Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Serge" data-source="post: 884638" data-attributes="member: 4049">You're welcome.  And thank you for asking.Right.  I was trying to make it clear that I didn't think your comment was part of that whole "1ed is God" complex.  The comment was a reference to one image and you drew a parallel between the two images.  However, I do think that because you brought up the 1ed image, it sort of opened up the door for that debate to rear its head.I'm not suggesting that you're to be held accountable for anything.  I'm just pointing it out.As far as your comments about the Hindu thing (and I'm getting off the 1ed/3ed topic for a moment), I think that getting rid of or at least reducing that imagery is a good move.  I think this because Mariliths are Chaotic evil.  I don't see them as having any sort of commitment to any one culture.  It is clear that Gygax (or whoever can be credited with the D&D concept of the Type V Demon) was greatly influenced by the image of Kali or the destroyer aspect of Shiva (or even one of those old Sinbad movies), but I've never thought that Mariliths would adhere to any cultural atmosphere.  As to your tension/repulsion comments, I generally agree with your assessment... although not necessarily for the same reasons.Anyway...As I said above, I wasn't clear in my comments.  You aren't responsible.  The comment did just sort of set a 1ed vs. 3ed tone, but that was not your intent.  Sorry about how I communicated that.As far as the whole anthropomorphic monster discussion, I tend to agree with the attitude that some of the images in 3ed have taken liberties with the "classic" representations of various monsters.  When I say "classical" I mean myth, not D&D.  However, I like the departures largely because they reinforce two attitudes I agree with:1.  The beings of myth resemble human beings and the monster they're crossed with rather than being a clear dual monster.  It's sort of like the mermaid and the manatee; to the sailor spying from the distance, he thought he saw a gorgeous woman from an rather large shapeless sea-faring mammal related to elephants (I think that's what they're related to...).  But, these are just resemblances.  It's like the rhino, elephant, or brontosaurus.  Totally different creatures with similar physiologies to the casual observer.2.  The new images capture an "otherworldiness" that I don't think was every really captured by trying to create these monsters strictly as human/beast melds.  Adding spikes, giving them haggard human appearances, frizzy hair, strange eyes, whathaveyou capture this otherworldliness well.  There were some images like this in 1ed as well as 2ed and 3ed and I've always liked it.Anyway, thanks for responding.</blockquote>

Verification