#5 Undress for Success

By Shamus Posted Friday Mar 8, 2019

Filed under: DM of the Rings 97 comments

Male fighters envelop their bodies in bulky, clanking plate mail. Female fighters favor stiff metal underwear.

A male rogue will wear dark leather armor with little metal studs all over it, because nothing says “stealth” like a bunch of glittering bits of metal all over the place. Ladies in the same profession lean towards the skin-tight catsuit look, because the first step in being stealthy is apparently to make sure every able-bodied man within a hundred paces is staring at you with his mouth slightly open.

Male wizards wrap themselves in thick shapeless woolen robes that would – let’s face it – collect odors at an astounding rate. These robes would most likely be heavy, and itch like a fiberglass jockstrap. On the other hand, females who practice the arcane arts wear little strips of translucent gauze over their naughty bits.

It’s nice to see that when it comes to apparel, roleplaying games have a lot of equality: Everybody dresses like an idiot.


Shamus Says:

Since writing the above, I have explored the world of MMO gaming. My opinion remains unchanged.

Shawn Says:

I just find it interesting how different Sapphire looks here compared to how I eventually settled on drawing her. I think I’m going to have to side with Hot Elf Chick as opposed to Hot Elf Chick Who Kind of Looks Like a Dude With a Giant Rack.

Also, the 12 year old in me never gets tired of referring to this strip as “the arrival of the titular chainmail bikini.”

We’re one strip away from the start of ZOMGRapeDramaSplosion ‘07. Hopefully we can accurately recap what happened and how without repeating the dramahz of two years ago. Keep your fingers crossed and see you on Wednesday.

Just a reminder that the above commentary was from 2010 and we will not, in fact, see you on Wednesday.

From The Archives:

97 thoughts on “#5 Undress for Success

  1. Olivier FAURE says:

    Well, 10 years later, we’ve made a lot of progress, right?

    Look at Blizzard’s last game, where only half the female characters have latex or legless costumes showing off their improbably curvy figures!

    (okay, I’m exaggerating, Overwatch isn’t that bad; but Tracer, Mercy and Symmetra are still way too sexualized)

    1. Chris says:

      I personally like sexy characters in stupid sexy armor. As long as its not a literal chainmail bikini, then my brain is like “yeah this is too obviously sexualized and trying to get the attention of your second brain”.

      And Apex legends just came out with zero sexualized characters.

      1. Syal says:

        Silly sexualization is still fun, but one-sidedness has started to bother me. Alas, having no idea what people find attractive about guys, it’s got to be really obvious to come off as equal opportunity. Persona 5 is the only game I know of that qualifies, with the guy with the center-of-screen crotch ring and the other guy with the foot-long red nose.

        1. Kyrillos says:

          I find FF14 is great about this, actually, if only because the large majority of outfits show up the same, regardless of character gender. Want to stomp around in full plate? Great! It is the same full plate, just scaled differently on both sexes. Want to flounce around in your skivvies? Cool, everyone gets naked!

        2. Sartharina says:

          I think the problem is nobody knows how to silly sexualize the male body.

          1. BlueHorus says:

            I disagree, and present Exhibit A as proof.
            (Not as NSFW as you might think, but still somewhat.)

            …man, that took more finding than I anticipated. Welp, time to delete my browser history!

            1. Erik says:

              …and the fact that this took more finding than you anticipated goes back to demonstrate the original point, and defines this (admittedly great) example as an “exception that proves the rule”.

            2. Sartharina says:

              The amount of difficulty in finding something so bland and tame emphasizes my point.

              1. BlueHorus says:

                It’s not even from a game. I’m just amused by Sting’s bulging eyes, rigid sci-fi Budgie Smugglers and general demeanor in that clip*, which I find hilarious.

                However, I think that while you’re right that its rare to have sexualised men in games (and other media) compared to women, it’s not because it’s hard to do. Fantasy games could be filled with costumes like Conan the Barbarian’s or similar…they’re just not.
                Often, normal clothes or armor sets transform into skimpy outfits when given to a female character.

