Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.32281725 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

ITT realistic fantasy armor.

>> No.32281784

>>32281725
> ITT realistic erotic fantasy armor.

FIFY

>> No.32281792

>>32281725
0/10

>> No.32281804

As long as it's magic.

If the lingerie is mundane, you'll find yo fine ass slain.

>> No.32281806

>>32281725
realistic / fantasy ... pick one

>> No.32281809

>>32281725

>> No.32281838

>>32281806
You can be both, don't be a cunt.

>>32281792
He didn't say practical. Someone could wear OP's outfit, they'd just be uncomfortable and not well protected.

>> No.32281846

>>32281838
They could be perfectly protected.

Magic, anon. Its shit has repeatedly proven to be without need for explanation.

>> No.32281850

>>32281838
You forgot being treated like a whore by everyone around them.

>> No.32281857

>>32281838
uncomfortable? why?

>> No.32281867

>>32281846
This notion is retarded and you should feel retarded.

>> No.32281887

>>32281857
You ever worn a bunch of thin plastic straps, anon? That shit gets unpleasant real quick. There's also a reason why women don't run around with a big strap between their tits most of the time, and I'll give you one guess why.

>>32281850
If they're wearing that I think they want to be thought of that way, at least by the audience they intend to be visible to.

>>32281846
I'm going on the "assuming nonmagical" baseline because not all settings have magic force field armor and there'd be no point discussing armor with some faggot mage ruining the fun.

>> No.32281916

>>32281867
>the notion of magical armor is retarded

Sure it is, anon. Sure it is.

>>32281887
The topic is realistic fantasy armor. No one would realistically wear that in fantasy unless it was somehow enchanted. Whether with a magical forcefield, a mind-control-everyone-that-stares spell, a blinding spell, or anything else remotely useful.

>> No.32281926

>>32281867
>This notion is retarded
No, it's just something you don't like. There's a difference.

>> No.32281927

>>32281887
>If they're wearing that I think they want to be thought of that way, at least by the audience they intend to be visible to.

Sure but it's more fun if you actually take faggots who think it's fine to have their characters wear stupid shit like in OP and constantly have their character be harassed, or if you're really feeling it, get gangraped by a bunch of sailors or something.

But what if the player gets off on that, you say? Well good, then we know we're playing with a blatant freak and he's forever banned from the group. Win-win.

>> No.32281936

>>32281916
>>32281926
>"lol Magic" is an excuse for anything and that's fine.

Nope, it's 100% retarded

>> No.32281938

>>32281916
There are people who intentionally go without armor in fantasy, intentionally wearing armor that's silly and impractical isn't far off.

I mean if I'm going to have to accept some nerd can go sit in a tower full of old men reading books for fifteen years and come out able to wipe out armies by violating the laws of physics, I'm gonna have to accept that some people will do silly things because humans are inherently flawed and not everything they do is in the name of practicality.

>> No.32281950

>>32281927
>Sure but it's more fun if you actually take faggots who think it's fine to have their characters wear stupid shit like in OP and constantly have their character be harassed, or if you're really feeling it, get gangraped by a bunch of sailors or something.

I'm not a passive-aggressive twat, so that doesn't appeal to me.

>> No.32281953

>>32281806
Because having realistic elements of a fantasy world is totally unheard of

>> No.32281954

>>32281936
This bait is bad and you should feel bad.

>> No.32281960

>fantasy armor thread
>2 Images
>20 Replies

>> No.32281966

>>32281960
Trolls trolling trolls: the thread.

>> No.32281969

Just because you have magic to protect you and are beyond petty mortal notions of fashion doesn't mean you want to dress like a whore. In all likelihood you would just dress like a medieval version of the Doctor.

>> No.32281970

>>32281960
The armor autists do not sleep. They do not hunger. They exist on their rage-filled tears alone.

>> No.32281973

>>32281938
>intentionally wearing armor that's silly and impractical isn't far off.
No, yeah, it's pretty far off. There's actually upsides to wearing no armor. Wearing armor that intentionally sucks is just players being retards.

>>32281954
>hurr I have no arguments so your post is bait now

>> No.32281984

>>32281936
Show me on the figure where the bad wizard touched you.

>> No.32281987

>>32281969
The theme for people that wear skimpy armor is probably liberation. Not saying there aren't more conservative enchanted pieces out there, just that if you're going to parade around in magically altered garments, might as well complete the fuck you to physics by flaunting your assets.

Assets also most likely augmented in arcane ways.

>> No.32281991

>>32281973
Maybe they feel the only way to have a fair fight is to give themselves a handicap. I've never said any of this was practical, but it's stuff people do. The whole "getting rid of all your weapons to have a fist fight with the big bad" thing is an ancient cliche, this would just be a variant on the same idea.

>> No.32281999

>> No.32282006

>>32281984
Not that guy, but wizards touch everyone in their sense of immersion unless magic is just as dangerous to them as it is to their opponents.

There should be a reason there are so few people willing to be wizards and fewer who last long as them, and it's called backlash.

>> No.32282021

>> No.32282026

>>32282006
>so few people willing to be wizards

Same reason as so few people head into the sciences, anon: they ain't got time for that shit, there's mouths to feed and things to get paid for.

>> No.32282040

>>32282026
That only works if a single scientist could wave their hand and break the laws of reality. They cannot.

>> No.32282044

>>32282006

It's called that level 1 Warrior kobold chieftan will kick your shit in because a level 1 wizard can't actually do anything.
They don't gitgud until level 3, and that's a long, long journey when you have no significant ability at all.

