| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
 Posted - 21 Feb 2012 : 23:20:34
|
I think what a woman is dressed in and how she's portrayed are separate but related issues. A female character can be as cool, developed, or excellent as you want, but fetishizing her body is still sexist and unfair to women. Even if the costume makes sense in the context of the world presented, how it is presented to the audience still makes a difference.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
 |
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2012 : 23:49:27
|
I don't want to put anyone on the spot or anything--I specifically quoted MT's post because we're friends and he knows I respect and value his opinion.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Why should anyone's enjoyment of novels and game products be dictated to me by some sort of out-dated, puritanical set of (double) standards? If a thousand people like something, and one person does not, should we conform to that one person's tastes?
...
I really don't get this argument at all - why does fantasy have to conform to someone's explicit set of standards? Are we going back to the dark ages, and want to cut all the genitalia off the statuary in the Vatican because ONE MAN found it offensive? Its art, and I find any movement to censure art VERY offensive - far more offensive then the naked human body.
We definitely shouldn't conform to a "moral majority," but we're not talking about something that some people find "distasteful." A lot of people have issues with the human body--I personally find absolutely nothing wrong with it and feel we should be much less hung-up about nudity. Moving toward a more enlightened view of the human form is a gradual process.* Also, of course presentation is as important as content, and the context and intent of an image make a big difference.
We're not talking about that. What we're talking about is art that is *disrespectful* or actively *abusive* to a particular minority group (in this case women). Misogyny is the most *prevalent* form of discrimination embedded in fantasy, but it's hardly the only one. There are a lot of people who don't really care about homophobia or casual racism at the gaming table, but that doesn't make it ok.
There is of course a line to be drawn here. I might not be offended by something that offends a friend of mine. But I do think there are concrete standards--about respect, treating a person as a subject not an object, and a sense of equality--that always hold true, and if a piece of art violates these things, then one can't just hand-wave away the objections of an offended party.
So yeah, this thing we're talking about--about fantasy art being unfair to women, or racial minorities, or GLBT people--is a real thing. You don't just "get over" discrimination, and if you don't speak out against it, you're condoning it.
Like I said, I don't mean to call anyone out, and I don't even really want to go farther with this point. But this thing I'm talking about is a real thing and not just a question of taste.
Cheers
*Note: It's a valid point that people who are hung up about nudity might have a lower threshold for seeing the human form, and interpret the worst out of things that most people wouldn't find offensive. This is one of those "where do we draw the line" things. |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2012 : 23:52:12
|
Erik, whether or not a portrayal is 'fair' doesn't seem to me to be a very important measure of its artistic merit and it is not a very useful metric when it comes to sales of entertainment.
'The Very Hungry Caterpillar' contains neither a representative portrayal of caterpillars nor an empowering message for them. What it does do is appeal to the target audience, i.e. children.
If I don't like caterpillars or if I want stories written without the implicit value-judgment that butterflies are inherently superior to caterpillars, I should probably buy something else.
In turn, if I really love reading about caterpillars eating implausible things, I think that it's in no way bad for me to consume the living daylights out of that book and other similar ones.
And all people who want to fetishise bodies, souls, midgets, goats or even caterpillars ought to be completely free to engage in their particular peccadillos, as long as they are reasonably discreet about any other activities that may result from enjoying their fetish.
Human beings have a mental capability to meaningfully relate to around 500 people at a time. The world has a lot more. Through media or just walking around, we encounter and see a lot more people than we can ever get to know and judge as people.
Every single time we conduct a transaction of some sort with a vendor with whom we do not have a deep personal relationship, every time we make use of a service provided or amenity maintained by someone unknown to us, every time we buy a good made with the labour or capital of a stranger; we objectify other human beings. Can't help it. And every time we fantasise about or even just note the attractive appearances of someone with whom we are not deeply in love, let alone enjoy sexualised contact with someone without commitment, we objectify them.
Seems kind of pointless to demonise a behaviour that we can no more stop than we can stop breathing. We can't treat every human being like a human being because we don't have the mental room for so much knowledge about them or the critical capability to form so many informed opinions.
