Female Characters and Attractiveness

Chromatic Eagle·Jul 31, 2015·13 votes·5,143 views

So this conversation pops out every now and then, and it will for a long time.

Now, whether or not you're a player or Riot, or your stance on the subject, these are some questions that should be asked,

Should a woman always be attractive regardless of her profession? Consider for a moment Leona and Diana. Neither of them are described as being beautiful, or at least defined by it. Should they have scars, burns, and less hair as a result? Then there's Tristana. She was the farthest thing from sexual, but was remade with a midriff.

Should a woman be made unattractive because of her profession? Cassiopeia is defined as losing her beauty, but only her lower half is affected. For a woman based off of Medusa, should she be more snakelike? Kalista isn't sexual, but attractive. Should a spctre be like this?

How do we even define attractiveness? Jinx is half naked, but is flat chested. Does this make her sexualized or not? Sona is always in a dress, but is busty. Both women are popular with men and women. Katarina has a scar, but she's attractive despite regardless, or even because of it. Vi has short hair and wears a suit, but she's curvy and the outfit is very tight.

Is it ok for women to be attractive, but to promote diversified ideas of it? If you want unattractive women, should it be by conventual standards? Warts and burns? Scales?

92 Comments

XulsigaeJul 31, 201520 votes

It's important to note that showing skin isn't necessarily sexual or attractive (otherwise nude champions like Zac would be way too much) and being covered up isn't necessarily nonsexual (skin tight out fits and such). What makes a champion attractive is a variety of aspects. A common complaint I hear is that people focus too much on females being uncovered or sexualized and not enough on males. This misses the point of uncovered not equating necessarily to sexualized. Just because Tryndamere/Braum/Pantheon/Varus/Ryze has a bare chest doesn't make him sexualized automatically. How a champion poses, what their kit and story is like, what quotes they say and their personality matter in how sexualized they are. Cultural context too, as a shirtless man in Western society isn't seen as sexual as a shirtless woman.

Being attractive or unattractive is similar. I (as a straight male) don't find Jinx attractive because she's crazy and I don't like homicidal people. Her personality and story makes her unattractive to me. Even if she wasn't flat chested, that wouldn't make her more attractive to me, but she would likely be more sexualized depending on how much focus was put on her chest. On the flip side, I don't think a few scars, scales, or a wart or two makes someone automatically unattractive. It's certainly okay for a champion to be attractive, but different body shapes, faces and such should be part of it and flaws not ignored. Being conventionally unattractive is the same.

What's important is how they are presented visually and thematically I think. A champion's looks should reflect their character and profession or background. Far too often someone will claim that asking for a more thematically appropriate costume is 'slut shaming' or 'too politically correct.' This is wrong. I don't mind Ahri being sexual in her appearance because it fits her character and role as a temptress, same as Eve. The first Cassiopeia made sense too (not much anymore due to that stupid curse in the tomb). If every female champion in League was a temptress sort and wore appropriate attire, it would be thematically appropriate. Lacking diversity sure, but appropriate. Even on champions like Sona it makes a bit of sense because she's a more social character and performer and her outfit might go with that aspect. Being attractive as a performer can be important, though obviously not necessary.

Other champions, being sexualized and wearing impractical outfits are not so appropriate. It didn't make sense for Sejuani to be going around in a metal bikini on the tundra (she doesn't have to be uncovered to be a badass). It doesn't make sense for Zyra to be just a lady with a few leaves stuck on her and with her feet in the shape of heels. It doesn't make sense that Leona wears heels either. Nami is based on a mermaid, but rather than just being a half human half fish, she's pretty fishy all around...but still has her skin split to have rather human cleavage. Caitlin is a highly competent and practical cop...with a miniskirt. They can be attractive sure, but at some point their appearance loses touch with their character and themes. If Caitlin likes to wear a miniskirt off the battlefield or when not on a case, that's just fine. If Leona likes heels, that's fine too, but not in a battle situation. Context for attire is vital. Impractical outfits in skins are fine as those aren't canonical and are just for fun (mostly, as sometimes they can get a bit too much). Splash arts are a common offender in that regard too. Spine breaking poses and other sexualized aspects can push a champion away from what they are as a character and into just an action figure or fan service. See Sivir and such. Champions like Vi I don't really see as sexualized (though her behind in her splash art is a bit exaggerated), but I do find her attractive. She's tough and scarred and that's okay. Same with Katarina (though her splash arts are a bit wonky at times and there was that debacle with her candy cane stripper pole). I like Kalista's look and think it fits her thematically, but I don't find her attractive physically. Leona and Diana are certainly attractive and I'd say even beautiful, but for the most part are practical and in appropriate attire (though Leona's heels...grr...).

