Thread: females and you

paying for one-off, customized clothing]

Originally Posted by whheydt

I would SWAG that service at $20,000, with a $10,000 non-refundable deposit. Who do you know that would be willing to spend that kind of money on a custom outfit in an MMO?

There have been several threads over the years, asking for clothing (or, at least, cloak designs) restricted to a single kinship on a server. That's not going to happen either; it would involve much too many artist-hours for too little return. The best approximation one can get is to choose a combination of readily available clothing, apply a selection of dyes to it, and create a sort of kinship livery (but which any non-kinsman would be able to duplicate if he felt like it, and if the kinship didn't like that, there would be nothing they could do).

And the concept of livery, or uniforms, didn't exist in the real-world period on which Middle-earth is based: the time between the fall of Rome and the coronation of Charlemagne. Warriors wore the best armour they could get; the nobility wore whatever clothing they liked and could afford; servants wore whatever they could get (which was, not infrequently, their masters' cast-offs.

Originally Posted by djheydt

paying for one-off, customized clothing]



There have been several threads over the years, asking for clothing (or, at least, cloak designs) restricted to a single kinship on a server. That's not going to happen either; it would involve much too many artist-hours for too little return. The best approximation one can get is to choose a combination of readily available clothing, apply a selection of dyes to it, and create a sort of kinship livery (but which any non-kinsman would be able to duplicate if he felt like it, and if the kinship didn't like that, there would be nothing they could do).

And the concept of livery, or uniforms, didn't exist in the real-world period on which Middle-earth is based: the time between the fall of Rome and the coronation of Charlemagne. Warriors wore the best armour they could get; the nobility wore whatever clothing they liked and could afford; servants wore whatever they could get (which was, not infrequently, their masters' cast-offs.

It would be cool if they combined this idea with the other great idea I read on the suggestions. That idea was kinship quests and rewards for working together as a kin. It's human nature to join packs. Working together, even in a video game, would strengthen friendship bonds and create a family type of kinship. Once your kinship reaches a certain level of cooperation, they could select from turbines pre-made emblems and uniforms a kinship outfit that would be exclusive to that kin.

Originally Posted by Dworin

2) The argument for "preserving the look' of LotRO has no merit, based on the fact that NPC's contribute to "the look" of the game as much as players do. There are outfits in-game that show some skin. There are player-wearable dresses that have low necklines and show plenty of cleavage now. Showing ankles and knees are not going to lead to whole-sale debauchery, and women who want to dress in a flirtier fashion for a night on the town are not automatically looking for extra earnings. (There is merit, IMO, for arguing against outfits racier than what can be seen on NPC's)

You're still failing to distinguish between NPCs who are from one of the cultures that are relevant to player-characters and those who aren't, like Dunlendings. As for dressing to be 'flirty', in past times that might have meant as little as wearing a skirt that was just an inch or two too short to be quite proper. Showing cleavage and showing a lot of leg shouldn't be equated, either, one might be acceptable and the other not. Showing a hint of shapely ankle might be daring but any more might be genuinely shocking. You shouldn't go by modern standards in a fantasy!

Originally Posted by whheydt

I would SWAG that service at $20,000, with a $10,000 non-refundable deposit. Who do you know that would be willing to spend that kind of money on a custom outfit in an MMO?

--W. H. Heydt

Old Used Programmer

In a world where people spend six figures on Zynga games, I'm sure there's a market for this.

And then there's this:

http://www.slashgear.com/age-of-wuli...word-28204848/

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

You're still failing to distinguish between NPCs who are from one of the cultures that are relevant to player-characters and those who aren't, like Dunlendings.

Absolutely. Because the Dunlendings are part of the *look* of LotRO, same as the brigands are. Arguing they should be excluded (as though they are invisible) has no merit in my opinion.

Save yourself some trouble here. Wear what you want. If you are happy wearing clothes that cover you from chin to toe, then by all means, do so. I'm just sorry that if Eukwen wants more variety in her dress in order to look good for me, you feel you have to tell her "No, you can't do that." The world will not stop if Eukwen wears a skirt that shows her knees the next time we go dancing.

Originally Posted by thelurchyone

It would be cool if they combined this idea with the other great idea I read on the suggestions. That idea was kinship quests and rewards for working together as a kin. It's human nature to join packs. Working together, even in a video game, would strengthen friendship bonds and create a family type of kinship. Once your kinship reaches a certain level of cooperation, they could select from turbines pre-made emblems and uniforms a kinship outfit that would be exclusive to that kin.

And those who can't find, or don't like, great big kinships with lots of fighters in them? They can stay in the Shire and grow taters?

