D&D 4E Women in 4E

[Clavis]

I played an ascetic monk Dawn (the fighting Caste), who didn't want to carry around weapons or armor. I had a full dodge pool (and a charm that let me apply that full dodge to every attack coming my way), full martial arts (and eventually a style that upped my soak), and I still had to get armor in case I got tagged by a heavy hitter. The GM invented a magical kind of ink so I could get tattoo armor that functioned like armor (and I had to spend the resources to get it) JUST so I could stay true to my character concept.

But did you have a magical bikini wax?

 

[Rechan]

But did you have a magical bikini wax?

No.

And before anyone asks, I wore the loose tunic, pants and shoes. No loincloth. Even if my character was partially inspired by Tarzan.

 

[Nifft]

It doesn't matter what's in my game. It matters what's in the art.

Okay, then here's the central issue I guess: why does the art in everyone else's game need to conform to your limited palette of tastes? There's plenty of art that I dislike, but so long as there's enough good art to illustrate things which I need illustrated (mostly monsters), I'm pretty happy.

Some of the "too sexy" images that I've seen in this thread are frankly terrible -- they're not attractive as artwork or pornography.

I'm much more annoyed at the poor facial physiology of the Arcane Archer illustration than I am at any part of a well-rendered boob, no matter how much (or little) is shown.

If there were some systematic pattern of female image abuse, then we might have something to talk about. But I'm just not seeing anything except a few isolated examples, which are balanced by a roughly equal number of equally silly male outfits.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Rechan]

Okay, then here's the central issue I guess: why does the art in everyone else's game need to conform to your limited palette of tastes?

In Everyone Else's?

If there's enough people to complain about it that agree with me, then that's at least enough people that it's not Everyone Else's.

And even if it was just The Majority that agree with you, that's not the point. The whole "It's not realistic" is just a facet of "It's just drawn to show boobs because it offers no protection, therefore there's no reason anyone would wear it".

I'm arguing the second part to reinforce the first and third portion. The rebuttal of "it doesn't have to be realistic" doesn't dispute the first and third part. There's nothing About fantasy that necessitates realism, but nothing that necessitates boobs, either.

I mean, if the armor is unrealistic, if it doesn't protect her, then she's just better off wearing nothing in the middle of battle and saving her GP for a more boss weapon.

 

[Nifft]

1) It objectifies women and is therefore inherently bad.
2) It demonstrates discrimination towards women.
3) Sex-pot fantasy art is ok in its proper place, but that place isn't D&D.

I know it seems like nitpicking to point out every armor boob-hole in the artwork, when most of the artwork isn't so bad, and much of it is quite good. But, well, that's how we advanced out of the era in which a woman's only role in D&D was as a slavegirl or prostitute, into the era in which her role was a nearly naked barbarian or sorceror, and into the present. Somebody paid attention to this sort of thing. Somewhere WOTC has a style editor or an art editor in charge of exactly this issue.

Your points are good, and I basically agree with you on point #3, that D&D shouldn't become a haven for sex-pot imagery. But I don't think we're in any particular danger of that.

My response was mostly addressed an invisible #4: Girl armor is unrealistic. To that point all I have to say is that girl armor should be no more unrealistic than boy armor.

There have been plenty of dull, realistic depictions of women in armor -- some to the point that it's hard to tell if there's a woman in it!

Cheers, -- N

 

[Ruin Explorer]

If there were some systematic pattern of female image abuse, then we might have something to talk about. But I'm just not seeing anything except a few isolated examples, which are balanced by a roughly equal number of equally silly male outfits.

I've not seen any "rougly equal" number of silly male outfits, actually. I've seen, er, ONE so far in this thread, of equal levels of "silly outfit suitable only for an adults-only fancy dress party" (that idiot Sorcerer, whatever he's called, and the outfit of one thousand straps). So just waving your hands and saying "Huzzah, all is equal!" seems a bit damn silly.

I agree that WotC are a lot better than, say, previous RPG companies, but I still have a problem with them having an uncharacteristically hookerplate-armoured person on the front of the bloody 4E PHB. I'm not sure how that's difficult to understand.

 

[Nifft]

In Everyone Else's?

You're not arguing that other people's books should feature art work which conforms to your (limited) tastes? Okay, then the solution is easy: put opaque tape over objectionable art work in your books.

And even if it was just The Majority that agree with you, that's not the point. The whole "It's not realistic" is just a facet of "It's just drawn to show boobs because it offers no protection, therefore there's no reason anyone would wear it".

I'm arguing the second part to reinforce the first and third portion. The rebuttal of "it doesn't have to be realistic" doesn't dispute the first and third part. There's nothing About fantasy that necessitates realism, but nothing that necessitates boobs, either.

So would it be fair to say that your argument applies to "unnecessary" visible flesh aside from boobs? If realistic armor covered a body part, then the art work featuring similar armor should also cover that body part?

Is that a fair summary of your argument?

Thanks, -- N

 

[Clavis]

A question for everyone who has actually played Exalted: what was the gender makeup of your gaming group?

It might be illuminating if we could get some context on whether or not the sexy art in another game scares away female gamers.

 

[Rechan]

You're not arguing that other people's books should feature art work which conforms to your (limited) tastes? Okay, then the solution is easy: put opaque tape over objectionable art work in your books.

Is this some of that charisma you were talking about earlier? Because I think you rolled a 1 on that check.

I'm not concerned about my sensibilities. I am not offended by the art.

So would it be fair to say that your argument applies to "unnecessary" visible flesh aside from boobs? If realistic armor covered a body part, then the art work featuring similar armor should also cover that body part?

Is that a fair summary of your argument?

I've read that summary six times and I'm trying to figure out how I feel with it, and how you're setting up your counter argument, and I'm still not sure about it.

Aside from breasts? Yes, in the way of stomach/thighs, since those are, well, pretty vulnerable areas. That's the "realism" part. But the other leg of that is that chest/stomach/thigh are also very sexualized parts.

If no one cared about the half-naked woman part of the "going against pointy objects while wearing useless protection", then the fact the armor is useless wouldn't be much of an issue. But I don't see a lot of useless armor slapped on guys; it's almost universally applied to women.

 

[Rechan]

A question for everyone who has actually played Exalted: what was the gender makeup of your gaming group?

There was one female in the group when the game first started (but was not happy with the game). This was before the infamous magic bikini wax picture*. She left the campaign, another joined, but while her character was a full-plate wearing horse-riding general, she did side-roleplaying with an NPC who was more, uh, vicarious with ensembles. Because she liked to taunt the shy spellcaster.

*Of course, in the D&D game I ran, this character posed as a prostitute once to get information from someone, and accidentally wound up picking up the wrong guy. So I wouldn't say she was a Prude, but likely would have rolled her eyes and scoffed at the aforementioned magical bikini wax pic.