D&D 5E Art in 5e...?

[Ruin Explorer]

Animated GIF showing the exact changes (hopefully it will work):

View attachment 61761

Indeed, and this, for my money supports what I was saying re: the light being okay but the pose likely to be accused of being ridiculous. I'm pretty sure that had that been the actual image, words and phrases like "effete" or "over-the-top" would have been being bandied about, or people would have actually been questioning the gender of the elf in question (always an issue with elves, of course, as OotS riffs upon sometimes).

It's idealized fantasy art set in a world where male barbarians may not be wearing anything other than loincloths, either.

If you can find me a sexualized, conventionally attractive, half-naked male barbarian in a WotC D&D product from the last ten years, I will be rather impressed.

The only ones I can think of are Half-Orcs and Dwarves, both of whom have their ugliness/toughness/rage emphasized, not their hawt-ness.

Full disclosure: I rather like playing hawt male barbarians (second only to bards), so I keep an eye out for this kind of art. I continue to be disappointed that few, if any, D&D classes support NOT wearing armour AND not being a wizard, monk or similar bore!

 

[billd91]

I do like the way the art of the starter set harkens back to the Red Box.

Note: That's harkens back to not duplicates. Lessons, I think, have been learned on that topic, at least.

 

[Cybit]

You all have noooooo idea how much art is in store for you (assuming their plan has gone through) in 5E.

MM and DMG are going to be amazing.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

You all have noooooo idea how much art is in store for you (assuming their plan has gone through) in 5E.

MM and DMG are going to be amazing.

I believe you. Since I first read the comment about the books looking like no other edition and there being a huge art budget, I got the concept in my head. I agree with you that most people will probably be quite surprised.

 

[Obryn]

Would you say the same thing if a male barbarian character's muscles were highlighted?

Let's go at this from another angle. Just for the sake of argument, let's say that you're right, and it is a highly sexualized image. So what? It's not like we are looking at pictures of female CEOs and politicians in mini-skirts. It's idealized fantasy art set in a world where male barbarians may not be wearing anything other than loincloths, either.

Oh goodness.

Look, I think the 5e PHB art is fine and a big step forward for D&D covers, but this is just not even relevant.

Barbarians in loincloths are not at all the same thing as, say, Pathfinder sorceresses without pants showing off their ass, or corseted 4e warlocks with boobs spilling out. Context matters. A mighty thewed dude with a sword and loincloth isn't sexualized, passive, etc.

 

[the Jester]

Good Photoshopping job! But I have to say, she looks even more feminine now.

Well, that's the thing about elves.

 

[Dausuul]

Well, that's the thing about elves.

Yeah. I removed the breasts, narrowed the thighs, looked at the result, and thought, "So... now it still looks like a woman, except she wears an A cup instead of a C cup." The sideburns were an effort, not terribly successful, to make the character more definitely male. I thought about going farther and making it a full beard, but then everyone would be reacting to "elf with a beard" instead of "male in possibly-effeminate pose."

 

[the Jester]

Yeah. I removed the breasts, narrowed the thighs, looked at the result, and thought, "So... now it still looks like a woman, except she wears an A cup instead of a C cup." The sideburns were an effort, not terribly successful, to make the character more definitely male. I thought about going farther and making it a full beard, but then everyone would be reacting to "elf with a beard" instead of "male in possibly-effeminate pose."

You could get away with sideburns and a moustache and goatee if it was a Drow.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Context matters. A mighty thewed dude with a sword and loincloth isn't sexualized, passive, etc.

Indeed, that's what I say sexualized and conventionally attractive - you just won't find that in modern fantasy art (go back to the '80s and you might). Maybe Brom I guess but he hasn't done much D&D for years.

 

[Bluenose]

A mighty thewed dude with a sword and loincloth isn't sexualized, passive, etc.

They might not be passive, but they're entirely sexualised. It's the same sort of sexualisation that you get in body builders rather than porn stars, but it's still designed to be sexually attractive. Badly, if you're trying to attract women, but that's a separate question.