tiny female armors!

[kikix12]

Armor from knights depending on the era and location could weigh up to a 100 lbs. you're not running a marathon in that, short bursts maybe but even then you're not going to have much speed. Even in 20-30 lbs you're going to have issues running, as for swimming forget about it, most people can barely even swim properly let alone swim with weight on them. A marathon runner that wore armor would be slower than hell, they're used to not having any weight, drag perhaps but weight no..a pro swimmer again same concept, they don't swim with weight, drag yes.

You misunderstood me. It's not about whether an average person can do this or that, but whether it is possible.

I said that a marathon runner still would be able to run further than a non-marathon runner (I did not mean that they would run faster, though I probably did use an ambiguous word for that). That is most certainly true, because even if they would run slower certainly (marathon runners do not run fast at all, to begin with, and an average person on a short distance will easily run faster than any marathon runner anywhere during the marathon will), they trained their body for endurance. Even halving that distance will bring their run to a number most people won't come even close to.

You also seem to mix reality with fiction. "They are used to running/swimming without armor" doesn't mean jack squat in reality. A person that runs a marathon will have stronger legs than a person that does not. It's a fact and no matter the weight they add, it won't change things. A marathoner weighting 60kg will run further than an average Joe will run at 50kg. That same marathoner weighting 80kg will STILL run further than the average Joe weighting 50kg. You are underestimating humans ability. Current soldiers wear almost 30kg of gear on them in the field and they most certainly can run longer distances, while most couldn't run a marathon.

As for that 100lbs gear, as I said, jousting gear was heavy. Yes, jousting gear did weight about 100lbs, so about 45kg. And yes, knights were the ones that wore it. But no, that gear was NOT taken to war. Never. It was a suicide. They were hard to wear, hard to move in. Getting on a horse without help was nigh impossible. If the squires died, such a knight was just an easy target for enemy that couldn't fight properly. Humans are smarter than to put on tin cans that make it impossible for them to move. When against wooden or rock weapons it's fine and all, but a full-strength metal-ended mace to the gut can kill you with or without armor, so it was mandatory to be able to move, and move well.

Now, swimming is another matter. A 60kg+20kg armor person is not the same as 80kg human (heck, the more a human weights the easier it is to swim). However, again. Trained professional swimmers have general fitness and strength to maintain themselves and armor afloat and...though they ain't gonna beat any record obviously...I never said otherwise. All I did was say that it is possible for a person to swim in armor and that a person in armor that is a well-trained swimmer will be able to swim further than an average Joe without armor (clearly making assumption of that average Joe weighting a reasonable amount, like 70-80kg, cause those that are heavily overweight just won't sink and can stay afloat indefinitely without having to do anything...till they die at least).

Look here for your "slow as all hell" comment on running...Believe it or not, but knights did give chase and run away, including against people that had nothing more than leather armor. Being unable to run fast is a good way to never win a battle...except with a Pyrrhic victory. Really...Humans have fought wars for ages. Give more credit to humans where credit is due. Unlike in water, on land the weight of armor is significantly less of a problem. It's not the same as running while holding 20-30kg's in your hands. The weight of armor is spread around your entire body and moves less than fat for obese people will. It's not without its effect on how long a person can run and maximum speed will be reduced, but a fit person will still be better at it (both distance and possibly speed-wise) than an average Joe.

Also, look here for some information on weights.

[Shouko]

I said that a marathon runner still would be able to run further than a non-marathon runner (I did not mean that they would run faster, though I probably did use an ambiguous word for that). That is most certainly true, because even if they would run slower certainly (marathon runners do not run fast at all, to begin with, and an average person on a short distance will easily run faster than any marathon runner anywhere during the marathon will), they trained their body for endurance. Even halving that distance will bring their run to a number most people won't come even close to.

You're right on a marathon runner is able to do stamina but again you're talking about a marathon runner that is wearing light clothing not bulky armor that's going to weigh them down and restrict their movement, then of course if we're talking pure metal armor on a reasonably cool day but not too hot will still still get overheated faster, think about a pc in this aspect inclose it in a case without air and its going to get extremely hot. Yes a person can run in armor but we're talking about people who ran with it that wore it, a marathon runner that just slaps on the armor that's not used to it isn't going to get far regardless of how good of a marathon runner they are. A sprinter or someone not used to running marathons is still going to be able to get away faster than a marathon runner can catch up to while in armor.

You also seem to mix reality with fiction. "They are used to running/swimming without armor" doesn't mean jack squat in reality. A person that runs a marathon will have stronger legs than a person that does not. It's a fact and no matter the weight they add, it won't change things. A marathoner weighting 60kg will run further than an average Joe will run at 50kg. That same marathoner weighting 80kg will STILL run further than the average Joe weighting 50kg. You are underestimating humans ability. Current soldiers wear almost 30kg of gear on them in the field and they most certainly can run longer distances, while most couldn't run a marathon.

Modern military people are trained to run in that gear through bootcamp, the gear they wear is meant to be convenient as possible, it's not the same as wearing bulky plate armor that weighs up to at least 100 lbs plus as I already said the shield and sword or other weapons. A marathon runner and soldiers can be hand in hand but they're not exclusive, there are plenty of soldiers that aren't used to running marathon like distances and then there are soldiers that are special trained that can do that much and more, but make no mistake it's still not the same as running around in bulky metal armor. Granted a soldier is going to have a better time of it. A marathon runner by themselves aren't used to running with that bulky equipment on, a sprinter might be used to weights or resistance dragline training but we're not talking about that so it's a moot point. Get your facts straight.

