D&D 5E PH(B) Soldier Background (Art is new)

[Nergal Pendragon]

As for the photos depicting women in armor, these are 18th - 19th century photos and again extremely rare .... not the norm. They are gorgeous though. With that said, they are posed and ceremonial (much the way I saw the d&d artwork). To draw a conclusion, however, that female Asian nobles were significantly more martial than European noble women would be a mistake. You can find many paintings of European ladies similarly practicing archery ... and few would mistake this as an indication of war-like prowess.

There were women knight orders that existed. Back in an era where "knight order" and "elite combat veterans" were synonyms. Plus, there were rules in medieval times for women wrestlers. And, yes, it did include a lot of injuries.

Women in Europe very much did wear armor and see a lot of combat. That's part of why the women who led men into combat were very much not that unusual.

In any case, we are talking about a game of make-believe here, right? In the world where this game is set, any of us can imagine the culture we like. In this world, maybe female samurai are the ho-hum norm. All I can say was my personal reaction to the art was positive, because I felt the artist showed duality between traditional soft, feminine imagery and predominantly male armor/sword props. It made me question and want to know more about her .... and she's just a bloody cartoon.

This is a game of make-believe where people argue about how things actually worked historically. No way was WotC getting away without being as historical as possible on this one

That said, the armor wasn't ceremonial; it was just bulky. Of course, that's because the armor wasn't made of metal...

 

[Azgulor]

Why do you find the makeup, hair and hair accoutrements to be flaws, though, given we've seen actual female samurai wearing the latter two (see pics upthread) and know samurai used eye makeup?

Sure, why not? :/

1. Unlike the pictures that Klaus included upthread, the Soldier art depicts a woman with a hairpin that is longer than the entire width of her head. This is similar to the 2nd picture (the one without a helmet), but if a hairpin is used in the 1st and 3rd pictures, they are smaller and not visible.

2. Unlike the 1st of Klaus' pictures which depicts a helmet that is wide/large enough to sit atop the piled elaborate hairstyle and unlike Klaus' 3rd picture which depicts a hat/helmet sitting atop the hair and not really protecting the head, our D&D Soldier is holding a full helm. Unless she has a hidden set of eyes in her hair or forehead, that helm will need to fit snugly upon her head in order for her to see through the eye holes.

3. Whatever the blue stones/adornments are they look like they're quite sizeable and solid. Even if this soldier was wearing a helmet that accommodated the hairpin (and she's not), I don't think having the equivalent of two rocks stuck between your skull/hair and your helmet is a good idea. She looks like a woman playing dress-up as solider vs. an actual soldier to me. The women in Klaus' pics 1 & 2 look like warriors to me. Pic 3, like our soldier here, looks like she's wearing something purely for ceremonial reasons.

The makeup thing is strictly a preference and the least of my issues with the picture. She looks pretty, not tough. That's fine as it goes more towards a Mulan-style depiction, it just wouldn't be my choice for an iconic-style representation.

... and you still have the freakishly-oversized left hand.

It's an opinion on one piece of art, not an indictment of the product.

 

[Azgulor]

The haters, they will do the hating.

I think it looks great! Couldn't be more excited about the new PHB. They're doing very well by me artistically.

Wait a second...

So unless I'm fawning over one particular piece of art, I'm a "hater"?!?!?

So should I infer that you consider yourself inclusive and open-minded... so long as others are in sync with your opinions?

Wow, that's pretty weak even for the Internet.

 

[Melkor]

The armor seemed heavier than she'd remembered.

It had been three years since she'd come to the inn, dragging her trunk behind her. Inside it had been everything from a past she had left a hundred miles away--her queen, her troops. The War. Three years of living the quiet life of a simple peasant in a peaceful city.

But three years later, and the war was just days from catching up with her. Smoke billowed on the horizon in the distance, and the wounded who had managed to escape the battlefields were already trickling into the cathedrals.

At the height of her career, in battle, she could stare down a hell hound without flinching. But she had run from the war just the same. Now, she realized the futility. She was a soldier, and her new home--her husband, her child--needed soldiers. She tightened the straps on her armor and picked up the helmet. She stared at it and thought about how her life had changed. When she thought about her home, the armor didn't feel so heavy after all.

The city didn't need peasants. She reached up and pulled the pins out of her hair. Tucking it back, she raised the helmet.

The city needed defenders.

I like this pic better that some of the other interior art we have seen, but that's not saying much. This made it better.

 

[Iosue]

Just a quick note. Samurai were not nobility, unless you're talking daimyo class. The nobility were the Kuge. Samurai would probably be better thought of as gentry.

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

2. Unlike the 1st of Klaus' pictures which depicts a helmet that is wide/large enough to sit atop the piled elaborate hairstyle and unlike Klaus' 3rd picture which depicts a hat/helmet sitting atop the hair and not really protecting the head, our D&D Soldier is holding a full helm. Unless she has a hidden set of eyes in her hair or forehead, that helm will need to fit snugly upon her head in order for her to see through the eye holes.

I agree with the hair adornments; those look like something put in after battle. But, you're wrong about the helmet.

Actually sit down and look at it, then compare it to her head; the helmet is actually obviously larger than her head is. It takes up a rather sizable portion of the right side of her armor, while her head by comparison does not.

Overall, the armor is rather massive and bulky and seriously bigger than the woman herself.

 

[Azgulor]

I agree with the hair adornments; those look like something put in after battle. But, you're wrong about the helmet.

Actually sit down and look at it, then compare it to her head; the helmet is actually obviously larger than her head is. It takes up a rather sizable portion of the right side of her armor, while her head by comparison does not.

Overall, the armor is rather massive and bulky and seriously bigger than the woman herself.

I agree that the helmet is somewhat larger than her head, but since popular opinion seems to be that her piled on hair helps cushion the blow, I was giving that a pass. Helmet as depicted or not, a full helm is going to be a hindrance if it doesn't fit her head and she can't see out of the eye holes.

If war "has been her life for as long as she cares to remember", I'm hoping she's smart enough to wear one that fits.

Agreed on the oversized/massive armor, however. I didn't cite it as I was sure someone would come along and tell me that's how samurai wore it. I'm not sure how she could move, defend, or even swing a sword with what looks like ill-fitting armor.

 

[SavageCole]

I am so bad at walking away from ridiculous, but delicious internet discussions. Damn you guys!

There were women knight orders that existed. Back in an era where "knight order" and "elite combat veterans" were synonyms. Plus, there were rules in medieval times for women wrestlers. And, yes, it did include a lot of injuries.

Women in Europe very much did wear armor and see a lot of combat. That's part of why the women who led men into combat were very much not that unusual.

Let's not lose context here, though. Women in Europe (or Asia)* overwhelmingly did not wear armor and see combat. Of all feudal European (or Asian) women, a microscopic number donned armor and went into combat. Of all feudal European (or Asian) combatants who donned armor and fought, literally a negligible proportion of them were female.

This is not to say there were not extremely rare and spectacular counter-examples, and presumably when we're talking about PCs in d&d we should be thinking extremely rare and spectacular. So, I applaud those raising awareness of ceremonial pics of female nobles in armor, mention of Gorgeous Ladies of (medieval) Wresting, and the like.

As a consumer of this piece of art, the juxtaposition of courtly feminine and war-like intrigued and grooved me.

That said, the armor wasn't ceremonial; it was just bulky. Of course, that's because the armor wasn't made of metal...

You mean the armor in the d&d artwork sample? The armor was just something an artist drew, made of ink and paper, digital pixels ... or whatever we imagine it to be. I interpret it to be ceremonial ... but we're all entitled to see it as we want.

*Is this a Python skit ... "African or European swallow?"

 

[SavageCole]

I agree with the hair adornments; those look like something put in after battle. But, you're wrong about the helmet.

Actually sit down and look at it, then compare it to her head; the helmet is actually obviously larger than her head is. It takes up a rather sizable portion of the right side of her armor, while her head by comparison does not.

Overall, the armor is rather massive and bulky and seriously bigger than the woman herself.

Here's something to look at for those obsessed with this part of the discussion.

http://www.bonhams.com/press_release/11545/

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

I agree that the helmet is somewhat larger than her head, but since popular opinion seems to be that her piled on hair helps cushion the blow, I was giving that a pass. Helmet as depicted or not, a full helm is going to be a hindrance if it doesn't fit her head and she can't see out of the eye holes.

If war "has been her life for as long as she cares to remember", I'm hoping she's smart enough to wear one that fits.

Agreed on the oversized/massive armor, however. I didn't cite it as I was sure someone would come along and tell me that's how samurai wore it. I'm not sure how she could move, defend, or even swing a sword with what looks like ill-fitting armor.

Funnily enough, that's actually how the samurai wore it. There's a specific reason for it: They didn't have the metal supplies necessary to produce metal armor in the same way that Europe did. The armor was primarily made of leather. IIRC, the specific style used in the picture was sometimes made from wood. So, a certain bulkiness is necessary for protection reasons.

I am so bad at walking away from ridiculous, but delicious internet discussions. Damn you guys!

You're welcome!

Let's not lose context here, though. Women in Europe (or Asia)* overwhelmingly did not wear armor and see combat. Of all feudal European (or Asian) women, a microscopic number donned armor and went into combat. Of all feudal European (or Asian) combatants who donned armor and fought, literally a negligible proportion of them were female.

This is not to say there were not extremely rare and spectacular counter-examples, and presumably when we're talking about PCs in d&d we should be thinking extremely rare and spectacular. So, I applaud those raising awareness of ceremonial pics of female nobles in armor, mention of Gorgeous Ladies of (medieval) Wresting, and the like.

As a consumer of this piece of art, the juxtaposition of courtly feminine and war-like intrigued and grooved me.

You have a very good point! And, I think it is important to remember that PCs are exceptional people and need to be compared to exceptional people, not to the commoners of history

You mean the armor in the d&d artwork sample? The armor was just something an artist drew, made of ink and paper, digital pixels ... or whatever we imagine it to be. I interpret it to be ceremonial ... but we're all entitled to see it as we want.

*Is this a Python skit ... "African or European swallow?"

Historically, the armor that picture used as a basis wasn't ceremonial; it was just bulky. It helps to remember that the reason Japan got so good at folding steel for katanas is they had a long-term iron shortage. While they could and did use iron in armor, most of the time the armor was primarily comprised of leather and silk. It wasn't unusual for them to even use wood in the place of iron. As you can imagine, they tended to make armor with the idea it might not have any metal in it. Once they got access to iron to import, they tended to not hesitate to take the opportunity to import, since history had given them a very long lesson in just how important it is (steady iron imports caused them to change armor construction).