>>44549809 Because people don't want to believe that that they could do extraordinary things on their own and the only person holding them back is themselves. Its much easier to believe that the system is designed against you and unless you're lucky enough for the "key" to fall into your hand you're just a fucked scrub, whether that key is a magic micguffin or a unique trait that only sets you apart is irrelevant.
The whole idea of a monk is that they're a normal person that pushes themselves through hard work, dedication and perseverance. Literally anyone can do it, but if you tell someone that the only reason you're you and not mister amazing hands over there is because they're a lazy fuck, they don't like that. So an excuse is made e.i. mister amazing hands was lucky, or shit is unfair. This correlates as much to real life as it does to fantasy and the fact that the people trying to escape real life via fantasy may often go to table top games just compounds this.
Tl;dr people are just as lazy in fantasy as in real life
Note: this does not apply to the people who actually enjoy the acting and real roleplaying as appossed to those who just want an ego stroke.
>>44549809 Because their class concept in D&D was mostly about the special powers of making unarmored barehanded combat for them equal to armed combat. Which is actually a pretty incredible feat but for heroes alongside other heroes, it's not fun to just be making up for losses that happen at level 1 over the course of your 20-level progression. The system tries to account for gradual-growth into being skilled enough to use your basic fighting style, which doesn't exist for anyone else - they just get proficiencies for free and are fully competent.
Depends on what we're talking about. Usually, it's because fighting with your fists is an extremely bad idea, as weapons were invented for a reason. But knowing /tg/, it's about D&D. In which case, it's because they were broken and terrible in 3.5, the most famous and popular edition.
Because it's underpowered due to being restricted to staffs, slings, pole arms, and fists when the rest of the party are carrying basic iron weapons that do 2x the damage of every monk weapon. Also, even though the wizard can't wear armor at least he has spells, only one crucial stat, and is usually behind the party tanks. The monk is supposed to be a frontline fighter but his AC, damage output, multiple stat dependencies, and low health die completely disagree with that idea. This means the monk can't do shit.
>>44549809 They're not. If you're talking 3.5/PF, my experience is that the most commonly under-rated class is Bard. Lots of people will insist that it's weak, when Bard's are actually pretty competent..
>>44550172 Monk as a class is fucking shit in 3.5 and PF, no, srly, is shit, the best "monks" are or totally not monk class or only have like 1 or 2 levels in monk and 18-19 in other class. Yeah, the system is designed against you in this case.
But thank god there're better systems out there, for example Anima and their Taos.
>>44552818 His point was that the system designers think like that, so they don't make monks good because if monks were good, that would imply that the only reason THEY, in real life, aren't that good is lack of effort.
>>44553428 Class ability that lets them spend money on giving their unarmed attacks enhancements like any other weapon. Higher ranked magical enhancements become available over time. Fluff wise, it's the monk training so hard that his fists catch fire, or vibrate sonic waves, or defend harder, WHATEVER.
Then again, what do I know about game design? I'm sure this idea is bad for balance somehow.
>>44549809 because they don't rely on equipment. It's simple, everyone wants some sort of loot and new toys to try out but with a monk a lot of the loot is of no use to you. Wands, scrolls staffs for magic users. Weapons armour for fighters. Monks could get trinkets but Rouges and Bards are usually better with those too.
Doesn't even have to be a class mechanic. A DM could just fluff it as wandering martial arts masters willing to teach their techniques to the worthy.
Heck, that means you can vary the cost for each of them. Maybe one will train you if you pay him enough, but another requires a quest from you. It doesn't have to be a prestige class, just a secret technique from another monastery.
Or it doesn't even have to be a martial artist. It could be inspiration. Perhaps the monk goes to a secluded place with beautiful, peaceful scenery, and meditates. Contemplating life while taking in the surroundings of the world inspires him to new techniques.
Or perhaps goes on a safari, where he observes wild animals in their natural habitat, and develops new techniques based off their movements. The money could go toward paying a local guide. Or he could try roughing it alone.
Heck, maybe the monk isn't above magical augmentation. Maybe since they do so much soul-searching, they can accept things like that because they're not just slapping it on or putting it in and calling it a day; they're training their very souls to accept the new and make it truly a part of them.
Magical accupuncture? You can spend 2,000gp and undergo a lengthy ritual in order to add a +1 enhancement bonus to your unarmed strikes, or spend 1,000gp likewise to add a +1 enhancement bonus to your natural armor.