As for that 100lbs gear, as I said, jousting gear was heavy. Yes, jousting gear did weight about 100lbs, so about 45kg. And yes, knights were the ones that wore it. But no, that gear was NOT taken to war. Never. It was a suicide. They were hard to wear, hard to move in. Getting on a horse without help was nigh impossible. If the squires died, such a knight was just an easy target for enemy that couldn't fight properly. Humans are smarter than to put on tin cans that make it impossible for them to move. When against wooden or rock weapons it's fine and all, but a full-strength metal-ended mace to the gut can kill you with or without armor, so it was mandatory to be able to move, and move well.

This simply isn't the case, as I said it really depends on the era and the location, some yes lancers had the heavier armor but not restricted to them. I never said anything about impossible to move I'm just talking about the strain that it would be required, stop cherry picking.

Now, swimming is another matter. A 60kg+20kg armor person is not the same as 80kg human (heck, the more a human weights the easier it is to swim). However, again. Trained professional swimmers have general fitness and strength to maintain themselves and armor afloat and...though they ain't gonna beat any record obviously...I never said otherwise. All I did was say that it is possible for a person to swim in armor and that a person in armor that is a well-trained swimmer will be able to swim further than an average Joe without armor (clearly making assumption of that average Joe weighting a reasonable amount, like 70-80kg, cause those that are heavily overweight just won't sink and can stay afloat indefinitely without having to do anything...till they die at least).

Trained swimmers aren't trained with armor on in mind, again Navy Seals and Marines are but that's again not armor but rather vests, fatigues and equipment designed to be unrestrictive as possible. I swam on my school teams for 4 years, even went on to help coach my local swim team for a few years after high school, when they needed someone to help off and on, not to mention also played lacrosse and helped coach that as well. I can tell you without a doubt that swimmers even olympic swimmers don't train with armor on, they're not used to it, now I can't say if they train with weights or not but they do resistance training which is completely different.

Look here for your "slow as all hell" comment on running...Believe it or not, but knights did give chase and run away, including against people that had nothing more than leather armor. Being unable to run fast is a good way to never win a battle...except with a Pyrrhic victory. Really...Humans have fought wars for ages. Give more credit to humans where credit is due. Unlike in water, on land the weight of armor is significantly less of a problem. It's not the same as running while holding 20-30kg's in your hands. The weight of armor is spread around your entire body and moves less than fat for obese people will. It's not without its effect on how long a person can run and maximum speed will be reduced, but a fit person will still be better at it (both distance and possibly speed-wise) than an average Joe.

Never claimed they couldn't run or swim but you're overestimating how much they really could.

https://www.livescience.com/15128-ar...ht-energy.html Here's a good example of what i'm talking about.

[RiyahArp]

Actually, it used to be a thing where men were relatively skimpily dressed too. Conan of Cimmeria goes barechested, with leather boots and loincloth. John Carter of Mars wears less, and depending who draws Elric of Melnibone, he is often wearing not much either. Trazan of the Apes as well. A lot of the "naked fantasy" look is from artists like Frank Frazetta, Julie Bell, and Boris Vallejo. It's just generally that it seems to have fallen out of fashion from the late seventies.

if you want a humorous example, go watch a clip of the old fantasy movie Zardoz. You can see the esteemed Sean Connery in a one piece man swimsuit, with thigh-highs and a mustache. It's funny now, but that actually was typical fantasy/sf house style for artwork at the time.

[Wilford111]

Is there really any controversy here? There are so many glams in this game, you can completely cover yourself or make yourself naked. It's really up to the user. And are we really going to debate lore reasons why a glam armour set protects the wearer?

[Tridus]

This breaks my immersion. Only catboys should be tanking in tiny clothes for entirely legitimate lore reasons that I can't articulate but that I'm sure are absolutely real.

[ElHeggunte]

Complaints about the practicality of armor begin to fall apart when you realize no amount of armor would realistically protect you from most of the things you fight in games like this anyway.

For example, I think the dude in full plate is just as fucked as the girl in a cloth bikini when it comes to tanking hits from something as big and powerful as Nidhogg. Unless you think you could survive being hit by a speeding freight train just because you put yourself in a soup can, but I’m certain that physics would vehemently disagree with you.

[Esp]

Let's not forget that we can fall/jump from amazing heights and land without breaking a thing in some dungeons xD

[Kacho_Nacho]

I guess you all are bored today. Me too!

I blame Elmore for a lot of the bikini armor out there. He wasn't the first; but, he's the artist whose fantasy art was featured most in AD&D and other games. So, ladies wearing their skimpy armor while the men fought in heavy armor without helmets has grown into an expected trope in MMOs.

But..

All that really doesn't matter because it's a game, and people get to choose whatever their gear looks like. It's no biggie.

In fact, that OP's suggestion is clever and got a smile from me. Sivvy's posted gif was funny too.

[ko_]

Does any of this matter when boss's throw things like Ki blast, pulse cannons, comets, and just general magic at you anyway?

[Vstarstruck]

How to explain skimpy tanks:
1. Nen user
2. Phenominal Cosmic Power, Ity Bity Living Space
3. Kill la Kill reject with boats for shoes (I dare someone to get the reference)
4. Kill la Kill
5. psychic powers
6. Wearing something so skimpy, the opposition is unable to strike a blow from gawking at you

I'm not sure if we're getting each others points

They do that a lot, i doono what it is, but no they did not understand your point, and it is common they reply to something then go so off tangent .. you just stare and go whaaa?