We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 69

Thread: Shorts

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,385

    Shorts

    I know England is chilly. In fact if it gets up to the mid-upper 80F (30ish C) for a few days the roads melt. Still doesn't mean that people can't wear shorts like Daisy Dukes or something, especially when it gets into the sweltering *cough* upper 20's C.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,712
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    I know England is chilly. In fact if it gets up to the mid-upper 80F (30ish C) for a few days the roads melt. Still doesn't mean that people can't wear shorts like Daisy Dukes or something, especially when it gets into the sweltering *cough* upper 20's C.
    We used to wear shorts, back in the 70's, but then all those obese US tourists came over here wearing them, and it looked so horrific, we had to ban them.

    BTW, that road melting is planned for, it helps fill in all the pot holes.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,385
    So no one else wants shorts to wear during Summer Festivals or while fishing?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,712
    [ Has this sudden terrible image of a hobbit getting a bikini wax ]

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    14,696
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    So no one else wants shorts to wear during Summer Festivals or while fishing?
    Only little boys. Cf. innumerable pictures of Prince George.

    However, just in case you were going to suggest wearing shorts in-game -- which will be no help in fending off Real World (tm) heat where you are -- I would want to see evidence of shorts being worn in Europe in the Early Middle Ages. I don't say it's impossible, only that in fifty years or so of researching Early Period costume, I've never seen an example of them.
    Eruanne - Shards of Narsil-1 - Elendilmir -> Arkenstone
    www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    I know England is chilly. In fact if it gets up to the mid-upper 80F (30ish C) for a few days the roads melt. Still doesn't mean that people can't wear shorts like Daisy Dukes or something, especially when it gets into the sweltering *cough* upper 20's C.


    Move along folks, nothing to see here!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Gallifrey. I need a Jelly Baby.
    Posts
    20,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Langie View Post


    Move along folks, nothing to see here!
    Pretty much this.
    Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"
    Continuing the never ending battle to keep Lobelia Sackville-Baggins in check

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,385
    I am serious about the shorts. I was joking about the melting roads, although those are real.
    But as far as shorts not being around 'back then' whenever 'then' was, as has already been debated in other threads, that has little to do here. Victorian Age that would have limited dress to a certain 'code' was late, very late to any era or time mentioned in the prior debates. Now the game has Waders which weren't around back then, which means people would have went out wading in shoes and long pants to fish? I doubt that. Sandals maybe, and short pants or undies even I would believe. I have many pics of nobles in stockings and short pants. Anyway the game already has Jumpsuits, cowboy hats, top hats and many cosmetics that would not be 'period', what ever period that would be.




    Since Middle Earth is not during the Victorian Age, why not shorts that look nice on female toons with male toon version having slightly longer legs, like they are in current real life?
    And for those talking about "Protection is combat" does a dress offer much in way of "protection in combat"? Or the Jumpsuit above? The shorts would be for gardening or fishing or festivals or picnics in an RP sense, not so much of adventuring.
    Oh and did I forget to mention the jeans and tanktop?
    Last edited by Milii; Jul 12 2018 at 08:45 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    I am serious about the shorts.
    Think breeches, not shorts. Asking for anything obviously twentieth-century is a bit much. As for hot-pants or Daisy Dukes, that's early 1970s... what else are you going to ask for, loon pants?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Think breeches, not shorts. Asking for anything obviously twentieth-century is a bit much. As for hot-pants or Daisy Dukes, that's early 1970s... what else are you going to ask for, loon pants?
    Only if they can be colored like this:


