I said it before and I say it again for you: Robes and pointy hats are no less practical than long skirt/ coats and cowboy hats.
The practicallity argument really holds no water. Just drop it already. Also, even though GoT takes a far more realistic approach to fashion than most other shows and movies of it's kind, it forgets about one historical fact:
The one that people wore hats, coifs and what not all the time in the middle ages. From the poorest beggar to the richest king. They protect you from sunburns, lice, rain and so on.
GoT isn't realistic, it's just good at pretending to be.
Also, the part about the subdued colours is simply not true, GoT has some of the flashiest fashion designs in the entire genre. The subdued colours era was around the 90s, where the only colour that seemed to have existed in "ye olden times" was brown and everything needed to be dark and gritty.
PS: Now, if you could please stop derailing my thread by making false assumptions and keep recycling your weak arguments, I would very much welcome that.
Robes: soak up mud and water and become heavy, get tangled around feet when running. Yes, long skirts have the same problem. I don't see many adventurers running around in long skirts either. Trousers or short kilts, depending on climate, are what sensible unarmoured adventurers wear, irrespective of gender.
Tall hats: get knocked off at inconvenient times, get stuck in doorways or when crawling through tight tunnels, get snagged on tree branches whilst riding, mark the wearer out as a target.
Hats without broad brims: worthless for protection from either the sun or the rain.
No one ever said the robes need to be so long that they reach to the floor.
Just because the brimm-less hats are less practical than the ones with brim doesn't automatically make the ones with brimms unpractical.
Most hats would get in the way when crawling through a tight tunnel. So would your backpack and your weapons.
There are pointy hats that are not so tall that they'd get knocked off your hat in a doorway (also depends on how tall the person is). Any hat can get knocked off your head while riding. Ever read Grimm's version of Cinderella? Also, that's what they invited close fits and hatbands for or what they are called.
Who was talking about capes (which are btw also historical fashion)?
Just drop it already. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Last warning: Stop derailing my thread. Come back when you got an argument that actually holds water.
People can say about DSA what they want, but they have some of the best visual designs in all of P&P history. (Also, instead of coming up with dumb shit like bikini-mail, they just straight up draw people naked.)
No one ever said the robes need to be so long that they reach to the floor.
They don't have to touch the floor. Having worn long robes, I know that anything below knee length is vulnerable to splashed water, and will entangle legs when running. There is a reason a Scottish Highlander's kilt is the length it is.
You can wear knee length robes if you like. Good luck with not looking silly.
Just because the brimm-less hats are less practical than the ones with brim doesn't automatically make the ones with brimms unpractical.
Being bald, I often wear a hat to protect from the sun. So I know from experience that hats without brims are useless. I'm all in favour of low hats with big brims. Hoods are better in rain though.
Who was talking about capes (which are btw also historical fashion)?
Sure they where, as tall hats have been sometimes. They serve as ostentatious displays of wealth and power. Just the sort of thing you might wear to the royal court. But not down a dungeon.
And yeah, Incredibles joke. Don't you think you might be taking this whole thing way too seriously?
Just drop it already. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Last warning: Stop derailing my thread. Come back when you got an argument that actually holds water.
That is rude, personal and arrogant. My opinion is just as valid as yours. I expect ostentatious and impractical clothing will come back into fashion with game designers eventually, and it has never gone out of fashion in JRPGs.
I always think of robes as being worn in layers. It would have been beneficial for people who spent their lives exposed to the elements to be able to add or remove layers of clothing. Even if some sort of pants were worn underneath, it makes sense to me that robes would be worn on the outside. Rather like modern day coats.
Hats of all kinds would have been a necessity for many of the reasons already stated here.
And in my personal opinion, no proper wizard would set out on an adventure without a wide brimmed, pointed hat.
Just a side note here. It is the OPs right to guide the direction of the discussion within their own thread. If a poster is asked to stop posting comments that the OP considers derailing to the thread, it is common courtesy to do so.
What I believe is that all opinions are valid, even if they differ from the OPs opinions.
