Please, Create Sexy Armor!


Pathfinder Online

51 to 100 of 183 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Give armor the glamered special ability so its apereance is costumizable. This way the cheese cake is voluntary.

Humbly,
Yawar

Dark Archive

DeathQuaker wrote:
Jodi Lane wrote:

Okay, I'm definitely going to be creating a stir...Apologies in advance! I just really love costumes and cosplay potential of the characters that I play. To me, it makes the game more awesome. I'm a huge Warcraft gamer and I enjoy seeing super-cool armor sets--my favorites are always the hotter ones.

I just want to put in a direct request for attractive and form-fitting female armor. The most awesome thing I find about being female is the fantastic cosplay outfits I get to make wear (That and being married to Sean lol). Don't be afraid of the people who hate cheesecake, you could make more conservative sets for them ;o). They don't necessarily have to be revealing to be sexy either, I could make suggestions? ;o)

Why only for females?

Last I checked, there were male cosplayers who might also want fun stuff to wear, and otherwise you're setting a double standard.

I don't think I said "only" for females ;o) I just want to make sure there IS sexy female armor. Because I really like cute looking gear. And I don't want to have everything look super-realistic because if I wanted to play in reality I'd play paintball or something. ;oD

Dark Archive

YawarFiesta wrote:

Give armor the glamered special ability so its apereance is costumizable. This way the cheese cake is voluntary.

Humbly,
Yawar

Exactly. I think you should have options either way of looking the way you'd like. Sort of how Wow just came out with their Transmogrification. ;o)

Dark Archive

Drejk wrote:
Gods forbid! Whatever will be implemented, let it not be in any way similar to World Of Warcraft robes and armors, blizzard devs have sick fetish about ridiculous shoulderpads and they have some obsessive compulsion to place some patterns on everything as if they could not stand a decent piece of plain cloth.

You know, because I never play male characters on Warcraft I don't notice this issue until I team up with some of my friends who play male characters (seems like few)...most play females. The male shoulderpads are crazy-huge. I guess it's just because the male characters are as well. And to me, that's okay, but I agree they look a little crazy sometimes. But Warcraft's female gear is awesome.

Being in the fashion industry, I actually understand the avoidance of plain-cloth stuff. It gets dull. But I do thing that somethings just need a touch of design rather than an explosion ;o)

Goblin Squad Member

Well, we do play the latest incarnation of D&D here, and I don't think D&D is exactly short on the bikini-chainmail department. If anything, the game has been a keystone in maintaining said trope.

Personally, while I certainly don't get visually bothered by it, I can understand people getting offended when it is the only option available. But if it can be made optional (an appearance overlay would simplify this issue enormously), everyone can be happy.

Dark Archive

Also, when I say "sexy" armor I don't mean just wearing two band-aids and a cork. I mean, stuff that is appealing. I know Sarah Robinson wont let me down ;o). And if PFO goes anywhere near the iconic gear, I will be totally happy with that! Obviously, I am visually pleased with Amiri's gear ;o). I do know that type of gear in REAL LIFE is not practical what-so-ever. But like I have said many times in similar discussions, if I wanted to be realistic, I would not play Pathfinder or any other fantasy games for that matter. I love these games because I think reality sucks most of the time. ;o) I *want* Amiri's armor to be realistic in the Pathfinder world.

The Grey Maiden's full plate, to me, is appealing because you can tell that she's a fit woman. I want my female characters to look awesome. And I want for people playing male characters to be able to play that beefcake they want and show it off if they want ;o). I don't think anyone should be 'forced' to wear skimpy outfits I just want it to be in the game so I can get it for my character. And I don't want Paizo to avoid creating it thinking that fans will argue the whole cheesecake argument like they did with that gorgeous Seoni Christmas card--I loved it.

Because I am female, I like to make sure I stand up and speak out FOR these things before someone has a chance to talk down about it. This year, it seems like I have gotten in more debates about sexy armor and cheesecake than I ever have in my life! And I make bikinis for a living! Hah! Other than being married to Sean, the coolest thing about being female is the awesome cosplay we get to pull off. Keep that dream alive! LOL!