    Just kidding. Cargo Pants for the Warrior / Burglar or Scholar / RK might be a good thing though. You know, lots of pockets with stuff pocking out of them like some of the horses' saddlebags.
    But as long as women have scissors I see no reason why short shorts would not be a thing. I could see how a Victorian Society would not allow such things to be immortalized with paintings and stuff. You know that early photography people would wear their 'Sunday Best' and some people think that is actually how people dressed all the time, even out in the Wild West, which was far from the truth. So yes, cutting down a pair of breeches or pantaloons makes sense, but then this game doesn't even have those knee-length pants. Last thing I want after being out in 90F weather all day is to come inside and see people dressed in hot looking clothes.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    Cargo Pants
    Just stop... those started off as WW2 era battle dress. What with that and the shorts, you could hardly get much further out of context if you tried.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Gallifrey. I need a Jelly Baby.
    Posts
    20,375
    Cargo pants in Middle Earth? Uh....no.
    Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"
    Continuing the never ending battle to keep Lobelia Sackville-Baggins in check

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymphonic View Post
    Cargo pants in Middle Earth? Uh....no.
    I don't know why anyone even bothers to reply to this person anymore, she is just such an obvious troll. At least Evelwyn was a little more subtle about it.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    5,855
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymphonic View Post
    Cargo pants in Middle Earth? Uh....no.
    Already exists, I'm afraid.

    I named my pet dog Cargo. I run around a bit with him, and when I stop, Cargo pants.
    The Lag is so bad I saw Sara Oakheart outrun someone - kickman77

    Cener, Ingo, Rilibald, Hesred, Halras, Belegthelion, Ingoror, Gloringo
    Arkenstone (ex-Elendilmir) - The Osgiliath Guard - http://www.theoldergamers.com

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,712
    Quote Originally Posted by Nosdracir View Post
    Already exists, I'm afraid.

    I named my pet dog Cargo. I run around a bit with him, and when I stop, Cargo pants.
    And people say my jokes are bad.......

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    battle dress.
    That is my point with the Cargo Pants. Basically pants with pockets/sheaths or maybe a belt with leg straps to keep the pockets secure. It makes zero sense for say a yellow Hunter to stop, take off her pack, shuffle through all the gear, to find a trap to stop some orc that is already charging the party. Nope, that Trap-user would have a pocket for that trap at ready and easy access and not buried in some pack. The best to make this happen is pocket on clothing.

    Other people imagine an assassin with a bandolier or two of throwing knives, yet having done a little bit of cliff climbing myself I realize that anything hanging loosly off the body when you might get sideways or even kinda upside-down is a hazardess proposition. However if the Assassin has a fitted leather shirt with built in sheaths down it on either side of the center-line then the knives will always be where muscle memory can find them and they will be out of the way for climbing walls/buildings or just normal sneaking about.

    It just makes more sense for some hard core adventurer to have clothing with specialized compartments to store their most used items ready at hand than to have it all just tossed into a pack. Since this is the idea of Cargo Pants I used those as an example to give the general idea of what I meant without having to type a novella in explanation. After all, the Artists in SSG always amaze me at their implementations of people's ideas and I would hate to restrict those creative juices with my vision.

    Since clothing is the first thing to deteriorate inside or out of a tomb we really have no idea of what people wore even just a few centuries ago, especially when it comes to 'dressed down', commoner, and specialty clothing. Since shorts fit into the first two items listed and 'cargo pants' or Utility Clothing the last there can be no well reasoned argument against either in a game. The jeans and possibly the jumpsuit above, as well as the two hats, there are reasonable arguments against, due to material-type for the former at the least.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    That is my point with the Cargo Pants.
    You don't really have any point there because those are decidedly modern in style. Heck, they hadn't even come up with battle dress when Tolkien was in the British Army (it came in more than twenty years later), for all that having lots of pockets would have been just as handy a thing during WW1 as it was in WW2 and has been since. And you certainly don't just casually insert modern stuff into a fantasy setting, because it looks wrong.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Gallifrey. I need a Jelly Baby.
    Posts
    20,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Nosdracir View Post
    Already exists, I'm afraid.

    I named my pet dog Cargo. I run around a bit with him, and when I stop, Cargo pants.
    My wife was wondering why I laughed out really loud while reading my phone.
    Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"
    Continuing the never ending battle to keep Lobelia Sackville-Baggins in check

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Langie View Post
    I don't know why anyone even bothers to reply to this person anymore, she is just such an obvious troll.



