D&D 5E The 5E Art is Awesome

[Morlock]

When I got my 5e DMG, my girlfriend went through and stick-noted every boob/thigh/stomach cutout, as well as any other art that read "creepy male gaze" to her.

This is odd to me, given that, in the real world, it's mostly females who dress in revealing clothing. And it's not really a close thing, either. Apparently "creepy male gaze" is something a hell of a lot of women find desirable.

But sure, let's erase that tendency...it's a prudish fantasy world.

This customer likes TnA.

P.S., killing a green dragon before it goes on to grow up and slaughter people is a good deed.

 

[Morlock]

I love the "whites aren't diverse" thing. English, Scots, Irish, Welsh, French, Spanish, German, Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish, Danish, Dutch, Austrian, Swiss, Italian, Greek, Russian, Polish, Latvian, Estonian, Lithuanian, Belarussian, Ukrainian, etc., etc., etc... no diversity. Never mind that Europeans are far more diverse in terms of appearance than any other similarly-large population group. Black hair, brown hair, blond hair, blue eyes, green eyes, brown eyes, pink skin, olive skin, somewhere-in-between skin.

So BLAND and BORING...to the suburban rubes who won't crack a book, anyway.

 

[redrick]

I love the "whites aren't diverse" thing. English, Scots, Irish, Welsh, French, Spanish, German, Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish, Danish, Dutch, Austrian, Swiss, Italian, Greek, Russian, Polish, Latvian, Estonian, Lithuanian, Belarussian, Ukrainian, etc., etc., etc... no diversity. Never mind that Europeans are far more diverse in terms of appearance than any other similarly-large population group. Black hair, brown hair, blond hair, blue eyes, green eyes, brown eyes, pink skin, olive skin, somewhere-in-between skin.

So BLAND and BORING...to the suburban rubes who won't crack a book, anyway.

Dude, are you just trolling?

Ain't nobody said that there's not a diversity amongst white people. Whites come in all different shapes, sizes and shades. Now, personally, out of the list that you've provided, I think I might be able to come up with 3 groups and maybe say, "oh yeah, this portrait is of a slavic/eastern european type." And "this portrait is of a scandinavian type." I could not tell the difference between an English person and a Dutch person just by looking at a picture.

But if you say, "these portraits are so diverse! We have a english white person, a scottish white person, a norwegian white person, a baltic white person, a bohemian white person, a spanish white person, and an african black person!" That's distorting the meaning of diversity and just reinforcing the idea that "fantasy is about white people," because you bothered to break your white people down into all their respective cultures and subcultures, whereas most fantasy settings have just one or two cultures each for every non-european continent.

Anybody should be able to open up a D&D player's handbook, thumb through the pages, and find characters who they can see themselves in. Now, if they choose to see themselves in a character who doesn't look at all like their projected self image, that's fine. But they shouldn't have to. Nor should they need to say, "oh, well, this dude is the only dude who looks remotely like me. cool."

 

[Patrick McGill]

I think the art did a fantastic job of creating evocative experiences, which I think is the ultimate goal. The art makes me think, and gets my juices flowing. The diversity of the art is a major player in that. That scimitar wielding dude in the front of the PHB? I wanted to be him immediately. I think the diversity isn't there to meet some kind of "agenda" (what agenda would that be, anyway?), it's there because the developers wanted to show how diverse the fantasy dreamlands of D&D are. Diversity is strength, and I think the diverse art has helped the new edition a ton.

Me, personally, I prefer realism in my fantasy art (hah). I'm not down with chainmail bikinis and all that. The older lady in the full plate featured in a few of the pieces is probably my favorite character out of the ones shown in the art. She looks experienced and intelligent, the sort of tactical fighter or paladin that I enjoy playing.

However, I don't think skimpy art is bad. Some people like chainmail bikinis. In fact, out of the people I know, the ones who like that sort of art tend to be women (I know quite a few women who are in love with those new Red Sonja comic covers). And it's fine. I think the art should cater to everyone. I wouldn't care if some of the art was titillating towards men or women (buff vikings or senpai batmen) at all. Fantasy art has a long history of bordering on the erotic. Much of this is creepy male "gaze" obviously, put in because sex sells, but for other people it's part of the subversion of societal norms, a reaction to puritanism and conservatism.

I think the same about power fantasies. I don't think thats unhealthy either. The swole Conan, crushing his enemies to dust beneath his bare feet, screaming to the sky with his blooded axes held aloft. I like that. That's sword and sorcery to me, and I don't find it bad at all.

I do think there needs to be more female power fantasy, however. A lot of that sort of art-with-heavy-metal-riffs is definitely male oriented. I wonder if the Red Sonja comics count? I think a full page art spread of a Red Sonja like character, leaning back on a throne of skulls and leopard skins idly inspecting a huge greatsword, being waited on hand and foot by a bunch of lean and attractive male thralls would be pretty damn epic.

