D&D General Art in D&D

Umbran said:

Mod Note:

Let us be clear - folks are free to find whatever qualities they want in art, and say so. If someone finds it creepy, then to them it is creepy - that is a valid opinion to have and to state.

It is NOT valid to tell them that they are incorrect. You don't get to tell people what their experience of art is.

Click to expand...

I'll assume this statement is bidirectional.

Son of the Serpent said:

You find it disagreeable but what was ill about it? Men AND women have adored his art for years. Adoration. Art always ilicits a varied reception.

Click to expand...

So... I find this statement, although it is technically true, misses the larger point about why 5e abandoned cheesecake art, and will likely never return to it.

The art existed, and was appreciated by D&D fans of both genders, I'm sure that can't be disproven. However, I'm equally certain that it was appreciated more by men, as D&D's earlier editions were played far more by men. Yes women did play, but not to the same extent as they do now.

5e designers have been pretty open that they don't do art like this and have language referencing different sexual/racial backgrounds more to appeal to a modern playerbase. This is, in the designers eyes, one of the reasons for D&D's surge in popularity today, making up a far more diverse group of newbies than any edition previously.

So sure, some women weren't bothered by this art. Others were. The art no longer exists, and now D&D is much more popular than it was. Obviously there are other reasons to this too, but I believe the more respectful and accommodating art is a point in its favor.

Urriak Uruk said:

So... I find this statement, although it is technically true, misses the larger point about why 5e abandoned cheesecake art, and will likely never return to it.

The art existed, and was appreciated by D&D fans of both genders, I'm sure that can't be disproven. However, I'm equally certain that it was appreciated more by men, as D&D's earlier editions were played far more by men. Yes women did play, but not to the same extent as they do now.

5e designers have been pretty open that they don't do art like this and have language referencing different sexual/racial backgrounds more to appeal to a modern playerbase. This is, in the designers eyes, one of the reasons for D&D's surge in popularity today, making up a far more diverse group of newbies than any edition previously.

So sure, some women weren't bothered by this art. Others were. The art no longer exists, and now D&D is much more popular than it was. Obviously there are other reasons to this too, but I believe the more respectful and accommodating art is a point in its favor.

Click to expand...

I feel that its only a matter of time before cheesecake art returns to being common. Why? Simple. The vast majority of both men and women enjoy it (provided its not on every page. Sprinkled in. Not everywhere.)
Its a relatively small group that dislikes it. Its actually a relatively small group that doesnt actively like it. Now, there are a lot of people in both groups. Im not saying either is a small number. But one is a reletively small population. And eventually, demand will force its return.
Yes some are offended by it. But a larger number of people are offended by its prohibition. And like it or not, give it a decade, its gonna happen.
Ironically long term diversity will actually only cement that. I'm confident of it.
For 100% certain confirmation we'll just have to wait and see but im pretty sure i can see what the eventual outcome is. Im just saying. People (far more people) like it.

Side note: as ive outlined above the following would change nothing if it werent so but - the proportion of play time represented by female gamers in d&d has actually barely chamged. The core female player base is slightly larger (in percentage) than before maybe.

Take any franchise with decades worth of material under its belt and you'll see some changes over the years.
Think of the debut of Star Trek the Next Generation in 1987 just a scant 18 years after the end of the original series. And in that relatively short period of time think of how dated the original was with the women on the crew sporting miniskirts, the special effects, the acting, the special effects, etc., etc. But it was still Star Trek.

When we talk about art in D&D we're looking at a period of almost 50 years at this point. The art we see in 1975 isn't the same as 1989 or in 2009. I expect the art in 2039 will be different from the art in 2019. D&D is a living breathing thing that changes with the times.

But for the record I prefer much of the art from 2nd edition to what we see today. I don't think I've seen much in 5th edition that approaches anything as good as Elmore's work for Cities of Mystery from 1989. GET OFF MY LAWN!!!

Urriak Uruk said:

So... I find this statement, although it is technically true, misses the larger point about why 5e abandoned cheesecake art, and will likely never return to it.

The art existed, and was appreciated by D&D fans of both genders, I'm sure that can't be disproven. However, I'm equally certain that it was appreciated more by men, as D&D's earlier editions were played far more by men. Yes women did play, but not to the same extent as they do now.

5e designers have been pretty open that they don't do art like this and have language referencing different sexual/racial backgrounds more to appeal to a modern playerbase. This is, in the designers eyes, one of the reasons for D&D's surge in popularity today, making up a far more diverse group of newbies than any edition previously.

So sure, some women weren't bothered by this art. Others were. The art no longer exists, and now D&D is much more popular than it was. Obviously there are other reasons to this too, but I believe the more respectful and accommodating art is a point in its favor.

Click to expand...

