# Free D&D 5E Monster A Day PDF On Reddit



## Mistwell (Nov 16, 2015)

As far as D&D fan creations go, this one is right top there among the best. Some of the folks over at Reddit have combined efforts to create a collection of new monsters, with full colour artwork and stat blocks. Currently 91 monsters strong, you can download the PDF completely free. Monsters range from the _Clockwork Pest_ at CR 1/4 up to the _Umalog, The Ceaseless Hunger _at CR 30. Others include the Fusion Elemental, Gnoll Deathknight, Ice Golem, Magma Bear, and many more. The stats were done by StoneStrix; the art by a wide range of folks.

​
[h=4]Original Post[/h]
I don't often go to Reddit, but there is one exceptionally good section for 5e that I like.  That's the Monster A Day section.  They now have a PDF of their work, complete with a cover.  It's basically like a Monster Manual 2, with all unique monsters.  They're at 91 entries now.  All are like a page out of a monster manual, complete with formatting and artwork and full stats, and many have strategy/tactics/background sections as well.

It's free.  I think some people might like it.  Check it out (accessible in two locations):

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/11857495/D&D/5E/MonsterADay/MaD - compendium.pdf

or

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bzjax1-rJLokcTRGbDJ5RW9WdVU

Both continually are updated (though tend to be a couple days behind the newest monsters.

There is also an image icons list for the PDF.

And a Fantasy Grounds module for the PDF.


----------



## Hussar (Nov 16, 2015)

Dammmm,  that's fantastic.  WOW.


----------



## wedgeski (Nov 16, 2015)

Fan-tastic! Love it.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Nov 16, 2015)

it seems cool but my computer isn't letting me download it...


----------



## werecorpse (Nov 16, 2015)

I haven't been able to access it yet - but the examples look great. Makes me realise (as a DM) that a Monster Manual 2 is what I really want from WOTC.


----------



## Lucas Yew (Nov 16, 2015)

That's just gorgeous. Especially the CR 30 colossal THING...!


----------



## garnuk (Nov 16, 2015)

If only the editorial process for monster balance was more clear. Its so amazing seeing all these homebrews following the WoTC style guides.


----------



## Dale Robbins (Nov 16, 2015)

I'd like to see a tutorial on how they formatted those pages. Gorgeous!


----------



## dave2008 (Nov 16, 2015)

Just downloaded it, looks great.  Where did they get the template for the pages - it looks so official?  Is that available for download and personal use?


----------



## jayoungr (Nov 16, 2015)

That's amazing!  Thanks for the link!


----------



## garnuk (Nov 16, 2015)

dave2008 said:


> Just downloaded it, looks great.  Where did they get the template for the pages - it looks so official?  Is that available for download and personal use?




I didn't click on the links, but I'm guessing they got it from here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/2x8u77/5e_tried_to_recreate_the_monster_manuals_style/


----------



## Jester David (Nov 16, 2015)

Cool. 
I wonder if those are those Creative Common pieces of artwork of if he's "borrowing" art because the content is free (and already of dubious legality)


----------



## Remathilis (Nov 16, 2015)

Jester Canuck said:


> Cool.
> I wonder if those are those Creative Common pieces of artwork of if he's "borrowing" art because the content is free (and already of dubious legality)




I guarantee you that the art is NOT creative commons; a lot of it is from Pathfinder or Magic: the Gathering (as are a few of the monsters themselves; Eldrazi and Slivers are longstanding MtG staples.) 

As a fan work, its pretty cool. However, I don't know if its me, but the page size varies wildly from entry to entry, as does the formatting (horizontal to vertical) making the work hard to read one-after-another.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 16, 2015)

Jester Canuck said:


> Cool.
> I wonder if those are those Creative Common pieces of artwork of if he's "borrowing" art because the content is free (and already of dubious legality)




Pretty sure they're not - I'm seeing a lot of Pathfinder art.