Jungle Lux GodJul 31, 20152 votes

To be fair to Zyra and Nami, their visuals actually somewhat make sense.

In Zyra's case, she is basically a plant in a human's body. I think it would be unreasonable for her to be dressed in the kind of clothes other champions have because she doesn't have access to the same materials other champions have for making clothes, but she does have access to plants and stuff. She might have taken design queues from the clothes of the sorceress she took magic from, which may explain the heels, or she may not otherwise be comfortable walking using the entirety of her feet, and use the thorns on her heels for support.

As far as Nami is concerned, she clearly takes inspiration from mermaids, and mermaids normally have some degree of cleavage in most other forms of media.

XulsigaeJul 31, 20154 votes

She doesn't have to be dressed in clothes per se, but it would make more sense for her to be more plantlike in her aesthetics. More leaves and branches and such, less cleavage and heels. More like Mao Kai, but not quite as tree like. Poison Ivy works in her aesthetics because she was a human first and has a temptress vibe at times. Zyra was a plant first and has no need to be sexualized. I think it's more likely that she was designed like that for visual appeal to gamers rather than her personality being like that. We would need to know what the sorceress was like too. If the sorceress was of that body type and wearing heels (though why she would be in heels in the jungle I don't know) then maybe it would make sense as that's all Zyra would know.

Sure, but they don't have their skin split open to show cleavage. They have cleavage because they are human(ish) on top and don't wear clothes or wear the minimum of them. As I said, Nami is more fishlike than most mermaids and doesn't need to show human cleavage, and especially not have her skin split for it. If she was a classic mermaid, then sure, cleavage would be fine. But she's not and is drawn to show her skin specifically split at that point to show cleavage. I'm not against cleavage, but it doesn't make sense in this instance. It's like if Alistar's female minotaurs didn't have udders but instead humanlike breasts. It wouldn't make sense thematically.

GreenLoreJul 31, 20152 votes

I think Zyra was simply meant to give a poison-ivy kind of feel.You know like Sivir is designed to resemble Xena or Nidalee is basically Tarzan. Its probably also a way to make her feel more natural.You know like Adam and Eve are usually depicted as being completely nude except for being covered in only very few places.

As for Nami: There are generally 2 kinds of mermaids,those who are more fish like and those who are more human-like and I think Nami is trying to mainly fit both depictions(because in the end,we'll only ever get 1 mermaid,thats simply riots design approach for champions),being more fishlike overall,but still extremely humanlike(and showing some boobs like the human ones do) at the same time

XulsigaeJul 31, 20156 votes

Possibly, but the way it's handled doesn't give equivalent reasons for her to look like that. Poison Ivy has a reason: She's a human that is infused with plant powers and has a temptress facet to her as described and shown in the comics. It makes sense for her to be sexualized.

Zyra is a plant that made a human like body. A tree is just as natural as a human. If she had more bark like skin for instance, it would make more sense I think. As it is now, it seems like the plant Zyra just happened to make her new appearance in a way that appeals to human sexual tastes. If her story was expanded to include a description of the sorceress as looking like that, that would make sense as that's all Zyra would know, though I'd still wonder why the sorceress was in heels in a jungle. As it is now, it doesn't make much sense to me for her to be as she is lore and character wise.