>>44549809 Throwing in with everybody else: Because they were bad in one game (and the off-brand mutation) and people are dumb and can't separate the concept from one mechanical expression of that concept.
>>44550172 >The whole idea of a monk is that they're a normal person that pushes themselves through hard work, dedication and perseverance. The whole idea is of a monk is you can accomplish what others accomplish but without any magic, armor, or weaponry, though it doesn't happen in practice with D&D in particular.
So what you have is a class that tells 99% of other classes that they're fundamentally inferior because they need actual tools to win encounters, not just the power of poverty.
The casters have magic. They are more capable when they have magic, so to compensate they are less capable when they don't.
The fighters have weapons. They are capable when they have weapons, so to compensate they are less capable when they don't.
The monk comes in at the bottom or the top of this pyramid depending on perspective. He can do the most with nothing, so as a counterbalance he can do the least in the opposite environment. Monks excel when you're imprisoned, when your weapons were checked by the guards, with your hands tied, or fighting in a magnetic or antimagic environment.
This is bullshit, of course. These days magic users have ways to never be without magic. But I feel like that was the original intent.
>>44558630 Which could have been solved by giving other martials more lateral utility and the ability to get more out of their gear. But, you know, martials roll d20 to attack once per 5 points of BAB, let's go write more spells.
>>44558728 The original intent is that one of Gygax's or Arneson's players wanted to play Bruce Lee, so Gygax made him a custom class. This then got ported into 3e alongside all the other AD&D and older content and became a sacred cow due to the hobby getting flooded by people who thought that everything written in the rulebooks was a high-quality product engineered by RPG scientists instead of a pile of homebrew made on the fly by some neckbeards.
>>44558733 Well it's not me that aggressively shilled for 3.5e/PF for years so if there's anyone to blame it isn't me.
I remember my ex-girlfriend got into table-top through some friends, her first experience with it, and I told her that's great, and that I was running a D&D 4E game at the local game store. She wrinkled her nose and sincerely said, "Ew" about D&D 4E, because her group played PF.
This is someone who just got into the hobby not even a month ago already brainwashed into obsessing over 3.clones and denouncing everything else.
4e monks were fantastic, though the exact sort of CQC varies a lot on the type.
The Desert Wind monk in my current game tends to act like a fighting game character.
>Blistering Flourish for +Cha to damage for a turn. >Rain of Hammers Ki Focus for an extra at-will attack against the same target. >Flurry of blows >Starblade flurry for an extra target 5 squares away. >Crossbow for an extra target 10 squares away >Supreme flurry for a second flurry of blows >Action point for a daily attack >another use of flurry when you action point (Via feat).
'Jesus fucking christ he's already dead and you've hit SSStylish, you can stop now'
>>44549809 Because a wizard and barbarian can be better at fisting things to death. And even the fact that they are supposed to be half-casters is ignored by the devs. Then there's the fact that they are worse with weapons than any other martial class despite being dedicated to the study of MARTIAL ARTS which fucking include weapons. Heck i'd give them double proficiency on all the monk weapons , give them 2 cantrips that scale well and don't cost ki and call it a day.
>>44558782 >I remember my ex-girlfriend got into table-top through some friends, her first experience with it, and I told her that's great, and that I was running a D&D 4E game at the local game store. She wrinkled her nose and sincerely said, "Ew" about D&D 4E, because her group played PF. Is that why she's an ex?
>>44558976 Iron Soul is constitution based. Stone Fist and Eternal Tide are strength.
Basically the lvl 6 feat Qi enhanced strikes only makes your unarmed attacks count as magical and does nothing else.
Change that to all your martial arts attacks counting as magical and you get to learn ''martial arts techniques'' that are basically enchantments for your body/monk weapon while it's being held by the monk from a list of enchantments designed for monks.
You Remember/Practice/Prepare them for half an hour every morning after waking up similar to what a wizard does.
At lvl 6 you gain 1 enchantment/technique and after that you gain one every 2 levels until you max out at 8 at lvl 20.
Also the martial arts die is upped to scale better.
Bam now they are at least competent at their MARTIAL ARTS theme.
