Stupid Fantasy Armours

While I accept that designers usually go for the rule of cool, there are limits to what I can stomach.

The cause of this insanity are likely English funeral effigies, which often look like the person is wearing a loose-hanging surcoat along with plate protection for the limbs.
Click to expand...
Of course if people used their brain, they would come to conclusion that surcoat was intended to be worn over the breastplate. It doesn't just allow the noble to show his heraldry but it also prevents the sun to warm up the metal plate too much, cooking him in his armor. But common sense is not all that common.
 
I think the Narnia movies (namely the first two) are the only medieval/fantasy movies/shows I've seen where the heroes wore their helmets. Well, until their helmets got knocked off and lost mid battle, but still. It's notable that the heroes and villains are kings, so they get distinctive decorated helmets and are thus immediately recognizable to the audience. The helmet visors/eye slits are also designed to be big enough (and due to good lighting) so that the audience can still see the character's eyes, so the facial acting still comes through.

 
Val the Moofia Boss said:
I think the Narnia movies (namely the first two) are the only medieval/fantasy movies/shows I've seen where the heroes wore their helmets. Well, until their helmets got knocked off and lost mid battle, but still. It's notable that the heroes and villains are kings, so they get distinctive decorated helmets and are thus immediately recognizable to the audience. The helmet visors/eye slits are also designed to be big enough (and due to good lighting) so that the audience can still see the character's eyes, so the facial acting still comes through.

Click to expand...


Yep, that is the detail I really liked about those movies. Doesn't fix the mistakes they did make, but still, A for effort.
 
women_warriors__horny_viking_vs_historical_viking_by_gambargin_d75ye03-fullview.jpg


Call me weird, but I prefer the armor on the right
 
Oddly, though, boob plate is surprisingly realistic. Is it perfect? No, but enhancing physical characteristics has always been part of armor, from weird looking codpieces (schlong armor) to narrow waists. If enough females fought in a society which didn't suppress female sexuality, I'd expect boobplate to be a thing.
 
Abhorsen said:
Oddly, though, boob plate is surprisingly realistic. Is it perfect? No, but enhancing physical characteristics has always been part of armor, from weird looking codpieces (schlong armor) to narrow waists. If enough females fought in a society which didn't suppress female sexuality, I'd expect boobplate to be a thing.
Click to expand...

Actually, narrow waist was primarily a functional thing. Full plate armour had to be a tight fit in order to maintain maximum mobility, with the only exception to this rule being the chest area - ribcage isn't exactly able to twist, yet it is a rather important area, so protection in that area was given priority over mobility.

Even the supremely ugly 17th century European armours displayed narrowing at the waist:
7cead9841c46f39ab5f124e9734e9824.jpg


Of course, it might well have had aesthetic purpose as well... but primary cause was functional.
 
Nilfgaardian armor:

intro-1579883337.jpg


Aldarion said:
Actually, narrow waist was primarily a functional thing. Full plate armour had to be a tight fit in order to maintain maximum mobility, with the only exception to this rule being the chest area - ribcage isn't exactly able to twist, yet it is a rather important area, so protection in that area was given priority over mobility.

Even the supremely ugly 17th century European armours displayed narrowing at the waist:

Of course, it might well have had aesthetic purpose as well... but primary cause was functional.
Click to expand...

scan00032_103.jpg
 
Last edited:
Abhorsen said:
Oddly, though, boob plate is surprisingly realistic. Is it perfect? No, but enhancing physical characteristics has always been part of armor, from weird looking codpieces (schlong armor) to narrow waists. If enough females fought in a society which didn't suppress female sexuality, I'd expect boobplate to be a thing.
Click to expand...

Considering that the Romans had muscle armor, yeah, probably.

As for sexy armor (or lack of armor, as the case may be), I'm cool with it in an obvious fantasy setting. I'm cool with Conan going topless into battle (seems to me historically there were some warriors who went full nude), so why should he have all the fun? I'm an equal-opportunity kind of guy. :sneaky:
 
Captain X said:
Considering that the Romans had muscle armor, yeah, probably.

As for sexy armor (or lack of armor, as the case may be), I'm cool with it in an obvious fantasy setting. I'm cool with Conan going topless into battle (seems to me historically there were some warriors who went full nude), so why should he have all the fun? I'm an equal-opportunity kind of guy. :sneaky:
Click to expand...
Some Gauls warriors fought romans full nude.Well,if you have no good armour,you could as well fight naked.
 
How stupid fantasy armor is is directly related to how much magic is in the setting.

In a high magic setting, where it is common for weapons to be enchanted to be able to say, cut through non-magical materials with ease, armor design is going to end up very different and focused on different things than in a low magic setting that is basically just like Earth except for a few strange creatures.

In a setting where magic is common and offers greater protection than full plate, well, I'd expect to see very little full plate with armor being mostly ornamental with the actual protection coming from the armor itself. In those kinds of settings I'd expect you'd see all the armor be designed in ways to showcase some ideal or idea about the people wearing it, it would be about sending a message.
 
Indeed. In line with @S'task's point I'd propose Claymore, which looks like stupid fantasy armor but actually makes sense in setting due to magic.

o9yiLCq.jpeg

EK1tYsT.jpeg


Claymore gals tend to wear a heavy gorget with extra armor at the back of the neck and massive anime pauldrons with light armor on their arms and thighs and nothing but a body stocking protecting their organs, which looks stupid on the face of it. However, their powerset includes supersonic speed and Wolverine-tier regeneration; the only thing that can actually kill them is decapitation. A stab right through the heart won't even slow a Claymore down. The only viable tactic for taking one out if you can't get a decapitation blow early on is to first remove the arms and legs so they can't move then remove the head. Going with armor that provides good protection for the neck and shoulders, and the best you can put on their arms without compromising speed (their enemies tend to be supersonic too) actually makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top