Any treating fictional people like objects seems to me to be even less objectionable than doing it with real people. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 00:53:25
|
Icelander, it sounds like you're saying we shouldn't do anything about racism, sexism, or bother being respectful to people, because it's not human nature?
(This is a legitimate question--because I might just not be understanding you correctly.)
If that *is* what you're saying, then I've got to admit, that sounds pretty sad to me.
I know actual women, actual gay people, actual people of different cultural backgrounds than my own, but even if I didn't, I'd like to think I could still be respectful to them and not encourage or condone behavior or art that is disrespectful to them.
It is indeed harmful to real people to perpetuate sexist art. It fosters a cruel, prejudiced, and (I'll go as far as) psychopathic disregard for how women are viewed and treated. You think the sexist art and objectified images of women we see in our movies, books, and art has nothing to do with our astronomically high rates of sexual violence?
But I don't think I seriously need to discuss why it's important to avoid being sexist.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 01:00:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
Every single time we conduct a transaction of some sort with a vendor with whom we do not have a deep personal relationship, every time we make use of a service provided or amenity maintained by someone unknown to us, every time we buy a good made with the labour or capital of a stranger; we objectify other human beings. Can't help it. And every time we fantasise about or even just note the attractive appearances of someone with whom we are not deeply in love, let alone enjoy sexualised contact with someone without commitment, we objectify them.
I don't buy this--not for a second. Not knowing someone very well does not require us to "objectify" them. I don't know you that well, but I'm not objectifying you. I have the power to imagine that you are a real person with real thoughts and real feelings. We don't have to have a deep personal relationship for me to treat you with respect and give merit to what you say. Which is part of why what you say upsets me.
Maybe we're talking about a different thing when we say "objectify." In this case, I'm talking about "objectifying women" being "making women into sexual objects whose only purpose is to arouse and entertain."
Characters in books or art pieces or films who fall into this category are not being treated with any real artistic conscience or merit, and an artist who can't breathe life into a woman to make her an actual character--to make her tell a story and intrigue a reader--rather than just a poorly-coded symbol for sex or arousal is doing a disservice to art and to the consumer of that art.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 01:14:50
|
you know if I didnt say it, I voted in between.
as to whether or not the chain mail bikini is sexist..... well I've no oppinion on it one way or the other and I too am in the whats good for the goose is good for the gander deal.
I however do not believe that said attire( really the scale mail bikini of red sonya was never intended for armor) should be used often.
I also am of the very small minorty that firmly believes that since its on a woman's body, only the majority of the women around the world can truely say whether or not it is offensive to them....(and by meaning the majority, I mean the ones who vote on the most)
here in the usa we have the right to bear arms... but in europe they have the right to bear breasts...... |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
Edited by - sfdragon on 22 Feb 2012 01:31:20 |
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 02:28:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Icelander, it sounds like you're saying we shouldn't do anything about racism, sexism, or bother being respectful to people, because it's not human nature?
My views on sexism, racism or indeed any other -ism were not discussed in the post, no.
I was pointing out the fact that in the course of our lives we interact, directly or indirectly, with a number of people several orders of magnitude higher than the number of people to whom we can relate as actual persons. Most of those whose services and goods we purchase have no purpose to us in our lives but to provide us with that service or to provide the capital which financed the production (by hundreds of other people) a given good.
Important political movements are founded in the idea that it is somehow a bad thing to do this, to interact with people without relating to them. If it is bad, then I guess humanity is doomed, because this isn't about human nature, as in personality, or something subject to potential change. This is about human data-processing capability and the fact that the lives of each individual are shaped by literally millions around the world, and, crucially, each individual also shapes millions. And while you might make an effort to imagine me as a person, you can't do it to all the millions whose life you will affect or who will affect yours.
The most common interaction in human society is where the two participants are totally objectified in their relations toward each other, i.e. they provide only a single function, whether that is political support, capitalistic investment or the exchange of labour or equivalent tender.
Given this fact, ascribing motives of hatred, fear or dominance to instances of objectification seems like a huge logical leap without much support for it. When we objectify each other as naturally as breathing and for much the same reasons*, it seems as unecessary to ask for reasons for objectification as it is to ask for reasons for drawing each breath.
