D&D 5E Toward a new D&D aesthetics

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos · Mar 27, 2022

Yaarel said:
D&D is a game that both kids and adults play. (Kinda amazing really.)

Trying to coordinate the needs of the two age groups has always been an awkward challenge for D&D designers. 2e is notorious for its bowdlerizing content.

Is there a pendulum swinging between "mature" and "safe"?

This is a good and natural tangent from @beancounter 's initial response. Bowdlerising... lol. That is a perfect one word summary of this thread.

To me, sanitising is wrong. I think that folks should make their own decisions about what's within their comfort level. And not transfer their own personal comfort level to others! If you like something, embrace it. If you don't, ignore it. I think the conflict, though, comes from the worry that the ignoring of other viewpoints could lead to those viewpoints somehow causing havoc in their lives. I am not on board with this. These sorts of lifestyle issues... they don't carry over. Nothing will change for (anonymous) you if some other person does things in a way preferable to them.

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos · Mar 27, 2022

I think I said a few posts ago I was bowing out of this thread. Spoke too soon clearly!

Yaarel · Mar 27, 2022

Ulorian said:
This is a good and natural tangent from @beancounter 's initial response. Bowdlerising... lol. That is a perfect one word summary of this thread.

To me, sanitising is wrong. I think that folks should make their own decisions about what's within their comfort level. And not transfer their own personal comfort level to others! If you like something, embrace it. If you don't, ignore it. I think the conflict, though, comes from the worry that the ignoring of other viewpoints could lead to those viewpoints somehow causing havoc in their lives. I am not on board with this. These sorts of lifestyle issues... they don't carry over. Nothing will change for (anonymous) you if some other person does things in a way preferable to them.

I think we are in a pendulum swing toward "safer".

In this case, the goals of inclusivity, welcoming other cultures, wanting each player to feel comfortable and able to see examples of ones own identity within D&D, representing women as other than sexual creatures, minimizing defacto fantasy racism, and similar ethical concerns, are modern examples of making the game "safer".

I dont think it is a "trend" because D&D occasionally does stuff like this across the decades.

I support these ethical concerns. Well, I actually want more sexualizing for both men and women, including goodlooking and fit images. For the sake of fun. At the same time there is a time and place for it, and it must never get in the way of the dignity of women and men. I expect all of these ethical concerns about inclusiveness to solidify and stabilize as the new norm.

To be fair, the D&D "traditions" are occasionally appalling, usually unintentionally. I appreciate the effort to update D&D.

Grendel_Khan · Mar 27, 2022

teitan said:
Add Dungeon Crawl Classics has great art, Mutant Crawl Classics, Swords & Wizardry, Pathfinder still has recognizable artists where you can see the actual credits and connect who did what. For my money best D&D style artist today is Doug Kovacs.

Kovacs is a great example of why the Disneyification-of-5e-art point is such an impossible one to disentangle (imo). A lot of Kovacs' work, as well as Mullen's and other DCC standbys, is objectively very silly at times, and at the very least adolescent in content, if not outright childish. But their art is synonymous with OSR, which no one (I would think) associates with kid-friendly, sanitized playstyles or visuals, and definitely not Disneyfied anything. So it seems like it comes back to that classic, annoyingly squishy notion that art is a matter of taste--not in the sense of good or bad taste, just taste as a subjective thing. One person's Disney silly is another's DCC silly, but the inherent silliness or childishness isn't really the deciding factor.

I still think it's valid for someone to say they aren't into some of the Radiant Citadel or Strixhaven for one reason or another. But it's maybe more useful to examine that outside the context of some notion that D&D is becoming more sanitized or kid-friendly. I think @Scribe 's posts about not liking a specific color palette, for example, are a lot more interesting. For me, I just really dislike when 5e art leans into the hazy watercolor-ish presentation, and when nothing has any specific flavor--another mushy, generic tavern. Getting sick of that is probably what's made DCC's scrappier art so appealing to me, and in turn made me appreciate DCC's leaner, meaner adventurers-as-scoundrels sensibility. It's not that DCC and its visuals are grimdark by any stretch. Just more evocative of a more specific playstyle, something I always prefer in a game.

