
Utgardloki |

Utgardloki wrote:Really? Personally, I found it had to many seperate skill check rolls, such as the many variations of the Perform skill. It looked like you'd only get one or two things done each night. Maybe three or four, if you didn't take a break in between and don't bother with snacks.Lord Fyre wrote:I don't know. You'll have to ask the DM. I don't do Porno-Exploitoiva World Settings. But if I can get at least one woman to sign in for my Macho Women with Guns campaign, then you can join, too. But I don't do pornographic campaigns. It would just invoke Too Much Information.Utgardloki wrote:7) Boys like to have fun. Why shouldn't we? And why should a guy's choices be limited to Burkas or Bikinis, between Mary Poppins World and Porno-Exploitoiva World? . . .Can I join that campaign setting? :D
That's exactly what I mean by Too Much Information.
The idea of a campaign setting featuring sexual activities has a certain degree of intruigingness to me. But I don't think it could ever work unless one had a group where they really understood each other.
Every once in a while I can work an idea into a more traditional campaign, such as using the Book of Erotic Fantasy to help define a cleric for a Goddess with the Fertility domain.
As for Seoni, I think people are reading too much sexuality into her. Sure she is drop dead gorgeous and has an intriguing red outfit. (Is Paizo saying that you have to be a Republican to be welcome? Or is Seoni part of the world wide Workers Revolution to bring about the Proletariat Paradise?) But she also looks a bit "unapproachable". She does not look to me like she's looking for male approval and attention.

Utgardloki |

Lindisty wrote:Armoring one's extremities and leaving the vital organs bare is just monumentally stupid for a front-line warrior.So you are calling people that fight with out Armor stupid. How racially superior of you.
There is a difference between fighting without armor (presumably benefiting from dexterity), and fighting with armor that has a wide open space, which looks a bit pointless.
I can see a benefit to having armor with a bare midriff, if that meant part of the body gets protected without the encumberance of covering the waist with metal. Basically it would be a tradeoff of armor vs mobility, that may even make sense for a Barbarian character.
On the other hand much of the open-chested type armor you often see females wear in fantasy art looks pointless. Why cover up much of the body with hard metal, but leave a wide open gap for your enemies? Is there any advantage to this?
On another hand, the sort of "armor" you see characters like Red Sonja wearing should really not be considered armor at all, but as a form of jewelry. Nobody complains that a woman's necklace or bracelet won't protect her from weaponry (unless it is Bracers of Armor or a Necklace of Protection). A chainmail bra should probably be held to jewelry standards instead of armor standards.
Editted because the "Submit Post" button was pressed a little bit too soon

magdalena thiriet |

There is a difference between fighting without armor (presumably benefiting from dexterity), and fighting with armor that has a wide open space, which looks a bit pointless.
QFT. That pic or Aribeth some posts above is a good example of an offender: it leaves plenty of vital body parts open while weighing her down and diminishing the mobility of arms (and probably legs, not visible in the pic).
Fighting without armor makes sense (at least if you modify your tactics to favor this type of fighting, ie. good mobility, ambushes etc.). Fighting with armor makes sense. Combining bad qualities of wearing armor (less mobility) to bad qualities of not wearing an armor (if you get hit, it hurts a lot and potentially kills you) does not make sense.
It is a good thing that art direction would give at least some thought to these matters, even while having cheesecake, beefcake etc. around...as it also does make sense that there are people who would prefer being in various states of undress (like those celtic warriors), or be concerned on how they look, sometimes even giving up some of the practicality (as we all know, these people exist in real world). Having a smart sensible warrior to dress in highly unpractical excuse of an armor would be, well, stupid.
A rough equivalent would be accepting adventure submissions featuring tyrannosaurs in F-14s and underwater ninja tigers. Sure, those would be kewl. But is that really a direction Paizo would want to go? Trying to be what Macho Women with Guns parodied?

KaeYoss |

As for Seoni, I think people are reading too much sexuality into her. Sure she is drop dead gorgeous and has an intriguing red outfit. (Is Paizo saying that you have to be a Republican to be welcome? Or is Seoni part of the world wide Workers Revolution to bring about the Proletariat Paradise?)
All I can say is that I heard her hum There's a red star on the christmas tree.
But she also looks a bit "unapproachable". She does not look to me like she's looking for male approval and attention.
She's taunting us, I say. She knows the effect her physique has on men and uses it like a greatclub.
So you are calling people that fight with out Armor stupid. How racially superior of you.
We call those who use the worst of both worlds stupid. Either go for material protection, or go for mobility. But don't weigh you down and hamper your movements and then leave vital areas of your body vulnerable if you're no longer able to dodge blows that well.
You could use magically or alchemically enhanced glass or similar translucent materials to combine revelation and protection, but you just don't put on your own body weight in armour and then make that armour useless (no, a hindrance) by foregoing the very effect it is supposed to afford you.

![]() |

Dogbert wrote:Boris Vallejo... Luis Royo... Julie Bell... Frank Frazetta... I rest my case.Someone care to explain this one to me? Cant say I recognise any of the names.
They're all pretty famous artists who paint in the fantasy genre. Frank Frazetta and Boris Valejo at least tend to "celebrate" the human form quite a bit in their art, both male and female.
I used to read a bit about Valejo and he was very much into the greek ideal of the body as a thing of beauty. Alot of his paintings are kinda greek influenced.
It's funny, when we look at the staue of David, no one cries pornogrpahy. Or a Reuben, or Gaugan (think I spelled that last one wrong). Art has always celebrated the human form, and this was a piece of art.
The greeks used to race nude and for a good time faught practically nude as well. Imagine what would happen if we were to make an historically accurate depiction of their olympic games say. Heaven forbid it would be considered exploitive!!!!
Scantily clad, impossibly built people have always been a part of fantasy/fiction, from the time of the greek gods through to modern imagry, I don't see that changing anytime soon, despite a slect few people getting bent out of shape about it :)
Cheers