It's fan stuff, though. Whether or not you have an issue with his copyright violations of the artists...it's a nuanced thing. You could always go buy WAR's new book as a way of paying for looking at his art used without his permission! Not sure that'll help some of the other concept artists there...


----------



## Neyd (Nov 16, 2015)

Really digging it on first glance, but when I download it and open it locally some of the pages are scaled differently, anyone else having this issue?


----------



## Mistwell (Nov 16, 2015)

Neyd said:


> Really digging it on first glance, but when I download it and open it locally some of the pages are scaled differently, anyone else having this issue?




Yeah he is aware of that issue.  He is going back through and adjusting the pages that are scaled different, but that's going to take some time (I think they are adjusting one page a day).  The PDF was sort of thrown together after-the-fact, as each page represents a different post from a different day.  Initially I don't think he was thinking of putting it all in a PDF and therefore would need to be concerned with scaling.  For now you can go to each individual page and print them from there.  There is an index of individual pages. That index also lists notes on changes, added lore, etc..


----------



## Nebulous (Nov 16, 2015)

holy wow.


----------



## mips42 (Nov 16, 2015)

And, as of 10am pacific, not working at either location. :/


----------



## Celtavian (Nov 16, 2015)

Pretty awesome.


----------



## neobolts (Nov 16, 2015)

I'm A Banana said:


> Pretty sure they're not - I'm seeing a lot of Pathfinder art.
> 
> It's fan stuff, though. Whether or not you have an issue with his copyright violations of the artists...it's a nuanced thing. You could always go buy WAR's new book as a way of paying for looking at his art used without his permission! Not sure that'll help some of the other concept artists there...




Yeah, I've been following this for a while now. This is a fan project including fan conversions from other products such as Magic: the Gathering. For a no-budget fan project, it's at least nice to see them giving credit where credit is due, especially when "swipe and play dumb" is just as common. Everything gets x-posted to the D&D subreddit, but you can follow their efforts more directly at https://www.reddit.com/r/monsteraday .


----------



## Xaelvaen (Nov 16, 2015)

dave2008 said:


> Just downloaded it, looks great.  Where did they get the template for the pages - it looks so official?  Is that available for download and personal use?



http://thegeniusinc.com/dd-monster-maker-download/?ref=3.0.0  That's a monster generator program.  Its not what Stonestrix uses, but it makes a pretty much perfect png (and other exportables) of the monster stat block.


----------



## Trance (Nov 16, 2015)

I am unable to download this... :/


----------



## Mistwell (Nov 16, 2015)

I read a lot of Doctor Seuss books to my 4 year old daughter.  I often think it might be fun to stat the various monsters portrayed in those books.  "If I Ran The Zoo" has dozens and dozens alone in that one book, and most of his over 60 books have monsters in them.  I could use that monster generator program along with the monster manual background formatting, some short text from the book that contains that monster, and create a Scroll of Seuss' Snarling Savages! (in softcover) book


----------



## Guyanthalas (Nov 16, 2015)

Mistwell said:


> I read a lot of Doctor Seuss books to my 4 year old daughter.  I often think it might be fun to stat the various monsters portrayed in those books.  "If I Ran The Zoo" has dozens and dozens alone in that one book, and most of his over 60 books have monsters in them.  I could use that monster generator program along with the monster manual background formatting, some short text from the book that contains that monster, and create a Scroll of Seuss' Snarling Savages! (in softcover) book




Love this idea. Mostly because I read a lot of Doctor Seuss books. No 4 year olds, just love Mr. Geisel.


----------



## garnuk (Nov 16, 2015)

There's a wocket in my pocket and a zamp behind the lamp, could be a good start as well... I like it!


----------



## Strahd_Von_Zarovich (Nov 16, 2015)

Wow, thumbs up for the good work.


----------



## Delazar (Nov 16, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> As a fan work, its pretty cool. However, I don't know if its me, but the page size varies wildly from entry to entry, as does the formatting (horizontal to vertical) making the work hard to read one-after-another.




someone in the same subreddit is working on making all the entries same size, and compiling a pdf for printing.


