Dungeons and Dreamboats VIII: Bulletproof Nudity

[Leon]

Dwarf, Barefisted, Red hair (some not)

Spoiler

Show

[Spiritus]

Thanks! I appreciate it.

[Roxxy]

So not an image, but something very interesting nonetheless:



Shad's argument, for those who aren't going to watch, is that Medieval and early Renaissance armor was designed to emphasize male sexual traits, insofar as this could be done without emphasizing safety on the battlefield. Namely, a very thin waist was often considered attractive on a man, so armor was designed to be narrow in that area in regions where that was the ideal, and large codpieces were very often fashionable. Therefore, Shad makes the argument that boob plate on armor specifically designed for women wouldn't be out of line. If historical male armor emphasizes an attractive waistline and a very sizeable manhood, armor which emphasizes female breasts would make complete sense, so long as the means of emphasis doesn't compromise defensive ability. So boob plate is actually realistic and perfectly in line with armor design philosophy, but any sort of exposed cleavage is still ridiculous.

I think it's a very interesting argument, at the very least.

[Keltest]

So not an image, but something very interesting nonetheless:



Shad's argument, for those who aren't going to watch, is that Medieval and early Renaissance armor was designed to emphasize male sexual traits, insofar as this could be done without emphasizing safety on the battlefield. Namely, a very thin waist was often considered attractive on a man, so armor was designed to be narrow in that area in regions where that was the ideal, and large codpieces were very often fashionable. Therefore, Shad makes the argument that boob plate on armor specifically designed for women wouldn't be out of line. If historical male armor emphasizes an attractive waistline and a very sizeable manhood, armor which emphasizes female breasts would make complete sense, so long as the means of emphasis doesn't compromise defensive ability. So boob plate is actually realistic and perfectly in line with armor design philosophy, but any sort of exposed cleavage is still ridiculous.

I think it's a very interesting argument, at the very least.

Im skeptical. While I have no doubt that there was armor made to be ornate and visually appealing, it was often separate from actual battlefield armor. To say nothing of the fact that there were so many layers worn under the actual plate that a boob plate would not actually conform to the shape of a woman's torso at that point.

[Roxxy]

Im skeptical. While I have no doubt that there was armor made to be ornate and visually appealing, it was often separate from actual battlefield armor. To say nothing of the fact that there were so many layers worn under the actual plate that a boob plate would not actually conform to the shape of a woman's torso at that point.

Shad is specifically talking about battlefield armor. Men did in fact wear thin waisted, large schlonged armor into battle.

As to boob plate, It's not supposed to conform to the shape of the torso, anymoreso than a codpiece conforms to the shape (and size) of the penis. A lot of armor also tends to overemphasize the shape of the hips, because of the narrow waistline. In fact, fitted armor already has a noticeable chest bulge, which doesn't conform to the shape of a man's torso. It's there to direct blows away to either side. What Shad argues is that this existing bulge could easily be moved higher and a bit out to emphasize the breasts, similar to a codpiece, which would fit into existing armor design philosophy, while not negatively impacting the ability of the armor to block incoming blows.

[Max_Killjoy]

Some of those supposedly "enhancing" features on armor for men have nothing to do with sexuality, and everything to do with making the armor work as armor, in terms of what fit works best for movement, how gaps are covered, what angles work best for deflection and for where armor needs to be thicker and where it can be thinner, and so on.

[Roxxy]

Some of those supposedly "enhancing" features on armor for men have nothing to do with sexuality, and everything to do with making the armor work as armor, in terms of what fit works best for movement, how gaps are covered, what angles work best for deflection and for where armor needs to be thicker and where it can be thinner, and so on.

I don't think that really applies to the schlong armor, though, and, while articulated plate does need to rest the weight on your waist, the narrow waisted style isn't really the only way to go about that. To my knowledge, while the lorica segmentata did require the absence of a gut in order to distribute weight properly, it wasn't really narrow waisted compared to later European armors.

[Mendicant]

IDK, a big codpiece or a narrow waist don't fundamentally compromise the armor the way decorative boobs would. I'm especially skeptical of the "move the dome higher" argument, since the ventral dome in most cuirasses is as much or more vertically aligned as it s horizontally aligned--it just wont look like boobs that much. I'm not an armor expert, but I don't think you'd want it that high at all unless it was basically a vertical ridge--you're gonna guide weapons towards your head and neck otherwise.

