What should a female breastplate really look like

[GrumpyOldschooler]

I know I'm not probably allowed to ask, but I still want to know why do people want boob plates and chain bikinis anyway in a game like this? I mean I can understand the sex appeal, but atleast for me it kills immersion totally if all female armor available looks like cheap fetish fashion. Why not just have "special" kind of dungeon (and no I don't mean dungeon in RPG sense ) for that stuff?

 

There are very few kind of worlds where such items feel approriate and can even be bool. They might fit to very bizarre and artistic world ie. Heavy Metal or some erotic-anime fantasy, but I don't see them having much place in more serious stuff unless the setting is bizarre enough and that's why such "porn gear" worked in Torment.

[Lephys]

People don't buy (at least usually) those mint-condition orginal #1 issues to read them but own them because they are rare which gives them value over their normal price. So if we use this analog to magical enchanted bikinis, then they have value only because they are rare, not because they are good.

Look... I really, sincerely try my best here. I fail to see how I can go any further out of my way to make my point clearly and provide as little extraneous text that could lead to misunderstanding as possible. Why must everyone pick what they want out of my words, mold it to fit an argument they'd like to make, and then just roll with that, rather than saying "Oh, maybe he's not saying what I intended to argue against, here."?

 

*sigh*

 

The point was that people spend lots of money on comic books even when the price has nothing to do with improved functionality. Which is why that's all I stated. I can't make a comparison to something that's EXACTLY like an enchanted chainmail bikini, but that doesn't mean that I'm saying that enchanted chainmail bikinis would literally have all the properties of comic books that you can possibly think of, and that people would purchase them for the exact same reasons. The point wasn't what the reason WAS for giving value to the comic book (rarity). It was what the reason WASN'T (functionality).

 

I don't know how to make a point such as that any clearer or more precise without an accompanying overly-explanatory paragraph like the above. And yet, still, it wouldn't surprise me if someone pointed out some more problems, picked out of the above clarification, in all the contextual stuff that still isn't in any way a part of my point. -___-

 

And if magic is costly resource one could think it would most likely be used more functional items than chainmail bikini, which would cause expotential price rise for those, without giving them any actual bonuses over "normal" magical armour.

Exactly. Therefore, everyone whouldn't simply run around in these instead of regular armor, just because they're functionally equal to regular armor.

 

 

I know I'm not probably allowed to ask, but I still want to know why do people want boob plates and chain bikinis anyway in a game like this? I mean I can understand the sex appeal, but atleast for me it kills immersion totally if all female armor available looks like cheap fetish fashion. Why not just have "special" kind of dungeon (and no I don't mean dungeon in RPG sense ) for that stuff?

No idea. I'm not voting for their inclusion in P:E. I simply enjoy analyzing the subject to find an actual valid implementation, in the face of at-a-glance "Those definitely would always be stupid in a game world" allegations.

 

Look at how people shoot themselves in the foot with stuff nowadays, with girls going to nightclubs in winter in miniskirts (with maybe a tiny, still-sacrificing-function-for-style fluffy half-coat on), waiting outside the club in line for upwards of 20 minutes, complaining about the cold but finding it even more annoying to have a warm coat that ruins their outfit.

 

I don't see how anyone could think that, in a believable world, not a soul (pun intended, ) would place more importance on style than function in some things.

 

Obviously no one would ever wear a regular chainmail bikini and be a successful warrior person, UNLESS they fought unarmored anyway (like a crazy Spartan or something), in which case the lack of armor from the bikini would be moot (as opposed to... a hide loincloth and mantle/shirt thingy?). But, that isn't to say no one would ever desire to wear such a thing for impractical reasons.

