D&D 4E Women in 4E

[Geron Raveneye]

Dunno...I have to admit in my search I came across more gratuitious "scantily-cladness" with females than males in WotC D&D illustrations...and with a greater balance of "reasonably clad" males and females in some 3rd party publishers...but basically I don't really see all the hullabaloo about that either...it's kinda like complaining that there are more (willingly) scantily clad females running around on the streets outside than there are guys. It's simply that the concept of "eye candy" wasn't invented by RPG publishers, or magazine publishers in general...women themselves noticed a LONG time ago that showing off some curves and a bit more skin is a surefire way to get male attention, no matter what the context.

I'm still maintaining that much, or most, of the art in D&D/D20 books is meant as demonstration more than as eye candy, but that's interpretation...and you can interprete a damn lot into a bare midriff or a naked chest, all according to your own taste and preference.

 

[Nifft]

Are we okay with cheesecake at this point, providing we have corresponding beefcake?

'Cause if we are, the rest of the details are just up to the individual artists to work on.

That would not be my preference (but then, I have very few objections to current (3.0e/3.5e) D&D artwork compared to some folks).

I'd prefer character art where the characters had more personality -- more range of facial expression -- and dressed in "genre-appropriate" clothing. Even if that genre involves very silly clothing.

Cheers, -- N

 

[SteveC]

That would not be my preference (but then, I have very few objections to current (3.0e/3.5e) D&D artwork compared to some folks).

I'd prefer character art where the characters had more personality -- more range of facial expression -- and dressed in "genre-appropriate" clothing. Even if that genre involves very silly clothing.

Cheers, -- N

Well that's certainly fair enough...I think I pretty much agree with where you're coming from anyway. I really don't have any strong objections to the current crop of artwork (especially in comparison to other gaming artwork like some shown in this thread). From the little we have seen of 4E artwork, it doesn't look like anything major is going to change, but I agree on the more personality angle. I know that 3X had the iconic characters, and I trust we'll get a new batch this time. Hopefully there will be something of an improvement.

Frankly, if I were WotC and reading this thread, I think there are some interesting things to draw from it that can genuinely make the 4E artwork better...you just have to look in the middle between the different extremes of the views (like most things...)

--Steve

 

[Jhulae]

I'd prefer character art where the characters had more personality -- more range of facial expression -- and dressed in "genre-appropriate" clothing. Even if that genre involves very silly clothing.

Cheers, -- N

I *completely* agree with this. I've seen some pictures by some artists in past and in current WotC products where the clothing has been *entirely* reasonable, yet the picture is absolutely *lifeless*. There's nothing worse than lifeless art, IMO, because it generally turns off everyone.

And Baxa's art. I just can't stand his art. At all.

Of course, now that I've seen bantied about how the portraits should allow one to say "Thats' what I want my character to look like", I'll say now that it's *so* much easier to find art or other pictures (like photographs) for how I envision my character than it is to find a miniatures for them. It's near impossible to find good miniatures about 3/4th of the time for me.

So, the problem really lies with the minis. It's all their fault.

 

[Moonshade]

Yeah, and a human is just a hairless ape with too much brains for its own good. It might shock you that something like an equine humanoid is viewed as eye candy for women..or rather, for SOME women...by same women, even.*shrug*´

I think that if random women were shown my photo of the half-naked man and the BOED pic and asked which one they thought was hot, they'd choose the first and wonder what kind of joke it was that the second was even included.

But lets see if we can find something for you specifically on the D20 landscape of fantasy art.

[cut images]

Is that more to your liking, then?

But that would be discussing my taste in men, wouldn't it? Anything more than "I see he's showing skin" and I'll be accused of hunting for material for masturbation (though Lux porn talk by guys was apparently on-topic commenting). Though I will say that in case of two of the pics, the likely answer should have been pretty obvious by now: how many posts have been made in this thread, by myself and others, about how freakishly huge muscles are generally something women find ugly?

 

[Geron Raveneye]

I think that if random women were shown my photo of the half-naked man and the BOED pic and asked which one they thought was hot, they'd choose the first and wonder what kind of joke it was that the second was even included.

Half naked? You mean 95% naked, right?

You know, if we're going to extend this from potrayals of males and females in FRPGs to what the average (i.e. non-gamer) person finds attractive, this thread will become useless for discussing fantasy artwork. Likely, if we narrow the focus down to "human only" pics. Again, in a game where players can choose to play over a dozen and more different (and in parts decidedly non-human) races, arguing about the attractiveness of pics of only humans is pretty fruitless, and narrowing.

But that would be discussing my taste in men, wouldn't it? Anything more than "I see he's showing skin" and I'll be accused of hunting for material for masturbation (though Lux porn talk by guys was apparently on-topic commenting). Though I will say that in case of two of the pics, the likely answer should have been pretty obvious by now: how many posts have been made in this thread, by myself and others, about how freakishly huge muscles are generally something women find ugly?

I'll just say that tastes always differ, and that it's hard to keep ones own taste out of a discussion such as this. Personally I know a handful of women, and their tastes concerning males have a very broad range. The problem with discussions like this here is, and will always be, that tastes and preconcieved notions can clash, and won't always find common ground. As long as everybody understands that and can live with it, that's okay.

 

[Piratecat]

I'm not accusing you of anything...but at the moment, we ARE discussing your taste in men...

If someone is uncomfortable, please don't push them. The thread is about women in D&D art, not one person's taste.

Thanks.

 

[wgreen]

For anyone who's interested, here's an old thread from rec.games.frp.dnd. It goes through pretty much the exact same arguments as this thread has.

-Will

 

[Nifft]

First pic: give some clothes so that the artist doesn't need to make him look neutered, maybe make him non-blue, and it's a start. Second pic: not my type, but I'll call him handsome enough. Third pic: neutered but at least the face isn't ugly. Last pic: bald, neutered anatomy study; freaky and not attractive.

But that would be discussing my taste in men, wouldn't it?

Yes, it would -- but that's the only criteria you've given us.

Contrast with those of us who have already specified our taste in Iconics (e.g.: I like Vadania and Lidda), but who are able to discuss pictures in terms other than "attractive" or "ugly". You are the only one who brought "your type" into this discussion (and I pointed out that it's not really conducive to a good discussion, but not very gently).

Finally, you posted something that looks closer to actual porn than anything I've ever seen in a D&D illustration. And that includes the 3.5e Nymph illustration.

- - -

Most importantly, many of us do NOT think that adding equal beefcake (or whatever it turns out you like) is an adequate response to cheesecake. Is it your position that you want art you find hot in order to promote equality?

Cheers, -- N

 

[WizarDru]

For my money, the issue isn't about sexiness and it's hardly new. If anything, 3e made one of the most conscious efforts with regards to well-represented female characters of any edition so far (a trend I expect to continue with 4e). The excesses of a company like Avalanche notwithstanding, most 3e art is relatively balanced.

Where I become concerned (and where my wife becomes irritated) is when I'm presented with artwork that appears to objectify the female subject. It's a slippery slope, to be sure, and more than a little subjective. However, one reason we specifically didn't pick up Mongoose's Quintessential Rogue book a few years back was the artwork. A particularly poorly drawn topless elven character still stands out in my mind.

This isn't to say that sexy illustrations are bad...but as PC points out, I prefer my women smart. No one argues that the nymph or succubus shouldn't be sexy...quite the opposite. But their images in the MM show powerful characters who are in control. Many of the illustrations in the D&D books are meant to evoke the stories for which the players strive...and few D&D players strive to be solely represented as someone else's object of lust. The goal of much of the illustrations is to give a representation of the heroes, their enemies and the challenges they face. In some cases, the artwork is inappropriate.

A real question is, what is the goal of such artwork? I would argue that the primary goal is not to tittilate, but to shape and inform the reader's perceptions of the games, as well as make the rules presentation more exciting by visualizing the game's concepts and story. If the artwork looses this priority in favor or exciting the reader, it's failed at it's intended goal, IMHO.

Artwork can show attractive, sexy characters of either gender without objectifying them.

Here's some examples of WotC artwork that shows how you can do appropriately dressed smart women in D&D. (And I'd also recommend reviewing the iconics for Paizo's pathfinder, as well).

PHB II: Lidda
PHB II: Meara
PHB II: Deruwyn
XPH: Eulad