No More Reptiles with Boobs!

[Alzrius]

I'm very surprised that the tenor of this thread is so opposite the recent one on female nudity in D&D art.

That thread had most of the commenters siding against the idea of exposed boobs in the artwork; whereas here, most of the posters seem to be for female creatures (dragonborn in particular, but others in general) having breasts (presumably so long as they're covered up).

From what I've read, it seems like there's a general sense that illustrations of breasts are acceptable so long as there's an in-game rationale for them, but the idea that they're there for the titillation of some of the audience is not. In other words, people feel a need to justify boob-imagery as not being a personal matter (presumably to avoid accusations of sexism).

Personally, I think that's something of a waste of time simply because most personal tastes can be dressed up as having some sort of objective rationale, and vice versa, especially in the context of fiction. You can make an argument for the appropriateness or inappropriateness of dragonborn having boobs whether due to your personal preference or their made-up biology.

 

[Umbran]

Yeah, but it makes conversations awkward when someone checks to see what gender you are like they do to alligators on the alligator farm.

Dude, if the alligator could hold a conversation, they'd just ask it.

 

[Sylrae]

But then they are missing feathers! Or at least feather-like structures.

*shrug*

I just figured that was a product of how long theyve been drawing dragons, and how recently we discovered dinosaurs had feathers/down.

Most production companies still call for their dinosaurs to have lizard skin.

I've heard of artists getting in crap for giving feathers to velociraptors, and having to redo the image.

Plus, dragons being fictional, I dont see them changing how they do dragons any time soon.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Since when are dragons reptiles? I don't know of any reptile that has six limbs or can breathe fire.

I'd like to see a picture of a dragon with boobs.

Not a dragonborn...a dragon...majestically flying through the sky, boobs flapping in the wind.

 

[Glade Riven]

Plus, dragons being fictional, I dont see them changing how they do dragons any time soon.

And yet dragonboobs bother you.

I'm very surprised that the tenor of this thread is so opposite the recent one on female nudity in D&D art.

PG-13 vs. R rating. Plus, with so many parts being non-human (hands, head, feet) it is a quick identifier of gender that the common person can identify at a glance.

 

[Sylrae]

And yet dragonboobs bother you.

Dragonboobs doesn't have the defense of "We've been doing it this way for 30 years, back when we thought dinosaurs were more lizard and less bird."

And as mentioned upthread, dragons looking like lizards isn't excessively sexualizing animals as primates, which is the biggest gripe I have with it.

 

[ExploderWizard]

With all of the important fundamental decisions about the game still in the balance, dragonboobs somehow seem far out on the radar.

I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

 

[Sylrae]

With all of the important fundamental decisions about the game still in the balance, dragonboobs somehow seem far out on the radar.

I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

I have a more important thread going at the same time. I'm surprised this got more than a page.

they do have more important stuff to do than art direction though. for sure.

 

[Simplicity]

It's clear to me that we need an optional module for boobs. That way we can bring everybody back to the fold.

 

[blalien]

While we're at it, stop putting over-sexualized women on the cover. It alienates half the potential market, makes the rest of us look like sex starved 14-year-olds, and raises the question of why a woman would wear makeup and a dress for an eight hour slog through an orc infested forest. Or at least put David Bowie on the cover in the interest of equality.