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

[WheresMyD20]

Fine. Then you won't care if it's 50-50 male/female, a range of ethnicities and body types, and a number of people with disabilities, will you? Those of us who want those things plus good art can have what we want, and those like you who don't care about them will be fine either way.

Just don't hold good art hostage to some kind of politically correct quota. The "inclusiveness quota" should be a minor concern, if it's a concern at all.

 

[WheresMyD20]

Absolutely! I would love a PHB that only featured fantastic art of Asian women with eyepatches.

If the PHB is for a game that about female pirates adventuring in the South China Sea, then sure, go for it.

However, I think you either missed my point or were just making a pathetic attempt a witty comment.

 

[Kynn]

Just don't hold good art hostage to some kind of politically correct quota. The "inclusiveness quota" should be a minor concern, if it's a concern at all.

Is it better hold good art hostage to outdated, sexist, racist, and non-inclusive ideas of what fantasy artwork is "supposed to" look like?

Because nearly anyone who rails against "politically correct quotas" seems to be saying they're fine with excluding people.

For many of us, inclusiveness definitely should be a concern, and not just a minor one.

 

[Incenjucar]

If the PHB is for a game that about female pirates adventuring in the South China Sea, then sure, go for it.

However, I think you either missed my point or were just making a pathetic attempt a witty comment.

And what is D&D about then?

It's certainly not about Jolly Old England.

 

[WheresMyD20]

Which has the effect of excluding people, of course.

And core D&D has not traditionally assumed a medieval, northwest European backdrop. Polytheism alone should put that notion out of court. But it doesn't stop there. Weapon lists contain everything from khopeshes (Egyptian) to scimitars (Middle Eastern) to shuriken (East Asian). Monks have always had a strong East Asian flavor. Among monsters that draw on real-world mythology, Greek myth is the biggest influence.

There's certainly room for medieval Europe as a backdrop for D&D. But it need not be, and should not be, the only one.

D&D traditionally was based primarily on the western world (Europe / Middle East / North Africa) circa the late middle ages/early renaissance. Monks were the "oddball" class that were introduced in Supplement II: Blackmoor during the chaotic, freewheeling days of OD&D, then grandfathered into AD&D 1e. They were listed last, out of alphabetical order, because of this.

Gygax later stated in 1e Oriental Adventures that the monk should be dropped from the PHB and that the monk class actually belongs in OA.

Since medieval Europe and East Asia had relatively little interaction (Marco Polo and the Mongol invasions aside), it makes sense to have separate books for the two so that you can use one or the other as a backdrop. Of course, you can also use both at the same time if your campaign world features a blended east & west world. However, trying to cover both east & west and doing them both justice is probably too much for one book.

 

[Incenjucar]

D&D traditionally

Was from the 70s, and we've grown as a culture since then.

 

[WheresMyD20]

Is it better hold good art hostage to outdated, sexist, racist, and non-inclusive ideas of what fantasy artwork is "supposed to" look like?

Because nearly anyone who rails against "politically correct quotas" seems to be saying they're fine with excluding people.

For many of us, inclusiveness definitely should be a concern, and not just a minor one.

Is this really about "inclusiveness"? Do you feel "excluded" if you go see a samurai movie and all the actors are Japanese? (assuming you're not)

If the core rulebook wants to cover all cultures (knights, samurai, tribal warriors, etc.) then go for it. If it wants to avoid historical cultures and go for some blended, totally made up European/African/Asian/Native American/etc mashed-up background, then go for it.

If it's just focusing on western culture, then I don't see any problem with not having Asians in it. Likewise, if it's focused on East Asian culture, then I wouldn't expect to see Europeans in it. It's not about "inclusiveness", it's just common sense.

The "open letter" basically demands that there be a 50/50 male-female ratio, equal balance between all skin tones, and disabilities in the PHB art. Are we living in such a super-sensitive age that people start throwing around labels like "sexist" and "racist" as soon as there's not a careful "balance"?

 

[Incenjucar]

Over any other concern, a game that has exclusionary art is going to exclude itself from being purchased by a wider audience. For that reason alone it is absurd to not include as many types of people as possible.

 

[Kynn]

The "open letter" basically demands that there be a 50/50 male-female ratio, equal balance between all skin tones, and disabilities in the PHB art. Are we living in such a super-sensitive age that people start throwing around labels like "sexist" and "racist" as soon as there's not a careful "balance"?

Why are you so utterly opposed to inclusive, diverse representation in D&D artwork?

I'm at a loss as to why someone would think it's "just common sense" to exclude various types of characters from being represented in the artwork.

I think the "super-sensitive" types of this age are the ones who get their noses bent out of shape at the mere suggestion that we can move beyond dated, sexist, and racist ideas of what an adventurer should be.

This is the 21st century, and I think D&D Next can do better than assuming the majority adventurers are white men.

 

[WheresMyD20]

Why are you so utterly opposed to inclusive, diverse representation in D&D artwork?

I'm at a loss as to why someone would think it's "just common sense" to exclude various types of characters from being represented in the artwork.

I think the "super-sensitive" types of this age are the ones who get their noses bent out of shape at the mere suggestion that we can move beyond dated, sexist, and racist ideas of what an adventurer should be.

This is the 21st century, and I think D&D Next can do better than assuming the majority adventurers are white men.

I think you need to read what I wrote more carefully. You're misrepresenting what I said. I NEVER said to deliberately exclude anyone. Your response is a classic straw man argument.