----------



## JohnTitusRenzi (Nov 16, 2015)

This is top quality stuff.


----------



## dave2008 (Nov 17, 2015)

Xaelvaen said:


> http://thegeniusinc.com/dd-monster-maker-download/?ref=3.0.0  That's a monster generator program.  Its not what Stonestrix uses, but it makes a pretty much perfect png (and other exportables) of the monster stat block.




Very cool - thank you!


----------



## Jester David (Nov 17, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> I guarantee you that the art is NOT creative commons; a lot of it is from Pathfinder or Magic: the Gathering (as are a few of the monsters themselves; Eldrazi and Slivers are longstanding MtG staples.)
> 
> As a fan work, its pretty cool. However, I don't know if its me, but the page size varies wildly from entry to entry, as does the formatting (horizontal to vertical) making the work hard to read one-after-another.





I'm A Banana said:


> Pretty sure they're not - I'm seeing a lot of Pathfinder art.
> 
> It's fan stuff, though. Whether or not you have an issue with his copyright violations of the artists...it's a nuanced thing. You could always go buy WAR's new book as a way of paying for looking at his art used without his permission! Not sure that'll help some of the other concept artists there...



Darn.

I'm okay with some copyright bending when it's already bending trademarks and is a free product. Fan projects are held to different standards. Especially when there's so much art. 

But I hold myself to a different standard and am crawling through Deviantart looking for decent Creative Commons artwork I can use for my own PDFs (prettying up my homebrew content), and it's slow and annoying. I was hoping to just copy some names from this PDF...


----------



## RevTurkey (Nov 17, 2015)

It looks very good..BUT...

I would hope that permission to use the art was given by the artists and/or copyright holders. If so...great. If not then I think it is wrong and should be taken down. It wouldn't be fair to the artists or companies who have worked hard to be in a position to purchase artwork.


----------



## Ovinomancer (Nov 17, 2015)

Jester Canuck said:


> Darn.
> 
> I'm okay with some copyright bending when it's already bending trademarks and is a free product. Fan projects are held to different standards. Especially when there's so much art.
> 
> But I hold myself to a different standard and am crawling through Deviantart looking for decent Creative Commons artwork I can use for my own PDFs (prettying up my homebrew content), and it's slow and annoying. I was hoping to just copy some names from this PDF...




They, uh, kinda aren't held to different standards.  While there's likely little room to sue for damages, as they'd be small at best, suing for infringement is the same standard -- using without permission.  This isn't even close to fair use, either.  This project is one C&D away from folding due to the art.  Heck, even putting the monsters in WotC trade dress is open to infringement.  They can't get you for making your own monsters, or even publishing or selling your own monsters, but they can get you for making your stat blocks look like theirs.

Again, damages could be small, but litigation is expensive for the defendant, and even a modest claim for damages that gets thrown out can end up costing a person far more in legal and lawyer fees.  This is exactly how copyright trolls make a living, and they do so successfully under far less obvious infringement than this project.


----------



## drjones (Nov 17, 2015)

Xaelvaen said:


> http://thegeniusinc.com/dd-monster-maker-download/?ref=3.0.0  That's a monster generator program.  Its not what Stonestrix uses, but it makes a pretty much perfect png (and other exportables) of the monster stat block.




That's great, I was just going to moan about how the pdf was interesting but I was not sure I could trust the design of the monsters to be relatively balanced.  I miss the 4e adventure tool monster generator.  I will be using this thing now to make some custom variants but what I'm not sure about is keeping the math legit.  This tool has a suggested CR but other than using that, reskinning other monsters, or winging it and fudging things up/down on the fly I'm not sure what to do.


----------



## Guyanthalas (Nov 17, 2015)

drjones said:


> That's great, I was just going to moan about how the pdf was interesting but I was not sure I could trust the design of the monsters to be relatively balanced.  I miss the 4e adventure tool monster generator.  I will be using this thing now to make some custom variants but what I'm not sure about is keeping the math legit.  This tool has a suggested CR but other than using that, reskinning other monsters, or winging it and fudging things up/down on the fly I'm not sure what to do.