I personally would expect Zyra to look more like Swamp Thing than Poison Ivy. Swamp Thing was a mass of plants that absorbed a human conscience and takes humanoid form because of that, but doesn't try to imitate the human's form to the point of replicating flesh and such.

Indeed there are two types usually, but the more fish like ones I've seen lack the cleavage Nami has, and even if they do have human like breasts, they aren't shown to be visible because of the skin being split. They are on the outside of the body in the usual places. What bothers me about Nami is not that she has cleavage, but that it looks like her species evolved to show cleavage via the split skin for no discernible reason. It just happens to look like human breasts. I like the rest of her design just fine as a mostly fishy mermaid but still attractive in human terms. Her face is plenty attractive and she didn't need anything more to be appeal visually. The chest to me looks like the artists just gave her cleavage without thinking of how it fits into the rest of her aesthetics. 'How will we give her sex appeal?' 'Unzip the skin on her chest to show cleavage!' How a champion is presented affects how attractive or sexual they are.

GreenLoreJul 31, 20152 votes

In Zyras case they probably were concerned with similarities to maokai. thats why she looks more human than plant.(Although giving her bark as skin wouldn't make that much sense,considering that regular plants don't really have bark)

In Namis case it is like I said that they probably wanted to merge the 2 styles. they only get one shot at making a mermaid champ,so they put as much mermaid into it as possible.

XulsigaeJul 31, 20153 votes

Why wouldn't bark make sense? Mao Kai has it for skin. Depending on the type of plant she was, different types of bark could be used as skin. Not every bark is as thick as Mao Kai's. Birch bark, Rose Bush bark, Cherry Bark etc. I can understand the desire to avoid similarities to Mao Kai, but I think they went too far to the looking like a human with a few leaves attached. I think she certainly can be attractive, but more plant features would be appropriate.

Indeed. I think they did a good job merging, but still felt the need to put cleavage on without thinking of better ways to do it. She's a good fishy mermaid but they couldn't abandon the cleavage.

GreenLoreJul 31, 20151 votes

trees have barks,but Zyra was seemingly more something like a flower(because flowers,thorns and so on are pretty much her thing).

XulsigaeJul 31, 20152 votes

Hmm...could be. Though, flowers aren't plants but just part of them. Rose bushes have bark when they reach maturity. It's just thinner bark.

QuortAug 1, 20151 votes

When Zyra dies she reverts to her plant form. For the most part it appears herbaceous so I don't think there would be any bark (especially because bark would be likely to restrict fluid movement).

XulsigaeAug 1, 20152 votes

Mao Kai movies pretty well for having thick bark. Even herbaceous plants (without needles) can have thin.

QuortAug 1, 20151 votes

Yes, but Maokai doesn't move like Zyra. Zyra is all about snaking vines and complex, human-like movement; Maokai just lumbers around in very stiff manor.

XulsigaeAug 1, 20151 votes

I'll grant you that, they do move very differently. Hmm. Perhaps not bark per se then, but something that looks less like human flesh.

QuortAug 1, 20154 votes

I can agree with this. She should be humanoid in appearance, but should be more plantlike in constitution. Perhaps a tangle of sinewy, thorny vines wrapped around each other, a more wood/mask-like face, etc...

Now... I do like Zyra's look (I even got her SKT skin to fulfill that more human look). but... Imagine this sort of aesthetic, in a female form with the inclusion of Zyra's iconic pinkish and red flowers/vines/thorns, a wooden mask sort of face, an overall earthy look. It would get rid of Zyra's strange sexiness and make her scarier and more predatory looking.

Use of imagination required! Proceed with caution! xD

IcyPepperJul 31, 20153 votes

Caitlin is a highly competent and practical cop...with a miniskirt.

For some reason, I have seen a few female snipers in fiction with skirts. Caitlyn's skirt seems rather loose, as opposed to skintight, so at least it's somewhat practical to assume a sniping position on the field. Makes me think of the Romans for some reason.

