Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

One example I always see in these kinds of threads (They come up quite often on Fantasy RPG boards) is Chris Lightfellow. Say what you want about how good or bad Suikoden III might be as a game, it's a nice design.



EDIT: Stupid Spellcheck

Indeed, that is a good design.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Witzkatz wrote:I see what you mean with the anime pics, but with those faces and the body/head proportions of the right one...they look like they're 12 or so. Therefore I'm having a hard time thinking about how the rest of the body might work for sisters. The tabard Idea might be nice, though.

The two last pictures are fairly nice. I'd be fine with sisters wearing armor more in that direction...however, with the abdominals on Titania only protected by soft cloth, she would get a 5+ armor save at best. That would need a change for SoB.

Read what I wrote below in order to see what I am talking about when I reference those images.

Plastic.

Obivously different poses. Lets be novel and have them actually aiming the bolters in one. Kneeling in firing position would be excellent as well. I am sick of the "legs slightly bent and spaced wide" format for freaking all base troopers. Lets have some running, kneeling, etc.

Have the cloaks as additional bits. Some are not a fan and its a way to differentiate minis.

Lets push the 14th Century Plate armor look. Its a good start. Better helmets or options in that regard.

A selection of heads, but with enough to have all the minis wear helmets.

Read what I wrote below in order to see what I am talking about when I reference those images.

When I started typing, those last lines weren't there. If you change your posts so quickyl in succession it's hard to keep up with a fitting answer.

I know, that's why I posted that. Give me a moment and I'll load up Mount and Blade: Warband to see if I can get a picture of my character in a mail w/tabard/tunic.

edit: Bah, the game's graphics are a bit too low quality for that to realy show. Ah well.

Melissia wrote:1: ... except that the models are already wearing bras and corsets outside their armor, leading to a different conclusion than if this stuff was absent.

This runs back into the slight problem that you haven't shown us which models actually wear bras and corsets outside of their armor. Every SOB model has armor covered either with tabards, robes, or nothing, none are actually modeled with underwear outside of the armor.

Melissa wrote:

BearersOfSalvation wrote:Chongara wrote: [his stuff, then the stuff Melissa quoted and is replying to]

2: I have already answered that. If you do not desire to read my posts, then simply do not respond to them.

I would think that close to 4000 posts would be sufficient for you to get the grasp of these complicated forum things, but I'll help you out here. If a post has some stuff in dashed lines with a slightly lighter background that says 'Chongara wrote' then some stuff from his post,and that's followed by some normal text, then the post is a reply to what "Chongara wrote", and specifically to whatever material from Chongara is quoted. It would need to say "Melissa wrote" for it to actualy be a response to one of your posts, since you are not Chongara, at least as far as I know.

Ignoring the silliness of telling me not to respond to your posts when I wasn't responding to one of your posts, how can this blatant objectification of men as nothing other than garter-wearing strippers prancing around half-illegal, half-pastied for your amusement possibly be considered OK in the 21st century? I don't see where you answered for the extreme sexism of the Ultramarines Stripper-Chaplain and his lonely purity-pasty, none of your posts address this very important issue as far as I have been able to determine, so can you tell me which post number to examine so that all of the raw anger I feel on this issue can be calmed?

Ok Modquisition on. Lets move forward here and back to topic. Should NEW Sisters of Battle models/depictions be 'Sexy'? Be as serious/humorous as you wish...

Here are some other examples with armor that has nice elements to it, that I could remember quickly. I know I've run into plenty of others but my brain is gumming up at the moment.


http://honya-ch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/fire-emblem-ds-minerva-679x1024.jpg
http://media.wizards.com/images/magic/daily/stf/stf102_knightEx.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/mtg/images/daily/td/td30_knightSplash.jpg
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080320204702/valkyrieprofile/images/thumb/0/0f/Jayle.jpg/300px-Jayle.jpg

Some probably apply a bit more than others to sisters specifically, but they all work as armored females (expert perhaps the last example, though that comes from knowledge of the originating game).

Okay, I think the comment about underwear was made as a metaphor, no? Can we all agree to that and let this part of the convo drop?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:Lets move forward here and back to topic. Should NEW Sisters of Battle models/depictions be 'Sexy'? Be as serious/humorous as you wish...

To answer this specifically: sexiness does not necessarily have to be a goal in a potential re-design . . . unless you count what they already have as sexy. To "tone down" SoB in the sense of the new Lelith would be a mistake, IMO, and it was a mistake to do it with her (although I get that Goodwin wanted her to fit in better with the new celtic thug Wyches).

What's more important than "toning down" is simply ensuring the models actually fit the fluff of them being crusader/protector knights of the church, ala the Knights Templar/Hospitalier/etc.

Topic of the thread wrote:Should NEW Sisters of Battle models/depictions be 'Sexy'? Be as serious/humorous as you wish...

should they be sexy? I don't think the SoB were ever sexy, perhaps some of the art throws in some racy elements. I think a re-scuplt would probably do them a world of good.

I don't particularly see any real problem with this image, it looks no different to the other armour suggestions. Excluding exaggerated breast region.

Melissia wrote:What's more important than "toning down" is simply ensuring the models actually fit the fluff of them being crusader/protector knights of the church, ala the Knights Templar/Hospitalier/etc.

