Is there any good motivation for a D&D character to go barefoot?

is there any good motivation for a D&D character to go barefoot?

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/text/barefoot/type/op/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

No, shoes were invented for a reason.

...

Ignorance of what caltrops are.

They're part of some race that has naturally developed though soles? It would especially make sense for elves. They're often depicted as being all "in tune with nature" and whatnot, but it doesn't make sense for them to have the cute, soft, humanlike feet they usually have. They'd be though, leathery and perhaps even have long, monkey-like toes to better grip branches with.

If they have some kind of enchanted soles and prefer to be barefoot then sure.

Sailors on deck too.

if they come to the conclusion that the extra dexterity and grip outweighs the possibility of stepping on something

Most shoes wouldn't really help you much against them either, since putting your full weight onto an iron point will still jam it through the sole.

Evidence of this can be seen in rusty nails and their tendency to go through even fairly thick rubber soles.

>The Druid that wears no boots becomes one with his surrounding environment and heightens his senses with primal instincts

Yes.

They aren't tenderfoot pussies.

Shoes are expensive

Yes, playing as a halfling

>Abandoned by her party for her sub-optimal build, the halfling barbarian is forced to resort to prostitution

The main reasons I can think of are:
>Something involved barbed hooks on the bottoms of their feet and hands, used as an aid when climbing for additional grip
>Being naturally armored to the point that, at their current level of technological progress, it's unnecessary / does not offer additional protection (though this one still runs into the issue that feet get cold and stepping on fantasy legos sucks so you'll probably put at least foot gloves or the sort on 'em anyways)
>They're some sort of shapeshifter that tends to destroy (or at least not transform) what they're wearing, but at this point you have bigger concerns like "Well what about armor?" and "Do you have a servant following you everywhere carrying emergency sets of clothes for when you hulk out?"
>You're a goddamn giant spider / scorpion / something that would look absolutely silly wearing footwear. I mean, can you imagine a Drider in platform shoes or combat boots?

The dm has a lowkey foot fetish and you want to upgrade your weapon?

No shoes allowed in the Magical Realm.

He wants an infinite Glamour-free activation of Nevertread.

I did that

But it still keeps a shoe-thickness' amount of caltop out of the foot, no?

Because it looks good.

>No thick hairy feet

not a real halfling

They are a centaur or some other race that can't wear shoes.

horseshoes

I chuckled.

Didn't mean to reply sorry

Centaur hooves are stronger and more durable than horse hooves so they have no need for horse shoes

Monk or some similar archetype. Once you can step into a pack of rabid orcs without any armor and punch your finger through their brows you don't care about gravel.

This thread is obvious fetish bait. Please never post any variation of it again.
archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/text/barefoot/type/op/

I've never forced Druids to wear shoes/boots in any terrain. Call it a perk of the class but they can opt to go barefoot and get a closer link with nature for fluff reasons and no real mechanical benefit or detriment. Yes, that means that if they accidentally step on a sharp rock or thorn branch that wasn't put there for that express purpose they take no damage. No cold damage in snow, even. Why not? It's just fun.

Sneaking.

Halflings =/= Hobbits

Why would halflings go barefoot then? Hobbits are the ones with the thick soles, Halflings are just small humans.

Depends, you'll feel the pain before you've put your weight on it, and be able to react in time.

If it's really fetish bait, why did it act as moron bait in bringing you here?

Tremorsense.

I'm not the one who said they would.

>cheapest shoes that do anything worthwhile is 2500 gp, these magical properties are worthless to your class
>mundane shoes do nothing and arent even worth the two seconds it would take to mark on your character sheet

Not before 3rd edition.

You're getting your only pair of boots iron shod because the fighter/druid keeps slamming things on your feet because they're petty. This holds everyone up from going into a tower because you're barefoot, but everyone agrees it's a prudent measure to take and waits after you explain where your boots went and why you're barefoot.

Sauce?

They either are so primitive they don't have shoes, or live such comforted and pampered lives they forego them.

I kind of like the idea of elves having a vague Owl theme. Great eyesight. Feathers in place of hair, known for being wise, and talons in place of feet to better grasp branches and handle rough terrain.

Shoes are better than barefeet, but (compared to hardened feet) not overwhelmingly so, unless you're in an unusual environment. So you can probably justify it on a character that has some pre-adventuring reason to be barefoot in wherever they grew up.

Like, I dunno, they lived in a swamp or something, where the shoes available to them would be worse than barefoot, and now they're refusing to adopt shoes because they don't see the need for them and/or, y'know, they think they're uncomfortable, or they think they represent giving up on their own culture, or whatever - you can find rationalizations for something like that easily.

Not that user. I'm gonna say Queen's Blade on a hunch, but I don't actually have any idea.

Religious or supernatural reasons, possibly connected to druids and their ilk.

They are playing a tribal or African setting where all the people have natural feet thickness rivalling that of modern shoes.

Or you could just not annoy people by trying to justifying your characters choice of wardrobe using anything other that "because I want to".
Also stop playing with autists. Never healthy for anyone.

Hey it's Alfie's ho cousin

I don't know about your games but if you walk around barefoot in mine and you're not a literal savage who's been doing it since childhood then you will fuck yourself up the moment you try to travel any significant distance on foot.

>Shoes are better than barefeet

This is definitely why Africans athletes always lose marathons.

People tend to not realize how shitty shoes could be without rubber for soles. A d&d character is likely fighting quite often, and so needs decent grip, which bare feet excel at.

Yes, hobnail shoes inconvenienced norm for soldiers in the field, but the metal on the bottom of those doesn't help very much with smooth stone surfaces, like those often featured in dungeons.

Given that adventurers in d&d are often exceptional, it wouldn't be a stretch to have someone used to bare feet anyways. I believe it might've been common for poorer stock.

Being from a culture that didn't develop shoes?

A bit less vaguely, I remember reading that sometimes Welsh archers would be known for only having one shoe, somehow having one bare foot helping them keep their footing in difficult terrain, which was good for skirmishing and guerrilla warfare.

Earth Genasi / Shaitan - need to be in contact with the earth to receive power. Attempting to force shoes on them makes them feel unholy or unclean, but, of course, is possible.

Cultural reasons - If your campaign is indoors, or in a clean cultural city - maybe the social taboos are not to wear shoes. Shoes are belonging only to dirty peasants and field workers.

Dwarven stone-cunning. - You learn about the stone and lay of the land because your feet are *that* sensitive to gradients and such.

They are literally synonyms.

...

Some sort of ability that requires touching the ground, maybe earth or plant based?

You'd think wild women would be more bare on top and less bare on the bottom. That seems to be how it is in less developed parts of the world.

...

...

This. If your body is your weapon and armour then why inhibit its speed and dexterity.

Also if I recall an conversation I had years ago correctly David Belle (THE parkour guy in France) doesn't wear shoes normally and as a result his feet are very muscular, his arches are ridiculously high, and his soles are like turtle shell.

>They're some sort of shapeshifter that tends to destroy (or at least not transform) what they're wearing, but at this point you have bigger concerns like "Well what about armor?" and "Do you have a servant following you everywhere carrying emergency sets of clothes for when you hulk out?"

>mfw I'm playing a character that has to deal with this shit

The way I figured a way to make it work is using very baggy clothes that are held in place by belts and bracers so they don't become too much of a hasle when travelling. When shifting, remove bracers and belt to loosen up your clothing to be in shape with the shifted form.

Unless, say, she lives in a warm coastal region where the primary food source is mussels and other animals fished out of shallow waters.

Like, if you live in a rainforest or a mountain or something you're gonna want to protect your legs from scratches and scrapes, but if you're spending most of your time in warm, shallow water, that's probably less of an issue. And nobody likes wet fabric clinging to their skin.

Just as a hypothetical.

your disgusting fetish, probably

game set in ireland

When all existing boots in the world are too flimsy to take the shit that character goes through on a daily basis.

One of my characters stopped bothering with clothes beyond pants after some time. Finding replacements time and again just became too damn annoying.

I'm sure there's a perfectly good explanation for why a piece of mass-market fantasy art aimed at a Western audience wouldn't feature bared female breasts.

She's not even facing the viewer; if her breasts were bare wouldn't matter in that context.

>has no sfw pics of toph
you get what i mean

Shoes don't protect you against caltrops in D&D. They literally do nothing.

The real question is - what's a good motivation to go bareback?

>They're Hobbits
>They need to stay in contact with the earth to do magic
>They are so tough that shoes would offer no appreciable protection from the environment

Vow of poverty.

Is there any reason you need to specifically mention to the group that your character is barefoot?

Re-branding after TSR got a cease and desist.
That's also why Ents are "Treants" and Balrogs are "Balor."

Might come up, depending on the terrain.
The referee certainly needs to know (caltrops and traps and whatnot).

>assuming no magical realm at all

Sure, playing in a bronze or early iron age setting.

Extremely poor or uncivilized settings in general.

A character who is still a young child.

An extremely low str character that they have to minimize the amount of gear that they have on them to avoid encumbrance.

Excuse me, is there something I didn't know about Ireland?

Fuck off you guys. Wealthy women in ancient Rome went barefoot by choice, because they didn't have to worry about difficult terrain.

So Hobbits?

>wealthy women in ancient Rome
>at most 0.00001% of the population
>sits at home all day being taken care of by slaves
>totally a D&D character

halflings/hobbits/whatever races that are naturally barefoot.
Primitive characters that have little in the way of clothing (though once they become "civilised" there is little reason for them not to get shoes of some sort).

Druids and/or some kind of cleric (think Jonathan Pryce as the High Sparrow in GoT).

The point is that rich people go barefoot by choice.

Because your shit is enchanted to look and feel stylized without sacrificing the actual function of the items in question. So you can wear shoes and armor, but it looks like you're not unless you want it to.

It is Queenblade indeed.
this show touche everything for fuck sake
>bunnygirl slime which lactate acide
>mud fight
>snake panties
>no panties
>leaf panties
>maid ghost who lose her clothe if she his attacked and have to kiss characters to steal energy
>milf with tits the size of her torso (and she is 2 metter tall
>loli girl who is actually 200 years old
>Tits
>Naughty nuns
>reverse aging
>tentacles aztec rapist girl
>and way more!

Nice

>is there any good motivation for a D&D character to go barefoot?
Yes, she is a beggar and doesn't have money for it.

Went hiking for a couple miles with a friend way back when. She grew up countryfied. She walked at least three miles over rocks and through thorns barefoot. Calloused feet are a real thing.

They're not "calloused", they're just desensitised to a degree.

so can we get some pics of bare feet male adventurers, or is this just a fetish thread?

>9 pictures
>fetish thread about female adventurers with bare feet
I think you're the one who wants to turn this into a fetish thread.

see

Tell me again how these african athletes are running marathons barefoot user.

Is there any good reason for real people to go barefoot? No, there is not, yet some people still do. There doesn't need to be logical reason for everything a character does, they are people, not computers. Maybe they just like it that way, nevermind the disadvantages.

For the same reason women today where stiletto heels, or why European nobles didn't start dressing like total fops until the death of chivalry: luxury. Luxury is pretty much this: I dress in the most retarded and impractical way humanly possible to show that I can afford to live a lifestyle that's overly expensive and in no way practical.

Practical clothes (whether it's a tunic or jeans) has always been the dress of the lower classes. The leisure class (not the warrior-nobility that actually did something) dress in the most impractical, self-destructive shit.

You may notice that women are overrepresented among history's leisure classes in pretty much all time periods. Draw your own conclusions. The only correct conclusion is that the power of pussy is incredible.

In ancient egypt it was normal for children to go completely naked, for most adults to wear only lower garments, and for the rich to wear fine transparent clothes.

maybe they don't have shoes or can't afford them?

...

The power of pussy i'd argue was a pretty central fact in the birth of civilization, the gender roles we have today are probably the result of women having an much better reproductive value than men.

...

>the gender roles we have today
You mean where women get everything and men are told they're still oppressing women?

The gender roles we had about 150 years ago? Maybe you have a point there.

I can tell you spend a lot of time on the internet.

>dem bathrobes of war