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.

I'm sure some of you have seen this fanart already but it got me thinking. If SoB were redesigned into a more modest armor, would they lose popularity? I'm not saying SoB players are a bunch of "chainmail bikini" lovers but I am curious to know what dakka thinks

I like it more. Looks like an actual suit of armor. Besides, having a section for each breast just looks stupid. This kind of armor looks a lot better.

Yeah, I do like it more than the current one. On models now, it just looks unrealistic and just wrong. This one looks more practical, less cluttered, and generally nicer.

Not to mention that having armour that deflects melee wepons towards your neck is a fast and sure way to become a martyr. Maybe that's why they're using it in the first place?

The army has more appeal than just regarding that part of their body, while they may lose a few, are those really the players we want those kinds of players playing sisters?

Just curious if any of you have ever seen a real piece of armour designed for a female fighter? Because they look just like what the current Sisters' models are wearing.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
Just curious if any of you have ever seen a real piece of armour designed for a female fighter? Because they look just like what the current Sisters' models are wearing.

I'm sorry, but if that's how female armor is, it's ridiculous. It's impractical, in how it protects and how it is made.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
Just curious if any of you have ever seen a real piece of armour designed for a female fighter? Because they look just like what the current Sisters' models are wearing.

Since female warriors in armour were quite rare there aren't too many pictures about them.
The few i know about show them either in ringmail or rather "normal" ( that is, no boobarmour ) plate like this one

Don't look at medieval art. Most of it was not realistic, simply because art mastery for realistic appearances had not been well-developed (case in point, look at the above-pictured woman's face. Are her eyes supposed to be on a flat plane on her skull?)

Go to a museum and look at the actual pieces of armor that survived. It's often designed (depending on region and era of origin) to show that, yes, the person wearing this suit of armor has breasts.

 moom241 wrote:
I'm sorry, but if that's how female armor is, it's ridiculous. It's impractical, in how it protects and how it is made.

Are you an expert armourer?

 KingDeath wrote:

Since female warriors in armour were quite rare there aren't too many pictures about them.

Who said anything about pictures? I've seen the real thing.

 Psienesis wrote:
Don't look at medieval art. Most of it was not realistic, simply because art mastery for realistic appearances had not been well-developed (case in point, look at the above-pictured woman's face. Are her eyes supposed to be on a flat plane on her skull?)

Go to a museum and look at the actual pieces of armor that survived. It's often designed (depending on region and era of origin) to show that, yes, the person wearing this suit of armor has breasts.

Which one for example? The various forms of european platemail have nothing of that kind. If anyone has an actual picture of breastplates on a suit of armour then please share it with me.

Here is the question, why is everyone so worked up about the armor, and especially the chest part?

Why not get worked up on the thigh and leg armor too?
oh and the gauntlet as well?

 LunaHound wrote:
Here is the question, why is everyone so worked up about the armor, and especially the chest part?

Why not get worked up on the thigh and leg armor too?
oh and the gauntlet as well?

The tigh and leg armour won't direct a bladethrust straight to your heart. Besides that, both tigh and legarmour have some resemblance to late medieval armour.

Even that has been "feminized" (skirt and long hair).

Not Image tagging this, takes up a huge resolution: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Joan_of_Arc_Emmanuel_Fremiet.jpg

Joan of Arc is a good example of armour for female warriors who actually participated in battle.

Showing the enemy you have tits is a bad thing because you will get raped after the battle if you lose.
It's one of the major reasons why Coat D'Arms were so bright, with whole schooling designed to make them more noticeable for "Don't stab me in the eye, you can make lotsa money by selling me off".
You get rid of your tit armour, or hope you die straight away with the tit armour directing weapons to your neck and important organs.

Armourers were smart enough to know that armour that would be used in battle should represent that school of thought. "Is my neck going to be attached to your shoulders after the battle?"

If you increase the plate size from the upper torso up to the neck region, you can solve the problems mentioned, all at the same time still keeping the chest :'D

Thus begins the 40k vs. real life argument.

That is some sweet design you got there.

If you want realistic warfare, 40k is not the place for you . In 40k, chain swords, tanks with 500mm calibre, and titans make sense. It is a collection of SciFi memes, where all men are strong and all women are sexy. If you want to change iconic armour in 40k to something more realistic, start with Space Marine shoulder pads

I don't like the concept art in the OP, tbh.
It looks a bit bland, like every other armored psuedo-knight.

The problem is that the way the SoB power armor is not designed for a standard view. It was built in that matter because of whole "Men under arms" Issue they have that the Church cannot have a standard army.

By showing that the SoB, the militant wing of the church is feminine and full female, it allows for them to continue to exploit that loophole.

all i am going to add to this topic is that everything is better with boobies... that is all

Regardless of the merits of boob-armour and how practical or effective it might be, the armour in the OP makes the warrior look chunky and fat, and not at all feminine.

One of the points of an all-woman army is that they are instantly recognizable as women. Boobs help in that regard.

I find the SoB armor overall to be a bit over the top. They are the Catachan equivalent of fetishizing the human body, only this case it's taking the Madonna-Whore thing and blending them all together. Anyone who knows Nuns and/or knows females in the various armed services knows that the extreme focus on looks exemplified by the sisters is nonexistent in any RL examples.