How do they not fit that fluff now?

Mostly?

Because instead of the plate-mail worn by the holy orders of crusading Christian knights, Sisters wear corsets and brassieres. Hell the texture of said garments in artwork isn't even metallic so it looks like they aren't actually wearing armor on their midsection/chest.

Melissia wrote:Mostly?

Because instead of the plate-mail worn by the holy orders of crusading Christian knights, Sisters wear corsets and brassieres. Hell the texture of said garments in artwork isn't even metallic so it looks like they aren't actually wearing armor on their midsection/chest.

Not really, no.

It's pretty obvious that its stylized power armor. And they aren't wearing bras and corsets, as has been pointed out on numerous occasions.

Yes, they are. There's even a zipper up the middle of the corset.

Wait you mean this artwork?



Thats not a zipper.
At this point I have to say:

Frazzled wrote:Wait you mean this artwork?



Thats not a zipper.
At this point I have to say:

The Zipper is very clearly present on the model in the link provided under the word "Zipper" in the quoted post.

Do look at both links. And try to avoid stupid image macros >.>

But yes . I do mean that image, it very much looks like a leather corset and cup bra. The second link I gave showed the VERY prominent zipper.

Frazzled wrote:Ok Modquisition on. Lets move forward here and back to topic. Should NEW Sisters of Battle models/depictions be 'Sexy'? Be as serious/humorous as you wish...

I don't know if the current models are considered to be "sexy" or not, but I like them quite a bit (and seem to be in the minority?). I'd be perfectly happy if new, plastic models were similar, but offered more variety.

"Sexy"? Why not? 40k is not a simulation, it is a fantasy game; one with daemons, plasma weapons, aliens, etc.

I love the idea of outrageously hot nuns cleansing the galaxy of filth with fire.

I own and love this skateboard deck (my wife, however, does not):



Sexy? yes, I think so. Realistic? No, but then again, I don't care.

Wow. I can't believe how dumb that Jake Nunn picture looks.

Melissia wrote:Do look at both links. And try to avoid stupid image macros >.>

be polite and try to avoid being banned.

Melissia wrote:Mostly?

Because instead of the plate-mail worn by the holy orders of crusading Christian knights, Sisters wear corsets and brassieres. Hell the texture of said garments in artwork isn't even metallic so it looks like they aren't actually wearing armor on their midsection/chest.

So this but futuristic? We already have the BT.

Perhaps full power-armour on Sisters should not be the case then.

Armour does not need to be metallic, it could be ceramic etc. Even metal amour could be embellished with leather to disguise its true nature.

EDIT:
So if that's a zipper, is the giant fleur de lis the easy access zip tag?

Melissia wrote: But yes . I do mean that image, it very much looks like a leather corset and cup bra. The second link I gave showed the VERY prominent zipper.

The first-you're clearly, clearly mistaken, which is reinforced by the actual minis.

the second has the same design around the top of mini. If its a zipper, the whole suit opens up, in a different fashion than anything else GW has done.

Then this should look "stupid", too. I'm not really sure why tongue-in-cheek-scantily-clad-badassery pictures are suddendly all that bad because there are women in it.

Yes, kinda like this.

The Sisters had a codex with the Knights Templar/Crusading Knights feel two full editions before the Black Templars ever had a codex period

Frazzled wrote:The first-you're clearly, clearly mistaken

No, sir, I do believe you are mistaken, not I. Take a leather corset with a front zipper, add metal studs to it, and it could look EXTREMELY similar to what is on that image.

Melissia wrote:
Yes, kinda like this.

The Sisters had a codex with the Knights Templar/Crusading Knights feel two full editions before the Black Templars ever had a codex period

So long as they don't have the bucket-helmets. God I hate those.

Melissia wrote:Mostly?

Because instead of the plate-mail worn by the holy orders of crusading Christian knights, Sisters wear corsets and brassieres. Hell the texture of said garments in artwork isn't even metallic so it looks like they aren't actually wearing armor on their midsection/chest.

First and foremost, the SoB aren't supposed to be exactly the same as the holy orders of crusading Christian knights. Let's not forget that the Ecclesiarchy ain't Christian, for one. The Space Wolves have a Viking/Norse theme to them; are they required to prowl the stars in battle barges shaped like longboats because of it? Of course not.

Secondly, they wear neither corsets nor brassieres. They wear power armor. I'm not sure why we keep having to come back and address this point. You can point to artwork that you feel reinforces your point all you like - and even in the cited case, it's clearly metal of some sort - but we're discussing the models, and thus far, no one has provided a single image showing a SoB model wearing either a bra or a corset - just power armor.

The Ecclesiarchy is like a grimdark mockery of the Catholic Church. With its own Space pope, the Ecclesiarch, sets of bishops, and cardinals, and so on. Much wider variants due to the size of the institution, mind you.

As for Sisters? There's a section of Sisters literally called Sisters Hospitaller, named after the Knights Hospitaller. I think that says a lot about what they were designed to represent.

Melissia, when and where did you get the right to speak in absolutes like you do? Are you in the GW design team, or what? Yeah, things might look a bit similar, but to insist everything HAS to look what YOU think is the one and only influence for a thing doesn't mean that it really should.

So you're saying I can't hold and express my opinion?