That said, a number of annoying features in LotRO and other MMOs were designed to force grouping. The interdependency of craft skills, e.g., which was meant to get players to interact and trade materials. Of course, it didn't work: serious crafters just made a sufficient number of alts.

Originally Posted by Dworin

Absolutely. Because the Dunlendings are part of the *look* of LotRO, same as the brigands are. Arguing they should be excluded (as though they are invisible) has no merit in my opinion.

Then your opinion is worthless. There are supposed to be different bunches of people out there: some of them dressed differently to the sort of people our characters are supposed to be. What some Southern bandit girl or Dunlending tribeswoman might wear need have nothing in common with what anyone would wear on the streets of Bree. In short, just because someone dresses that way it doesn't mean that it needs to be part of the look of player-characters in LOTRO, especially as the latter includes female Elves and hobbits too. It makes sense to keep some visual distinctions.

Save yourself some trouble here. Wear what you want. If you are happy wearing clothes that cover you from chin to toe, then by all means, do so. I'm just sorry that if Eukwen wants more variety in her dress in order to look good for me, you feel you have to tell her "No, you can't do that." The world will not stop if Eukwen wears a skirt that shows her knees the next time we go dancing.

And the world won't stop if she doesn't, either. As it's LOTR, that suggests a more traditional look than your average fantasy and that means long dresses, among other things. Turbine have got it right, there. There's no reason they should mess with it just because you want more of a typical fantasy look.

Originally Posted by djheydt

And those who can't find, or don't like, great big kinships with lots of fighters in them? They can stay in the Shire and grow taters?

That said, a number of annoying features in LotRO and other MMOs were designed to force grouping. The interdependency of craft skills, e.g., which was meant to get players to interact and trade materials. Of course, it didn't work: serious crafters just made a sufficient number of alts.

His thread's name is kinship revamp proposal. I think the purpose of it is to encourage kinships to help their members. You could still solo the game if that's how you like to play. I enjoyed my old kinship's kin night. Once a week, we would run instances, level our alts, or just help our low level members with their quests.

Originally Posted by thelurchyone

His thread's name is kinship revamp proposal. I think the purpose of it is to encourage kinships to help their members. You could still solo the game if that's how you like to play. I enjoyed my old kinship's kin night. Once a week, we would run instances, level our alts, or just help our low level members with their quests.

Sorry, no group work allowed for some folks.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

Then your opinion is worthless. There are supposed to be different bunches of people out there: some of them dressed differently to the sort of people our characters are supposed to be. What some Southern bandit girl or Dunlending tribeswoman might wear need have nothing in common with what anyone would wear on the streets of Bree. In short, just because someone dresses that way it doesn't mean that it needs to be part of the look of player-characters in LOTRO, especially as the latter includes female Elves and hobbits too. It makes sense to keep some visual distinctions.


And the world won't stop if she doesn't, either. As it's LOTR, that suggests a more traditional look than your average fantasy and that means long dresses, among other things. Turbine have got it right, there. There's no reason they should mess with it just because you want more of a typical fantasy look.

My opinion is worth the exact same as yours, so if mine is worthless, yours is as well. *shrug* In fact, my opinion maybe worth more; according to your profile you have not logged into the game for awhile. In other words, you are sitting there pontificating about clothing styles of a game you are apparently not even playing.

As I stated, I am here in support of Eukwen. If she is satisfied with long dresses in different styles than are presently available, then I am. It doesn't matter to me, I'm happy with how she looks as is. What does matter to me is when the fashion police start trying to insult and belittle (while claiming to deserve respect) people whose only crime is wanting to see things a little different.

How about this, then: In protest, those of us who want some minor changes run around Bree in only our underwear? Would that make you happy? I'll ask Eukwen, maybe we can get a movement started.

*edit* I wonder what Dwothin would look like running around in his skivvies. Hmmmmm.

Originally Posted by djheydt

That said, a number of annoying features in LotRO and other MMOs were designed to force grouping. The interdependency of craft skills, e.g., which was meant to get players to interact and trade materials. Of course, it didn't work: serious crafters just made a sufficient number of alts.

This is because of the diminishing relative value of silver as a character levels, combined with the diminshing value of crafting.

The prices for even basic materials on the AH range from incredibly expensive to completely out of reach for a new character, yet those same prices are barely worth the time to sell them to a high level one, thanks to the ease of earning silver from monsters later on. This means new characters are effectively locked out of trading with other crafts, and are forced to become self-sufficient. Add to this the fact that only one-shot recipes require cross-craft components and at high levels crafting is pointless, and you've lowered the demand across the board.

