Footware

Post by **GM_Chris** » Fri May 04, 2007 1:05 pm

The question has been asked, and well I was getting on to ask the same question.

Should we add some rules on footware. Should we give a bennifit to good footware..should we requiere footware?

Post by **WayneO42** » Fri May 04, 2007 1:42 pm

Nope...dont want to go there. I think we do need to make the rule though that footwear should be worn at all times. People running around barefoot is bad.

Malphus · Post by **Malphus** » Fri May 04, 2007 6:09 pm

I think that footware should be mandatory. There is a definite safety issue here. No matter how much fun I had as Grimble running around barefoot, it friggin hurt. A character can feel free to be barefoot, but the player must be shoed.

cole45 · Post by **cole45** » Fri May 04, 2007 8:38 pm

I agree. To much chance of someone running and cutting their foot open and getting Tetnus. Even in the Inn. To much chance of a stray rusty nail and such. I don't see this being an issue, I've never anyone with out shoes. (i missed that apperently.)

Post by **GM-Mike** » Sat May 05, 2007 7:55 am

Before this conversation goes too far, I do want to point out that the original post was meant as a joke that (sheepish grin) I started. I noticed that amazingly we had 10 pages worth of conversation on armor and helmets and so said the only thing missing was 5 pages worth of footware conversation. I think we are all in agreement that footware should be worn and that it should award no points toward costuming or armor.

However, I think really cool footware should, naturally, offer a reward to support points.

Malphus · Post by **Malphus** » Sat May 05, 2007 9:59 am

I think that no one should argue that highly accurate in-period foot gear should definitely benefit a character politically. After all, that is what all those below you see, isn't it?

Malphus · Post by **Malphus** » Sat May 05, 2007 10:00 am

and mike...you took all the fun out. Spoilsport

Malphus · Post by **Malphus** » Sat May 05, 2007 10:02 am

I've never anyone with out shoes. (i missed that apperently.)

That was way back in the CARPS days for me. I played two barefoot characters. One Orc (Grimble), and one Guthrie (Arlo Thompkins). Neither wore shoes.

Torakhan · Post by **Torakhan** » Sat May 05, 2007 12:35 pm

Yeah, I was going to post a lengthy reply on that thread about how I thought that adding "shoes" to the armor rules was going too far, but had no reasoning why it should be any less than if gloves should count as well.

Personally, I encourage everyone to have "in period" shoes/boots/etc., but I think that "in period footware" should be overlooked for both safety and comfort issues that go beyond just "the game". Blistered feet from rarely used boots/shoes, as well as cheap boots falling appart and having to be wrapped in duct-tape don't bode well for the game or its players. Also it's typically not something that even players can make (though if someone finds an easy "slip over boot" pattern, that could be useful... I saw something at GenCon years ago.. it slipped on just over the ankle and could turn just about any "matching color" leather shoe to look like a lace-up or "Robin Hood-esque" boot.)

I bought a pair of expensive boots that I rarely use because they are pretty uncomfortable since I don't wear them all of the time. I still bring them to the LARP most events and wear them for a day before going back to my normal shoes. But that's just me and my experience. I don't think I should get any more benefit for wearing them than a person who is wearing tennis-shoes. It's just me trying to look a little more "in character" for the game's sake.
Even if I put armor plating on it... I don't think it should count, since anything over the shin would be a Grieve, right?

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Sun May 06, 2007 8:56 am

You know in alot of games I play you get bonuses for accessories like rings, necklaces and earrings. One should definitely get a bonus to their wealth level for this.

Footware

Footware

Shoes, Boots and rules on covered feet.