Lindisty |

Sean K Reynolds wrote:it has made me think about future art orders.Sean this is what I feared.... you are allowing yourself to be censored by the self appointed "moral" minority.
If you're attributing that position to me, you might want to go back and actually read what I've been writing, because that right there is a straw man, my friend, and bears absolutely no resemblance to any position I've taken in any of my posts. I've made observations about Paizo's art, and encouraged them to think about their representations of women in their art. I've never once said that they shouldn't be allowed to represent women in any way that they choose to.
So you are calling people that fight with out Armor stupid. How racially superior of you.
Not at all. I'm saying that if one is going to wear armor, it should actually, y'know, function as armor.
If you care to have a civil conversation with me in future posts, I'll welcome it, but the two posts I've quoted here are both hostile and wildly inaccurate in their interpretation of what I've been saying. Dial the hostility down a notch and the reading comprehension up a notch, and we might actually have a reasonable exchange of opinion.

magdalena thiriet |

Boris Vallejo... Luis Royo... Julie Bell... Frank Frazetta... I rest my case.
Never saw the appeal of Luis Royo pics, much too slick and plastic for me...not a big fan of Bell or Vallejo either. Now, Frazetta, I admit, is great, he draws people who actually look like they are flesh and blood.
I would also link here some choice Will Eisner pics from Spirit comics too, but cannot find any good-looking ones, all the search brings up are about the movie...anyway, Sand Sarif is a hottie as many other Eisner women (and some of the men too).
James Sutter Contributor |

Likewise, the choice to make Lem a humorous character rather than a charismatic (and sexualized) male counterpart to Seoni seems to me to reinforce the whole idea that women in Paizo's art are more likely to get the 'cheesecake' treatment than men are.
Umm... you're presuming that we DIDN'T try to sexualize Lem. As we all know, halflings can be damned attractive - just look at Elijah Wood (and I'm not talking about him playing Frodo). If you don't think Lem's a ragin' sexpot himself - just look at that v-necked shirt with the medallions! - then I can only conclude that you're prejudiced against sideburns and hairy feet, in which case I say good day to you, sir! My people will not be discriminated against!
...nah, seriously, as mentioned before, you run into a lot of problems trying to do halfling cheesecake and keeping it from looking like child exploitation. It's not just in fantasy art, either - several of my closest female friends are roughly five feet tall. These girls are TOTALLY HOT by any conventional standards, yet when they get bundled up for winter, they're frequently mistaken for kids half their age. (Two of them went to speak at a middle school a while back and had teachers tell them to get to class. :P)
So yeah - we have to be careful. Which means you'll probably never see Lini as cheesecake, and if you want to see one of the male characters takin' it off, it's probably going to be Valeros (old-school beefcake), Sel (new-school metrosexual goodness), or Ezren (who I suspect is pretty ripped under those robes).
If you want Harsk, well... I'm sure Google can fulfill your needs in ways that Paizo cannot....

Sean K Reynolds Contributor |

Umm... you're presuming that we DIDN'T try to sexualize Lem. As we all know, halflings can be damned attractive - just look at Elijah Wood (and I'm not talking about him playing Frodo). If you don't think Lem's a ragin' sexpot himself - just look at that v-necked shirt with the medallions! - then I can only conclude that you're prejudiced against sideburns and hairy feet, in which case I say good day to you, sir! My people will not be discriminated against!
In other words, when Lem isn't out adventuring.....

Sean K Reynolds Contributor |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Sean this is what I feared.... you are allowing yourself to be censored by the self appointed "moral" minority.
Nah that's not what I mean at all. It just means I'm going to look at our art orders and see if there's anything irrelevantly gratuitous that could be changed. Priestess of Calistria trying to seduce someone = relevant sexiness. Battle scene with blood and gore that happens to have a bosom shot of Seoni = irrelevant sexiness.

Michael Miller 36 |

Sean K Reynolds wrote:it has made me think about future art orders.Sean this is what I feared.... you are allowing yourself to be censored by the self appointed "moral" minority.
Considering the history Paizo has shown over the last two years, I don't see how you can be surprised that they'd take any and all feedback into account. We are the ones paying their paychecks, buying the fruit of their labors and feedback both positive and negative are valuable. Will they necessarily agree with that feedback? Not every time. However the one most important thing Paizo sells is not their gaming books. Its their customer service and responsiveness to the fanbase. The gaming books we buy are a manifestation of that.
Paizo is leading the way in many ways, showing an equality and diversity in their iconics that for the first time has some of my players actually excited about playing characters of a differing ethnicity and culture and I find that amazing.
Overall, I think this is a tempest in a teacup over a relatively minor piece of art. Do I think Paizo should consider the feedback in future art orders? Certainly. Should Paizo begin suddenly censoring themselves? I don't think so. But I also believe there is room for a middle ground. They have done a remarkable job in listening to all of their audience thus far so I don't think they'll fall flat on us anytime soon. Course, that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep them on their toes ;)

Michael Miller 36 |

Nah that's not what I mean at all. It just means I'm going to look at our art orders and see if there's anything irrelevantly gratuitous that could be changed. Priestess of Calistria trying to seduce someone = relevant sexiness. Battle scene with blood and gore that happens to have a bosom shot of Seoni = irrelevant sexiness.
Exactly what I think most of the problem is, there were a couple images like that in the ROTR pathbooks. Indeed, I might even be overstating that, as i can only think of one off the top of my head. However images like that DO tend to draw the eye and their impact gets magnified. I have nothing against sexy art or shapely bodies, but a little goes a long way.

Lord Fyre RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32 |

The 8th Dwarf wrote:Sean this is what I feared.... you are allowing yourself to be censored by the self appointed "moral" minority.Nah that's not what I mean at all. It just means I'm going to look at our art orders and see if there's anything irrelevantly gratuitous that could be changed. Priestess of Calistria trying to seduce someone = relevant sexiness. Battle scene with blood and gore that happens to have a bosom shot of Seoni = irrelevant sexiness.
This is what I feared. Sexiness is almost never irrelevant. :)

Dogbert |

Nah that's not what I mean at all. It just means I'm going to look at our art orders and see if there's anything irrelevantly gratuitous that could be changed. Priestess of Calistria trying to seduce someone = relevant sexiness. Battle scene with blood and gore that happens to have a bosom shot of Seoni = irrelevant sexiness.
Isn't that already letting the self-righteous minorities influence your decisions? Next thing we know Seoni will move to a "less scandalous" outfit.

Utgardloki |

Sean K Reynolds wrote:Nah that's not what I mean at all. It just means I'm going to look at our art orders and see if there's anything irrelevantly gratuitous that could be changed. Priestess of Calistria trying to seduce someone = relevant sexiness. Battle scene with blood and gore that happens to have a bosom shot of Seoni = irrelevant sexiness.Isn't that already letting the self-righteous minorities influence your decisions? Next thing we know Seoni will move to a "less scandalous" outfit.
And I hope she keeps taking her improbable poses. It's just become a part of her character, I think. A Twisted Sorcerer prestige class would be really cool.

The 8th Dwarf |

If you're attributing that position to me, you might want to go back and actually read what I've been writing, because that right there is a straw man, my friend, and bears absolutely no resemblance to any position I've taken in any of my posts.
I do apologise I have gone back and reread your posts. Although I feel that your view and mine differ on several aspects, I respect your view in regards to the functionality and coverage.
I will point you in the direction of early Italian, and Samnite heart plates - essentially a metal disc that sits over the heart.
I will also ask you to consider Roman and Greek dress and parade armour which emphasise the masculine physical attributes such as the pectoral and abdominal muscles. Helmets especially parade cavalry helmets were designed to make the rider more beautiful.
In regards to erotic / sexualised depictions of men in combat and dressed impractically for warfare I suggest that you take a look at some ancient Greek art. The hoplites are usually depicted sans armoured kilt and linothorax (linen breastplate)with their genitalia and buff bodies on display. The Greeks did not fight as depicted in the art but with as much protection as possible.
Contemporary depictions of fire-fighters, ambulance officers, and surf lifesavers posing in the "full Monty" with an conveniently positioned extinguisher, defibrillator or fish for calendars and various women's magazines is using the male sexualised image how is this any different from a dressed Seoni.
Does the depiction of a well muscled grease smeared fire-fighter with nothing but his boots helmet and hose fall under the same category you apply to Seoni?
The point I am trying to make is that it is unfair to take the pictures of Seoni in isolation and I understand that you find the image inappropriate. I have done my best to go through all of the images I could find of Seoni, in regards to the Christmas depiction interpreted this to be a kitsch representation of 1940's christmas cards. Seoni does seem to pout a lot but have also observed her mean crescent kick, blasting foes, conducting mysterious rituals, and in mortal danger.
People use the way they dress as a tool or a weapon. Our internal security people wear dark suits sunglasses and short cropped hair these people project an aura of intimidation both male and female. I have also seen women use the little too high (for business) hem line the extra undone blouse button to distract and unsettle the men they are negotiating with. How is the way that Seoni represented any different to the real world I have met all kinds of people flirtatious, vampy, intimidating, annoying.
I've made observations about Paizo's art, and encouraged them to think about their representations of women in their art. I've never once said that they shouldn't be allowed to represent women in any way that they choose to..
What I am arguing here is that you asserted that a picture was sexist then in the same breath said that you did not condemn them. In my mind after reading (forgive me if I have misinterpreted your position) this you were having a "bet each way" in publishing the picture Paizo is guilty by association but you were also deflecting any retort by saying you do not hold it against them. Sexist, is a powerful word it can crush a business, put people out of work, it is also subjective and culturally based.
So you are calling people that fight with out Armour stupid. How racially superior of you.
Not at all. I'm saying that if one is going to wear armor, it should actually, y'know, function as armor.If you care to have a civil conversation with me in future posts, I'll welcome it, but the two posts I've quoted here are both hostile and wildly inaccurate in their interpretation of what I've been saying. Dial the hostility down a notch and the reading comprehension up a notch, and we might actually have a reasonable exchange of opinion.
I apologise - That was more than childish on my part, in my future posts I will research more and take more time with my answers. Please understand I admire your conviction and your refreshingly articulate arguments. I have no desire to flame you from the boards. I look forward to agreeing or disagreeing with you in future posts.

The O P |
Wow, I fly from New York to LA then to San Diego, spend Christmas, fly to New York, fly to South Beach to work New Years and fly back to New York and my little cute thread becomes this ??
You guys are soo adorable. Really. HUGS
[Has nothing on the Lamashtu worshipping gnoll, human, and werehyena sacrificial orgy in the Osirion book. Still surprised that section survived edits, and amazed it got an illustration. I approve. ;)
And how did you let this little morsel go through without comment ?
TODD YOU ARE A GENOME ROCKSTAR !!
And Mr. Reynolds, as Stephen Corbert would say, "trully you speak words of truthiness".
I for one applaud your point of view and would like to subscribe to your newsletter [as long as there are naughty pics of you on page 6].

![]() |

I will also ask you to consider Roman and Greek dress and parade armour which emphasise the masculine physical attributes such as the pectoral and abdominal muscles. Helmets especially parade cavalry helmets were designed to make the rider more beautiful.
Just to interject for this minor bit of your post, but you did state that these were parade and dress uniforms. Of course they're going to make the wearer look better. That's the whole point of parade and dress uniforms. Form over Function. In battle situations, they would place Function over Form.

![]() |

Lindisty wrote:What I am arguing here is that you asserted that a picture was sexist then in the same breath said that you did not condemn them. In my mind after reading (forgive me if I have misinterpreted your position) this you were having a "bet each way" in publishing the picture Paizo is guilty by association but you were also deflecting any retort by saying you do not hold it against them. Sexist, is a powerful word it can crush a business, put people out of work, it is also subjective and culturally based.
I've made observations about Paizo's art, and encouraged them to think about their representations of women in their art. I've never once said that they shouldn't be allowed to represent women in any way that they choose to.
Yes, labelling a company as sexist or racist can have huge ramifications in our contemporary culture--usually the one doing the labelling gets thoroughly trounced and loudly discredited. Sometimes the company suffers consequences. Noting that sexism or racism is reflected by a single image produced by a company is much less likely to see people put out of work and I don't think Paizo needs to worry.
Lindisty's posts seem very reasonable. She's expressed her preferences and has asked that her voice be one of the many Paizo listens to. I love that Paizo listens to its customers. That's what makes them great.

Pendagast |

The concept of sexist (or sexually repressive) is, like beauty, in the eye of the beholder.
The faith of islam, as a religious belief,covers their women from head to toe, including face and hair.
By design this keeps women from "luring" men by their beauty. Islamics beleive this prevents adultery, rape, lust and dreaming of other mens wives (amoung many other beliefs).
Women of our country (not all but many) beleive that those women are being repressed (the same thing as men being sexist).
So by that definition, totally covered up, or totally hanging out, if a group of women do not like it, they label it as sexually repressive.
The european culture was highly decadent before the settling of the new country. The Puritans (which arguably where the highest volume of settlers here in the new world) spoke out against scantily clad women, and public displays of sexual behavior as being morally wrong.
They were practically stoned in the streets for their beleifs. Puritans came here to the new world, hoping they could practice their beleifs and life style without interference.
Only to land on plymouth rock an find "naked savages".
What did they do? Tried to force them into christianity, and clothe them. A process that was thouroughly humiliating and demeaning to the naitve americans.
See they went from being the minority to the majority (at least in density) and then proceeded to force their beleifs on others, as had been done to them not a year prior.
The real issue here is peoples "opinions".
Barely over 100 years ago, women could not vote, they wore dresses that practically choked them they went so for up their neck and their under-garments were so tight they were known to break womens ribs. A woman could not own property, and her voice could only be heardthrough her husband.
If a widowed woman, or a single woman whose father died, lived in a house alone and did not remarry, it was common custom for that property and home to be taken from her, because by law, women could not own property!
This was changed, because why? women needed to be liberated! (according to women)
The liberation went step by step after that, until the point were in the sixities, women gathered around bonfires to burn their bras like hitler encouraged burning books.
Bra-less hippies bounced all over the streets of this country, arrested for various crimes such as public ludeness to creating a nusiance (basically people noticed they werent wearing bras so they were arrested for it).
Women became more and more scantily clad over the course of the 60s and 70s, until sometime around the 80s government stopped fighting it, stopped sensoring it and the "80s" was seen (by women) as the age of the "empowered woman". In the last 20 years we have seen the empowered woman go from a professional woman who could hold a job as a ceo for first time in history to Jenna Jameson, a porn star with her own porn brand.
The problem is this is what young girls are looking up to, as the defination of "successful"
Men have not done this to women, no man made them burn bras, or go out and vote, in fact both those acts were in defiance of male dominance. Men did not decide a powerful sexually independant woman ment she had all her "equipment" hanging out. Women did. This idea was perpetuated throughout soceity in womens magazines, like redbook, harpers bazar and the like.
Sure Hugh Heffner and Larry (cant remember the guys last name) helped alot, but they did not drug, capture or otherwise force the endless line of women (girls) who wanted to be "recognized as successful" by appearing in their magazines.
Multiple female actresses who became successful in the 80s and 90s were quoted as saying "if you want to be successful you have to be willing to show skin"
Whats mans part in all this? We stopped fighting it, we watched it, we liked it, and now that we are an audience for it, we are being blamed for it?
Balderdash!
IF women dont like it throw on a burkha! cover yourself up, throw out your mini skirts, stop showing your g-string over the top of your jeans that are cut too low (if men do this its called plumbers crack and considered gross) and stop crying about the picture of a non existant fanasty sorceress.

Lindisty |

I do apologise I have gone back and reread your posts. Although I feel that your view and mine differ on several aspects, I respect your view in regards to the functionality and coverage.
I appreciate that. I honestly didn't expect to receive a civil response to that post, and I thank you for re-reading and engaging the conversation with a more reasoned approach.
Contemporary depictions of fire-fighters, ambulance officers, and surf lifesavers posing in the "full Monty" with an conveniently positioned extinguisher, defibrillator or fish for calendars and various women's magazines is using the male sexualised image how is this any different from a dressed Seoni.
I'd say it differs in two respects. 1) It's less common to see men sexualized that way in art than it is to see women sexualized that way in art. Additionally, even when men are sexualized in art, they're usually represented in ways that emphasize their power and ability to act in powerful ways. Women are more often sexualized in ways that represent them as passive objects rather than active subjects. 2) It's not at ALL common to see men represented as sexual objects in art unless that's the point of the art to begin with. By which I mean that it's not the norm to see a depiction of a battle scene with a supine male in an artfully torn costume with his back arched and his lips all pouty while the battle rages around him. That kind of image of females is not at all uncommon.
Those are both generalizations, and obviously there are going to be specific examples that defy them, as with any generalization. I'm not so much discussing specific pieces of art as I am discussing general trends and cultural norms, though.
What I am arguing here is that you asserted that a picture was sexist then in the same breath said that you did not condemn them. In my mind after reading (forgive me if I have misinterpreted your position) this you were having a "bet each way" in publishing the picture Paizo is guilty by association but you were also deflecting any retort by saying you do not hold it against them. Sexist, is a powerful word it can crush a business, put people out of work, it is also subjective and culturally based.
I asserted that Paizo sometimes reflects sexist cultural norms in their art. That's not at all the same as saying that Paizo as a company is sexist, or that all of Paizo's art is sexist. I think they should be aware of cases where they may be reflecting sexist cultural norms in their art and to consider whether that's what they want to do or not. As a company in the business to make money, it may make sense for Paizo to occasionally do that in order to appeal to a particular market. That's their business, and I wouldn't condemn them for making that choice occasionally.
But as a customer, I'm personally far more likely to purchase products that reflect diversity and equality, and I see no reason not to tell them that.

Lindisty |

...nah, seriously, as mentioned before, you run into a lot of problems trying to do halfling cheesecake and keeping it from looking like child exploitation. It's not just in fantasy art, either - several of my closest female friends are roughly five feet tall. These girls are TOTALLY HOT by any conventional standards, yet when they get bundled up for winter, they're frequently mistaken for kids half their age. (Two of them went to speak at a middle school a while back and had teachers tell them to get to class. :P)
So yeah - we have to be careful. Which means you'll probably never see Lini as cheesecake, and if you want to see one of the male characters takin' it off, it's probably going to be Valeros (old-school beefcake), Sel (new-school metrosexual goodness), or Ezren (who I suspect is pretty ripped under those robes).
Fair point. I recognize that it would be a real challenge to present Lem as a 'Casanova' type rather than the humorous prankster. I don't think it's impossible, but I could see why it might dissuade you from making that choice.
If you want Harsk, well... I'm sure Google can fulfill your needs in ways that Paizo cannot....
Well, if you're asking me, I'd rather see Seelah, Sajan, Seltyiel, or Kyra en deshabille than any of the others, but that's just my own personal taste. :)

Lindisty |

Lindisty's posts seem very reasonable. She's expressed her preferences and has asked that her voice be one of the many Paizo listens to. I love that Paizo listens to its customers. That's what makes them great.
Thank you. I'm glad to know that my posts have been clear enough to be interpreted that way by at least some folks here.
And I agree entirely about Paizo's penchant for listening to their customers. There are plenty of companies that I wouldn't bother expressing an opinion to, for the simple reason that I know there'd be no point in doing so. That Paizo pays attention to its customers is one of the things I like best about the company.

![]() |
Granted! This is actually a good point as she's a magic user. "enlarge object" or a localized "enlarge person" could certainly have been at work here. Its not paizo's fault, its Seoni's! ;) (and in fact, if i recall, James Jacobs DID say she started out a lot less spectacularly endowed....)
ah vanity, thy name is Charisma.

Utgardloki |

Let's see what Paizo has been doing. I have here a couple of Pathfinder issues.
#4 has this lady on the cover who looks quasi-islamic, covered just about from head to foot, with a little bit of arm showing, and a scarf wound around her head reminiscent of a style worn in both Islamic and medieval European countries as a sign of modesty. Looking in the back, I see that her name is Kyra. She has plenty of armor and robes over her armor, but it is obvious that she has good-sized breasts. Whether it is because she naturally has large breasts that need to be protected or whether she wants to project an image of femininity under all those robes can not be determined. She is holding a statuette of a winged woman that appears to be topless. Behind her, stone giants throw boulders at people, but the only one who can be seen clearly is a fighter-guy who looks a little alarmed that he's about to be squashed, still has his sword raised to make the best defense that he can.
Two pages in you see the same illustration of the stone giants throwing boulders, but with Kyra out of the way, I can see there is another woman, blond and skinny clad in black leather with two swords, who also looks worried but looks like she is likely to be able to get out of the way.
Page 4 we have our friend Seoni, looking back at the reader while the fighter [Varleros] charges into the battle where Meresiels lies on the ground having just been knocked down, and Kyra looks like she is casting some sort of spell. I don't see anything unbelievable about her pose, although of course she's in that red outfit that emphasizes her sexuality.
Skipping on to page 17, we have Seoni, bent down as she is preparing a spell against two green giants, one of whom is swinging a cow. I would say that her pose is animated, designed to capture energy rather than to titillate. Behind her is someone who looks like a guy wearing the same sort of outfit as Seoni, with a bare back, although the legs are covered and I can't see if the person's chest is covered or not. There is a bit of androgyny, he's probably an elf with long hair, but the back looks muscular enough that I'd guess it to be a male els.
Page 26 we have a harpy jumping down on top of Valeros, with another harpy behind jumping down on a sorceress. The sorceress is a blond with long blue sleeves and that's about all we can see of her. Valeros's sword has just been deflected by the harpy's claw. The harpies are scantily clad, with loin cloths and bands of cloth across their chests -- consistent with portrayals of savage males, except that males don't get their breasts covered. Harpy #1 has her legs apart, which could give a guy some ideas, but it is also consistent with the savage archetype of not really caring about aspects of civilization. Harpy #2 is twisted around so that we can't see her chest and her knees are in contact with each other -- perhaps she is being affected by the sorceress's spell.
A person could certainly see this picture in a Freudian way, or as a picture of two humans being attacked by savage creatures who just want to tear them apart and maybe eat them, later. But who reads Freud, anyway?
Page 39 has Valeros, Merisiel, and a couple of lamias. Lamia #1 is reared up on her hind legs with a whip in her right hand. Lamia #2 is behind her, apparently has just prepared a spell, but is standing in a relaxed pose waiting to see if she should use it. Valeros is on guard with his sword out (What is it with Valeros and his sword?) and a shield on his other arm. One leg is back and one forward in a battle-ready stance. Merisiel is behind and under the sword; she has a blade in one hand, pointed downward. She stands erect and almost relaxed, but apparently ready to plunge that blade if she should choose to do so, presumably at Lamia #1.
Page 43 has Kyra and Seoni, prepared to battle a giant. The giant is bent over; he's just created a crater in the floor with his fist, and is looking around to decide which gal is going to get his second fist. Kyra's back is to us, and she has her sword out and ready. Since all we see is a broad back covered with a patterened blue cloak and a helmet, it is only be reference to the characters in the back that we can identify her as female. Seoni is facing us, with her back to the wall. She tightly holds her glowing staff, ready to swing it as soon as she gets a clear shot.
Page 51 has Kyra and Merisiel fighting another stone giant, with Kyra holding up a holy symbol and a sword. Merisiel is a little bent over; it looks like she's been hurt, badly. But she has a weapon in her hand and she is studying the stone giant's back. I would say Mr. Stone Giant has forgotten Rule #1 of fighting against Rogues. He probably thought that she was out of the fight, and the mistake may well be his last.
All in all, I would say that this is excellent work. A lot of fantasy art portrays characters in a way that makes me wonder just what they are trying to accomplish. (At work, I have a World of Warcraft mouse mat which I think portrays two characters about to end up in a jumbled heap because one guy just decided to simultaneously turn left and then stop to cast a magic missile spell at the darkness.)
I would not say that anything is gratuitous, except perhaps Seoni's poses do not fit in with her personality description of "keeps her emotions tightly bottled". From the pictures, Seoni seems more of an energetic type. She might still be lawful neutral, but she strikes me as more expressive than Kyra or Merisiel.