I'm a female and not conservative at all but "sexy gear" does not belong in a game like LOTRO. It makes no sense.. and doesn't fit with what the game is based on. I wish there were better outfit choices though. 99% of the robes are so bulky and ugly. The only thing I like for my LM is the summer festival dress.

That said, a number of annoying features in LotRO and other MMOs were designed to force grouping. The interdependency of craft skills, e.g., which was meant to get players to interact and trade materials. Of course, it didn't work: serious crafters just made a sufficient number of alts.

Originally Posted by Ameranth

This is because of the diminishing relative value of silver as a character levels, combined with the diminshing value of crafting.

The prices for even basic materials on the AH range from incredibly expensive to completely out of reach for a new character, yet those same prices are barely worth the time to sell them to a high level one, thanks to the ease of earning silver from monsters later on.

Only for those players whose purpose in crafting is to make money on the AH. Neither my two characters (Scholar and Farmer/Cook), nor whh's entire stable of every crafting profession in the game, craft to make online money; we craft to make materials that we and a few kinmates will use.

This means new characters are effectively locked out of trading with other crafts,

Or didn't try trading with other players' characters to begin with, because it's such a hassle; easier to make another alt and train him/her to provide the materials you need.

Add to this the fact that only one-shot recipes require cross-craft components and at high levels crafting is pointless, and you've lowered the demand across the board.

Are we talking about the same game?

Originally Posted by Dworin

My opinion is worth the exact same as yours, so if mine is worthless, yours is as well.

You're insisting our characters should be allowed to dress like NPCs who aren't even the same sort of person our characters are supposed to be, regardless of whether their look would fit our characters. So for example when we meet the Woodwoses (as we're pretty much bound to), who apparently went naked except for grass skirts round their waists, by your argument it'd instantly become legit for our characters to likewise prance around naked except for grass skirts, just because somebody in the game dresses like that. So I'm sorry, but trying to establish that as a general principle is plainly nuts: you can't insist that just because some NPCs wear something, that should make it up for grabs for Freep fashion too.

*shrug* In fact, my opinion maybe worth more; according to your profile you have not logged into the game for awhile. In other words, you are sitting there pontificating about clothing styles of a game you are apparently not even playing.

As I've said before, this is an old account I post on because I don't entirely trust the security of the forums. So you've had it there, mate. Trying that one on is a sure sign you've run out of any real arguments.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

You're insisting our characters should be allowed to dress like NPCs who aren't even the same sort of person our characters are supposed to be, regardless of whether their look would fit our characters. So for example when we meet the Woodwoses (as we're pretty much bound to), who apparently went naked except for grass skirts round their waists, by your argument it'd instantly become legit for our characters to likewise prance around naked except for grass skirts, just because somebody in the game dresses like that. So I'm sorry, but trying to establish that as a general principle is plainly nuts: you can't insist that just because some NPCs wear something, that should make it up for grabs for Freep fashion too.


As I've said before, this is an old account I post on because I don't entirely trust the security of the forums. So you've had it there, mate. Trying that one on is a sure sign you've run out of any real arguments.

Exactly why do you think our characters shouldn't be allowed to dress the way that we want them to including the way that the NPC characters dress? You have yet to give a reason (good or bad) why you feel that we should not be allowed to make clothing choices for our characters including those that the NPC characters make.

What is actually "nuts" here, is your negativity.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

You're insisting our characters should be allowed to dress like NPCs who aren't even the same sort of person our characters are supposed to be, regardless of whether their look would fit our characters. So for example when we meet the Woodwoses (as we're pretty much bound to), who apparently went naked except for grass skirts round their waists, by your argument it'd instantly become legit for our characters to likewise prance around naked except for grass skirts, just because somebody in the game dresses like that. So I'm sorry, but trying to establish that as a general principle is plainly nuts: you can't insist that just because some NPCs wear something, that should make it up for grabs for Freep fashion too.


As I've said before, this is an old account I post on because I don't entirely trust the security of the forums. So you've had it there, mate. Trying that one on is a sure sign you've run out of any real arguments.

And you are strawmanning, changing my argument into something easier for you to attack. I said shorter skirts are already in the game, which is plainly true. I used the brigands as an example, only to show that short skirts are already in the game. Turbine can, therefore, design skirts that are shorter, using different material looks and patterns, and not break the *look* of the game. It's already been shown that one short skirt already exists, a dyable version of the underwear look Elvish women wear. If Turbine made different patterns of skirts that length, the precedent is already there. The *look* will not be destroyed by making different versions of something that is already in-game. But please, keep strawmanning.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

You're still failing to distinguish between NPCs who are from one of the cultures that are relevant to player-characters and those who aren't, like Dunlendings.

