Dragon’s-Eye View 3/28/2012... now with ENW poll!

[Wednesday Boy]

I beg your pardon.

Polish hussars, btw.

Very cool--Like a cavalry charge of devas!

 

[Scribble]

Tarzan doesn't coexist with Charlemagne. In any marginally-realistic world, he finds himself cut down in seconds.

But I'd say D&D is more of a pulp style world though where those things do exist at one time.

I'm a mix of photo realistic and fantasy realistic.

I like stuff to have a basic grounding in realism, however I don't like it if it gets hyper focused on realism.

The manga style presented isn't "bad" it's just too stylized for my personal tastes.

 

[KesselZero]

Does anybody else think the "manga" and "fantastic realism" examples look identical except for the eyes and horns? The "photorealism" example is the only one I like at all.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Does anybody else think the "manga" and "fantastic realism" examples look identical except for the eyes and horns? The "photorealism" example is the only one I like at all.

No, and while the "Fantastic Realism" example may not be the best example of Fantastic Realism, the "manga" example is a typical example of a JRPG type character with the vaguely schoolgirl type outfit.

 

[KesselZero]

No, and while the "Fantastic Realism" example may not be the best example of Fantastic Realism, the "manga" example is a typical example of a JRPG type character with the vaguely schoolgirl type outfit.

I was being a bit off-the-cuff, but honestly, look at those two examples. They both have high boots with stilletto heels, V-shaped waistpieces that reveal the entire upper thigh, chestpieces that cover the breasts and curve down along the ribs but leave the midriff exposed, armbands for the upper arms, something covering the forearms (high gloves or bracers), and axes. The differences are that the manga example has a headband and a little skirt, which actually makes her outfit slightly less revealing than the tiefling's, and that the tiefling has a pouch on her belt.

I think the problem with the cartoon is that it doesn't really capture what it intends to. What people object to about the "manga" style in D&D tends to be that it's hyperexaggerated (see the endless debate about the barbarian's huge sword in Wayne Reynolds' Pathfinder art), but this manga example is no more or less exaggerated than the fantastic realism example, except for the eyes I suppose. Her axe is no more disproportionate than the tiefling's, her armor no more revealing.

Others have mentioned this already, but I also wish they had gone with a different example of "fantastic realism." The example used brings up too many arguments about the depiction of women that I don't think are what Schindehette is originally trying to address. I would have much rather seen a triptych of armor that, from left to right, gets less and less wild, improbable, and fantastical. I think that would have supported the article better. Because ultimately, I do like fantastic realism, but I can't support the image from the example since it's such a piece of cheesecake.

 

[Scribble]

I was being a bit off-the-cuff, but honestly, look at those two examples. They both have high boots with stilletto heels, V-shaped waistpieces that reveal the entire upper thigh, chestpieces that cover the breasts and curve down along the ribs but leave the midriff exposed, armbands for the upper arms, something covering the forearms (high gloves or bracers), and axes. The differences are that the manga example has a headband and a little skirt, which actually makes her outfit slightly less revealing than the tiefling's, and that the tiefling has a pouch on her belt.

They're similar, but that's kind of the point.

Really what he's asking is do you prefer extremely exaggerated, slightly exaggerated, or not exaggerated.

The one in the middle is basically taking example 1 and 3 and smushing them together.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Does anybody else think the "manga" and "fantastic realism" examples look identical except for the eyes and horns? The "photorealism" example is the only one I like at all.

Yeah, they're both very fanservice-y. All heels and hips and chokers and bikinis and ridiculousness. About the only difference seems to me to be the betty/veronica dichotomy.

But I really did like his serious image about the African-inspired folks. They look capable of awesome.

 

[Scribble]

Yeah, they're both very fanservice-y. All heels and hips and chokers and bikinis and ridiculousness. About the only difference seems to me to be the betty/veronica dichotomy.

Second picture:

Proportions Still way more busty then a warrior would be but not "out of whack...." like the first image.

Looks more woman then girl.

Slightly more emphasis placed on muscle tones.

Less stylized facial features (eyes aren't the size of her hands for instance...)

More attention to gravity when it comes to clothing and hair, as opposed to picture one where the stuff is just inexplicably flowing around.

 

[ExploderWizard]

About the only thing I wouldn't want is for any of them to be chosen as THE STYLE and all the art produced in the same monostylistic tone.

Chainmail bikinis and oversized swords are silly. The thing to remember is that D&D is partially silly too. Everything done in a single style gets boring eventually no matter how well done it is.

 

[Derren]

Question.

Look at the LOTR films. Of you were to take a drawn image that came damn close to Eowen at the Palenor fields, that would be realism. What about the Nazgul? They have a very "realistic" look (the film made it so), yet they are a complete fantastic race with no grounding in reality.

So the art of the film is "realistic", but the material is fantastic. So when you have the image of Eowen vs the Nazgul, what would you class it as?

(Cause in truth, thats sorta what Im aiming for)

Considering the answers I got, Lotr/GoT would class as realistic because the armor has no spikes and are not sexy.