KiddDaBeauty wrote...
*gasp* I beg your pardon! I certainly do not agree, my good lady!XCelfa wrote...
Imagine the damage I could do if I put my pc in pasties and a g-string.
The less covering = higher armour rule certainly only applies if less armour is sexier when seen from an objectifying gaze. And I dare say g-strings are absolutely dreadful looking. Why, such inferior undergarments could never deserve a high armour or defence value! The fabric simply does not accentuate the fine curvacious form of the female buttocks, you see. Nay, I say we need to add at least a bit more astounding cover to form a classic and proper undergarment such as the traditional thong. Perhaps we could go even farther and make some gracious pants that cover and lift the whole of the behind, lifting it in terrifically perfect manner. For it is true, only the sexiest of women can tank the foul darkspawn from the depths.
Nonsense. You just haven't seen a nice enough posterior in such.
[I agree, though. When it comes to underwear, there's definitely such a thing as too little /cringe]





Retour en haut











