Please do NOT alter Dark Knight AF for female characters.

[Samcaesar]

Snip

Whenever the basis of the thread is "Please don't make the girl's DRK AF like the girl's DRG AF SE" and a good bit of people respond with "No that's dumb!! Armor for girls must show the belly hole because it's feminine and that's the way armor for girls should be!" I'm working to what people say. And again, armor isn't meant to look masculine or feminine, it's armor, which is meant to protect you, not show off all your curves and what not. If you want skin tight outfits that show off curves, go with a set that isn't meant to protect your body from attacks.

But seriously please, explain to me your concept of "Feminine" armor is so we can continue discussing within a slightly different context. If it's skin tight metal, which outside of that just looking ridiculous, then how is it any different than "Showing some skin", because to me it seems like it's just showing some very shiny skin if that's that case.

A practical idea of how armor works? Less metal means it's easier to cut through. Look at the first set of "Feminine" armor design you linked from.. Aion I suppose it is as someone else commented? With exception of the pauldrons, every bit of it is much thinner on the girl model than the male. Or how it purposely shows off the girl's jawline, while on the male model their face is more concealed with those (Albeit too large) additions to the helm. Looking at the second set, the men have an entire layer of metal covering their legs while the girls have skintight boots and high heels, but the two sets seem much more fair in the look intended (IE showing off the skin without pulling the zipper down to the girl's belly button while the guys have everything zipped up nicely and securely.) I have far less of an issue with the second set simply due to the fact that it's focused on a motif (Leather clad attractive badass) than I am with the first set because it's suppose to be armor, which less metal and more form fitting means it's less protective.

To bring in a game I absolutely adore and it's take on armor, Dark Souls. http://i.imgur.com/U3Mgz.jpg (Ignoring the clipping issues, as it's just how games are) This is an armor set in the game (Coincidentally worn by arguably the most powerful character in the game) It's purpose? To protect the person wearing it, as armor ought to be. Now, that's not to say I'm saying "Every set ought to look super bland and boring and only make 150% sense!", because this is fantasy after all. What I am saying is that whenever sets have ridiculous things added or remove more sensible things, it should be the case for whatever model you use in the game.

So again, armor isn't meant to be "masculine" or "feminine" it's suppose to provide the most protection to your body. In fantasy, feel free to do whatever ridiculous thing you want to it, but if it's going to make sense on the male model (Or make little sense on the girls model) it ought to be equal for both sides.

[Reinha]

So again, armor isn't meant to be "masculine" or "feminine" it's suppose to provide the most protection to your body. In fantasy, feel free to do whatever ridiculous thing you want to it, but if it's going to make sense on the male model (Or make little sense on the girls model) it ought to be equal for both sides.

There's no need for armor to "make sense" in a fantasy game, when we already suspend our disbelief with other things related to physics. We can fall from any height without dying, make a flame into a ball that flies, jump ridiculous lengths, have a 4 foot person be as strong as a 6 foot person, have an almost wingless bird fly (fat chocobo), have bullets or arrows not one-shot people, not feel any fatigue from fighting or running, and have a crown be equally good head protection as a helmet.

We also have females that are always as strong as their male counterpart in the game, despite that not being the case in real life. Why else would there be different requirements for certain jobs (army, police, fireman) and different sport and martial art leagues for different genders? Different fighting styles are a fact.

If a physically taller and more muscular person isn't any stronger and more durable than a non-muscular smaller person, then why would a thicker plate of metal be more durable than a thinner one? If we are going to abandon real life physics in all the other cases I mentioned, it won't be a sufficient argument in the case of gender based armor either. The truth is that character strength and stamina is determined by the visible stats the same way gear durability and weapon power is, regardless of their looks.

Samcaesar, you were willing to believe (direct quote), that "maybe there's some magic shield thing with the dumb little crown, it looks like it's gold, which means canon-wise it'll dampen magic attack in FFXIV". That same logic can be used to cover any visible differences in male and female specific gear. Practicality is not something you require of every gear piece, which is why I must ask if you have some other motive to argue against more feminine outfits. Do you, for example, believe that having separate gear is an act to diminish female fighter's value (in showing that they are different from men)? Or that tightly fitted armor makes a female character to be taken less seriously? Or that having different outfits for one job would not portray the general look of the job as well as a unisex outfit?

[saber_alter]

-snip-

practicality or not, the appearance of an item should fit the art direction of a particular game, and in this game the armor designs have been on the more unisex, pragmatic side (bar a few.)

so no, i agree with your points, but i would have to pass on it because it simply wouldn't make sense for SE to heel-face-turn from our current designs to practical/absurdly bulky on males, implausible on females.

[Niwashi]

And again, armor isn't meant to look masculine or feminine, it's armor, which is meant to protect you, not show off all your curves and what not. If you want skin tight outfits that show off curves, go with a set that isn't meant to protect your body from attacks.

Actually, in terms of heavy plate armour, if it's supposed to be useful and protective, then it would be as skintight as the people making it are capable of making it. The way plate armour protects you is by spreading out the force of blows. You get hit by a weapon in one spot and you absorb that blow with your entire body, with the force dispersed by the larger area. Bulky armour that's not form-fitting simply can't do that nearly as effectively. With bulky ill-fitted armour, there will always be some spots where it's closer to your body than others and those same smallish spots would have to absorb all the force of every blow you're hit with.

The reason armour is at times rather bulky is simply because it's difficult and costly to shape more precisely. Most soldiers would have to settle for whatever off the rack one-size-fits-all piece of gear they might be able to get. Skin-tight armour, on the other hand, would have to be custom built to the exact size and shape of the individual it's being made for and would be pretty useless for almost anyone else. For that matter, it could become useless even to the person it was made for if they ever gained or lost weight, since metal plates won't flex to allow for such variations.

But for anyone who could get it, perfectly form-fitted armour would spread the force of blows more effectively so therefore provide much better protection than bulky armour. And at the same time, it creates far less hindrance to your movements, allowing you to fight more effectively (including to protect yourself more effectively). The fact that such well-fitted armour would match your shape well enough that it's likely to be visible which gender you are is completely irrelevant to its purpose, but no less true for that fact.



p.s. I agree with you when it comes to overly revealing armour that tries to be "feminine" by covering less of the body. That's ridiculous. It's only when you try applying that same argument to armour that's feminine simply by being well-fitted that the argument doesn't work. Well-fitted armour is effective, and in fact more so than bulky armour is.

[Onikimaru]

Actually, in terms of heavy plate armour, if it's supposed to be useful and protective, then it would be as skintight as the people making it are capable of making it. The way plate armour protects you is by spreading out the force of blows. You get hit by a weapon in one spot and you absorb that blow with your entire body, with the force dispersed by the larger area.

Eh? XD, do you understand the laws of gravity and force?. Actually if you read up on female armor and how FULL plate works you would know that females are better off wearing as little armor as possible on the upper torso.

On a side note - have supported this thread and DO NOT MIND females in full plate armor. I for one would actually love(if i ever make one) my female Au Ra to wear full plate with no revealing parts.