>> No.32282062

>>32282044
I think we've all seen what Color Spray and Sleep can do.

Quadratic wizard progression is not an excuse for them being utter bullshit.

>> No.32282069

>>32282040
It's the parallel, anon, it's not literally the same thing. Shall we put the military against level fighters, now?

>> No.32282073

>>32282062

Oh no.
You can disable one foe.
A day.

>> No.32282077

>>32282006
Not really, that's your arbitrary take on the subject, which you are entitled to as long as you don't treat it like some kind of objective truth.

>> No.32282130

>>32282073
...again
>Color Spray
>Sleep
Both AoE's, and only a babby wizzard only gets a single spell a day.

>> No.32282186

>>32282130

Well you need to live as a babby wizard for 1000 fucking exp.
And really any wizard worth the trade is going to have a second spell from their INT modifier but still, the point being is that they are deeply limited in capacity of action until they get access to those long-lasting 2nd level spells.

>> No.32282201

>>32282006
>unless magic is just as dangerous to them as it is to their opponents.
>There should be a reason there are so few people willing to be wizards
Or you know, they'd be willing but aren't able due to: lack of necessary talent, access to education and training due to geographical / financial / social limiting factors just to mention a few.
I love the WFRP style take on magic, treating it as something that will fuck you up if your attention slips for a moment and sometimes even if it doesn't, but it's hardly the only route.

>>32282130
And most NPCs never get past that since they don't have access to the personal enlightenment provided by being a walking genocide, more commonly referred to as an adventurer.

>> No.32282209

>>32281969

>In all likelihood you would just dress like a medieval version of the Doctor

Pre-modern fashion is so much more then robes, and a lot of people don't appreciate how armor gets in the way of a good outfit.

I always try to get rid of any mechanical necessity to wear armor as quickly as possible. In AD&D 1e, if you put an 18 into DEX, you get a 6 AC, and this is good enough to justify not wearing armor at low levels.

Rings of protection and such can then be added, but I've never had a GM give me one that was better then +3.

>> No.32282220

>>32282186

Everybody sucks at level one. Get up there and hit someone with your staff, you bearded pansy.

>> No.32282242

>>32282220
But anyone who put more than a +1 into STR has a steep advantage in that they can keep swinging.
Wizards tend to see STR as a dump stat.

>> No.32282250

>>32282209
Now this is SO much more interesting than the shit that has been posted so far. Thank you for classing this thread up a notch.

Though I don't necessarily agree. Brigandine can look rather fancy.

>> No.32282288

>>32282250
Seems just as boring as the shit that has been posted so far.

>> No.32282294

>>32282130
>no one every makes saving throws, I'm a wizard!
>enemies always clump up just right, I'm a wizard!
>I always have access to just the right spell all the time, I'm a wizard!
>I can cast spells any time all the time, I'm a wizard!
>what actually happens in games is unimportant because I'm a wizard!

>> No.32282321

>>32282294
>A three man party of a wizard and pretty much anything else encounters a group of goblins
>Wizard casts sleep
>Helpers coup de grace
>Wizard gets free xp, helpers get xp and loot
>Wash, rinse, repeat
>Level acquired

>> No.32282333

>>32282288
Well, there's no accounting for shit tastes.

>> No.32282386

>>32282333
I agree and don't blame you for yours despite it apparently being a terminal case.

>> No.32282393

>>32282209

More recent styles. At one point, I thought fashion was the one thing that didn't really matter in regards to verisimilitude in a fantasy game. I'd always preferred the 18th and 19th centuries to earlier eras of European clothing, so one day, I thought I'd dress my character that way.

Then my GM informed me that bustles and corsets didn't exist in his setting. Of course, he couldn't stop me from ordering them from tailors and leather-workers.

He could, however, have me laughed at by both commoner and court.

>> No.32282413

>>32282393
Did you respond by starting a fashion revolution?

>> No.32282416

>>32282393
I think I'm the only one I've heard of that spend lots of time on stuff like cultural fashions and architecture in my homebrew.

>> No.32282448

>>32281999
Damn, that's sexy.

>> No.32282501

>>32282416
You're not, I made that mistake too on two occasions.

>> No.32282518

>>32282501
How is it a mistake?

>> No.32282545

>>32282518
90+ percent of the time it turned out to be wasted effort and I only end up feeling like I'm just stroking myself off with setting detail that never gets used or noticed.

>> No.32282557

OK.

>> No.32282617

>>32282413

Let's just say that the GM's constant sprinkle of in-character giggles and staring children didn't stop me.

I tried to argue that fashion used to be far more varied before the modern era, and people would be used to strange people wearing strange clothes, but he would have none of it.

>> No.32282686

>> No.32282696 [SPOILER] 

fuck you

>> No.32282758

There's already a cheesecake thread up you fucking faggot.

>> No.32282805

Am i doing this right?

>> No.32282851

>>32282545
Most fluff in a setting is wasted effort, except maybe monsters and magical items. Languages, fashion or working economies just tend to get in the way. A setting should be made with the players in mind, not for the DM to wank off to.

If I want to learn about useless junk like languages I'd do it on wikipedia.

>> No.32282897

>>32281725
Source is a corruption themed image set.

Most corruption pics involve everyone turning into sluts because it's a fetish, but come the fuck on. That just implies sex is evil.