>>44549809 I never understood why people say the monk class sucked for 3.5/PF. In the 8+ years of running/playing (mostly running) I have never seen a problem with monk characters being outclassed by other players. Especially at higher levels with the monk's higher base save.
>>44553428 Full BaB d10 HD Pounce-like ability so they can move and full attack in the same round Less MAD, make DEX and WIS their core stats, let them use WIS for extra damage instead of STR Class ability to apply enchantments to their fists. Increase their AC bonus
>>44559306 Clearly you can't or else you'd notice how badly fucked over they are, what with being a 3/4 BAB class with zero accuracy boosts that pays three times as much for their enhancement bonuses, gets no precision damage, and who is completely locked off from using Power Attack effectively because of their MAD, BAB, and Flurry of Blows forcing them to use 1x STR on attacks regardless of whether they're two handed or not.
>>44559519 A) Tanking is fucking useless in 3.5 if you aren't a Crusader. B) Even ignoring that, Monk is one of the worst possible classes for the job. Nobody fucking cares how much you're not getting hit when you have zero effect on the battlefield when enemies ignore you.
>>44559519 >>44559468 If you focus on defense, the monk becomes the anti-Wizard. >High movement to move around meat shields >Higher touch AC then anyone else >Very High Saves >Some additional class bonus stuff against magic
>>44559554 What are you smoking. I use mostly NPCs and I have multiclass a huge variety of tanks. I made a Abjurer/Fighter tank before.
>>44559599 If it is a flying enemy, it would be assumed that the party caster could cast fly as well? Or the fellow barbarian or fighter could give you a toss aided with acrobatics. Then it is a matter of making Perceptions checks. What high wisdom character wouldn't have good perception
>>44559572 >>44559599 >>44559623 And this is all ignoring the fact that enemy spell-casters in DnD are usually physically powerful too. Getting adjacent to a Lich or spellcasting Dragon isn't going to help you that much.
>>44559688 No because you're not necessarily fighting low tier classes. 3.5 has a huge variety of enemies and assuming that you fight a variety of them, your tank character's defenses are almost guaranteed to be useless at some point or another, and since you focused on those to the exclusion of everything else...
>>44552644 someone cant into multiclass with rogue and grapple shit in 5e if you monk/rogue you can be solid snake including chokeholds. for fluff, get your DM to agree to let you grapple with a knife (no damage difference for monk)
Monk is actually pretty fun for multiclass builds. I remember my brother was playing a monk5/wizardX in a campaign once and it was a cool character. He was a bit tankier than most wizards and had the control to back it up. Though the decent saves and higher amount of skill points are what he mainly got out of the class. The GM though was modifying monk to have more skill points and a higher BAB if I remember right.
I mean, grapple monks still aren't the best, bards do it better thanks to cutting words and silence, barbarians do it better thanks to rage, and wizards do it better thanks to the divination school being amazing.
>>44561880 >Masters or CQC >Needs a scarce as fuck resource while other classes do it better without spending shit Coolio
Btw, sure, they can, but you won't do it once you have stun because your team will ask you to stun instead of trip (because others do it better), you become pic related, and in the odd case you reach 17th level (because almost no game ever reachs that hight) you then become useful again in dealing damage
>>44561908 >Better glappers than fighters Fucking no, stop spreading lies. Fighters have better Str than monks, they also gain stats faster, in the odd case you make a monk with the same Str as a fighter you then have Shitty AC and HPs and still you can't grapple better than a fighter, just, at best, equal.
Meanwhile Bards, Rogues and Barbarians laugh at then both.
>>44562034 You still get a minimum of 2 at-will maneuvers beyond "I attack X". It still has the core idea. >>44562052 >Stun wears off and has to waste movement to do shit. >Knocking prone is a FREE effect of your FoB which you use anyways. What else? Monks can also run up walls, over water, get 60+ speed, catch arrows, get proficiency in all saves and talk nonsense fortune cookie wisdom. They DO suck at grappling and normal tripping because the system is retarded, but the monk is good in 5E.
>>44562112 >Monks can also run up walls, over water, get 60+ speed, catch arrows, get proficiency in all saves and talk nonsense fortune cookie wisdom Half of that is fucking useless, other classes also do it and better or doesn't appear before the game ended.
