[Dragon] Lord, the cheese...

[Harlock]

Chainmail bikinis are part of DnD, and have been for a very long time now, better to take it up at the source, i.e. deal with DnD as a whole over the issue, rather than singling out Dragon.

Amen to that. As for the people that keep insisting D&D is not a game for younger people I am frankly shocked. I know I for one started playing D&D at age 8. I had lots of friends from 3rd grade on into High School that all played. Even at different schools I could always meet new people that were into D&D. I, for one, cannot separate D&D from a childhood game that has grown up as I have. And like many people my age I am starting a family of my own now. There are certain books and now certain issues of Dragon Magazine I frankly do not want my son to peruse until he is old enough to decide for himself what is right and or wrong about them. Would it be a whole lot easier for me if D&D cleaned up the chainmail bikini thing? You bet your life! Would I like them to? Sure. Will they? Doubtful. So then the next step is me censoring for my child.

Of course I am censoring for myself as well now and this is where I draw the line. It's not as bad as say with a book, like BoVD which I can just glance at in a store and decide how bad it is. Where it gets bad is in a subscription to a magazine. I think the people telling subscribers that they should just deal with it are quite wrong. The subscribers are where the money is at. They are the guaranteed readership that the magazine bases its advertising rates off of. They prepay for goodness sakes. They have every right (and dare I say responsibilty) to voice their opinion as loud and long as they want to. Anyone who pays for the magazine has this right. Personally, I feel the chainmail bikini image for D&D and fantasy in general has hurt it as a whole in the long run. Sure it creates some sales, just as those bodice-ripper covers do for "romance" novels. But at what cost? I do not know many men (if any in my circle) that read "romance" novels. I DO know a few women who game and read fantasy, but not nearly as many women as I do men. I was sort of hoping LotR with its strong female characters and joyful lack of Red Sonja and Barberella half-naked-sterotypes would be a good indication to the suits of what people really want: good storytelling and fantastic adventures. Next time your at the theatre for a LotR flick, check out how many women are actually there. Heck, maybe this can give the gamer-geeks and real live girls a chance to mingle. I know the moral high road is seldom taken and uncharted territory for corporate types, but I implore them to try it out, at least for a while and see if it really does hurt their profit margins too badly.,

 

[Larry Fitz]

Ok, my first post was in response to Fenzer's post, not in response to the art itself. Unlike some who have posted I think the art is fine, it is a quality piece even if it is a bit obvious and pandering. The difference between this and what was in the BoVD issue is the difference between flirting and exploitation. My sympathies Fenzer but there's nothing on that cover that your kids couldn't see at the beach, well except for the horns and the tail I guess.... though on some beaches in Miami even those... Heck even the demon's "come hither" look (or is that "go thither"? I often confuse those two).

My concern was with Dragon (the premiere gaming magazine) narrowing the scope of our future endeavors while maintaining that they are attempting to expand it. I think this piece of art falls well short of that.

For the record Wizard magazine pre-dates Wizards of the Coast by about 4 years, a good friend of mine (and very talented artist) is the Art Director there. They were created in 1991 and I believe Wizards of the Coast was started in 1995, wasn't it?

Cover art for publications are very often commissioned, though sometimes it's more along the lines of "Hey this is what the general theme of the issue is, what can you give us?" Was the piece already extant? Or created for this issue? I don't think it really matters. It's not meant to necessarily be an illustration of anything specific, just give you an obtuse reference to the flavor of the issue and entice people who are on the fence about buying to buy.

On Angelsboi's complaint, the way to get more beefcake than cheesecake is to buy more of the beefcake issues. If the marketing director notices that issues with gorgeous men on them have a significant positive sales impact, he will inform the Art Director and more of those will be made. It's no different than if they notice that portrait covers seem to sell better than scenic covers (which they apparently have). The power of the dollar, it's discrimination, but not sexual discrimination, monetary discrimination.

 

[Olive]

I was sort of hoping LotR with its strong female characters and joyful lack of Red Sonja and Barberella half-naked-sterotypes would be a good indication to the suits of what people really want: good storytelling and fantastic adventures.

i'm sorry, have you READ the book? strong female characters? i see...

 

[Harlock]

i'm sorry, have you READ the book? strong female characters? i see...

I'm sorry, did I not indicate I was referring to the movies and not the books as much? As far as strong females in the book, really, there are a couple. Women in roles of leadership and not shown as sex objects. Have I read the books? Yeah, a lot of times and apparently without blinders.

 

[Angelsboi]

Umm i have. I own 274 and up. I even own the VERY first issue of Dragon. Not bad for a 2nd ed hater/3e player who is just 23.

I own a lot of Dragon so ive paid my dues. My hubby says i should even get a sub to dragon and dungeon b/c i always buy them at the store. Says it would save money.

Who knows.

So ive done what i could do and even have wrote in several times.

 

[Psion]

Originally posted by
Of course I am censoring for myself as well now and this is where I draw the line. It's not as bad as say with a book, like BoVD which I can just glance at in a store and decide how bad it is. Where it gets bad is in a subscription to a magazine.

Yes, this is the point that Johnny Wilson need to realize, IMO. He is no longer editing a magazine about a product so much as he is editing a magazine that is a product, one that has a wider distribution than a typical d20 product.

That said it still annoys me when individual books go for low brow art that have good content, because I have to put up with it if I want the content. Still, since such books are not by subscription, filtering out what you don't want is a lot more viable strategy than with a magazine.

 

[Celebrim]

Psion: I generally agree.

Some of Royo's stuff is very tough. But that stuff ends up in art books and not on the covers of novels. For a Royo, the novel cover in question was very uncontriversial, and I doubt it would have created much of a stir had it been this month's cover of Dragon.

I stick by my standard. If the peice works as a cover to a major fantasy novel, then it works fine as a cover for Dragon and for the very same reasons. Just as Royo's tougher works won't show up on the cover of a major release in order to avoid offending public sensibilities and get maximum exposure for the book by displaying it in the most public way, you don't want to put Royo's tougher works on the cover of Dragon because you want it displayed in the most public way. On the other hand, you want as much of Royo's maturity, brushwork, and well artist eye on your cover as possible because that is what is going to attract the widest range of readers.

The latest round of Dragon art has been juvenile, garish, and tacky. It is not going to get sold as the cover of a major novel, and it shouldn't be going on the cover of one of fantasy's premier periodicals.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Same argument, different month.

Game on!



As an aside, I like the use of red in this cover, and I think it is probably the best cover that we've seen, from an artistic point of view, on any issue of Dragon in the past year or so.

As another aside, Angelsboi, while being straight myself, I would have no objections to seeing sword wielding half naked barbarian men on the covers once in a while. I mean come on, the majority of the Conan audience was made up of heterosexual males.

 

[Crothian]

I think the cover was a clever ploy to make us miss the more important thing of this issue: The Snail is completely gone.

 

[Angelsboi]

Thanks Bar.