A modest request...


Prerelease Discussion

51 to 100 of 244 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

12 people marked this as a favorite.

I'll be honest, "let's not appease the social justice warriors" is perhaps the least compelling argument imaginable as a response to "this particular creative decision is ridiculous and I don't like it."

One will notice that almost all of the complaints about boobplate are "it's dumb" not "it objectifies women" or whatever other imagined "social justice warrior" strawman people want to argue at.

"Let's not appease [some group]" is a bad argument when that group is making salient points. One does not get the desired effect of "cool armor" when a significant portion of your audience rolls their eyes at it.

Like if the dodge for "ridiculously impractical armor" is "it's glamered, it doesn't really look like that" why not have the glamered plate armor appear like an actual evening dress, since the special ability says "Upon command, a suit of glamered armor changes shape and appearance to assume the form of a normal set of clothing."


10 people marked this as a favorite.

On the other hand, "Stopping liking what I don't like" isn't exactly that far off from "screw those other guys"

That's literally what this whole topic is. "I don't like how x looks, REMOVE IT AT ONCE,"

It's about as salient as me demanding Paizo change goblins to have normal sized heads because I think the current oversized ones look dumb. It's ultimately me (and probably a bunch of other people) complaining about art style with a bunch of other people saying its fine. Pointless hand wringing all around.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Ultimately all we can do is say what we like or dislike and why we like and dislike it, and if the developers are suitably motivated they can change something or if they feel strongly about sticking to their guns they can do that instead.

So if you dislike boobplate, say why. If you like it, say why. Arguments like this are compelling.

But when you resort to shibboleths from the disagreeable set in "geek hobbies" that's when people stop listening. "Don't do X because 'SJWs' want you to do X" is way less convincing than "Don't do X, because I don't like X for the following reasons."


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean, I don't know about you, but OP didn't have any reasoning to it beyond "remove boobplate kthnx" and any reasons beyond "I don't like the style" (realism, practicality, history) don't hold up with the rest of the design in general which runs whole hog with the impractical, silly, and ahistorical. So...we have a bunch of people wringing their hands saying how much they do/don't like a particular style. It all amounts to circular bickering.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
"Let's not appease [some group]" is a bad argument when that group is making salient points. One does not get the desired effect of "cool armor" when a significant portion of your audience rolls their eyes at it.

Is it? Even assuming a "significant portion" rolls their eyes does it mean a vast majority doesnt like it?

Personally i dont think this is a major issue at all, they could literally put every single girl in a bikini armor, if the system still worked in a way i liked it, i would be it without any issues at all. Ofc, i wouldnt also give up buying because of the armor.

With this said, i completely disagree on setting a standard for how magical armor should look. It should go from a bikini or a string to a casual setting like a dress, better yet if it can change by command.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Nox Aeterna wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
"Let's not appease [some group]" is a bad argument when that group is making salient points. One does not get the desired effect of "cool armor" when a significant portion of your audience rolls their eyes at it.
Is it?

I take it PossibleCabbage was just pointing out that this is an ad hominen argument (an argument that appeals to what some person or group of people like/dislike or believe/disbelieve), and ad hominen arguments are generally taken to be bad arguments.

E.g., presumably we'd all agree that this is a bad argument:

"You should dislike sweaters, because [political figure/group you dislike] likes sweaters."


7 people marked this as a favorite.

I would assume if people liked boobplate I would think they would have reasons they are willing to explain beyond "don't make the people I dislike happy".

I have heard scant few arguments in favor of boobplate that aren't "don't do what those people like."

If one's reasons for liking boobplate aren't ones they are willing to admit publicly, that may be cause for self-examination.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

OK... I'm going to go out on a limb here and try to find an argument why so-called "boob plates" might actually exist in a fantasy world.

In the real world, highly detailed molded breatsplates, showing extreme chest musculature - male musculature, I hasten to add - go back at least to ancient Greece. It was always male, though. Why? Because the warriors were always male.

If you hypothesize an ancient culture where women were warriors, and this stylistic choice of having detailed breastplates as part of armor, it seems entirely plausible that you could have a breastplate modeled on a female chest, a "boob-plate" as it were.

This said, I don't really understand why we're discussing this topic... unless it's just because it's Sunday and there isn't anything new to talk about and folks have gotten tired of beating the usual dead horses like goblin charisma, chaotic paladins and resonance whining. <g>


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Boobplate is fine if it's in keeping with a particular character's sense of aesthetics—or vanity, if you want to be uncharitable. For example, The Sanguinor from 40k has armor sculpted to look like a bare (albeit male) torso. Roman armor is often depicted with the same type of breastplate, but I don't know off the top of my head if that was even historically accurate, let alone worn into battle.

