D&D 5E D&D Next weekly art column!

[Savage Wombat]

Poppycock.

Female gamers like to see pictures of women adventurers in their game books.
Male gamers like to see pictures of women adventurers in their game books.

I fail to see a downside here.

 

[the Jester]

No, I just don't think it's a good idea to follow a 50% quota out of political correctnes that is not based with the realities of human life.

What about the realities of elven or dwarven life? Oh wait, D&D isn't about reality.

EDIT: And as for female players playing warriors, our last female player (who recently moved across the country, alas) plays the group's paladin. I've seen plenty of female players who enjoy being the fighter.

 

[avin]

I've seen at least two females playing FIGHTERS, the greatest class ever.

 

[Ratskinner]

Art is art, I can't say I'm Wayne Reynolds' greatest fan (I always want to turn the contrast up on his work), but its not like It kept me from buying the books.

I think the one thing I'd like from art is for it not to get in the way. (maybe this is editing as much as art.) I always hate it when text runs over art. I also think the amount of color and size of the art in some of the later editions was getting out of hand. Honestly, for a lot things, I'd be fine with just a little line-art sketch here or there. Give me great color art on the cover, and maybe for each chapter page or something, but otherwise...

okay, wait. There is one other thing....

Swords....weapons...please portray them at a size that does not look ridiculous. Something about seeing a guy (or girl) totin' a sword that looks like it weighs more than they do just sets my teeth on edge.

Of course, its not like that's a deal-breaker for me.

 

[Yora]

Actual warhammers or maces would also be nice, but those would look flimsy even next to actual swords and axes.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Certainly a good way to start a column.

My hope for the art of the edition is more scenes and fewer character images. In particular, scenes other than "fight!" or "we just fell into a trap!" would be nice. Show characters setting up camp, relaxing in a tavern, sitting down at a table to plan a military campaign, negotiating with a king, and so on. Putting more effort into illustrating key game mechanics than 3E and 4E's token art would be a huge plus.

Most of all, less anger and poor attempts at looking "cool", and more grandeur and class would be a big improvement. Would it hurt to draw some female characters who looked elegant and beautiful, rather than violent and sleazy?

 

[Dausuul]

No, I just don't think it's a good idea to follow a 50% quota out of political correctnes that is not based with the realities of human life.

By this logic, 99% of all characters portrayed in the D&D rulebooks should be peasant farmers. Or moldering skeletons in centuries-old graves.

It is not the job of the art department to model the demographics of the game world. It's the job of the art department to excite and inspire players and DMs. That includes female players who want to play tough fighter-types--and just because you haven't met such players doesn't mean they don't exist. I've played with several.

Moreover, "players and DMs" also includes potential players and DMs. The game art plays a role in welcoming new players to the game... or pushing them away. D&D art has often done the latter with women when it should be doing the former. Quite aside from concerns about prejudice and privilege, our hobby is not large enough that we can afford to discourage anyone from joining.

 

[Zaukrie]

First, I'm thrilled this column exists.

Second, not a fan of pointy/spiky stuff all over the place.

Third, I'd like pictures of landscapes to have depth, so I can see how tall buildings are relative to each other. That top down view we get all the time is annoying.

I think Dausuul had it mostly correct, frankly.

And, that concept that monsters interact with each other and adventurers, and that art is better than just poses, is right on. Art should help me come up with ideas and stories, not just show me what a monster looks like (though every monster should get a picture....I still remember thinking a shrew was a mammal, or was it a bird?).

 

[Stormonu]

One of the things that struck me from the linked blog was ableness. I hadn't thought about it, but I'd love to see a few pictures of adventurers (and/or bad guys) who are missing a limb here and there - peg legs, a hook hand, an eyepatch, a literal "one-armed bandit", maybe even a disabled mage in a fantasy wheelchair or moving about on Tenser's Floating Disk. If not overdone, I think they would really help to expand people's imaginations into heroes they haven't contemplated before.

Also, in the ways of art I'm a fan of many of the old artists - Roslof, Ken Frank, Elmore, Easley, Parkinson. Most of it was because their art, while fantastic, seemed very much grounded in a reality you could believe in. I liked Jim Halloway's comical art, as well as the cartoons in the old 1E DMG.

Above all, as a personal favor, I'd love to see a 5th edition rendition of the "fighter trapped in a water-filling room with skeleton" picture [that montage is done by [MENTION=9470]weem[/MENTION], BTW] - and perhaps homages to the old greats - "A Paladin In Hell", "Emirkol the Chaotic", Elmore's "The Dragonslayers", etc.

 

[Savage Wombat]

One of the things that struck me from the linked blog was ableness. I hadn't thought about it, but I'd love to see a few pictures of adventurers (and/or bad guys) who are missing a limb here and there - peg legs, a hook hand, an eyepatch, a literal "one-armed bandit", maybe even a disabled mage in a fantasy wheelchair or moving about on Tenser's Floating Disk. If not overdone, I think they would really help to expand people's imaginations into heroes they haven't contemplated before.

Although I do support inclusiveness, I have trouble with adventurers being down on limbs when the game system at no point allows for the possibility of such injury, and makes it so easy to fix even if it somehow does.