 

Just, this type of thing is generally met with that whole "OMG, any 'sexy' equipment, whatsoever, is just sexist sexualization!", when really, a world of believable people is going to have people in it who just so happen to want to dress like that. Obviously, games go a bit overboard a lot of the time, but the answer isn't just a clean-sweep approach to all things scant/stylish. "In this world... no one cares how they look, at all. No one, ever. Everyone's 100% practical. In the entire world. Because we don't want to offend anyone in reality with the sheer existence of things in a fictitious world full of characters who are supposed to act like believable people." I just don't buy that, is all.

 

But, I don't really think there've been many people in here making any huge arguments for everyone to have boob plates and bikinis (and/or speedos, dudes, u_u).

Edited May 7, 2013 by Lephys

[GrumpyOldschooler]

Also I had an interesting realization while pondering on this, ironically I have heard people calling semi-old RPGs like Fallout and Arcanum sexist or even misogynist, yet in these RPGs you can play unsexualized normal woman. Newer games that are called "inclusive" and "female-friendly" tend to generally oversexualize (ofcourse there are exceptions) look of all the women up to armor even if it's not usually the extreme bikini-variety. Strange really when you come to think of it.

Edited May 7, 2013 by GrumpyOldschooler

[Dream]

And if magic is costly resource one could think it would most likely be used more functional items than chainmail bikini, which would cause expotential price rise for those, without giving them any actual bonuses over "normal" magical armour.

 

Pretty sure there are more practical uses for carbon fiber than a Ferrari, but what the hell.

[centurionofprix]

Also as far as i know two handed weapon fighting never existed historically but it's something you find in most fantasy games. (i'm not that certain on that, please forgive me if i'm wrong)

 

A minor point, but too cool not to be mentioned: Musashi the legendary Japanese swordsman also fought with two weapons. Or a wooden one, sometimes.

http://www.bookoffiverings.com/MiyamotoMusashi.htm

Edited May 7, 2013 by centurionofprix

[TrashMan]

My point was that the very existence of such armor opens up a whole can of worms.

 

You start with X, but the you realize.."hey, if X, why doesn't anyone use it for Y. I would"

 

 

Also, there's a difference between willing to endure some uncomfort for going out clubbing, and straight-up risking your life by going into battle in a loincloth.

 

Redicolous and impractical things were always an odditiy in battle - mostly because people wearing them got killed. There's an entire range of redicolous experimental weapons in RL that completely and totally failed.

[Elerond]

 

And if magic is costly resource one could think it would most likely be used more functional items than chainmail bikini, which would cause expotential price rise for those, without giving them any actual bonuses over "normal" magical armour.

 

Pretty sure there are more practical uses for carbon fiber than a Ferrari, but what the hell.

 

That is what I said, so you agree that magical chainmail bikini is only expensive ego stroking thing that don't give any actual benefit to cheaper magical armours and in some cases it is even worse? If so don't see any bad in it, as my beef is that in ego-stroking things that are better than functional things and only reason for this is "magic" that don't have any logic in it.

[SharDarkness]

 

Also as far as i know two handed weapon fighting never existed historically but it's something you find in most fantasy games. (i'm not that certain on that, please forgive me if i'm wrong)

 

A minor point, but too cool not to be mentioned: Musashi the legendary Japanese swordsman also fought with two weapons. Or a wooden one, sometimes.

http://www.bookoffiverings.com/MiyamotoMusashi.htm

 

Thanks for sharing this, looks interesting.

 

Also i indeed meant two weapon fighting not two handed... got to correct that.

[Dream]

My point was that the very existence of such armor opens up a whole can of worms.

 

You start with X, but the you realize.."hey, if X, why doesn't anyone use it for Y. I would"

The existence of magic opens that can of worms; not a skimpy piece of clothing.

 

Also, there's a difference between willing to endure some uncomfort for going out clubbing, and straight-up risking your life by going into battle in a loincloth.

 

Redicolous and impractical things were always an odditiy in battle - mostly because people wearing them got killed. There's an entire range of redicolous experimental weapons in RL that completely and totally failed.

But in a world of magic you're not really risking your life. That's kind of the point of magic; to have the best of all worlds. 