I think he's right that people's aesthetics influenced design--hell, greek/roman muscle cuirasses were a thing and most likely were worn in actual combat at certain points--so it's not at all implausible that in a world where women regularly operated in plate that plate would often reflect people's idea of a feminine aesthetic. I just don't think boobplate would have been the way to go unless it was pretty subtle.

[Mike_G]

I'm going to jump in with the group who think that the "breasts" on a breastplate would compromise it's effectiveness.

Traditional keel shaped breastplates direct force off to the side if you get hit pretty much anywhere on the breastplate. Having boobs on it would direct the force of some blows to the sternum, which is a really bad idea.

[Lord Torath]

I'm going to jump in with the group who think that the "breasts" on a breastplate would compromise it's effectiveness.

Traditional keel shaped breastplates direct force off to the side if you get hit pretty much anywhere on the breastplate. Having boobs on it would direct the force of some blows to the sternum, which is a really bad idea.

I was going to say this very thing. You could, I suppose, have a break-away boobplate on top of the regular breastplate, something thin and lightly attached, if you really wanted to emphasize your breasts without compromising the effectiveness of your armor.

[exelsisxax]

Cleavage in armor unquestionably reduces its effectiveness. You are adding material to deflect strikes towards your vitals: that is a design fail. The proportions of that particular boob plate are also quite absurd for people actually present on the battlefield. If we look at female athletes, a... generous top-heaviness is the first thing to go. That armor would be restricted to an extremely narrow range of women with a weird fat distribution AND a very particular level of fitness.

So sure, put that thing up next to those ridiculous gold leaf and 2000 hours of enamel engraving sets of decorative or trophy suits. But that isn't real armor.

This is real armor. It's just male armor with size adjustments for a female. You want to not die, you don't make boob cups.

Spoiler: real armor

Show

[DrownsInCancer]

Aesthetic wise, I like the male armor fitted for females. Realistic wise, if men's armor accentuated thin waists and large codpieces, it would make sense that women would have boobplates too. But that was then, and women weren't allowed to serve. I see this argument as an argument of both perference and something of realistic value too. Also this thread is a godsend, found some great portraits that sparked some great NPC ideas. Bless this thread. Also can I get a tiefling female with blue skin, dark hair, and sorcerer that is not Jester?

[hymer]

Also can I get a tiefling female with blue skin, dark hair, and sorcerer that is not Jester?

Spoiler: Will this do?

Show

Also, have you tried looking for draenei?

[exelsisxax]

Aesthetic wise, I like the male armor fitted for females. Realistic wise, if men's armor accentuated thin waists and large codpieces, it would make sense that women would have boobplates too. But that was then, and women weren't allowed to serve. I see this argument as an argument of both perference and something of realistic value too. Also this thread is a godsend, found some great portraits that sparked some great NPC ideas. Bless this thread. Also can I get a tiefling female with blue skin, dark hair, and sorcerer that is not Jester?

Again, as max_killjoy mentioned, these are not aesthetic choices. They are design elements of plate armor to make it more protective. The codpiece is big because it needs to protect your entire groin area, including the upper legs. You'd see the exact same thing on female armor. Some decorative, useless armor suits have stupid codpiece designs because they are not for function, just as some suits for females have boob cups.

Real armor has a boob plate, singular, that deflects blows outwards - in both male and female suits. There's just a difference in contour. No real armor has boob cups.

[Mendicant]

Again, as max_killjoy mentioned, these are not aesthetic choices. They are design elements of plate armor to make it more protective. The codpiece is big because it needs to protect your entire groin area, including the upper legs. You'd see the exact same thing on female armor. Some decorative, useless armor suits have stupid codpiece designs because they are not for function, just as some suits for females have boob cups.

Real armor has a boob plate, singular, that deflects blows outwards - in both male and female suits. There's just a difference in contour. No real armor has boob cups.