                *In fact, all of Sting’s performance in David Lynch’s Dune is fun.

          2. tmtvl says:

            There are plenty of jokes around that (Hard Gay, Sacha Baron Cohen, Rocky Horror,…) but they seem to cause less of a stir.

            1. Sartharina says:

              Jokes, no real attempts at sexualizing masculinity

              1. tmtvl says:

                how to silly sexualize

                Silly = joke. For serious sexualization of the male body, check out a bodybuilding competition. You know, the kind that has been going on since the Hellenistic period, over 2,000 years ago.

                1. Brendan says:

                  Speaking of bodybuilding and jokes, the Australian comedian Hamish Blake once accidentally won a bodybuilding competition by virtue of being the only competitor in the heavyweight division (200+ lbs.)


                2. RFS-81 says:

                  I can buy that old-timey bodybuilders were meant to be sexy, but nowadays it seems more like some kind of radical body-modification. You know, in the same category as getting leopard-print tatoos all over your body or one million piercings or whatever.

          3. Syal says:

            I don’t either, but I think I have some ideas.

            Some stuff should carry over between sexes; haphazard clothing, suggestively colored pants (if it’s a uniform, you can put a knee-length triangle down the legs). You could give someone a long flowing beard that they drape across their face like reversed bangs.

            Female costumes typically emphasize the center of the body, while I think male costumes would want to emphasize the edges, make the muscles look as wide as possible. Probably curvy lines on sleeves. Thick horizontal lines for fake chest hair. Poofy sleeves and leggings with tight cuffs.

            Then there’s stuff like Nier Automata, where all they had to do was have Self Destruct blow off 9S’s shirt like it does with 2B’s.

            Even if they miss sexy, they should still hit silly. There are worse places to be.

            1. Len says:

              But it does blow his shorts off, like it blows off 2b’s skirt. No shirts are harmed by the androids’ self destruction.

              1. Syal says:

                2B loses her whole dress and ends up in the ridiculous corset thing. 9S loses his shorts but keeps his shorts-length shirt and comes off as still nearly fully-clothed, with no crazy underwear reveal.

            2. CloverMan-88 says:

              For ridicolous sexualised male costumes, just look at some JoJo’s Blizzare Adventure Characters: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/84/8e/64/848e64e6e4deace9710e4ce3e5363357.jpg

      2. Lino says:

        I personally like sexy characters in stupid sexy armor.


        1. Daimbert says:

          I often like sexy characters in sexy armor, but my view on it is this:

          1) If you give players the ability to choose what they wear, make reasonable armor a choice alongside sexy armor.

          2) If you don’t give players the choice, then make the sexiness level appropriate for the character.

          3) If you make all of them sexy, cop to the fact that, yeah, you’re playing on sex appeal.

          The worst thing you can do is 3) but then make a stupid argument for it being “realistic”. Just say “We think it looks hot and that’s what we were going for”.

          1. I like DDO, which has a wide range of options, and you can wear cosmetic armor on top of any suit of armor, so you can pick what you look like independent of what you’re wearing.

          2. Lino says:

            The worst thing you can do is 3) but then make a stupid argument for it being “realistic”.

            That reminds me of this genius video by ProZD.
            But more to the point, I don’t know how you could determine 2), because it seems too subjective – there’s always going to be someone who thinks an outfit is too revealing. I guess, if the character is intended to be very serious, then you should probably reflect it in their clothing as well…

            1. Daimbert says:

              Well, as an example, a femme fatale character like, say, Catwoman would be more likely to wear more sexy clothing, even if it’s a bit impractical, but as you said serious or shy characters wouldn’t. Essentially, you can create a Ms Fanservice character for that as long as it makes sense for that character to be Ms Fanservice.

          3. Geebs says:

            Assassin’s Creed Odyssey has a strange inversion of the heavy/revealing armour axis. I tried equipping some of the weightier sets and they looked absolutely ridiculous on a character who spends half of their time climbing up buildings and the other half jumping off the other side. I ended up wearing the “skimpier” stuff most of the time because it actually just seemed more sensible.