Eh, not really - being a brigand has nothing to do with "culture" or "faction". And even in case of actual cultures - it is hardly an argument.

#1 Brigand npcs dress alike - but we know it happens due to technical limitations - not because there is secret dress code among brigands in Shire, Evendim or... those in Great River region. We don't know *why* they would choose to dress in such way or if there is even a "why" that fits them all. Until there is a connection between specific outfit (or specific style) and being evil/NPC, "but they are not Free People/PC" argument is well... worthless.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#2 Angmar is a good example of the dress code we can attribute to entire faction (until we meet... Apprentices of Saruman, curse you, cheap Turbine...) and in this case it is reasonable to deny such *specific* choices to players. Headpiece for example - not to mention the entire idea of looking "like Angmarim" is out of place considering we can only kill them. But it's similar to #1 too - until you can claim that "skimpishness" belongs to Angmarim/Evil faction, you are missing the point. And so far your only explanation was "well, they look differently than other factions that are already in-game and besides, we are defined by our heritage/allegiance". Really? See below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#3 Reputation factions. Hello, Lossoth outfits we can receive after meeting certain criteria. We can defy logic and wear them in southern regions. And why exactly are those outfits available to us? It is certainly not "who we are" and "how we should look". If it is about "when in Rome", think about the time we spend in Dunland-ish territories including Enedwaith. If it's about "Free People" - we can use various housing items from Lhanuch, so there goes "free people should have no identity crisis". Human from Dale wearing Annuminas outfits is just as exotic as if wearing Lhanuch ones (assuming they suddenly appear in Store just like any weird outfits that are already there - Rift set for example)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#4 Neither "free" nor "people", nor "character you are playing" bring any specific obligations in terms of clothing, "who our characters are", or gameplay/activities. Even questgivers disagree. Even Turbine (chuckle) disagrees considering what they're selling in Store. You can choose to remain in Shire and RP for entire game, it doesn't matter who are we "supposed" to be. Hah, we can even go to Moors and act like a spy for creeps if we want to, effectively playing on the side of Sauron despite having no options to engage in combat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#5 Assumptions. I know there is a big amount of descriptions we can find in source material. But I'd rather see specific kind of them - the ones including normative-ish statements of the author. Like "and he wore simple, olive shirt just like all of his kinsmen" or "she dressed in usual way for West Emnet...(description follows)".

Oh, wait...

"the ‘dress’ of various peoples, Men and others, was much diversified in the Third Age, according to climate, and inherited custom."

Accompanied by:

"I do not know the detail of clothing.".

We are not dealing with societies of clones (despite MMO logic). While there is low risk in saying dress code was different depending on a hierarchy, LOTR characters deal mostly with royalty, royalty-ish or... soldiers. Let's not even go into occupation-specific differences. And that's just race of Man - Hobbits are dealth with, Elves? Not really - specific characters are wearing certain kind of clothes. That's it.

So no, assumptions "what author meant" or "how it should look to preserve author's ideas" is not "lore". Let's not fool ourselves: current set of outfits is mostly a set of *design choices* with some unspecified limitations we can only speculate about. If designers decide we might spend money on some other style of outfits (exluding Darth Vader level of ridiculousness & enraging "Watchers" from Licensing Pool), we will get them. Quitting the game over that as if it was "destruction of Tolkien's world" is weird reasoning when author himself denied such vision even existed.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

As for dressing to be 'flirty', in past times that might have meant as little as wearing a skirt that was just an inch or two too short to be quite proper. Showing cleavage and showing a lot of leg shouldn't be equated, either, one might be acceptable and the other not. Showing a hint of shapely ankle might be daring but any more might be genuinely shocking. You shouldn't go by modern standards in a fantasy!

Not really, either. "Flirty" dress code changed a *lot* and it was anything BUT simple progression from "full body carpet" to "modern standards of fantasy". No idea which period is deemed "appropriate" in drawing similarities. We might as well ban certain kind of dye because it was used as "working girls" ID few centuries ago. Finally, sexuality in general is not out of the picture because Free People were following some (unknown, never mentioned, never even suggested) set of strict rules - it's like Orc females all over again: story is about something else. Does that mean anything specific about the place of "skimpishness" in M-E societies? Nope.

