The Gaming Den

---

But seriously, the Greeks were fuckin' perverts.

CatharzGodfoot wrote:

---

But seriously, the Greeks were fuckin' perverts.

That's guy's got half a chub on, at least.

This is exactly the conversation that go Frank one of his warnings on the Wizards' boards...

Of course, that time he linked to the 3.0 Harpy.

-Crissa

Succubi are supposed to be sexy, so they can be heavily sexualized. I still wouldn't go with bare breasts, though. The rest of the art needs to be pretty conservative. No giant breasts, no chainkinis, no bare midriffs. Then again, I'm quite the prude.

Koumei wrote:lol we drew a nipple on the Fiend Folio cover, for no apparent reason

There's a nipple on the cover of the Fiend Folio?

<looks>

So there is. That's actually extraordinarily repulsive.

Lago wrote:I'd normally never comment on this, but I have some vague prehistoric memory of Maj and Crissa and Frank saying the same thing back when there was a Nifty. So I guess I might as well get this mini-rant off my chest.

You actually liked that? I, well, while I didn't hate the picture I didn't think it was any good. The dryad was generically cute and so out-of-place she looked stupid. Like if you commissioned the artist of the Disney comic and the people who create aliens for Star Trek to come up with their interpretation of a dryad. From a 'oh, it's so pretty' standpoint I don't really see that either. She's all-right looking.

If I ever said that I was fond of that picture, I'd like to retract my previous statement.

I don't. I think the drawing may be well-done from a technical perspective, but the picture, itself, is rather lacking. A dryad - in my mind - needs to have more "tree" about her - a few swirling leaves doesn't cut it. And her face looks vacant. Not like she's stupid, but like she actually is receiving no stimuli from the outside world. All in all, her appearance reminds me of a gypsy mannekin at a ren faire, not a dryad.

Lago wrote:Now granted I didn't care for the 3.5E replacement, but at least that dryad LOOKED like an alien exotic creature rather than some schoolteacher cosplaying as Demeter.

They got the "one with the tree" concept down in that picture, but what I don't get is the butterface. The picture has great potential up to the neck and then it just goes off into . The leaves for hair would have been great if the hair wasn't twig-stiff and not actually hair-like. And she looks kinda like a squished catgirl, facially speaking. Really, the picture looks to me like the artist slapped a wood texture on one of those gray aliens, stuck a leafy camouflage mat on her head, and added a tree at the bottom. And there's still no intelligence in the face.

PR wrote:Succubi are supposed to be sexy, so they can be heavily sexualized. I still wouldn't go with bare breasts, though. The rest of the art needs to be pretty conservative. No giant breasts, no chainkinis, no bare midriffs. Then again, I'm quite the prude.

I don't have a problem with nudity in art - as long as it looks like art. Stuff like the 3.0 nymph - even though she's clothed - looks too much like your typical porn star. I blame the artist and the lack of context - the nymph is just standing there posing like the proper response is jumping her. This {NSFW, boobs, anime} is more my style of a nymph, though preferably with a little less anime-ness.

But because there are people that have problems with boobs and penii, I think that adding some convenient censoring from the environment would be a fair compromise.

Personally, it makes sense to me that a race of creatures skilled in basic tool usage would do something to protect genitalia in a martial context, so I don't think it stretches the boundaries of believability for me to see war-like races wearing nut covers.

Maj wrote: Personally, it makes sense to me that a race of creatures skilled in basic tool usage would do something to protect genitalia in a martial context, so I don't think it stretches the boundaries of believability for me to see war-like races wearing nut covers.

This is one of the most sensible things I've heard in awhile, Maj.

Maj wrote: I don't have a problem with nudity in art - as long as it looks like art. Stuff like the 3.0 nymph - even though she's clothed - looks too much like your typical porn star. I blame the artist and the lack of context - the nymph is just standing there posing like the proper response is jumping her.

What did you think of the 3.5E nymph, Maj?

Lago wrote:What did you think of the 3.5E nymph, Maj?

That thing?

Its supposed "cum hither" look falls utterly short because someone put the image into photo-manipulating software, squished its head, pulled on its ears and said, "Don't worry. It has boobs. Guys will still want to sleep with it." Also, the nymph is supposed to be a creature of nature, yet the picture has very little nature in it. It totally could be just getting out of the bathtub.

Really, the line that they left out of the 3.5 MM explains it all.

3.0 Monster Manual, page 143 wrote:Nymphs hate evil and ugliness.

See, given the new picture, if they left that line in the book, then all nymphs would commit suicide upon looking at themselves in their bathing water.

To add: The 3.5 Nymph has a far too narrow waist and it looks awkward. (Yes, I notice that. When I was 12, I used to sneak my father's Playboys to read the articles. I have never been highly affected by the anatomy of either gender).

The 3.0 Nymph looked kind of pissy to me.

And as an aside, Maj's anime nymph link looks very much like my GF did in high school. To the point that I'm somewhat wigged out.