    2. DerJungerLudendorff says:

      Not to mention Widowmaker.

      It’s also worth noting that almost every single female character is some variety of a conventionally attractive 20-something. And most of them are slim, and dress in figure-hugging clothing.

      And if they do vary, it’s usually in one trait. Ana is a conventionally attractive, slim 60-something. Zarya is a conventionally attractive brawny 20-something with figure-hugging clothing. Phara is a conventionally attractive 20-something in armour that emphasizes her feminine body shape. And so onwards.

      1. Kylroy says:

        Well, Orisa is a quadripedal robot, but (like Zenyatta) only nominally gendered.

        Other than that, yeah, single point of difference max:

        Ash, Brigitte, DVA, Sombra – all conventionally attractive 20somethings.

        Mei – conventionally attractive 20something, just a bit bigger.

        Moira – I’m going to vote for slightly unconventionally attractive here with the whole androgynous/Bowiesque thing, but still a slim 20something.

        1. Abnaxis says:

          To be fair, while the male cast certainly has their share of unattractive members, there’s some eye candy there too.

          Also, what’s the threshold where you have “enough” points if difference?

          1. Kylroy says:

            That’s the thing, though – there are *no* female cast members who aren’t conventionally attractive, save the centaur robot. The issue isn’t that Widowmaker is in the game – she’s a femme fatale, a recognized archetype, and being sexy is a central part of that. The issue is that there are no (carbon-based) female characters who don’t have “sexy” as at least a sub-theme…possibly because our culture doesn’t really have any archetypes that fit, at least within the context of people energetic enough to participate in a shootout. I’m not knocking Blizzard, I’m just now (as in since reading this post) realizing that they are pushing as much as they can on the boundaries of common archetypes without going beyond what a mass audience will recognize.

            1. DerJungerLudendorff says:

              And they could easily include people who wouldn’t be “energetic” enough. We have a hamster with a giant ball, a robot horse, and a magic android in this lineup. Realism isn’t exactly an insurmountable barrier.

            2. Lino says:

              The issue is that there are no (carbon-based) female characters who don’t have “sexy” as at least a sub-theme

              I don’t actually see that as a big problem – the world is full of “normal” people, and I like seeing something different in my escapist fantasy about shooting dudes with laserguns and assault rifles. If appearance and society standards were central themes of the game, then the characters’ appearance would be an enormous deal. But the main purpose of most games people have these issues with (Overwatch included) don’t have that as their main theme, and I could never see why it’s considered such an issue.

              1. Kylroy says:

                It’s a problem because it makes “sexy” a requirement for female characters to exist in the setting. There is room for Torbjorn and Roadhog in this fantastical world, but not any woman less than a “7” (to put it crudely). No, it’s not a theme of the game, it’s just a message that gets unthinkingly included in *damn near everything*, even when the designers are actively trying to move beyond making all the female characters Barbie reskins.

                1. Lino says:

                  Unfortunately, dismantling the fallacies in that argument would require me to break some of the written (and unwritten) rules of this blog. So I’ll just say that I respectfully disagree.

                  1. Kylroy says:

                    “The only women shown in Overwatch are attractive, while both attractive and unattractive men are shown in the game.”

                    Do you disagree with that statement?

                    1. tmtvl says:

                      Attractiveness is subjective, though, isn’t it? I mean, Diva looks like a kid, so someone who would find her attractive would probably not be suited to a career as a middle school teacher.

                    2. Cannongerbil says:

                      Yes, because Zarya and Moira both exist. They might not be strictly speaking unattractive, but to consider them conventionally attractive is to stretch the meaning of that term beyond breaking point.

                  2. baud says:

                    Which fallacies?

                    1. Kylroy says:

                      We’re not allowed to know.

                  3. Shamus says:

                    I know the rules are annoying sometimes. The restraint is very much appreciated. :)

                    Kylroy and baud: If having the discussion would break the rules, then goading Lino into arguing with you is also breaking the rules. Let’s just move on.