The model for the sisters is clearly nun/sex/fetish chic and designed to be sexy and titillating, so I have to reject any arguments that they dress that way because it's fantasy or fiction. While I've modeled females into my IG army as regular Guard troops (fatigues, no special emphasis on sex) I can think of a lot of ways GW could have gone with the sisters and still has a badass, fantasy collection of women warriors that don't resemble the very common dominatrix/nun fetish model.

If removing them will make SOB 2pts. cheaper per model I am all for it...

 variable wrote:
I find the SoB armor overall to be a bit over the top. They are the Catachan equivalent of fetishizing the human body, only this case it's taking the Madonna-Whore thing and blending them all together. Anyone who knows Nuns and/or knows females in the various armed services knows that the extreme focus on looks exemplified by the sisters is nonexistent in any RL examples.

The model for the sisters is clearly nun/sex/fetish chic and designed to be sexy and titillating, so I have to reject any arguments that they dress that way because it's fantasy or fiction. While I've modeled females into my IG army as regular Guard troops (fatigues, no special emphasis on sex) I can think of a lot of ways GW could have gone with the sisters and still has a badass, fantasy collection of women warriors that don't resemble the very common dominatrix/nun fetish model.

Look, I don't know how familiar you are with females in sci-fi and fantasy environments, but the SOB are very, very very far removed from the 'sexy and titillating' end of the spectrum. They're fully clothed, for starters. In fact, apart from the boobs and the haircuts, there's barely anything remotely feminine about them.

I think the SoB are a good example of making something look feminine, without sexualising it.

Incidentally, the Joan of Arc picture above was not created until many years after her death. In fact, only one picture of Jean d'Arc that was created of her, during her lifetime, has survived to the modern era.

I'm still researching this topic, but I'm at work and google is... not entirely helpful, what with the preponderance of fantasy games.

 Kaldor wrote:
Regardless of the merits of boob-armour and how practical or effective it might be, the armour in the OP makes the warrior look chunky and fat, and not at all feminine.

One of the points of an all-woman army is that they are instantly recognizable as women. Boobs help in that regard.

Exactly what I was thinking.

I think people are too worried about boobs, infact they should stop dwelling on it so much.

Warhammer and 40k was never realistic to start with. They are mostly over the top, and have CERTAIN AESTHETICS in their design to help strongly define each army. Evermore so on the table top because they are MINIATURES.

Just like Catachans, anyone that complains about BOOBS should take a closer look at the catachan's giant biceps and their 5+ armor save from a tshirt.

GW should never remove the feminine aesthetics from Sisters, do you think they care about practicality? really? from technologies that oils their tanks and uses crossbows?

I have to agree with CthululsSpy. Whilst it is a nice design it just doesn't have anything particularly unique going for it. Whilst I not really like to admit it - yes, "boobs" (or the female form in general) are one of the most striking design features of the entire army. Take them away and you'd end up with an army of Black Templar Space Marines trading the cross for a flower. Basically, what Kaldor said.

Would they lose popularity? That is hard to say. To some people, they would become less unique and thus less interesting. To others, they might appear more "professional". It'd be difficult to gauge what would outweigh the other.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Not to mention that having armour that deflects melee wepons towards your neck is a fast and sure way to become a martyr.

Good thing the armour actually has a neckguard, then.

variable wrote:women warriors that don't resemble the very common dominatrix/nun fetish model.

But ... that's kind of the point, isn't it? Did you look at the Ecclesiarchy's and the Sisters' fluff? This is Warhammer 40.000 we're talking about. GW has taken the worst cliches the Catholic Church has to offer and dialed them up to 11. How do you think we ended up with Repentia Mistresses whipping half-naked girls into a battle frenzy? "Nunsploitation" is part of the setting, way beyond the visual designs. And the SoB are by far not the only army making use of this method. Valhallans going into battle with unarmed soldiers or sending infantry to clear a minefield or performing zerg-rushes ... how do you call that? Rusploitation? Or the rather obvious hyperemphasis of the Space Marines' and Catachans' bodies? Mansploitation?

While we're at it, why don't we criticise Space Marine armour? In their effort to make them look as manly as possible, GW ended up with a chestplate that severely restricts arm movements, so much so that it should become a liability in melee combat. Where's the realism in that?

ZebioLizard2 wrote:The problem is that the way the SoB power armor is not designed for a standard view. It was built in that matter because of whole "Men under arms" Issue they have that the Church cannot have a standard army.
By showing that the SoB, the militant wing of the church is feminine and full female, it allows for them to continue to exploit that loophole.

Actually, that armour is older than the Decree Passive.

However, as per old Codex fluff, the armour is "based upon the original garments worn by the Daughters of the Emperor" of San Leor. If said Daughters attempted to stress their femininity back then - which is quite possible, given the name of this all-female cult - it would seem likely that they deliberately designed their clothes that way.

Also, Vandire was a perv, so that's two in-universe reasons already.

 kenshin620 wrote:
I'm sure some of you have seen this fanart already but it got me thinking. If SoB were redesigned into a more modest armor, would they lose popularity? I'm not saying SoB players are a bunch of "chainmail bikini" lovers but I am curious to know what dakka thinks

This armour looks pretty cool, much more streamlined and simple than the current design.