Female Sarnaks & Dresses (also Iksar/Sarnak & feminine figure or lack thereof)

[Tigress]

<p>I wanted an evil female character with WIS & STA as her attributes in character development.  This left me with four choices:</p><ul><li>Troll</li><li>Sarnak</li><li>Ogre</li><li>Barbarian</li></ul><p>I despise the SOGA and hate that ppl will see my character looking like something else so that eliminated barbarian.  Out of the three left, I thought that maybe I could live with Snarnak more than the others.  I can't really tell if she is a boy or girl when I see her on screen so I decided to feminize her a bit.  Why can't she wear a dress?  I viewed the maiden outfits that a tailor makes and it looks as it would on a male character (boy's suit).  Now she's wearing a mage's robe but it's not the same. </p><p>Will you please let girl sarnaks wear dresses?  TY.</p><p>And....  why doesn't she have a female chest/figure.  The female iksars are the same.  (Although with Iksars, you can make them look feminine with the hair/horns/spikes; cannot do that with Sarnaks.)  If you can look at a kerra and immediately know "boy/girl", then the reptiles should have the same.  TY.</p>

[shadowscale]

<p>rather like the diffrence myself due to being reptile they wouldent have the same diffrences mammles have.and sarnak are military based and female dominant, so could explane why no dress that way. and to tell female from male just look at the horns on the head and hight diffrence, they are definitly more feminen looking then the males.</p><p>and as to no chest.. they lay eggs so no reason for them to have anything.</p>

[Tigress]

<p>if you saw a female tiger and a male tiger, you wouldnt be able to easily distinguish them *unless the female is nursing or about to have cubs*.  nothing about EQ2 is realistic.  there is no way to tell diff btwn male & female sarnaks.</p><p>choices are always good.  denying sarnaks dresses eliminates choices.  iksars can wear dresses, why not sarnaks?</p><p>how do you know that they lay eggs?  i havent read that anywhere.  yes, reptiles in the real world do but, again, nothing about EQ2 is realistic.</p>

[Cusashorn]

<p>I remember them saying when Sarnaks were first introduced that the lack of any mammaries or otherwise feminine features meant that they could just use the male graphic instead of having to go through the trouble of developing an entirely new one just for that race and gender. There wouldn't be any point to it: There's nothing to show. Quite frankly, I'm surprised that the female dress does apply to female iksar and frogloks, but those races' models have been around since the start of the game, so... yeah.</p><p>Back in EQlive, female iksar started off completely naked save for underpants. They had nothing to hide because they had nothing to show. Female frogloks were still given a strip of cloth across their chests, but not so much for censorship reasons, as more just to tell the two genders apart.</p><p>That's the thing about sexual dimorphism. It's easy to tell if a mammal is female because they WILL have breasts. Iksar, Sarnaks, and Frogloks are Reptillian, Reptillian, and Amphibian, respectively. They cannot have breasts, so the designers needed a way to tell them apart from males.</p><p>In EQlive, female iksar had more colorful patterns on their faces. in EQ2, they have frills, horns, and a distinctly different skull shape from males.</p><p>Frogloks are... well, there are some physical differences, but at first glance you wouldn't be able to really tell right away. This is the same in both games.</p><p>The Sarnaks though, you can tell gender apart by height. Females stand 12 feet tall, whereas males only stand 8. I think there really doesn't need to be anything else that tells them apart besides that rather jarring difference in height.</p>

[shadowscale]

<p><cite>Tigress wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>how do you know that they lay eggs?  i havent read that anywhere.  yes, reptiles in the real world do but, again, nothing about EQ2 is realistic.</p></blockquote><p>how about an entire zone in EQ1 <a rel="nofollow" href="http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/zones.html?zstrat=621." target="_blank">http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/...ml?zstrat=621 .</a> and lots of lore about iksar and eggs out there like when trackanon burned the hatcherys in sebilis.</p>

[Tigress]