Unfortunately, sometimes once a poster with a differing opinion has expressed that opinion, they simply refuse to let go of the argument. This forces the OP to counter the same posters points over and over again. At that point it just become an argument between the two, and effectively derails the thread.
What I believe is that all opinions are valid, even if they differ from the OPs opinions.
Unfortunately, sometimes once a poster with a differing opinion has expressed that opinion, they simply refuse to let go of the argument. This forces the OP to counter the same posters points over and over again. At that point it just become an argument between the two, and effectively derails the thread.
The OP wasn't forced to counter anything. Accepting that other people have different opinions is a valid option!
Personally, I don't think modern game devs "hate" the classic wizard look any more than early game devs "hated" the modern wizard look. I think it could be fun to have clothing options in games actually matter but making that work in game mechanics could be tough sometimes. For instance, a long robe might hinder movement slightly but could give you a plus to save against a cold based spell.
I always think of robes as being worn in layers. It would have been beneficial for people who spent their lives exposed to the elements to be able to add or remove layers of clothing. Even if some sort of pants were worn underneath, it makes sense to me that robes would be worn on the outside. Rather like modern day coats.
Wearing anything at all below the robe removes the one existant upside to the garment, though: being able to piss yourself from fear without ruining your clothes.
Which is probably why so many wizards wear them, come to think of it.
@mf2112 said: I think it could be fun to have clothing options in games actually matter but making that work in game mechanics could be tough sometimes. For instance, a long robe might hinder movement slightly but could give you a plus to save against a cold based spell.
That’s an interesting thought. In some of The Sims games, wearing a coat can help your character not freeze to death quite so quickly. Of course they are an entirely different kind of game.
Still, it could be interesting if say your character took cold damage if they were not properly equipped when adventuring somewhere like Icewind Dale.
Though I suppose that sort of thing wouldn't appeal to everyone.
Perhaps there was something to the pointy hat . . .
(although I really don't want to see it in a video game)
Oh. Archaeologists sometimes get really carried away. How could one think of those as hats? They have nothing to do with head coverings, actually. You don't want to know what they're for. Really, you don't.
You don't know. Pray that you never will.
Don't open that spoiler!
I warned you...
Back in the bronze age, these metallic devices may or may not have been used in sexual intercourse... a lot. The Goddess has really weird fantasies sometimes.
Wow. I had no idea -- we've been doin' it rong all this time.
But at least . . .
(not for anyone with taste)
there isn't a parallel to the wizard's staff, right? Sure the wizards carry a long piece of wood in their hands but that doesn't mean anything. Sometimes a staff is just a staff
To me, the classical wizard appearance is less about being a wizard and more about being mysterious. The travel-worn robe, cloak, and hat suggest someone who lives on the outskirts of society, and unknown quantity. And for wizards like Elminster and Gandalf, that works.
But in a lot of settings these days, wizards aren't mysterious. They might be powerful and dangerous, but quite often, they aren't an unknown quantity. Dragon Age is actually a prime example of this. Mages in Thedas are controlled and legislated, and when the average person hears "mage" they have some idea of what to expect. Mages aren't keepers of secret knowledge, and their power is understood, if not well-liked, by the rest of the world. Given this, the mysterious robe/cloak/hat ensemble doesn't really work for them. They aren't mysterious. In fact, it's a pretty core part of the narrative in Dragon Age that mages are just ordinary people. So more and more, they dress like ordinary people. And this is just as appropriate for the mages of Thedas as the Odin suit is for Gandalf.
That said, I must also confess to a dislike for extravagantly colored robes and hats in mysterious wizards, though. That suggests a need to stand out that doesn't really fit with the mysteriousness. It makes me think more of charlatans trying to pass as wizards than it does of actual wizards.
His point about not having rules for magic makes no sense. It's not about having set rules, it's about how much about those the story reveals. If you don't have set rules, chances for plot holes increase rapidly.
