Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not using "practical" as a euphemism for only % of skin covered.
I remember seeing a PBS special on present day English armor enthusiasts where someone did a cartwheel while wearing plate and chain mail armor. Very impressive. If you can't move well in armor you can't fight well.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From a purely immersion standpoint I would like to see anything with a super high base armor before magic effects look like this.
And have bikini mail have a low base armor bonus so that if you put the same magic on the armor in the first picture as bikini mail... the real armor is stronger.
Many Men Online Role-Playing as Girls would surely object to this though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Also, in pvp, once everyone knows what the healer always looks like they are dead instantly. I think there should be a way to muddy the water a little so we aren't insta-targeted. Of course, that is assuming that we have anything resembling the traditional roles.
Well, in PNP, healers are often clerics. Clerics often wear medium or heavy armor. Paladins and Fighters also wear medium and heavy armor. Rangers and Barbarians and Bards can also often wear medium armor. Spellcasters might tend to wear only cloth, but so to with monks and some barbarians. Basically, already there is plenty of overlap in role vs armor worn.
Really though, no matter what they wear you'll be able to single out the spell casters and healers because they'll be the ones standing around chanting and spewing magical effects while everyone else is hitting things in the face. Ultimately it is your actions that define you, not what you wear.
From a purely immersion standpoint I would like to see anything with a super high base armor before magic effects look like this.
And have bikini mail have a low base armor bonus so that if you put the same magic on the armor in the first picture as bikini mail... the real armor is stronger.
Many Men Online Role-Playing as Girls would surely object to this though.
I think your right Andius, certainly makes sense.
Also, in pvp, once everyone knows what the healer always looks like they are dead instantly. I think there should be a way to muddy the water a little so we aren't insta-targeted. Of course, that is assuming that we have anything resembling the traditional roles.
I'm really hoping that they will add player collision and logical LOS to combat so the healers can stand behind the fighters and not get hit by weapons that pass through the fighters.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From a purely immersion standpoint I would like to see anything with a super high base armor before magic effects look like this.
And have bikini mail have a low base armor bonus so that if you put the same magic on the armor in the first picture as bikini mail... the real armor is stronger.
Many Men Online Role-Playing as Girls would surely object to this though.
I'm not sure what the problem is with making characters with different parts. I wouldn't suggest that only people with big ears can play elves, either.
As I said, I tend to make about half of my characters of each sex, and I wouldn't want either of them forced to look extremely sexualized.The look of the armour need not necessarily affect the total protection when it comes to magic, either. That can be the case with bracers of armour, to some degree, but there are other ways of hiding one's armour without limiting its effect.
Upon command, a suit of glamered armor changes shape and appearance to assume the form of a normal set of clothing. The armor retains all its properties (including weight) when it is so disguised. Only a true seeing spell or similar magic reveals the true nature of the armor when it is disguised.
&
Hat of DisguiseThis apparently normal hat allows its wearer to alter her appearance as with a disguise self* spell. As part of the disguise, the hat can be changed to appear as a comb, ribbon, headband, cap, coif, hood, helmet, or other headwear.
*disguise self: You make yourself - including clothing, armor, weapons, and equipment - look different. You can seem 1 foot shorter or taller, thin, fat, or in between. You cannot change your creature type (although you can appear as another subtype). Otherwise, the extent of the apparent change is up to you. You could add or obscure a minor feature or look like an entirely different person or gender.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From a purely immersion standpoint I would like to see anything with a super high base armor before magic effects look like this.
And have bikini mail have a low base armor bonus so that if you put the same magic on the armor in the first picture as bikini mail... the real armor is stronger.
I agree with this. Makes good sense.
Many Men Online Role-Playing as Girls would surely object to this though.
I don't entirely agree with this. Truth be told, I play female characters about 65% of the time. It's just easier to make interesting female characters I'm happy with, while with male character I generally only want to recreate myself. Regardless, I much prefer my female characters wearing full, practical armor and clothing. With the exception of maybe spellcasters. I usually don't play casters though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am a girl and on some(read most)characters I like to wear feminine things. So sexy has never really bothered me. I have heard many others complain though and don't mind more conservative attire as long as its not limited to being the ONLY choice. Yes choice, choice is good.
I will say one thing I have noticed in many games I have played is the heavy armors are way more revealing than leather and cloth. Shouldn't that be the other way around? Tired of robes looking like sackcloth.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think UO hit a happy medium with this, they had skimpy armor options (only for women), but those options did provide a little less protection than their more covered counterparts (until later updates anyway), and they also, to me, seemed reasonably practical, and armor looked the same on a male or female character, just more fitted to them.