>> No.32282916

>>32282897
>not having a setting where sex spreads negative energy
>not having necromancers becoming liches during massive orgies
>not having families pray to their gods before and after sex for the purpose of procreation

>> No.32282917

>>32282805
>that stance
>that shield and hammer
>that fucktarded armor
>that look on her face

Yep, you nailed it.

>> No.32283001

So, garters for your greaves. Sexy?
>>32282917
Wee, im helping!

>> No.32283460

what's the best example of armour that's both sexy/erotic and realistic/practical?

>> No.32283479

>> No.32283487

>>32282897
It's more of losing all sense of restraint and discipline

>> No.32283492

>> No.32283497

>>32283479

>> No.32283518

>>32283497

>> No.32283539

>>32283460

>> No.32283594

>>32282209
Apparently 'fuck it, wrap yourself in sheets' is the fashion of basically every civilization until about the halfway point of recorded history.

>> No.32283618

>>32282557
Oh Koei what are you doing.

>> No.32283640

>>32283618
Musou game first, zelda game second

>> No.32283664

>>32283640
Playable Impa, apparently!
>She's probably just another ninja character
Oh well those are usually fun

>> No.32283747

>>32283539
muh dick.

>> No.32283860

>>32281916
>a mind-control-everyone-that-stares spell

>> No.32283986

>>32283618
She's probably trying to get Link's attention with that outfit. She wants his Courage
So,
Very.
Hard.

>> No.32284072

>>32283594

As you can probably guess, it's a lot of work to get fibers from something and work them into thread. Then, you have weave that thread into fabric. Finally, to have fitted clothing you have to cut and sow this fabric, and to make it look it's best you have to fit it to a certain person.

Back when all this had to be done by hand, you can imagine that some people might refuse to cut their fabrics out of sentimentality - a great deal of work was put into it.

So, you just wrap it around yourself and tie it with another piece. That way, you stay warm, stylish, and you don't have to worry about anything not fitting.

This only changed when copious quantities of cheap labor and fabric came about - about halfway though history.

Tell me if I'm stating the obvious.

>> No.32284165

>>32281887
>If they're wearing that I think they want to be thought of that way, at least by the audience they intend to be visible to.
Check your goddamn privilege.

>> No.32284272

>>32284165
This is sarcasm right?

>> No.32284429

>> No.32284451

>>32282805
Prime daughteru material right there.

>> No.32284887

>> No.32284919

>>32284072
Actually it's more complex than that. The techniques to create truly fitting clothes, namely combining button and button hole were not really seen in europe until about 1300~AD. And then fashion went crazy because before that to create fitted garments required a lot of workarounds, such as reinforced areas that could be sewn up repeatedly (literally stitching it together for final fit whilst on the wearer).

So the earlier shapes being more simplistic are a result of the inability to do much more than that.

There's also the changing climate, with noticeable warmer/colder periods (though not by much and certainly not the the extremes of weather we see currently with regularity) also affected the styles in use.
And then there's simply the problem of records. For instance, the corruption of they typical Roman robes styled garment in art over time into standardized 'biblical' clothing which if examined in many depictions is not really even plausible clothing in how it goes together.

And of course we're still dealing with the perceptions of everything being shit between (western) romans and the renaissance, to the point of ridiculous caricature.
Anyway, have a guy with his doublet rolled down. You can even pick out the lining and stitching here.

>> No.32284922

I dont know why, but i like this

>> No.32284933

>>32284887
To be fair, that one is from pornography.

>> No.32284989

>>32281809
What is this from?

>> No.32285067

>>32284989
Kill La Kill episode 23.

lade regalia:Secret Unleashed
Symphony regalia: Finale
probe regalia: Truth Unveiled
Shakle regalia:Persona Unleashed

in before no diaz sub, pls we are on /tg/

>> No.32285187

>>32283460

>> No.32285231

>>32284933
No no no it is reimagined presentation of the 100 year war in anime way.
The sexual side just shows to horrors of war where men killed or in the language of the internet "gut raepd"

>> No.32285238

>>32284922
Please, please tell me you have more women in full plate, including helmet
dat sallet, unf

>> No.32285906

>>32285238
Thy body, prepare ith

>> No.32286985

>>32283460

>> No.32287053

>> No.32287070

>> No.32287137

>> No.32287209

>>32285231
no, it's just porn

>> No.32287281

>>32287137
>>32287070
>>32287053
>>32286985
>>32285906
Good sir, my dick thanks you

>> No.32287726

>> No.32287931

>1 pauldron & 1 vambrace
+4 AC

>> No.32288011

+2 for shield

>> No.32288079

>>32287931
>>32288011
-8AC for no chest armor besides a half-open bodice

>> No.32288225

>> No.32288246

>> No.32288252

>>32288225
>no barding for the battle bunny
3/10 would not go to war alongside

>> No.32288274

>>32288079
Not wearing armor doesn't give penalties, it just fails to give you bonuses. At least, in most systems I'm aware of.

>> No.32288289

>>32288079
that gives a bonus when fighting hetero males and lesbians

>> No.32288301

>>32288274
Well I was trying to imagine how it would work out in a system where partly armoring one limb is worth a +4

>> No.32288321

>>32288289
Unless they're Lawful enough to accept that their clear duty is to run her through and mourn the loss of nice tits later.

>> No.32288342

>> No.32288351

>>32288274
>Everything is D20!!!!1

>> No.32288384

>>32288351

Show me a system that more than a few people have heard of which gives penalties to not wearing armor. Oh wait you can't.