A good example for how to do it would be Schmendrick from The Last Unicorn. Not even he understands the rules of his magic. Yet we can tell from how the results, that his magic becomes more powerful, the less he tries to control it. The more specific he gets about his spells, the likely they are to fail. (Btw, great example for a wild mage.)
Harry Potter's magic doesn't lose it's mysteriousness because it has set rules. It's not mysterious because it's explained in marticulous detail. That is true for pretty much anything.
Look at the Jokers from the different Batman movies for example. Both are terrifying and at their core the same character, but unlike Nicholson's Joker, Ledger's Joker is shrouded in mystery. Still, neither of them has super natural abilities or powers, so we know that they only can do what is humanly possible. And so they both act within those rules.
Ehhh, I think that turned out more confusing than I intended, but right now I don't know how to explain it better.
I love The Last Unicorn (both the movie and novel). Off subject but ex-GF/Current best friend was able to use her librarian magic to get a copy of The Last Unicorn: The Lost Version which is the rough draft. There's like only 1000 copies in existence. I didn't get to keep it of course but was a great read.
Admittedly, that would work better if they didn't carry blatantly obvious mage staves, most of which would be hard-pressed to pass for ordinary walking sticks.
Aren't the pointy-hat, old, bearded wizard-y types usually the 'mentor' figure starting the main characters on their journey - they usually then suffer some kind of death/removal requiring the main character to overcome the ultimate evil themselves (and often a rebirth just before the end)...?
Aren't the pointy-hat, old, bearded wizard-y types usually the 'mentor' figure starting the main characters on their journey - they usually the suffer some kind of death/removal requiring the main character to overcome the ultimate evil themselves (and often a rebirth just before the end)...?
BrB, filing a feature request for Gorion to wear dat hat!
Aren't the pointy-hat, old, bearded wizard-y types usually the 'mentor' figure starting the main characters on their journey - they usually then suffer some kind of death/removal requiring the main character to overcome the ultimate evil themselves (and often a rebirth just before the end)...?
Comments
Robes and pointy hats are no less practical than long skirt/ coats and cowboy hats.
The practicallity argument really holds no water. Just drop it already.
Also, even though GoT takes a far more realistic approach to fashion than most other shows and movies of it's kind, it forgets about one historical fact:
The one that people wore hats, coifs and what not all the time in the middle ages.
From the poorest beggar to the richest king. They protect you from sunburns, lice, rain and so on.
GoT isn't realistic, it's just good at pretending to be.
Also, the part about the subdued colours is simply not true, GoT has some of the flashiest fashion designs in the entire genre. The subdued colours era was around the 90s, where the only colour that seemed to have existed in "ye olden times" was brown and everything needed to be dark and gritty.
PS: Now, if you could please stop derailing my thread by making false assumptions and keep recycling your weak arguments, I would very much welcome that.
Tall hats: get knocked off at inconvenient times, get stuck in doorways or when crawling through tight tunnels, get snagged on tree branches whilst riding, mark the wearer out as a target.
Hats without broad brims: worthless for protection from either the sun or the rain.
Also see: Edna Mode on capes.
Just because the brimm-less hats are less practical than the ones with brim doesn't automatically make the ones with brimms unpractical.
Most hats would get in the way when crawling through a tight tunnel. So would your backpack and your weapons.
There are pointy hats that are not so tall that they'd get knocked off your hat in a doorway (also depends on how tall the person is). Any hat can get knocked off your head while riding. Ever read Grimm's version of Cinderella? Also, that's what they invited close fits and hatbands for or what they are called.
Who was talking about capes (which are btw also historical fashion)?
Just drop it already. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Last warning: Stop derailing my thread. Come back when you got an argument that actually holds water.
Gotta love The Dark Eye, especially the cRPG franchise Drakensang, for its pointy retro hats and winged Asterix helmets!
(Also, instead of coming up with dumb shit like bikini-mail, they just straight up draw people naked.)
You can wear knee length robes if you like. Good luck with not looking silly. Being bald, I often wear a hat to protect from the sun. So I know from experience that hats without brims are useless. I'm all in favour of low hats with big brims. Hoods are better in rain though.