XulsigaeJul 31, 20154 votes

Have you ever seen them in real life though? There are cases where skirts/kilts were worn for battle, but they usually weren't gender based and had a practical function behind them, ease of movement and how easily they could be manufactured and such. Now we can make pants just fine with modern textile technology. There's a reason modern armies don't use them except for ceremonial purposes: Pants are better protection against pretty much everything. Bare legs are not something you want in the field, and in hot conditions shorts are sometimes used, but not skirts. Skirts offer nothing to a sniper except to make one more vulnerable to the elements and the enemy.

MimaropaJul 31, 20151 votes

I think the skirt fits well for cait. She's a sniper, she's supposed to be far from danger and with a skirt she can be very comfortable being in one position for a long time(snipers can stay for one place as long as one day). The skirt gives her better mobility, she needs it since she's a cop that chases criminals. Also, it could be some sort of piltover fashion that females wear some sort of skirt(vi has one but wears pants for protection, she's melee kind of person so its necessary)

XulsigaeJul 31, 20155 votes

Pants are superior to skirts for protection. If you're working or in a battle, you don't want to get hypothermia, sunburn, insect bites, cuts from plants or stones etc. There's a reason skirts are not used in modern battles: Pants are better. A sniper is not far from danger usually. Often they are in extreme danger, far behind enemy lines and in the worst conditions. Pants give plenty of mobility and better storage and protection than skirts or kilts. There is no reason to wear one in battle or on a police force.

NemeBroAug 1, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Pants are superior to skirts for protection. If you're working or in a battle, you don't want to get hypothermia, sunburn, insect bites, cuts from plants or stones etc. There's a reason skirts are not used in modern battles: Pants are better. A sniper is not far from danger usually. Often they are in extreme danger, far behind enemy lines and in the worst conditions. Pants give plenty of mobility and better storage and protection than skirts or kilts. There is no reason to wear one in battle or on a police force.

Cait isn't a soldier behind enemy lines. She's a police officer in her own city.

XulsigaeAug 1, 20155 votes

So? Pants are still the better option. Plenty of hazards in a city. Piltover isn't a utopia by any means.

IcyPepperAug 1, 20152 votes

To be fair, Vi fights with giant mechanical gauntlets. She could be using a gun, but sticks with those.

Sometimes we just have to ignore logic in favor of character/story/fun/cool/awesomeness. Caitlyn is some kind of beauty in her lore, and she's a sniper, and she sounds a bit cocky in her lines (to be fair, only one crook has ever escaped her). The skirt might be her way of expressing "I'm sexy and confident enough to wear what I want on the chase."

She gets the job done, even with a skirt, so it's not like anyone in-universe is going to complain.

XulsigaeAug 1, 20157 votes

Characters are not created in a vacuum. It's humans that create them. Saying characters won't complain is meaningless as they have no voices of their own. Readers and writers are the ones to speak for them. It doesn't fit with her character. That's the issue. Vi's fists make sense for her. Caitlin's skirt doesn't.

DreamspitterAug 2, 20152 votes

{quoted}

It's important to note that showing skin isn't necessarily sexual or attractive (otherwise nude champions like Zac would be way too much) and being covered up isn't necessarily nonsexual (skin tight out fits and such). What makes a champion attractive is a variety of aspects. A common complaint I hear is that people focus too much on females being uncovered or sexualized and not enough on males. This misses the point of uncovered not equating necessarily to sexualized. Just because Tryndamere/Braum/Pantheon/Varus/Ryze has a bare chest doesn't make him sexualized automatically. How a champion poses, what their kit and story is like, what quotes they say and their personality matter in how sexualized they are. Cultural context too, as a shirtless man in Western society isn't seen as sexual as a shirtless woman.

Being attractive or unattractive is similar. I (as a straight male) don't find Jinx attractive because she's crazy and I don't like homicidal people. Her personality and story makes her unattractive to me. Even if she wasn't flat chested, that wouldn't make her more attractive to me, but she would likely be more sexualized depending on how much focus was put on her chest.

Yup, Not everyone is into Yandere.

Really, there is no single definition of what is attractive, but as you note when you go out of your way to sexualize something everyone notices.

