Hairstyle Concerns for The New Races

[Duskane]

I don't think adding a fur pattern can really be on the same page as adding a hairstyle
Since there body will be covered most the time

[Reinha]

I don't think adding a fur pattern can really be on the same page as adding a hairstyle
Since there body will be covered most the time

Again this preference is being stated as a fact. There is nothing in the game that forces you to wear helmets or full body armor. If either the hair styles or fur patterns are covered up, that is a conscious choice of the player and not a downside of the feature.

So what you're saying is

right above.

[Penthea]

Again this preference is being stated as a fact. There is nothing in the game that forces you to wear helmets or full body armor. If either the hair styles or fur patterns are covered up, that is a conscious choice of the player and not a downside of the feature.

So what you're saying is being topless is the same as not wearing a hat.

[VirusOnline]

Again this preference is being stated as a fact. There is nothing in the game that forces you to wear helmets or full body armor. If either the hair styles or fur patterns are covered up, that is a conscious choice of the player and not a downside of the feature.

I'm sorry, but this is a bit ridiculous, but are you saying that :
Dressing (which is THE default and which will cover up markings and fur), is a conscious decision therefore it's the player's fault and not the feature's downside ?

Sorry, but that's the very definition of a feature with a downside. If you adhere to the default of the game's dress code, the default being that one is commonly clothed, then a feature which by default will be hidden is a downside of that feature. No one will see if unless you purposely remove your armor or a clothing allows for it to be somewhat seen.

I have to agree with Duskane here, hair style and markings are two different forms of player expression/choice and I don't see the logic in barring the one and only race from hairstyles. We're asking for carbon copies with the only difference is telling a colour palette swap, because let's be honest here we know what face is going to be the most widely used.

[Reinha]

If you adhere to the default of the game's dress code

Which is a choice. I don't know why it's so controversial to challenge that "the body will be covered most the time". If my Hrothgar is able to show the fur pattern most of the time, it's not a bug or a hack. It's... player preference.

a feature which by default will be hidden is a downside of that feature

You are arguing that any modifications to the body, such as tattoos, scales, fur or chest hair, are all features with an inherent downside. I don't agree. It's up to the player's fashion preferences whether the placement of the feature is a downside or not.

I have to agree with Duskane here, hair style and markings are two different forms of player expression/choice

Yes, they are.

Dressing (which is THE default and which will cover up markings and fur)

I just want to point out that the default outfit for Hrothgar does not cover the fur.

you can't deny that when choosing to not cover the fur patterns your choice in chest pieces is dramatically reduced

And I didn't deny this.

[VirusOnline]

Which is a choice. I don't know why it's so controversial to challenge that "the body will be covered most the time". If my Hrothgar is able to show the fur pattern most of the time, it's not a bug or a hack. It's... player preference.

Proof ? Hrothgar aren't even released yet with not testable means to show all types of armor on them. According to what we have now, yes the body will be covered most of the time. That is the design, unless you glamour the Emporer set / purposely choose some of the very few glamours where body markings/fur colour will show. If a feature causes you to restrict your clothing in order to 'feature' it, then it's a downside.

You are arguing that any modifications to the body, such as tattoos, scales, fur or chest hair, are all features with an inherent downside. I don't agree. It's up to the player's fashion preferences whether the placement of the feature is a downside or not.

No, don't misread the conversation. I said markings and body fur color are a downside because they will inherently be hidden, according to what current armor sets are available and how they are handled (which is usually fully covering the body).

I just want to point out that the default outfit for Hrothgar does not cover the fur.

The default here is when we put on some Omega gear, it's covering the entire body. Most armours by default cover the entire body. Most people are not going to go around wearing Hrothgar racial gear for the entirety of their gameplay.

[Seraphor]

Proof ? Hrothgar aren't even released yet with not testable means to show all types of armor on them. According to what we have now, yes the body will be covered most of the time. That is the design, unless you glamour the Emporer set / purposely choose some of the very few glamours where body markings/fur colour will show. If a feature causes you to restrict your clothing in order to 'feature' it, then it's a downside.



No, don't misread the conversation. I said markings and body fur color are a downside because they will inherently be hidden, according to what current armor sets are available and how they are handled (which is usually fully covering the body).



The default here is when we put on some Omega gear, it's covering the entire body. Most armours by default cover the entire body. Most people are not going to go around wearing Hrothgar racial gear for the entirety of their gameplay.

How about:
If you want to show off the body, you'll wear gear that shows it off, and if you don't, you'll wear gear that covers it?
Seems pretty straightforward to me.

If anything, ask for more revealing armour options.

[Penthea]

How about:
If you want to show off the body, you'll wear gear that shows it off, and if you don't, you'll wear gear that covers it?
Seems pretty straightforward to me.

If anything, ask for more revealing armour options.

You're missing the point. The amount of revealing chest-gear wearable by males in the game is small. On top of that the chest piece tends to be the centre-piece of gear sets. For example you're not going to look like a whm without the robe, but you still can without the hat. This is why having fur options isn't comparable to having hair options even if the amount of options is the same. You rarely radically change a gear set if you hide the hat, but you often do if you hide or change the chest piece. Not even the lvl 80 job gear takes the fur patterns into account. Most of the chest pieces hide them.

And this is why giving hrothgar fur options instead of more hairstyles isn't good, because showing the fur patterns would often force you into a far smaller selection of glam gear that will potentially make your gear set unrecognisable. While a hrothgar's head, that will almost always be displayed anyway due to how gear is designed, will have less options for hairstyles.

It's not really fair that for hrothgar players to show off more physical individuality that they have to pigeonhole themselves into the above situation, while no other race has to.

And just because we ask for more revealing gear doesn't mean we will get it, and even if we do it won't compare to the amount of gear that covers your whole torso and arms, and it won't change the fact that most of the lvl 80 job gear doesn't allow for the ease of showing off fur patterns.