It would be honest to just state: "I don't want to". Bringing various arguments from lore-land (without actual lore) or "respect"/"human rights" (without actual humans) that are supposed to give "objective" or "mature" vibe to "NO!" however... It is a good thing recent "Tera controversy" or certain marketing techniques feel like from completely different world. But it hardly means any possessive stances, ridiculed by already existing outfits, do not resemble "this is my game, go away".

Well said, Ferthcott. +rep for you.

Originally Posted by djheydt

Only for those players whose purpose in crafting is to make money on the AH. Neither my two characters (Scholar and Farmer/Cook), nor whh's entire stable of every crafting profession in the game, craft to make online money; we craft to make materials that we and a few kinmates will use.

I wasn't talking about selling, but buying. I meant that a new player will be unable to support their crafting at AH prices. Even a 'cheap' price to a higher level character is out of their reach, so you don't get any trading going on. By the time they can afford those prices, they no longer need to buy supplies from the AH since they can either make the items on alts or the gear isn't worth making at all.

Originally Posted by Ameranth

I wasn't talking about selling, but buying. I meant that a new player will be unable to support their crafting at AH prices. Even a 'cheap' price to a higher level character is out of their reach, so you don't get any trading going on. By the time they can afford those prices, they no longer need to buy supplies from the AH since they can either make the items on alts or the gear isn't worth making at all.

Now you're really confusing me. I don't BUY things on the AH either.

If we're now talking about how you start out a new character with very little money -- it used to be NO money, and you used to have to kill mobs in Archet or Thorin's Gate and vendor everything you looted to get a few coppers for a better pair of shoes -- the solution was, and is, simple. Go out and kill things. Vendor everything you don't actually have a use for. As you progress, and want to make more money, go to an area where the humanoid mobs are just barely grey to you, slaughter them unmercifully, loot everything they've got, and continue to vendor.

The AH is one of those things like housing or PvMP: a delight to some, irrelevant to others.

Originally Posted by Ameranth

I wasn't talking about selling, but buying. I meant that a new player will be unable to support their crafting at AH prices. Even a 'cheap' price to a higher level character is out of their reach, so you don't get any trading going on. By the time they can afford those prices, they no longer need to buy supplies from the AH since they can either make the items on alts or the gear isn't worth making at all.

The solution, as is pointed out in every thread complaining about AH prices, is to SELL the low-level components you can gather and use the proceeds of those sales to BUY the higher level components that you can't gather.

--W. H. Heydt

Old Used Programmer

Originally Posted by Ferthcott

Eh, not really - being a brigand has nothing to do with "culture" or "faction". And even in case of actual cultures - it is hardly an argument.

#1 Brigand npcs dress alike - but we know it happens due to technical limitations - not because there is secret dress code among brigands in Shire, Evendim or... those in Great River region. We don't know *why* they would choose to dress in such way or if there is even a "why" that fits them all. Until there is a connection between specific outfit (or specific style) and being evil/NPC, "but they are not Free People/PC" argument is well... worthless.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#2 Angmar is a good example of the dress code we can attribute to entire faction (until we meet... Apprentices of Saruman, curse you, cheap Turbine...) and in this case it is reasonable to deny such *specific* choices to players. Headpiece for example - not to mention the entire idea of looking "like Angmarim" is out of place considering we can only kill them. But it's similar to #1 too - until you can claim that "skimpishness" belongs to Angmarim/Evil faction, you are missing the point. And so far your only explanation was "well, they look differently than other factions that are already in-game and besides, we are defined by our heritage/allegiance". Really? See below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#3 Reputation factions. Hello, Lossoth outfits we can receive after meeting certain criteria. We can defy logic and wear them in southern regions. And why exactly are those outfits available to us? It is certainly not "who we are" and "how we should look". If it is about "when in Rome", think about the time we spend in Dunland-ish territories including Enedwaith. If it's about "Free People" - we can use various housing items from Lhanuch, so there goes "free people should have no identity crisis". Human from Dale wearing Annuminas outfits is just as exotic as if wearing Lhanuch ones (assuming they suddenly appear in Store just like any weird outfits that are already there - Rift set for example)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#4 Neither "free" nor "people", nor "character you are playing" bring any specific obligations in terms of clothing, "who our characters are", or gameplay/activities. Even questgivers disagree. Even Turbine (chuckle) disagrees considering what they're selling in Store. You can choose to remain in Shire and RP for entire game, it doesn't matter who are we "supposed" to be. Hah, we can even go to Moors and act like a spy for creeps if we want to, effectively playing on the side of Sauron despite having no options to engage in combat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#5 Assumptions. I know there is a big amount of descriptions we can find in source material. But I'd rather see specific kind of them - the ones including normative-ish statements of the author. Like "and he wore simple, olive shirt just like all of his kinsmen" or "she dressed in usual way for West Emnet...(description follows)".