The thing I was pointing out was the maneuver recovery methods present in the ToB, each of the three classes had their own means, that's the unique thing, the thing that has never been re-used, and was the most interesting thing about the ToB classes, and it isn't present in 4e
>>44562136 Only magic users do it better and that's still their stupid idea of magic > martials. Fighters can only fight better, literally nothing else. Barbarians can JUMP GOOD and Rogues can't run up walls at 30 feet/second. And if we only count up to X level then at the least give me some guidelines to compare classes with.
>>44562112 >Monks can also run up walls, over water Both of those are skill checks, and last time i checked even as a level 20 monk, Levitation is still worth about 200 ranks of jump contra 400 for normal classes.
>>44562213 Barbs jump good. It is "flying". The other two uses spells and if we want to go there the monk can also cast Fly. Should the monks get buffed? I am down for that. Is it as bad as 3.PF monk? Not even close. They're below average, but still better than ranger.
>>44562295 The biggest problem is that there is no feat for them. For STR you have GWM and all that shit, for ranged DEX you have crossbow mastery and sharpshooter. Rogue got sneak attack. But for the straight dex figther? There is nothing.
Mechanically speaking 4e monks are pretty damn good. But they're kind of weird, they only make implement attacks, and actually going unarmed is a terrible idea for them. Which means that the main reason to play a monk for many people (I wanna punch dudes inna face!) isn't present
>>44561367 You see, you're thinking of monks in the weeb sense. When you get right down to it though the only objective difference between a monk and cleric is the monk focuses on virtues rather than details of the religion and clerics can into armor. Monks were healers for most of history. It makes no sense to have a monk with such an intense and disciplined understanding of human anatomy and energy flow that can't heal properly.
>>44562479 Ki focuses are fine, and you never actually need to use the weapons you wield (if you decide to wield; it's a really nice bonus, but it's not that important). You can say you use them in your off hand for defense and stuff.
>>44562256 >still better than Ranger ... ... So this shit isn't as bad as the fermented feces. That's like saying this art is better than having ameobas eat your eyes. This music is better than having your ears clapped. This sensation isn't as bad as being slowly disemboweled with a jagged chunk of rock salt.
No, the Monk doesn't suck as bad as the Ranger. If that's the best praise you have for it, it's still indefensible.
>>44558728 the problem is, in terms of running a game, there are essentially 'monk' moments you would have to include in your game, making one player force the others to fight at a disadvantage every once in a while
>>44563113 You are settling for too little. Just because something could be worse does not mean it is of acceptable quality. This permissive, stubbornly accepting attitude is what keeps giving money to games that should be allowed to fail. By paying for and protecting inferior goods, we keep them inferior goods, we keep them bad. No incentive to make an excellent anything, if one that isn't so bad will suffice.
The problem with Monks in 3.5 is that they've been created entirely based on flavour, as opposed to mechanics and flavour together. Literally the only bit of mechanics they got right was the unarmed damage scaling with level. If you rewrote it to be based on mechanics, then added flavour to them, it'd probably be as good as a fighter.
Monks are the only ones written so badly that they must have made them based solely on flavour. Think of every monk trope you want and it's there. It's bad, but it's there. What needs to happen is they need to keep mechanics in mind when making a class.
>>44563483 You compare them to casters because casters are the gold standard and do everything well.
I've been fortunate enough to play with noobs when I have played D&D (only AD&D and 3.5), and they just wanted to make ersatz anime characters and didnt metagame, but just seeing the WEALTH of options casters have compared to my maligned friend happily playing a fighter is sad.
>>44563406 I don't see why you think the monk is that bad. The only problem the monk has is bad damage and low HD. There is no other problem. That doesn't make it a bad class at all, you can do a lot of things with a monk,
>>44563672 It's not the best decision ever, but I can sort of see the logic behind it. If the player wants to do vampire things to the point that it's the focus of their character, the best way to represent that in 4e is to make it their class. An extensive list of racial abilities on top of class abilities can be a bitch to balance. Rouges rouge, Fighters fight, Wizards wiz, and Vampires vamp. I think there was a background option or a multi-class feat for vampire characters that didn't want vampirism to be their main focus.
>>44563796 What? What magic items can't they "reliabily use?" Magic armor? Yeah, okay, but that's the same for mage and you have robe and clothes and cloak available for the monk. Magic weapons? Well, as you just said, they CAN use it. And with FoB they can hit four times with hit, more than any other classes except figther. And when they don't use FoB, they hit two times, one more with a bonus unarmed if they want. That's enough. And 5e is not balanced aroung magic items.
