test content
  • Games
  • Social
  • Arc News
  • Support
  • Zen
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Forums > Home› Neverwinter Discussion › General Discussion (PC)

Cleavage - To cleave open with an axe? NO

thorak257thorak257 Member Posts: 125 Arc User
edited October 2013 in General Discussion (PC)
Please allow us to disable visuals for shirt+pants so we can show a little cleavage and leg. People already do it anyways and loose out on the stats. If you want to make money off of it, sell us lingerie so can transmute our shirt and pants.

I respect the fact that this game gives female warriors protective armor but please give us the option.

Thanks,
Post edited by thorak257 on
«134

Comments

  • bioshrikebioshrike Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 4,729 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Agreed - just allow the "disable visual" option on shirts & pants...
    <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::)xxxxxxxx(:::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::>
    "Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
    Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
  • mconosrepmconosrep Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    This topic has come up a surprising number of times, but I see those in favour have changed their lien of attack to appealing to PWE's greed.

    Pretty sure this will work :)
  • sockmunkeysockmunkey Member Posts: 4,622 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    As long as they maintain a fashion tab that allows folks to look naked while fully geared. It seems somewhat silly to not allow any equipment slot to have an option to have its visual disabled.
  • echokazulechokazul Member Posts: 149 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Oh, how I want this so badly! The cleric's chainmail looks so frumpy. Here's how I want my cleric to look, and how she looks if I want actual stats on her.

    RuneFellchainmail_zps8c2d5923.png
    Kyba Fell- Tiefling GF (Main)
    RainFeather- Dragonborn DC
    Rune Fell- Drow CW
  • ladymythosladymythos Member, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 637 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    Dunno about PvP, but in PvE, you can run around with your town clothes in combat. For instance, here's my TR with the town clothes I use, as well as her armor. The armor does show off some skin. If short, chubby women are your taste. :p I prefer her town clothes, though. It's simple, yet effective. Though what I wish they could do was what LotRO did, and simply let us use armor as cosmetic clothes. We would still have to use the 'real' armor for PvP, but it doesn't matter what you look like for PvE.

    2gxem1d.jpgrsuc1h.jpg
  • rapticorrapticor Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,078 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Most characters seemed to showed more skin during the closed beta periods. But there seemed to be a lot of complaints about too much skin and how it wasn't realistic that a fighter would be half naked so... Here we are.
  • ladymythosladymythos Member, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 637 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    Why do people want to see skin anyway? I've never really understood that part.
  • dragoncrest0dragoncrest0 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 120 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    Rather have the ability to disable visual for all slots.
  • savagedeaconsavagedeacon Member Posts: 219 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    ladymythos wrote: »
    Why do people want to see skin anyway? I've never really understood that part.
    ehm... you see it has to do with like the babies are born...there are the bees ..you know...and the flowers..and Supergirl too shows some skin now and then like in your avatar...

    but that not explain like the babies are born..let us return to the bees:p
  • kiralynkiralyn Member Posts: 1,440 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    I "disable visuals" on my characters' shirts & pants by removing them. Which I've always assumed was the intent - if you want to have more revealing outfits, you can - but you've got to sacrifice for it. (a handful of stats, so it's not a huge sacrifice)
    ladymythos wrote: »
    Why do people want to see skin anyway? I've never really understood that part.

    Because we grew up with the "fantasy" genre meaning Frazetta & Vallejo? And our D&D is the D&D of the 1980s/90s, with artwork by Clyde Caldwell, Keith Parkinson, and Larry Elmore, among others?

    Personally, I find the modern trend to "gritty realism" (i.e, incredibly boring outfits in stunning shades of brown, iron, and grey) to be, well, boring.
  • ladymythosladymythos Member, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 637 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    kiralyn wrote: »
    grew up with the "fantasy" genre meaning Frazetta & Vallejo? And our D&D is the D&D of the 1980s/90s, with artwork by Caldwell, Foglio, Parkinson, and Elmore, among others?