Assuredly, there exist artists who hold all kinds of negative views. I just don't think that looking at their work tells you much more than, at most, what they have found sells well or what they enjoy in their fiction. Causal links between enjoying one type of fiction and engaging in things that society labels undesirable in connection with it are proving so resistant to discovery as to suggest comparison with the yeti. With that in mind, I think that condemning artists for their artwork, corporations for what they choose to commission to sell their publications or individuals for what art they consume is, ironically, knee-jerk prejudice of the same sort that underlies any form of irrational stereotyping and group stigmatising.
I believe that my specific political views, as opposed to what I've tried to keep a general refutation of the tendency to make all human society and in particular, all creative art (including RPGs), into expressions of political dogma, are not on topic for this scroll. I believe that it is not only possible to enjoy or create art which represents viewpoints, events, characters or situations that one does not agree with in one's personal life, it is a sine qua non of true art, not to mention a necessary ability if one is to do business in a society with more than one point of view.
I therefore refuse to equate a discussion of artistic merits with a discussion of the morality of treating the fictional people represented in art with dignity. This scroll is about whether scribes have a preference for functional armour or fantastical ones in fantasy artwork. Germane to that is to what extent real-world armour are plausible in a fantasy setting and to what extent fantastical creations useless in the real world would be popular in a fantasy setting.
Anyone interested in knowing my views on sexism, racism, censorship of commercial messages, free trade or any other subject not related to a Realmsian subject is invited to send my a private message and/or invite me to partake in such a discussion on a forum dedicated to such discussions.
*Some 95% of modern humans would die if large-scale trading were to end. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
Edited by - Icelander on 22 Feb 2012 05:50:18 |
|
|
|
Wolfhound75
Learned Scribe
USA
217 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 04:18:25
|
Wow. An amateur sketch artist who likes drawing as a hobby asks a simple question of how do you like your armor depicted and all of this stemmed from my polling a group of fans to see what people prefer these days.
Realistically - using actual armor parts, sizes, and articulation.
Fantastically - may not even appear as usable armor because it has absurdly large parts, articulation that would make it impossible to move/fight, or in the case of stereotypical stuff, a chain mail speedo or the Conan loin-cloth.
Somewhere Between - armor has enough realism to give the impression that it is in fact armor but has a fantastic elements of its design that would be impractical in use such as large knee spikes, articulation joints placed at the wrong points on the body or great helms that would make it difficult to find an opponent on your flank but still look cool.
Talk about opening a can of worms. Clearly Pandora's box wasn't quite empty. Who knew this would degenerate into a discussion of sexism in art and generate such hostility. My thanks to the women who weighed in on the subject. From my perspective as a doodlebug, it's nice to know how you view the current trends in fantasy artwork as well. Perhaps I'll draw up a picture of Cale in a plate mail speedo and chip-n-dale style bracers and submit it to CK's fan art under the notion of countering the stereotypical chain mail bikini.
Good Hunting! |
"Firepower - if it's not working, you're not using enough." ~ Military Proverb
"If at first you do succeed, you must've rolled a natural 20!" |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2427 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 04:43:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
However, I must never forget that a corollary of the very voluntary model of mutually agreeable exchange* inherent in the free market that gives me the right to vote with my wallet is that the publisher has a corresponding right, namely the absolute moral right to choose to whom he markets his products.
Exactly, the target group and it's assumed priorities. So, returning to the argument of an extra-extra-puerile cover being chosen as the big sale-drive, it correlates with the chance that top concerns there were quality or even generally honest approach (like, not padding it five times with 300 copies of what doesn't substantially differ from "Redundant Creature" template) how?.. 
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
Look at the character models for any MMORPG or, indeed, almost any popular computer game. These are the biggest markets.
My point precisely. If it's quite obviously and even demonstratively decorated the same way as tweenlight or wow of wowcruft, that's already a valid reason to assume it will not be any better than that. The same way as when you see a plastic clown in the storefront, it's not a good reason to expect anything more edible than mockdonuts to be found inside. A great time-saver, yes. 
