D&D 5E (2014) Toward a new D&D aesthetics

[J.Quondam]

You can say a lot about those big headed halflings, but it works. They just look very short and stout...

I'll admit it: I've always liked 5e's big-head-little-feet halflings.
They're clearly not human, but still very human-like in a distinctive way that is not simply bolting on animal parts or slapping on a rubber mask.

* edited to be more respectful of huge elf ears.

 

[Scribe]

Where are the screw-ups who manage still to be good at something the party needs? Where are the scoundrels that don't secretly have a heart of gold?

In a different genre of Fantasy.

I'm not sure what I would call D&D's brand of Fantasy. Is it High? Maybe? Is it Epic? Sometimes. Heroic? Perhaps.

If I had to pin it, I would put it at Heroic, but leaning so heavily into that positive "hopepunk" territory these days, that any ambiguity about the character motivations is going to all but abandon any kind of Sword and Sorcery trappings. You know, the exaggerated physique, the fan service, the anti-hero.

One of the attributes of hopepunk that I think absolutely is part of what is informing the D&D (and wider media!) trend.

• A weaponized aesthetic of softness, wholesomeness, or cuteness — and perhaps, more generally, a mood of consciously chosen gentleness.

 

[Guest 7034872]

One of the attributes of hopepunk that I think absolutely is part of what is informing the D&D (and wider media!) trend.

• A weaponized aesthetic of softness, wholesomeness, or cuteness — and perhaps, more generally, a mood of consciously chosen gentleness.

Yeah, I think that's right. I didn't even know such a thing as "hopepunk" existed, but what you describe does seem to predominate in current official art.

 

[Azzy]

What I write here is exclusively a reaction to the posted image: I don't know if it extends to 5e art overall. I suspect at least points (1) and (3) do, but I haven't actually done a study on it, so who knows?

1. Consistently over-saturated colors. Not just bright: over-saturated. I do home theater as another hobby and calibrate my own screens and audio. No way on planet Earth would I accept a post-calibration image that looked like the one above. That whole thing looks like everyone in it went to a drug-tripped Neon Superhappy Funtown. We had stuff like this in 1e and 2e, but not so persistently.

This is a collection of different images.

1. Only the male characters wear revealing clothing here.

Revealing? Perhaps from a Puritan's standpoint.

1. (The big one to my mind) About half on them are grinning or smirking. When did a smirk become endearing??? It isn't. And those that aren't grinning hold facial expressions of extreme self-confidence. No one in this image looks nervous or afraid in the least. Everyone seems fully assured of their own overflowing competence.

Ookay, then.

1. I've seen psychedelic mushrooms before, but never quite that large (though in that old Alice in Wonderland module they seemed huge if only because the PCs were shrunk down so much).

Mushrooms in the underdark grow large. They have since the underdark was conceived.

1. It's only showing heroes: no villains appear here, and certainly none take center stage and, oh...actually defeat the heroes. This is something I've noticed a lot. Not universally, but a lot (the cover of the 5e PHB has a gorgeous villain on it, for instance, so of course this point isn't universal).

These are illustrating variours subclasses. Of course there's no villians here.

1. Where's all the heavy armor?? Seriously. I see one character that has what could be called heavy armor (but not really); all the others have none or light armor only.

Not being worn by mages or rogues or rangers as per usual.

Overall, I'd say 5e art has bought into the contemporary Cult of Omnicompetence: everyone is always great at whatever they do and ultimately decent-hearted. Where are the screw-ups who manage still to be good at something the party needs? Where are the scoundrels that don't secretly have a heart of gold? And why is everyone so insufferably self-assured? This is one of the points Stefano Rinaldelli made just before opening this thread, and yes, he did get unfairly dogpiled for it, as did beancounter. I don't think they deserved such treatment for the sin of questioning a prevailing orthodoxy. People who relish cultural critiques shouldn't be so fragile when the tables turn and their favored sub-culture starts to receive one: it's a simple matter of the goose and the gander.

With all that said, though, it's still the case that the new art doesn't really bother me; it merely isn't the art I would use, and that's hardly a big deal.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

A weaponized aesthetic of softness, wholesomeness, or cuteness — and perhaps, more generally, a mood of consciously chosen gentleness.

I’m always amazed that people use “weaponized” to describe this, and even more that people object to it.

 

[Scribe]

I’m always amazed that people use “weaponized” to describe this, and even more that people object to it.

Its not my definition, its just part of one I found.

 

[Guest 7034872]

I’m always amazed that people use “weaponized” to describe this, and even more that people object to it.

Why? I object to it for all the same reasons I object to kitsch: it trivializes.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Why? I object to it for all the same reasons I object to kitsch: it trivializes.

No, it doesn’t.

Its not my definition, its just part of one I found.

Oh I know, it’s just a wild way to word it, IMO.

 

[Guest 7034872]

This is a collection of different images.

Oh, I had no idea. So the posted image is actually a pastiche of official images? That would help to make sense of why I saw what I saw in there.

Mushrooms in the underdark grow large. They have since the underdark was conceived.

That also is helpful. I've never even dealt with the Underdark, so that stuff is all as if brand new to me.

These are illustrating variours subclasses. Of course there's no villians here.

Right. That I get now.

Not being worn by mages or rogues or rangers as per usual.

So is it the case that there are other official images featuring full-on fighters who sport serious armor? I'm not being sarcastic here--I genuinely don't know because I never really paid much attention to the art.

 

[Scott Christian]

(The big one to my mind) About half of them are grinning or smirking. When did a smirk become endearing??? It isn't. And those that aren't grinning hold facial expressions of extreme self-confidence. No one in this image looks nervous or afraid in the least. Everyone seems fully assured of their own overflowing competence.

I am sorry I do not remember exactly where, but this was just posted and discussed not too long ago. It was comparing original D&D art, where many PCs were fearful or nervous, as opposed to 5e, where they all appear to be confident and unafraid. I think the DM's Guide and PHB was used as a reference.