Despite the artist's description, armor has become a placeholder term for all clothing in fantasy games. I wouldn't get bent up about it, there's nothing at stake, not even politics.
A mage's robes (regardless of being fully-covering or revealing) aren't considered armor, even if the game says so. Something like Morrigan's robes from Dragon Age, or even the Circle Mages' robes sure as heck aren't armor, and if you think a layer or two of cloth offers any significant protection, I've got a bridge to sell you.
But on that subject, you could honestly go after plenty of other media examples, for "impractical or nonexistent armor." For example, the getups sported by Conan, John Carter, or the 300 Spartans (from the 2007 Zack Snyder film). Plenty of heroes in action movies with lots of shooting don't wear armor, and I can assure you a bullet does far more damage than a blade or arrow.
Regardless, rules in fantasy games are at the mercy of the developer - they can code this outfit to have more protection than full plate or mail.
It's pretty funny to see all of these people complaing about '' practicality ''. Firstly. It's a FANTASY game. Not all fantasy games have to be '' realistic '', you shouldn't bitch and moan at artists and developers for their artistic decision. Ignore it/ don't buy it, and move along. There's plenty of games for your taste out there. To say that '' the majority of games have skanky girls '' is just dishonest honestly. At least outside of Asia.
Secondly. You people do realize that the average fantasy armor would completely break the spine, shoulders, legs etc on anyone that is wearing it right? Or what about molten lava shoulders and spikes? Don't even get me started on how unrealistic something as simple as spikes on your armor is. And A LOT of the armor designs that people come up with would simply hurt the wearer even if it wasn't heavy. There's a VERY good reason why real armor looks almost the same, if you change little things you may cause HUGE problems , vibrations etc that will just injure you the instant someone strikes you or make you completely immovable.
Why do you people expect and DEMAND that EVERYONE adheres to YOUR specific opinions and preferences? Get over yourselves and stop harassing people. And really, the ironic and funniest thing here is. That this '' armor '' is FAR more realistic than the average big bulked plate armor. Even if you made the assumption that it was weightless or whatever. Just the way that they are usually built. Really, '' realism ''. Pfft.... Right. Be freaking honest here. You're upset because it shows skin. That's it. Don't try and hide behind '' ugh, it's not realistic ''.
Would you rather break bones the very moment that you put your armor on, or break your ribs the moment someone strikes you? Or not get injured by your own armor and be mobile? Ask yourself that BEFORE you start bitching about '' realism ''.
Before I say anything, I'd first like to address the fact that your comment is your opinion, which I fully respect. I do hope you take this comment as someone stating their own opinion, and not trying to sabotage your own.
Firstly, it does not matter if the setting is Fantasy or not. People really need to stop using that excuse to try and justify this kind of absolute bull.
Fantasy is not and should never be exempt from some very basic rules of reality, logic and common sense. I will address a few very basic problems with this design that I have beforehand.
"In a real fight, she would be the first person to die, because the "armor" does nothing to defend her. At all. In fact, this thing isn't even armor, there's only a few pieces of metal, and the rest of it looks like nothing more than thin silk. One of the main tactics in medieval combat was to go after the one with the least defense, that way you wouldn't have to worry about multiple people.
With that in mind, the outfit she's wearing offers literally no protection whatsoever; making her the prime target in battle. Spellcaster or not, it's very easy to get overwhelmed in a fight."
There is absolutely no justification for making a character's outfit look like this, unless you're making some sort of prostitute, in which this makes sense. But if you intend to make a tried and true character and call this kind of design "armor", you need to stop, think with the head located on your shoulders, and redesign it. Designs like this are meant to appeal to horny men or teens, because as the saying goes, "sex sells".
If no one believes me, just look at this picture again. She is literally in nothing but see-through underwear, her nipple is showing through the silk, and there is barely any sort of material that would classify this as actual armor.
No woman in her right mind, would EVER dress like this. If you told a woman that she was going to war medieval style, and you offered her the chance to wear this underwear or this img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20… I 100% guarantee that she would choose the armor in the link.
Pretty much my point throughout all of this, as well as all of my comments on this in general, boil down to two things.
One: This is not armor. It is just underwear with about one or two pieces of metal here and there.
Two: This design, as well as every other design like this has no thought put into the practicality of it or the protection it will offer, but only into how "sexy" they can make it look.