I like there to be skimpy options(for both genders), but I don't think they should ever be forced. Sometimes style is more important than practicality to a character or player anyway. I'm fine with there being logic to it though, more revealing and less practical armors offering less protection.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can see it now. My muscular male fighter just found some nice armor and puts it on. Unfortunately it is a two piece chain bikini. It is going to be embarrassing running through town with that on and way too tight down below.
No, no, no. The male version isn't a two piece bikini, its a matching banana hammock and bow tie. You only get the armor bonus if you wear the bow tie and no shirt.
How about providing a choice for each set of armour male and female and not penalising a player for how they want their character to look.
If you pick up some armour you can choose from some options.
1. Standard - practical serviceable realistic Armour.
2. Gritty - a scratched blood spattered version of the above
3. Polished - parade ground perfect.
4. Fantasy - his and her stripper wear.
No mechanical difference between any of the types.
People shouldn't be punished if the way they want to play their fantasy game they pay for differs from yours.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would expect, that crafters can customize items they create (and other items brought to them) in some ways. Easy changes would be things like color and other decoration (like the symbol of a faction or deity), it might be more complicated (and expensive) to change the general look of the item. It should still be pretty clear what kind of armor someone is wearing. And please no boob windows – unless the “armor” actually is a stripper outfit (with the protection value of an empty soda can).
The option to use magic to customize the look of your armor would be awesome, especially considering that there might be some benefit to looking unarmored. Of course once you use magic to change the visuals of an item, there really is no reason to limit how it looks, if someone wants to look like something from a wet dream (that includes beefcake and cheesecake obviously) more power to them. If other players have a problem with that, they should voice their opinion in the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
All appearances should be available. If someone wants to wear low-coverate(skimpy) armor, they can get armor that provides little protection and is more a fashion statement. If you see a character in low-coverage armor, you will know they either have a magical protection, or will be very open to physical attacks. Male and female versions of armor should be very similar, down to the bikinis and banana hammock options.
If someone wants to play a character in skimpy armor, they should be able to, and their physical defenses should reflect their gear choice.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One idea that comes to mind for this topic is something I've used as a GM in the TTRPG before.
You're average Longsword is just that, average. Pretty difficult to tell one Longsword from another.
Master Craft Longswords now, they are just that, Masterfully Crafed and there for much easier to distiguish.
Once you start reaching magical levels you're talking about truly unique items.
Perhaps for cosmetics GW could employ a similar system, give each item a certain number of player customizable cosmetic differences depending on the uniqueness of the item itself.
Your standard issue platemail may not look much different from anyone elses, but your +3 Platemail of Pure Awesome could look far different. (it could also be more revealing cause... well its magical protection after all).
This could also be a good place to put micro-transactions in the game.
Just a thought.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think one of the things that has also changed is that wearing heavy armor had penalties,in UO you actually were slower and regen'd mana slower... and in modern MMOs you don't see that so much.
So someone wearing lighter armor, or skimpier armor wasn't necessarily gimping themselves, just compromising defence for speed.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Glamered armor aside, it's important for armor to be easily identified by the opponent. That means that it's a lot of work to develop the models to have a distinctive appearance.
There's no reason why that distinctive appearance -can't- show some skin, but there's plenty of reason for there to be models that don't, and to make those equally available. I can expand my suspension of disbelief to incorporate 'impractical armor', but I think it's a bad business decision to require it. There are too many women who object to not having a choice in the matter.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm actually fairly skeptical of the PvP need to be able to identify a character's role based on the armor they're wearing. Hopefully, it will be possible to identify what someone is capable of doing by seeing what they're doing, rather than what they're wearing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm actually fairly skeptical of the PvP need to be able to identify a character's role based on the armor they're wearing. Hopefully, it will be possible to identify what someone is capable of doing by seeing what they're doing, rather than what they're wearing.
What they are wearing, and what they are holding is a small part, the rest is watching them as they fight and knowing the game mechanics behind their abilities.
Making visual appearance reflect part of a character's ability opens out a bunch of deception based actions, like disguise and illusion.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Is the PFO community ready to move our characters beyond the hot hot shake your stuff kobold seducing sexy times battle equipment?
I would pay so much for kobold-seducing equipment... but that's not likely to get much crowdforging support, I fear ;p
On topic, I wholeheartedly agree with the general consensus of this thread. Having skimpy "un-armors" is not only a little too immersion-breaking for a more down-to-earth setting like Pathfinder, but it hinders the atmosphere of inclusion that the developers want to have in the game, having women (and anyone who plays a female character, really) feeling like they're on equal social footing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So do male characters get to wear skimpy bikini outfits as well if they so choose?
