I've been generally pretty happy with the art, but this pic just rubs me the wrong way. That armor looks way too big for her.
Shame they picked this as the background to preview when it was already previewed by means of the Starter Set pregen with soldier background, and when this background is already previewed in the Basic rules. I hope we get a peek at a background we haven't seen yet this week.
docdoom77 wrote:
For those of us with weak eyes, here's a link to the full-size version.
zoroaster99 wrote:
pukunui wrote:
For me, it's just that her head looks too small compared to the everything else.
pukunui wrote:
I've generally liked most of the art we've seen but I'm not a fan of this. That armor is majorly ill-fitted for her, to the point where I think it would actually interfere with her actions more that it protects her.
Soldier background itself is nice but we've already seen it.
Could also be Mommy's armor. Just sayin'.
She looks like a samurai to me. So I expect a bulky and layered look.
pukunui wrote:
Samurai Armor is pretty suprisingly big and bulky. So a young woman in samurai armor would look like this, I feel.
I think it's a pretty awesome picture, and I love that the PHB is diversifying setting so much.
This is the first piece of art for 5th Edition that I've disliked.
Try as I might, I just can't see anything samurai-flavored and think "Dungeons & Dragons." And it certainly doesn't say "this is an example of a soldier" to me at all. Not even a little bit.
It just doesn't work for me--it feels more L5R than D&D.
docdoom77 wrote:
I like the picture, and it doesn't seem terribly ill-proportioned to me, but I question whether she'd be able to fit that helmet over her hair accessories.
Where are her boob-plate and chainkini? Worst 5e art yet. 
I think the art looks fine. Besides, even if the armor makes her look bulky, some variation between visible weight and body type in the character art is nice. Enough toothpick thin elves!
Elwood: The problem with elves is they ain't got no meat on their bones. You gotta get yourself a nice 250 pound dwarf, with hair on her chin you can hang on to!
The reason it looks weird to me is because she is only 6 heads tall. For Humans to look proportional they need to be around 8 heads tall. 1 for the head itself, 3 for torso and 4 for lower body. With the bulkiness of the armor, it is impossible to tell where the missing heads are supposed to be.
AH_schulerta wrote:
Huh, the armor design is very nice, and I don't mind some oriental touches in the PHB... but her head is too small, and her neck is too long. Her shoulderpads should be a bit higher if that's where her head stands.
We’ve removed content from this thread because of a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
Remember, a community is a joint effort of all those involved, and while we want intelligent meaningful and productive banter to ensue we also need it to be polite and considerate of others.
Thank you for your time and support as we continue to try and make a great community for everyone.
CelticPaladin wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
pukunui wrote:
Nicodaudel wrote:
CelticPaladin wrote:
The_White_Sorcerer wrote:
Ugliest armor picutre I have seen in a long time. I am not a fan of oriental armors and this is a big reason why. It looks extremly bulky and ill-fiitting.
pukunui wrote:
I LOVE this art! Diverse, shows how D&D is trying to embrace many different cultures. Love it!!!
As for the background itself...I like the write up quite a bit. Does a nice job of guiding players to think about how the life of a soldier would shape the personality of their character. Gritty!
I'm disappointed with this piece of art. The proportions look very wrong. The arms look too long for the head. The hands look wonky (especially the left!). And the armor looks way too bulky for her size. I really wonder what it would look like in an action scene.
It looks like they changed the head on an original concept at the last minute...perhaps for the sake of diversity?
The biggest issue is that it draws my attention from the text, instead of enhancing the reading.
Not what I was expecting to see for the Soldier at all.
I like being surprised like this.
omg that pic... lol.
a geisha girl in armor...
CelticPaladin wrote:
Ethnic individual.
Female in non-revealing armour.
Looks good to me.
IMO, deliberately, conspicuously "diversifying" the art is just as lame as doing the reverse. As far as the art qua art...I give it 4 yawns.
She still seems far too attractive for this day and age. Shouldn't they add some acne to her face? It's 2014 after all. Ugly her up. And if you dare show any cleavage I'll cut your hands off.
You know those programs that generate fantasy character portraits by putting different heads on different armours? It's a male dwarf samurai with the head of a geisha girl. That's why the proportions don't match.
If the half-orc male paladin is shown wearing a kimono, I'm not buying the PHB. I don't care how politically correct it is, I'm not buying it.