 

That is what I said, so you agree that magical chainmail bikini is only expensive ego stroking thing that don't give any actual benefit to cheaper magical armours and in some cases it is even worse? If so don't see any bad in it, as my beef is that in ego-stroking things that are better than functional things and only reason for this is "magic" that don't have any logic in it.

Are you under the impression that ego stroking is some modern development? We're not talking about what would be the theoretical maximum in magical protection, but in what opportunities the existence of magic opens up. For instance, if the enchantment provides the equivalent protection of a foot of steel I doubt it really matters what the base item is; yea, 101 > 100, but not enough to matter.

[Elerond]

 

That is what I said, so you agree that magical chainmail bikini is only expensive ego stroking thing that don't give any actual benefit to cheaper magical armours and in some cases it is even worse? If so don't see any bad in it, as my beef is that in ego-stroking things that are better than functional things and only reason for this is "magic" that don't have any logic in it.

Are you under the impression that ego stroking is some modern development? We're not talking about what would be the theoretical maximum in magical protection, but in what opportunities the existence of magic opens up. For instance, if the enchantment provides the equivalent protection of a foot of steel I doubt it really matters what the base item is; yea, 101 > 100, but not enough to matter.

 

 

No, but ego-stroking in design usually comes with price because there is nearly always cheaper and better ways to achive same goals.

 

But if you enchament normal cloths for in that cause, you don't need to sacrifice you precious magical resources to make those bikinis or speedos to work in winter. If there is way to make magical barriers then there is probably way to broke those barries, in which case normal armour that is enchanted gives you better protection in those cases. And you probably can make better or more enchament in that armour, because, it has more mass and surface area where you can put those enchaments, so 1001>101. That is all what I am saying.

[TrashMan]

 

 

The existence of magic opens that can of worms; not a skimpy piece of clothing.

 

The way magic is used (or what it's used for) opens up a can of worms.

In essence, if magic is (ab) used without thought, just as a justification/handwave for something "cool", that opens up a can of worms.

 

"Flying sharks with lazors on their heads? That's so cool. A wizzard did it!"

 

 

 

But in a world of magic you're not really risking your life. That's kind of the point of magic; to have the best of all worlds.

 

And yet you don't get either.

Except for a silly setting.

 

 

 

[Dream]

And you probably can make better or more enchament in that armour, because, it has more mass and surface area where you can put those enchaments, so 1001>101. That is all what I am saying.

I guess you thought lord of the rings was awful then because Sauron didn't make one necklace (or helmet, or gauntlet, or just about anything other than a ring) to rule them all because, you know, more mass.

 

 

 

The existence of magic opens that can of worms; not a skimpy piece of clothing.

 

The way magic is used (or what it's used for) opens up a can of worms.

In essence, if magic is (ab) used without thought, just as a justification/handwave for something "cool", that opens up a can of worms.

 

When exactly has magic been used for anything other than to justify fantastical **** happening in the story? That's kind of the whole point of it.

[Lephys]

Also, there's a difference between willing to endure some uncomfort for going out clubbing, and straight-up risking your life by going into battle in a loincloth.

 

Did not the Spartans sometimes go into battle unarmored, and were not they quite successful?

 

Obviously everyone's not going to do that, but some people fight unarmored already. The odds of those same people caring about things that produce differing aesthetics for them and simultaneously provide no practical/functional benefit to averting wounds in battle are not that slim, really.

 

Also, you keep talking about going into battle, like cRPGs' typical combat scenario is 15,000 vs 15,000 in some kind of formal-ranks city siege, where you always want armor because 1,000's of arrows will be raining upon you at any moment, and random people will stab you with swords and pikes in the midst of a flood of soldiers, rather than small-scale, party-based engagements.

 

There are plenty more reasons to worry less about armor and focus more on agility and various other means (similar to martial arts, etc.) when you and 5 other people are fighting up to 10-or-so other creatures.