I've been doing a lot of monster design work lately (mostly for a Tome of Beasts entry) and it is very much a "more art than science" kind of thing. The guidelines are pretty straight forward on how to do the mathematics behind AC/To-Hit/Damage, which is the important bit anyway. Where it gets a little more... liberal... is the "traits" and "abilities" you give to monsters. I really don't think you can mess it up that badly just following the DMG. After I got done making the monster, I understood the process MUCH better and feel way more comfortable using tools like the one posted in this thread.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Nov 17, 2015)

Ovinomancer said:


> They, uh, kinda aren't held to different standards.  While there's likely little room to sue for damages, as they'd be small at best, suing for infringement is the same standard -- using without permission.  This isn't even close to fair use, either.  This project is one C&D away from folding due to the art.  Heck, even putting the monsters in WotC trade dress is open to infringement.  They can't get you for making your own monsters, or even publishing or selling your own monsters, but they can get you for making your stat blocks look like theirs.
> 
> Again, damages could be small, but litigation is expensive for the defendant, and even a modest claim for damages that gets thrown out can end up costing a person far more in legal and lawyer fees.  This is exactly how copyright trolls make a living, and they do so successfully under far less obvious infringement than this project.



Skipping the are you right or wrong part.  Is there a name of someone to sue?


----------



## Sunseeker (Nov 17, 2015)

Yeah, I've always thought it would be cool to covert some of the stuff from MTG and other fantasy games to D&D, and there's nothing wrong with making the attempt, though the names of the things may be covered by copyright.  However, using art the way they're doing is simply going too far.  

I won't download this and I encourage others to not download this and if you have contact with the creators to suggest they remove the art.


----------



## Jester David (Nov 17, 2015)

Ovinomancer said:


> They, uh, kinda aren't held to different standards.  While there's likely little room to sue for damages, as they'd be small at best, suing for infringement is the same standard -- using without permission.  This isn't even close to fair use, either.  This project is one C&D away from folding due to the art.  Heck, even putting the monsters in WotC trade dress is open to infringement.  They can't get you for making your own monsters, or even publishing or selling your own monsters, but they can get you for making your stat blocks look like theirs.
> 
> Again, damages could be small, but litigation is expensive for the defendant, and even a modest claim for damages that gets thrown out can end up costing a person far more in legal and lawyer fees.  This is exactly how copyright trolls make a living, and they do so successfully under far less obvious infringement than this project.



It falls into the same legal area as fan fiction or fan films. It's almost free advertising for the artist and the game, it gives credit, and it explicitly does not try and make money. No real money is being lost, especially since it doesn't reasonably compete with a published work. 
It's certainly illegal, but targeting it for a lawsuit is an inefficient use of resources and only targets the fans, resulting in negative publicity. 


As for a different standard... I was referring to myself making 5e content for my blog/webcomic 5 Minute Workday, while using creative commons art from Deviantart, which _would _be different as the artists gave implicit permission for use.


----------



## Ovinomancer (Nov 17, 2015)

GMforPowergamers said:


> Skipping the are you right or wrong part.  Is there a name of someone to sue?



Yes.  If the holder of the copyright wishes to pursue, they can subpeona the real names of the participants from the service provider.  Sadly, the internet isn't as anonymous as people seem to think it is. It takes work.


Jester Canuck said:


> It falls into the same legal area as fan fiction or fan films. It's almost free advertising for the artist and the game, it gives credit, and it explicitly does not try and make money. No real money is being lost, especially since it doesn't reasonably compete with a published work.



Fan art and fan fiction are both creative acts, and so enjoy more leeway than copying art directly.

Really, the issue here is the taking of IP that implies that the work is sanctioned by or even produced by the copyright owner.  The trade dress is particularly of issue there.  Also, failure to defend a copyrighted work reduces your ability to protect it in future cases -- even to the point of losing the ability to protect it at all, so the image owners have an interest in protecting their works even if there's no chance of damages.