BoldItalic wrote:
The proportions are fine. It might take a decerning eye to really see it though. If you look at real samurai armor, the armor she is wearing is pretty run of the mill in terms of bulk. Part of samurai armor bulk was it was supposed to be larger than life to intimidate other warriors.
My next character is now going to be a half-orc paladin in a kimono, because that sounds badass.
ChrisTheS wrote:
Why does her left hand look so huge?
ChrisTheS wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
I dig the art, I wonder if they will sell a print.
FLAKPANZER wrote:
GhostStepper wrote:
pukunui wrote:
Eh not great art and I dope hope they don't over diversify everything but it looks ok much better than the warlock for example. She is just a young female dwarf wearing her fathers armor.
BoldItalic wrote:
Someone should sell a package of replacement art stickers for the PHB.
BoldItalic wrote:
WhiteHarness wrote:
Mr_Treegins wrote:
docdoom77 wrote:
As for the Character Background, why wouldn't a Soldier add at least one Weapon Proficiency? Every Soldier (be it a Scout down to the Quartermaster) would have training in some type of weapon. Be it a spear, bow, or sword. I know Classes and Races grant Weapon Proficiencies, but what if I want to go against the grain with character generation and choose Halfling Wizard and I want to use a Martial Weapon? A Greatsword-wielding Halfling Wizard...yeah....
In this thread, complain that D&D isn't exclusive to white guys only (and a couple fantasy chicks in skimpy robes). Even the half-orc must be as pasty as the flesh of maggots!
Seriously, that's what I'm picking up from you guys.
And oh look, an actual female samurai. Yes, the armor is supposed to be bulky, depending on the style. And yes, it is supposed to sit that low on the shoulders.
Sir_Klark_Heston wrote:
Mr_Treegins wrote:
dmgorgon wrote:
So, for everyone claiming that the armor here is historically accurate in bulk and fit, here are some museum pieces and some period art. Neither of which conforms to the level of bulkiness and ill-fittedness of the D&D art.
GhostStepper wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
Though I'm not a big fan of 5e, I have tried to defend its art (the Ogre was great, for example).
This... is terrible.
kill_the_wiz_first wrote:
Mr_Treegins wrote:
WhiteHarness wrote:
pukunui wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
i dont like the picture
1) drawing looks not very skillfull
2) i dont like this samurai look in D&D at all
Looks at thread:
"Oh noes! Sam oo rays r not Derptards and Drudgeons fer meee!"
Looks at Kara-Tur, Maztica, Al-Qadim and Oriental Adventures.
Yeah, ain't no cure for dumb.
docdoom77 wrote:
Saelorn wrote:
RustedKitsune wrote:
Aaaargh. Cant read the text! My eyes burn from looking at the utter phugglyness of that picture!
Looks at some posts:
"Wah wah, buh hu, sum purples r sayin' they dun like samhurrays in my Durptools Fatnasty Gamorron core material - how d-d-d-d-dare they insult whach I rike !!1!!one!!"
Looks at Kara-Tur, Maztica, Al Qadim and whatever other related stuff that WAS NOT IN THE COREBOOKS, it was campaign world specific, numbered just a few releases and it's been all but gone for many years.
Yeah, ain't no cure for idiocy that causes to claim that others are dumb.
Seriously, if we all relax enough to let go of our personal preconceptions about what the flavor of everyone else's game should be, and keep an open mind, I think we will find that we're all a lot less angry all the time. There's also the simple fact that flavor is the single most mutable thing in D&D. You are always free to tell your players: "Everybody has to be white, Western Europeans in my game."
RustedKitsune wrote:
JonWake wrote:
Sir_Klark_Heston wrote:
Be3Al2 wrote:
Mr_Treegins wrote:
<span>Mr_Treegins</span> wrote:
WhiteHarness wrote:
We get *one* piece of Asian-inspired (not oriental, ffs) art and people cry that the game has abandoned Western fantasy (my AD&D PH still has kung-fu monks and bo staffs but let's pretend that didn't happen) by "excessively" trying to be inclusive? More like they're offended that it's not exclusive.
Oh, and this "Japanese woman = geisha" deal is extra embarassing.
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Rastapopoulos wrote:
dmgorgon wrote:
GhostStepper wrote:
LMAO! how did that image get approved?
kev777 wrote:
People to Burn...
Rastapopulous, Dmgorgon...
Okay, all you Onna-Samurai out there, get the napalm ready!
