goes usually with option that picture her more manipulative. And stable boy incident has also historical merits as Borgias family said that Lucrezia had affair outside of marriage and her child is not her first husband's (Giovanni Sforza).

[Archaven]

I kind of like my male and female characters to be clearly distinguishable from each other, realism be damned.  That's just me, though.

 

You are forbidden of that. Sexism is not allowed. They should be covered without revealing any bodyline at all, even totally covering the head.

[Elerond]

 

In regards to the posts stating that you wouldn't wear plate while adventuring, the spanish conquisitors, historical real life adventurers, wore plate while exploring south america. Plate was not that heavy also, there was a reason it became the de facto best choice of armour wanted by everyone.

 

Breatplates, but full suits of plate though? There's a difference in terms of convenience, even if plate wasn't restrictive combat.

 

Full suite of plate cost too much for most of conquistadors as such cost over million british pounds in todays money and conquistadors usually did go life risking adventures because they wanted to become so rich that they would afford one.

 

But conqistador leaders that were noble men did wear such plates, as you can see from Francisco Pizarro's (man who conquered Inca Empire) statue in Lima, Peru