Btw, I got a shadow monk in my group with an amulet of health, slippers of spider climbing, and bracers of defense and he put these item to very good use.
>>44563698 >The only problem the monk has is bad damage and low HD And Monks are billed as frontline fighters. The above, plus having the Rogue's BAB means they simply cannot work as advertised. As for the "other things," that mostly comes down to a grabbag of abilities with no synergy (meaning you have no defined role in the party beyond the frontline fighter one you can't fill) and being able to run away really really well. A smattering of immunities at higher levels, a restricted form of Feather Fall, and a stun ability that most monsters of your level will breeze through does not inspire confidence in a class.
>>44563759 I think a vaguely remember this but I just skipped over 4e.
>>44563793 I guess it's the difference between having a "vampire that fights with swords" and a "swordsman who is also a vampire".
I get it, I guess. Looking at the wiki though, it seems pretty lackluster. I don't know how good they are compared to other races, but it seems like they're missing a lot of actual vampire abilities. Maybe the template or class has those.
>>44563877 >That's enough. If it were enough they wouldn't be the martial class that deals the lowest damage, they're behind rogues, behind barbarians, behind rangers, behind paladins behind fighters and even behind valor bards.
>>44564036 Which has zero sinergy with your class unlike metamagic, warmagic, sneak attack and other shit other classes have, good, fucking job, it's not like you need those feats you rise your Dex/Wis because you don't have other way of rising your armor unlike other martials that can buy better armor.
>>44563971 Vampire abilities aren't subpar; the problem with the class is that it has not enough choices and can't focus on a single stat like all other classes can. They are literally PHB only paladins, except they came out at the very end of the cycle (because mearls sucks cocks).
If you use a hybrid vampire you fix basically all of their problems, and you get to decide how vampire you want your character to be.
>>44564139 >zero synergy Because booming blade is a good synergy for someone except the rogue that can disengage with a bonus action? It's a way to have better damage, so it's nice. The fact that there is no synergy is not a big problem. And come on, the monk got no AC problem, you can go beyond 18 which is better than other martials that focus on damage.
There is a small damage problem with the monk but it's nowhere as big as you want it to be
>>44564288 He's just saying that booming blade got synergy. That's right, I overlooked that. But still, that synergy with a feat. Feat is a variant rules for 5e. With rare magic items and no feats, the monk got nice damage. With feats, it's bad, because he got none.
>>44559599 >monks are bad because spellcasters are broken as fuck and outpace literally every other class in the late game combined
Melee classes are heavily reliant on gear. In campaigns where the money flows like wine it's easy to equip fighter and rogue types with all sorts of magical weapons and items. They can't use any of the cool armor or the cool weapons.
It's easy to just find a Dagger of Whoopass +9 in an enemy keep, because they're awesome and even the maid can use it in a pinch. You're going to mount that shit on the wall. This... magical piece of rope that enhances monk abilities? Uh... yeah. Maybe they used it to tie back the curtains or something.
Monks have to have all of their gear given to them by the DM as loot "for reasons..." and then hope they have enough party stroke to not have those items just taken by the sorcerer or the cleric.
You nullify gear, a monk can wreck shit while your fighter is holding his dick.
You nullify magic, a monk can wreck shit while your wizard is raging about his resistance rolls.
They're a hard pure class to balance because everything else gets so fucking broken so fast if you don't keep your party in line, but nobody wants to do that because you lose the "epic unbeatable heroic badass..." element of a fantasy game everyone loves. (And then casters dominate even more when the gear isn't available...)
We had a monk rogue build in one of our older campaigns that was simply unstoppable mid-game. Flurried backstab bonuses, a pimped monk-class weapon, and the huge movement speed ended encounters often before the rest of the party got in range.
Then that ended late-game once the wizard bloomed, like every late-game. Time-stop 9x death flurry pew pew with a few floating wands for good measure... and any encounter lasting longer than six seconds makes the party worry.
>We've been arguing about this since 1E, and nothing has changed. >Why stop now?
>>44565350 There's a thing I don't get, their excuse on caster/martial disparity is that they didn't playtested it enough and used the cleric as a healbot, the wizard as pew pew spellslot wasting evocator and the druid turned only in rabbits and robins...yet the CRs are mostly intended for optimized groups that know what they're doing, not going to say they're a fucking piece of liars that are trying to excuse their casterfaggotry, but it seems pretty fucking convinient.
