Dragon’s-Eye View 3/28/2012... now with ENW poll!

[ArmoredSaint]

Photorealism, please.

Most of the races in D&D are more or less humanoid. I think a good case can be made that the question of how to defend the human(oid) body from weapons by sheathing it in metal plates would have been answered by humanoids on whatever fantasy world in very much the same way it was answered by humans on our own world.

Thus, I feel that "real" fantasy armour should wind up looking not too differently from armour on historical Earth. To do otherwise would feel less believable to me, and would shake my immersion in any of the art.

Regardless of what they decide, in my campaigns, full plate armour will always has and always will look like this:

 

[El Mahdi]

I imagine the crusaders rode around on horses while wearing light clothing, and when they got near to some place where armor was useful they would get dressed in it.

I would imagine that both Yes and No apply to this. Yes, they'd likely only wear armor when necessary, but "necessary" was likely more often than one might think.

Basically, I'd think that once they were outside of a Fortress or a protected area, the armor likely went on. That would probably include long patrols in the hot desert. Enemies tend to not provide the time to "get ready" before they come riding down on you...

Full plate in the desert? Guess what the crusaders wore?

Plate Armor wasn't in use during the Crusades in the Middle East. They wore Gambeson and Mail, or other armors (Scale, Leather, and combinations of such), and towards the later Crusades in the Middle East (most in Egypt), Transitional Armors would have only just started becoming common (Mail with Plate in certain areas - elbows, knees, armpits, maybe a cuirrass, etc.)...but Full Plate Armor wasn't developed yet during those periods.

However, I get your point...and in actuality, Mail and Gambeson would have been even more uncomfortable than Full Plate.

 

[BobTheNob]

Question.

Look at the LOTR films. Of you were to take a drawn image that came damn close to Eowen at the Palenor fields, that would be realism. What about the Nazgul? They have a very "realistic" look (the film made it so), yet they are a complete fantastic race with no grounding in reality.

So the art of the film is "realistic", but the material is fantastic. So when you have the image of Eowen vs the Nazgul, what would you class it as?

(Cause in truth, thats sorta what Im aiming for)

 

[Sunseeker]

So the art of the film is "realistic", but the material is fantastic. So when you have the image of Eowen vs the Nazgul, what would you class it as?

Fantastical realism. It's realism...within the scope of a fantasy genre.

That's what I don't like about the source image for this discussion, "fantasy realism" is more than just cheesecake or beefcake. It's such a broad moniker it covers anything that wouldn't/didn't exist in reality(such as female warriors and undead knights to loin-clothed barbarians and wanna-be succubi).

 

[Mattachine]

I can't imagine a D&D adventurer in realistic full-plate, tromping through a dungeon.

You would be incredibly loud, have extreme difficulty with climbing, tire quickly, and have no peripheral vision.

In medieval times, full armor was for the battlefield and ceremonies, not expeditions.

 

[Lwaxy]

Uhm... where, exactly, is the difference between the "Manga" and "fantastic realism" (rather fantastic irrealism to me)? The only difference is the "Manga" version is drawn in Japanese style.

Both show females in overly sexist outfits with too large . No self respecting woman unless she is of a certain profession would run around like that on a daily basis unless she is of a certain profession... oh wait... *looks at all the belly free slutty fashion styles of today* Well, no one says women in a fantasy setting can't fall slaves to stupid fashion styles, too

But really, the styles of the first 2 pics may be a bit different but it is basically the same.

The 3rd picture is best. For a fighter, anyway.

 

[Klaus]

Clarification:

The image related to a part of the article that was edited out, so part of the context was lost.

 

[Ranganathan]

All of the above. And a whole lot more.

Above and beyond any game play issues I might have had with the more recent editions of D&D, the one thing I hated most was the unified art style of the books. I want a broad spectrum of art, artists, color / black & white, manga, photoreal, magical realism, wood block, what the hell ever. If it's cool and evocative of "D&D" then it's in. Seeing 100s of images in roughly the same style by a dozen or fewer artists is damned annoying in a fantasy RPG, especially if that style isn't what I think of when I day dream about D&D.

 

[howandwhy99]

All of the above. And a whole lot more.

Yep. I was just coming here to post that too.

 

[delericho]

Not all fantastic realism is so sexually oriented, though admittedly both men and women tend to have more idealistic bodies.

While that's true, the idealism works differently for the two sexes. The female characters tend to be idealised to project sexiness - exaggerated curves, posed specifically to highlight key areas (sometimes contrary to the limits of anatomy), and so forth. Basically, they're a male fantasy.

The male characters, on the other hand, are idealised to project power - they're tall, with exaggerated muscles, carrying over-large "weapons", and are either scarred or scowling badasses. Those are also a male fantasy.

(Indeed, for a really good example of this, just look at the 4e PHB cover - the male character is fully armoured and posed for combat; the female character is twisted precisely to highlight T&A.)

Believe it or not, this was actually addressed quite recently over on Cracked - if you scroll down to the section on Namor. But be wary - although there's no nudity, I would suggest that a lot of the artwork there is borderline NSFW.

Don't get me wrong - I don't have anything against either idealised bodies or male fantasies. But if they're going down that route, there should be balance - let's have significant representation of badass female adventurers, and let's have the 'sexy' male characters as well.

And, honestly, D&D artwork could actually benefit from a small dose of Frazetta-like inspiration (just with less nudity)...A lot of modern D&D art has become rather dry and/or cartoony and could stand that shot in the arm to reinvigorate interest in the medium...

I don't disagree. A lot of the D&D art (and, actually, D&D itself) seems to have fallen into a groove of being overly neat, overly serious, and generally less fun. So, yeah, let's look to the older style of the 1st Ed books, and let's look to Frazetta, and let's look to other media.

And, for that matter, I have no issue with there being nudity in the books either, if that's the direction WotC want to take. (Though somehow I doubt that they would!)