These kinds of designs are why I disdain the armor and weapons of Fantasy these days. Because people have taken the Fantasy genre and turned it into nothing else other than a cesspit of big breasted, practically naked women and tall, rugged men in spiked and bladed armor. It seriously needs to stop, because it has gotten very old, very fast.
I have noticed that most of the comments where aggresive to the fact that the armor was revealing for one I dont think this armor is as revealing as you all say most of her rear is covered by her cape and hair while the front doesnt cover as much as it could at the bottom but that is justifiably as it could allow for a slightly wider range of movement it may not have been the correct fitting as for her chest it is covered much better than about 80% of the other chest peices I have seen for females and moving on to the charactor herself she is a MAGE to be exact an elementalist so she doesnt need full body covering armor as she would m8st likley be in the rear and depending on how she casts spells she may need some skin showing because she may draw energy frow her surroundings and the material in her armor may limit her ability to do so and you are all missing one EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FACTOR Maybe... she likes it she is a girl after all she could feel more attractive in it giving her pride and confidence as this to may be importent in casting spells
Now aside from my rant I think this armor is extravigent and beautifully composed the armor itself is a work of art and it still would be if it wher made with crayons but its not and it is one of the best styles of art I have ever seen needless to say I FRIGGEN LOVE THIS
I hope you don't mind me quoting you so as to make a few points.
" I dont think this armor is as revealing as you all say most of her rear is covered by her cape and hair"
Erm, this "armor" is actually very revealing. The definition of revealing clothes is: "Of clothing allowing more than is usual to be seen." This "armor" looks more like some sort of undergarment or something that a stereotypical prostitute would wear.
In a real fight, she would be the first person to die, because the "armor" does nothing to defend her. In fact, this thing isn't even armor, there's only a few pieces of metal, and the rest of it looks like nothing more than thin silk. One of the main tactics in medieval combat was to go after the one with the least defense, that way you wouldn't have to worry about multiple people.
With that in mind, the outfit she's wearing offers literally no protection whatsoever; making her the prime target in battle. Spellcaster or not, it's very easy to get overwhelmed in a fight.
Also, it doesn't matter if her rear is covered or not, she is still showing far more skin than she should, and she is also showing every last one of her vital points.
"the front doesnt cover as much as it could at the bottom but that is justifiably as it could allow for a slightly wider range of movement"
It's a very common misconception that plate mail, or any form of armor, was incredibly heavy and offered little mobility. Yes some armor was heavy, but not so much that wearing it caused you to struggle just to move. If armor didn't offer that much mobility, they wouldn't have worn it back then, as the point of combat is to be able to move without restriction so as to avoid your opponent and help your weapon meet it's mark. When people say "all in the footwork", there is truth to that.
"as for her chest it is covered much better than about 80% of the other chest peices I have seen for females"
If you've actually seen outfits/armor that are more skanky than this, than those outfits/armor must be borderline pornographic; and the women wearing them deserve to get impaled by a spear.
"moving on to the charactor herself she is a MAGE to be exact an elementalist so she doesnt need full body covering armor as she would m8st likley be in the rear"
Mage or no, wearing that little of armor is still going to make her a prime target. Especially for archers, who can simply hide in bushes or sneak around her so as to shoot her in the back. If she's in the rear, that also means the others wouldn't see the archers going after her, so staying in the rear would also be incredibly dangerous.
"depending on how she casts spells she may need some skin showing because she may draw energy frow her surroundings and the material in her armor may limit her ability to do so"
That sounds like an excuse that a perverted man would use so as to make his mage show this much skin. Also, the possibility that she needs to show some skin, has a keyword in there.
That being, "some skin". If all she needs to do is show some skin, she doesn't have to go practically naked.
Also, material doesn't seem to be much of a problem, as if it was, she still wouldn't need to show that much skin.
"you are all missing one EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FACTOR Maybe... she likes it she is a girl after all she could feel more attractive in it giving her pride and confidence as this to may be importent in casting spells"
Alright, as I am a guy, I can't really speak for women, but I can say that I highly doubt that any woman would willingly dress like this in battle, just because she likes it and/or wants to.
Women would more than likely look at this, and see how impractical it would be to wear into battle, and would probably ask for something that wouldn't make every enemy on the field go after her. Also, without trying to sound rude or sexist, if a woman needs to be practically naked so as to feel pride and confidence, than I feel very sorry for her, because that doesn't sound right at all.
Well, that's all I've got to say. Fantasy or not, this "armor" is still highly impractical and would lead this woman to her death sooner or later.