For Golarion-specific examples, I can imagine the Grey Maidens' armor accentuating the female figure on purpose, because the fact that they are an all-female unit is part of their raison d'être, and they have abilities that only work in Grey Maiden Plate though it is statistically identical to regular Full Plate. A Paladin of Shelyn or Antipaladin of Calistria might commission a similarly sculpted set of armor.

Of course, the above is still functional armor, and frankly a quirk like a metal cleavage acting as a shot trap shouldn't figure into the game's mechanics because the game doesn't and shouldn't go into that level of detail. A chainmail bikini (that isn't enchanted similarly to Bracers of Armor) isn't armor, it's clothing that happens to have some metal bits, or counts-as Haramaki at best.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

But what if a woman in a fantasy world is fine and comfortable wearing said chainmail bikini (expecially if magically enhanced)? Wouldn't demanding a more prudish outfit limit her freedom of expression and showing herself as she liked?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wheldrake wrote:
This said, I don't really understand why we're discussing this topic... unless it's just because it's Sunday and there isn't anything new to talk about and folks have gotten tired of beating the usual dead horses like goblin charisma, chaotic paladins and resonance whining. <g>
One of the concept art pieces that ran in a Game Informer in which a art for an Elf Fighter reads:
Quote:
Not Gender Specific Armor Female Elven Armor tends not to have a boob-plate, however if an artist feels it necessary

Some people are heartened by that and would like it to be more of a general standard of "don't do it unless you have a really good reason." Or like "no boobplate on generic characters, only named characters with established personalities which would justify them wanting to wear impractical armor should be depicted in impractical armor, it is not a normal thing otherwise."


3 people marked this as a favorite.

So, for those saying that casters should be the ones portrayed in more risque outfits: I've seen articles that point out "Women + Spellcasters = Problematic Trope"

So there's no right answer here.

What I feel, is that the art should be what the designers want the art to be, and as the consumer you have every right to vote with your wallet.

Circular, rehashed debates get nowhere.

That being out of the way: My opinion as a Man with a very active male gaze, is that I prefer a more slice of life look to my adventurers. I prefer art like Gaia whereas my wife would prefer half of the iconics (male and female) be rendered in straight up S&M gear half of the time.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Athaleon wrote:
Boobplate is fine if it's in keeping with a particular character's sense of aesthetics—or vanity, if you want to be uncharitable. For example, The Sanguinor from 40k has armor sculpted to look like a bare (albeit male) torso. Roman armor is often depicted with the same type of breastplate, but I don't know off the top of my head if that was even historically accurate, let alone worn into battle.

I feel like if you are going to do this sort of thing the art should clearly indicate that the sculpt is part of an extra bit of metal that goes on the armor and is not form-fitting. But even so I would prefer to avoid having a v-shaped piece of metal aimed directly at your sternum, since that's a really good way to get dead.

An appropriate sort of effect can be accomplished with shelving and subtle lines in the armor.


11 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
Steve Geddes wrote:
When you’re drawing women, don’t aim for the way you think men want to see them. Draw them the way they want to be seen.

Well, see, that's the interesting thing. Most women, like most men, want to be seen to be attractive. Most of the time for women that means accentuating secondary sexual characteristics (breasts, hips) because that's what most men find attractive. Most of the time for men that means accentuating masculinity-associated traits, which most of the time means musculature. Before the Exceptional Brigade arrives, I'd like to append a few bonus mosts. Most most most most.

I'm just a little too Cro-Magnon to be entirely sure if the recent upward trend in suggestions that art depicting demographically statistically typical attractive people in alluring but not overtly sexual ways should be avoided is enlightened or if there's more individual-based psychology at work. Good luck unpacking that sentence; I'd be more clear if I didn't feel the need to preemptively anticipate attacks.

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
The problem, Steve, is that there is a lot of creative bias out there towards such things, because that is always what gets the commissions and contracts.

Funny thing about art is that most artists aren't viewing their work with the eye of a documentary camera. While I grant that far from every artist is driven by attraction (in at least the case of H.R. Giger I hope it wasn't the case), most to a degree are. Advertisers, casting directors, photographers, painters, sculptors and so on are merely human, and on average, what is attractive is what is sought to be shown to the viewer's eye.

In a predominantly white predominantly heterosexual demographic, that means that women will be portrayed sexily and white because that is most productive in terms of attracting customers. In a different demographic, what is portrayed will vary. Bollywood actors and actresses for instance don't look the same as most North American ones do. Sex, in a nutshell sells.

Given Pathfinder is not a historical documentary trying to portray a factual depiction of "what was", it is to be expected... and to a certain degree to be desired... that attractive art, not accurate art is what ends up in the product. This is - literally - fantasy. It may not be yours (or indeed necessarily mine), but this is a work of art.

This is normal. I think. This is healthy. I think.

Frankly I think Paizo does a good job of balancing attraction versus gratuitous sexuality. There really isn't anything I've seen in their books that are scandalous and - for instance - children should be sheltered from. The art isn't about titillation, it's about presenting visually attractive subjects.

Again, maybe I'm just horrendously insensitive to the emotional impact depictions of attractive people have upon... uh... those people who are impacted by it. I honestly try to lead an enlightened life and I by and large have an attitude of tolerance, but this is one topic that I have a really hard time wrapping my head around. Attraction is literally the most natural thing in nature. Note I don't say something exclusionary like "heterosexual attraction", or "same-creed attraction" or nationality, or skin colour... because I don't care what anyone else is attracted to. I just can't help but feeling averse reaction to attraction is... unnatural.

I must be a horrible, insensitive person. Which makes me sad. But I guess I deserve to be sad since I'm such a horrible, insensitive person. So it's okay.

But in the interim, until my brain is adjusted to understand modern mores, I'm going to go ahead and vote against a blanket ban on "boob armor", shirtless dudes in media, and any else that is visually attractive.


Also I have read articles that list the depiction of female spellcasters as a horrible thing that needed to replaced. Those articles exist out there, but I don't want to link them as they'd feed into the negativity that exists here already.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Athaleon wrote:
Boobplate is fine if it's in keeping with a particular character's sense of aesthetics—or vanity, if you want to be uncharitable. For example, The Sanguinor from 40k has armor sculpted to look like a bare (albeit male) torso. Roman armor is often depicted with the same type of breastplate, but I don't know off the top of my head if that was even historically accurate, let alone worn into battle.

I feel like if you are going to do this sort of thing the art should clearly indicate that the sculpt is part of an extra bit of metal that goes on the armor and is not form-fitting. But even so I would prefer to avoid having a v-shaped piece of metal aimed directly at your sternum, since that's a really good way to get dead.

An appropriate sort of effect can be accomplished with shelving and subtle lines in the armor.

Alternatively the armor looks the way it does and practicality doesn't even enter the realm of suggestion because this is Warhammer 40k where there's giant warmechs with actual cathedrals bolted to their backs among other bits of pure insanity. Style is style, virtually every entertainment company ever rolls with rule of cool over practical when it comes to fantasy/sci-fi.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, as i reread all the armor entries in PF 1ed, i see no such thing as a statted bikini-mail or boob-plate, so every argument is kinda silly. You can't ask people not to imagine things the way they like, just as people don't ask you to come out of your comfort zone (which you have all the rights to have). Not everyone is a pervert, some of us even prefer more historically accurate representation of certain suits of armor (and/or weapon).


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Also, as I feel needlessly attacked for presenting a comic that has moderate, even conservatively dressed adventurers, I'm just going to leave this particular thread and not look back. I do hope those that want conservative adventurers takes a moment to read Gaia though. It's a wonderfully drawn comic that I love dearly.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
theGlitch wrote:
Also, as i reread all the armor entries in PF 1ed, i see no such thing as a statted bikini-mail or boob-plate, so every argument is kinda silly. You can't ask people not to imagine things the way they like, just as people don't ask you to come out of your comfort zone (which you have all the rights to have). Not everyone is a pervert, some of us even prefer more historically accurate representation of certain suits of armor (and/or weapon).

Yeah, if your GM hands out a suit of chain mail and a picture of bikini mail and says it must look like that, it might be time to get a new GM.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Bard of Ages wrote:
Also I have read articles that list the depiction of female spellcasters as a horrible thing that needed to replaced. Those articles exist out there, but I don't want to link them as they'd feed into the negativity that exists here already.

It doesn't take long on a site like Salon, Buzzfeed, or Cracked to find a listicle of "6 Shocking Reasons [Thing] is Shockingly ______ist". They're a dime-a-dozen, churned out daily because those are their sites' bread-and-butter, and could even be generated procedurally. If I was more conspiracy-minded I would suspect Salon and Breitbart are secretly owned by the same person and deliberately designed to inflame each other's readers for those sweet, sweet clicks.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I would assume if people liked boobplate I would think they would have reasons they are willing to explain beyond "don't make the people I dislike happy".

I have heard scant few arguments in favor of boobplate that aren't "don't do what those people like."

If one's reasons for liking boobplate aren't ones they are willing to admit publicly, that may be cause for self-examination.

Let's see what Family Feud would come up with. Top 10 reasons why people who like "boob plate" like "boob plate."

Survey Says...

