D&D 5E (2014) D&D Next Art Column Discussion: May

[Kobold Avenger]

I must be like the only person who voted for R, which I really don't expect that to win out. I just voted R to make sure the average opinion isn't shifted towards the G direction.

 

[Libramarian]

I chose R, because I am an adult who doesn't play with children, so I felt that I would be trying to speak for other people if I chose otherwise.

What I mean is that the artists should be free to go up to R if that's what works.

At the Game of Thrones level would be cool with me.

 

[RedShirtNo5.1]

I want the introductory box to be PG or even just G, but the core rulebooks to be PG-13.

 

[hafrogman]

Yeah, I think the massive inconsistency with which ratings are applied to movies is gonna cause more issues with this poll than anything else.

But in the end I voted PG-13, not because I feel that most of the art should go that far, but because I could see one drawing containing "moderate action violence" getting it bumped up. But if D&D had a big name director and/or budget, it could probably talk the MPAA into dropping it back to a PG.

 

[Slander]

Yeah, PG-13 makes sense. While the game can be played by a younger audience, I really don't think it should be marketed towards an audience not yet in high school.

I also don't think R-rated art design would really do anything to substantially help my immersion into the game world. I think D&D art has much more of an impact by implying R-rated situations, either one that just happened or is about to happen, than it does depicting them outright.

 

[Stormonu]

I went with PG-13, R is definately too far and PG can be a little too Disney with no blood and death always off-camera. There's plenty of killing monsters in D&D but we don't need the heroes dripping in gore or really show the monsters (or adventerers, as in the Hackmaster parody covers) being hacked to pieces or having weapons shoved through their innards. Likewise, nude art doesn't bother me, but I don't think gratitous nudity fits D&D art.

Really, the best thing to do is flip through the images of B/X, BECMI and 1E/2E/3E/4E so far (minus Book of Vile Darkness). The subject matter hasn't changed all that much between editions.

Games like 40K/Fantasy and Shadowrun have artwork at times that are too dark/gruesome to fit the feel of D&D. Also, I don't expect the likes of Luis Royo (warning, NSFW!) being D&D's cover artist.

 

[Hussar]

I am going to suggest PG, but with the understanding that I think "PG" and "PG-13" in Canada are not identical to the United States. I think you can get away with more on those ratings than you can in the US.

Yeah, I did the same thing and then realized that the rating system is totally different. Canada is a fair bit less stringent on its ratings and you can pretty much guess that anything PG-13 in the States is going to be PG in Canada. Poop, wrong click.


That said though,

Evoke the feel of the world.
Context matters.
Depict genders fairly and with equal frequency.
Show a variety of body types.
Avoid stereotypes.
Depictions should be appropriate to (in the setting) cultural context and roles. (Examples: armor, weapons.)
Realistic poses.
Depict a range of (in the setting) ethnicities.
Fewer "perfect people."

hits things pretty solidly. I can't think of anything off hand that I'd want to add.

 

[Klaus]

New article is up, with polls concerning the level of violence in the art, and the minimum appropriate age for the books: Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Violence and Gore)

 

[grimslade]

I voted moderate violence with bloodshed. One of my favorite pieces of D&D art is from the 1E Fiend Folio. It shows a fighter battling Lizard Kings in a ruined temple. A violent picture but not completely gratuitous.


I am fine with this level of violence occasionally in D&D.

 

[Gold Roger]

First I want to give Kudos to Jon Schindhette. One after another he tackles really tough topics in a way I personally can only applaud. He strikes me as very professional and this blog makes me wonder why we didn't read more from him before, considering how long he seems to be involved with D&D.


So, I've voted full gore and violence for this one.

While I don't want it to be everywhere, I got my reasoning from my own first autonomous steps in gaming. You see, at the tender age of nine, I got the 2nd edition box of the Warhammer 40k and thus access to that games art, which fully falls in line with that option.

I mean:

Disfigurement- check

Mortal wounds- check

Landscapes of demonic terror- check

Beastmen and Chamions of Chaos, holding up severed heads and drinking the blood pouring forth- check

Now, I don't think every nine year old should be exposed to this stuff. But it reminds me that art of that level is not necessarily a hindrance to non-adults entering the a gaming hobby.

The art of the warhammer games is to this day some of the most evocative in all gaming to me. It relly gets the point across that it's villains are real beings of darkness and madness (and that everyone else isn't much better).

While D&D isn't as dark (and by default shouldn't be), it has the whole gallery of devils, demons and other nasties. And I want those creatures depicted as the evil they are. Demogorgon should visibly be a whole other level of threat than the humble (and adorable) owlbear, even though both are strange mix and mesh monsters.

So yeah, while I don't think D&D books should be drenched in depictions of gore, the art should be open in all directions.