On a more pragmatic note I propose a game mechanic whereby the more attractive/sexy armor, regardless of whether for a male character or female character, can only be equipped by characters with a charisma of 14 or higher.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Red Sonja comes to mind when I think of this topic. A barbarian woman running around half naked choppin heads. The caveat to that though is she wore leather. If there has to be half naked women running around PFO, at least make it light armor they are wearing. The seductive sorceress comes to mind.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to say, I really don't want someone in bikinis to have the same AC as someone in full plate mail covering all parts of the body. That's just a terrible immersion breaker for me. There are like tons of those types of games and images in the net. Those who want to see bikinis can take a brake from playing pathfinder and browse the net for a while and then come back.
I love so many things in this thread.
I would love to see impractical armor impose Impracticality Penalties.
I would also love to see glamers that have actual bonuses in Diplomacy, Bluff, etc vs. the opposite sex. Sex glamers ftw(see: Night Angel Trilogy) - though nothing explicit please. No need to invite the creepy side of the internet to play.
While I wouldn't mind seeing some kinda of armor customization, it would get excessive fast...cause dudes be creepy.
Here's some pathfinder covers.
Hmm...lots of cleavage, impractical armor, and unnecessary ass shots...huh.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Here's some pathfinder covers.Hmm...lots of cleavage, impractical armor, and unnecessary ass shots...huh.
And lots of practical heavy armor. The skimpy outfits were cloth or leather, and the leathers covered pretty much all of the body even if they were a little tight. There was a barbarian who chose to wear hide on her shoulders and legs but leave the belly bare, but that was the exception. It's also worth noting that the first three covers were the characters that were used in the technology demo video.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I love so many things in this thread.
I would love to see impractical armor impose Impracticality Penalties.
I would also love to see glamers that have actual bonuses in Diplomacy, Bluff, etc vs. the opposite sex. Sex glamers ftw(see: Night Angel Trilogy) - though nothing explicit please. No need to invite the creepy side of the internet to play.
While I wouldn't mind seeing some kinda of armor customization, it would get excessive fast...cause dudes be creepy.
Here's some pathfinder covers.Hmm...lots of cleavage, impractical armor, and unnecessary ass shots...huh.
Well I see lots of skimpy armor, just none of it that looks like it is suppose to be Heavy armor. There is definitely light and cloth, but no platemail bikinis. You might even be able to argue one or two of them are medium.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If someone wants to play a character in skimpy armor, they should be able to, and their physical defenses should reflect their gear choice.
I haven't heard anyone say there should be only one ethos of armor available. Just that the base mundane and magical armor in PFO is actual armor and other specialized pieces -including alterations to basic pieces- are custom crafted (enhancing the roles of player crafters) or have supporting lore behind them. And for putting an end to wildly different visualizations on different genders, keeping the look just about the same regardless of wearer.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Hmm...lots of cleavage, impractical armor, and unnecessary ass shots...huh.
well female art directed towards males will have that...while male art directed towards females generally has a nice set of pecs and a more manly posture.
Men and women like different things in their sexy art doesn't make one any better than the other.....*gets off soapbox*
that said, most of the revealing armors on those seem to be magic or diplomacy based characters who aren't likely to wade into a melee.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Does anyone have the link to the detailed 3D models they showed us for generic male and female avatars?
Scroll down here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I actually hope any one piece of armor/clothing looks exactly the same on males or females. Don't bother with male/female art for same piece, just do art for males pieces and for separate female pieces...and let us mix and match as we wish.
While I'm not a woman, and this does sound like a good idea, I think that any metal armor designed for a guy is not going to be comfortable on a woman with any amount of curves. The armor is going to be either to tight in certain areas or so loose it is sloppy. I thinking their should be a male and female version of the armor. Like most people here i think the versions should be comparable. If the male version is full plate with not an inch of skin showing, then the female should be the same, just with a little more curve here or there. If the female version is a chain bikini then the male version should be something like a pair of arm bands and a loin cloth.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually hope any one piece of armor/clothing looks exactly the same on males or females. Don't bother with male/female art for same piece, just do art for males pieces and for separate female pieces...and let us mix and match as we wish.
Another way of doing this, which I am not in favor of, is having the armor be gender specific when it drops. Which means Bubba the barbarian beefcake could wear a chain bikini if he would like to. But that also means that you would have a 50% chance of getting something you wouldn't wear simply because you don't want to play a transgender character.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Does anyone have the link to the detailed 3D models they showed us for generic male and female avatars?Scroll down here.
I was thinking of the high def 3d models showing leather clad generic male and female characters standing on a small flagstone tiled square, arms spread at their sides with no weapons. Does that ring a bell?