>> No.32288414

>>32288351
Isn't armor also handled as a bonus in WoD, GURPS...
Like, maybe in FATE you'd take a "I don't wear armor" aspect and mostly use it to get points for being inconvenienced? Besides that I can't think of much, but I don't know, I'll admit my knowledge is somewhat limited.

>> No.32288422

>>32288384
Show me a system that more than a few people have heard of which gives a bigger bonus for having your tits out than it does for using a shield. Oh wait you can't.

>> No.32288443

>>32288422
inb4 FATAL

>> No.32288446

>>32288301
Stop trying to... pick apart the logic of fantasy armor protection

>> No.32288451

>>32288384
It could be some sort of a wargame where everybody is presumed to be armoured like a tank by default, so losing what would be penalties.

>>32288422
And neither was the example given like that. Woop de woop.

>> No.32288465

>>32288446
>ITT realistic fantasy armor
>waaah why don't you guyz liek me for posting boobplate?

>> No.32288468

>>32288443
>FATAL
>giving bonuses to females
That would make them harder to rape, so it obviously can't happen.

>> No.32288496

>> No.32288502

>>32288422

So you can't then and have no argument to back up your HUURRR D20 shit. Glad we got that settled, fagtron.

>> No.32288505

>>32288468
No see, I meant FATAL would probably be the only system where a woman gets a bigger bonus to AC/Defense/whatever for having her tits exposed than for using a shield. Because having her chest bare makes her easier to rape, like you said, the game would reward that.

>> No.32288529

>>32288502
Dude, I'm not even the guy you were replying to. You're the one who had to come in here and start shitting up the thread with stuff that doesn't belong. Go make a chainmail bikini thread and post everything you want, I won't come over there and take a dump on everything you like so why do you have to come over here and do so?

>> No.32288539

>> No.32288547

>>32288321
>not taking prisoners

>> No.32288568

>>32288529

Except for my post pointing out that almost every single system ever has no penalty for not wearing armor was the first post I made in this thread.

>> No.32288574

>>32288547
She's clearly just there to boost her army's morale, limit the prisoner-taking to those who either can provide you useful information or are important enough to be worth ransoming.

>> No.32288580

>> No.32288590

>>32288568
see
>>32287931
unarmored, for all intents and purposes, yet "+4 AC"

>> No.32288603

I only skimmed the thread, I'm ignoring most of you.

However, I will pose this question: why does "fantasy" armor have to look different than historical/real world armor?

I don't want to argue, I want to think about why a generic fantasy setting would even develop armor that looked different from historical armor.

I'll try and find my folder of sweet armor pics in the meantime.

>> No.32288607

>> No.32288640

>>32288465
Why so serious? Are you a serious northman from the cold and serious north?

>>32288468
Armor on females can give you a bonus to rape them because you want to know whats underneath?

>> No.32288669

>>32288640
Yes I am, we are serious here, and do not respect women unless they are armed and armored enough to fight for respect. We do not respect men either unless they can fight effectively.

>> No.32288681

>> No.32288719

>>32288079
This is AD&D right?

>> No.32288901 [SPOILER] 

Gonna add to the kill la kill pile because why not

>> No.32289048

I can't find my folder, but I did find this.

>> No.32289092

>>32288669
Well, i'll try to keep my shenanigans to a minimum

>> No.32289110

>>32289048
B-but she's wearing 2 pauldrons AND 2 vambraces. That's got to be at least +8 AC so how could she possibly be hit by even 1 arrow, let alone 3?

>> No.32289176

>>32288505
Cheesecake Armor grants an evasion bonus to defense rolls as long as you are in non-grapple melee combat with a character that would find you attractive, but grants zero benefit to the games version of damage reduction.

While in a grapple you have a massive penalty to your defense.

Funny thing about FATAL, how it caters to the stereotypical autistic necbeard is actually worse from a rules perspective than its misogyny.

>> No.32289188

>>32288669
>armored enough to fight for respect.

>> No.32289239

>>32289188
Yeah, no. That one on the right makes even 40k look restrained and realistic in its depictions.

>> No.32289253

>>32289110
Because fantasy art has been traditionally sexualized due to stereotypical sexist ideas about females stemming from the principle of the male gaze (see: Mulvey) and she, as a woman, has to be penetrated, no matter what. In fact, she exists to be penetrated.

>> No.32289273

Just a reminder that style over substance is historically accurate

>> No.32289304

>>32289273
>I'm 12 and what is ceremonial decorative armor that still provides better protection to vital organs than the fapbait being posted ITT

>> No.32289310

>>32289188
>Chainmail and erect nipples.

My nipples explode in sympathetic pain.

>> No.32289316

>>32289273
Ugh, the comments on that image are so wrong but I'm afraid if I respond to them I'll get dragged into a stupid /tg/ argument.

>> No.32289318

>>32289253

Clearly, she should start to question her choice of artist.

>> No.32289326

Would this count as realistic fantasy armor?

>> No.32289339

Does this count as half plate?

>> No.32289343

>>32289318
She's a little too dead to be questioning anything.

>> No.32289347

>>32289273
Check out my sweet limb protection, peasants.

>> No.32289365

>>32289318

Looked up the source. That one is rather mild compared to some its sibling pictures.

>> No.32289367

>>32289326
>walker
>no canopy

yeah sure.

>> No.32289376

>>32289318
She meaning the girl in the picture.

Mulvery is a feminist scholar, primarily for film.