MerxamersJul 31, 20157 votes

I've been pretty happy with the variety of female body types Riot has designed in the last year or so; Jinx , Kalista , for example, are a nice change of pace from the previous string of identical body types we had (Elise, Zyra, etc.).

I don't have a problem with 'sexy' champs; i just feel awkward when it feels like they're meant exclusively to arouse a minority of the userbase with the back-breaking poses and impractical clothing (this mostly only happens for the splash arts). To use an example, Mortal Kombat has a problem with this, in my opinion. If I play as Sonya Blade or Kitanna, I want them to kick butt, not spill their jiggle-physics breasts out of their gauzy barely-there clothing.

Unfortunately, I give this thread about 10 minutes before it's infested with Goobergate-esque garbage

IamawalrusJul 31, 20157 votes

I think a game like League needs a pretty diverse set of types of attractiveness just because it's a large game. I don't particularly mind if every champ aside from monsters or typical icky types (twitch, etc) is attractive or cool in some way, as I see most of the champs in League as a sort of hero with good physical and mental traits or a set of skills, not average Joes, so not too unlikely.

That said, it's important to me that a wide variety of "attractiveness" is cool. A strong woman in proper armor is cool and a more elegant classical beauty is cool (I'm personally usually not a fan of more temptress type chars unless they're implemented in a particularly cool way).

It would be interesting to explore characters that are cool or enticing for other reasons than beauty, though! It could be a bonus.

DreamspitterAug 2, 20152 votes

{quoted}

I think a game like League needs a pretty diverse set of types of attractiveness just because it's a large game. I don't particularly mind if every champ aside from monsters or typical icky types (twitch, etc) is attractive or cool in some way, as I see most of the champs in League as a sort of hero with good physical and mental traits or a set of skills, not average Joes, so not too unlikely.

That said, it's important to me that a wide variety of "attractiveness" is cool. A strong woman in proper armor is cool and a more elegant classical beauty is cool (I'm personally usually not a fan of more temptress type chars unless they're implemented in a particularly cool way).

It would be interesting to explore characters that are cool or enticing for other reasons than beauty, though! It could be a bonus.

You say "proper" armor -curious, have you seen Repair Her Armor? WHat do you think of it?

HellioningAug 1, 20157 votes

My primary issue isn't that women are generally attractive, it's that every woman is attractive. Every humanoid female that doesn't look like a child (or is a child) in this game has an attractive face and an attractive body type, bar maybe Kalista with the claws and such (and yes, Cass' upper half counts). Doesn't matter if they're a career soldier or a magical musician, they are, at least, cute. Even the female yordles tend more towards 'cute' in a human way, with their smooth skin.

In comparison, there are a bunch of male characters who are less attractive. We have old men, fat men, more weirdly proportioned men (Singed, for example.) Sure, we have a bunch of hot dudes, but we have things BESIDES hot dudes. The male yordles, for example, are all much closer to animals than the females. When someone says Kennen is cute, they're saying he's cute because he reminds them of a hamster. When someone says Lulu is cute, she's cute because she reminds them of a little girl.

Then there's the fact that female characters tend to have more skin showing; skins, I think, are some of the worst about this. We have straight up fetish wear for a lot of female characters, but very few 'male stripper' outfits.

I don't have a problem with Ahri being sexy, or for MF's beauty being a big part of her character. I'd just like some variety. Give us a horribly scarred woman, or an old hag, or something.

FailTsukkomiAug 2, 20151 votes

{quoted}

In comparison, there are a bunch of male characters who are less attractive. We have old men, fat men, more weirdly proportioned men (Singed, for example.) Sure, we have a bunch of hot dudes, but we have things BESIDES hot dudes. The male yordles, for example, are all much closer to animals than the females. When someone says Kennen is cute, they're saying he's cute because he reminds them of a hamster. When someone says Lulu is cute, she's cute because she reminds them of a little girl.

I don't have a problem with Ahri being sexy, or for MF's beauty being a big part of her character. I'd just like some variety. Give us a horribly scarred woman, or an old hag, or something.