Codpieces and wasp waists were definitely influenced by aesthetics and saw combat; the landsknechts, for instance, had pretty oversized codpieces that were well past the point of strict utility. As long as doing so doesn't come with a serious cost, people will shape equipment to their aesthetic preferences. A sōmen gets turned into a demon face, a helmet gets more crest than strictly necessary, etc.

[Keltest]

Codpieces and wasp waists were definitely influenced by aesthetics and saw combat; the landsknechts, for instance, had pretty oversized codpieces that were well past the point of strict utility. As long as doing so doesn't come with a serious cost, people will shape equipment to their aesthetic preferences. A sōmen gets turned into a demon face, a helmet gets more crest than strictly necessary, etc.

While this is technically true, a boobplate will never be anything other than lethally dangerous to actually wear into a fight. Theres a vast difference between taking an existing design element and changing it slightly for aesthetics, and changing it such that it dramatically changes its function.

[danielxcutter]

Hmm... there should be something possible for that, if not to the degree fantasy would have you believe.

[Keltest]

Hmm... there should be something possible for that, if not to the degree fantasy would have you believe.

Why? Sometimes an idea that seems dumb on the surface really is just that dumb.

[LordCdrMilitant]

Honestly, I kind of doubt a boob plate would have any significant detrimental effect [the fact that it would certainly be uncomfortable notwithstanding].

Anyway, back to the shell-trap... I don't think it matters. Being a shell-trap isn't relevant if the penetrator in question won't penetrate anyway. Cutting or stabbing through a steel plate is a largely futile endeavor, and it's not relying primarily on it's deflective properties. Adding cups wouldn't magically compromise the plate's structural integrity. Also, that region is the best guarded part of the body.

That said, I'm sure fighting with cloth, chain, then a steel plate wedged between my breasts would certainly be less comfortable than otherwise, and might impair my ability to fight well, but that doesn't have anything to do with armor weakpoints and shell traps.

[Keltest]

Honestly, I kind of doubt a boob plate would have any significant detrimental effect [the fact that it would certainly be uncomfortable notwithstanding].

Anyway, back to the shell-trap... I don't think it matters. Being a shell-trap isn't relevant if the penetrator in question won't penetrate anyway. Cutting or stabbing through a steel plate is a largely futile endeavor, and it's not relying primarily on it's deflective properties. Adding cups wouldn't magically compromise the plate's structural integrity. Also, that region is the best guarded part of the body.

That said, I'm sure fighting with cloth, chain, then a steel plate wedged between my breasts would certainly be less comfortable than otherwise, and might impair my ability to fight well, but that doesn't have anything to do with armor weakpoints and shell traps.

Even if the armor isn't actually destroyed, that's a lot of force that's suddenly smacking into an area not well suited to resisting that force. That's why armor is designed to deflect force away from the body instead of just absorbing it. It might not kill you outright, but it isn't doing anything good to you, that's for sure.

[Leon]

Back on track, too much text.

Spoiler

Show

Onion Knight

Spoiler

Show

And Friends

[gkathellar]

Can anyone help me with images of a heavily armored, female martial artist/unarmed fighter? Lots of monks in robes, not enough in plate. Long red hair preferable but not essential.

Thanks in advance.

Honestly, I kind of doubt a boob plate would have any significant detrimental effect [the fact that it would certainly be uncomfortable notwithstanding].

Anyway, back to the shell-trap... I don't think it matters. Being a shell-trap isn't relevant if the penetrator in question won't penetrate anyway. Cutting or stabbing through a steel plate is a largely futile endeavor, and it's not relying primarily on it's deflective properties. Adding cups wouldn't magically compromise the plate's structural integrity. Also, that region is the best guarded part of the body.

It's not penetration from the blades you have to worry about (although repeated hits on the armor can still bruise and exhaust), it's the blunts and the armor-piercers. And the bullets. And depending on who you ask maybe arrows and crossbow bolts. Shots in particular are far more likely to skip off of a convex design, following the path of least resistance. Likewise, a mordhau or a warhammer to the chest might fail to connect solidly if it slides off to the side of a convex shape. Concave armor design, on the other hand, may actually channel the force inward, allowing more of the energy to penetrate (resulting in bruising and broken ribs) and more rapidly compromising the integrity of the plate. In the case of something like a pike or an estoc, it might even cause hits to skid upwards towards the throat or downwards toward the pelvis, where there are gaps to be exploited. This is to say nothing of the fact that for boobplate to even be form-fitting on most women, the armor would need to be nearly skintight and thus at an additional mechanical disadvantage (plate is individually fit but not that individually fit).