Oh, wait...

"the ‘dress’ of various peoples, Men and others, was much diversified in the Third Age, according to climate, and inherited custom."

Accompanied by:

"I do not know the detail of clothing.".

We are not dealing with societies of clones (despite MMO logic). While there is low risk in saying dress code was different depending on a hierarchy, LOTR characters deal mostly with royalty, royalty-ish or... soldiers. Let's not even go into occupation-specific differences. And that's just race of Man - Hobbits are dealth with, Elves? Not really - specific characters are wearing certain kind of clothes. That's it.

So no, assumptions "what author meant" or "how it should look to preserve author's ideas" is not "lore". Let's not fool ourselves: current set of outfits is mostly a set of *design choices* with some unspecified limitations we can only speculate about. If designers decide we might spend money on some other style of outfits (exluding Darth Vader level of ridiculousness & enraging "Watchers" from Licensing Pool), we will get them. Quitting the game over that as if it was "destruction of Tolkien's world" is weird reasoning when author himself denied such vision even existed.



Not really, either. "Flirty" dress code changed a *lot* and it was anything BUT simple progression from "full body carpet" to "modern standards of fantasy". No idea which period is deemed "appropriate" in drawing similarities. We might as well ban certain kind of dye because it was used as "working girls" ID few centuries ago. Finally, sexuality in general is not out of the picture because Free People were following some (unknown, never mentioned, never even suggested) set of strict rules - it's like Orc females all over again: story is about something else. Does that mean anything specific about the place of "skimpishness" in M-E societies? Nope.

It would be honest to just state: "I don't want to". Bringing various arguments from lore-land (without actual lore) or "respect"/"human rights" (without actual humans) that are supposed to give "objective" or "mature" vibe to "NO!" however... It is a good thing recent "Tera controversy" or certain marketing techniques feel like from completely different world. But it hardly means any possessive stances, ridiculed by already existing outfits, do not resemble "this is my game, go away".

nice post!

Originally Posted by Ferthcott

Not really, either. "Flirty" dress code changed a *lot* and it was anything BUT simple progression from "full body carpet" to "modern standards of fantasy". No idea which period is deemed "appropriate" in drawing similarities. We might as well ban certain kind of dye because it was used as "working girls" ID few centuries ago. Finally, sexuality in general is not out of the picture because Free People were following some (unknown, never mentioned, never even suggested) set of strict rules - it's like Orc females all over again: story is about something else. Does that mean anything specific about the place of "skimpishness" in M-E societies? Nope.

It's not like Middle-earth doesn't relate to anything else: it borrows heavily from Northern European myth and legend. Take the Rohirrim: everything about them says Northern European by inspiration, and from a fairly specific period at that. So, what would women wear in a society like that? Hint: not short skirts. Not showing off any midriff, either. It's a traditionally-minded sort of fantasy, and that has implications for the sort of clothes that people would be likely to be wearing. Modern sexuality should be out of the picture.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

It's not like Middle-earth doesn't relate to anything else: it borrows heavily from Northern European myth and legend. Take the Rohirrim: everything about them says Northern European by inspiration, and from a fairly specific period at that. So, what would women wear in a society like that? Hint: not short skirts. Not showing off any midriff, either. It's a traditionally-minded sort of fantasy, and that has implications for the sort of clothes that people would be likely to be wearing. Modern sexuality should be out of the picture.

You are still ignoring a simple fact. Short skirts are already in the game, even player wearable short skirts. But hey, don't let reality stop ya.

Originally Posted by Dworin

You are still ignoring a simple fact. Short skirts are already in the game, even player wearable short skirts. But hey, don't let reality stop ya.

And you're ignoring the context of what I said. The question there was what it probably ought to look like, not what it looks like after already having been adapted into a game. Some compromises have already been made in that, but they've not moved away from it entirely. And that of course is why you're here, carping about it.

As for reality in-game: the dresses are all long. Robes come down to beneath the knee at least, hauberks too. There are long tunics (not skirts, as such) but they're worn with pants. Anything else is what you might call proper armour, which does often feature a short skirt but that's all part of it being armour, it's not there to look sexy. It's quite plain what Turbine have set out to achieve, so asking for conventionally 'sexy' fantasy outfits is a waste of time.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

It's quite plain what Turbine have set out to achieve, so asking for conventionally 'sexy' fantasy outfits is a waste of time.