                    1. Kylroy says:

                      But “I’m too polite to point out how wrong you are” is A-OK?

                    2. baud says:

                      I don’t think I would have argued with him; I just wanted to know what he was talking about. But your home, your rules and I will respect that.

            3. Cannongerbil says:

              Are you…

              Are you just going to ignore the existence of Zarya and Moira?

              I don’t know what I kind of place you live in, but if muscled bodybuilder girl and a stick figure with claws is considered conventionally attractive, then so is roadhog and junkrat.

        2. decius says:

          D.Va is 20-something? Not 16?

          1. Kylroy says:

            Appearance-wise, functionally yes. Many of these characters are well past their 20s, but I’m going by how they look, not the lore. And “conventionally attractive late teen” is a mighty fine hair to split from “conventionally attractive 20something”.

            1. DerJungerLudendorff says:

              Basically what Kylroy said.
              And if the best argument for why a character doesn’t fall into societies objectifying standards where every woman must be young and attractive, is that the character is still underage…. well, that just makes it so much worse.

              1. Sartharina says:

                … I know people in their late 20 and early 30’s that ‘look like teens’.

                But even aside from that, this came up in a discussion on the Soul Calibur Reddit (Which features outright-underaged characters in skimpy outfits), and it hits something that, as a former teenager myself, really bothers me. Notably, the infantilization of Teens, treating them as asexual toddlers/children, instead of sexually-curious and active almost-adults.

                Overwatch and Soul Calibur are targeted largely to teen audiences. And teens are interested in other teens. I loved the heck out of the scantily-clad and teenaged Seong Mi-Na and Yunsung back in Soul Calibur 2 when I was a teen.

            2. Hector says:

              But they’re all done in an stylized, almost cell-shaded style where it can be very difficult to tell someone’s age just from their status appearance. The guys really do not look their ages in most cases, either, or are so ripped they could benchpress an entire retirement home. Even Junkrat could be a fashion model if he had elegant-looking cybernetics and a haircut.

              All the character are wish-fulfillments of one sort of another. The onyl difference is the fantasy that it’s fulfilling, and most people don’t have fantasies of being hideous or scary. For those who do… there’s Reaper, but he was also hunky as Reyes.

              1. Kylroy says:

                Of the male characters, Hanzo, Soldier 76, Reinhart, and Roadhog are all visibly graying or white-haired. Of the women, it’s Anna and the obviously young albino Ashe.

                And I’m talking less about “monstrous” fantasies and just fantasies that don’t include conventionally “sexy”. Neither Roadhog or Torbjorn could get a makeover that turns them into GQ material, but (within the confines of the game’s cartoony style) I don’t think we’d call them “hideous”. Again, this isn’t a shot at Blizzard as much as a comment on the culture at large – when Blizzard initially made WoW’s Horde female models as inhuman as the male ones, they got a lot of feedback from female playtesters that they didn’t like the look.

        3. DerJungerLudendorff says:

          Yeah, Orisa is an example of how designers get around this, without actually doing something to break this convention.

          Since adult human women are the only ones held to this standard (so like 40% of the world population), they dodge to a group who isn’t held to it. That usually means making the character a child, or an animal/monster/alien/other inhuman creature. If said character has distinctly human parts, like a human torso or face, the standards apply again.

          Honestly, it’s disturbing how many games with dozens or hundreds of characters don’t have a single adult woman who can’t be easily plastered on a beauty magazine cover. Or any cover outside a newspaper for that matter.

          And when they do have one, the character is usually designed around that divergent trait.

          1. DHW says:

            Best that you stop picking this fight.

  2. Mattias42 says:

    I’ve never really gotten the appeal of the chain-mail bikini as aesthetic or titillation. It just looks so… goofy to me.

    Not to kink shame or anything, but to me? You might as well go for clown makeup. At least that’s a bit funny to people that don’t see it as fan-service.