    Personally, I find the modern trend to "gritty realism" (i.e, incredibly boring outfits in stunning shades of brown, iron, and grey) to be, well, boring.

    savagedeacon wrote: »
    and Supergirl too shows some skin now and then like in your avatar...
    Think she's scantly clad here? You should see the other picture... :p But seriously, Supergirl is a special case, in many ways. She has always dressed a bit 'lightly', yet she never dress like a HAMSTER. And don't get me wrong, I don't mind women showing skin in games like these. But I think it has to be classy. A little cleavage can work, but wearing nothing but a steel bikini? That's wrong on so many levels. Basically, I want the armor to be effective, and offer a lot of protection while still being easy enough to use. If it covers that, it doesn't matter how much or how little skin we show.

    Btw as for Supergirl, I really like the Laura Vandervoort version from Smallville:

    https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ0_8ZBthAr7YdwFkC023K4H-Frbc8_yP6CrFJlOflnpRQeJLp0

    Besides, Batgirl is covered head to toe in my avatar, so that cancel out Supergirl's costume. :p
  • arkamedeezarkamedeez Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    People complain in other games how the chain and plate usually cover less than the cloth and leather, and now in D&D people are trying to find ways to make the chain and plate look like the bikinis of these other games?

    I guess you really can't please everyone.
  • dragoncrest0dragoncrest0 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 120 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    arkamedeez wrote: »
    People complain in other games how the chain and plate usually cover less than the cloth and leather, and now in D&D people are trying to find ways to make the chain and plate look like the bikinis of these other games?

    I guess you really can't please everyone.

    I think its more or less the option of customization.

    I dont want to enter in a Tavern with full gauntlets on, and perhaps I dont want to have the sleeves showing while in the dungeon for whatever reason such as with a control wizard. (and I really dont like those sleeves)

    Instead of taking off those things, would be better to just hide the visual. The options are there already, just disabled.
  • savagedeaconsavagedeacon Member Posts: 219 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    ladymythos wrote: »

    Besides, Batgirl is covered head to toe in my avatar, so that cancel out Supergirl's costume. :p
    To be covered head to toe is not much useful when the person that sit near you happens to have x-ray vision unless you dress in lead but then you would have some difficulty to swing around with the bat-rope:p
  • vientorvientor Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 80
    edited August 2013
    arkamedeez wrote: »
    People complain in other games how the chain and plate usually cover less than the cloth and leather, and now in D&D people are trying to find ways to make the chain and plate look like the bikinis of these other games?

    I guess you really can't please everyone.

    And there were probably a ton of people in those other games that liked the way it was.

    Also, we are not talking about the armor. We are talking about the shirt underneath.

    No, you can't please everyone, with a static wardrobe, but this game already has a "hide visuals" option. All they have to do is enable it for all items. If it were functional for all items then everyone would be happy...other than the people that concern themselves with how other people play the game. Those people will always find something to complain about.
  • ladymythosladymythos Member, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 637 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    savagedeacon wrote: »
    To be covered head to toe is not much useful when the person that sit near you happens to have x-ray vision unless you dress in lead but then you would have some difficulty to swing around with the bat-rope:p
    I hardly think Supergirl would bother use her x-ray vision to look at Batgirl other than in your fantasies, and even then, Batgirl would probably be naked anyway. ;)
  • vrtesseractvrtesseract Member Posts: 631 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    The don't allow mixing of armour and Fashion outfits for a very specific reason.

    Fashion outfits are accually not just one armour slot

    chest= head neck belt(yes seriously) gloves shirt
    lower= pants and boots
    head= head

    what id like to see as an option is is you don't have a fashion outfit in a slot it will show the armor components for that slot instead. this will kill2 birds,
    1 it will make people running around nekid or in JUST the liira mask have to reduce stats or find bugged armor to do it.
    2 it will alow people to mix in some armour with their fashion outfits thus increasing the likely hood people will dye armors and increasing the sales of fashion outfits to cover head ect.

    if you have a fashion outfit it will totally override all channals that that outfit slot covers. so if you have the courtesan top on you'd show all the cleavage you want and still have chain pants and boots. and your hat. or lets say you want the armors as they are but just have the pirate eye patch, or one of the fashion head masks.

    this would allow ample flexibility. Im not against disabling shirts / pants for cleaves/miniskirt reasons im just hopig for some armor/fashion mixing down the line.
  • evilderprimus88evilderprimus88 Member Posts: 148 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    thorak257 wrote: »
    Please allow us to disable visuals for shirt+pants so we can show a little cleavage and leg. People already do it anyways and loose out on the stats. If you want to make money off of it, sell us lingerie so can transmute our shirt and pants.

