Just noticed that u can enchant clothing!

[wanderon]

 

 

It ain't rocket science it's just adding a new option and retaining the old robe and it's fine by me.

 

Apparently it is, because you've completely missed the points

 

1) Having a wizard put on a robe shouldn't be a punishment for the wizard

2) Some people want robes to be functional rather than bad, even if only for costume variety.

3) Robes are not any more restrictive and confining than several other outfits of the same period, nor do they use thread any more capable of turning sword blades than anything else.

4) The armor system is borked to the point that only specific character builds should bother with any sort of armor at all, and everyone else should lounge around in casual clothing, or be naked. Which given the setting and historical parallels, isn't as ridiculous as you seem to think it is.

 

 

 

 

Why shouldn't it have the same sort of penalty as putting on any other armor? It's not like the robe isn't giving you something in return (just like other armors) and now you have an alternate choice if you don't want to deal with the penalty and still want to wear something enchantable.

 

As for there being any setting or historical parallels that would make adventuring (facing dangerous foes and trekking through towns and wilds comunicating with the local inhabitants etc.) naked a reasonable option from any roleplaying perspective LOL... 

[Luckmann]

 

 

It ain't rocket science it's just adding a new option and retaining the old robe and it's fine by me.

Apparently it is, because you've completely missed the points

 

1) Having a wizard put on a robe shouldn't be a punishment for the wizard

2) Some people want robes to be functional rather than bad, even if only for costume variety.

3) Robes are not any more restrictive and confining than several other outfits of the same period, nor do they use thread any more capable of turning sword blades than anything else.

4) The armor system is borked to the point that only specific character builds should bother with any sort of armor at all, and everyone else should lounge around in casual clothing, or be naked. Which given the setting and historical parallels, isn't as ridiculous as you seem to think it is.

 

 

Why shouldn't it have the same sort of penalty as putting on any other armor? It's not like the robe isn't giving you something in return (just like other armors) and now you have an alternate choice if you don't want to deal with the penalty and still want to wear something enchantable.

 

As for there being any setting or historical parallels that would make adventuring (facing dangerous foes and trekking through towns and wilds comunicating with the local inhabitants etc.) naked a reasonable option from any roleplaying perspective LOL... 

 

Because

• The distinction between robes and clothes makes no sense whatsoever thematically. Robes are literally just pieces of cloth sown together in a certain shape, no different from any two other articles of clothing in the game.
• Robes serve absolutely no mechanical purpose. There is no situation where you will be wearing a robe, where you would not be better served wearing other articles of clothing that comes without penalty. It is a trap choice with no mechanical value or strategic worth.

Do we really need to draw you a road map?

[Voss]

 

 

 

It ain't rocket science it's just adding a new option and retaining the old robe and it's fine by me.

 

Apparently it is, because you've completely missed the points

 

1) Having a wizard put on a robe shouldn't be a punishment for the wizard

2) Some people want robes to be functional rather than bad, even if only for costume variety.

3) Robes are not any more restrictive and confining than several other outfits of the same period, nor do they use thread any more capable of turning sword blades than anything else.

4) The armor system is borked to the point that only specific character builds should bother with any sort of armor at all, and everyone else should lounge around in casual clothing, or be naked. Which given the setting and historical parallels, isn't as ridiculous as you seem to think it is.

 

 

 

 

Why shouldn't it have the same sort of penalty as putting on any other armor? It's not like the robe isn't giving you something in return (just like other armors) and now you have an alternate choice if you don't want to deal with the penalty and still want to wear something enchantable.

 

As for there being any setting or historical parallels that would make adventuring (facing dangerous foes and trekking through towns and wilds comunicating with the local inhabitants etc.) naked a reasonable option from any roleplaying perspective LOL... 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudity_in_combat

Here you go. Meet the Celts not-actually-Glanfathans, honest. 

Would you like something on the Greek Olympics?

 

 

As for the first part- because the trivial amount of DR you get is absolutely worthless (given health and damage numbers) and the recovery penalty you get in exchange is borderline obscene.  It's like getting a penny for being punched in the face. 

[Luckmann]

 

 

 

It ain't rocket science it's just adding a new option and retaining the old robe and it's fine by me.