My reply was mostly a joke but in all seriousness, I have never heard a decent argument for sexy armor--it really all comes down to the fact that it's "sexy" or "cool" but nbd magic fixes that

"realistic" fantasy armor in my opinion wouldn't look much different from historical armor

>> No.32289385

>>32289310
If it was good enough for Morgan Ironwolf it's clearly good enough for /tg/.

>> No.32289402

>>32289339
Yeah no, we asked to either stay on-fucking topic or make your own thinly-veiled porn thread.

>> No.32289425

>>32289048
so is that low fantasy? No enchantments? No magical protection?

>> No.32289440

>>32289304
I refuse to believe that you honestly believe what you are saying.

You know for a goddamn fact that the armour in that picture is historically accurate officer armour from Mediterranean Europe from late bronze age into the early Renaissance.

Lesser troops wore simpler but no more covering armour into battle.

>> No.32289452

>>32289425
It must be, obviously in any *real* fantasy setting a magic bustier would protect her just as well as a suit of magic plate.

>> No.32289483

>>32289440
Maybe I wasn't clear, the molded pecs and abs are clearly ceremonial, but even still he's armored his torso and head, ie the body parts you absolutely can't live without. And that makes infinitely more sense than cheesecake art with a completely unarmored torso and some tiny pieces of armor on the limbs.

>> No.32289484

>>32289347
I love these examples of historically accurate suits of armor that would make the average fa/tg/uy cry all over their fullplate boners

>> No.32289554

>>32289483
You weren't clear at all. You were acting like a retard.

Half the armour people are bitching about in this thread is no more covering than, for lack of a better term Roman armour, it just happens to be worn by a woman so y'all be bitching like faggets.

Ans, yes, I understand that using the Queen's English spelling for my words while also saying "ya'll" does make me look kind of like a hypocrite for calling you a retard. Eat my ass and call me Prince Phillip for all I care.

>> No.32289597

>>32289402
>showing thigh
>porn

I'd hate to see how you'd react to someone showing midriff or something

>> No.32289694

>>32282321
>The second half of the goblin raiding party ambushes your ass at range because you were too focused on the first
>Sling bullet damage, sling bullet damage everywhere

>> No.32289729

>>32289367

Magitek armor is manned less for its defensive capabilities and more for its offensive.

The entire point is riding a machine that blasts your enemies with magic, since no army in the world of FFVI could fight against magic.

>> No.32289787

>>32289554
TRUTH

>> No.32289797

>>32289484
The problem with the full plate harness lovers is that as usual, many take it too far and miss the point in other armours. The same with people who use these fancy examples from history to bash 'practical' armours by pointing at these things.

Like all of the points on that greek guy, miss the numerous contributing factors and compromises that made that armour effective for it's time. Or the limited armour of the Landsknects. Or the complete lack of armour for most people throughout history barring some form of shield. And it takes a degree of study and information that cannot be got on 4chan to cover the whys and whats of all of it and explain the differences between actuality, the misconceptions and the silly fantasy. Unless you're KM and really damn good at summing these things up in a concise and comprehensible manner.

I am not how ever, so have some fancy pants. They're pretty fancy.

>> No.32289832

>>32289797
>Starting a new character in Mount and Blade: Warband.jpg

>> No.32289841

>>32289376
>I have never heard a decent argument for sexy armor--it really all comes down to the fact that it's "sexy" or "cool"

Which is the best argument there is.
What arguments are there for 600 lb swords and axes? For 40K characters wearing shoulder pads the size of small cars and no helmet between them?

But you don't hear people complain about them much. It's just when it comes to female armor that some suddenly develop a rampant realism fetish.

>> No.32289857

>>32289832
>Colovian fur helm.png
FTFY

>> No.32290030 [SPOILER] 

>>32282686
Is this R63 on Guts?

>> No.32290052

Spear sword?

>> No.32290073

>>32288640

>> No.32290079

>>32290052

Its a large rapier, obviously.

>> No.32290136

>>32289339
I had to laugh at this, when I scrolled down I saw only the top first and thought "decent armor", then I saw the miniskirt.
Top half for slaying dragons, bottom half for hitting the clubs.

>> No.32290145

This looks like a good place to ask; does anyone have a picture of a woman with black, curly hair, wearing chain mail? Somewhat realistic looking would be preferable.

>> No.32290151

>>32290030
Speaking of

>> No.32290181

>>32290030
You mean this?

>> No.32290235

>>32290145
Well, Elmore draws pretty realistic-looking characters...

Oh, you meant the chainmail.

>> No.32290272

>>32290151
The best example of realistic female fantasy armor ever. So hot.

>>32290181
Awesome! The other one looks like him in his Dwarf armor too.

>> No.32290323

>>32290073
Hurgen blurgen?

>> No.32290409

>>32290235
Yeah, I meant more along the lines of actual armor, as opposed to chain mail bikini.
>>32290323
If you read the filename, anon translated the pic anyway.

>> No.32290498

>>32289797
even now, they still wand into melee with legs and arms exposed

>> No.32290679

>>32289841
Maybe that's because with males in unrealistic armor at least I can say "well he IS covered with armor" but with females it's usually "I can see 90% of her"

I understand your point though, and it is very valid

>> No.32290761

>>32289841

I get and agree with your point.

But wouldn't the massive shoulder guards help protect the head from side attacks allowing the person to focus on killing one target at a time?

>> No.32290765

>>32290498
Here, have an actual soldier instead of that civilian-beating policeman who isn't expecting gunfire.