    1. Joshua says:

      Speaking as a person who used to make chainmail jewelry, a lot of people like the aesthetic appeal from the “weaviness” aspect of it. It’s not that unusual that people who like medieval wear would find various spinoffs attractive, even if they are anachronistic.

    2. Karma The Alligator says:

      Same. I’ll often look for armour I find good looking (regardless of its effectiveness), but being half naked has never interested me.

      1. Sartharina says:

        I too hate my characters being only half-naked, and prefer to have them be either 3/4th, 19/20ths, or completely naked instead. What’s really silly is Chuck’s character wears less than Marcus’.

    3. Thomas says:

      Yeah, I find it too in your face silly to be attractive

      1. BlueHorus says:

        +1. It definitely strikes me as more ‘goofy’ and ‘stupid’ rather than ‘sexy.’

        And I would agree with Syal that it’s unequally done: why did that man’s suit of normal-looking chainmail magically turn into a figure-hugging breastplate with extra space set aside for boobs just because a woman put it on? Those magic boots didn’t feature stiletto heels when my male character was wearing them.

        Give everyone a silly sexualised outfit if that’s what you want to do. Or, better yet, the option to have normal clothes.

  3. Joshua says:

    “A male rogue will wear dark leather armor with little metal studs”

    This is also as ridiculous as the chainmail bikini, and not just for the shininess. Studded Leather armor didn’t actually exist. Apparently there was a misunderstanding from looking at older artwork of riveted armor, where the metal “dots” were actually the rivets sticking out from cloth where they were holding in metal plates behind the cloth. Even as a kid, I always wondered how the heck adding little metal pieces spaced several inches apart was supposed to substantially improve the armor’s protection.

    1. DerJungerLudendorff says:

      I always assumed it was a light-weight attempt to deflect blades.
      If a sword or something hit one of those metal bulbs, it would probably deflect off it and absorb some of the blow right?

      Still stupid and impractical, because you still have a sword coming at your body, but it sounds like it might work.

      1. Kylroy says:

        I think the problem is that by the time you’ve added enough studs to meaningfully improve the protection, you’ve created so many holes in the leather it’s ready to fall apart.

        1. DerJungerLudendorff says:

          Good point, I hadn’t even considered that.

      2. Syal says:

        It’s for falling down in winter conditions; if someone knocks you down on ice, you don’t want to go sliding off a cliff or something.

        1. DerJungerLudendorff says:

          Hmm, wouldn’t spikes be a better idea then?

          At least that’s my justification for my spiked-codpiece clad barbarian from the frozen wastlands.

      3. Trystan de Lyonesse says:

        Actually, proper leather armor isn’t light-weight, and won’t be lighter with hundreds of rivets in it. And thin leather can’t be considered armor at all, no matter “studded” it or not.

      4. decius says:

        Absorb the blow and what? Distribute it to a single point on the inside of the armor?

        My vision of ‘studded leather’ is metal sewn into light leather clothing, such that a slash is likely to hit metal before it goes very far; compare the dubious ‘ring mail’ concept of non-interlocking rings sewn into fabric. The ‘studs’ would be the manner by which the reinforcement was fixed to the leather, not the actual protection.

        1. Gethsemani says:

          Studded Leather came about because RP makers of the 70’s and 80’s didn’t realize what a Brigandine was, so you’re pretty much spot on. The studs were used to afix the metal plates to the outer fabric layer and could apparently be gilded, embossed or otherwise decorated to stand out.

          1. DerJungerLudendorff says:

            That does seem like a more sensible design.

            Also, is it me or does the armour in that link have a hook bolted on the front?

            1. Trystan de Lyonesse says:

              Also, is it me or does the armour in that link have a hook bolted on the front?

              It’s called Lance rest.

              1. DerJungerLudendorff says:

                Ah, that’s clever.

    2. Jbc31187 says:

      I’ve been looking at HEMA (historical European martial arts) and one of my favorites is Matt Easton of Schola Gladiatoria. He introduced me to the Gambeson, which is a cheap armor woven of stiff fabric. Here’s a video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-tnlH3ffw

      So the basic footman would go into battle wearing these big quilted jackets and a helm of some kind. Soldiers all over wore similar versions, like in South America where they would stiffen the fabric in salt water. I find gambesons appealing because they’re historical, practical and they look cool.