Inheriting armor or a weapon is a common part of many a PC's back story, especially one with that background. You don't have to play a fighter to have the soldier background, either. Also, Japanese armor fits just fine into D&D, it often looks ill-fitting (compared to some late European armors), but is in fact light, strong, manueverable, and incredibly well padded. It was also worn just as much for pomp (if not more-so) than for actual combat.
Also, for anyone still talking about a petite woman not being bad ass enough to wear armor and/or fight, I'll just leave this here. There's more to that link that an article on ninjas, BTW.
http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2014/07/mochizuki-chiyome-and-the-tradition-of-female-ninjas/
CVB wrote:
seti wrote:
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Look at the picture of the actual samurai warrior posted upthread. She does not look like completely unconcerned with her appearance. The warrior from the PH has her hair in a utilitarian braid and has a similar adornment in her hair. Perhaps they would be less ornamented at times; we don't know that either is dressed for war rather than for some ceremonial occasion. Would we need to freak out if the illustration showed a handsome man wearing ornate armor or carrying an elaborate sword and shield?
The real problem with the pic is not that it's a samurai in D&D. It's not that it's a "pretty" female as a warrior. It's not even that the armor looks too big.
The problem is that the proportions look awkward in an acceptionally weird way. Look at the legs. They're far apart but they don't look like the're radiating out from her hips in a normal anatomical fashion but are somehow parallel all the way down instead. They give the impression that her legs are strangely tacked onto the sides of her hips instead of coming from below them, and that she probably has a 1 foot gap between her legs starting the the groin and going down. The armor's bulkiness isn't the real issue here, it's that it doesn't look like a normal human body would fit in it.
Where do people keep finding these page previews? I keep pouring through the site and haven't found any of them yet.
RoninJT wrote:
RoninJT wrote:
As for the art in question, for some reason it is growing on me, her head may look a tad small, but, as I said, something about it I like, and as for Asian/Oriental influence, in my experience, has always been there, 1st Ed has Asian/Oriental loveliness all over the place.
seti wrote:
GhostStepper wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
I have removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: http://www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_company_about_codeofconduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the Report Comment button below the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
It's just a terrible image that doesn't even deserve a shred of consideration.
BoldItalic wrote:
GhostStepper wrote:
kev777 wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
ChrisTheS wrote:
All done, I now have the perfect soldier mini for my next 5e game All I had to do was rip the head off geisha barbie and attach it to Mekaneck.
kev777 wrote:
GhostStepper wrote:
CVB wrote:
We'll probably find out that's based on some RL photo and once again people take reality as looking fake.
Thing I have is really she looks super delicate (the women depicted in the starter set look like soldiers). There's a reason some people turn to wizardry - it's because they are not line backers and they have delicate cheek bones.
OH NO...!!!!
The samurai woman isn't ugly and her armour is a bit too big - RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!
Seriously - how many people are really emotionally delicate enough not to buy a book because of one piece of artwork that doesn't quite fit?
... and somehow this became a sexism thing at some point??
Good lord... I don't particularly like the willowy wimp of a soldier being represented here, she is far too skinny for that panoply, but... so what!
There is just far too much hysterical, overblown reactionism in these forums. They should be renamed to 'Much Ado About Nothing'.
Fact - some of the artwork isn't going to be particularly evocative or representative of realism or indeed your particular preferences and taste, the cartoony skipping warlock springs to mind for me... but if it isn't sexist or racist or otherwise socially divisive in some way, why get so animated out about it?
Can we talk about the rules entry now? The rules are the only thing that are going to have a lasting impact on your game.
That's the important bit n'est pas?
Caliburn101. wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
Caliburn101. wrote:
kev777 wrote:
dmgorgon wrote:
dmgorgon wrote:
GhostStepper wrote:
GhostStepper wrote:
Caliburn101. wrote:
GhostStepper wrote:
Let's argue more about a totally subjective topic!
dmgorgon wrote:
Not to mention, this preview shows that they've clearly got many classic artists on-hand; the artwork was NOT solely outsourced, if it was outsourced at all.
"Let's argue more about a totally subjective topic!"
Left Twix is the clearly superior half.
Caliburn101. wrote:
DemoMonkey wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
h347h50 wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
dmgorgon wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
pukunui wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
I think our samurai is a dwarf...
TiaNadiezja wrote:
Brock_Landers wrote:
"I think our samurai is a dwarf..."
An interesting thought, but I think the face is too narrow for any of the dwarves we've seen so far.
Caliburn101. wrote: