D&D 4E Women in 4E

[Rel]

hahah you should have quoted me

theirs always suckubus? hahah.

It's ok. I can edit your post back anytime I want.

 

[Nifft]

It's ok. I can edit your post back anytime I want.

I'm so glad the mods here have a sense of humor.

But I think its fair to say we would be deliberately missing the point.

Perhaps I could get you to concisely state what it is exactly that is the point?

Thanks, -- N

 

[Moon-Lancer]

It's ok. I can edit your post back anytime I want.

eep! I gotta start using the preview button. *doh*

 

[Cadfan]

Perhaps I could get you to concisely state what it is exactly that is the point?

In that particular instance, the point was that you can't just point to any old picture of a man with no shirt and proclaim that the game's art has gender parity in terms of cheesecake. Some (most) of those shirtless men are in there for men to look at, not for women. Guy minus shirt does not equal artwork aimed at appealing to women, even if the guy has muscles. If that were the case, professional wrestling audiences would be an estrogen fest. In reality, its the opposite. The men in spandex briefs are there to look strong and intimidating and appealing to males.

Now that we've added giant horse-beast men, I think its all the more clear.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

How on earth could it seem like a good idea to post those pics in reply to a request for handsome men who show skin? Would a photo of Angelina Jolie with a request for more in the same style make people think that the cow picture posted by Aloïsius was the kind of art the person wanted to see?

We're talking fantasy RPGs here, after all. Just because elves basically look like slender humans with big eyes and pointy ears doesn't mean the call for "hot models" has to limit itself to humans only, I'd say.

As counterexamples...

We should be a little broader of mind when talking about "sexy" FRPG art, when there's more than just humans and human-looking races around.

 

[Nifft]

In that particular instance, the point was that you can't just point to any old picture of a man with no shirt and proclaim that the game's art has gender parity in terms of cheesecake. Some (most) of those shirtless men are in there for men to look at, not for women. Guy minus shirt does not equal artwork aimed at appealing to women, even if the guy has muscles. If that were the case, professional wrestling audiences would be an estrogen fest. In reality, its the opposite. The men in spandex briefs are there to look strong and intimidating and appealing to males.

So, the picture on the previous page (the glittery drugged dude with the shaved chest and gold-chrome cup)... You claim that picture was intended to appeal to men? If so, it's not working. Maybe the original poster can tell you if it appeals to women.

- - -

What kind of pictures would represent "gender parity in terms of cheesecake"? With examples, if you don't mind.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Cadfan has one thing right...there's a difference if the man/woman depicted is put in for the same sex to look at and think "Wow, I'd sure LOVE my character to look like that" or if it is put in to catch the eyes of the opposite sex.

Mostly I think it's a placement matter. Cover xxxcakes are usually meant to be eye-catchers, the illustrations are more meant as "example illustrations", as far as I see it.

 

[Aloïsius]

Cadfan has one thing right...there's a difference if the man/woman depicted is put in for the same sex to look at and think "Wow, I'd sure LOVE my character to look like that" or if it is put in to catch the eyes of the opposite sex.

Ideally, whatever the sex of the depicted character, you should be able to say "wow, I'd love to play a character like that". RPG is about being something else. As a DM, one of the character I had the more fun with, was an old woman (commoner NPC, 12th level, 12 hp because of the -6 CON). I created her mostly because, a few years before, I just saw ( a few seconds in the bus ) such an old woman*. A character don't need to be hot or sexy (or even worse : he don't need to try to be hot...) to be a great character : he just need to be likeable, fun or otherwise fascinating. I guess this is why I don't like WAR : his characters are often scowling and have strange, distorded poses, which don't make them likeable, fun nor fascinating.


* the living proof that comeliness is not charisma

 

[Cadfan]

Cadfan has one thing right...there's a difference if the man/woman depicted is put in for the same sex to look at and think "Wow, I'd sure LOVE my character to look like that" or if it is put in to catch the eyes of the opposite sex.

Thank you. No one ever agrees when I say that, but I'm still certain I'm right.

Nifft- I didn't say that men in briefs automatically exist to appeal to men. I said they can, and gave examples.

And I don't feel like providing too many examples of men drawn to appeal to women because 1) I'm not a woman and I'll miss the nuances, and 2) I'm afraid you'll try to systematize it and I don't feel like getting into a debate about how one of the pictures I presented had a guy with, I don't know, sandals and therefore all pictures of guys with sandals must be designed to appeal to women. Ask a woman what actors she thinks are hot. Buy or borrow a Playgirl, and some yaoi anime. Contrast it with some action heroes, professional wrestlers, and male character art in D&D. You'll get the general idea. You won't find a bright line on human sexuality, but you'll get the gist.

 

[Nifft]

Contrast it with some action heroes, professional wrestlers, and male character art in D&D. You'll get the general idea. You won't find a bright line on human sexuality, but you'll get the gist.

The thing is, I think I have the general idea.

You're the one claiming that all the examples so far are terrible. If you're going to claim to know what's better, you've gotta be ready to back it up somehow.

You're afraid that I might "systematize" your examples? Is that what you call ... whatever your previous arguments were? Don't worry, I'm not ... whoever you're thinking of. I'll discuss this just like I have been.

Cadfan has one thing right...there's a difference if the man/woman depicted is put in for the same sex to look at and think "Wow, I'd sure LOVE my character to look like that" or if it is put in to catch the eyes of the opposite sex.

Huh, I didn't see that point, but I'll willingly agree with it. The art should be primarily of characters who you'd like to be, rather than who you'd like to see.

This goes only for art of characters, though. Monsters, NPCs, etc. have no such requirement. I love what WAR does for monsters, for example.

Cheers, -- N