Apparently it is, because you've completely missed the points

 

1) Having a wizard put on a robe shouldn't be a punishment for the wizard

2) Some people want robes to be functional rather than bad, even if only for costume variety.

3) Robes are not any more restrictive and confining than several other outfits of the same period, nor do they use thread any more capable of turning sword blades than anything else.

4) The armor system is borked to the point that only specific character builds should bother with any sort of armor at all, and everyone else should lounge around in casual clothing, or be naked. Which given the setting and historical parallels, isn't as ridiculous as you seem to think it is.

 

 

Why shouldn't it have the same sort of penalty as putting on any other armor? It's not like the robe isn't giving you something in return (just like other armors) and now you have an alternate choice if you don't want to deal with the penalty and still want to wear something enchantable.

 

As for there being any setting or historical parallels that would make adventuring (facing dangerous foes and trekking through towns and wilds comunicating with the local inhabitants etc.) naked a reasonable option from any roleplaying perspective LOL... 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudity_in_combat

Here you go. Meet the Celts not-actually-Glanfathans, honest. 

Would you like something on the Greek Olympics?

 

 

As for the first part- because the trivial amount of DR you get is absolutely worthless (given health and damage numbers) and the recovery penalty you get in exchange is borderline obscene.  It's like getting a penny for being punched in the face.

 

 

Inb4 a "Buh.. but.. muh penny"-argument. Some people really like to earn their shekels.

Edited March 14, 2015 by Luckmann

[wanderon]

@ Voss

 

Did you even read the information in the wiki?

Nudity in combat

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Nudity in combat is the practice of entering combat without the use of clothing and armor. It is rarely practiced, however; apart from the social aspects of nudity, the combatant lacks even the basic protection of clothes, for instance when diving for cover or crawling. Also the combatant misses the practicality of hiding/carrying objects in pockets and attached to clothes.

 

 As for the Olympics that is hardly similar to the functions a typical fantasy RPG party endures while adventuring - try again.

Edited March 14, 2015 by wanderon

[Luckmann]

 

Anyone that's actually found the Dyrwood clothing (#3) in the game? I'm starting to despair.

[Falkon Swiftblade]

yes I have found a set of dyrwood clothing. Not exactly sure where, but I've not made it to Defiance bay yet. I think I found it in a crate or a dude on the ground, but can't remember which map. I also haven't done any of cad nua and my party is lvl 4. If that helps you.

 

EDIT: I actually don't know which one I have, I only saw one in my inventory. I'll get back to you if it's that one.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Falkon Swiftblade

[Luckmann]

Actually, I checked, and it's been replaced by this monstrosity:

 

 

To bad, because there seems to be nothing in the game even resembling noble's clothing.

[Luckmann]

Actually, scratch that. They just look completely different depending on whether it's male or female, for some arbitrary and completely asinine reason. This brings back memories of Wasteland 2 again... =_=

 

Teh womyn get at least 70% fancier clothing. Especially cloth_outfit_dyrwoodan_vest stands out as being "filthy open-chest field hand" for men and "upper-class merchant-lady" or "clan matriarch" for women.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Luckmann

[Moira]

There are actually two different (by appearance; the name is the same) sets of Dyrwoodan Clothing in the game. I can't remember where I picked these up, unfortunately, but I'm guessing somewhere in Defiance Bay.

[Shdy314]

Yes and the Vailian clothing on women looks fashionable as hell while on men it looks like some sort of hilarious disgusting suit.

[Moira]

Does anyone have a "clothing collection" pic like this for male looks?

[Luckmann]

I was going to make one, with all the appropriate titles of the items and the codes for each, but I didn't have time and now I'm in Germany until Monday.

 

Unless someone else does it, I'll get one up on Tueday or so.

 

Some of them are up as pictures on the Wiki.

[Kelth]

You can also have the cloth with this command line: AddItem Cloth_Outfit_Dyrwoodan(Clone) 1

[Luckmann]

That just means you are producing a clone item, it is still based on the cloth_outfit_dyrwoodan base item.

[XomRhoK]

 

 

Does anyone have a "clothing collection" pic like this for male looks?

 

 

 

 

Just made it, didn't chage descriptions.