ETA: I should be clearer, I think--I personally reject the notion that 5e's supposedly generic, do-anything-fantasy approach is a benefit. I think the best RPGs are the ones that do a thing, and do it well. And it's great when a game's art really solidifies what the game is for. I say this as a former GURPS superfan, a game that features some truly, truly terrible art, because how do you really capture the flavor of everything?

doctorbadwolf · Mar 27, 2022

Ulorian said:
The number of people who requested clarification on this term though... it stretches the boundaries of belief that there are that many people who are unfamiliar with this expression or are at least unable to glean the intent even if they aren't familiar with it.

I think the thing you and beancounter may be overlooking, here, is that it isn’t about unfamiliarity or not understanding the term, it’s that the claim is confusing if you can’t see the supposed trend in question. A lot of the requests for clarification were about how the poster came to their conclusion, and why they view the situation this way, ie what makes them think there is a clear case of disnification?

Because for many of us, it’s an obviously absurd claim.

But Umbran asked a while ago for the thread to go back to being about art, so this is the last exchange we should have here about this.

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos · Mar 27, 2022

Yaarel said:
I think we are in a pendulum swing toward "safer".

In this case, the goals of inclusivity, welcoming other cultures, wanting each player to feel comfortable and able to see examples of ones own identity within D&D, representing women as other than sexual creatures, minimizing defacto fantasy racism, and similar ethical concerns, are modern examples of making the game "safer".

I dont think it is a "trend" because D&D occasionally does stuff like this across the decades.

I support these ethical concerns. Well, I actually want more sexualizing for both men and women, including goodlooking and fit images. For the sake of fun. At the same time there is a time and place for it, and it must never get in the way of the dignity of women and men. I expect all of these ethical concerns about inclusiveness to solidify and stabilize as the new norm.

To be fair, the D&D "traditions" are occasionally appalling, usually unintentionally. I appreciate the effort to update D&D.

For sure, sanitising should not be about erasing voices. No one should feel that they can't say what they want to say because they worry that the culture at large is going to stomp on that.

There have been some, as you say, "traditions", which have been appalling. Yes, unintentionally. The effort to update D&D is appreciated by me as well. I fully support the idea of folks trying to understand one another.

I don't fully understand the rest of your post though. Which is not a bad thing! You didn't say anything offensive. I think I might understand your point? Just remember that kids visit this site too...

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos · Mar 27, 2022

doctorbadwolf said:
I think the thing you and beancounter may be overlooking, here, is that it isn’t about unfamiliarity or not understanding the term, it’s that the claim is confusing if you can’t see the supposed trend in question. A lot of the requests for clarification were about how the poster came to their conclusion, and why they view the situation this way, ie what makes them think there is a clear case of disnification?

Because for many of us, it’s an obviously absurd claim.

But Umbran asked a while ago for the thread to go back to being about art, so this is the last exchange we should have here about this.

Interesting. I see what you're saying. To be fair, the responses for clarification were not phrased how you said they were. It sounds like you were saying the intent might have been to dig deeper into why he was saying what he was saying. (I just used the word 'saying' three times in one sentence...) Again, to be clear, if this was the intent, it failed miserably. It was couched in passive aggressiveness, which killed the intent.

But this is great! Why not ask the question now? Hey @beancounter ! Why not answer this question in this more thoughtfully rephrased way?

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos · Mar 27, 2022

Grendel_Khan said:
Kovacs is a great example of why the Disneyification-of-5e-art point is such an impossible one to disentangle (imo). A lot of Kovacs' work, as well as Mullen's and other DCC standbys, is objectively very silly at times, and at the very least adolescent in content, if not outright childish. But their art is synonymous with OSR, which no one (I would think) associates with kid-friendly, sanitized playstyles or visuals, and definitely not Disneyfied anything. So it seems like it comes back to that classic, annoyingly squishy notion that art is a matter of taste--not in the sense of good or bad taste, just taste as a subjective thing. One person's Disney silly is another's DCC silly, but the inherent silliness or childishness isn't really the deciding factor.

