wow, a lot of politics sliding by in one direction here
Attractive, including sexually so, characters sell in all visual media: TV, film, comic books, etc, etc. It's just a fact. There are allegations the effectiveness of sex appeal in marketing to Gen Z , which publicly, if not privately, espouses values of female empowerment, body positivity, and personal expression, may not respond well to sexualized imagery. It's generally thought to be more effective with males than females. I know there are some very thirsty ladies about, though, so there are no monoliths. Regardless of how it might apply vs any specific groups, knowing your product's specific target audience is the actual key.
Gen Z buys manga over comics, virtue signalers don't buy comics in any noteworthy amount either, and males buy 2 to 1 vs females.
That said, one might try to buck trends & projections, risky as it is. I looked up Wilton Santos art, and I think the choices are quite intentional. He can draw attractive males, at least, and while I do not care for his females, they are typically as sexual as usual for the genre. (I just do not care for them personally, foxy-faces?). So its all on purpose.
And I don't care what the book character was like; artists (or movie casting, etc) NEVER EVER care. Wolverine is a foul looking Canadian runt with a voice like sandpaper, Hugh Jackman is a tall & handsome Australian with an angel's voice.
Try it out, reality may bite, but it's quite visible. How many "heavy" martial arts stars were there? Bruce Lee, Jet Li, Jackie Chan, Michelle Yeoh, Tony Jaa...hell, Kenau Reaves or Jean Claude Van Damme? nah. I know a couple, but they mostly were regulated to villains & secondary roles, the exceptions only prove the rule. NOT real fighters/athletes, mind.
Apply it to whatever you like, it's human nature, and even social engineering can't actually get rid of it. Warp or suppress it, briefly, at best (or worst).
Will this bold choice pay off? I doubt it. That there is a book series behind it helps. It falls to the virtue signalers, women & Gen Z to pick it up a bit more than usual, since it's AIMING to please them, while managing to draw enough the usual comic book audience, males not in those subgroups, based on other factors: the D&D brand name (wavering lately), follow the artist or writer in ("dude did World War Hulk! it's gotta have smashing bad ass action coming, despite the look!"), or the books, or ?
Looks can be abandoned too, with, or without a new creative team or just a new penciller, but potentially with the same penciller...changed looks, even radically so, are common in the medium of comic books. More than others, because it's all too easy to do. Effort needs to be made NOT to change various looks in comics (generally only the big 2 would have such...models & so forth on how XYZ is to be drawn). It isn't even always addressed, or can be with a throwaway line of "all that extra working out has paid off!" or the like. Time will tell.
I'm quite shocked there is so much discussion on an upcoming comic book here, really...I'm guessing the political charge is the underlying reason, but happy to be mistaken...was there much discussion of other "fantasy" comics here in the past? Pathfinder? old AD&D or FR from DC? more recent D&D comics, adaptations of D&D novels or games(icewind dale, dragonlance, dark sun, baldur's gate, etc), less directly connected stuff like Conan, Red Sonja, Kull, the Warlord, Cerebus, Asterix, Bone, Elric, Elfquest, Berserk, Thorgal, Slaine, Rat Queens, Groo, Mouseguard, Price Valiant, Amethyst, Den, Sojourn, Masters of the Universe, Usagi Yojimbo, etc, etc?