 

Not to mention the entire suspension of disbelief that already goes into an RPG world, simply because of the structure of an RPG (You start out with rudimentary competence, and by the end of the game you've slain about 7,000 individuals of gradually increasing threat/skill/difficulty, mastering every combat skill you have as you go along.)

 

A real group of 6 people wouldn't fight their way through an entire world-wide conflict, magic or no.

 

There are plenty of factors at play, and there are reasons to wear oodles of armor, and reasons to not wear so much. Obviously the dev team has to pick one set of values for the factors involved, as they can't pick all of them, and they can't pick none.

 

To put it simply, does there need to be impractical (but completely do-able) stuff in the game world? No. Does the game world need to be completely devoid of any such things? No. People are a bit crazy at times. If you prevent the game world from reflecting that, then it feels like a world full of half-empty, shallow "people."

 

If they so chose to come up with a clever means of incorporating enchanted chainmail bikinis/loincloths (for example), I'd take no issue with that. Oodles of tribes in reality pierce 50% of their body surface with various bones and such, and stretch out their earlobes, etc. Is that in any way practical? No. But they have some reason for doing so, and that's their own. The British, in the American Revolutionary War, war bright red coats. Is that intelligent and practical? Nope. And yet an entire nation's army did so.

 

Again, people are crazy sometimes. 8P. Wartime is no exception.

[JFSOCC]

Are we really still discussing this? this thread is boring, let it die.

[Lephys]

It might've died after that last post of mine, but we'll never know, 'cause you hit it with a defibrillator, ironically in the form of a "Why is this thread still getting posts?" post. 8P

 

Hehe. I'm truly not trying to be an arse, but if the thread is so boring, why not stop reading it, much less posting your lack of interest?

 

It'll die when no one wants to discuss it anymore (or it hits the post limit, which I guess, technically, your post does work toward, so touche...)

[jamoecw]

 

Also, there's a difference between willing to endure some uncomfort for going out clubbing, and straight-up risking your life by going into battle in a loincloth.

 

Did not the Spartans sometimes go into battle unarmored, and were not they quite successful?

 

actually the spartans had a law against going into battle unarmoured.  there was an account of a young spartan that didn't have time to don armour so he grabbed his spear and shield and ran off into battle and defended the city.  he was given a medal for valor and fined for not wearing armour.  they were all about law, if you did something that had to be done, but broke the law to do it you would get in trouble, but they might also pin a medal to your chest (yes i know they didn't use medals, but wreaths).

 

all this talk about women on the battlefield, as if it was uncommon.  it is just uncommon in a few cultures, plenty of cultures considered women capable of fighting, heck scythian women would sometimes remove their right breast so they could fight better.  once you go past medieval monoculture you end up with a great variety in things, like weapons and tactics, political and spiritual views, gender and racial equality, and so on.

[BruceVC]

I know I'm not probably allowed to ask, but I still want to know why do people want boob plates and chain bikinis anyway in a game like this? I mean I can understand the sex appeal, but atleast for me it kills immersion totally if all female armor available looks like cheap fetish fashion. Why not just have "special" kind of dungeon (and no I don't mean dungeon in RPG sense ) for that stuff?

 

There are very few kind of worlds where such items feel approriate and can even be bool. They might fit to very bizarre and artistic world ie. Heavy Metal or some erotic-anime fantasy, but I don't see them having much place in more serious stuff unless the setting is bizarre enough and that's why such "porn gear" worked in Torment.

 

I want Bikini armour due to the aesthetics, I also have no issue with full armour for ladies. It would be ideal to have the option of both. For me I don't over-analyze the whole "bikini armour isn't feasible, realistic or serious " point  because its a fantasy world where  magic and dragons exist and if we can have those things I fail to see why the game can't have other uncommon components like bikini-chainmail armour

[BruceVC]

It might've died after that last post of mine, but we'll never know, 'cause you hit it with a defibrillator, ironically in the form of a "Why is this thread still getting posts?" post. 8P

 

Hehe. I'm truly not trying to be an arse, but if the thread is so boring, why not stop reading it, much less posting your lack of interest?