Some aspects of armor design absolutely reflect an idealization of aspects of the male form. Some cultures and subcultures (Landsknechts have been mentioned) in particular used exaggerated presentation that was occasionally criticized even in its time. But in general plate was around for long enough and faced a consistent enough package of threats that armorers had learned to create idealized elements that were also functional. Boobplate, on the other hand, has no historical basis, would have numerous likely faults, and appears in fantasy art for one reason: to remind us what the character looks like without the boobplate on.

[hymer]

Concave armor design, on the other hand, may actually channel the force inward, allowing more of the energy to penetrate (resulting in bruising and broken ribs) and more rapidly compromising the integrity of the plate.

I'll add getting knocked off balance being more likely in boob plate for this reason.

Spoiler: No armour

Show

Spoiler: Yes armour

Show

[danielxcutter]

I'll add getting knocked off balance being more likely in boob plate for this reason.

Spoiler: No armour

Show

Spoiler: Yes armour

Show

Hmm...

Okay, "easier to lose your balance" sounds like a good point.

So boobplate at all is totally impossible without more or less negating the entire point of armor?

[hymer]

So boobplate at all is totally impossible without more or less negating the entire point of armor?

Depends how you want to define the point of armour. If the point is to strike a sensible balance between protection and ability to fight, all with the materials and the skills available - then no, boob plate is right out. But you don't have to pick that definition. That's just what I would do if I was going into battle, and the smith asked me what principles he should construct my armour on.

Spoiler: Let's not forget why we're here

Show

[danielxcutter]

Depends how you want to define the point of armour. If the point is to strike a sensible balance between protection and ability to fight, all with the materials and the skills available - then no, boob plate is right out. But you don't have to pick that definition. That's just what I would do if I was going into battle, and the smith asked me what principles he should construct my armour on.

So you can't without sacrificing defense or mobility or something? I know decorative parts tend to in general, but still... eh.

[gkathellar]

So boobplate at all is totally impossible without more or less negating the entire point of armor?

Well, in a lot of fight situations, a crappy breastplate is still probably better than none. But it would perform badly compared to more practical designs.

A shaped chest-protector isn't completely ridiculous, to be clear - they're worn in fencing under the jacket and in kyudo over the gi - but those are made from leather or plastic, are not the outer layer in a suit of armor, and are certainly not meant to deflect serious and unpredictable injuries (in fencing it's mostly because breast are softer and more prone to bruising than chest, and in kyudo it's because they might get hit by the bowstring).

If you really want form-fitting armor, very fine mail shirts were sometimes worn (often illegally) by the wealthy in civilian settings.

Anyway, fantasy isn't necessarily improved by realism. Boobplate is generally exploitative and completely implausible, but there's potential reasons why a person might like it as an aesthetic element other than simple titillation. Compromising on realism to emphasize aspects of a character's femininity and sexuality is usually suspect but not intrinsically wrong. But it will always be compromising on realism, and the notion that such an item would ever see use in serious fighting in the real world is indefensible.

Here's some other things:

Spoiler: welp

Show

[Potato_Priest]

I love those vegetable knights, Leon.

[Mike_G]

Hmm...

Okay, "easier to lose your balance" sounds like a good point.

So boobplate at all is totally impossible without more or less negating the entire point of armor?

It doesn't "negate the entire point." It's still armor.

It's just worse than it would be without the boobs on it. And being less effective at its job just to look sexy puts it on the "chainmail bikini" scale. Not so far down the scale as that, but on it.

[Keltest]

It doen't "negate the entire point." It's still armor.

It's just worse than it would be without the boobs on it. And being less effective at its job just to look sexy puts it on the "chainmail bikini" scale. Not so far down the scale as that, but on it.

Deflecting blows into the middle of your chest actually is kind of worse than just wearing regular clothes. At least those wont typically guide your enemy's weapon into center mass.