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I think what a woman is dressed in and how she's portrayed are separate but related issues.
You see, that requires thinking. After not being stopped by the above-mentioned quality statement. I... er... have a hunch that two filters like these may narrow the set down enough to significantly change the representation. 
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Icelander, it sounds like you're saying we shouldn't do anything about racism, sexism, or bother being respectful to people, because it's not human nature?
No, we should unite on these issues, around the Community Organizers. And Pasternak, too - I didn't read him, but the Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia writes we should decisively condemn him an several issues, so... |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 04:45:17
|
| Aw, gee, what's wrong with cubit-length knee spikes? |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 04:50:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfhound75
Perhaps I'll draw up a picture of Cale in a plate mail speedo and chip-n-dale style bracers and submit it to CK's fan art under the notion of countering the stereotypical chain mail bikini.
Good Hunting!
Do it! 
I think it's safe to say that we all aren't going to come to anything even resembling a consensus on the issue. One person's reasonable armor is another's streetwalker garb, while another's reasonable armor is yet another soul's metallic burkah. The affording of courtesy versus the knowledge that there is no such thing as a right not to be offended will also always be something people will never agree on.
The arguments here are, to be honest, entirely academic. I do not think it unreasonable to say that the game companies will pay attention primarily to the opinions that are expressed with the wellspring of the almighty dollar (or pound/franc/lira/whatever), regardless of how that is expressed. We are free to patronize or boycott their efforts as we desire, and realistically, that is all they will listen to.
- OMH |
|
|
|
phineusbright247
Acolyte
1 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 05:46:03
|
i think a realistic Armour would give a more realistic look...where as 'Fantastic' is like playboy calander shoot..(well...the conservative version...maybe..)
so my personal choice has to realistic ones.....
|
stick games shooting,[url=http://www.stickgameslist.com/]stick online game[/url], stick figure games
music game, [url=http://www.musicgameslist.com/]play music game[/url],free music games |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 14:07:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Aw, gee, what's wrong with cubit-length knee spikes?
Pwent was fond of all sorts of spikes |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
Thauranil
Master of Realmslore
India
1591 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 14:56:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Aw, gee, what's wrong with cubit-length knee spikes?
Pwent was fond of all sorts of spikes
Good old Pwent. His armour was ridiculous but a lot of people loved it. |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 15:08:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Aw, gee, what's wrong with cubit-length knee spikes?
Pwent was fond of all sorts of spikes
Good old Pwent. His armour was ridiculous but a lot of people loved it.
Battle-ragers. Psht, why can't they just learn to discuss their problems like civilized people?  |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
Wolfhound75
Learned Scribe
USA
217 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 15:42:02
|
IMO, Pwent is a perfect example of "Somewhere Between".
His armor definately looks and gives the impression that it is armor. But it has some fantastic elements that would make it impractical or improbable. In the end though, there is no doubt that what he is wearing is in fact supposed to be a suit of armor and provide protection.
Good point and I wish I'd have thought to bring it up as an example earlier.
Good Hunting! |
"Firepower - if it's not working, you're not using enough." ~ Military Proverb
"If at first you do succeed, you must've rolled a natural 20!" |
|
|
|
Marc
Senior Scribe
658 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 15:48:41
|
| I like realistic armors, but with a few fantasy elements added on because medieval armors are almost all ugly. That's why I prefer settings with more advanced technology. |
. |
|
|
|
Varl
Learned Scribe
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 17:25:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Women can be sexy without showing unreasonable amounts of skin or being in ridiculous poses. If we want more women gamers, we need to recognize that.
I find the women in well drawn full body armor to be more sexy than those in fuzzy chainmail bikinis. Two bandaids and a cork art I can get anywhere. Well drawn women warriors, rogues and priests in armor you'd expect them to be in is exciting and much more interesting. |
I'm on a permanent vacation to the soul. -Tash Sultana |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 18:08:07
|
And yet, when I go to a con or a Renfaire, I find many of the women attending 'dressing sexy' (even when they don't exactly have what it takes to pull it off).