Maj wrote:

3.0 Monster Manual, page 143 wrote:Nymphs hate evil and ugliness.

See, given the new picture, if they left that line in the book, then all nymphs would commit suicide upon looking at themselves in their bathing water.

Hahaha, fantastic.

I still don't get this obsession over nudity in D&D artwork. Personally, I think women in proper armor or clothing look sexier than one wearing nothing.

Does anyone have a link to the 3.5 or 4e nymph? I don't have that book.

-Crissa

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_ ... _PG198.jpg

3.5 nymph

Not sure where the 4.0 is.

I find the 3.5 nymph about as creepy as the 2E one. It always seemed to me that the artist was aiming for "more beautiful than human", and somehow fell short in an attempt to make it stand out:



I always liked most of Tony DiTerlizzi's work in the 2E monster manual, but I never liked that nymph.

At least the 2e one was green and lithe. The 3.5 one just looks... I can get better art on DA for free.

-Crissa

Just got to say, if you want to make bullshit archaic Latin/Greek pluralizations of genitals, you don't use the word "penii" because that's not a word. They are:

Vagina => Vaginae
Clitoris => Clitorides
Penis => Penes
Anus => Ani

-Username17

FrankTrollman wrote:Just got to say, if you want to make bullshit archaic Latin/Greek pluralizations of genitals, you don't use the word "penii" because that's not a word.

People usually use penii as a joke, to make fun of people who hypercorrect platypi, octopi, rhinoceri, hippopotami and so on. I'm totally with you on "If you HAVE to use the ancient Greek, it's oktopodes. Are you ancient Greek? No? Then fucking call them octopuses." but penii is kind of funny. And presumably serves as a lesson.

That said, I use the words chimerae and medusae when really, it won't kill me to say "medusas" and "chimeras".

Frank wrote:Just got to say, if you want to make bullshit archaic Latin/Greek pluralizations of genitals, you don't use the word "penii" because that's not a word.

If I want to make "bullshit archaic Latin/Greek pluralizations of genitals" (or other kinds of words, for that matter), then it doesn't matter if they're right or not because they're, well... bullshit.

Koumei wrote:People usually use penii as a joke, to make fun of people who hypercorrect platypi, octopi, rhinoceri, hippopotami and so on.

+1

Koumei wrote:

FrankTrollman wrote:Just got to say, if you want to make bullshit archaic Latin/Greek pluralizations of genitals, you don't use the word "penii" because that's not a word.

People usually use penii as a joke, to make fun of people who hypercorrect platypi, octopi, rhinoceri, hippopotami and so on. I'm totally with you on "If you HAVE to use the ancient Greek, it's oktopodes. Are you ancient Greek? No? Then fucking call them octopuses." but penii is kind of funny. And presumably serves as a lesson.

That said, I use the words chimerae and medusae when really, it won't kill me to say "medusas" and "chimeras".

http://lol.i.trollyou.com/

I'd be reticent to bandy about Classical sculpture as a precedent for nudity in gaming texts, if for no other reason than players thinking a kynodesme should be enchanted.

CatharzGodfoot wrote:

mean_liar wrote:I don't recall what the 3.0 dryad looked like. Do we have a link?

I'm not sure what the big deal is. There are many more risqué monsters.

Umm, guys? Did anyone notice her lower right leg doesn't line up with her hips or the upper right leg? I thought I was looking at it wrong for a second, but it doesn't have the right perspective or angle to be the left leg either.

What we have here is anatomically impossible.

Cent13

FrankTrollman wrote:Just got to say, if you want to make bullshit archaic Latin/Greek pluralizations of genitals, you don't use the word "penii" because that's not a word. They are:

Vagina => Vaginae
Clitoris => Clitorides
Penis => Penes
Anus => Ani

-Username17

Thank you, Mr. Trollman. I can now die happy.

Cent13

Centurion13 wrote:Umm, guys? Did anyone notice her lower right leg doesn't line up with her hips or the upper right leg? I thought I was looking at it wrong for a second, but it doesn't have the right perspective or angle to be the left leg either.

What we have here is anatomically impossible.

Responses that have run through my mind...


It's magic.

My eyes have never strayed that far down on that pic before.

It's possible that her leg is twisted and out of joint and she's actually in an incredible amount of pain.

That isn't her leg.

what about: "The artist just screwed up and didn't continue her leg contour up far enough"? Were that fixed, it'd be fine.

Her right leg is behind, and neither one actually ends because she is rising out of some plant matter because she is a Dryad and can do that. And also because drawing feet is hard and unrewarding, so the artist probably took that as a good enough excuse to not draw any.

-Username17

The leg is fine. The problem is that the sash does not conform to the curve of her leg. She is at an angle so the other leg is mostly behind her.

Chances are good it was a sexy drawing at first like a nude, and they went back and said "cover up her pubic area" but the guy didn't take the time to rework the whole drawing.