> It's certainly illegal, but targeting it for a lawsuit is an inefficient use of resources and only targets the fans, resulting in negative publicity.



Granted with a maybe.  The actual blowback might be very small, or it might Streisand.  Hard to say.  Also, if the complaint is directly targeted at only the infringing bits (hey, it's great you guys are making and sharing critters, but you can't use my art/trade dress to do it without permission), then the blowback would be very small indeed.

To put it bluntly, the project is doing something worthwhile, but is going about it in a stupid way.  Most stupid is stealing art.  Only minorly stupid is taking the trade dress when you don't have to.



> As for a different standard... I was referring to myself making 5e content for my blog/webcomic 5 Minute Workday, while using creative commons art from Deviantart, which _would _be different as the artists gave implicit permission for use.



Ah, both cool and very legal of you!


----------



## Corpsetaker (Nov 17, 2015)

Isn't that the sorcerer from Pathfinder?


----------



## Morrus (Nov 17, 2015)

Ovinomancer said:


> Also, failure to defend a copyrighted work reduces your ability to protect it in future cases -- even to the point of losing the ability to protect it at all, so the image owners have an interest in protecting their works even if there's no chance of damages.
> !




One thing that many folks mistake this for though is that "defend" doesn't mean "sue". It means "don't abandon". A polite email asking for correct acknowledgement counts. There's nothing that forces companies to sue people. 

Not that I'm saying that's always an appropriate response; but it is a valid response.


----------



## Ovinomancer (Nov 17, 2015)

Morrus said:


> One thing that many folks mistake this for though is that "defend" doesn't mean "sue". It means "don't abandon". A polite email asking for correct acknowledgement counts. There's nothing that forces companies to sue people.
> 
> Not that I'm saying that's always an appropriate response; but it is a valid response.




Yes, very true.


----------



## Morrus (Nov 17, 2015)

Ovinomancer said:


> Yes, very true.




It's something that's always bugged me a little.  When armchair lawyers proclaims that a company *had* to sue or lose their IP. They never *have* to sue; they choose to sue (well, to be fair, they very rarely do that). They can do a thousand other friendly things rather than sue and still be excellent custodians of their IP.


----------



## Hussar (Nov 17, 2015)

Since they do credit the artists quite prominently in most of the pages, they're at least trying to be aboveboard about it.  Would that be enough to count as protecting the IP?  Might not stop someone from saying, "Hey, please remove that, I don't want you using my art", but, it does protect the artist no?


----------



## Morrus (Nov 18, 2015)

Hussar said:


> Since they do credit the artists quite prominently in most of the pages, they're at least trying to be aboveboard about it.  Would that be enough to count as protecting the IP?  Might not stop someone from saying, "Hey, please remove that, I don't want you using my art", but, it does protect the artist no?




No, the IP owner has to protect their own IP.


----------



## Jester David (Nov 18, 2015)

Corpsetaker said:


> Isn't that the sorcerer from Pathfinder?



It's an image of the iconic sorcerer. Whether or not it was done as fan art or for a book is less apparent.


----------



## Sunseeker (Nov 18, 2015)

Corpsetaker said:


> Isn't that the sorcerer from Pathfinder?




The sorcerer is explicitly art of one of Pathfinder's main characters, Seoni.

 @_*Jester Canuck*_ It is by Federico Musetti, who on the image itsself (http://federicomusetti.deviantart.com/art/Seoni-fan-art-348882356), says that it was not used by Pathfinder, which means control of the image is mostly with him, so you'd have to ask him if he gave permission to use it for something else (which I suspect might be an area of tricky legality).

FYI: that literally took me 10 seconds to find the creator.


----------



## Jester David (Nov 18, 2015)

shidaku said:


> The sorcerer is explicitly art of one of Pathfinder's main characters, Seoni.
> 
> @_*Jester Canuck*_ It is by Federico Musetti, who on the image itsself (http://federicomusetti.deviantart.com/art/Seoni-fan-art-348882356), says that it was not used by Pathfinder, which means control of the image is mostly with him, so you'd have to ask him if he gave permission to use it for something else (which I suspect might be an area of tricky legality).
> 
> FYI: that literally took me 10 seconds to find the creator.