![]() |

I would not say that anything is gratuitous, except perhaps Seoni's poses do not fit in with her personality description of "keeps her emotions tightly bottled". From the pictures, Seoni seems more of an energetic type. She might still be lawful neutral, but she strikes me as more expressive than Kyra or Merisiel.
This might be a good time to point out that the artists don't have any information other than what we tell them. In a typical art order, we might say, "The iconic sorcerer stands against a pillar as the giant lumbers toward her. One hand is raised and a bolt of fire shoots from her finger to strike the giant in the eye. To her right, the iconic cleric crouches over the iconic fighter, who lies on the ground, badly wounded. The cleric uses glowing golden magic energy to fix the fighter's wounds."
Then, we send along reference for the three; the images Wayne provided us for the covers. We never send anything about the character's alignments or personalities, since that generally would overcomplicate the art order to the point where the artist could get frustrated and we risk bad art.
How each artist interprets those references and our art order is up to each individual artist. So the "sexualization" of a character is very much in the hands of artist; we generally don't specifically ask for sexy unless that's the point of the illustration. By the same extent, we don't ask that all pictures of Seoni be "stern and dour because she keeps her emotions tightly bottled."
Micromanaging art is a great way to get sub par art, so generally, if the art comes in cool (which it usually does) we don't really care (and can't care) if the artist has chosen to increase a character's bodily proportions or the cut of her dress a bit, as long as it's within the threshold of good taste. Whether or not what qualifies as "good taste" to me and to someone else depends on the person, of course.

Utgardloki |

Utgardloki wrote:I would not say that anything is gratuitous, except perhaps Seoni's poses do not fit in with her personality description of "keeps her emotions tightly bottled". From the pictures, Seoni seems more of an energetic type. She might still be lawful neutral, but she strikes me as more expressive than Kyra or Merisiel.This might be a good time to point out that the artists don't have any information other than what we tell them. In a typical art order, we might say, "The iconic sorcerer stands against a pillar as the giant lumbers toward her. One hand is raised and a bolt of fire shoots from her finger to strike the giant in the eye. To her right, the iconic cleric crouches over the iconic fighter, who lies on the ground, badly wounded. The cleric uses glowing golden magic energy to fix the fighter's wounds."
I read something written by Isaac Asimov which said that he used to think that artists were illiterate, but then learned that they were just given "Draw a science fiction book cover" with no clue about what the book was even about. Now things are different, with the artists actually being able to read the manuscript before painting.
As a amateur artist, I think it would be helpful to get a brief description of the character's personality, such as "flirty" or "stoic". But I am not a professional, so I don't know how professionals work best.
As it is, if I were to include Seoni and Merisiel in a campaign, I'd probably switch their personalities to better match the artwork. Easy fix, since my Golarion is not anybody else's Golarion anyway (especially since I have an infinite number of Golarions in my multiverse).
Micromanaging art is a great way to get sub par art, so generally, if the art comes in cool (which it usually does) we don't really care (and can't care) if the artist has chosen to increase a character's bodily proportions or the cut of her dress a bit, as long as it's within the threshold of good taste. Whether or not what qualifies as "good taste" to me and to someone else depends on the person, of course.
You certainly have good art. I do hope that I don't see Seoni being portrayed in the future as a "Ms Spock." Now, if I ever see a picture of Kyra is a miniskirt, I'll start another thread ;-)
(Not to say that Kyra can't wear a miniskirt, just that that would probably provoke comments.)

