Pretty much this.
You don't say? But wait a minute...Originally Posted by Max_Killjoy
It's almost like the pros and cons of more or less armor is somehow connected to how it works out in fantasy roleplaying games that are D&D-like. It was probably aliens.Originally Posted by ORIGINAL POST
You're proud of your pecks. Amusingly, an armor that grants +0 armor is still potentially useful in D&D.Important point -- if you're going to the expense and trouble of wearing around armor, why wear armor that's useless?
But here's some more pictures of Mialee.
Mialee #1
Mialee #2
Mialee #3
Hennet as a bonus.
EDIT:
It's no more snuff material than swashbuckling pirates. That's factual. You can't say characters like Mialee are snuff bait if Captain Jack Sparrow isn't too.The only preferences that "this character is going to die" would seem to appeal to is known as "snuff". If anyone doesn't know what that refers to, looking it up is probably going to get you NSFW hits.
And which fantasy setting is that by the way? Every one I've ever seen doesn't really mesh with that idea. We've got armor spikes (terrible design), helmets with flashy horns and stuff on them, spiked chains, and all kinds of goofy (but awesome) stuff.The problem is, you keep looking at this as an issue of subjective aesthetics, when it's not -- it's an issue of objective functionality. And in the case of settings that claim to be historically accurate, grounded, or inspired, there's the issue of objective accuracy or at least the attempt at it, as well.
Or maybe you mean NOT-D&D, in which case, I guess that also includes things like Star Wars, Star Trek, and lots of other fantasy and/or sci-fi settings where people go about and fight and do crazy stuff without wearing armor.