D&D General D&D Red Box: Who Is The Warrior?

The Dungeons & Dragons Red Box, famously illustrated by Larry Elmore in 1983, featured cover art of a warrior fighting a red dragon. The piece is an iconic part of D&D's history.

WizKids is creating a 50th Anniversary D&D miniatures set for the D&D Icons of the Realms line which includes models based on classic art from the game, such as the AD&D Player's Handbook's famous 'A Paladin In Hell' piece by David Sutherland in 1978, along with various monsters and other iconic images. The set will be available in July 2024.

Amongst the collection is Elmore's dragon-fighting warrior. This character has only ever been seen from behind, and has never been named or identified. However, WizKids’ miniature gives us our first look at them from the front. The warrior is a woman; the view from behind is identical to the original art, while the view from the front--the first time the character's face has ever been seen--is, as WizKids told ComicBook.com, "purposefully and clearly" a woman. This will be one of 10 secret rare miniatures included in the D&D Icons of the Realms: 50th Anniversary booster boxes.

The original artist, Larry Elmore, says otherwise. (Update—the linked post has since been edited).

It's a man!

Gary didn't know what he wanted, all he wanted was something simple that would jump out at you. He wanted a male warrior. If it was a woman, you would know it for I'm pretty famous for painting women.

There was never a question in all these years about the male warrior.

No one thought it was a female warrior. "Whoever thought it was a female warrior is quite crazy and do not know what they are talking about."

This is stupid. I painted it, I should know.

- Larry Elmore​

Whether or not Elmore's intent was for the character to be a man, it seems that officially she's a woman. Either way, it's an awesome miniature. And for those who love the art, you can buy a print from Larry Elmore's official website.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Has anyone done the Aerosmith "Dude looks like a lady" joke yet?

I am guessing those of us who get that reference are on the older side

 

[Bedrockgames]

For those in the thread stating that everybody knew that figure was a male, I didn't. I had always assumed that was a female warrior. I realize that I'm in a minority, but I am proof that a non-zero number of people interpreted the original art in a different way to the artist's intent.

There is always going to be outliers. I don't think anyone would be surprised to learn a handful of people drew this conclusion. Peoples point is more that there wasn't a widespread speculation on whether the character was male or female.

 

[TheGlen]

I am guessing those of us who get that reference are on the older side

I've seen Snu Snu the Barbarian and his name was Robert Paulson for more recent references. And there is an Amazonian have a resemblance to the model from that Futurama episode

 

[Minigiant]

I am guessing those of us who get that reference are on the older side

I was a toddler when that song came out.

It was old by the time I first remembered hearing it.

 

[TiQuinn]

Whether people were stereotyping or jumping to conclusions, the issue I took with what wiz kids did, wasn't them making the change, it was them acting like there was widespread mystery over what sex the character was. And all I said in respect to that was I think it was rather silly. And I also felt it could be viewed by the artist, and admittedly I can't read the artists mind so I don't know if Elmore is bothered by this,, but the artist did take the time to weigh in and say it has always been a man, as a statement about their talent. Can someone look at that image and see something different? Of course. When the face of a figure is hidden, when other key details are hidden, even if most of the indicators say one thing, a person can take creative license in they interpretation. But when this image came out, it was widely understood to be a man: and this is really my only point-----it is a little silly to act like there wasn't widespread agreement about this

Someone decided to pose this as a “mystery” (i.e. ComicBook.com) and someone decided to ask a still undisclosed question to Larry Elmore that prompted his initial response.

 

[billd91]

There is always going to be outliers. I don't think anyone would be surprised to learn a handful of people drew this conclusion. Peoples point is more that there wasn't a widespread speculation on whether the character was male or female.

There also wasn’t widespread speculation on who the figure represented. The perspective and anonymity implied it was YOU the player in an active role as a fantasy hero. That the figure was painted as a male and, as you say, was widely interpreted as male is part of the institutional sexism of the hobby.
Now that we, the hobby gamers, are trying to get over that foolish limitation, what’s the harm in presenting a derivative work as female?

 

[Bedrockgames]

There also wasn’t widespread speculation on who the figure represented. The perspective and anonymity implied it was YOU the player in an active role as a fantasy hero. That the figure was painted as a male and, as you say, was widely interpreted as male is part of the institutional sexism of the hobby.
Now that we, the hobby gamers, are trying to get over that foolish limitation, what’s the harm in presenting a derivative work as female?

I need said there was anything wrong with making the figure a female. I just said it was silly to act like there was mystery and speculation over whether the original image was a man or woman

 

[Mistwell]

With how the OGL issue was about controlling & protecting their IP? I doubt it. They have pretty tight reins at WOTC.

I don't see what this has to do with IP or the OGL issue. WizKids already has a license for the IP in this format. They might clear the topic of "Warrior from this cover." I don't think we have anything telling us it was more specific than that, or anything telling us they usually get more specific than that.

We can't just substitute guesses for facts. We just don't know.

 

[teitan]

I don't see what this has to do with IP or the OGL issue. WizKids already has a license for the IP in this format. They might clear the topic of "Warrior from this cover." I don't think we have anything telling us it was more specific than that, or anything telling us they usually get more specific than that.

We can't just substitute guesses for facts. We just don't know.

It has everything to do with it. The whole controversy in the OGL was lawyers saying that the D&D game was THEIR IP and they didn’t want people making more than they did off the IP. They were bringing everything back in house similar to the 3-4e transition. For a company like Hasbro it’s all IP.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

I would let that woman do things to me that were so debauched they're gonna have to add like a whole five or six layers to the hells