Nero24200 |

This might be a good time to point out that the artists don't have any information other than what we tell them. In a typical art order, we might say, "The iconic sorcerer stands against a pillar as the giant lumbers toward her. One hand is raised and a bolt of fire shoots from her finger to strike the giant in the eye. To her right, the iconic cleric crouches over the iconic fighter, who lies on the ground, badly wounded. The cleric uses glowing golden magic energy to fix the fighter's wounds."Then, we send along reference for the three; the images Wayne provided us for the covers. We never send anything about the character's alignments or personalities, since that generally would overcomplicate the art order to the point where the artist could get frustrated and we risk bad art.
How each artist interprets those references and our art order is up to each individual artist. So the "sexualization" of a character is very much in the hands of artist; we generally don't specifically ask for sexy unless that's the point of the illustration. By the same extent, we don't ask that all pictures of Seoni be "stern and dour because she keeps her emotions tightly bottled."
Micromanaging art is a great way to get sub par art, so generally, if the art comes in cool (which it usually does) we don't really care (and can't care) if the artist has chosen to increase a character's bodily proportions or the cut of her dress a bit, as long as it's within the threshold of good taste. Whether or not what qualifies as "good taste" to me and to someone else depends on the person, of course.
Sorry, but this contradicts alot of what I've bene taught. I'm studying art and design at collage and the first thing they say is that "If you do work for a client, you meet their requirements first before your own". From a design perspective, knwoing more about the characters i.e Their alignment, their personalities, any specifics trait that might factor in their appearence, or even go as far as asking what theme or idea helped to inspire that character in the first place.
Truthfully, if you're receiving complaints about the art commisioned, it is worth speaking to the artist in question. The biggest aspect for any artist or designer in regards to working with a client is learning to assess how much of the work requires you to hold back and how much work you're left to experiment with.

Utgardloki |

James Jacobs wrote:Sorry, but this contradicts alot of what I've bene taught. I'm studying art and design at collage and the first thing they say is that "If you do work for a client, you meet their requirements first before your own". From a design perspective, knwoing more about the characters i.e Their alignment, their personalities, any specifics trait that might factor in their appearence, or even go as far as...
Micromanaging art is a great way to get sub par art, so generally, if the art comes in cool (which it usually does) we don't really care (and can't care) if the artist has chosen to increase a character's bodily proportions or the cut of her dress a bit, as long as it's within the threshold of good taste. Whether or not what qualifies as "good taste" to me and to someone else depends on the person, of course.
On the other hand, the English Language is notoriously bad at communicating emotional and other continuous states. So saying that Seoni is "dour" might result in an unattractive character. What does a "control freak" look like? How do you draw an "extremely detail-oriented" character?
If I was a professional artist, perhaps reading the descriptions might prove useful. Knowing that she has +18 in Bluff and +14 in Concentration could be handy.
I can see the argument against micromanaging, though. If I were to make my last PC an iconic, I'd say "She is a 4th level monk." I don't how I'd try to convey that she has dark secrets in her past, or tends to be the "moralist" in the group, but also knows how to have fun in a good, clean, family-atmosphere kind of way. I might say "always travels with a collection of monk weapons, but her favored is the 'Katrina's Hook'". Maybe saying "hates evil spellcasters" would be helpful, especially in artwork that depicts her fighting evil spellcasters. However, I've learned that simplicity is usually the best policy.
I think I'm just rambling at this point.

Gurubabaramalamaswami |

Obviously, Paizo leaves a lot of interpretation in the artist's hands. This is a good thing. Two different artists give us two different views of a character.
That said...I wish Paizo would use less of the artists who are obviously strongly influenced by comics and their art style. Comics tend to grossly emphasize attribute like boobs and biceps and whatnot and tend to turn characters into caricatures.
More realistic art is better than cartoony art. In my not so humble opinion. In fact, humble my ass. It's just my opinion.

![]() |

Sorry, but this contradicts alot of what I've bene taught. I'm studying art and design at collage and the first thing they say is that "If you do work for a client, you meet their requirements first before your own". From a design perspective, knwoing more about the characters i.e Their alignment, their personalities, any specifics trait that might factor in their appearence, or even go as far as asking what theme or idea helped to inspire that character in the first place.
Truthfully, if you're receiving complaints about the art commisioned, it is worth speaking to the artist in question. The biggest aspect for any artist or designer in regards to working with a client is learning to assess how much of the work requires you to hold back and how much work you're left to experiment with.
It's true, to be honest. And it bears noting. Artists who work well with what we give them get continued jobs from us. Folk like Wayne Reynolds, Eva Widermann, Ben Wootten, and the other regulars you see in Pathfinder are regulars not only because they're great artists, but because the actually "GET" Pathfinder. They do indeed give us what we want, and in some cases they're so good at it that we barely have to art direct some of them at all at times. Other artists who are good but don't follow our art orders as well generally find that we don't ask them to do work for us in the future.
That said, the game itself is super complicated. We can't expect all of our artists to know the game inside and out, although it helps. Similarly, we can't expect our adventure authors to be artistic and capable of turning over map orders that are attractive and clear and well drawn, but if they do, it helps. The BEST artists/authors are the ones who excel in multiple areas.
And it's also worth pointing out that, for all the sound and fury over this particular thread, there are actually very VERY few complaints about the Christmas Seoni. Especially considering that I suspect that picture went out to over a hundred thousand people...
That said, we HAVE had a lot of complaints about the "cartoony" art that sometimes appeared in Pathfinder in the first few volumes. While I actually like a lot of that "cartoony" art, it doesn't fit the look and feel of Pathifnder, and a lot of customers didn't want that kind of art in there, and in that example, we have drifted away from that style in our products. So we DO listen to complaints and make changes... but this thread is to a certain extent a tempest in a teapot.

![]() |

Obviously, Paizo leaves a lot of interpretation in the artist's hands. This is a good thing. Two different artists give us two different views of a character.
That said...I wish Paizo would use less of the artists who are obviously strongly influenced by comics and their art style. Comics tend to grossly emphasize attribute like boobs and biceps and whatnot and tend to turn characters into caricatures.
More realistic art is better than cartoony art. In my not so humble opinion. In fact, humble my ass. It's just my opinion.
Some people have called Wayne Reynolds' art "comic booky." If that's true, then I suppose I like comic book art an AWFUL lot.
Realistic art is still art; and being art, one person's realistic art is another person's garbage. Without providing specific examples and naming specific artists whose styles you consider to be realistic... this kind of feedback isn't really useful...