The link to his DA site does not appear to be Creative Commons. It usually says so at the very bottom right if you scroll down far enough. So it's used w/o permission from the creator.


----------



## Nebulous (Nov 18, 2015)

what an amazing little book. I don't understand how all that art is being utilized, but this is what i would have wanted from an official MM2.


----------



## Hussar (Nov 18, 2015)

Nebulous said:


> what an amazing little book. I don't understand how all that art is being utilized, but this is what i would have wanted from an official MM2.




Oh, I think that's not too hard to understand.  it's being used badly.


----------



## evilbob (Nov 19, 2015)

Looking over the content briefly, my first impression is:  wow, you can tell that D&D needs more women in the game.  Especially the fantasy art community - it REALLY needs more women.  For the tiny handful of female monsters, the design aesthetic is the old school, sexist look for every one.  The example given on the first page is a good example of something that wouldn't (and shouldn't) have made the 5.0 MM, and I think the book is stronger for it.


----------



## Greenstone.Walker (Nov 19, 2015)

evilbob said:


> The example given on the first page is a good example of something that wouldn't (and shouldn't) have made the 5.0 MM



That image (the azure mind sculptor?) is very, very Pathfinder-ish. It is Seoni, one of the Pathfinder iconic characters. See more images. Pathfinder art is very sexually dimorphic, something that puts me off the game a lot.


----------



## evilbob (Nov 19, 2015)

Greenstone.Walker said:


> It is Seoni, one of the Pathfinder iconic characters.



Thanks for the info!  Wow, and Pathfinder is only ~6 years old.  I would have guessed an image like that was from the 90s.  The industry is still changing very, very slowly.


----------



## Remathilis (Nov 19, 2015)

evilbob said:


> Thanks for the info!  Wow, and Pathfinder is only ~6 years old.  I would have guessed an image like that was from the 90s.  The industry is still changing very, very slowly.



Pathfinder's art is more complex than Seoni. Out of their iconics, she and the barbarian are rather unclothed, but that is due to cultural elements of their cultures (see those lines on her skin? They're tattoos and culturally important). Other iconics (the cleric, rogue, and paladin) are more traditional in their dress. One of Pathfinder's later iconics (I forget who) is transgender as well. 

Paizo doesn't shy away from skin, but they don't embrace it for cheesecake factors either.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Nov 19, 2015)

I don't understand why people complain about SOME cheese cake, if it isn't ALL that way (and I am far from a pathfinder defender here).

If I take my phone an record a walk through my mall today (and it's about 50 degrees today) I will record women showing more skin then that picture. I will also record men like that... I will also record people in much more clothing, and I bet at least 1 woman in a burka (we have a surprisingly high amount of that), and everything in between. 

If I had a campaign setting drawn, and there were 75 people (with some double ups of the same person in different pics) in my 400 pg book, and 35 are female, and 35 are male, and 5 could be either (I mean really some elves you can't tell) and of those 35 woman 4 of them are dressed exposeing a lot of skin, and 1 of those 4 in one of her 2 shots is depicted as nude, but nothing is shown... people call sexist... the fact that the queen of my heroic nation is a paliden in useable not much skin showing plate... means nothing... those 4 pics mean sexist... by the way if 1 of those 4 women is a barbarian warrior, and next to her is a male in a loincloth, no one will bat an eye at him...


----------



## evilbob (Nov 19, 2015)

Remathilis said:


> Pathfinder's art is more complex than Seoni. Out of their iconics, she and the barbarian are rather unclothed, but that is due to cultural elements of their cultures (see those lines on her skin? They're tattoos and culturally important). Other iconics (the cleric, rogue, and paladin) are more traditional in their dress. One of Pathfinder's later iconics (I forget who) is transgender as well.
> 
> Paizo doesn't shy away from skin, but they don't embrace it for cheesecake factors either.



