D&D 5E D&D Next weekly art column!

[ArmoredSaint]

Nobody is suggesting that they cater only to the traditional base; I think everyone agrees that appealing to the largest possible audience is in the game's best interest.

I just don't want the Diversity Mandate to dominate the feel and look of the core books to such a degree that it feels like the game has become somebody's political soapbox.

The "traditional base" has never been reflected in the art, and if you only cater to the "traditional base" you'll never expand the base.

Put in art that as many people as possible can identify with or aspire to, and you get the largest possible audience, which is great for everyone, even people who don't care for diversity. Quotas are an easy way to do this, since otherwise artists will tend to do what's most familiar.

 

[Dausuul]

That "Open Letter" by Kris Hansen made me roll my eyes. I want good art, not over-sensitivity to political correctness. I really don't care what the male/female ratio is, the skin-tone ratio is, the disability ratio is, etc.

Fine. Then you won't care if it's 50-50 male/female, a range of ethnicities and body types, and a number of people with disabilities, will you? Those of us who want those things plus good art can have what we want, and those like you who don't care about them will be fine either way.

 

[Incenjucar]

And I don't want the "LotR LoL" mandate to dominate the art.

Diversity should be heavily encouraged in the art, so that each book has something for every major group of people to identify with at least somewhat.

It's not even a political thing - there is no Spain or Russia or Korea or Congo in Greyhawk (Maybe in FR ) - it's just representing a larger range of body types and general styles. Someone with dark skin, red hair, blue eyes, and a feather headress - and paladin armor - would be perfectly appropriate.

 

[Dausuul]

Nobody is suggesting that they cater only to the traditional base; I think everyone agrees that appealing to the largest possible audience is in the game's best interest.

I just don't want the Diversity Mandate to dominate the feel and look of the core books to such a degree that it feels like the game has become somebody's political soapbox.

Traditionally, D&D art has been dominated by portrayals of able-bodied white people, particularly men. That feels unwelcoming to a lot of folks who don't fall into those categories.

Do you want that to change, or not?

If the answer is "Yes, I want that to change," then welcome to the diversity mandate, as you call it. It's going to be different. It's not going to be what you're used to. That's what change means.

If the answer is "No, I want able-bodied white men to continue to dominate," then own up to it.

 

[Yora]

If the answer is "I want to art to be representative of the culture of the world they illustrate", you're welcome.

 

[Dausuul]

If the answer is "I want to art to be representative of the culture of the world they illustrate", you're welcome.

If the world in question is a fair analogue to the real medieval one, that means mostly Chinese-looking rice farmers. And since D&D tends not to explicitly embrace a particular setting in the core books (3E came closest, but even there the books never came out and said Greyhawk was the default), the "culture of the world" is largely defined by the art.

 

[ArmoredSaint]

Core Dungeons & Dragons has traditionally assumed a North/West European, medieval-flavored cultural backdrop. I want that to continue in 5th edition--not because I want to exclude anybody, but because I just like the European middle ages.

 

[Dausuul]

Core Dungeons & Dragons has traditionally assumed a North/West European, medieval-flavored cultural backdrop. I want that to continue in 5th edition--not because I want to exclude anybody, but because I just like the European middle ages.

Which has the effect of excluding people, of course.

And core D&D has not traditionally assumed a medieval, northwest European backdrop. Polytheism alone should put that notion out of court. But it doesn't stop there. Weapon lists contain everything from khopeshes (Egyptian) to scimitars (Middle Eastern) to shuriken (East Asian). Monks have always had a strong East Asian flavor. Among monsters that draw on real-world mythology, Greek myth is the biggest influence.

There's certainly room for medieval Europe as a backdrop for D&D. But it need not be, and should not be, the only one.

 

[Klaus]

Core Dungeons & Dragons has traditionally assumed a North/West European, medieval-flavored cultural backdrop. I want that to continue in 5th edition--not because I want to exclude anybody, but because I just like the European middle ages.

Most people think that, but are actually mistaken.

If we look at the original D&D setting, the World of Greyhawk, it has its own very well defined variants of humankind:

- Baklunish: golden-skinned, green-to-hazel eyes and hair from black to dark brown.
- Flannae: copper-to-dark brown complexion, black-to-amber eyes, black or brown hair (wavy to curly).
- Oeridians: tan-to-olive complexion, blonde-to-black hair, any eye color.
- Suloise: fair-to-albino complexion, red-to-blonde hair (commonly curly to kinky), blue-to-violet eyes.

As you can see, darker complexions and a wide range of skin tones have been a staple in D&D.

Of the regions that comprise the Flanaess (the "known" area of the world of Greyhawk), you have states that have echoes of Middle-Eastern and Asian cultures (specially those of Baklunish descent), while the southern regions have a more "Caribbean", pirate-y feel. And the City of Greyhawk itself owes a lot to Fritz Leiber's Lankhmar, which shows a very Byzantium/Constantinople-type influence.

 

[Mercule]

Most people think that, but are actually mistaken.

If we look at the original D&D setting, the World of Greyhawk, it has its own very well defined variants of humankind:

- Baklunish: golden-skinned, green-to-hazel eyes and hair from black to dark brown.
- Flannae: copper-to-dark brown complexion, black-to-amber eyes, black or brown hair (wavy to curly).
- Oeridians: tan-to-olive complexion, blonde-to-black hair, any eye color.
- Suloise: fair-to-albino complexion, red-to-blonde hair (commonly curly to kinky), blue-to-violet eyes.

Yup.... But.... That isn't quite the same thing.

I want to avoid the "creature cantina" vibe that 4e had, where it seemed the elven/dwarven/whatever lands had been replaced with these weird, but harmonious, menageries. Eberron is also a bit guilty of this, despite being a great setting. I did not care for the "whatever color you want" approach in that setting. I much, much prefer Greyhawk's racial origins model.

In fact, I'd say that whatever the Greyhawk "vibe" is, I want to keep that. Races (both in the elf vs. dwarf and the brown vs. white sense) exist and there are elements that go along with that. Every Greyhawk ethnicity had a proud heritage to claim and attractive reasons to choose to play a character of that stock. In fact, when I played a Baklunish rogue in RtToEE, the background I brought with me helped to engage the group with the setting more than any NPC could have done. In Eberron, it doesn't matter so everyone plays whatever color they are.

Dang. I hadn't realized just how perfect Greyhawk was, in this regard, until you pointed it out. Whatever it had, keep it.

As far as art goes, I have absolutely no problem seeing more variety in the characters portrayed. We have a lot more action movies that have women leads than we did in the '80s. I don't think most guys are going to feel threatened by a few reasonable pictures of women with swords. As far as political correctness goes, just make sure the art doesn't go so far that I don't have any images to inspire my burly/sneaky/smart dude characters.

Also, this Kormarck guy would make an awesome anchor artist for 5e. I really like the style. People in life, not striking poses. Some actual backgrounds, too.