D&D 5E Mearls and Crawford interview with The Mary Sue

[ExploderWizard]

I know I'm going to regret bringing this up but...where does magic fall in this equation?

A 1st-level endure elements spell (or magic item that allows for that) solves that problem. Likewise for impractical-looking armor that has a +5 enhancement bonus, or is just normal armor with the glamoured property, etc. (Strictly speaking I don't know if any of that is going to be in 5E, but the larger point is at least worth the discussion.)

Such things might exist but what sensible adventurer is going to rock a loincloth on an arctic expedition just because someone in the group has endure elements?

That is right up there with skipping food & water because the cleric can create it. Next thing you know the party is weeks away from anything and the cleric gets killed.

In the jungle, it doesn't matter what the armor is glamoured to look like, it's a matter of encumbrance and heat exhaustion. So if that plate armor magically looks like a chainmail bikini, you would still be better off with an actual chainmail bikini because heatstroke isn't sexist.

 

[SkidAce]

HUMOR

...A picture of a female elf in a summer dress shopping for shoes doesn't really fit, I don't think.

HOW DARE YOU DISPARAGE MY GAMING STYLE!!

(j/k?)

 

[Alzrius]

So the elves are shopping for shoes of elvenkind?

 

[Agamon]

Admittedly, it would be humorous to have a picture in the equipment section of a female elf standing in front of a shelf of shoes looking like she just opened a chest full of gold with a male dwarf standing beside her with a "please shoot me" look on his face. But, that would be sexist in it's stereotyping. And it doesn't look like they're shooting for humor in the art we've seen so far, anyway.

 

[Selkirk]

i respect mearls (and i even bought the starter set ) but i have to say i wholeheartedly disagree with the art direction so far. diversity is one thing...but what are we saying here? that diversity equals boredom? why not have people wearing next to nothing (as to the realism aspect....in a game that involves goblins and magic we are far removed from miniature wargaming/retainers (thank god) etc...). what sort of character walks around in full armor/battle dress all day?

why not have some sexiness? shouldn't barbarians and drow wear skimpy outfits (for cultural reasons)? the characters in the starter set struck me as adrogynous and badly drawn. lets put the sex back in starter set ...mmm ok perhaps badly worded but.... the games are supposed to be fun not some exercise in head to toe medieval 'fashion'.

 

[Thaumaturge]

The games are supposed to be fun.

I am greatly looking forward to the fun I'll have pouring over the books with my 5 year old daughter.

That fun will be diminished by the presence of art meant to please an adult's more puerile sensibilities.

EDIT: The other night I played the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game with my wife and her sister. We had fun. My sister-in-law played the sorcerer, and was aghast at the amount of side-boob her character was showing. We all had fun despite that bit of art not because of it.

Thaumaturge.

 

[delericho]

I'm glad to see more diversity appearing in the books, and glad also that it seems they're going for better representation of female characters in particular.

Not fighting for their lives at that moment, per se, but in their "work clothes" regardless (see the campfire pic in Basic). A picture of a female elf in a summer dress shopping for shoes doesn't really fit, I don't think.

There's an excluded middle there, though - I could certainly see a "tavern scene" fitting the game, and that doesn't necessarily require that the PCs be in their work clothes. Indeed, if those work clothes are heavy armour and, especially, closed-face helms, those would be equally out of place.

I know I'm going to regret bringing this up but...where does magic fall in this equation?

A 1st-level endure elements spell (or magic item that allows for that) solves that problem. Likewise for impractical-looking armor that has a +5 enhancement bonus, or is just normal armor with the glamoured property, etc. (Strictly speaking I don't know if any of that is going to be in 5E, but the larger point is at least worth the discussion.)

While that's all true, there's no easy way for the image to convey that it's the case. (Except perhaps in the case where the image is captioned to say so, or if it's right beside text talking about that very spell/item/whatever - which we can assume probably won't be the norm.)

So it's probably best if the art is shown assuming characters aren't using endure elements spells, or glamoured armour, or similar - just as the viewer will likewise assume that the knight in shining armour isn't a polymorphed demon lord/half-flumph.

 

[Thaumaturge]

just as the viewer will likewise assume that the knight in shining armour isn't a polymorphed demon lord/half-flumph.

Right, because he's obviously half-modron.

Thaumaturge.

 

[ExploderWizard]

- just as the viewer will likewise assume that the knight in shining armour isn't a polymorphed demon lord/half-flumph.

OK. Now I demand that we get a picture of an un-polymorphed demon lord/half-flumph.

A HALF FLUMPH CAMBION!

 

[Alzrius]

While that's all true, there's no easy way for the image to convey that it's the case. (Except perhaps in the case where the image is captioned to say so, or if it's right beside text talking about that very spell/item/whatever - which we can assume probably won't be the norm.)

So it's probably best if the art is shown assuming characters aren't using endure elements spells, or glamoured armour, or similar - just as the viewer will likewise assume that the knight in shining armour isn't a polymorphed demon lord/half-flumph.

I agree with your first paragraph, but disagree with the conclusion you come to in the second. The contextualization/interpretation of art is always going to be subjective to the viewer - all of the presumptions about what's being shown happen in the mind of the people viewing it. While it's certainly simplest to read absolutely nothing into a given picture, but I wouldn't call that "best."