I mean... to be perfectly fair, it is a lot more practical than most female armour we see here.
I would worry about crotch chaffing though. Usually you would have couple of clothes layer underneath your plate, but this seems almost skintight.
I dunno why people say this, skimpy armor isn't even common nowadays. People also ignore how guys run around half-naked in games too, I dunno why this is treated as a '' female '' thing rofl.
In WoW for example some people complained that Sylvanas and Jaina showed midriff. Both of them are ranged fighters, meanwhile you've got guys running around all over the place in WoW allergic to shirts in melee combat and no one questions it. Shirtless men as main villains in WoW even became a meme at some point because of how common it was. Ppl flip out about Whitemane showing legs being '' impractical '' then Herod runs around as a melee fighter wearing full armor except his completely unarmored topless torso rofl. Imagine if he was a female character people would complain about it.
People are just weirdly hypercritical and nitpicky about it when it's female characters, but no one questions or points at it when it's male characters. Male characters can run around half-naked or in the most absurd and unrealistic armor imaginable, but a womans chestplate has even a slight feminine curvature and suddenly people start pretending to care about practicality it gets ridiculous.
It's just hard to take it seriously and also extremely annoying how people literally only talk about this when it's female characters. But the same standards are never applied to male characters.
Chilly93 said: But the same standards are never applied to male characters.
You have a point, usually in settinngs with super impractical armor male tend to be even worse, having usually some added stuff like giant pauldrons that would reduce movility a lot and some added spikes.
But as the comment said
Elmithian said: ...we see here.
Here in danbooru I think there are more impractical female armors than male. Even if one of the main reasons we have so many practical or rather "covering a decent amount of skin" is because generic background/unnamed characters tend to be male and background characters tend to have less flashy armor.
That being said there's also an awfull amount of recurring "armor crimes" in male fantasy armor, but some aren't as noticeable because they have some clothing(that doesn't really look armorish tbh) instead of skin. For example post #5375732 , he may be decently covered but he has some gaps here and there which look fully unprotected like the groin, the groin for some reason tends to be left unprotected in many decent looking fantasy armor.
But guess you're right , some people want 0 female features on an armor even if irl there are things like abs on armor and codpieces.
It's just hard to take it seriously and also extremely annoying how people literally only talk about this when it's female characters. But the same standards are never applied to male characters.
Because male characters are never designed with their dicks on display. In the majority of these cases, men are the ones handling these designs for both male and female characters, and often the female characters are intentionally given impractical designs that show off sex appeal, while the men can range anywhere from being fully covered to at most being shirtless.
Most people aren't actually complaining about the impractically of female armor, they're complaining about the impractically of female armor only being there at all to show off T&A. Men wearing stupid armor are supposed to look cool, women wearing stupid armor are supposed to be sexy or arousing.
justAweirdo said:
But guess you're right , some people want 0 female features on an armor even if irl there are things like abs on armor and codpieces.
The abs found on historical armors weren't form fitted to the abs of their wearers, however, they're just part of the design and don't detract from the armor's affectiveness.
"Boob armor" however runs into two issues:
1. If the boob pockets are form fitted to the wearer's breasts, then the armor would be absurdly uncomfortable. Think about how often a woman has to readjust her bra, then imagine having that same problem with metal crushing your breasts instead of fabric. 2. If they're not form fitted, then they serve zero purpose, and could just have been a normal set of armor. At worst, wearing armor that announces yourself as a woman to the enemy might just put a very unwanted target on your back.
blindVigil said: Most people aren't actually complaining about the impractically of female armor, they're complaining about the impractically of female armor only being there at all to show off T&A.
I've seen people not being explicit on that here and there, but maybe they just don't wanna say it explicitly for demonization or just think it's obvious. People that really care about practicality also tend to dislike the rule of cool abuse, so they would also point those flashy stabby armors or 40K tier pauldrons if they where really bothered by practicality.
Abs and or boobs fitting on armor sound so dam awful, It's a bit weird how people just put a bunch of moving pieces of steel on skin as if it was nothing.
blindVigil said: 2. If they're not form fitted, then they serve zero purpose, and could just have been a normal set of armor. At worst, wearing armor that announces yourself as a woman to the enemy might just put a very unwanted target on your back.
I guess they would have the same purpose as codpieces, sometimes humans just show off even if they compromise a bit practicality. Announcing yourself as a woman in your standard high fantasy doesn't seem to be a problem that much as gender seems to be purely cosmetic in most of those settings especially in games.
I mean sure boobs on armor is pretty stupid but I just thought that maybe they aren't as silly as other stuff they do in fantasy armor. But honestly plate armor really shines when you barely can tell anything about who is underneath, so you indeed make a good point.