Wait, what? I am not asking for that. I am asking for access to outfit styles that are already in the game. Or if you prefer, access to "freep versions" of outfit styles that are already in the game.

That is what Dworin and I are supporting. Not Age of Conan naked avatars, "tin foil bikinis" or whatever you have your mind set on as conventional "sexy" fantasy outfits.

Concerning the female brigands clothing:

While it's not exactly a message I'd want to send, thinking about this has made me realize that, within LOTRO, the skimpy clothing and evil-ness of characters *do* go together, so much so that I've come to associate the one with the other (again, within LOTRO). If you see a woman who's barely covered, so far, there's a 100% chance that it's a mob.

I really don't think this is intentional - if only because it's not quite politically correct - but it is the status quo as I perceive it.

I think this is why the idea of fellow players wearing that kind of clothing bothers me; in my mind, it comes with both the scowl the mobs always seem to have and their aggressive attitude. (If I try to picture a player character wearing something like that, that's what happens.) Of course, that would easily be solved by enough players wearing it and proving to be just as nice as the average LOTRO player has thus far proven him/herself to be. I'm sure I could get used to it.

I guess what I'm saying is that there does seem to be a convention of the good girls covering themselves up, and the bad ones not bothering. Because of that, we're not just talking about 'increasing the options', but also about changing that convention. I'm not saying that's a bad thing - I just think it's something to be aware of, and acknowledging it might make the discussion run more smoothly.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

And you're ignoring the context of what I said. The question there was what it probably ought to look like, not what it looks like after already having been adapted into a game. Some compromises have already been made in that, but they've not moved away from it entirely. And that of course is why you're here, carping about it.

As for reality in-game: the dresses are all long. Robes come down to beneath the knee at least, hauberks too. There are long tunics (not skirts, as such) but they're worn with pants. Anything else is what you might call proper armour, which does often feature a short skirt but that's all part of it being armour, it's not there to look sexy. It's quite plain what Turbine have set out to achieve, so asking for conventionally 'sexy' fantasy outfits is a waste of time.

If the only aspect of the game were battling baddies, I might (somewhat) agree with you, but that is a very limited, narrow vision of what people are capable of in this game.

When Eukwen and Est go to battle, she is wearing armor, cosmetically, that looks good but still looks like armor. As she should. But is your vision so limited that you cannot see that what is right on the battlefield, may not be right for a night of dancing and merriment in town, away from the baddies? Then it's time for the soft dresses and *nicer* look. Which Eukwen does well with what is available. All she's asking for is a bit more variety in her choices. And since the precedent is already there, it is not inappropriate to ask for, even if it means that some skirts are shorter than ankle length.

Originally Posted by Dworin

You are still ignoring a simple fact. Short skirts are already in the game, even player wearable short skirts. But hey, don't let reality stop ya.

I'd like to see a picture of these short skirts that are already in the game please.

Originally Posted by isbjorn

Something tells me it is only the male players running female toons that are wanting to dress their characters a bit 'saucy'.

Am I wrong?

I think that somehow you might be right.

Originally Posted by Unique

I'd like to see a picture of these short skirts that are already in the game please.

From this very thread....



http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...78#post6088078

Dyable version. Named Leggings of the Haunted.

I *think* there is another leg item with that look, but I may be wrong. I know Eukwen has such a skirt in her wardrobe (Because I saw an Elf wear it to a concert and Eukwen told me she had it.) but I do not know the name of it. Eukwen can tell, or correct me if I am wrong.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

It's not like Middle-earth doesn't relate to anything else: it borrows heavily from Northern European myth and legend. Take the Rohirrim: everything about them says Northern European by inspiration, and from a fairly specific period at that.

Actually, almost everything about the Rohirrim says "Old Mercian". This includes their language but *doesn't*--ironically--include what the Rohirrim are best known for: mounted combat. The Mercians rode *to* battle, but then dismounted and fought on foot.

Still...The Mercian pagan burial excavation reconstructions would give good data on how a wealthy Rohir woman would dress...much like a wealthy Viking woman.

Google on Gale Owen-Crocker, who has made an extensive study of the relevant garments.

--W. H. Heydt

Old Used Programmer

Originally Posted by Okokdir

Wait, what? I am not asking for that. I am asking for access to outfit styles that are already in the game. Or if you prefer, access to "freep versions" of outfit styles that are already in the game.

The point is that there's no reason there should be 'freep versions' of those. Those are worn by different people, different cultures, and so some differentiation is both natural and desirable. Some of those people are rather 'wild', others rather nasty too. From the point of view of the fantasy world, its internal logic, there's no obvious reason why anyone would want to dress at all like them.