Dark Archive

Anguish wrote:
Jodi Lane wrote:
Okay, I'm definitely going to be creating a stir...

You, Sean, and Vic are all awesome. In your own ways.

You for expressing an atypical opinion that sexy doesn't mean denigrating, humiliating, or oppressing. I'd admit that last year's pictures of you as Amiri conveyed "sexy lady". This post (amongst others) has added "cool person who doesn't toe the line". Not that you need my approval but good on you.

Sean for supporting you without supporting you. Subtle, but he's basically just underlined your point, not played Mr. Overprotective.

Vic for dodging the bullet by coming up with an answer we can all live with.

Seems Paizo and the people around them are all just cool folks.

Awwww thank you ;o). And you're right...they are cool folks!

Dark Archive

Klaus van der Kroft wrote:
Personally, while I certainly don't get visually bothered by it, I can understand people getting offended when it is the only option available. But if it can be made optional (an appearance overlay would simplify this issue enormously), everyone can be happy.

For sure, it shouldn't be only skimpy items for the characters, that would seem a little odd. But I think (after my string of responses) I tried to make it clear I didn't want it to be only sexy armor/gear for the ladies without other options. ;o) I don't care what other female characters wear, I just want mine to look cute! Hehe!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As long as armor looks like the type of armor it is I don't have any problem with these ideas. But if a player can disguise their full plate as a wizard's robe through the use of a "costume slot" or the like that has certain consequences in PvP type situations. It may not be vital to differentiate a rogue from a ranger (ie. guy with leather armor and a pair of short swords), or even a paladin from a cleric (guy in full plate with a holy symbol), but at some level it should be immediately obvious that a glass cannon wizard isn't a rampaging barbarian. At least not without the use of some sort of illusion effect, or at very least a disguise skill.

Goblin Squad Member

Jodi Lane wrote:
Klaus van der Kroft wrote:
Personally, while I certainly don't get visually bothered by it, I can understand people getting offended when it is the only option available. But if it can be made optional (an appearance overlay would simplify this issue enormously), everyone can be happy.
For sure, it shouldn't be only skimpy items for the characters, that would seem a little odd. But I think (after my string of responses) I tried to make it clear I didn't want it to be only sexy armor/gear for the ladies without other options. ;o) I don't care what other female characters wear, I just want mine to look cute! Hehe!

Oh, yes, I completely understand your position and agree with it. I believe this matter often gets blown out of proportions and attached to presumptions that might not be there to begin with (as a man, I stand for the "Hey, we're not pigs, at least not all the time" movement), and the state of skimpy outfits in MMOs I think has more to do with the trope than any consious desire to objectify women. It is always a sensible position to look at it carefully and make sure there are options available to those who don't want to look like that, however.

With an appearance tab, the devs can create anything from thong-plate to DEFCON-5 grade armour made out of meteorites, and everyone would be happy, able to chose their own style.

As a game of traditiona fantasy, though, there are some tropes I'd be sad to see broken. Namely, girls in chainmail bikinis and men in leather loincloth. Maybe not what I would personally wear -unless I make a Fabio-like warrior-, but certainly something I like to see around.


I would add, let there be options with the clothing in general. If I'm playing a female wizard or other character that doesn't wear actual armor, I don't want to be wondering how she's not exposing herself every time she moves (like I do in some games). For some people, they might like this. For me, it's an annoying distraction. I would rather my characters wear clothing that is properly supportive and not likely to unintentionally flash someone if it were worn in real life. I also wouldn't want any character I make to necessarily be ultra-feminine and "sexy," but I would like to have those options. Customizable clothing/armor would be awesome.

Scarab Sages

Ettin wrote:

Sexy armour is immersion breaking.

However, if we have to have it, I am putting in my vote for a plate thong for men.