 

It'll die when no one wants to discuss it anymore (or it hits the post limit, which I guess, technically, your post does work toward, so touche...)

 

 

I agree, the irony always makes me laugh when someone says a thread is boring but takes the time to post on that thread. No one forces anyone to contribute on any discussion or to even read the comments

Edited May 9, 2013 by BruceVC

[TrashMan]

 

Did not the Spartans sometimes go into battle unarmored, and were not they quite successful?

 

Obviously everyone's not going to do that, but some people fight unarmored already. The odds of those same people caring about things that produce differing aesthetics for them and simultaneously provide no practical/functional benefit to averting wounds in battle are not that slim, really.

 

Contrary to what some think ,300 is not historicly accurate at all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, you keep talking about going into battle, like cRPGs' typical combat scenario is 15,000 vs 15,000 in some kind of formal-ranks city siege, where you always want armor because 1,000's of arrows will be raining upon you at any moment, and random people will stab you with swords and pikes in the midst of a flood of soldiers, rather than small-scale, party-based engagements.

 

There are plenty more reasons to worry less about armor and focus more on agility and various other means (similar to martial arts, etc.) when you and 5 other people are fighting up to 10-or-so other creatures.

 

You are actualy less likely to get back-stabbed in a 15000 vs 15000 fight then you are in a 5 vs 10 one.

So no, you won't really worry less aboutarmor nad more about agility.

 

 

 

Not to mention the entire suspension of disbelief that already goes into an RPG world

 

You already jumped from a height of 2 feet...why not 10? Why not 100?

At some point you have to stop shifting the goalpost.

 

 

A real group of 6 people wouldn't fight their way through an entire world-wide conflict, magic or no.

 

No? They might. Of course, the likelyhood of their survival is redicolously low, but there are Real World instances of people surviving multiple suicide missions.

 

 

 

 

 

To put it simply, does there need to be impractical (but completely do-able) stuff in the game world? No. Does the game world need to be completely devoid of any such things? No. People are a bit crazy at times. If you prevent the game world from reflecting that, then it feels like a world full of half-empty, shallow "people."

 

If they so chose to come up with a clever means of incorporating enchanted chainmail bikinis/loincloths (for example), I'd take no issue with that. Oodles of tribes in reality pierce 50% of their body surface with various bones and such, and stretch out their earlobes, etc. Is that in any way practical? No. But they have some reason for doing so, and that's their own. The British, in the American Revolutionary War, war bright red coats. Is that intelligent and practical? Nope. And yet an entire nation's army did so.

 

Again, people are crazy sometimes. 8P. Wartime is no exception.

 

I have nothing agaisnt people being stupid.

Wheat I do have against is people being stupid and not paying for their stupidity.

 

If you might recall, marching slowly in single file while wearing bright, red uniforms ended up being a disastrous tactic that resulted in massive loss of life.

 

 

[motorizer]

 

 

You are actualy less likely to get back-stabbed in a 15000 vs 15000 fight then you are in a 5 vs 10 one.

So no, you won't really worry less aboutarmor nad more about agility.

 

 

 

Thing is though, you're an adventurer and a traveller, not a foot soldier...you might have to swim, you might have to climb, you might have to squeeze through a small gap, you have to carry your armour everywhere you go, you'd have to sit down in it to eat since there is nowhere to put it and it would be awkward to take off and put on, you don't have a squire to carry your stuff,(probably) you don't have wagons(probably)

 

I don't really see the point in plate armour in these situations...the fact that games tend to have you fighting all the time and don't simulate all aspects of life leads to unrealistic choices working the best.

