D&D 5E D&D and who it's aimed at

[Irlo]

Right there. Dark Sun. The most recent attempt would be 2 pages out of the last Ravenloft book, around 'Dark Fantasy', I believe with little to no art contribution for setting the tone (I dont own the book, just flipped through.)

Got it, thanks. There’s my disconnect. I would never have considered Dark Sun as Conan-like.

 

[Maxperson]

Right there. Dark Sun. The most recent attempt would be 2 pages out of the last Ravenloft book, around 'Dark Fantasy', I believe with little to no art contribution for setting the tone (I dont own the book, just flipped through.)

There was a Conan module or two in 1e I think. Might have been 2e. Dunno for sure.

 

[Minigiant]

And here we are.

So you admit you are being aimed at.
You just your turn faster or first.

 

[theCourier]

With Lankhmar and Dying Earth under their belts, it may just be a matter of time before DCC Conan makes an appearance (idk to be honest and it probably depends way more on the Howard estate, I'm guessing)

 

[hawkeyefan]

Good lord folks. The lack of skin in the art doesn’t prevent anyone from playing a sword and sorcery game.

If you can’t find sword and sorcery in D&D the issue ain't with the art.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

OK, so you guys defending capitalism here with respect to going for what's popular - you're pretty much making the same arguments used for Hollywood making so few movies with minority protagonists and why there are so few products catering to them on store shelves across much of the US.
So, you might want to reexamine that a bit and just how much following the rules of the capitalist game leads to marginalization - marginalization, I might add, that WotC's and other corporations' diversification efforts are actively fighting against.

Hey, I'm not defending capitalism. I hate capitalism more than would be appropriate to say on this site.

I'm just saying that with the system WotC has to work with (capitalism), it really isn't their fault for making popular changes/bringing back popular things. Making popular changes is how you make money in this game, and if WotC doesn't make money, the game dies. And most of the changes they've been making recently are the exact opposite of excluding minorities to make a profit.

 

[Maxperson]

Good lord folks. The lack of skin in the art doesn’t prevent anyone from playing a sword and sorcery game.

I don't know. If all the creatures in the artwork lacked skin, it would probably turn me off to the game.

 

[Scribe]

Good lord folks. The lack of skin in the art doesn’t prevent anyone from playing a sword and sorcery game.

If you can’t find sword and sorcery in D&D the issue ain't with the art.

Of course it doesnt, and who am I to complain, they gave us 2 pages in the Guide to Ravenloft talking about how to create a Domain that would lean into a Sword and Sorcery themed game. I suppose I should be happy with what I've been offered.

It is however, part of set of tropes, that makes up that style of setting, in my opinion.

 

[Medic]

Good lord folks. The lack of skin in the art doesn’t prevent anyone from playing a sword and sorcery game.

If you can’t find sword and sorcery in D&D the issue ain't with the art.

The salient point is not that people can't play a S&S game with mostly-nude beefcake warriors, rather, that WotC would not publish such a product in this day and age because they are targeting a particular audience.

 

[bedir than]

The salient point is not that people can't play a S&S game with mostly-nude beefcake warriors, rather, that WotC would not publish such a product in this day and age because they are targeting a particular audience.

What's missing from the game that prevents Sword & Sorcery, that isn't just art?
As my 5e campaign launched with nearly no magic and just 3 races I'm interested in hearing what more was needed