To be fair, the only champions that don't fit some paradigm of "badassness" or attractiveness that are still popular like Singed, Gragas or Taric are only liked because they're seen as funny. That or they're not human, like yordles or skarner or maokai or whatever. But that's a different thing altogether I'd say.

Male humanoid champions that don't fit into those two categories that also aren't really funny tend to be unpopular. I don't think many people actually care about, say, Yorick. I don't think it's as easy to make "funny" unattractive female champions either - I mean, I can't say a female analogue to a fat drunken guy that attacks people with alcohol will go over that well with most folks.

You could argue that we need more non-human female champions though, which I don't disagree with. I liked Rek'sai a lot.

HellioningAug 2, 20153 votes

Yorick's unpopular because Riot put him in the 'guaranteed nerf whenever he sees plays, working on rework' box for years, not just because he's not 'badass'.

I'm not getting into the design space of whatever Riot should make a 'funny' unattractive female character and if it would be popular. I wouldn't know. But Riot can certainly make a 'badass' unattractive female character. Or, at least, they should be able to. If Swain can become popular, not because he looks good but because he's cool, than a female version should be able to do the same as well.

Jungle Lux GodJul 31, 20155 votes

Every champion, whether the champion is male, female, or something else (eg. Bard ) should have some degree of attractiveness.

In my opinion, this kind of attractiveness doesn't simply involve whether or not the champion is beautiful or whether the champion has an idealized body shape, but instead may refer to the champion simply looking good. You can look at champions like Lissandra , Diana , or Kalista and consider them attractive. Are they beautiful? Not really. Do they have an hourglass figure? Maybe. But are they still attractive? I'd say so, because they look pretty good despite not having any ordinarily "attractive" features about them.

sp441Jul 31, 20154 votes

Also, a problem with this topic is that most times it devolves into calling the designers sexist. As if the only explanation for design trends is disdain for women. And then it all becomes a sjw vs anti-sjw war and it all goes to shot and whatever debate that could have been is ruined.

Crowe StalkerAug 1, 20154 votes

I think what needs to be done is that females need to be made without sexual attraction being a focus. If it's in the character like Leblanc then go ahead and tease, but Sona is beautiful and it shouldn't be a priority to make a Pool Party Sona just for money. The real key about it is not asking 'Is she attractive?' but rather 'Is she sexualized?' if the answer is yes, you need to go back to the drawing board and start over. The difference is really easy when you look at the characters, their personalities, and what they do:

Elise Acceptable. Irelia Unacceptable.

Chromatic EagleAug 1, 20151 votes

Who's to say that Sona's pool party skin is only for sex appeal and money? Look at Leona. Oddly enough I see people criticize LeBlanc's current outfit. Also Elise.

As for Irelia, her base skin isn't sexualized, but Frostblade is. Is this fine for certain skins?

Karma is the farthest thing from sex, but her splash art and visual update made her more sexualized. Is this good or bad?

Crowe StalkerAug 1, 20153 votes

Leona could be seen as acknowledging her own Beauty, and her power comes from the Sun anyway. Pool Party Leona isn't even that bad honestly, I think it struck a great balance for the character.

Elise and LeBlanc are all about Manipulation and Deception, just look at their lores. If a guy's admiring their assets, they can play around that, tease him, you'd be amazed what Sexual Tension can get if you know just the right strings to pull (and these two have had very long times to practice and master exactly that.) Their outfits are fine because the characters use their sexuality to manipulate others.

Sexualization is not fine for any skin if it breaks the character. If your goal is to make a skin sexual, you are breaking the rule I previously stated. This does sadly apply to previous skins as well (as much as I love DJ Sona, her outfit's design makes it obvious what their priorities were)

Karma's Visual Update is bad in that they tried to sexualize her more. Sexualization should never be the main intention.

Chromatic EagleAug 1, 20151 votes

DJ Sona was influenced by Daft Punk, which tends to focus on futuristic stuff. A skin tight outfit doesn't automatically have to be sexualized.