That is what Dworin and I are supporting. Not Age of Conan naked avatars, "tin foil bikinis" or whatever you have your mind set on as conventional "sexy" fantasy outfits.

Everything is relative. It being based on LOTR, the bar's set a little bit higher here in terms of what looks the part even allowing for it being a game. And no, I'm most certainly not thinking of the extremes of AoC, or anything else of that sort.

Originally Posted by Dworin

But is your vision so limited that you cannot see that what is right on the battlefield, may not be right for a night of dancing and merriment in town, away from the baddies? Then it's time for the soft dresses and *nicer* look. Which Eukwen does well with what is available. All she's asking for is a bit more variety in her choices. And since the precedent is already there, it is not inappropriate to ask for, even if it means that some skirts are shorter than ankle length.

And I am saying that there should not be, because it's bringing modern notions of fashion into it. Looking 'nicer' doesn't require higher hemlines, that's the mistake you're making. In a setting like this, just as in RL history, it'd mean richer fabrics, stylish cut and detailing, more elaborate decoration (embroidery, in particular), the use of expensive colours, and so on. Plus some accessories to set it off, of course, and an attractive hair-do, and whatever cosmetics might be available and fashionable. Depending on the customs of the time, it might involve showing more or less of the upper body and arms to advantage but the skirts would stay long.

My view here isn't in the least narrow, it's simply informed.

Originally Posted by Dworin

From this very thread....



http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...78#post6088078

Dyable version. Named Leggings of the Haunted.

I *think* there is another leg item with that look, but I may be wrong. I know Eukwen has such a skirt in her wardrobe (Because I saw an Elf wear it to a concert and Eukwen told me she had it.) but I do not know the name of it. Eukwen can tell, or correct me if I am wrong.

Technically that's the skirting of a pair light leather armour leggings, meant to protect a fighters manly parts, not a fancy new outfit to wear to a dance. It's not really a skirt but it fits in the game.

You'll be happy to know there are all kinds of those in the game like

http://www.northshield.co.uk/LOTRO/L...warf1726AF.JPG
http://www.northshield.co.uk/LOTRO/L...warf2932AF.JPG
http://www.northshield.co.uk/LOTRO/Light/Radiant/RadiantDB.JPG

Ignore the above part, your link stopped on another picture of skirt like leggings


Edit: OH I see you're talking about the ones that look like underwear.....that was a bug apparently and got fixed according to this thread http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...-Haunted-model

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

And I am saying that there should not be, because it's bringing modern notions of fashion into it. Looking 'nicer' doesn't require higher hemlines, that's the mistake you're making. In a setting like this, just as in RL history, it'd mean richer fabrics, stylish cut and detailing, more elaborate decoration (embroidery, in particular), the use of expensive colours, and so on. Plus some accessories to set it off, of course, and an attractive hair-do, and whatever cosmetics might be available and fashionable. Depending on the customs of the time, it might involve showing more or less of the upper body and arms to advantage but the skirts would stay long.

My view here isn't in the least narrow, it's simply informed.

It's actually quite narrow, since you can't seem to grasp something as simple as no one requires higher hemlines, but that they'd like to have a choice in the matter.

Originally Posted by Dworin

From this very thread....



http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...78#post6088078

Dyable version. Named Leggings of the Haunted.

Yikes those are uncomfortably short.

Originally Posted by Unique

Technically that's the skirting of a pair light leather armour leggings, meant to protect a fighters manly parts, not a fancy new outfit to wear to a dance. It's not really a skirt but it fits in the game.

You'll be happy to know there are all kinds of those in the game like

http://www.northshield.co.uk/LOTRO/L...warf1726AF.JPG
http://www.northshield.co.uk/LOTRO/L...warf2932AF.JPG
http://www.northshield.co.uk/LOTRO/Light/Radiant/RadiantDB.JPG

Ignore the above part, your link stopped on another picture of skirt like leggings


Edit: OH I see you're talking about the ones that look like underwear.....that was a bug apparently and got fixed according to this thread http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.p...-Haunted-model

Awwww, that's too bad. They should bring them back, or something similar; the poster on the link you provided seems really upset to find her nice outfit ruined. But, what was wrong with that outfit? I though it looked nice.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

The point is that there's no reason there should be 'freep versions' of those.

Except that some people might want to wear something similar, which is reason enough.

Originally Posted by Dworin

Except that some people might want to wear something similar, which is reason enough.

No, it most certainly isn't given that this is an RPG rather than just fantasy dress-up, and it's not generic fantasy either. People want all sorts of things, that doesn't immediately make it right.