Welp,classic tolkien elves often depicted using heavy armor and shield.
aside from that,I myself just hate bikini "armor" it's just plain dumb and too much sex appeal.
This. So very much this. Women in realistic armor is my interest (I wouldn't go as far as calling it a fetish). I really dislike fantasy armor with more naked skin than armor.
This. So very much this. Women in realistic armor is my interest (I wouldn't go as far as calling it a fetish). I really dislike fantasy armor with more naked skin than armor.
It's a peeve of mine too, only for the fact that bikini armor is such a ham-handed justification and usually looks awful in the setting. Blatant sex appeal is blatant. It's much nicer to see girls portrayed elegantly rather than seductively sometimes.
I've been growing rather weary of skimpy female armor (although I don't hate it), and as such would prefer more realistic armor.
The double standard in the level of skimpiness between male and female armor is what I find the most jarring part of it (applies to outfits in general). If the general levels were about the same, I think it wouldn't be so grating, but that's definitely not the way things work out in most series.
I am one of the few who like idea of girls in skimpy armor but being of an agile or stealth class, and the men as more armored and heavy class. It seems to compliment each other well in my opinion. You don't just charge into battle with one type of approach, you have a primary assault and a secondary to quickly flank and target exposed weaknesses.
I am one of the few who like idea of girls in skimpy armor but being of an agile or stealth class, and the men as more armored and heavy class. It seems to compliment each other well in my opinion. You don't just charge into battle with one type of approach, you have a primary assault and a secondary to quickly flank and target exposed weaknesses.
The thing about skimpy armor is that it is totally useless - or even downright disadvantageous. It is only useful for looking sexy. Also, secondary attacks and flanking manouevres were usually done by cavalry, due to their much superior speed and manouvreability, combined with a substantial force. And whether or not you had one or more means of attack/defense in any given battle depended entirely on your army, available resources and tactics. Sometimes it really was down to just charge ahead with everything you've got.
I am one of the few who like idea of girls in skimpy armor but being of an agile or stealth class, and the men as more armored and heavy class. It seems to compliment each other well in my opinion. You don't just charge into battle with one type of approach, you have a primary assault and a secondary to quickly flank and target exposed weaknesses.
There is a reason why Leather Armor existed before.
The thing about skimpy armor is that it is totally useless - or even downright disadvantageous. It is only useful for looking sexy. Also, secondary attacks and flanking manouevres were usually done by cavalry, due to their much superior speed and manouvreability, combined with a substantial force. And whether or not you had one or more means of attack/defense in any given battle depended entirely on your army, available resources and tactics. Sometimes it really was down to just charge ahead with everything you've got.
I am one of the few who like idea of girls in skimpy armor but being of an agile or stealth class, and the men as more armored and heavy class. It seems to compliment each other well in my opinion. You don't just charge into battle with one type of approach, you have a primary assault and a secondary to quickly flank and target exposed weaknesses.
Why does the woman have to be the lightly armoured stealth/agility class?
Why does the woman have to be the lightly armoured stealth/agility class?
Emancipation. Also rule of Damsel in Distress: a Thief would be more likely to be a damsel in distress compared to fully equipped, heavy-armored Knight...although in case of Orcs they'd be both endangered *wink wink*