    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    That is my point with the Cargo Pants. Basically pants with pockets/sheaths or maybe a belt with leg straps to keep the pockets secure. It makes zero sense for say a yellow Hunter to stop, take off her pack, shuffle through all the gear, to find a trap to stop some orc that is already charging the party. Nope, that Trap-user would have a pocket for that trap at ready and easy access and not buried in some pack. The best to make this happen is pocket on clothing.

    Other people imagine an assassin with a bandolier or two of throwing knives, yet having done a little bit of cliff climbing myself I realize that anything hanging loosly off the body when you might get sideways or even kinda upside-down is a hazardess proposition. However if the Assassin has a fitted leather shirt with built in sheaths down it on either side of the center-line then the knives will always be where muscle memory can find them and they will be out of the way for climbing walls/buildings or just normal sneaking about.

    It just makes more sense for some hard core adventurer to have clothing with specialized compartments to store their most used items ready at hand than to have it all just tossed into a pack. Since this is the idea of Cargo Pants I used those as an example to give the general idea of what I meant without having to type a novella in explanation. After all, the Artists in SSG always amaze me at their implementations of people's ideas and I would hate to restrict those creative juices with my vision.

    Since clothing is the first thing to deteriorate inside or out of a tomb we really have no idea of what people wore even just a few centuries ago, especially when it comes to 'dressed down', commoner, and specialty clothing. Since shorts fit into the first two items listed and 'cargo pants' or Utility Clothing the last there can be no well reasoned argument against either in a game. The jeans and possibly the jumpsuit above, as well as the two hats, there are reasonable arguments against, due to material-type for the former at the least.

    Thanks so much for proving my point for me

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    You don't really have any point there because those are decidedly modern in style. Heck, they hadn't even come up with battle dress when Tolkien was in the British Army (it came in more than twenty years later), for all that having lots of pockets would have been just as handy a thing during WW1 as it was in WW2 and has been since. And you certainly don't just casually insert modern stuff into a fantasy setting, because it looks wrong.
    First, someone else was making their clothes for them, and secondly they had utility belts. Thirdly, how is pockets a 'modern stuff'? I am just saying that instead of having a satchel on a belt or a bandolier of knives to build these into the clothing. We aren't talking at metal armor or mass produced uniforms but mostly leather (and sometime cloth) clothing/armor that are special made for a hero that include pockets (or what passes for one in utility) with some of them showing part of their contents, like dagger hilts, scrolls, trap-teeth, a rope, whatever. They would be a series loosely based upon Class (scholar, burglar, Beorning, hunter, warrior) that have different tools-of-the-trade attached to them.

    I mean did you even see the extended edition of the Two Towers and the weapons check before they entered the Horse King's Great Hall?

    And shorts aren't 'modern stuff' either, they just weren't the Sunday Best that everyone got their picture painted wearing and the certainly were not armor to be in battle scenes nor would one be buried in them. So just because there is a blank in the archeological record doesn't mean a thing does not exist. I know too many types of layered armor, including rice-paper armor, that there is no modern example of them but there are writing about them. But these were armors worn by heroes and armies so there is written record of them. However there is less written details of most common items. We know about ancient latrines not because of people writing about them but from archeology digging them up. Pots or drinking skins or drinking horns might be mentioned but unless it is made of gold or unicorn horn it is unlikely that we have more detail than that about them in writing. Even clothing is often left to 'He was clad in animal skins' with little detail on the length of the skins, the style they are cut and sewn together in or only a little more often what animal the skins came from (usually some ferocious animal like a bear or lion very rarely would sheep or goat be noted). And if we went and dug that person up, most likely there would be nothing left of his clothing to enlighten us more. And, like today, someone attending a Royal Feast would not be wearing 'common' clothing but they would wear their Sunday Best instead, so even if a writer makes a detailed survey of clothing it would be unlikely that shorts would be mentioned. However since uneven bare dirt and wild brush was the paths or the day it makes zero sense that women would be running around in floor length dresses to go draw water from the stream or hoe the garden. It makes zero sense to wear clothes in a time that everything was handwoven where the bottoms of the clothes would be torn to bits within days.

