Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Painfully" data-source="post: 709253" data-attributes="member: 601">I honestly just didn't notice it, but I think the fact that it is an illustration rather than a live actor does make a difference towards acceptability.  I can remember being much more offended over the Insane Clown Posse ad where one of their band members was covered with fake blood, and looking like he was enjoying it.  Haven't you ever known kids in high school to draw girlie pictures?  This is tame to say the least.I remember a cover illustration many years ago with a naked woman wearing some kind of see-through dress sitting atop an altar.  That one had nipples and had no problems making the cover of Dragon!  Still, even that cover was probably rated PG-13, and I don't think most kids mature enough to play D&D would have had a problem with it.Keep it rated PG-13 I say.  As for the back cover illustration, it's really not that provacative IMO (and that's coming from a guy that just bought $100 worth of their minis).  They'd do better if they had a full page of that cavalry mini, it's fantastic!  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>