D&D 4E The 4e PHB : Cheesecake Y/N?

[glass]

Regardless of "raciness," its just plain ugly.

Ditto.

EDIT: Anyway, I don't have any strong objection to (or desire for) 'cheesecake' or 'beefcake', but I don't think this cover qualifies as the former anyway -arguably it is the latter if you don't look at the guy's face.


glass.

 

[small pumpkin man]

I was offended in the sense that Nerds are offended by things which are stupid, so that's what I ticked. The guys fugly and uninteresting, the chicks wearing that dumb armour with holes in it, I mean a chain mail bikini actually makes more sense than that (in the sense that holed amour actually hinders you by slowing you down with little to no benefit), and shes standing in that position crappy comic book artists put chicks in so you can see their T & their A in the same picture and pretend it's "simulating movement". (The fact that you can't actually see her "bits" just makes the picture that much lamer)

There's nothing wrong with "appropriate cheesecake", put poorly drawn women showing skin in situations where it directly harms them, both insults my intelligence and implies that the women are only there for guys to look at, as opposed to being full fledged characters in their own right. Who also happen to be very nice to look at.

There's actually a lot of 4e cover art I don't like that much, but the PHB is one of the worst.

 

[Maggan]

The world is full of much greater injustices than depicting cleavage.

Yes. But unless you (the general "you") are targeting the single greatest injustice of them all (which ever one that may be), that will always be the case. Which is why I think that it's not really a relevant dismissal of attention lavished on a perceived injustice.

There's always a bigger dragon to slay, after all.

As for cheesecake, I ain't seeing it in the 4e art. If it was at the level of the infamous Avalanche covers, it'd be bad. Not offensively bad, but stupidly bad. As things are now, it's just a fantasy picture to me.

/M

 

[Gort]

Well, the girl's ugly and has armour that's stupid and impractical. I kind of get the feeling she was supposed to be pretty, but that the artist failed to do it right. The "cheesecake" here is (as most of you have said) very tame, but it still looks stupid to me. If you really must have a cleavagy chick on the front of your books, put the guy in armour and the girl in clothes, don't put stupid openings into plate armour.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Two polls.
A thread.
A poll about Dragonborn.

.....yyyyyeaaaaaaaaaaaah....there must be a REAL lack of actual 4e news for us all to obsess over how it's going to show us ladyparts so freakin' much.

Really. Apparently, this is the most pressing matter in the new edition right now. Boobies.

(sigh)

The picture is fine, cake-wise. I guess it's a bit stylized, but you'd have to have your gears wound pretty tight to call this offensive.

 

[Klaus]

wow lots of art dicussion. The question about cheesecake got me thinking, whilst i don't want soft porn in my D&D, what is cheesecake (and more importantly - at what point we should be offended by it)

Definition(ish)

So lets go with what will be the iconic D&D 4e picture

The 4th edition PHB cover

How much does this offend/please you?

Looking at it, the male warlock at the back is showing a fair amount of chest, but he's a tiefling male and pretty ugly, so i'm not going to take offence (i mean, trolls with just a loin cloth are ok)

The female teifling fighter i think is athestically pleasing. Her armour is fairly practicaly, even if it is showing a bit of thigh (if she stood up strait that would be pretty much covered too). I do think the beauty spot is a nice touch.

I didn't vote because there's no reply in there for me.

The PHB cover is trying, but isn't even good cheesecake. The female warrior's armour is too concealing to truly be cheesecake, her pose is off and the anatomy is anything but appealing.

One of WAR's worst pieces, and I love WAR's art.

 

[delericho]

It doesn't affend me. I just don't like it.

 

[Stogoe]

I'm confused. People actually think the cover is cheesecake? My conception of cheesecake is more Betty Grable or Book of Erotic Fantasy, rather than female adventurers who (OMG!) have breasts. You know, pictures that are only there for titilation.

 

[Piratecat]

Heh heh. Stogoe said 'titilation.'

.....yyyyyeaaaaaaaaaaaah....there must be a REAL lack of actual 4e news for us all to obsess over how it's going to show us ladyparts so freakin' much.

Ya think?

Right now this forum is almost self-recursive, as we over-analyze any scrap of information we can get. Once the D&D Experience really unveils 4e, I suspect we're going to see threads that are a lot more substantive. (i.e., not about boobies.)

 

[Lackhand]

I suspect we're going to see threads that are a lot more substantive. (i.e., not about boobies.)

Not offensive unto me. I do wish it were a different picture for the cover of the single most important book in the new edition, though; I agree this is probably WAR's weakest piece.