Crowe StalkerAug 1, 20151 votes

Honestly, every time I think of 'Daft Punk' and League, I think of Jayce and Viktor because of some stupid shenangians I saw back in the day. Also because of this picture: http://41.media.tumblr.com/3379410b62d2321ef400556fdd26a3bf/tumblr_nio2ivGvTG1t3zjxyo1_1280.png

I don't know, DJ Sona might not be sexualized, maybe that was taking it a bit too far. Still, the key is learning when you are crossing that line and when you aren't. It's something the Art Team needs to learn as they move forward.

Chromatic EagleAug 1, 20153 votes

That much I'll agree on.

WakamuneAug 1, 20153 votes

What's an attractive male?

What I don't understand is why is attractiveness only a relevant issue for females. If male characters are not "attractive" then they wouldn't see as much playrate. Keep in mind personalities that are "attractive" in fiction runs on a different scale from reality.

Chromatic EagleAug 1, 20154 votes

Male characters outside of kit design aren't really as defined for their attractiveness. That doesn't mean no one will play them, but how many people are into Zed?

WakamuneAug 1, 20154 votes

But you don't suppose people or women can find a masked, mysterious man_ attractive_ just from the implication of not-so-obtainable.

Chromatic EagleAug 1, 20153 votes

Not impossible, but I doubt he was made with that intention in mind. Who thinks Urgot is sexy?

Celio Hogane HDAug 1, 20153 votes

Diana is beautifull, but not for her aspect. Diana is a precius character that i will seal in my heart for ever, she did so much to me, she is league of legends to me, she is what maked me like lore. The sadness of her history and what happen to her is all what she did make the character so beautifull.

And i know that is not the point, but i just want to say you are wrong in something, Diana has a shit ton of scars, she was tortured, inside her armor should have a full scared body, or at least her back.

Ah, but you can actually see one of her scars, you know the lunari symbol of her face? Im going to explain to you how she did got it with a single image: http://thumb1.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/960055/122255680/stock-photo-a-metal-cattle-brand-with-the-word-brand-as-the-marking-area-on-an-isolated-background-122255680.jpg

sp441Jul 31, 20152 votes

Characters are pretty much idealized concepts, even more so in League of Legends. Until their design calls for unnatractiveness, a champion will be beautiful.

Darius , Garen , Yasuo , Jayce , all of them are pretty attractive for somebody of their station, even though they are war-harded veterans who probably had their share of wounds, a fugitive that probably doesn't have a lot of time to shower and groom, and a hot-headed mechanic.

XulsigaeJul 31, 20153 votes

Even then we usually get 'Hollywood Ugly.' Put a pair of glasses on a character and suddenly they are hideous or at least homely.

sp441Jul 31, 20152 votes

Also, off the top of my head, the few male champions that aren't conventionally attractive are Urgot , Gragas , and Draven . Again: Because their personalities and background calls for them being unnatractive. One's a unholy combination of necromancy and science, other's a loud obnoxious drunkward who spends most of his time getting in brawls, and the other is a egomaniacal psychopath who believes himself to be God's gift to Runeterra.

XulsigaeJul 31, 20152 votes

Even then, I'd say Draven is attractive in his own way. He's got a snarl sure, but not burned or badly deformed and such.

QuortAug 1, 20153 votes

Yea but... Brand was burned crispy and he's attractive to some degree! xD

But more seriously, I like Singed's aesthetic. He's covered in chemical burns, he's older, he's got a stooped/unnatural figure, is bald, etc... and yet he still looks good! He looks great because it matches his thematic so well. :)

XulsigaeAug 1, 20152 votes

Agreed! Singed is a good one and I hope when they eventually do his VU, they keep what makes him that mad chemist.

sp441Aug 1, 20151 votes

That's the point: Every champion is made to be aesthetically pleasing in regards to their lore and personality. It's why none of them have warts, zits, or any other blemish that affects real people, they're MADE to represent their concept as best as possible.

QuortAug 1, 20152 votes

I agree. I don't think Riot should intentionally add in blemishes unless there is a thematic reason for it.