Sigh. if only I had the body to pull it off.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jodi Lane wrote:
I just want to put in a direct request for attractive and form-fitting female armor. The most awesome thing I find about being female is the fantastic cosplay outfits I get to make wear (That and being married to Sean lol). Don't be afraid of the people who hate cheesecake, you could make more conservative sets for them ;o). They don't necessarily have to be revealing to be sexy either, I could make suggestions? ;o)

It's possible that for some people the issue is one of conservatism and sex negativity. That's actually pretty far from the real issue of why depicting women in sexy armor can be problematic.

Problem #1: Lumpy armor (eg, boob armor) is *not safe*. It catches blades rather than turns them, and if you take a header you can break your sternum and/or ribcage due to the uneven impact. Ask the safety marshals in any of the serious larp/SCA/Amtgard/etc rattan and live steel combat sports if they would ever allow lumpy armor on the field. The answer for insurance reasons has got to be no.

Same caveat applies to any fancy armor that has lumps and protrusions and flares and dingle-doodles that detract from its safety and functionality. You can't seriously fight in that stuff. Nothing good generally happens when you try.

Basically what you are saying when you draw a woman in boob armor is that her looking sexy is more important than her being an effective fighter on the field. Ornamental value high, effective value low. She's being shown as a sexy ornament, not a serious fighter.

Problem #2: While I absolutely support the right of consenting adults to be sexy and to express their sexiness in any way that works for them, it is equally important for people to have the right to not HAVE to be sexualized if they don't want to be, especially at the expense of their being taken seriously as real fighters. Or as effective leaders, achievers or doers. It is hard to be the hero when you are limited to being pretty at the expense of being effective.

And that's the crux of the issue. I truly do want you to have every right to be as empoweredly sexy as you want to be. It is your body and your absolute right, which I would cheerfully kick ass to defend. And I want the same right to be free from the default expectation that I must be sexualized and made into a pretty but relatively ineffective ornament for the male gaze even while I am fighting.

In an ideal world, we could have both things side by side and it would be a non issue. Nobody would nonconsensually sexualize women who did not enjoy it or all women by inescapable default. Everybody would respect that some women enjoy being sexual objects of gaze and accord them the space to do that without being jerks about it.

That isn't the world we live in, so please know that when I say that I have a problem with the default depiction of women in fantasy art as sexy even when it makes them unsafe or ineffective or stupid in that situation, those are the actual reasons.


Klaus van der Kroft wrote:
Well, we do play the latest incarnation of D&D here, and I don't think D&D is exactly short on the bikini-chainmail department. If anything, the game has been a keystone in maintaining said trope.

I am picturing a well endowed female "fighter" in a skimpy chainmail bikini under a hail of orc arrows, simpering with her butt and boobs stuck out in a totally impractical position, "Gee, I'm sure glad I was wearing my +5 Nipple Pasties of Protection."

Major eyerolls and facepalming. I get that fantasy is fun, but there's fantasy and then there's flushing all possible suspension of disbelief down the toilet after beating it to death with a sledgehammer and setting the remains on fire.

Okay, yes, porn is cool. Porn is great. If you like porn of any flavor, either looking at it or making it yourself, go you. But porn and gaming isn't quite like peanut butter and chocolate, and the two don't automatically go together. Especially if some of the folks at your table don't consent to their characters being porn-ified by default.

Goblin Squad Member

Please have many many different styles of armor.

I would love to, as a armorsmith or weapon smith be able to custom make armor.

So for example, what armor looks are based on your skill, with more armor unlocked the higher your skill level.

An example i used in another post was for weapons.

1) you picked weapon base type (longsword, raiper, greatsword...etc)
2) You picked a blade design (so number 25 longsword blade out of 50 different longsword blade designs)
3) you picked a hilt design (so number 45 hilt out of 50 different longsword hilt designs)
4) You pick a pommel ( number 32 of 50 different pommels)
5) after you picked the pommel you could use any gem you wanted for it.

Looks would be different than material. So you could make the above in any material you were good enough to do.

I would love to have that many different designs, where function is independent of looks. This could be used for armor also.

Your weapon could be 100% mundane but still impress people (status symbol). Holy crap is that a Dragon Bone longsword with a land shark tooth hilt and an Eye of Super Gem in the pommel? That must have cost a fortune to make!

Goblin Squad Member

Jodi, there has been an intensive debate on many points you and others have brought up here on a related (and older) thread: "Informal Poll: Skimpy Armor" . We have been talking about this since January, if you have the time I highly recommend it as there are a lot of good viewpoints there. :)

Goblin Squad Member

Why have armor at all? Everyone should be running around in thongs and pasties!


My problem with with having armor that has the appearance of something different then what it looks like is it'll be deceptive going into PvP. This would be like wearing plate mail that has the appearance of Mage robes.

To put it into another example. A player could take a +5 Holy Avenger and change the appearance to that of a low level copper dagger.

I'm not sure how to reach a compromise TBH.

I feel pretty confident that the Devs will NOT have Wow style armor. Overly cartoonish with mile high shoulder pads, spikes larger then dragon teeth, basically unrealistic armor. The same goes for weapons. Nothing is more immersion breaking to me then grossly oversized weapons like we are seeing in many MMOs being put out nowadays.

I'm all for sexy clothing. Not a lot has been said about tailoring so far, but I feel that clothing off all types is really important in an MMO and critical in an MMO with such an emphasis on RP like in PFO. I would also like to throw my vote behind dyes for armor and clothing.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A summary of "Informal Poll: Skimpy Armor" -

* No one says sexy armor shouldn't be allowed at all.

* A lot of people want armor to be armor first and the sexiness be elective if that's what you want to do for your character. But not the situation where you're pushed into sexy armor because it's a significant chunk of your options to fight.

* If a piece of armor does sexualize female wearers, it should sexualize male wearers too. Time to do away with sexism.

* Dev commented they'll be following previous Pathfinder models pretty closely.

That last part has me slightly hopeful and half depressed at the same time because while there's not an overabundance of bare skin in their art, they still seem to sex up the females most of the time which is the thing I want to avoid as a prerequisite for going into battle. Seriously what about sexually boring that's just an interesting design?

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Proxima Sin wrote:


That last part has me slightly hopeful and half depressed at the same time because while there's not an overabundance of bare skin in their art, they still seem to sex up the females most of the time which is the thing I want to avoid as a prerequisite for going into battle. Seriously what about sexually boring that's just an interesting design?

Seelah, Kyra, and Lini aren't very sexual at all. Almost no skin showing, and nothing is form-fitting in any of them. The option should be there if you just want to be functional and not sexy.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd suggest a bit of realism. If either gender wanted to run around in the equivalent of a few scraps of cloth and some soda pop-top rings for role playing purposes, let them. It could be lots of fun, indoors. But running around wilderness areas in your underwear is crappy armor, and that should really be reflected in the stats.

Heck, if it were up to me and it wouldn't be the marketing knell of doom, I'd suggest total adult customization of avatars for adult players, allowing pretty much any 'skins' (including nothing *but* skin) in private instances with the appropriate labeling so nobody could click in who didn't consent or who wasn't an adult.

Go outside with this stuff, and it's a) problematic if you have minors as players and b) majorly impractical in a hail of goblin arrows or hostile fire spells if you are nekkid. Talk about a wiener roast.

Shadow Lodge Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
Proxima Sin wrote:


That last part has me slightly hopeful and half depressed at the same time because while there's not an overabundance of bare skin in their art, they still seem to sex up the females most of the time which is the thing I want to avoid as a prerequisite for going into battle. Seriously what about sexually boring that's just an interesting design?
Seelah, Kyra, and Lini aren't very sexual at all. Almost no skin showing, and nothing is form-fitting in any of them. The option should be there if you just want to be functional and not sexy.

Umm you need to pay more attention...

All three of them have obvious breasts.
Lini has lines designed specificly to draw your eyes to them.
She's also incredibly perky in that particular area and her armor especially the breastplate is form fitting...

Seelah isn't quite so endowed, but man are they big also the bronze wings with silver etching does an excellent job of making them stand out...

Kyra you can see them, but they aren't as accentuated the way the other two are. Of course given how she is from a middle eastern culture the amount of shown skin would be scandalous....