    I respect the fact that this game gives female warriors protective armor but please give us the option.

    Thanks,

    No, absolutely no! Why? Well, 1. it is disrespectful towards women, and it's a nice change that some game developers stopped using semi-naked rendered female forms as a way to peddle their games. 2. Not realistic in the context of the virtual world of the game. There are stats attached to these shirts, pants and armors, and if you don't use them - live with consequences. I, for one, would rather see fashion items not retaining the armor stats at all. It actually makes sense that you can't tank in your burlap underwear, unless you're Conan, I suppose. And if your rogue is wearing only bikini, I sure want my cleric, who is covered in mail armor from head to toes, to easily pwn it on the battlefield. Because lol, column of holy fire and zero defence.

    And 3. Second Life may provide free and game-like experience with a lot of HAMSTER and other interesting body parts flying around. You may want to check it out, if lack of cleavage is your main concern in an action RPG.
  • UnknownUnknown
    edited August 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • lonnehartlonnehart Member Posts: 846 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    Well, you can always buy the Courtesan clothing from the Z store. It looks impressive and you can wear it in your fashion slot. I'd like to know if you dye Z-Store Fashion though...
    *sings* "I like Gammera! He's so neat!!! He is full of turtle meat!!!"

    "Hah! You are doomed! You're only armed with that pathetic excuse for a musical instrument!!!" *the Savage Beast moments before Lonnehart the Bard used music to soothe him... then beat him to death with his Fat Lute*
  • rhoricrhoric Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    How about the prudes stop. If we want sexy armour then we should have it in game. It is already in the game for the npcs so players should have access to it.
  • kiralynkiralyn Member Posts: 1,440 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    lonnehart wrote: »
    Well, you can always buy the Courtesan clothing from the Z store. It looks impressive and you can wear it in your fashion slot. I'd like to know if you dye Z-Store Fashion though...

    You can, my one character with the Courtesan outfit used the Liira dye from the fireworks festival. (The top actually goes well with pants. Too bad the only pants I have are those ratty peasant ones. I'm surprised they haven't released more Fashion outfit bits.)
  • cribstaxxxcribstaxxx Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 1,300 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    evilderprimus88 wrote: »
    No, absolutely no! Why? Well, 1. it is disrespectful towards women, and it's a nice change that some game developers stopped using semi-naked rendered female forms as a way to peddle their games. 2. Not realistic in the context of the virtual world of the game. There are stats attached to these shirts, pants and armors, and if you don't use them - live with consequences. I, for one, would rather see fashion items not retaining the armor stats at all. It actually makes sense that you can't tank in your burlap underwear, unless you're Conan, I suppose. And if your rogue is wearing only bikini, I sure want my cleric, who is covered in mail armor from head to toes, to easily pwn it on the battlefield. Because lol, column of holy fire and zero defence.

    And 3. Second Life may provide free and game-like experience with a lot of HAMSTER and other interesting body parts flying around. You may want to check it out, if lack of cleavage is your main concern in an action RPG.

    If your #2 were correct then you couldn't simply wear fashion clothes (or naked fashion slots) and still keep 100% of your gear stats. Not that I really care one way or the other but chances are Devs are going to go in favor of customization and allow disable in the near future. It is very true that metal bikini's are quite stupid, but it isn't that bad... yet lol.
    Guild Master of <Enemy Team>
    We are definitely dominating, and we are always about to win.
  • valdariousvaldarious Member, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 22 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    kiralyn wrote: »
    You can, my one character with the Courtesan outfit used the Liira dye from the fireworks festival. (The top actually goes well with pants. Too bad the only pants I have are those ratty peasant ones. I'm surprised they haven't released more Fashion outfit bits.)
    +1, My Courtesan outfit has been dyed. I went with a Green and Red primary and secondary color customization on the top and bottoms.
    ____________________________________________

    Veteran from 2009 recently returned to the fray.
  • kiralynkiralyn Member Posts: 1,440 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    re: not "realistic"

    I've never been a fan of that argument.

    1. As I mentioned earlier, decades of experience with the fantasy genre (novel covers, RPGs, movies, etc) has given me a good sense of suspension of disbelief at characters running around in chainmail bikinis and/or Conan's furry shorts.