Which kinda disproves the whole theory that it is driving women away. The ones that like our hobby (and related interests) don't seem to mind the look, and even embrace it, in many cases.
And I know this is really going far out from the OT, but - whats wrong with woman looking attractive? Woman can't be warriors (or whatever) and still have 'sex appeal'? Are we now implying that woman who don't look like men can't fight as good as men? Look at this video - is she any less tough because she is attractive? (and thats not even what I was looking for - there is a new movie out with a female martial artist I was trying to find).
The idea that women have to be 'either/or' is antiquated. A woman does not have to look like a man to kick a man's arse.
We are looking at art from a world that never existed - a world wherein female (melee) fighters are considered equal to men in every way. Why wouldn't fashion (even in armor) represent that? Why would women on such a world not want to still appear feminine?
We are judging 'boobmail' by our own RW standards, which shouldn't apply at all. If I can believe in 50-ton flying lizards and people who throw lightning around, I can believe in powerful women who still want to look pretty. Hell, its just another weapon in their repertoire.
And like I keep saying, it doesn't really matter to me one way or the other - I just don't want to see a part of the genre die just because certain folks are offended by it. I do not think it 'turns off' as many possible fans as it brings in, both male and female. Should we start showing our barbarians as skinny, weak-kneed wimps, because most D&D customers feel 'inferior' because of the Conan-types? That would be ridiculous! Why is there a double standard? Male armor is just as silly and skimpy as female armor in fantasy/scify art.
Is the guy in This Picture any better protected then the woman? At least she has some sort of armor (useless as it is). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 22 Feb 2012 18:10:15 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 18:25:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
And yet, when I go to a con or a Renfaire, I find many of the women attending 'dressing sexy' (even when they don't exactly have what it takes to pull it off).
Which kinda disproves the whole theory that it is driving women away. The ones that like our hobby (and related interests) don't seem to mind the look, and even embrace it, in many cases.
And I know this is really going far out from the OT, but - whats wrong with woman looking attractive? Woman can't be warriors (or whatever) and still have 'sex appeal'? Are we now implying that woman who don't look like men can't fight as good as men? Look at this video - is she any less tough because she is attractive? (and thats not even what I was looking for - there is a new movie out with a female martial artist I was trying to find).
The idea that women have to be 'either/or' is antiquated. A woman does not have to look like a man to kick a man's arse.
We are looking at art from a world that never existed - a world wherein female (melee) fighters are considered equal to men in every way. Why wouldn't fashion (even in armor) represent that? Why would women on such a world not want to still appear feminine?
We are judging 'boobmail' by our own RW standards, which shouldn't apply at all. If I can believe in 50-ton flying lizards and people who throw lightning around, I can believe in powerful women who still want to look pretty. Hell, its just another weapon in their repertoire.
And like I keep saying, it doesn't really matter to me one way or the other - I just don't want to see a part of the genre die just because certain folks are offended by it. I do not think it 'turns off' as many possible fans as it brings in, both male and female. Should we start showing our barbarians as skinny, weak-kneed wimps, because most D&D customers feel 'inferior' because of the Conan-types? That would be ridiculous! Why is there a double standard? Male armor is just as silly and skimpy as female armor in fantasy/scify art.
Is the guy in This Picture any better protected then the woman? At least she has some sort of armor (useless as it is).
Individuals are not necessarily representative of the larger population, something that has been pointed out in these halls more than once, in regards to the edition wars.
And nowhere has anyone said women in fantasy art can't look attractive. The discussion has been on women being depicted in unrealistic, unprotective armor for the purpose of playing on the sex appeal, as opposed to wearing more reasonable armor that does not obscure the woman's figure but does offer protection. Some of the Elmore art I linked to shows exactly that -- attractive women, with armor that would protect more than their breasts and bikini area.
As I've already said and been quoted on -- women can be sexy without showing unreasonable amounts of skin or being in ridiculous poses. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Zireael
Master of Realmslore
Poland
1190 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 19:07:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfhound75
IMO, Pwent is a perfect example of "Somewhere Between".
His armor definately looks and gives the impression that it is armor. But it has some fantastic elements that would make it impractical or improbable. In the end though, there is no doubt that what he is wearing is in fact supposed to be a suit of armor and provide protection.