Goblin Squad Member

When I touch my LCD screen they feel flat though.

Goblin Squad Member

Mikaze wrote:
Ettin wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
I actually rather like that idea. It would probably be a TON of work to try to set up a custom avatar creation system or whatnot
Well, really it's just one bulge between the legs. Not too difficult.

Unless jiggle physics are applied.

Now there's a landmark for equal treatment in videogames.

Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle, wiggle, wiggle! Yeah!


Being wrote:
When I touch my LCD screen they feel flat though.

Time to upgrade to a "touch" screen.


Being wrote:
When I touch my LCD screen they feel flat though.

You know that silly stereotype of the 40 year old virgin male gamer who is pathetically desperate? Usually it really is pretty silly and inapplicable.

o.O

Goblin Squad Member

TanithT wrote:
Being wrote:
When I touch my LCD screen they feel flat though.

You know that silly stereotype of the 40 year old virgin male gamer who is pathetically desperate? Usually it really is pretty silly and inapplicable.

o.O

I can wish I were 40 again! Ah, those were the days!

Goblin Squad Member

Being wrote:
TanithT wrote:
Being wrote:
When I touch my LCD screen they feel flat though.

You know that silly stereotype of the 40 year old virgin male gamer who is pathetically desperate? Usually it really is pretty silly and inapplicable.

o.O

I can wish I were 40 again! Ah, those were the days!

I lol'd


2 people marked this as a favorite.

If I'm going to be in full plate as a female character and I don't have a choice to not look like a fetishized bikini knight, I will be displeased. Fantasy is fine, but I'd rather look like I deserve my armor class.

To be honest, I'm hard line enough to say that having nice, round breast impressions in a breast plate is retarded from any practical standpoint, as has been mentioned. (Yes, it's great for gender identification.) Armor is supposed to deflect away from your organs, not towards your sternum. Breasts will fit better without giant steel cups, I promise. And, I don't know if anyone here can confirm this, but I've heard it's uncomfortable as hell because breasts are soft and pliable and metal is hard and unyielding and bruising.

It's too much to hope for, but if it were to be one extreme or another -- super sexy skin form fitting laughable excuses for armor or armor so realistic you can't tell the difference between a male or female in heavier armors -- I'd favor realistic. Plenty of cheese out there already, folks.

Plus, you can dramatically take off your helmet and swish your hair.

Goblin Squad Member

Doomed Hero wrote:
Seriously. If I want to play a half-dressed conan or tarzan type it would be nice if I could get the mechanical advantage of a decent armor class without the visual eyesore of a giant suit of armor ruining my theme.

I absolutely hope this is not the case. I cannot express this enough.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

KitNyx wrote:
Doomed Hero wrote:
Seriously. If I want to play a half-dressed conan or tarzan type it would be nice if I could get the mechanical advantage of a decent armor class without the visual eyesore of a giant suit of armor ruining my theme.
I absolutely hope this is not the case. I cannot express this enough.

It absolutely will be the case. For the Monk class or for those that invest in Glamored Armor, Bracers of Armor or Amulets of Natural Armor.

Goblin Squad Member

Lord of Elder Days wrote:
Why have armor at all? Everyone should be running around in thongs and pasties!

I'll second that!

Goblin Squad Member

Against the panorama of unknowns, the constellations of questions and issues, the fact that this thread is getting so much attention is... illuminating.

The Mayans may not have been all that far off...

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

Why I will always laugh at people in "Sexy Armor"

Goblin Squad Member

I have to ask, will we all be toned and buff gods of physicality?

For instance I want to be a short, portly, and rotund dwarf. Lots of curves with little tone. I'm also not planning on wearing armor sticking mostly to clothes but when I occasionally put it on I find it hilarious that my guy might want to go shirtless.

So yeah put the cheese and beef options in there, but I also want to know how much control over our body shapes we'll have? Because the wrapper is only part of the package. :)


I got the impression that the Devs wanted to have a fairly sparse character creation engine favoring more focus on other systems, but pretty much everyone seems to be for a more in depth creation system, so not much has been said on what they are planning that I've seen.

