Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DandD" data-source="post: 3964156" data-attributes="member: 55168">Both are okay, as long as the non-cheesecake-pictures dominate AND most importantly are used to depict combat situations. No to scantily clad fighter chicks protecting wizards holding their shields in a stupid position just to show her cleavage. Yes to at least believable competent warrior women wearing heavy full armour with no holes and silly gaps in their protective armament to shield their wizard companion against incoming attacks. Yes to both pictures if the warrior-woman just is standing there for show, although the more dressed woman should always be preferable to the bikini-chainmal slut (yes, that's how I think about them). Heavy protective armour does look cool too, after all. If you absolutely must have have a female warrior being almost half-naked just for the sake of drawing semi-perverted pictures and trying to appeal to little boys, draw them while they're trying to don their armour (so, reverse-striptease, basically. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> ). And show the barely-armoured wizards, rogues and whatever-dudes and dudettes having heavy wounds BECAUSE they don't wear armour, and perhaps should be glad and thankful to the dude and/or dudette who does wear armour and stays at the front-line to protect them.</blockquote>

Verification