I'm sure their art is, and I've seen some great examples from them, too - I'm not trying to make broad implications, just talking about this one image.  And they're also doing great work on diversity, I know.  But "cultural" factors don't do anything to justify the fact that this image is problematic on multiple levels.  You can create an image of a woman who is just trying to show off her tattoos... and that ain't it.  This image isn't empowering or trying to make her look strong in any way.  That's an image that is trying to capture a male market segment; nothing more.  Again, I'm not trying to attack Paizo; I'm just saying that for a company that does so well in some places, this particular character/image is impressively bad, and that made me think it had to be much older than it probably is.



GMforPowergamers said:


> If I take my phone an record a walk through my mall today (and it's about 50 degrees today) I will record women showing more skin then that picture.



Those are women choosing to dress the way they want because that's their choice.  The woman in this image was a creation of a man drawn in a way to please men.  Like I said, you can draw women who have agency and who are both empowered and sexy.  But this isn't any of those things:  this is just sexism.

And yeah, just because a woman is queen of a nation doesn't mean she's empowered if she's forced to wear skimpy clothing designed to show off her underboob (and nothing more).  You can write whatever backstory you want but the pose and the clothing are telling a different tale.


----------



## ChrisCarlson (Nov 19, 2015)

evilbob said:


> Those are women choosing to dress the way they want because that's their choice.  The woman in this image was a creation of a man drawn in a way to please men.



I think this statement is both sexist and wrong. The wrong part: You strongly imply images like this women are drawn by men (not always). The sexist part: And that it is done so with the purpose of pleasing _men_ (certainly not always).


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Nov 19, 2015)

evilbob said:


> Those are women choosing to dress the way they want because that's their choice.  The woman in this image was a creation of a man drawn in a way to please men.  Like I said, you can draw women who have agency and who are both empowered and sexy.  But this isn't any of those things:  this is just sexism.
> 
> And yeah, just because a woman is queen of a nation doesn't mean she's empowered if she's forced to wear skimpy clothing designed to show off her underboob (and nothing more).  You can write whatever backstory you want but the pose and the clothing are telling a different tale.





I'm sorry but that's pure crazy. I am a man, my exgirlfriend is a woman (well I guess the fact that it was a girlfriend says that) if she draws a picture, and I draw a picture, it is still a picture...   if the CHARACTER is drawn that way for a reason, and it fits there world view then it's not sexsist....


----------



## evilbob (Nov 19, 2015)

ChrisCarlson said:


> I think this statement is both sexist and wrong. The wrong part: You strongly imply images like this women are drawn by men (not always). The sexist part: And that it is done so with the purpose of pleasing _men_ (certainly not always).



Ha, funny.



GMforPowergamers said:


> if the CHARACTER is drawn that way for a reason, and it fits there world view then it's not sexsist....



But it can be.  The woman in the image on the front page is drawn in a sexist way:  she doesn't have agency, she's drawn in a way to please the presumed male audience.  You can't justify it with backstory; her outfit makes no sense in any practical way.  It's clearly drawn to show off her boobs and her legs - not to show how she's a powerful mage.  (Not to mention her pose and proportions are nearly impossible to achieve on a real person...  Her spine is extremely contorted to help push her boobs out.)

I mean, look at the guy right next to her - it's a perfect counterexample.  He's fully covered, head-to-toe.  His pose is more aggressive and he looks like he's actually about to do something - not just waiting for something to be done to him.  She should look like that.  But why doesn't she?  Because the artist is trying to show off her boobs.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Nov 19, 2015)

evilbob said:


> But it can be.  The woman in the image on the front page is drawn in a sexist way:  she doesn't have agency, she's drawn in a way to please the presumed male audience.



 citation please... since you know the mind of the artest please tell me how you gained this info... is it a sexy picture... sure I can see that, but is it meant to please male or female audiences, or both?



> You can't justify it with backstory; her outfit makes no sense in any practical way.  It's clearly drawn to show off her boobs and her legs - not to show how she's a powerful mage.  (Not to mention her pose and proportions are nearly impossible to achieve on a real person...  Her spine is extremely contorted to help push her boobs out.)




two movies, one staring Jennifer garner, and one staring Peirce Brosnen... both are about retired spys. both have a scene where they are in a bath/shower and someone breaks into there house... compltly naked they kill an assassin, then make a funny one liner about getting dressed... is that sexsist? is it different if male or female? does it matter if it's PG 13 or R?  of course the context matters....


> I mean, look at the guy right next to her - it's a perfect counterexample.  He's fully covered, head-to-toe.  His pose is more aggressive and he looks like he's actually about to do something - not just waiting for something to be done to him.  She should look like that.  But why doesn't she?  Because the artist is trying to show off her boobs.



 I'm starting to think you are sexsist and reading your own thoughts into this...  what I see is a woman saying "Come at me bro" ready to strike down an enemy... it shows power and confidence...


----------



## Radaceus (Nov 22, 2015)

This is good stuff, without the art, though I think within the fan community it should be very possible for up and coming artistic fans to contribute to ( much in the same way the very first MMs were done)

OFF-TOPIC~regarding the sexism conversation:

My wife (who plays in my campaign as a Half-Elf Sorceress) jokes when she levels up that she needs to find a new avatar with less clothing....this is to culminate in the epic levels wearing only a mithril bikini. That is, just like in MMOs, the higher level your character, the less they wear 
She expects this in her heroines, and sure the scantily clad is a running joke, but in seriousness she wants to play this type of amazonian, Boudiccean, Sacajawean, huntress style character. Does she flaunt herself like a harlot in game(s)...nope, but she may like the idea of her raw expressed primal sexuality.

I would be curious to hear other female gamers attitudes toward this genre of Frazzetta/Vellejo styled art, and its depiction for female avatars in RPGs, maybe we should start a thread on it


----------



## Dragoslav (Nov 22, 2015)

Very fine product. Can't wait to download it and distribute it freely among everyone I know.


evilbob said:


> But it can be. The woman in the image on the front page is drawn in a sexist way: she doesn't have agency, she's drawn in a way to please the presumed male audience.



Of course the woman in the picture doesn't have agency: she's a drawing. No actual women were coerced into dressing that way and posing for a photograph in order to produce that image.



evilbob said:


> I mean, look at the guy right next to her - it's a perfect counterexample. He's fully covered, head-to-toe. His pose is more aggressive and he looks like he's actually about to do something - not just waiting for something to be done to him. She should look like that.



She _should _look like that? So you're the official art censor now, are you? I'm sure you would _like _it if she were drawn that way, but that's just your personal taste. Besides, you don't know that she's not "about to do something" -- maybe she's luring her opponent into letting his guard down so she can cast a spell or unexpectedly pull a dagger against his throat. Your interpretation is very disempowering.


----------



## Pants (Nov 22, 2015)

Jester Canuck said:


> But I hold myself to a different standard and am crawling through Deviantart looking for decent Creative Commons artwork I can use for my own PDFs (prettying up my homebrew content), and it's slow and annoying. I was hoping to just copy some names from this PDF...



I forgot to respond to this earlier, but this is a great idea, but how do you know what is Creative Commons? I have a bunch of monsters that I've to slap into a pdf and release for free on the interwebs and a bit of artwork would a nice addition, but I don't want to step on anyone's toes (legally speaking).


----------



## Jester David (Nov 23, 2015)

Pants said:


> I forgot to respond to this earlier, but this is a great idea, but how do you know what is Creative Commons? I have a bunch of monsters that I've to slap into a pdf and release for free on the interwebs and a bit of artwork would a nice addition, but I don't want to step on anyone's toes (legally speaking).



The very bottom right of a deviantart image will say. It'll generally be pretty visible if someone is making content Creative Commons. Just look for the logo.


----------