(I could be wrong in my first sentence, or my whole post :p )

Goblin Squad Member

GozerTC wrote:
I have to ask, will we all be toned and buff gods of physicality?

The game will be based on Wayne Reynolds' art.


Nihimon wrote:
GozerTC wrote:
I have to ask, will we all be toned and buff gods of physicality?
The game will be based on Wayne Reynolds' art.

FINALLY! Thank you for posting this link Nihimon! I've been wanting to see more of this style and kept forgetting to poke around looking for examples of his work.

Goblin Squad Member

"Based on Wayne Reynold's art style" is lots of layers, accessories, flowing fabrics and such.

You can still put all that on a portly dude or athletic non-mannequin lady. Or a woman who being slender has an A cup that doesn't strain your 3d rendering or a pale scrawny male caster type. If enough of us want it for long enough time they might put a little more development into it.

The main thing is getting over cleavage, bare thighs, and boob plates in standard female armor ( chill out it can still be in your special elective stuff). Men's armor is already fine.


Proxima Sin wrote:

"Based on Wayne Reynold's art style" is lots of layers, accessories, flowing fabrics and such.

I especially like how he adds different things an adventurer would need tied on, strapped on however they fit, very cool :)

I did see a few obscenely oversized weapons but by and large they were fine.

Goblin Squad Member

Proxima Sin wrote:

"Based on Wayne Reynold's art style" is lots of layers, accessories, flowing fabrics and such.

You can still put all that on a portly dude or athletic non-mannequin lady. Or a woman who being slender has an A cup that doesn't strain your 3d rendering or a pale scrawny male caster type. If enough of us want it for long enough time they might put a little more development into it.

The main thing is getting over cleavage, bare thighs, and boob plates in standard female armor ( chill out it can still be in your special elective stuff). Men's armor is already fine.

Exactly my point. All the cool armor be it cheese/beefcake or not depends on what's underneath as well. By and large I figured we'd all be physically awesome but one can hope for the portly dude or flat chested lady now and then. :\

Goblin Squad Member

Proxima Sin wrote:
The main thing is getting over cleavage, bare thighs, and boob plates in standard female armor...

Wayne Reynolds' Art seems to have "gotten over" this.

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Proxima Sin wrote:
The main thing is getting over cleavage, bare thighs, and boob plates in standard female armor...
Wayne Reynolds' Art seems to have "gotten over" this.

Cleavage and bare thighs, midriffs and the like = bare, unprotected areas that will be where someone aims their weapon. Boob plates lead to cracked sternums, as the area between them focuses the kinetic energy right onto the bone. It may look "sexy" to some people (especially 30 YO males still living in their parent's basements). but test done by medieval armor experts have shown they suck at keeping anyone alive.

You want armor which can be layered to help protect against a number of weapon types. Plate over chain with padding below that will stop most weapons except heavy crossbows and guns. This was why, for centuries, there was a Papal interdiction on the use of Crossbows by Christians (especially against fellow Christians), as it was thought to be very dishonorable to make use of one (and because even a lowly serf could fire one effectively).

During the Crusades, particularly the Third, Crusaders learned to pack layers of felt below their chain armor to protect against arrows. The Islamic warriors use both felt and silk for the same reason (silk was lighter, and prevented any arrow that did enter the body from lodging in there, or too deeply). Layered Lammilar armor was also favored by the Islamic and Byzantine forces, much like Japanese armor of the Samurai period. Trust me, Jean d'Arc didn't have boob plates.

Goblin Squad Member

I think most breast plates curved outward and had enough layers underneath to hug the body directly. The outward curve I'm sure deflected most blows.

That being said, I'm a huge fan of sexy armor.

WOW:

I had a blood elf hunter who was finally able to find the skimpiest male armor out there. He looks very Conan-ish, now. But incredibly sexy.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Gloreindl wrote:


Trust me, Jean d'Arc didn't have boob plates.

No, but the greeks did.