 

That's not to say you couldn't have a breastplate though...and I reckon having some that are form fitting and some that aren't would be best...keep everyone happy .

if there is plenty of armour types that don't all look the same, and no ultimate "best" armour then it's up to the player if they want the team in uniform or not.

Edited May 9, 2013 by motorizer

[jamoecw]

 

 

 

You are actualy less likely to get back-stabbed in a 15000 vs 15000 fight then you are in a 5 vs 10 one.

So no, you won't really worry less aboutarmor nad more about agility.

 

 

 

Thing is though, you're an adventurer and a traveller, not a foot soldier...you might have to swim, you might have to climb, you might have to squeeze through a small gap, you have to carry your armour everywhere you go, you'd have to sit down in it to eat since there is nowhere to put it and it would be awkward to take off and put on, you don't have a squire to carry your stuff,(probably) you don't have wagons(probably)

 

I don't really see the point in plate armour in these situations...the fact that games tend to have you fighting all the time and don't simulate all aspects of life leads to unrealistic choices working the best.

 

That's not to say you couldn't have a breastplate though...and I reckon having some that are form fitting and some that aren't would be best...keep everyone happy .

if there is plenty of armour types that don't all look the same, and no ultimate "best" armour then it's up to the player if they want the team in uniform or not.

 

keep in mind that you have to do all of those things in war as well, and that people did do those things while wearing plate armour.  in fact a full set of plate weighs less than the gear that modern soldiers wear.  from a realism point of view there isn't much against armour if you can afford it, from a fantasy point of view there may be reasons against armour.

 

 

 

I want Bikini armour due to the aesthetics, I also have no issue with full armour for ladies. It would be ideal to have the option of both. For me I don't over-analyze the whole "bikini armour isn't feasible, realistic or serious " point  because its a fantasy world where  magic and dragons exist and if we can have those things I fail to see why the game can't have other uncommon components like bikini-chainmail armour 

 

 

same logic for having nudity wen you remove all of your characters clothes.  i have nothing against nudity, nor scantily clad women, so either can go in and i'd be fine, but i want the baseline to be realistic female armour (sorta unisex).

Edited May 9, 2013 by jamoecw

[Lephys]

Contrary to what some think ,300 is not historicly accurate at all.

Crap. I was sure it was actually the story told by a still-living Spartan. That's why I simply stated it was historically 100% accurate, instead of inquiring as to the actual practices of the Spartants of old.

 

You are actualy less likely to get back-stabbed in a 15000 vs 15000 fight then you are in a 5 vs 10 one.

So no, you won't really worry less aboutarmor nad more about agility.

It's not back-stabbing I'm worried about. It's multi-directional stabbing. Try as you might, you can't really control which of the 14,999 people around you fall, and when, and if the 5 guys around you take arrows to the neck, or spears to the shoulders, or horses to the face, methinks your armor isn't going to do you much good against 10 other soldiers of the hostile persuasion.

 

There are quite literally more sources of striking in a large battle, thus the armor statistically is more likely to protect you.

 

When you're fighting one-on-one, you KNOW the guy isn't going to hit you from the side, or from behind, or above, or suddenly ride in on a horse, or launch arrows from a distance.

 

Once again. True, you just won't go "Okay, cool" when I make a point. You have a mighty need to misconstrue it, like I said anything about backstabbing being the leading cause of death among historical melee soldiers, much less stressed that.

 

You already jumped from a height of 2 feet...why not 10? Why not 100?

At some point you have to stop shifting the goalpost.

Curses! Foiled yet again! Because I said "since something's going to happen, we might as well make sure we in no way moderate it!"

 

I'm just going to start pretending your arguments are actually valid replies directly to the things I was saying. Maybe it'll work like reverse psychology, and, in an effort to side-step what you perceive as my argument, you'll sidestep the pretend one and actually address the real one, inadvertently.

 

No? They might. Of course, the likelyhood of their survival is redicolously low, but there are Real World instances of people surviving multiple suicide missions.

