Search results

It does look more bestial, as in, more like a beast - more reptilian, to be specific. I definitely agree that, as a demon, it should look bestial, as it is literally inhuman and demonic. I was pushing back against “brutish” because it seemed to be getting used as synonymous with “unrefined.”...

There’s only one creature in the art, and it’s sex and gender are, at most, unclear.

Only one creature, but its sex can’t be determined from the art, and it does have feminine gender signifiers, though they are subtle. And? Doesn’t mean they can’t be female.

Tolkien is kind of just vicariously relevant at this point - obviously his work had a huge and lasting impact on fantasy as a whole, but it’s no longer the direct reference for anyone under 30. George RR Martin is pretty influential due to Game of Thrones and House of the Dragon. Brandon...

Did you get that same sense of dissonance from the 3e design? What about this design says “not a tactical commander”?

Presumably the description was changed because they didn’t want every single marilith to be female, just as hags, satyrs, and many other formerly mono-gendered creatures were changed to be dual-gendered. This seems to be an across-the-board change, that monsters are not being limited to one...

I’d say it looks more monstrous. But I don’t think brutishness is something that can be discerned from its body shape. Sleekly-shaped bodies can be very brutish, and large, muscular, and corpulent bodies can be very graceful. Fangs, claws, and scales likewise communicate nothing about degree of...

Ah, ok, now we’re getting somewhere! Thank you for the specific answer, I appreciate it. So, acknowledging that this will ultimately come down to subjective preferences, why do you feel that these design choices are worse than the more sleek, human-like (at least in the torso) design they’re...

What about it looks male?

But from this art, could you tell the creature’s level of genius - tactical, intuitive, or otherwise? I could not. How do you know? I mean, lots of creatures have very minimal sexual dimorphism, if any. Even if this design was completely lacking in traditional gender signifiers, we would not...

Do you see male in it?

Ok, so this Marilith could be a tactical genius, right? So what’s the problem with its design again? It’s not the lack of boobs and it’s not the lack of grace or dignity. Is it just that it’s scaly instead of fleshy?

Well, I also quoted that person’s post. I’m not trying to weigh in on whether or not demons should be brutish and undignified, I’m calling into question the underlying assumption that anything about this art communicates brutishness or lack of dignity. This monster certainly could be brutish and...

Chunky and with scales = not capable of being a master tactician. Apparently.

A lot of females don’t have breasts, even if we are only talking about adult, cisgender, human females.

I’m sorry, but what about this design marks it as brutish and undignified?

Again, specifics, please. You don’t like that the design changed, I got that part. What exactly changed that you dislike? You say it’s not the breasts, I’ll take your word for that. So what is it? The color and number of arms haven’t changed. So, what are we left with? That she’s muscular? That...

So what, specifically, is it about then?

I dunno, kinda seems like it’s about boobs, cause this marilith still has six arms and looks female.

I think it’s in the eyelids. They’re purple, and form an upturned teardrop shape, which creates the illusion of eye shadow - a common feminine gender signifier.