![]() |

One more thing.
My friend Sean Glenn is a brilliant art director. He's the guy who helped develop the look for the 3rd Edition D&D books, and the one who developed the look of the Dragon and Dungeon relaunches back in issues #323 and #114 respectively. And when I first started working at Paizo, he gave me some incredibly useful advice that basically boiled down to this:
"Let the artist be the artist."
In other words, unless you're an artist and/or have training in graphic design and art direction, don't micromanage and try to second guess the art. It's an unusual position, to an extent, to be an RPG designer/developer, in which you're the one who creates the world and its adventures and everything, but unless you're also the artist, the actual LOOK of that world is something that's provided by someone else. And often, that person has some great ideas on how to make your ideas even better. If you're lucky, you get an art director who knows how to get the right artists for the job, and Paizo's been lucky that way with Sean for the magazines, and now Sarah Robinsion for Pathfinder.
Time and time again, I've seen editors get overly involved in the art side of things and try to micromanage things. And in almost every case, the result is sub-par art, because the art director and artists have to remake images over and over and get frustrated and fed up.

Dogbert |

*previous paragraphs most important for context but too long, scroll up to original for details*
Whats mans part in all this? We stopped fighting it, we watched it, we liked it, and now that we are an audience for it, we are being blamed for it?
Balderdash!
IF women dont like it throw on a burkha! cover yourself up, throw out your mini skirts, stop showing your g-string over the top of your jeans that are cut too low (if men do this its called plumbers crack and considered gross) and stop crying about the picture of a non existant fanasty sorceress.
Pendagast, as an enemy of double morals I declare you my newest best friend, and I salute you!
...All this over a X-Mas card...
And lo I propose a new addendum for the Flag Post options: "It's hogwash".

Disciple of Sakura |

I understand that alot of people didn't like 'cartoony art', but I for one really liked the races layout in the gazeteer/pathfinder #3, etc.
Who was the artist for that, Arnold Tsang I think?
Either way I love clear art, too realistic can get too cluttered, etc. So it all has it's pros & cons.
I am a huge fan of art that some would consider "cartoony," what with being a big fan of anime and manga art. I have noticed that a great deal of RPG fans are really, vehemently opposed to art that isn't trying its best to be "realistic," though a great deal of art isn't exactly realistic to begin with. It's something of a frustration to me that a great deal of art that I've liked in books (like the races line-up in the Beta, for example), is decried by others and is often driven out of my favorite RPGs. At one point, I wanted to pursue a career as an artist for RPGs and other fantasy illustrations, but my style does tend towards a less photo-real approach, and I realized that I really wasn't going to get to do art that I enjoyed doing for people I wanted to do it for, because of all the negative sentiments from fans who are really tied to a particular style. It was a bit depressing, honestly.
Now, I understand that there may be particular considerations for art that make art lean in one direction or the other, but writing off a style "because it has no place in my RPG" as I've heard several times, just doesn't sit with me.

![]() |

Maybe we should just use The Order of the Stick artist. It's very hard to make them sexified. Someone would still have their soap box.
I like the art work that we have now. I got into the hobby when Elmore was the artist to have and Conan movies were the rage. Matter of fact if it hadn't been for Boris and some Heavy Metal magazines I probabily would not even be playing.
And James I am still waiting for my Hotties of Golarion Calendar.

Utgardloki |

Utgardloki wrote:There is a difference between fighting without armor (presumably benefiting from dexterity), and fighting with armor that has a wide open space, which looks a bit pointless.QFT. That pic or Aribeth some posts above is a good example of an offender: it leaves plenty of vital body parts open while weighing her down and diminishing the mobility of arms (and probably legs, not visible in the pic).
Fighting without armor makes sense (at least if you modify your tactics to favor this type of fighting, ie. good mobility, ambushes etc.). Fighting with armor makes sense. Combining bad qualities of wearing armor (less mobility) to bad qualities of not wearing an armor (if you get hit, it hurts a lot and potentially kills you) does not make sense.
On the other hand, in Jared Diamond's book _The Third Chimpanzee_, he describes something called "stotting", in which an animal will do something that seems counterproductive, in order to prove that he really, really, excells at something (such as strength or running). This is why some species of birds evolve such heavy tails to impress the ladies -- if a bird can carry that much around, he must be strong.
Diamond applies the same logic to phenomenon like drinking alchohol. Alchohol is a poison, but a man who can drink a lot of it and still fight is obviously a bad-ass and a superior mate to one who won't touch the stuff.
A similar argument might apply to armor. A guy with a big chunk cut out of his armor is obviously an excellent warrior since he can leave a vulnerability and still ensure that nobody takes him down.
Of course, this is primarily "guy" phenomenon, as in you usually don't see females act this way. But, we're in the era of ERA, women can do anything that men can do.
And of course, this logic is totally ignoring the fact that in fantasy art it is usually the female warriors who have the impractical gaps in their armor, not the male warriors.
Reminds me of an ancient article in Dragon Magazine, back in the early 1980s, which was titled "Women Want Equality". It was underneath a picture of a busty female in leather armor that had a wide and tightly laced gap right in front. I've always felt like copying that picture with the title, and writing underneath it: "and enough leather to finish this armor."

Ismellmonkey |

One more thing.
In other words, unless you're an artist and/or have training in graphic design and art direction, don't micromanage and try to second guess the art.
Ha ha, as it so happens I am in fact a graphic designer. However, most of people I know in my field are actually less critical of artwork then laymen, if you will. The reason being is we appreciate the tight time constants, nearly belligerent clients, and general difficulty in putting out a piece of really good work (one both you and the client likes).
Also, I find that in life one has to make the occasional compromise, and art isn't any different in that regard.
Otherwise I have nothing more to ad to the discussion.