This, 100%. Many people are made uncomfortable by sexual objectification in art, and it is commercially self-limiting to go that route.

Parmandur said:

This, 100%. Many people are made uncomfortable by sexual objectification in art, and it is commercially self-limiting to go that route.

Click to expand...

Yep. We certainly don't need to bash people over liking it, but it's not really my cup of tea in my D&D art.

Urriak Uruk said:

So... I find this statement, although it is technically true, misses the larger point about why 5e abandoned cheesecake art, and will likely never return to it.

The art existed, and was appreciated by D&D fans of both genders, I'm sure that can't be disproven. However, I'm equally certain that it was appreciated more by men, as D&D's earlier editions were played far more by men. Yes women did play, but not to the same extent as they do now.

5e designers have been pretty open that they don't do art like this and have language referencing different sexual/racial backgrounds more to appeal to a modern playerbase. This is, in the designers eyes, one of the reasons for D&D's surge in popularity today, making up a far more diverse group of newbies than any edition previously.

So sure, some women weren't bothered by this art. Others were. The art no longer exists, and now D&D is much more popular than it was. Obviously there are other reasons to this too, but I believe the more respectful and accommodating art is a point in its favor.

Click to expand...

This is what WotC sees, but without so much concern for respect.

WotC is a company, and they'll do what makes them popular among the playerbase.

Son of the Serpent said:

I feel that its only a matter of time before cheesecake art returns to being common. Why? Simple. The vast majority of both men and women enjoy it (provided its not on every page. Sprinkled in. Not everywhere.)
Its a relatively small group that dislikes it. Its actually a relatively small group that doesnt actively like it. Now, there are a lot of people in both groups. Im not saying either is a small number. But one is a reletively small population. And eventually, demand will force its return.
Yes some are offended by it. But a larger number of people are offended by its prohibition. And like it or not, give it a decade, its gonna happen.
Ironically long term diversity will actually only cement that. I'm confident of it.
For 100% certain confirmation we'll just have to wait and see but im pretty sure i can see what the eventual outcome is. Im just saying. People (far more people) like it.

Side note: as ive outlined above the following would change nothing if it werent so but - the proportion of play time represented by female gamers in d&d has actually barely chamged. The core female player base is slightly larger (in percentage) than before maybe.

Click to expand...

I can't disagree with you more. For one, you don't have any evidence to prove that your opinion (that the vast majority of both men and women enjoy it) is true.

But more importantly, the business results point to cheesecake art being dead and buried. 5e is extremely successful for Wizards/Hasbro right now, continuing to get record sales numbers year after year. I am almost certain that with these results, Wizards is looking at their strategy as "Keep doing what we're doing, but more and better."

Re-instituting cheesecake art would be a reversion to previous strategy that largely failed the company. Now, we can disagree whether the art actually matters in these sales or whether it is other factors; but it doesn't really matter whether it does or not, as Wizards isn't going to "fix what's broken," by trying to change up the art style now.

Son of the Serpent said:

Yes some are offended by it. But a larger number of people are offended by its prohibition.

Click to expand...

I think you may be missing a large part of the point. Everyone keeps using the word "offended". That's not actually the issue for D&D art. This isn't about, "Oh, no, we see skin, and are puritanical people!"

The issue with cheesecake art is that the art displayed in the game materials represents the characters. It sets expectations. So, when a woman sees that art, the implication is that is what the characters are like in people's minds. The art says, "Female characters are eye-candy."

Coupled with a culture outside the game - in the world at large, in which women are, in fact, treated as sex objects, this isn't just offensive - it is demoralizing and may actually induce fear of the kind of focus on their sexuality that they see in everyday life. If you were sick and tired of being treated as a lesser being because of your gender, and tired of being constantly considered a sex object, that art simply says, "That game is not for me."

That is why they don't include that art any more - because while it may have sold to men, it turned women away from the game - and that's bad for business.

Maybe, some day in the future, when we have gotten past prevailing sexism in our culture, or we have regressed further back into that sexism, that art will be seen again in a mainstream game. But, so long as there's a power imbalance in society, but we are acutely aware of it, that art will be problematic and rare.

I’ve always been a sucker for the late 1-to-early 2e art; my favorites were always Elmore, Easley, Caldwell, etc.

That said, I really don’t have any real criticisms of the 5e art; not my favorite, but it also doesn’t contain my LEAST favorite, who was Tony DiTerlizzi. Nothing against the man himself, but his style of portrayals, with every single character just vaguely unnatural and aberrant, usually spindly, sometimes bloated, just always creeped me out. I’d love it if just his Fey were like that, the man can draw Fey as I’ve always pictured them, but in every other subject was just off-putting for me (it’s possible that’s why Planescape never resonated with me much.)