I think it's an interesting debate, anyway, because on the flip side such art can make women feel uncomfortable. Objectification is for sure a thing. Where is the line? Is there a happy medium? I dunno.

I tend to take the side that sexuality is healthy, and bodies aren't things that we should be ashamed of. I also, however, wouldn't ever want women to feel uncomfortable in this awesome hobby. So in a lot of words I'm basically saying I have no idea what's right.

 

[Grainger]

Personally I find all the bare-chested barbarian stuff really, really naff, and the chainmail bikini stuff likewise. Likewise anything vaguely "heavy metal". I just find it stupid, pure and simple, and I'm glad to see the back of it. That's just personally speaking; I don't claim this is an objective truth - just personal taste. I found it naff 25 years ago, and it just seems even more cringe-worthy now.

Moving on to the subject of erotic fantasy art, there's nothing wrong with it, but I'm not sure I want to see it in the PHB, and I think the real issue anyway is one of representation - I certainly wouldn't want a PHB where most of images of female characters are of the "glamour model" variety. To give an example of the sorry state of affairs in general, and of how the PHB is better than the general level of female representation in fantasy art, one of my players has a female fighter, and she was looking for images of practically-armoured female warriors. She found a decent one eventually, but it was far harder than it should have been. If I google image search "female warrior" which is hardly an erotically-loaded term (and I have safesearch on, I hasten to add), the overwhelming majority of the images are of the chainmail bikini/cleavage variety, and/or in glamour model poses. To me, it's immaterial whether men or women created or like these images; it's a pretty sorry state of affairs in my view, and in this regard the PHB certainly does a lot better than the general internet.

 

[redrick]

To give an example of the sorry state of affairs in general, and of how the PHB is better than the general level of female representation in fantasy art, one of my players has a female fighter, and she was looking for images of practically-armoured female warriors. She found a decent one eventually, but it was far harder than it should have been. If I google image search "female warrior" which is hardly an erotically-loaded term (and I have safesearch on, I hasten to add), the overwhelming majority of the images are of the chainmail bikini/cleavage variety, and/or in glamour model poses. To me, it's immaterial whether men or women created or like these images; it's a pretty sorry state of affairs in my view, and in this regard the PHB certainly does a lot better than the general internet.

I had this problem with the game that I DM. Finding half-way decent artwork for my female NPCs could be a real drag. I stumbled across this forum thread (on the Baldur's Gate forum, of all places), and found it to be a real gem:
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/32429/images-of-females-in-believable-armour

Of course, it's telling that a lot of the images there still seem to toe the line of cheesecakery, but I spent a very fruitful evening paging through that thread and downloading a ton of useful character portraits that I can use for NPCs in my game.

Some women may like the cheesecake, and some women do not. That's a personal choice on a person by person basis, as far as I'm concerned. Not really my place to judge it either way. I just don't want to hand a Red Sonja mini to every woman who sits down at my table.

 

[Reynard]

Some women may like the cheesecake, and some women do not. That's a personal choice on a person by person basis, as far as I'm concerned. Not really my place to judge it either way. I just don't want to hand a Red Sonja mini to every woman who sits down at my table.

I think this is the thing right here: 5th Edition has done a good job of broadening the depiction of female character types. Of course there is room for the femme fatale and the busty warrior woman, but there is also room for the armored knight and the practical sorceress and the demure priestess. Likewise male figures, but males have always had a much higher variety of common archetypes compared to females in fantasy art.

I can't think of any damsels in distress in the art off the top of my head, which is a very good thing.

(All that said, I love me some sexy fantasy art and in my head D&D is always illustrated by Frazetta, but I don't think for a second all D&D art should look like that; fantasy is the broadest genre of all.)

 

[Jeff Albertson]

(All that said, I love me some sexy fantasy art and in my head D&D is always illustrated by Frazetta,

And Roger Dean!

 

[Werebat]

When I got my 5e DMG, my girlfriend went through and stick-noted every boob/thigh/stomach cutout, as well as any other art that read "creepy male gaze" to her.

I was going to say, "RUN, do not walk, away!", but then I realized that I don't know you or your girlfriend and have no idea of the context of this event.

So I'll just say, "Red flag, dude -- red flag."

 

[Saxon1974]

5e art is a mixed bag as some have said. Lots of stuff I don't like in the PHB. The MM is much better. The art direction isn't very good either, its all over the place setting wise and no consistency. I am a fan of medieval Europe era stuff as well so not a big fan of Asian and African themed stuff but that's person opinion. Give me 2e era Elmore/Parkinson/Easley any day! The Elmore box covers actually inspired me to start playing D&D; can't get more praise then that.