    Of course you are going to say "But tapestries" and I present to your the following:



    Do you really think that he would be working in that jacket or she would be working in that blouse wearing that broach? At least Grant Wood left the farmer in his Bibs and the wife in her apron. Only Victorian Dogma insisted than women always wear floor length dresses or skirts. Since you yourself said that the armor should be based on early Medieval period and the Victorian Era was late Renaissance- Colonial period such restrictions would not exist in Middle Earth.

    Even though these are not short shorts, they certainly are not long pants like everything in game:



  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,712
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    First, someone else was making their clothes for them, and secondly they had utility belts. Thirdly, how is pockets a 'modern stuff'? I am just saying that instead of having a satchel on a belt or a bandolier of knives to build these into the clothing. We aren't talking at metal armor or mass produced uniforms but mostly leather (and sometime cloth) clothing/armor that are special made for a hero that include pockets (or what passes for one in utility) with some of them showing part of their contents, like dagger hilts, scrolls, trap-teeth, a rope, whatever. They would be a series loosely based upon Class (scholar, burglar, Beorning, hunter, warrior) that have different tools-of-the-trade attached to them.

    I mean did you even see the extended edition of the Two Towers and the weapons check before they entered the Horse King's Great Hall?

    And shorts aren't 'modern stuff' either, they just weren't the Sunday Best that everyone got their picture painted wearing and the certainly were not armor to be in battle scenes nor would one be buried in them. So just because there is a blank in the archeological record doesn't mean a thing does not exist. I know too many types of layered armor, including rice-paper armor, that there is no modern example of them but there are writing about them. But these were armors worn by heroes and armies so there is written record of them. However there is less written details of most common items. We know about ancient latrines not because of people writing about them but from archeology digging them up. Pots or drinking skins or drinking horns might be mentioned but unless it is made of gold or unicorn horn it is unlikely that we have more detail than that about them in writing. Even clothing is often left to 'He was clad in animal skins' with little detail on the length of the skins, the style they are cut and sewn together in or only a little more often what animal the skins came from (usually some ferocious animal like a bear or lion very rarely would sheep or goat be noted). And if we went and dug that person up, most likely there would be nothing left of his clothing to enlighten us more. And, like today, someone attending a Royal Feast would not be wearing 'common' clothing but they would wear their Sunday Best instead, so even if a writer makes a detailed survey of clothing it would be unlikely that shorts would be mentioned. However since uneven bare dirt and wild brush was the paths or the day it makes zero sense that women would be running around in floor length dresses to go draw water from the stream or hoe the garden. It makes zero sense to wear clothes in a time that everything was handwoven where the bottoms of the clothes would be torn to bits within days.

    Of course you are going to say "But tapestries" and I present to your the following:



    Do you really think that he would be working in that jacket or she would be working in that blouse wearing that broach? At least Grant Wood left the farmer in his Bibs and the wife in her apron. Only Victorian Dogma insisted than women always wear floor length dresses or skirts. Since you yourself said that the armor should be based on early Medieval period and the Victorian Era was late Renaissance- Colonial period such restrictions would not exist in Middle Earth.

    Even though these are not short shorts, they certainly are not long pants like everything in game:



    OOOooo, taking a BIG risk using films stills; a lot of Tolkien fans really HATE the liberties taken in the films..

    No evidence of cargo pants, but there are depictions of men wearing short trousers in the Early Middle Ages, and shorts as part of military uniforms from 1888.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    how is pockets a 'modern stuff'?
    Cargo pants would be recognisable as modern stuff. They were a modern idea. No more needs to be said, it'd be an obvious anachronism.

    As for pockets in general, they're from the 17th century and later. Before that, people used pouches instead. As far as Middle-earth goes, hobbits wear clothes with pockets but then the Shire is purposely anachronistic - everything else is decidedly older in character. And it's hardly as if the idea of having pouches rather than pockets is unfamiliar to people who play fantasy RPGs, is it?

