DRAGON #360 Art Gallery: Dryad

[Clavis]

These are the same gnomes that are showing up in the MM, right? And what about Elves, and Dwarves? How does this fit into this 'Removal from the public domain' theory of yours?

Can't wait to see what they do to the Gnomes this time. Maybe now they all run around in thong underwear and shoot laser beams out of their eyes.

As far as I can tell, both the elves and Dwarves of 4th edition will be as far away from Tolkien's conception of either race as they could be made. For one thing, wise magical elves are no apparently longer even going to be called "elves", but are now "eladrin"! For another, the Dwarven concept art shows Dwarven wizards and rogues, and un-bearded females. Personally I don't care, because the elves in my campaign were never Tolkien-like, and I personally dislike Dwarves and only use them as comic-relief political satire.

Incidentally, the new Dryad concept is still stupid.

 

[Epic Meepo]

It's been mentioned in a Wizards article, and said article has been referenced, that this is a Dryad's combat form.

No, the author of said article, Stephen Schubert, says, "This fey of the woods appears here in what we are thinking of as her natural form" (emphasis mine). That's not her combat form. That's what she actually looks like unless she is in disguise.

It's also been stated it can look like the old (read Sexy tree creature) dryad if it wants to, so I'm failing to see the entire problem here.

From the same article: "The concept of the dryad has moved away from being only a woodland faerie whose tree is always in danger. The new dryads are fierce protectors of the forest..."

I can't speak for anyone else, but here's one problem I'm having here: take a look at what the designers did to turn the dryad into a fierce protector of the forest; they turned her into a monster. Apparently, part of the 4e design philosophy is that women cannot be convincing protectors unless they can change into something other than women at the first sign of combat.

In fact, of the sixty DoD minis, only five appear to be female. Of these, the dryad and the drider are both monstrous women instead of ordinary women. Where, I ask, is the creature that looks like an ordinary woman, and yet still fills the 'fierce protector' role? The general lack of such creatures is, in my mind, a fairly big problem; especially considering WotC's stated goal of actively trying to appeal to female gamers.

 

[Bagpuss]

Maybe they are still the sexy Dryads we're used to, but they can morph into this combat oriented creature.

Or maybe that's an illusion, or how people remember them, and that's their true form. After all dryads have suggestion and charm person.

 

[Victim]

We're not talking about mortal creatures here, we're dealing with fey. The whole idea of a 'true form' might be a strictly mortal consideration. A person who grows angry might scowl, shout, and turn red in the face. Is that his true form? Is the paler, smiling person a trick? A creature that's magical in nature would reasonably be capable of even greater alteration.

You know, if fey creatures typically express their moods via their forms or through the environment, that'd be pretty cool.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

No, the author of said article, Stephen Schubert, says, "This fey of the woods appears here in what we are thinking of as her natural form" (emphasis mine). That's not her combat form. That's what she actually looks like unless she is in disguise.

From the same article: "The concept of the dryad has moved away from being only a woodland faerie whose tree is always in danger. The new dryads are fierce protectors of the forest..."

I can't speak for anyone else, but here's one problem I'm having here: take a look at what the designers did to turn the dryad into a fierce protector of the forest; they turned her into a monster. Apparently, part of the 4e design philosophy is that women cannot be convincing protectors unless they can change into something other than women at the first sign of combat.

In fact, of the sixty DoD minis, only five appear to be female. Of these, the dryad and the drider are both monstrous women instead of ordinary women. Where, I ask, is the creature that looks like an ordinary woman, and yet still fills the 'fierce protector' role? The general lack of such creatures is, in my mind, a fairly big problem; especially considering WotC's stated goal of actively trying to appeal to female gamers.

Because it's silly. Neither an "ordinary man" nor an "ordinary woman" can count as a fierce protector. It must be a strongly muscled, a greats spellcaster, or heavily armored (or all togehter). Ordinary people are just that - ordinary. If they can do something spectacular, they are effectively protected by an illusion.

And I like the idea of feys using illusions to conceal their true appearance. It makes the creepier. And anything non-human should usually be that. The book where these creatures appear is called "Monster Manual", not "Creatures of the World".
And maybe, behind the illusion concealing a non-humanoid, plant-like, slightly freaky looking creature, there might be yet a caring and loving creature that just wants to protect its home and its family.

I mean, if a Nymph or a Dryad is just a hot chick with some powers, it might as well just be a Druidess. If there is more behind it, the creature becomes very distinct.

 

[Testament]

For another, the Dwarven concept art shows Dwarven wizards and rogues, and un-bearded females.

Like 3rd Ed?

 

[D.Shaffer]

With all the talk about moving the Fey closer to there mythological/folklore based roots, (Ha! Dryad! Roots! Get it? You see...oh never mind) the various fey not appearing as what they first seem to be appeals to me a lot. Many of the stories of the fey have to deal with glamor and illusion. If they want to enhance that aspect, more power to them. In any case, if the 'Big hulking tree' form IS there natural form...it's not going to be THAT hard to chance the flavor text to make a more pleasing humanoid form the normal one.

As far as I can tell, both the elves and Dwarves of 4th edition will be as far away from Tolkien's conception of either race as they could be made.

So, first you claim that they've got some wierd conspiracy going on to remove 'public domain' creatures from the books. Then, when it's pointed out that they havent, you then change your complaint to 'it's not longer Tolkien'?

Nevermind that this is DND, NOT Tolkien. Also nevermind that you then go on to say you never liked the Tolkien version of those races anyways.

 

[an_idol_mind]

While the dryad supposedly will have the ability to appear as the gentle tree spirit of the past, the fact that they can transform into big ol' tree monsters changes them dramatically. The dryad of before is a creature who needs to rely on enchantments and trickery. The dryad of 4th edition is someone who can walk into a fight and start kicking ass. Some people consider that a good thing, others consider it a bad thing, but either way it is a dramatic change for the creature.

 

[wayne62682]

Where are teh bewbiez?!?

Seriously, I like the idea of the Dryad looking like the Games Workshop version in the Feywild or whatever their home area is, and taking the shape of a "hawt nekkid elf babe" in the Material plane.

 

[frankthedm]

Where, I ask, is the creature that looks like an ordinary woman, and yet still fills the 'fierce protector' role?.

Female human paladin. Was a chaimail fig. http://www.wayaadisi.com/chainmail/graphics/thalos/paladin1.jpg . Was remade as the Sword of heroneous once DDM came out.

Cosidering most of the minis of the set have no way to determine gender, your claim of only 5 of 60 is far less than provable.

Blade Spider: No gender discernable
Capricious Copper Dragon No gender discernable
Bar-Lgura: No gender discernable
Boneshard Skeleton: No gender discernable
Visejaw Crocodile: No gender discernable
Demonweb Swarm: No gender discernable
Ettercap Webspinner: No gender discernable
Gelatinous Cube: No gender discernable
Large Fire Elemental: No gender discernable
Flame Snake: No gender discernable
Macetail Behemoth : No gender discernable
Nightmare : No gender discernable
Rage Drake : No gender discernable
Rot Scarab Swarm : No gender discernable
Shadow Mastiff : No gender discernable
Spined Devil : No gender discernable
Warhorse : No gender discernable
Umber Hulk Delver : No gender discernable

And another chunk are being lumped in with 'male' becasue they lack apparant mammary glands;