Good point and I wish I'd have thought to bring it up as an example earlier.
Good Hunting!
Exactly, and that's the type of things I'd go to. Cool looking helmets/armor, wings, spikes, that sort of stuff, without displaying undue unrealistic amounts of skin. |
SiNafay Vrinn, the daughter of Lloth, from Ched Nasad!
http://zireael07.wordpress.com/ |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 19:48:42
|
.... diito rw issues should not apply in a fantasy game..... though I can agree with the 1 ft spiked shoulder pads.....
(and btw when the concept of this thread came up, did anyone ever consider the fact that in a sword fight or any melee type of melee fight, one is no just going to stand still, even that full plate was designed to move with the body.... oh but this is a rw deal isnt it...." |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 19:49:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zireael
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfhound75
IMO, Pwent is a perfect example of "Somewhere Between".
His armor definately looks and gives the impression that it is armor. But it has some fantastic elements that would make it impractical or improbable. In the end though, there is no doubt that what he is wearing is in fact supposed to be a suit of armor and provide protection.
Good point and I wish I'd have thought to bring it up as an example earlier.
Good Hunting!
Exactly, and that's the type of things I'd go to. Cool looking helmets/armor, wings, spikes, that sort of stuff, without displaying undue unrealistic amounts of skin.
I would count Pwent a solidly 'fantastical' and, as noted earlier, much more fantastic than going into combat naked or wearing only jewelry and other ornaments (which happened).
The extensive spikes of his armour make is basically non-functional without powerful magic to handle the myriad of ergonomic problems.
And this is just the reason I voted against 'fantastical' and prefer 'realistic'. It's not that I don't admit that some magic-users in a fantasy world might create impractical armour. It's just that I think those look stupid and detract from my enjoyment of the art. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
Wolfhound75
Learned Scribe
USA
217 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 22:32:10
|
Thanks Ice. The discussion is finally where I wanted it to be - how the armor is depicted, not what someone calls armor.
Pwent's armor definatly has some fantastic characteristics to it but it gives, in my mind anyway, the solid impression that it is definately armor and not 'clothing'. That what he is wearing is designed to absorb, deflect, and attenuate blows he receives during melee. I've never actually seen an official WizBro released picture of him so I'm basing all this on description from novels.
Does his armor have some fantastic, and IMO bordering on absurd with the overly large helmet spike, elements? Sure. But in description, it definately has all the pieces you'd find on a set of plate, has proper articulation (movement) ability or he wouldn't be able to thrash around in his seizure-like fashion, and is definatly capable of taking a pounding and providing protection to the wearer.
Ridges on armor are not an unknown feature, in fact they serve the same purpose for armor as a blade fuller does for a sword, they provide additional strength. A quick Google search of armors, helmets, etc. will show many different styles of ridges. To extend some of them a bit and sharpen them is not that much of a stretch. As long as they're not located in absurd places like anywhere the wearer's body contacts itself, under armpits, between legs, etc. it shouldn't present too much of a challenge to draw it. If you want more realistic looking ridged armor, then the ridges need to be oriented on the piece correctly. For example, putting vertical ridges on a chest plate creates the same design flaw as individual breast humps - channels that trap the blade and prevent its deflection away from the centerline. Put them horizontally however and they deflect the blow and provide a substantial means of preventing the blade from deflecting up under the chin.
Spikes are also not unknown. Granted, his helmet spike is even described as rediculously large and the impression I get is something akin to a short, light lance attached to the top of his helmet. That, to me, is pushing well into the fantastic realm. But elbow spikes on the cowter, spiked gauntlets which are even in the PHB, or spiked sabatons are not at all that far-fetched.
No where in the descriptions of Pwent's armor do I feel that the impression that all of those spikes, excepting the mentioned helmet spike, are overly large. Nor do I get the impression that the ridges are rediculously huge. A ridge of approximately 2-3cm would provide enough space for a sharpened edge and not, IMO, impede movement substantially. The armor would need to be a well-planned design though, meaning you can't just randomly apply the ridges if you expect to have the mobility necessary to engage in his unique fighting style.