Yeah, and we might all be in the Matrix right now, thinking it's real life.

 

Were there any real world accounts of people starting out as lowly peasants, getting caught up in World War II, stealing a German U-boat, liberating Britain, then fighting all the way through Europe to ultimately take down Hitler?

 

Nope. People have done some really amazing stuff in real life, and it STILL doesn't even come close to comparing to the sum of the main characters' accomplishments in 90% of RPG storylines.

 

I have nothing agaisnt people being stupid.

Wheat I do have against is people being stupid and not paying for their stupidity.

 

If you might recall, marching slowly in single file while wearing bright, red uniforms ended up being a disastrous tactic that resulted in massive loss of life.

Touche. But the fact remains that there are those who practice fighting SPECIFICALLY in very light armor and never wear heavy armor, and those who do the opposite. And there are those who wear no actual armor. Do they run out into the frontlines of combat and not die? No. They don't do that. Just like an archer doesn't charge the frontlines in battle. He's not stupid. He's just fulfilling a certain combat role, at the cost of not filling others.

 

Someone who wears no armor in the first place isn't any less stupid than someone who wears no-armor-that-happens-to-be-in-the-form-of-a-specific-aesthetic-style-that-they-personally-place-value-upon.

 

It IS a party-based game. One character could rely upon another to "tank," while the first only strikes at opportune moments, in opportune ways.

 

Also, since it was brought up that something as functionally useless as a chainmail bikini could be enchanted to actually provide, say, the same level of armor as full leather or chainmail, I don't see how that person should "pay for their stupidity" of happening to go through the trouble to provide their body with protection that just happens to come in the form that they prefer in a purely subjective fashion.

 

In short, no one said anything about not paying for being stupid.

[motorizer]

 

keep in mind that you have to do all of those things in war as well, and that people did do those things while wearing plate armour.  in fact a full set of plate weighs less than the gear that modern soldiers wear.  from a realism point of view there isn't much against armour if you can afford it, from a fantasy point of view there may be reasons against armour.

 

this is kind of the wrong argument, since the thread is about what it looks like rather than whether it is practical, but anyway, I know plate isn't ridiculously heavy, and I know people did those things in war...but, as far as I now it's not a war, at least not to begin with..an army in a war had blacksmiths, transport vehicles..etc...

Human nature being what it is, (based on the obseravtion that we needed laws to make people wear protective stuff such as motorcycle helmets and seatbelts, and that people often override guards on machinery etc..because it's in the way) I reckon the armour would be the first thing to get binned when travelling in a small group (who as far as I know aren't actively seeking battle)

If you had to travel across a hostile country, in a group of six, would you honestly put on a clanking great suit of armour or would you wear something lighter and try to avoid trouble

If you're looking for a fight then obviously it's different

 

Back on topic...I'm more than happy with the looks of the concept art...I just think it should (and I think it will) be viable to wear something else....after all Robin Hood got away with not wearing plate...

and I see no reason at all for non plate armours not to look slightly different on females

[Iucounu]

When it comes to lightweighted armor, it can make sense to have uncovered bodyparts, but even then a piece of rag provides more protection than nothing, and doesn't limit your agility much.  And heavy armor, that has uncovered areas, clearly puts you at a disadvantage, e.g this..

 

You don't gain significant weightloss, and the uncovered area can be your death.

[FlintlockJazz]

When it comes to lightweighted armor, it can make sense to have uncovered bodyparts, but even then a piece of rag provides more protection than nothing, and doesn't limit your agility much. And heavy armor, that has uncovered areas, clearly puts you at a disadvantage, e.g this..

 

You don't gain significant weightloss, and the uncovered area can be your death.

Heh yeah she might think she looks sexy in that but it all it would do would be to get stabbed in her neckline and then raped (if she's lucky she'll be dead before the raping starts). People have claimed that looking sexy would help distract your enemy but really it would just guarantee a more horrific death.