<p><em><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite></em></p><p><em>I remember them saying when Sarnaks were first introduced that the lack of any mammaries or otherwise feminine features meant that they could just use the male graphic instead of having to go through the trouble of developing an entirely new one just for that race and gender.</em></p><p>now THAT i believe.  path of least resistance for the devs.  that stinks. </p><p>not being able to wear dresses is just dumb.  i dont like that my female is so freaking huge and bigger than the boys.  i dont like that she looks like a boy.  if i could put a dress on her, then maybe she'd look like a girl.  why r the girls bigger than the boys anyway?</p>

[Avirodar]

<p><cite>Tigress wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><em><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite></em></p><p><em>I remember them saying when Sarnaks were first introduced that the lack of any mammaries or otherwise feminine features meant that they could just use the male graphic instead of having to go through the trouble of developing an entirely new one just for that race and gender.</em></p><p>now THAT i believe.  path of least resistance for the devs.  that stinks. </p><p>not being able to wear dresses is just dumb.  i dont like that my female is so freaking huge and bigger than the boys.  i dont like that she looks like a boy.  if i could put a dress on her, then maybe she'd look like a girl.  why r the girls bigger than the boys anyway?</p></blockquote><p>Why are the girls bigger? Because the Devs decided that the females are the dominant gender of the Sarnak species, and to help promote such, they made the females physically larger.Amusingly enough, there was another recent thread, where a small handful of Iksars complained about the "injustice" of having to wear the same dresses as other mammal races (citing the lack of breasts as not being flattering, for the outfit design/print). These same people pointed to the Sarnak race, with envy, saying they want the same.When you play a monster-based race, you will have some limitations. The perks, and uniqueness, comes at a cost. If the cost is too high, play another race, or pick another outfit.</p>

[Sandyfoot]

<p>It's easy to tell the difference from a male and female Sarnak.</p> <p>Males have facial horns and females don't.</p> <p>Males have small eyes and females have large expressive eyes.</p>

[kelvmor]

<p>I nearly auto-posted something already said here, about reptilians not having mammary glands. Oh, well. To be frank, racial bonuses don't really mean too much. It's a difference of maybe a few points of WIS/STA. I know a guy who plays a Troll Wizard, he doesn't seem to lose power any faster than an Erudite Wiz, and there's at least a 15 point base INT difference there.</p>

[Avirodar]

<p><cite>kelvmor wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I nearly auto-posted something already said here, about reptilians not having mammary glands. Oh, well. To be frank, racial bonuses don't really mean too much. It's a difference of maybe a few points of WIS/STA. I know a guy who plays a Troll Wizard, he doesn't seem to lose power any faster than an Erudite Wiz, and there's at least a 15 point base INT difference there.</p></blockquote><p>Yeah, the differences are insignificant, compared to what they were in days gone.Gear and skill are the important factors, above race.</p>

[msgnomer]

<p><cite>Tigress wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I despise the SOGA and hate that ppl will see my character looking like something else so that eliminated barbarian. </p></blockquote><p>I'm with you on SOGA, but why does it really matter how all people see your character.  In real life people are always looking at you through the prism of their personal experience and biases, so why not just laugh it off if people what to put on their wonky distorted SOGA glasses.  Plenty of people will see your character as it really is.</p><p>That said, I actually don't much like my Barbarian in dresses - at least not the puffy style all the dresses are.  She's not a monk but occasionally enjoys donning a decorative Gi.  Which actually makes me think that might something for you to look at and see if you like on the race of your choice.  I'm not much for buying from the Marketplace, but they did have a crate of four Gi outfits that I divided up between my characters - all different and generally nice looking.</p>

[Ceebia]

<p>Yea alot of dresses on female Sarnaks don't look right.  Same goes for armor on a Sarnak male.  As for the lack of a femiinine figure, not really seeing it.  Iksar females have the slight build just not in the chest area.   Sarnak it's kinda hidden only thing that tells them apart is the lack of facial horns on the females and normally larger size.</p>

[Snowdonia]

<p>Troll is, hands down, the shmexiest choice of that lot. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Faecia]

<p>I think frogloks should have giant knockers too, please.</p>