Sure they where, as tall hats have been sometimes. They serve as ostentatious displays of wealth and power. Just the sort of thing you might wear to the royal court. But not down a dungeon.
And yeah, Incredibles joke. Don't you think you might be taking this whole thing way too seriously?
That is rude, personal and arrogant. My opinion is just as valid as yours. I expect ostentatious and impractical clothing will come back into fashion with game designers eventually, and it has never gone out of fashion in JRPGs.
Hats of all kinds would have been a necessity for many of the reasons already stated here.
And in my personal opinion, no proper wizard would set out on an adventure without a wide brimmed, pointed hat.
Just a side note here.
It is the OPs right to guide the direction of the discussion within their own thread. If a poster is asked to stop posting comments that the OP considers derailing to the thread, it is common courtesy to do so.
If so, all I can say is that I absolutely, totally, and utterly disagree with you.
What I believe is that all opinions are valid, even if they differ from the OPs opinions.
Unfortunately, sometimes once a poster with a differing opinion has expressed that opinion, they simply refuse to let go of the argument. This forces the OP to counter the same posters points over and over again. At that point it just become an argument between the two, and effectively derails the thread.
Which is probably why so many wizards wear them, come to think of it.
I think it could be fun to have clothing options in games actually matter but making that work in game mechanics could be tough sometimes. For instance, a long robe might hinder movement slightly but could give you a plus to save against a cold based spell.
That’s an interesting thought. In some of The Sims games, wearing a coat can help your character not freeze to death quite so quickly. Of course they are an entirely different kind of game.
Still, it could be interesting if say your character took cold damage if they were not properly equipped when adventuring somewhere like Icewind Dale.
Though I suppose that sort of thing wouldn't appeal to everyone.
Maybe developer or designer wants to be different from "classic".
They don't call classic for nothing. It have its charm, like a magic.
Mrs. Salesbury with her Grandchildren, Edward and Elizabeth. By John Michael Wright (May 1617 – July 1694)
But at least . . .
(not for anyone with taste)
But in a lot of settings these days, wizards aren't mysterious. They might be powerful and dangerous, but quite often, they aren't an unknown quantity. Dragon Age is actually a prime example of this. Mages in Thedas are controlled and legislated, and when the average person hears "mage" they have some idea of what to expect. Mages aren't keepers of secret knowledge, and their power is understood, if not well-liked, by the rest of the world. Given this, the mysterious robe/cloak/hat ensemble doesn't really work for them. They aren't mysterious. In fact, it's a pretty core part of the narrative in Dragon Age that mages are just ordinary people. So more and more, they dress like ordinary people. And this is just as appropriate for the mages of Thedas as the Odin suit is for Gandalf.
That said, I must also confess to a dislike for extravagantly colored robes and hats in mysterious wizards, though. That suggests a need to stand out that doesn't really fit with the mysteriousness. It makes me think more of charlatans trying to pass as wizards than it does of actual wizards.
It's not about having set rules, it's about how much about those the story reveals.
If you don't have set rules, chances for plot holes increase rapidly.
A good example for how to do it would be Schmendrick from The Last Unicorn.
Not even he understands the rules of his magic. Yet we can tell from how the results, that his magic becomes more powerful, the less he tries to control it. The more specific he gets about his spells, the likely they are to fail. (Btw, great example for a wild mage.)
Harry Potter's magic doesn't lose it's mysteriousness because it has set rules. It's not mysterious because it's explained in marticulous detail. That is true for pretty much anything.
Look at the Jokers from the different Batman movies for example. Both are terrifying and at their core the same character, but unlike Nicholson's Joker, Ledger's Joker is shrouded in mystery. Still, neither of them has super natural abilities or powers, so we know that they only can do what is humanly possible. And so they both act within those rules.
Ehhh, I think that turned out more confusing than I intended, but right now I don't know how to explain it better.
On subject, even Schmendrick has a wizard hat