We all know that in real life, boob plates aren't optimal. In real life, women fighting isn't optimal. I have known several feamle knights in the SCA and several female martial artists that are VERY skilled fighters. But 90% of the time men are stronger and and have a longer reach than women. That advantage means that a woman needs to be more highly trained to be equal, and even then they need to be fast and stay out of reach. We already throw out that un-politically correct truth in fantasy gaming and rightly so. This is a fantasy game, and unrealistic armor is a core of the genre. Wayne Reynold's art is the core visual design of the Pathfinder RPG. It's only fitting that his style represent Pathfinder Online even if it isn't realistic, boob plates and all.

Goblin Squad Member

While I believe that it is correct that with equally skilled opponents of the same style, the stronger has an advantage, However, a reasonably skilled practitioner of aikido, hapkido, and other circle based defense arts would make a collapsed junk pile of a armored over-reaching sword wielder.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Harad Navar wrote:
While I believe that it is correct that with equally skilled opponents of the same style, the stronger has an advantage, However, a reasonably skilled practitioner of aikido, hapkido, and other circle based defense arts would make a collapsed junk pile of a armored over-reaching sword wielder.

If they can get in range to use a joint lock or throw, yes. But if You have a sword and shield fighter wearing heavy armor with gauntlets and basket hilt, then a, they likely won't be able to get in range without being hit be the sword or shield, and b, The armor would not allow the kinds of joint locks and throws that aikido specializes in to be as effective. The best strategy would be to try to dodge the first strike, and hope they over-swing the sword to give you an opportunity to close before they are ready again, but a trained swordsman doesn't swing a sword like a baseball bat.

Modern martial arts teach you to fight against unarmored opponents wielding fists, knives, guns, and occasionally clubs. They don't teach you to fight against armored opponents armed with swords.

Goblin Squad Member

Imbicatus wrote:
Modern martial arts... don't teach you to fight against armored opponents armed with swords.

That's not really true. In my Aikido class, we do exercises where our opponent has a (nerf) sword.

The thing about Aikido is that you don't ever try to enter someone else's space; you always react to their movement and you always want to stay in a position where they have to move (either step or turn) before they can strike you. If they're swinging a sword with enough force to bite into your body and do serious damage, then they're going to be a little off-balance if your body isn't there to absorb that force. If you're skilled enough, you'll be in a position to add just a little bit of energy to their motion, and time it just right so that their body doesn't fight against it, and you'll be able to throw them with very little effort.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
Modern martial arts... don't teach you to fight against armored opponents armed with swords.

That's not really true. In my Aikido class, we do exercises where our opponent has a (nerf) sword.

The thing about Aikido is that you don't ever try to enter someone else's space; you always react to their movement and you always want to stay in a position where they have to move (either step or turn) before they can strike you. If they're swinging a sword with enough force to bite into your body and do serious damage, then they're going to be a little off-balance if your body isn't there to absorb that force. If you're skilled enough, you'll be in a position to add just a little bit of energy to their motion, and time it just right so that their body doesn't fight against it, and you'll be able to throw them with very little effort.

I have studied or fought in Goju-Ryu, Shotokan, Pai Lum, Fencing, SCA heavy fighting, boffer LARP, and Live Steel ARMA techniques. While the basic techniques you describe are true, armor changes your body momentum and the way you move. Training against someone not wearing armor and using a foam rubber sword is not the same as training against someone wearing heavy armor, a full weight sword, and a shield.

If you are skilled enough, you can still overcome an armed opponent when unarmed. But it should always be an option of last resort, as if you fail in that situation, you would likely die. Of course, the only people who really use Swords and Armor anymore are historical re-enactors and medieval martial artists, and we don't actually try to kill anyone. :)

Goblin Squad Member

Imbicatus wrote:
Training against someone not wearing armor and using a foam rubber sword is not the same as training against someone wearing heavy armor, a full weight sword, and a shield.

I hope I didn't say anything to make you think I would disagree with that. The same could be said about the difference between training in shorts and jerseys and actually playing in the Superbowl. Yet, teams still train in shorts and jerseys.

51 to 100 of 183 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Please, Create Sexy Armor! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.