Free D&D 5E Monster A Day PDF On Reddit

The quality of this resource is AMAZING! It shames many other third-party products. I would have paid for this level of editing, really. Our group will definitely use it

Thanks!

 

[evilbob]

Looking over the content briefly, my first impression is: wow, you can tell that D&D needs more women in the game. Especially the fantasy art community - it REALLY needs more women. For the tiny handful of female monsters, the design aesthetic is the old school, sexist look for every one. The example given on the first page is a good example of something that wouldn't (and shouldn't) have made the 5.0 MM, and I think the book is stronger for it.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

The example given on the first page is a good example of something that wouldn't (and shouldn't) have made the 5.0 MM

That image (the azure mind sculptor?) is very, very Pathfinder-ish. It is Seoni, one of the Pathfinder iconic characters. See more images. Pathfinder art is very sexually dimorphic, something that puts me off the game a lot.

 

[evilbob]

It is Seoni, one of the Pathfinder iconic characters.

Thanks for the info! Wow, and Pathfinder is only ~6 years old. I would have guessed an image like that was from the 90s. The industry is still changing very, very slowly.

 

[Remathilis]

Thanks for the info! Wow, and Pathfinder is only ~6 years old. I would have guessed an image like that was from the 90s. The industry is still changing very, very slowly.

Pathfinder's art is more complex than Seoni. Out of their iconics, she and the barbarian are rather unclothed, but that is due to cultural elements of their cultures (see those lines on her skin? They're tattoos and culturally important). Other iconics (the cleric, rogue, and paladin) are more traditional in their dress. One of Pathfinder's later iconics (I forget who) is transgender as well.

Paizo doesn't shy away from skin, but they don't embrace it for cheesecake factors either.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I don't understand why people complain about SOME cheese cake, if it isn't ALL that way (and I am far from a pathfinder defender here).

If I take my phone an record a walk through my mall today (and it's about 50 degrees today) I will record women showing more skin then that picture. I will also record men like that... I will also record people in much more clothing, and I bet at least 1 woman in a burka (we have a surprisingly high amount of that), and everything in between.

If I had a campaign setting drawn, and there were 75 people (with some double ups of the same person in different pics) in my 400 pg book, and 35 are female, and 35 are male, and 5 could be either (I mean really some elves you can't tell) and of those 35 woman 4 of them are dressed exposeing a lot of skin, and 1 of those 4 in one of her 2 shots is depicted as nude, but nothing is shown... people call sexist... the fact that the queen of my heroic nation is a paliden in useable not much skin showing plate... means nothing... those 4 pics mean sexist... by the way if 1 of those 4 women is a barbarian warrior, and next to her is a male in a loincloth, no one will bat an eye at him...

 

[evilbob]

Pathfinder's art is more complex than Seoni. Out of their iconics, she and the barbarian are rather unclothed, but that is due to cultural elements of their cultures (see those lines on her skin? They're tattoos and culturally important). Other iconics (the cleric, rogue, and paladin) are more traditional in their dress. One of Pathfinder's later iconics (I forget who) is transgender as well.

Paizo doesn't shy away from skin, but they don't embrace it for cheesecake factors either.

I'm sure their art is, and I've seen some great examples from them, too - I'm not trying to make broad implications, just talking about this one image. And they're also doing great work on diversity, I know. But "cultural" factors don't do anything to justify the fact that this image is problematic on multiple levels. You can create an image of a woman who is just trying to show off her tattoos... and that ain't it. This image isn't empowering or trying to make her look strong in any way. That's an image that is trying to capture a male market segment; nothing more. Again, I'm not trying to attack Paizo; I'm just saying that for a company that does so well in some places, this particular character/image is impressively bad, and that made me think it had to be much older than it probably is.

If I take my phone an record a walk through my mall today (and it's about 50 degrees today) I will record women showing more skin then that picture.

Those are women choosing to dress the way they want because that's their choice. The woman in this image was a creation of a man drawn in a way to please men. Like I said, you can draw women who have agency and who are both empowered and sexy. But this isn't any of those things: this is just sexism.

And yeah, just because a woman is queen of a nation doesn't mean she's empowered if she's forced to wear skimpy clothing designed to show off her underboob (and nothing more). You can write whatever backstory you want but the pose and the clothing are telling a different tale.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Those are women choosing to dress the way they want because that's their choice. The woman in this image was a creation of a man drawn in a way to please men.

I think this statement is both sexist and wrong. The wrong part: You strongly imply images like this women are drawn by men (not always). The sexist part: And that it is done so with the purpose of pleasing men (certainly not always).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Those are women choosing to dress the way they want because that's their choice. The woman in this image was a creation of a man drawn in a way to please men. Like I said, you can draw women who have agency and who are both empowered and sexy. But this isn't any of those things: this is just sexism.

And yeah, just because a woman is queen of a nation doesn't mean she's empowered if she's forced to wear skimpy clothing designed to show off her underboob (and nothing more). You can write whatever backstory you want but the pose and the clothing are telling a different tale.

I'm sorry but that's pure crazy. I am a man, my exgirlfriend is a woman (well I guess the fact that it was a girlfriend says that) if she draws a picture, and I draw a picture, it is still a picture... if the CHARACTER is drawn that way for a reason, and it fits there world view then it's not sexsist....

 

[evilbob]

I think this statement is both sexist and wrong. The wrong part: You strongly imply images like this women are drawn by men (not always). The sexist part: And that it is done so with the purpose of pleasing men (certainly not always).

Ha, funny.

if the CHARACTER is drawn that way for a reason, and it fits there world view then it's not sexsist....

But it can be. The woman in the image on the front page is drawn in a sexist way: she doesn't have agency, she's drawn in a way to please the presumed male audience. You can't justify it with backstory; her outfit makes no sense in any practical way. It's clearly drawn to show off her boobs and her legs - not to show how she's a powerful mage. (Not to mention her pose and proportions are nearly impossible to achieve on a real person... Her spine is extremely contorted to help push her boobs out.)

I mean, look at the guy right next to her - it's a perfect counterexample. He's fully covered, head-to-toe. His pose is more aggressive and he looks like he's actually about to do something - not just waiting for something to be done to him. She should look like that. But why doesn't she? Because the artist is trying to show off her boobs.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

But it can be. The woman in the image on the front page is drawn in a sexist way: she doesn't have agency, she's drawn in a way to please the presumed male audience.

citation please... since you know the mind of the artest please tell me how you gained this info... is it a sexy picture... sure I can see that, but is it meant to please male or female audiences, or both?

You can't justify it with backstory; her outfit makes no sense in any practical way. It's clearly drawn to show off her boobs and her legs - not to show how she's a powerful mage. (Not to mention her pose and proportions are nearly impossible to achieve on a real person... Her spine is extremely contorted to help push her boobs out.)

two movies, one staring Jennifer garner, and one staring Peirce Brosnen... both are about retired spys. both have a scene where they are in a bath/shower and someone breaks into there house... compltly naked they kill an assassin, then make a funny one liner about getting dressed... is that sexsist? is it different if male or female? does it matter if it's PG 13 or R? of course the context matters....

I mean, look at the guy right next to her - it's a perfect counterexample. He's fully covered, head-to-toe. His pose is more aggressive and he looks like he's actually about to do something - not just waiting for something to be done to him. She should look like that. But why doesn't she? Because the artist is trying to show off her boobs.

I'm starting to think you are sexsist and reading your own thoughts into this... what I see is a woman saying "Come at me bro" ready to strike down an enemy... it shows power and confidence...