#1 "Because it's sexy."
#2 "Because it's sexy."
#3 "Because it's sexy."
#4 "Because it's sexy."
#5 "Because it's sexy."
#6 "Because it's sexy."
#7 "Because it's sexy."
#8 "Because it's sexy."
#9 "Because it's sexy."
#10 "Could you repeat the question please... I was distracted by this sexy boob plate."

There's nothing mysterious about this. Most people find sexy things sexy. And sexy is not synonymous with slutty, gratuitously sexual, prurient, obscene, or inappropriate.

Nobody should be ashamed of admitting this. Nobody should be ashamed of not being attracted to it either... attraction is a wide-spectrum personal thing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"I like boob-plates, and I cannot lie"


2 people marked this as a favorite.
dragonhunterq wrote:
theGlitch wrote:
Also, as i reread all the armor entries in PF 1ed, i see no such thing as a statted bikini-mail or boob-plate, so every argument is kinda silly. You can't ask people not to imagine things the way they like, just as people don't ask you to come out of your comfort zone (which you have all the rights to have). Not everyone is a pervert, some of us even prefer more historically accurate representation of certain suits of armor (and/or weapon).
Yeah, if your GM hands out a suit of chain mail and a picture of bikini mail and says it must look like that, it might be time to get a new GM.

It would indeed be the time to get a new one, as i'm playing a half-orc MALE fighter... although it could mean that it's easier and quicker to don, and much more breathable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
dragonhunterq wrote:
theGlitch wrote:
Also, as i reread all the armor entries in PF 1ed, i see no such thing as a statted bikini-mail or boob-plate, so every argument is kinda silly. You can't ask people not to imagine things the way they like, just as people don't ask you to come out of your comfort zone (which you have all the rights to have). Not everyone is a pervert, some of us even prefer more historically accurate representation of certain suits of armor (and/or weapon).
Yeah, if your GM hands out a suit of chain mail and a picture of bikini mail and says it must look like that, it might be time to get a new GM.

Yeah I mean, trying to pass off a bikini as medium armor? Shame on him. I could see reskinning an armored kilt as a scale bikini maybe...


7 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't think "when I am splattered with gore and viscera from the ogre I just finished disemboweling" is really a good time to be sexy. Be sexy when you take the armor off if you want, but I have a very strong preference for practical armor.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes depiction of female breasts in armor is a thing, even for official paizo art. I didn't notice, I don't care.

I don't think that its a problem, because everyone is responsible for the looks of his own character.

I don't like ruling "only practical armor allowed", because I like all the dangling things paizo art has, jewelry, tonisters, potions, scrolls, capes and so on. Would all be gone. So this isn't a solution. Should plate be looking like plate, yes of course. But realism would be, completly thought through ruin the game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I don't think "when I am splattered with gore and viscera from the ogre I just finished disemboweling" is really a good time to be sexy. Be sexy when you take the armor off if you want, but I have a very strong preference for practical armor.

However moderate sexy appearing occasionally in my favourite fantasy RPGs art is not a bad place for it.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I happen to like my fantasy pulpy, tropey, and over the top. Chain mail bikini, "boob-plates", what-ever; they're all fine. Right along with the male armor that consists of loincloth, colossal shoulder pads, and sheer manliness (gigantically oversized compensatory weapon option).

If you don't personally go for that, you are certainly welcome to ban it at your own table. By all means, and more power to you, but lets not pretend censorship is ever a good thing. More facets receiving representation, rather than fewer, is always better. Lets have sensible, historically accurate chestguards, absolutely, but there's no reason there's not space for impractical nonsense beside it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wild Spirit wrote:


To be honest, I just find it a bit sad that someone thinks he is entitled to tell women what they should be wearing (even in a Fantasy world!).

Oh, I completely agree. I think being mocked and told to cover up is just as horrible as being commanded to show more skin.

Humans are so strange. Their differing experiences lead them to have such different perspectives. They can't even always agree on what comfort is, let alone what elicits it. Strange, indeed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Impractical

If they start taking "impractical" things out if the artwork, I'm less likely to enjoy it. I, personally, WANT things to seem fantastic and magical. If I want to see 'realistic', I can go see some cosplay or IMCF/SCA fights. I come to pathfinder EXPECTING to leave reality behind.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I don't think "when I am splattered with gore and viscera from the ogre I just finished disemboweling" is really a good time to be sexy.

You're right. Dragon gore is far more suited to my skin tone. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )


3 people marked this as a favorite.
1of1 wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I don't think "when I am splattered with gore and viscera from the ogre I just finished disemboweling" is really a good time to be sexy.
You're right. Dragon gore is far more suited to my skin tone. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )

It goes quite well with your natural complexion. I myself am a mechanical being, so it would probably get stuck in my gears and clog everything. My maker hasn't done a very good job in creating me (*sad beep)

51 to 100 of 244 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / A modest request... All Messageboards