The line of exactly where something goes from Realistic to Somewhere Between to Fantastic though is always going to be a grey area. It is impossible to establish because every scribe is going to have their own opinion on what makes something Fantastic based upon their mental image of what that individual looks like when they read the character's description.
Good Hunting! |
"Firepower - if it's not working, you're not using enough." ~ Military Proverb
"If at first you do succeed, you must've rolled a natural 20!" |
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 22:55:14
|
Very true, Wolfhound. The placement of the spikes is critical. Some places would weaken the armour only a little, whereas others would basically negate the deflective capabilities of the armour, which is a major flaw.
I haven't seen a canon picture of Pwent either, but I'm going off the range of online depictions. They all epitomise, to me, the 'fantastical' armour design philosophy, i.e. artists who believe in giving the imagination free reign in portraying fantasy settings, sometimes to the extent that nothing in these pictures looks anything like anything found on Earth, at any time. As it happens, I think of good fantasy as speculative fiction, not merely stream-of-consciousness wish-fulfillment*.
Our imagination produces more interesting results if it is used in a structured way, i.e. to ask 'what if' questions about the nature of reality and then follow the fantastical consequences to their logical conclusion. Just because the natural laws of a given world are different than ours doesn't mean that there is no internal logic in the world. The evolutionary pressures and the cultural factors that led to armour in a world with magic and monsters would be different from ours. But that doesn't mean that some things would not still hold true in both.
Many of the most interesting forms of art arise from breaking the 'rules' of an art form as it is conventionally approached. But in order to know when breaking the rules is better than following them, people generally have to learn the basic skills of their art. I'm not objecting to artists trying to design and represent new types of armour, never seen in our world. I'm asking that before they do so, they develop a solid understanding of what people look like, what armour looks like, how people move and how the armour must move with them. If people just unleash their imagination and draw armour without ever having seen a suit of it, the result is not just fantastical, it is farcical.
To return to Pwent, even if someone drew his spiked armour in such a way that the spikes were not, as the crop of pictures of Pwent that Google yields, basically negating the protective value of the suit by ensuring that no blow is ever deflected but instead hits pre-made weakspots, we have to remember that the protective capabilities of armour are not the only consideration for their utility.
Knee spikes, for example, might not weaken the armour all that much, but they interfere with a lot of things that armoured people might have to do. Even on level ground, soldiers have to be able to have enough freedom of movement to cross their legs without tripping themselves. Not to mention the effects on formation.
And that's on level ground. Dwarves supposed to be able to fight in caves and tunnels would have to be able to crawl, climb and jump under and over obstacles. These spikes would be in the way and not in any minor way either.
As for the helmet spike, the less said about that, the better.
*Not that free-form daydreams are a bad thing. I just think that they work better for perrsonal consumption, where each person can tailor them to their tastes, than as commercial entertainment or art that appeals to me. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 23:21:08
|
thought there was one of pwent..... and there is.
its in the readers guide to the legend of drizzt.....
... and then some ..... spikes...... to many spikes...... |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Wolfhound75
Learned Scribe
USA
217 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 23:31:27
|
I think you and I are in the same ballpark on Pwent.
I also took some time to Google images of him but the images that are there don't fit my mental picture of him based upon his description. Sure there are points in the battle sequence where he is specifically stated as smashing a spike into an opponent but the helmet excepted, it is usually a gauntlet or the elbow that is stated as containing the spike. Nowhere from description do I get the impression that these spikes are overly large as depicted by some of the artwork. Attached to the back of a gauntlet and designed to be driven home with a punch, a spike or series of spikes in the 4-6cm range would still punch through the thickness of most armors yet remain unobtrusive enough to not significantly impact movement. An elbow spike with proper angling for a smash-style strike with the forearm cocked would likewise benefit the wearer and since, barring injury, most elbows don't get bent backward to the point where the spike would stab the wearer it also wouldn't impinge on movement and it would add additional protection to the back of the elbow by ensuring that blades coming down the upper arm don't get hung up in the plate joint.