      1. krellen says:

        Add to all that the fact that Gambeson is extremely effective.

        Doubt me? Fold up a towel into fourths and try to stab through it.

        1. Christopher says:

          You gotta look like the Shocker tho.

          1. Hector says:

            Gambeson armor looks pretty good, though. Check out Shadiversity on Youtube; almost his entire video collection is discussing medieval arms, armor, and the techniques of warfare or siegecraft. He has good stuff on gambesons.

  4. Hector says:

    I think the punchline should have been, “Please continue” once the stat bonuses were mentioned. ALthough I get that the humor is more about the situation rather than jokes per se. Chuck just seems like the kind of person who would take an absurd setup if it were mechanically advantageous.

    1. Sartharina says:

      Nah. Josh is the munchkin. Chuck’s “The Real Man”.

  5. Christopher says:

    I know the usual issue is that all fo the post is on the front page, but this time it seems like none of the post is on the front page.

    1. Hector says:

      With the comic posts, Shamus has been leaving them off. It would just be cut in the muddle anyway.

  6. Thomas says:

    One of the nice things I can say about Assassins Creed Odyssey is they have quite good looking armour and a wide variety of styles

    1. Biggus Rickus says:

      I’ve been wondering about that game. Is it worth playing, or is it just a bunch of generic open world quests with a dumb Assassin’s Creed story tacked on?

      1. Thomas says:

        I’m very divided on it. It’s not really a full RPG but it’s not really an Assassins Creed game either.

        The quests are all well acted, but you quickly realise the mechanics of them are dumb open world stuff.

        Theres no way to interact with the world outside of speaking to quest givers, and the quests don’t flesh out the world like a good RPG would. They dont even have the codes entries from previously in the series. As a result, coming upon something like Delphi is way less exciting than it should be.

        So I’d mostly say to ‘rubbish open world stuff’ but the acting (Kassandra is fantastic) the visuals and the smoothness keep me playing even as I wish it was a proper RPG.

        Only buy it if its cheap

        1. Biggus Rickus says:

          Thanks for the reply. Given that I’m running through four playthroughs of Dragon Age: Origins depending on which I’m in the mood to continue (I had never played it until the beginning of this year), it’ll be cheap by the time I get around to wanting to give it a shot.

        2. Geebs says:

          I second this. Odyssey is basically an asset flip of AC:Origins with the annoying levelling mechanic turned up even further, the world scaling turned down so that the geography is bizarrely tiny, and the stupid Ancient Aliens nonsense making an unwelcome return. The combat system tries to rip off the Souls games but completely misses everything good about them.

          It’s partially saved by a pretty charismatic lead, but they’re embroiled in their own awful plot about The Importance of Family which is centred around redeeming a sibling who is, throughout the entire story, a stupid asshole.

          Basically, play Origins instead.

          1. Geebs says:

            Also there’s a character in it called “Testicles” (pronounced as in “Herakles”), which is a linguistic hanging offence because the game is set in ancient Greece during the Peleponnesian War, and “testicle” is a Latin word.

  7. Ninety-Three says:

    Well this is an interesting new problem Shamus: Normally you post the whole thing to the front page, this time we’ve got nothing, not even the Chainmail Bikini header image.

  8. Mersadeon says:

    I gotta say, Rainbow Six: Siege has become a lot better at this over time. There’s still things I find a bit stupid (really, we’re doing the “this female operator has a skin-tight neoprene-suit to show off her behind” thing?), but they have quite a few non-sexualized female characters and with the newest one they even have someone who’s not the stereotypical body-shape, being modelled off powerlifters. Obviously, this caused a lot of drama on the typical forums. I find it a bit funny that many there are criticising it for being “unrealistic” that someone like that would be in counter terrorism unit… while the game also has someone who suffers from a terminal bone disease that uses nanomachines to inject adrenaline into her to keep fighting while her body deteriorates. And a dude with only one eye. Like, depth perception would seem pretty important.