>>44565477 >No one can make a good martial arts system without designing the whole game around it. Not really. Anima is a good example of a system that handles martial arts well without being designed entirely around martial arts.
>>44563672 I legitimately don't see why you could have a problem with Vampire being a class unless you're so attached to the idea that RACE BELONGS IN DA RACE SECTION due to 3.5e that you simply can't break the spell in which case I can't help you and I'm sorry.
>>44549809 mechanics and game systems aside, i would say it is because i have only ever seen bad players want to play as a monk. Greedy stupid monks who want loot cause they feel underpowered, weeboo edgelord monks who rant on about all the situations they could do a special punch, but never a disciplined, thoughtful, and kind monk.
>>44561164 It's not an anti-mage class, otherwise like you said it would work. It could do a decent job, but casters do it better.
In my experience I've found the Monk most effective as a Scout. Not as good as a Ranger or Rogue but they do have high movement, high saves, and a good deal of resistances and self-healing. They may not be able to detect the traps but they have a good chance of surviving most.
>>44558699 So pick Way of the Open fist, get those magic gauntlets that let you take no damage from catching missiles without having to roll damage and possibly multiclass into Druid for Wild Shapes.
At most, I believed you get 1d10+Dex mod x 7 unarmed hits. You're also allowed to carry monk weapons without penalty.
This also doesn't change the fact that with high acrobatics, you dodge everything 9/10 times and everything that gets through does half damage.
Spell casters like Sorcerer/Bard multiclass are OP as all godly hell but Monk are fun too, what with quivering touch basically allowing you to basically do 200 damage at once, so if you absolutely, positively kill something, you use the insane stealth abilities monks have, sneak in to the BBEG's lair, use quivering on two asshats, meditate for half an hough, get your ki back, go use it on two more ass hats or the same two to stack up the damage, do this over the course of a day since quivering punch lasts like a day times each level the monk has or something, so a level 17 has more than 2 weeks to do this before snapping his fingers and having every monster or minion in the BBEG's lair fucking explode into a spray of blood.
Oh and it's not magic and pretty much undetectable.
And if you're worried about being caught cause you're not stealth enough go be a fucking ninja or something.
That's your options in monk and they're fucking glorious.
Way of the 4 stars shit so hard it fucking explodes into a storm of gore, dodge everything and heal the paper cuts you get; Naruto so hard your autism causes everything to explode and heal yourself when you get paper cuts; or Punch shit so hard the universe bends to your will as the wizards run back to their rooms crying because your version of their spells is better than theirs and you get your casts back after meditating for half an hour.
Just throwing an idea out here. Give the monk a feat that lets him hurt through armor. 17+STR, Power attack. You ignore armor, natural armor and shields when attacking. Feat that lets him lower the enemies effective armor. You are adept at pushing, pulling and kicking in just the right places so that the scales and plates of your enemie's armor ceases to function properly. Any time you deal damage to an enemy, you reduce his or her armor by 1 (to a minimum of 1/2 of the armor's usual bonus). This can be used against natural armor as well. The enemy must take off and redon their armor to remove this condition.
Purchasable no-magic aura gear. (5-20)-ft around you, all magical effects except evocation ceases to function. If that's too much, then an ability to sever or limit the spells that your target can dish out. Feat, 15+WIS, monk. Your intense studies to the flow of ki has lead to the discovery of the flow of the spellcasting abilities of your compatriots, including on how to sever them. 3+mod/day you can take a full round action to attack your enemy. If successful, the enemy cannot cast their spells for 1round+1/5lvls(monk) you have attained. Any spellcaster trying to do so finds that the familiar energies simply do not flow. They do not lose their spells, or spell slots, nor any other Su abilities, but cannot use them for that duration. Fort save.
I'm only lightly familiar with pf, and not at all with monks. But we can theorycraft out the wazoo...
>>44578029 >Classes based on encounter abilities, high offensive and defensive stats, and skills are the same as a class based on daily abilities, low offensive and defensive abilities, and magic spells.
The idea that Tome of Battle is anything like Vancian magic is hopelessly stupid.
Thread replies: 241 Thread images: 9
Thread DB ID: 361944
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.