>> No.32290819

>>32290765
does she even have any armor on? I don't think long sleeves counts as arm protection.

>> No.32290863

>>32290819
Armored vest of some sort. The sleeves are camo, and also prevent sunburn.

>> No.32290869

>>32290765
eh, you do know their arms and legs are still unarmored right? also, unless they have a metal or ceramic insert, their body armor is useless against rife+ rounds

>> No.32290877

>>32290498
its like mobility and comfort vs protection is a thing or something

>> No.32290894

>>32290869
god those towelheads must hate female warriors.

>> No.32290921

>>32290863

IOTV without half the parts attached, there is still the standard front back and kidney portions on.

>> No.32290925

>>32288446
Stop complaining about chainmail bikinis....
You can't have a hero's journy... without chainmail bikinis.

>> No.32290928

>>32283594
Pants were considered the main identity symbol of barbarians.

>> No.32290933

>>32290877
>>32290869
You can't forget that with modern armor and weapons, it's not very practical to cover yourself in Kevlar. Hence why they only really use chest/back/head protection. It covers the most vital areas with the least amount of hindrance.

>> No.32290936

>>32290498
>>32290765
>>32290869
Here are some ladies i wouldn't mind violating my civil rights

>> No.32290970

>>32289425
Could be discworld. Apparently magic armor isn't very popular because it has a habit of failing at inconvinent times. A lot of peoples' last words were "You can't kill me because I've got magic ARGH!"

>> No.32291002

>>32290936
>not bad
>crack whore
>down syndrome sally

>> No.32291026

>>32291002
>really more interested in the g-man looking motherfucker in the back

>> No.32291037

>>32290079
The word is epoc. It's like a rapier, but for killing people in plate.

>> No.32291067

>>32290928
No, that was beards.
What with the word barbarian meaning people with beards and all.

>> No.32291097

>>32291067

No it doesn't. Barbarians were called such because their language sounded brutish, like they were saying bar bar bar or whatever. So the romans (I believe) coined the term for them.

>> No.32291128

>>32291097
Greeks

>> No.32291143

>>32291097
I thought it was the Greeks, but either way yeah that's the ticket.

Pants and beards were barbaric, but the term came from how people saw their languages from a life in the sunny Mediterranean.

>> No.32291154

>>32291067
You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

It wasn't beards. It pretty much began by meaning "non-Greek" and later was just "anyone who wasn't us because we're super civilized Romans"

>> No.32291172

>>32291097
Greeks. Specifically the Greek language had a distinct "V" and "B: sound but the northern barbarians didn't, so they said their V's like B's. Hence "barbarian" as in "bar bar bar."

It's also where the word "barber" comes from since the barbarians were known for their beards, but the word barbarian came first.

>> No.32291242

>>32291002
>wouldn't have relations with a person that has downs
why must you discriminate?

>> No.32291330

>>32291242
because...people are different, and I don't like certain traits?

>> No.32291498

>>32291067
>>32291143
>>32291154

Also, greeks also had beards. The barbarian beard was a very specifical one, and wasn't the first sign to identify barbarians. Pants were.

>> No.32291579

>>32291330
well, if you had to choose between a beautiful but mentally retarded woman or an ugly but personality desirable woman for a wife, whom would you pick?

>> No.32291625

>>32291579
depends on how beautiful, how retarded, how ugly and hoy personality desirable. The cash is also important.

>> No.32291628

>>32291579
Personality.

>> No.32291701

>>32291579

Retarded like she thinks "irrigardless" is a word or retarded like needs her colostomy bag changed twice a day and she can't stay out in the rain or she'll drown?

>> No.32291800

>>32291579

Ugly but desirable in terms of personality, unless we mean "so ugly you will be permanently ill with disgust around her"

>> No.32291845

>>32291579
Severity of mental retardation?
Degree of ugliness?

I mean, I prefer the personality, but she can't be so ugly that I see her and think something besides "Holy fuck she's ugly"

>> No.32292408

>>32291579
Can I have a robot instead?

>> No.32292722

>>32291625
>>32291701
>>32291845
eh, retarded like Rita Leeds from Arrested Development (nb4 that's not how the mentally handicapped actually are). child like sense of right and wrong and sense of responsibility for actions. capable of simple math and literacy. easily tricked. some long term memory issues. cries and throws temper tantrums when she doesn't get what she wants. can't drive or cook for herself.

for the unattractive one, i'm not talking about her having the face of a leper, but shes not 'Hollywood ugly' either. body is overweight or anorexic (whichever you hate more), teeth are mildly 'British', eyes are dull and lifeless, hair is a ratty mess, face slightly manish, with worker hands and feet.

>> No.32292787

>>32292722

probably the autistic broad. I'd just beat her until she left me or learned her place anyway.

>> No.32293121

>>32292408
robutt robutt (looks like a machine), android (human on the outside), or gynoid (machine that has feminine traits)?

>> No.32293145

>>32293121
Android, R. Dorothy model.

Obviously mechanical but human enough to be adorable.

Also, weighing roughly 2 tons.

>> No.32293297

>>32292722

retarded beauty

>> No.32293311

>>32293121
The last, naturally.

>> No.32293336

>>32291172
Oh. Sorry, confused.

>> No.32293666

>>32292722
I'll take the retard
I don't have to love her

>> No.32293841

>>32293145
cast in the name of god, ye alright

>> No.32293918

>>32293145
>>32293841
A fine choice. I'd be put off by the whole uncanny valley thing, and 2-ton weight, but she can play the blues. I guess that evens it all out.