    1. BlueHorus says:

      Was their argument that the women in skin-tight neoprene were more realistic?

      …the game also has someone who suffers from a terminal bone disease that uses nanomachines to inject adrenaline into her to keep fighting while her body deteriorates.


      1. DerJungerLudendorff says:

        The best kind of excuse.

        I’m assuming her special move is to suplex a wall and ride it into the sky with a hostage in tow.

      2. Mersadeon says:

        > Was their argument that the women in skin-tight neoprene were more realistic?

        Their argument was generally incoherent, like always, flip-flopping between “women wouldn’t be in these special force at all”, to “well there’s actually a far-fetched reason why she is wearing that neoprene suit, so it couldn’t possibly be sexualized” to “well this is a power fantasy, and women want to be sexy”. Of course, all of these fall apart very easily.

        > *Sigh*…really?

        Yeah, the game has been going towards more futuristic stuff lately. I’m generally okay with it, alhtough the nanomachines bit is particularly far-fetched and could easily have been explained a different way.

  9. Matthew Downie says:

    I’ve seen this before in comics about RPGs, and it always bothers me: how does Chuck know that the character is wearing a bikini? Did Marcus hold up a picture of it?

    1. baud says:

      Perhaps there would be a description in the actual conversation (with perhaps something like “elven brassiere of charisma”), but since we already have a visual aid, it would be quite redundant to put it in the comic.

    2. Dan Efran says:

      Old-school character sheets sometimes had space for a character portrait. Maybe that’s not a thing anymore? But I think the real answer is, they’re a group of friends and experienced roleplayers. Given even minimal descriptions, knowing each other, they naturally converge on a shared vision of the game world.

      1. Matthew Downie says:

        Character portraits boxes are still a thing, even in 5th edition D&D.

  10. Zaxares says:

    In fairness to mage robes, most mages (in D&D at least) have access to low level cantrip spells that can immediately clean/deodorize clothing. In fact, it’s established fact in most D&D novels that mages never, EVER bathe, because they all use cantrips to clean themselves instantly without the need to waste time with bathing.

    1. Trystan de Lyonesse says:

      Also clothes made of natural fabric don’t collect odors that fast.
      And Shamus is wrong about quality of “quasi-mediaeval” woolen clothes. It’s not heavy and very comfortable to wear, especially if made of fine quality fabric.
      The real problem with mage robes is their length and size. Classic “Gandalf’s robe” makes running, jumping, climbing, fighting etc. impossible, it’s a nuisance in the field.

      1. baud says:

        Regarding long mage robes, I know a religious community whose members wear cassocks as their everyday wear, including when practicing sports (like football and ski), it doesn’t look like their movement is much restricted.

        1. Trystan de Lyonesse says:

          Well, if the bottom of the cassocks reaches the ankle, or even shorter, I think it’s ok. But mages often portrayed with robes that reach the flor.

          1. baud says:

            I knew I had forgotten something ;) ! Still it was a example on how ample clothing do not necessarily restrict movement.

  11. Scampi says:

    A bit late, but I just realized the font of Marcus’ character always threw me off.
    I always read his character’s name as Sapphire Sun-shy and believed it was an explanation for her pale skin tone.
    I just now recognized I always read this specific K as an H.

Thanks for joining the discussion. Be nice, don't post angry, and enjoy yourself. This is supposed to be fun. Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked*

You can enclose spoilers in <strike> tags like so:
<strike>Darth Vader is Luke's father!</strike>

You can make things italics like this:
Can you imagine having Darth Vader as your <i>father</i>?

You can make things bold like this:
I'm <b>very</b> glad Darth Vader isn't my father.

You can make links like this:
I'm reading about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darth_Vader">Darth Vader</a> on Wikipedia!

You can quote someone like this:
Darth Vader said <blockquote>Luke, I am your father.</blockquote>

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.