I distinctly remember multiple times during reading that his armor was described as mostly ridges with a statement like, Pwent tromped away, the ridges on his armor squealing obnoxiously.... This might be another example of what I was referring to earlier in the discussion where the artist doesn't take the time to match their artwork to the description of the individual. Big spikes 'look cool' when you can make the individual look like a porcupine on steroids. However, my mental image of him if you ignore the fact about the description talking more about the ridges in his armor and cover him in spikes would be more akin to the way the character Pinface is portrayed. It would also fit his fighting style of close, grapple, & thrash much more than the large spikes as portrayed in the google search. Spikes that large would really only be useful on the initial impact. Afterward, they may actually impede his ablity to deal damage to his opponent by holding him away from the target since he doesn't have the inertia to drive them through his target's armor. Smaller spikes though would actually contribute to his damage in close by allowing them to find their way through the gaps in the armor's protections.
Good Hunting!
I'm right with you on the |
"Firepower - if it's not working, you're not using enough." ~ Military Proverb
"If at first you do succeed, you must've rolled a natural 20!" |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2012 : 05:40:09
|
Found another great artist - he's done a few book covers, so he's pro. Definitely another one WotC should use for 5e.
THIS is probably some folks upward limit of unrealistic - she's fully covered, and yet retains a nice femininity about her (and the tiger's cool, to).
Do yourselves a favor and peruse his gallery - really nice stuff there, and not 'comic-bookish'.
EDIT: I found an illustration he did for them, so they are already aware of his talent. Definite Lockwood-caliber.
EDIT2: And now I've found a bunch of stuff he did for Pathfinder. Nevermind - he is exactly where he belongs.
[b]EDIT3:]/b] And finally, I have found a bunch of stuff he did for 4e - why is it all I noticed (in those books) was the cartoonish stuff? His Dark Sun art was off-the-chain. Fire the comic-book guy and stick with this one for 5e (an edition should have a certain style, and his is compatible with Todd Lockwood's). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 23 Feb 2012 06:00:03 |
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2012 : 05:49:33
|
While there is indeed every chance that this is an adventurer who found 'fashionable' armour made for an elf noble and had it altered to fit her, I simply don't find the artistic decorations of stylised armour as sleekly beautiful as purely functional designs.
Armour where you can see the thought that went into making it easier to maintain in the field, with comfortable all-purpose footwear and no 'frills', just sends a different message. It looks lethal and strangely, savagely beautiful in the same way that a real battlefield sword, not frilly replicas or civilian fashion-pieces, look beautiful.
I'm not saying that adventurers wouldn't end up wearing a lot of armour made for aesthetic purposes as well as functional ones. I'm just saying that seeing a character in a 'plain' armour, I think of him/her as professional, dangerous and capable. Anyone with elaborate decorations on his or her armour gets mentally filed into 'amateur'. Maybe a talented and magically potent amateur, but still, the feel I get is of a someone less formidable.
A lot of historical warriors did get decorations for their armour, don't misunderstand me. The difference is the difference between 'soldier' and 'warrior'. The warrior thinks about glory, reputation, single combat and either Valhalla or coming home to camp to be taken care of by lesser mortals. The soldier thinks of the mission and s/he knows that s/he's the one who has to take care of the gear.
I find soldiers to be infinitely more admirable than warriors. And history has shown that while one warrior may stand up to and even defeat one soldier, ten soldiers will defeat ten warriors and a thousand soldiers will defeat more than an order of magnitude more warriors. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
Edited by - Icelander on 23 Feb 2012 05:54:29 |
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2012 : 06:00:54
|
A good example of the kind of thing I mean are the armours from Lord of the Rings movie trilogy. There were a lot of different types, with some of them being way over in the 'fantastical' range, which made sense, given that a lot of the armour seen was made for purposes of intimidation, ceremony or artistic expression as much as for pure combat purposes.
To me, the most beautiful armour in the movie, by far, were the ones that the Rohirrim were wearing. They might have had some decorations to identify certain noble or royal warriors, but only in ways that didn't detract from the utility of the armour. Their style was functional, shaped by constant warfare, and it was awesomely cool. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Fantasy Armor
