Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

If you can see this message, the SSL certificate expiration has been fixed.
Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 311 KB, 2048x1361, 38646-sdcc2012_546.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20020447 No.20020447 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

In a fantasy setting, most adventurers walk around bare foot right?

>> No.20020476

Why would they? In a fantasy setting most people in general don't walk around bare foot.

>> No.20020487

If they wear any armor at all they're assumed to be wearing boots or foot protection. The heavier the armor, the more leg and foot protection they have.

A monk wouldn't be amiss as a bear footer but anything beyond lathers would assume boots.

>> No.20020498

Stop using us to justify putting your fetishes in game

>> No.20020499

>Why would they?

People walked around bare foot in the Middle Ages.
Why would your average fantasy world be any different?

>> No.20020507

>>20020476

Shit, you're generous to you peasants. Most of mine are lucky to have a hand to wipe their asses, and cloth to keep their modesty. Leather costs money you know.

>> No.20020509

Halflings might.
Hobbits would.
Gnomes might.
Giants might.
Demigods might.
Elves might.

Depending on location, everyone might.
On beaches.
In elf kingdoms.
In halfling lands.
In hobbit lands.

Finally, if you're broke or poor. Especially in cities.

Generally speaking, first order of business if you don't have shoes is to go hunt, kill, and skin an animal for the leather. Even crappy shoes are better than nothing.

>> No.20020511

>>20020499
No people did not walk barefoot in Middle Ages.

>> No.20020520

>>20020499
Because these are adventurers that set out on long treks around the world.

>> No.20020539

In a fantasy setting, most adventurers walk around naked right?

>> No.20020550

>>20020499
NO THEY DID NOT!

Shoes were cheap any easy to make. By the 900s CE/AD nobody would be barefoot in unsure ground, while working or when travelling more than a mile or so.

>> No.20020559

In a fantasy setting, everyone's covered in hair and walking around with their hairy legs and genitals visible, right? Just swingin' around in the breeze, right?

>> No.20020574

>>20020550

>when travelling more than a mile or so.

How often was that then? I was under the understanding that the average person didn't go further than their farmhouse to the village .

>> No.20020589

Thieves
>Barefoot to be more silent

Clerics
>Forgoing footwear as a sacrifice to your god

Barbarian
>Wooden feet blankets are for the weak

Monks
>Bare-footed training leads to hard and swift feet.

Druids
>Animals do not need shoes. Why should I?

Rangers
>Shoes leave distinctive tracks behind. It is easier to conceal the tracks of bare feet.

>> No.20020592

>>20020499
Ha ha, no.

Cobblers were the most numerous shops per person in the middle ages. Shoe making was big fucking business.

>> No.20020594

>>20020574
He also said while working. Which is all peasants did

>> No.20020603

>>20020574
Farmers and the like? Yeah, not much more than a few miles at most.

Soldiers, Hunters, Entertainers, the people who Adventurers model closer than farmers. They saw much more of the country side, and sometimes even other countries.

>> No.20020618

No.

>> No.20020625

In a fantasy setting, most adventurers are morbidly obese right?

>> No.20020631

>>20020574
>their farmhouse to the village
That could easily be over a mile. From farms to villages can still be over a mile today, and villages are much larger than they used to be.

Also, people traded in markets which could easily be miles away for their villages.

>> No.20020635

>>20020594

What peseant works more than a DAY away from a town? Your farm is what you can walk to in a half day, because you need to be back by night.

You may have further fields for grazing but you have horse for that and need not walk when you can range.

>> No.20020637

>>20020539
Troglodyte Quest?

>> No.20020658

Orcs don't wear shoes

>> No.20020676

>>20020447
>Walking into dragons lair
>cut foot on sharp rock
>tetanus
>die
A fitting end to the tale of Sir Fetishton.

>> No.20020693
File: 112 KB, 400x548, Orc.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20020693

>>20020658
>Orcs don't wear shoes

>> No.20020705

>live on a beach
>walk bareful out to the shore and then into the water
>ow ow ouch rocks ow ouch ow ow OW ow

>> No.20020712

>>20020635
>a day away
You can easily walk 20 miles in a day. Walking a mile takes twenty to forty minutes.

>> No.20020713

>People walked around bare foot in the Middle Ages.

Beaten to death already, but shoemaking was an important business throughout the middle ages, and peasants wore shoes like everyone else. There were occasions when you wouldn't wear shores - say, a barefoot pilgrimage - but peasants in their day-to-day lives wore shoes.

Granted, sometimes the shoes were shitty - a group of Norwegian rebels were called "berkebeiner" (birch-legs) because they were supposedly so poor that the only "shoes" they could afford were wrapping their feet in birch bark - but they still covered their feet, because you'd be retarded not to.

>> No.20020729

Enjoy your hookworm, OP.

>> No.20020747

Every society has developed shoes. They might not have pants or argriculture but they have shoes.

>> No.20020751

>>20020589
All of those
>because stepping on rocks and sticks and any other shit on the ground is totally worth the relatively minuscule benefit that not wearing shoes would offer.

I'm a pretty weird guy with some unusual kinks and predilections, but seriously.. Foot fetishists are fucking retarded and this thread is proving it.

>> No.20020752

>>20020712
Not even that if there are good trails/roads.

>> No.20020767

>>20020747
Don't forget pockets

>> No.20020800

>>20020767

>Don't forget pockets
Nope

>In his youth he was so profligate and dissipated that he actually carried about with him money to procure the immediate gratification of his desires, and would even keep sums concealed in lanes and alleys. Even in the Academy a piece of three obols was found close to a pillar, where he had buried it for the same purpose.

Three obols was the accepted fee for the lower grade of prostitute. This concealing of bits of money is actually a rather curious detail, seeming to indicate that ancient Athenians did not normally carry loose change around with them--which, before the invention of pockets, they may not have done!

>> No.20020801

>>20020589
>>Barefoot to be more silent
Sneaky types, such as ninjas, did wear cloth shoes, but they were still shoes.

>> No.20020805

>>20020767
Pockets weren't really a thing, but a small pouch tied to your waist by a sash or length of rope has been a thing for centuries.

>> No.20020819

>>20020801

Fantasy thieves are all filthy street urchins.
They don't have the giant piles of gold required to buy fancy silk shoes.

>> No.20020830

>>20020819
Nice try, but even a slice of leather bound around your foot with rope was preferable to running around barefoot in the middle ages.

You can continue to be a creepy, retarded foot fetishist all you like, but don't try and make up facts just to facilitate your fantasies.

>> No.20020831
File: 3 KB, 126x122, killeveryoneinthisthread[3].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20020831

>> No.20020872

>DM strives for realism
>Accused of being a depraved fetishist

You people see sex everywhere.
It disturbs me.

>> No.20020878
File: 83 KB, 960x328, Get off on the wrong foot.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20020878

>> No.20020881

>>20020872
Aw, boo boo, let me make the OP more realistic for you.
>In a fantasy setting, most adventurers rape defenseless women right?
There you go. I made it better for you.

>> No.20020892

>>20020872
>implying there isn't a precedent for people inserting their fetishes into things they make
>implying foot fetishes aren't widely prevalent

>> No.20020893

>>20020872
>2012
>on /tg/
>not being a depraved fetishist

>> No.20020909

>>20020872
>DM strives for realism
>/tg/ shows him what actual realism is
>while also accusing him of being a depraved fetishist

Par for the course here.

>> No.20020911
File: 59 KB, 1324x438, shrunkan.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20020911

>>20020447

>> No.20020939
File: 90 KB, 593x342, what_am_I_look_at.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20020939

>>20020872
...The fuck are you on about?
OP is dead fucking wrong and everyone has already explained why.

Also..
>FANTASY
>REALISM
Pick one, then go fuck yourself with an orange transparent chainsaw.

>> No.20020956

If the setting is any good.

>> No.20020970

>>20020911
It's shit like this that makes me hate shrinking and giantess fetishists. Specifically the whole crushing and abuse and masochistic tendencies.

It's like, you can't just let a girl cuff you to the bad and slap you around a little? No? You have to have elaborate, lengthy fantasies where she smushes you with her ass and asphyxiates you with a giant fart or something?

Seek some help you sick retards.

>> No.20020976

People did walk around barefoot in the ancient world. I've seen pictures.

>> No.20020993
File: 353 KB, 600x764, TrollIsee.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20020993

OP, Good Sir!

9 / 10 Troll. Well played. Very well played.

>> No.20021047

>>20020872
>DM strives for realism
Roll
>7
You need to shit. Roll to find a toilet
>3
You can't find a toilet. Roll to dig a hole.
>17
You did a hole. Roll for shit radius.
>12
Roll for shit consistency.
>19
It's hard and larger than your anal radius. Roll to successfully shit
>1
Critical fail, it's really painful and bursts your hemorrhoids. Roll to continue shitting.
>12
You manage finish your shit after ten minutes but it leaves for arse with a stabbing pain. -2 on all actions for the following ten minutes then -1 on all actions for an hour. Roll to find nearby leaves.
>18
You find leaves. Roll to wipe your arse.
>4
You wipe your shit off but some of it clumps in your arse hair. Some of it gets on your hand. Roll to notice it.

>> No.20021056
File: 43 KB, 1323x311, shrunkon.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20021056

>>20020970

>> No.20021087

>>20020893
I thought that everyone knew the rule that for every 12 hours you spend on /tg/ roll 1d20, If the roll is even gain new fetish, if odd hone old fetish.

>> No.20021089

>>20020589
take off your socks and walk across a wooden floor
you'll make more noise than you'd have done with shoes.
Your feet will kinda stick to the wood

>> No.20021093

Even if they didn't have "shoes", people would wrap cloth or leather around their feet.

>> No.20021110

There are even pictures of hoplites wearing armor and shield but no sandals. The ancients went barefoot, deal with it.

>> No.20021118

>>20021056
...
Off to /d/ now!!

>> No.20021143

>>20021110
Except that's wrong you retard. They wore knee-high, semi-armored sandals.

>> No.20021149

>>20021056
Pray tell source board fellow anon?
The board style is different to this one >>20020911, is this just a choice of the observer? Or is something more sinister at play.

>> No.20021152

>>20021110
the zulu, who prided themselves on being able to run barefoot anywhere, used sandals when running over rocky terrain

>> No.20021173

>>20021149
It's likely >>>/d/ but it might be someone viewing /tg/ with the Yotsuba style.

>> No.20021174

>>20021149
They were posted on different boards, good sir.

>> No.20021187

>>20021143
Sometimes. And sometimes they wore greaves but no sandals. Deal.

>> No.20021198

>>20021110
And there are many, many more pictures of them wearing sandals.

This whole "I've seen pictures!" defense isn't really working for you if you don't actually have pictures, by the way. Especially since you can't really extrapolate the entire cultural relevance of a single article of clothing based on one picture, you fuckwit.

>> No.20021200

>>20021187
There is no evidence of it.

>> No.20021233

>>20021047
dude, take 10

>> No.20021247

>>20021200
Pictures are evidence.

>>20021198
>Especially since you can't really extrapolate the entire cultural relevance of a single article of clothing based on one picture, you fuckwit.
Ah the classic defense of 'we have very little evidence for anything that happened in the ancient world at all so I can dismiss what I don't like'.

>> No.20021258

>>20021247
Provide pictures.

>> No.20021259

>>20021173
>>20021174
My thanks.

>> No.20021275

http://www.ancient-greek-sandals.com/

just sayin

>> No.20021290

>>20021247
I can draw a picture of a barefooted Spartan, but that doesn't make it historically accurate.
I can also draw it in a historically accurate style, and that still doesn't make it accurate.
For that matter some dude who was alive 600 years after hoplites no longer existed could draw one with no sandals in a period accurate style. It still doesn't make it correct.
In fact, someone from that period could draw one without sandals, just like how I can draw a modern soldier dual-wielding M-60s, and wearing high heels. It doesn't make it true.

>> No.20021322

>>20021247
There's a difference between, "Here's one picture of a man not wearing shoes while walking about Ancient Greece. One might guess that footwear was not always needed, especially in the city where the roads were paved and clean, but we cannot be sure." and "The Greeks never wore shoes for anything! This picture is proof."

Also, since when the fuck is having little evidence of a retarded claim suddenly defensible on the grounds that the person disagreeing with you has already proved you wrong?

>> No.20021379

>>20021322
>"The Greeks never wore shoes for anything! This picture is proof."
Except I never said that. I said they sometimes fought without sandals.

>>20021290
Fine. Then you don't know anything about the ancient world. Did the hoplites fight with spear and shield? No clue, there are pictures of them fighting with spear and shield but someone could have just made that up!

>> No.20021397

>Pictures are evidence.
They are. However, if you have a picture of a hoplite I'd very much like to see it, considering photography was invented around 2000 years after Hoplites were around. Or do you mean drawings? Because no, that isn't evidence.
>Ah the classic defense of 'we have very little evidence for anything that happened in the ancient world at all so I can dismiss what I don't like'.
We have plenty of evidence that ancients wore sandals. Because it's fucking idiotic to not wear shoes when an infection can cost you a foot if you're lucky. Would you like to walk around barefoot in shit and mud?

>> No.20021416
File: 62 KB, 592x559, 1289920141090.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20021416

>>20021379
There's a difference though. This entire thread has been filled with fucking retards, like yourself, who are insisting that people went barefoot all the time because there were no shoes, they could not afford shoes, there were times when they didn't wear them, or other inane excuses probably to fulfill some sort of fascination with ancient feet.

Everyone else is saying, "No. Even back then, shoes and footwear were worn quite often because it was safer and more practical to protect to two appendages that you'd be walking on for the rest of your natural life."

We're not saying no one ever went barefoot. We're not saying people have ALWAYS covered their feet. We are saying that, historically and logically, people wore something on their feet most of the time.

Why they NEED to be barefoot to fulfill some sort of bizarre obsession of yours is your own fucking issue, but, please, would you kindly stop trying to insist that barefeet are some how necessary?

>> No.20021429

>>20021379

Spears and shields are commonly found artifacts. We don't find artifacts of people without shoes for obvious reasons.

Tell you what. What reasons can you think of for a Hoplite to fight barefoot?

>> No.20021437

why the hell would you fight without sandals? in GREECE?
It's rocky down there!

>> No.20021474

>>20021379
They wrote shit down you fetishist.

>> No.20021477

>>20021437

>It's rocky down there!

Why did this made me think of an H-doujin with a golem girl?
Goddamit, 4chan.

>> No.20021483
File: 62 KB, 1478x326, Sicksister.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20021483

>> No.20021532
File: 32 KB, 484x440, Caligae.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20021532

These are Caligae. Roman sandles. Yes, Roman, but similar time periods and the legions were derived from Hoplites in a way.

These things are a bitch. They cause horrible blisters, hurt to walk on for long periods, and provide no protection from cold weather beyond a bare minimum.

The Legions never fought without them. They provided superior traction, protection from the elements, and rudimentary protection from weapons. Even really shitty sandles are superior to nothing.

>> No.20021545

>>20021397
>Or do you mean drawings? Because no, that isn't evidence.
So you admit that you dismiss most evidence we have about history because it could have been made up. Ok then.

>>20021397
>>20021429
>Tell you what. What reasons can you think of for a Hoplite to fight barefoot?
>Because it's fucking idiotic to not wear shoes when an infection can cost you a foot if you're lucky. Would you like to walk around barefoot in shit and mud?
This isn't evidence. Things may seem stupid to us now and people still did them. Your own incredulity has nothing to do with history.

>>20021416
>his entire thread has been filled with fucking retards, like yourself, who are insisting that people went barefoot all the time because there were no shoes, they could not afford shoes
>Except I never said that. I said they sometimes fought without sandals.

>Why they NEED to be barefoot to fulfill some sort of bizarre obsession of yours is your own fucking issue, but, please, would you kindly stop trying to insist that barefeet are some how necessary?
So you admit it's not a lack of evidence but the fact that it creeps you out.

>> No.20021564
File: 236 KB, 826x481, macro-i-can-t-fap-to-this.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20021564

>>20021532

>> No.20021596

>>20021545
>intellectual checkmate
>Dunning–Kruger would like a chat.

>> No.20021597

>>20021545

How about you provide evidence for them fighting barefoot then?

Starting to sage, since you're obviously either too stupid to understand all the myriads of ways you're wrong, a fetishist dead set on validating himself, or trolling.

Hey, hey. You know something? If you're DMing, make your peasants barefoot. Make hoplites barefoot. Make everyone barefoot. Just provide a reason and do that shit. Just don't come in here and try to say that history was like that.

>> No.20021620
File: 1.50 MB, 1108x4000, bobafeetnigga.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20021620

>> No.20021626

I'm a footfag and I disapprove of this thread.

>> No.20021647

>>20021545
Are you just dead set on playing Devil's Advocate, or do you actually think you have some sort of intellectual, historically valid point to make regarding the sorts of footwear?

Disregarding the topic being far removed from OP's original question, the point we've been trying to make is that, yes, people all throughout history and even in fantasy settings can go barefoot, but there is no reason to travel, work, or even just go about your daily duties around town barefoot when shoes and footwear have always been readily available to nearly every person because they serve an important purpose.

>> No.20021671
File: 1.91 MB, 1329x3722, 1342710293166.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20021671

>>20021545

Also, you discount that Greek sculpture and art was not to imitate life. It was to create an idealized version of it, and show off just how buff and manly these hoplites were. If they were depicted not wearing sandles, it was because the artist wanted to show off just how fucking awesome these idealized feet were. Pic related. This is a contemporary depiction of medieval armor, so armor must have looked like that, right? Nope. It's decorative to show a philosophical undercurrent n' shit.

>> No.20021676

>>20021545
No, that's not intellectual checkmate, retard.

also

>>Because it's fucking idiotic to not wear shoes when an infection can cost you a foot if you're lucky. Would you like to walk around barefoot in shit and mud?
>This isn't evidence. Things may seem stupid to us now and people still did them. Your own incredulity has nothing to do with history.
So you're going to dismiss hundreds of years of conjecture and application of common sense in the field because common sense 'didn't exist.'

Apparently Roman soldiers didn't understand pain can come from stepping on stones and burrs.

>> No.20021690

http://www.footwearhistory.com/
"Spanish cave drawings from more than 15,000 years ago show humans with animal skins or furs wrapped around their feet. The body of a well-preserved “ice-man” nearly 5,000 years old wears leather foot coverings stuffed with straw. Shoes, in some form or another, have been around for a very long time. The evolution of foot coverings, from the sandal to present-day athletic shoes that are marvels of engineering, continues even today as we find new materials with which to cover our feet."

>> No.20021720

I...I...I MASTURBATE TO BAREFOOT WOMEN'S FEET!!!

>> No.20021723

>>20021671

Aww shit, I was wrong. That's Saint George. So under your logic, becasue this is a picture of a Roman guy and he looks like this, this is what a Roman soldier dressed like.

<spoilersontg>He's wearing shoes.</spoilersontg>

>> No.20021779

>>20021720
Not at the table, Carlos.

>> No.20021814

>>20020447
The earliest pair of dated footwear is a pair of sandals dated pre-10000 bc. Everyone had shoes and has had shoes for quite some time, because ground has sharp rocks, or hot patches, or cold patches or things you'd rather not walk through barefoot.

Stop trying to inject your fetishes into games as the norm.

>> No.20021829

To answer OP's retarded question:
>In a fantasy setting, most adventurers walk around bare foot right?

Wrong. There a a large number of reasons to wear shoes, sandals, or some form of protective footwear.

Going barefoot when you could be wearing shoes is asking for a world of pain and infections.

>> No.20021977

>>20021596
>>20021597
>>20021647
>>20021671
>>20021676
Yeah well. That's just like your opinion man.

>> No.20022627

Regardless of other people in the setting (Most should be wearing footwear of some kind.) Adventurers are the most likely to wear shoes. Armor includes boots, adventurers are wanderers and therefore need shoes, and adventurers are wealthy and can afford good shoes or boots.

>> No.20022693
File: 8 KB, 168x168, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20022693

>>20021829
Tell that to Cody Lundin, dude hasn't worn shoes for something like 20yrs, teaches survival in the Arizona desert

>> No.20022772
File: 99 KB, 600x800, Medieval-fantasy-high-boots.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20022772

>>20020447

No. People in certain cultures or areas might - the Irish were well known for being mostly barefoot during the period in which Norman nobles ruled over them, and Pacific island cultures rarely used shoes. You want to know what those two cultures didn't have to deal with? Snakes. Also, even the famously barefoot Irish slapped some shoes on during the winter, because walking through snow barefoot is asking for frostbite.

There's reasons for NPC's or PC's to be barefoot - monks and barbarians are supernaturally tough, druids have that ability which means they're never inconvenienced by any natural hazard, the area is in a warm climate with no burrs or snakes that would threaten to injure bare feet, or the person in question is a young beggar (both too poor, and growing feet make buying shoes a poor investment)

But to answer your question, no. Most adventurers, being constantly roaming and traveling folk, would wear shoes or boots, both to protect their feet from mundane hazards, and because it's a fucking place you can wear a magic item, and thus have more magic at your disposal.

>> No.20022909

>>20022693
The key word in that sentence is "most"
That guy is not most adventurers. He's not even most survivalists.

Also, 20 years of being a survivalist, walking barefoot is likely to leave him with feet so thick and calloused that he can't even feel his toes.

>> No.20023132

>>20022693
Have you ever actually watched the god damn show? He ends up putting shit on his feet ALL THE TIME, even makes some sandals out of tire and says he wants to keep them. Sometimes, MOST Of THE TIME, you just need fucking shoes.

>> No.20023237

>>20023132
I've watched the whole first season, not much of the second. First episode he wears wool socks in the snow, didn't wear anything on his feet the rest of that season that I can recall. He did have to walk really slowly across some jagged stone area in the amazon.

I don't believe that would qualify as "all the time" in fact you almost never wears shoes in In the 10+ episodes I've seen

>> No.20024908
File: 15 KB, 396x300, candyspaceballs.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20024908

>>20020447
Funny, she doesn't look Druish.

>> No.20024939
File: 80 KB, 360x321, I+see+what+you+did+there.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20024939

>>20024908

>DOHOHOHO

>> No.20024964
File: 32 KB, 334x384, homunculus lateral to medial.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20024964

>fetishist
FACT: In your brain, your feet neurones are rubbing sensuously on your genital neurones

>> No.20025001

Unless it's in school or a formal environment, I'm always without shoes. Helps that where I live people don't care about no shoes.

>> No.20025030

I am certainly not a foot fetishist, but anyone who doesn't believe the foot to be a potential erogenous zone hasn't taken the time to properly explore their partner's body.

>> No.20025105

>>20024964

That would explain why i feel the need to stretch my toes and move my feet after orgasm. Not even foot fetishist.

>> No.20025205

>>20025105
>Not even foot fetishist.
I got news for you son

>> No.20025213

>>20024964
All that means is that there's a reason for toe-curling orgasms. Nothing about feet being erogenous zones.

>> No.20025247

The girl in OP's pic is really cute, regardless of the feet.

>> No.20025281

>>20025247
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNyE2xExktA
I've seen cuter Leias, but she's definitely up there.

>> No.20025283

>>20020447
probably not, they'd have to do a lot of walking and anyone without boots is going to annihilate their feet pretty quickly

>> No.20025426

>>20025281
>dem hips

>> No.20027159
File: 392 KB, 600x800, Tiefling HIPS.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20027159

>>20025426
This thread is now about hips.

>> No.20027613

>play a monk
>wear nothing on feet
>every step make a sunder check
>never invited into another building again

>> No.20027943

>>20027159
Damn.
How are you supposed to pronounce that, anyway?
Does "Tief-" rhyme with "teeth"?

>> No.20028145

>>20022693
I remember that show. It was the one where the trained survivalist has to keep himself and a useless hippy alive in the wilderness.

All the freaking time it was "well I'm going to do X, Y, and Z....and you can sit around and watch the shelter because you can't do anything because you don't have any shoes"

Later, when they go to prepare their meal, the survivalist comes back with some birds that he killed with a bow he made in a cave and some scraps. The hippy contributes a handful of berries and a dead fish that he found floating in the water. He didn't even catch a fish. He just fucking picked up a fish that he found floating around dead for some unknown reason (probably some kinda disease).

Is that show still airing? Or did the hippy finally die?

>> No.20031208

My character goes barefoot because she grew up as a handmaiden to the king and was never given hard work or allowed to leave the royal harem, where all the concubines were barefoot.

>> No.20031282
File: 225 KB, 764x966, Wakfu - Evangelyne.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031282

Someone say hips?

>> No.20031298
File: 51 KB, 407x904, Wakfu 186.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031298

>>20031282
I don't know, but this is now a Wakfu thread, hips edition.

>> No.20031302
File: 93 KB, 957x966, Wakfu 100.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031302

>> No.20031307
File: 91 KB, 698x1144, Wakfu 91.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031307

>>20031302

>> No.20031316
File: 170 KB, 536x637, Wakfu 29.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031316

>>20031307

>> No.20031324
File: 163 KB, 800x1233, Wakfu 56.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031324

>>20031316
ECAFLIIIIIPS!

>> No.20031343
File: 411 KB, 918x864, Wakfu 101.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031343

>>20031324
Time to go and watch Batman

>> No.20031344
File: 103 KB, 600x1036, Wakfu Pandawa_girl_by_gueuzav.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031344

>> No.20031353
File: 390 KB, 1920x1080, wakfuwhores.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031353

wakfu has the best whores

>> No.20031359
File: 139 KB, 1024x768, Wakfu sadida_plante-1024x768.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031359

>> No.20031366
File: 51 KB, 572x355, Wakfu - Breadnought.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
20031366

>>20031353

best bread too

>> No.20031383

Weren't shoemakers fucking everywhere?
Everyone needs fucking shoes, man.
Its like the first thing you invent when you don't want to die of a minor infected sore full of pig shit.

>> No.20031571

>>20031324
>>20031307
The Wakfu artist is also a big foot feticist.

>> No.20031612

>>20031383
I believe they were called cobblers, or something.

There's an interesting passage about shoes in the 4E book Mordenkainen's Magnificent Emporium. Quote:

"The simple boot represents a stunning innovation. The most primitive people run barefoot through the world, but when they discover sandals, they can walk farther with fewer troubles. A simple closed toe on the sandal can add miles to the distance an army can march in a day. And when your soldiers' cracked and bleeding feet are armored by a true shoe as they walk for miles along dung-spattered trails, the benefits are multifold. When you realize all this, it's no wonder that spellcasters have lavished enchantments upon footwear."

>> No.20031615

>>20031366
> breadnought

>> No.20032197

>>20022772
And also High boots are FABULOUS!

>> No.20033432

>>20031571
I thought it was teens and hips.

>> No.20035080

>>20027943
It rhymes with "fife"

>> No.20037259

>>20027943
>>20035080
I pronounce tiefling "teef-ling", rhyming with reef. I believe that's the official pronunciation.

>> No.20039977

>>20032197
I'll second that.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action