    2. Physics says that the 100' long dragon, smashing down on you with it's multi-ton weight? Chainmail bikini will be just as much protection as a full suit of plate - i.e, none at all. Ditto for the giant swatting you on the head with it's tree-trunk club. And then there's fire-breathing things - which, "realistically", would flash-burn all the cloth/leather parts of your "realistic" fully-covering armor while super-heating the metal parts. Again, just as really really dead as the dude wearing less.

    Just like in the Iron Man movies, there's this whole issue of force & inertia - it doesn't matter that Tony's got full-body armor. Being thrown into a concrete wall hard enough to crack it, would still cause all the squishy bits inside that armor to be pulped. There's no "realism" here, physics was thrown out the window ages ago.

    (note: while there isn't "realism", there is "consistancy" - make the rules for your game/fiction world, then keep true to them. So we've got magic, and getting fire breathed on you doesn't make you fall to the ground screaming as the plate armor fuses to your 3rd-degree burns, etc. But that's still not "realism".)
  • tinkerstormtinkerstorm Member Posts: 812 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    rhoric wrote: »
    How about the prudes stop. If we want sexy armour then we should have it in game. It is already in the game for the npcs so players should have access to it.
    Then my character should get a codpiece. A really, really, really big codpiece.
  • sockmunkeysockmunkey Member Posts: 4,622 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    I love when folks use the realism argument. And in the same breath mention clothing stats. Discounting the whole high fantasy setting. Ive yet to find a shirt that helps my real life crit stat, or one the boosts my power.

    If this was real life, coffee would work better for that then clothing.

    Now im sure most arnt asking for the over the top Asian themed settings with battle gear resembeling dental floss. But to say skin has no place in the granddaddy of all western fantasy is fairly obsurd. DnD has been using skin to sell books from its inception.
  • drakesigardrakesigar Member Posts: 231 Bounty Hunter
    edited August 2013
    It was the 70s/80s, they used skin to sell bread and milk. Maybe it is a good thing to actually examine what we've been doing for decades instead of carrying on simply because the thing we've been doing for decades, is something we've been doing for decades. That's not a good reason to do anything. Not a good reason at all.
    Check out Adventuring College! A 20 minute male-centric comedic solo adventure.
    Quest ID: NW-DPCZNUVQ7
  • invalidgirlinvalidgirl Member Posts: 26 Arc User
    edited August 2013
    evilderprimus88 wrote: »
    No, absolutely no! Why? Well, 1. it is disrespectful towards women, and it's a nice change that some game developers stopped using semi-naked rendered female forms as a way to peddle their games.

    Oh don't give me that "disrespectful towards women" tripe! What do you call men running around in their skivvies bare chested?

    I don't need to be "protected" by white knights, thank you very much, and I'm pretty sure a lot of women would agree.
    embracemysword wrote: »
    If cryptic turns NW into one of those E-RP HAMSTER games i and many others will be gone and this game has to face the same fate as champions online did. E-RP should be bannable and also it shouldn't be tolerated in a game that is rated Pegi 12? Many people enjoy the not so sexy armor style.


    Disney does not like cleavage, neither does hasbro. Go play TERA. or better, get a gf irl.

    As for you... Why so offended by a little pixelated skin, hmm? Might want to speak for yourself and yourself alone on your phobia of nudity in the slightest sense. I'm certain you'd fit in nicely in the Middle East(No offense whatsoever to individuals from that area or with an affinity towards their lifestyles).

    Oh yeah, thanks for completely derailing the topic with Disney and Hasbro...

    TL;DR: How can people possibly ask for "real life" realistic in DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS? (O_O;)

    I know D&D's all about how you make of it but to ask that much... you're doing it wrong! D:
  • kotlikotli Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild Users Posts: 577
    edited August 2013
    Realism, you want realism? Here's some things that are needed for realism:
    1) Either no magic or the magic users should be able to instagib everything with one spell unless the target got some kind of antimagic protection in which case the mage magic is useless.
    2) Same goes for dragons.
    3) A blow with a sword etc that get landed either will do minimal damage or it will do so much damage the target is either killed or mortally wounded.
    Basically D&D is not realistic and under the rules of D&D it possible for a simple ring to make someone indestructible if the DM wishes.
This discussion has been closed.