I still think it's valid for someone to say they aren't into some of the Radiant Citadel or Strixhaven for one reason or another. But it's maybe more useful to examine that outside the context of some notion that D&D is becoming more sanitized or kid-friendly. I think @Scribe 's posts about not liking a specific color palette, for example, are a lot more interesting. For me, I just really dislike when 5e art leans into the hazy watercolor-ish presentation, and when nothing has any specific flavor--another mushy, generic tavern. Getting sick of that is probably what's made DCC's scrappier art so appealing to me, and in turn made me appreciate DCC's leaner, meaner adventurers-as-scoundrels sensibility. It's not that DCC and its visuals are grimdark by any stretch. Just more evocative of a more specific playstyle, something I always prefer in a game.

ETA: I should be clearer, I think--I personally reject the notion that 5e's supposedly generic, do-anything-fantasy approach is a benefit. I think the best RPGs are the ones that do a thing, and do it well. And it's great when a game's art really solidifies what the game is for. I say this as a former GURPS superfan, a game that features some truly, truly terrible art, because how do you really capture the flavor of everything?

I had to read your post three times to understand it. Way too many tangents and unnecessary details. Just a hot tip to introduce clarity to your future posts.

But now I think I get what you're saying. You are on the beancounter bandwagon. Right? The art you associate with your RPG of choice kindles the feeling you get when you play. As a game designer, find your style and the emotion you want to convey and super duper embrace it.

Fifth Element · Mar 27, 2022

Ulorian said:
Just to pick an example, when someone uses the term Disneyfication, there's not any nuance. It's a commonly used expression that means 'overly softened and simplified so as to be inoffensive... but with anything interesting disappearing in the process'.

Ulorian said:
It is a pejorative term. That is what I said in the post that you are quoting. It means taking something interesting and reducing it to pablum.

Ulorian said:
It was an unfortunate use of an inflammatory term.

Earlier…

Ulorian said:
He (?) did not use the word disneyfied in a pejorative way. It seems like you felt it was used so? Just because you reacted to a word in a certain way doesn't mean it was intended as a weapon. Take the time to look at the world from your 'opponent's' viewpoint.

So:

Ulorian said:
I keep finding myself bringing up the word 'disingenuous'. Here it is again. This post is disingenuous.

Furthermore:

Ulorian said:
The number of people who requested clarification on this term though... it stretches the boundaries of belief that there are that many people who are unfamiliar with this expression or are at least unable to glean the intent even if they aren't familiar with it. That's what I meant by disingenuous and anti-intellectual.

This is absurd. People requesting clarification, such as me, did so in order to not make an assumption about the intent of the term. I did not want to assume it was being used pejoratively, even though context clues suggest it probably was. It's best to be charitable, however, so instead of making that assumption, ask for clarification instead. The request for clarification was therefore to give beancounter the benefit of the doubt. And to those people who were trying not to assume that it was intended as an inflammatory pejorative (as you now say it explicitly is), you claim that they were treating beancounter unfairly, when in fact they're the ones attempting to not make assumptions. Bananas.

Jahydin · Mar 27, 2022

To me, the shift in D&D art over just the past 5 years has changed pretty dramatically. Surprised they're so many here that don't think so...

D&D 5E Toward a new D&D aesthetics

What is your feeling about the changes in aesthetics of D&D illustrations?

I really enjoy those changes. The illustrations resemble well my ideal setting!

I'm ok with those changes, even if my ideal setting has a different aesthetics.

I'm uncertain about those changes

I'm not ok with those changes because it impairs my immersion in the game.

I hate those changes, I do not recognize D&D anymore

The art doesn't really matter to me either way. I don't buy/play the game for the art.

Change in aesthetics? Where? What?

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos

Legend

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos

Legend

Yaarel

He-Mage

Grendel_Khan

Hero

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos

Legend

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos

Legend

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos

Legend

Fifth Element

Legend

Jahydin

Hero

Similar Threads