>> No.32294244

>>32293918
did she really weigh 2000 kg. been a while since i watched Big O, but i could swear Roger was able to do the "i won't let you fall" arm clasp think with her dangling over an abyss. he couldn't lift her up, need Dastun (and Angels?) help for that that. so, maybe nothing over 250 kg. which is still a lot of mass for something under 5'

>> No.32294280

>>32294244
Yeah I was joking about the exact weight.

But she's 'two man lift' heavy so yeah probably closer to a quarter-ton.

Still a big girl for such a little girl

>> No.32294343 [SPOILER] 

>>32282805
>uniboob plate
I wonder who could be behind this post

>> No.32294456

>>32289339
Throw some plated greaves on that bitch and I'd allow it, thighs were unarmored through most of history anyway. (no, regular trousers don't count as armor)

>> No.32294621

>not preferring realistic, non-slut armour
Boy it's almost like you people have opinions that aren't the same as mine. How completely understandable. I'm gonna not get mad about that. You fags.

>> No.32294691

>>32289092
Nephenee a best girl

and second only to Ike in ass kicking potential also

>> No.32294700

>>32290970
But Discworld Elves are hideous

>> No.32294717

>>32294456
i think you'll love Artesia then

>> No.32294738

>>32294717
>Cute black girls in armor with skirts

I'm diggin' it.

>> No.32294785

>>32294738
>>32294717
That fucking same face though. Worst case of same face I think I've ever seen.

>> No.32294813

Fire Emblem 9 and 10 has great character artwork.

The armor is well balanced between being fanciful and realistic I think.

>> No.32294846

>>32294785
yeah, but pretty much everything else is glorious

>> No.32294851

>>32294813

>> No.32295294

>>32290936

>Presumably about to go into a riot situation or something
>Parted hair and shiz
>Done up makeup and eyes

Yup

>> No.32295517

>>32281784
>>32281806

are you an idiot

>> No.32295551

>>32294691
God, Fire Emblem needs to give more pikemen to its players. 2-3 per game just doesn't feel like enough, considering you get around 5-8 mounted knights and potentially 3-5 foot knights.

>>32294813
True that, FE does do some great armor. I just wish they could drop the unrealistic plate colors and focus on character colors through their cloth armor, surcoats, tabards and the like. But then again, colored armor does work if you assume the armor is hardened leather, but that'd be plain unfitting for a gallant knight

>> No.32295588

>>32290894
>female warriors.

Female soldiers. Being a soldier doesn't make you a warrior.

>> No.32295702

>>32295294
that's how Turks roll

>> No.32296742

>>32295588
Out of curiosity, how do you define the difference? Discipline of rank? Being geared for offensives?

Or are you just thinking of Carth and Canderous' bit from Kotor?

>> No.32297439

>>32291579
Neither is the only correct answer.

You can learn to love mental retardation just as you can learn to love physical retardation, so they're the same in both being described as undesirable.

If you're going to be with someone presumably for the rest of your life you need to be okay with them on all conceivable levels. These include physically, sexually, emotionally, and intellectually since the human fucking condition and all that shit.

>> No.32297746

>>32297439

Yes, because that same person is going to remain beautiful for the rest of your marriage. Very important.

>> No.32297887

>>32297746

Parts of her thigh are armored... sort of... ok I give up, all my fantasy armor is straight cheesecake.

>> No.32297911

>>32297887

Oh no, please sirrah, do not strike me in the buttocks.

>> No.32297937

>>32297911

This count as chainmail, right guys? Right? Guys?

>> No.32297944

>>32289841
600 pound swords and axes and big shoulder pads have pragmatic purpose. Not wearing clothes usually doesn't

>> No.32298034

>>32297937

Which one of you in here is spreadin rumours about me wearing armor?

>> No.32298065

>>32298034
Jessica Rabbit as a barbarian?

>> No.32298093

>>32297937
shameful, put some clothes on harlot

>> No.32298128

>>32297944
...and no helmet between them.

>> No.32298232

>>32298065

What a slut, right?

>> No.32298305

>>32298093

Shamefur Dispray!

>> No.32298375

>>32298034

That dagger sheathe is totally impractical.

>> No.32298415

So close. SO very close.

>> No.32298455

And yet so far

>> No.32298470

>>32298232
Ok, I'll bite: sauce?
Google just gives me a billion wallpaper sites.

>> No.32298481

>>32298375
I know right?

>> No.32298590

>>32298470

Sorry, my sauce was 4chan. Probably another armor thread, a cheesecake thread, or a character art thread! Since that's all I browse.

>> No.32298595

>>32298375
what about this one?

>> No.32298633

>>32298595

Much better, but that is totally not how you hold what looks to be a longsword, and she's missing the scabbard for it too. Where does she expect to keep it when not in use?

So impractical.

>> No.32298657

>>32298595

Well, at least she has a sheath, if you know what I mean. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

>> No.32298695

>>32298633

Clearly she discarded the scabbard before entering the fight, purely as a practical consideration, and she just managed to expertly parry a blow. She's so much better than her opponent that she's showing off by jumping over the blade and such, no doubt.

>> No.32298771

>>32298695

In the bright derpness of the negative 41st millenium, only limbs need armor.

>> No.32298851

>>32293841

>> No.32298892

>>32291579
Mind over matter, every time. Besides, if they're a landwhale that probably means they make some bad decisions and thus don't have a good personality.