    As for shorts - don't just make things up. And learn the difference between breeches and shorts, already (in the movies male hobbits wear breeches, just as they should be)... breeches are a thing in Middle-earth, but breeches aren't 'shorts' because they come down to below the knee. And you can always roll up the legs on breeches if you need to on account of what you're doing.

    However since uneven bare dirt and wild brush was the paths or the day it makes zero sense that women would be running around in floor length dresses to go draw water from the stream or hoe the garden. It makes zero sense to wear clothes in a time that everything was handwoven where the bottoms of the clothes would be torn to bits within days.
    Yes, working women often wore skirts that were somewhat shorter for practicality but only relatively so, ankle-length or short enough to show feet and ankles. You can see that in period illustrations. You ought to know what traditional clothing was like, and it certainly wasn't about running around showing leg.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    14,696
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Yes, working women often wore skirts that were somewhat shorter for practicality but only relatively so, ankle-length or short enough to show feet and ankles. You can see that in period illustrations. You ought to know what traditional clothing was like, and it certainly wasn't about running around showing leg.
    Rich and noble ladies wore long skirts that swept the ground -- indeed, in some historical periods they wore *puddle-hemmed* skirts that were *longer* than their legs, and they had to take careful gliding steps, hardly lifting their feet from the floor, in order not to trip. But these were great ladies who didn't go outdoors much, and if their hems got dirty or frayed, that was something their maids had to deal with. It was a form of conspicuous consumption: "Look how much more fabric I can afford than I actually need!"

    If somebody wanted to design a puddle-hemmed wedding gown for Arwen, I wouldn't object. But if she has to walk in it, rather than just standing in it, the devs will have to design a new walking style for her, as described above. (I learned how, when my daughter made me a fifteenth-century houppelande. It can be done.)

    _____
    *Or if they did, it was on horseback, so that they could wear exceedingly long skirts and show off some more. Here's the month of May from Les Tres Riches Heures:

    https://www.wayfair.com/decor-pillow...gid=null&pid=1
    Eruanne - Shards of Narsil-1 - Elendilmir -> Arkenstone
    www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Gallifrey. I need a Jelly Baby.
    Posts
    20,375
    Quote Originally Posted by djheydt View Post
    y houppelande.
    I had to Google that word, learn something new everyday!
    Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"
    Continuing the never ending battle to keep Lobelia Sackville-Baggins in check

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    As for shorts - don't just make things up. And learn the difference between breeches and shorts,
    Next you will say that my concept of cookies is wrong, too. "Breeches" is British-English, not American English. Here there are shorts, short-shorts, and long shorts. We don't have prams or petrol here either. What you just said is the equivalent to me telling you to learn English and is quite rude.

    And you do admit Pockets exist in Middle Earth for it where Bilbo kept the Ring, and they had been around long enough that Gollum knew what one was because of the Riddles in the Dark. Besides, cargo pants, although we call them pockets, is really more like built-in pouches. If things like Craftsman's Robe have them, why not pants or shirts for adventurers?




    Quote Originally Posted by Yarbro View Post
    OOOooo, taking a BIG risk using films stills; a lot of Tolkien fans really HATE the liberties taken in the films..
    I thought this was settled last fall with the introduction of Elk Mounts to the game. Just like the movie Two Towers gave a nod to EQ1's 'dwarf roll' this game has to give a bit of a nod to the movies because that it how fandom works and hence the 'elf-roll'. Strict adherence to Tolkien's work, which is flawed in itself as far as what-period-is-it-anyway is concerned, would push away that base that has never read the books and have only seen the movies. Details that are in the books can be inserted in the quest/story lines to help advance the knowledge of these players if one wishes but strict adherence to the books is not what the game is about for a number of reasons.

    The movies may not be Canon but they are Lore just as the Amazon Series will become unless they really botch it. Of course, no matter what they do some will say that Amazon did botch it because that is the sad world we live in today.

    ps - @djheydt thank you for the good information.
    Last edited by Milii; Jul 15 2018 at 05:35 PM.

 

 
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload