Anything special for barefooted PCs?

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

There is an essay somewhere over here http://www.thearma.org/ which argues the accuracy of prints of soldiers wearing soft shoes because no one would really want to fight hand to hand in boots, and boots became more popular when muskets became more popular and thus the need for something to march in is increased.

I'm not sure that follows. Muskets don't magically make you have to march. What Pike & Musket warfare does is make you stay in formation (but so did older-style shield walls, etc.).

That period did see a shift from seasonal warfare to soldiers being in the field constantly, though often as unpaid bands of essentially brigands during the off season. Professionals effectively living in the field and constantly moving would need good walking footwear regardless of their weapons.

I can buy the timing, but not that it was the weapons that caused the change in footwear.

[fredtheobviouspseudonym]

Originally Posted by Dalillama

My uncle has gone shoeless for decades, and I'd have no arguments wirh giving the soles od his feet DR 1. I've watched the man walk on broken glass and thorn bushes without difficulty

While not boots as such, Roman caligae were pretty heavy-duty footwear.

See also any history of the Zulus; IIRC Shaka forced his impis to discard their sandals and walk over rough ground, thorns etc. to harden their feet.

Part of the time the Zulu army moved at a run -- and you can't run wearing heelless sandals. You'll run right out of the footwear.

As Dalillama said, a properly prepared human can walk on many difficult surfaced barefoot with little injury.

Your Monk character probably could claim such conditioning of bare feet as an effect of his training in the monastery.

[Flyndaran]

Mostly I think it's just getting used to it mentally, developing calluses, and learning more careful gaits rather than unconsciously relying on protective footwear.
I don't believe the myth about westerners running radically differently than habitual barefoot peoples. I have always run on the "balls" of my feet with or without shoes, while my brother is the opposite with heel running.
I do have somewhat flat feet, but now in our 40s and neither of us have had any problems.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Rupert

I'm not sure that follows. Muskets don't magically make you have to march. What Pike & Musket warfare does is make you stay in formation (but so did older-style shield walls, etc.).

That period did see a shift from seasonal warfare to soldiers being in the field constantly, though often as unpaid bands of essentially brigands during the off season. Professionals effectively living in the field and constantly moving would need good walking footwear regardless of their weapons.

I can buy the timing, but not that it was the weapons that caused the change in footwear.

It wasn't that they had to march more but that they had to spar less.

[Rupert]

In the push and shove of a pike-on-pike or spear wall vs whatever, I think I'd prefer boots with decent treads (hobnails counts for this) and solid construction over softer footwear anyway. Foot work is all well and good, but in a mass combat with fair rigid formations solid footing and protection beats sensitivity, IMO. Also, later on there's a real chance of having a horse stand on your feet, and that hurts a lot less in heavy boots (speaking from personal experience). Now, if one was a skirmisher, then the lighter footwear looks attractive - quieter, faster, better for more open melees, should you get caught up in one.