>> No.32298951

>>32298481
>different boob sizes

>> No.32299040

>>32298771
for the most part, "fem marines" leave mids and thighs bare.. for the emperor

>> No.32299116

>>32289273
You don't even need to read the words to know this is troll bait. Just look at the font.

>> No.32299137

>>32298481
. . . oops, wrong one of her.

>> No.32299145

>>32299040
Considering the main female troops are fetish nun bondage bimbos who wear skintight body armor complete with corsets and heels... not terribly unrealistic for 40k's aesthetic.

>> No.32299390

>>32299116
Its a hyperbolic response to the people who make the same kinds of arguments about pinup art.

By taking a piece of depiction of real world armor that was used for hundreds of years and tearing at it with the same aspergian fervor and pants on head retardation that the neckbears like to use.

>> No.32299477

>>32299145
Sisters are usually covered in armor, it's the Rogue Traders/Inquisitors/Commissars that show the body flesh

>> No.32299514

>>32299477

hey man, just because those boobs are covered in armor doesn't make them any less boob.

>> No.32299533

>>32299514
that's not a SoB; these are

>> No.32299572

>>32299533

... point?

They also aren't covered in armor.

Hell, it's pretty much stated in setting that SoB armor has to be exaggerated in order to get around the degree passive.

>> No.32299664

Post more cute girls doing ridiculous-but-not-completely-revealing armor things

>> No.32299697

>>32299664
long live the uniboobplate

>> No.32299700

>>32299572
that SoB has boobplate 90% of the time? idk

>> No.32299724

>>32299697

>> No.32299740

>>32299700

... and I totally missed your original point.

Yeah, it works out.

>> No.32299768

>>32299724
I've been waiting weeks for a good armor thread not filled with people arguing about realism

I need this, /tg/

>> No.32299806

>>32299768

>> No.32299830

>>32299806

>> No.32299861

>>32299040
>not power armour golem waifu
"All is dust~"

>> No.32299886

>>32299830
Well that's all I have

Do your best, anons!

>> No.32299918

>>32299861
Or perhaps a dominant, rough and tough, god praising champion of Chaos?

>> No.32300616

>>32290052
Why is the dragon looking up her skirt?

>> No.32300648

>>32300616
Why wouldn't he be looking?

>> No.32300984

>>32299918
the only one to praise is the god emperor, you filthy heretic

>> No.32301111

I shit still being torn apart?

>> No.32301123

>>32301111

>> No.32301138

>>32301123

>> No.32301161

>>32301138

>> No.32301175

>>32301161

>> No.32301184

>>32301111
wut?

>> No.32301376

>>32301184
Sorry, I meant "Is shit" as in, is armour being torn apart into realistic and non-realistic and all that bollocks rather than cool armour pictures?

>> No.32301382

>>32291037
I think it's just a rapier. A real rapier from before small-sword faggotry.

>> No.32301444

>>32301376
k

>> No.32301469

>>32289347
they might be wearing splinted armguads under those boner-inducing sleeves, you will never know

>>32299533
the are celebrating the shape of humanity, because humanity is sacred and they are crazy zelots

>> No.32301506

>>32301444
Glad we settled that.

>> No.32301519

>>32301506
They said this game would be out in Spring....

>> No.32301542

>>32301519

>> No.32301567

>>32301542

>> No.32301580

>>32301567

>> No.32301584

>>32301567
Loving these. I've saved everyone so far

>> No.32301590

>>32301580

>> No.32301617

>>32301584
I wasn't sure what was wanted...

>> No.32301643

>>32301617

>> No.32301658

>>32301617
well if it helps my favorites have been
>>32301111
>>32301161
>>32301506
>>32301542
but I'm content to just let you continue as is

>> No.32301660

>>32301643

>> No.32301679

>>32289841
40k space marine armour is some of the most realistic power armour around. It's basically huge slabs of armour rounded to make attacks glance more easily.

None of that crappy put a fragile person into an equally fragile and horrendously expensive and logistically untenable exoskeletal robot.

Which is not terrible because of nanomagic and anti-physics fields.

>> No.32301710

>>32301658
Kay, I keep going into other threads tho, so I'm slow.

>> No.32301722

>>32301710

>> No.32301732

>>32301710
fine by me Provider

>> No.32301745

>>32301722

>> No.32301755

>>32292408
Have fun~

>> No.32301761

>>32301732

>> No.32301776

>>32301745

>> No.32301802

>>32301761

>> No.32301803

>>32301776
>>32301761
goddammit...these are so awesome and you've got nice filenames too. I'm going to have to steal those

>> No.32301806

>>32298305

>> No.32301816

>>32301802

>> No.32301836

>>32301803
You're welcome! It's what I aspire to do with my tripfagness.

Also, we've reached our image limit.

>> No.32301837

>>32281809
hey to be fair, when your opponent is clothing itself you tend to show a bit more skin then usual

>> No.32301853

>>32301836
Indeed we have. Well thank you kind tripfag

>> No.32301869

>>32301853
You're welcome. If I see a thread pop up again, I'll pop in and help out!

>> No.32302092

>>32301722
dat cameltoe
Mrgrgr a slut
also a best

>> No.32302341

>>32297944
Nobody can realistically lift, much less swing, a 600 lb sword. What's the pragmatic purpose of bringing that to a battle then?
If you're gonna be anal about realism, be it about more than one cherry-picked subject.

>> No.32302845

>>32288321
or barbarian who doesn't into anything but kill because rage mode

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action