Increased boob quotient

[buzz]

I've noticed that the covers for TMW and FHG2 both feature some impressive female cleavage. Is this a new trend? Just curious.

[Nyrath]

I've noticed that the covers for TMW and FHG2 both feature some impressive female cleavage. Is this a new trend? Just curious.
{enter MCP mode}Why do you ask, are you complaining{/MCP mode}:D

More seriously I'd opine that it isn't a trend, just the whim of a couple of cover artists. However, the biggest problem with RPGs is standing out from a crowded shelf full of rival products. The sad fact of the matter is: for the target demographic, such covers attract attention.

[buzz]

{enter MCP mode}Why do you ask, are you complaining{/MCP mode}:D
Not really. Seeing as Witchcraft is hot for the bod of one my characters, I was quite chuffed when I saw the TWM cover. ;)

I realize that, as a male, I can only complain so much about luscious hotties with mega-mams before I look like I'm trying too hard. Still, as used to it as I am in the RPG/geek-fandom universe, I always feel better about companies that don't use boobage to sell books.

Thankfully, DOJ isn't particularly egregious in this regard, so I'm not trying to take them to task. The last two cover previews had fleshy cleavage dead-center, so I simply noticed it.

I think the FHG2 cover is well-done, regardless. (A lot better than TNW, to be honest.)

[Mark Taylor]

I wouldn't worry about the IBQ if I were you. They're both pretty tasteful really. :winkgrin:

[Dynamo]

I've noticed that the covers for TMW and FHG2 both feature some impressive female cleavage.You're concerned about the woman?!? Her companions are dang near naked! Those loin clouts may satisfy the censors, but don't be surprised at the backlash from the undead community.

Oh well, at least they can't complain about showing too much skin.

(Now waiting for the inevitable bone joke.)

[Ben Seeman]

Bone!

[Dynamo]

I see I didn't have to wait long.

[Vanguard00]

From the thread title I thought maybe we'd had an influx of new people to the boards...

...or maybe DoJ was hiring :winkgrin:

Kidding!

[Chris Goodwin]

Nothing new about it. Champions II had plenty of boobage on the front cover, to the point where you could count Flare's nipple bumps.

[Thag13]

I was a little surpised at the cleavage, but not disipointed at all.

Well done cover. The magic user could have been in a complete covered top and still be sexy.

I do wonder what some of our female posters think.

[Turin]

Well either of the covers is less revealing then 95% of Vogue or Cosmopolitan covers. And those magazines are geared/targeted to women.

[Armitage]

Two words:
Avalanche Press.

http://www.avalanchepress.com/hotchicks.php

[Mark Taylor]

Two words:
Avalanche Press.

http://www.avalanchepress.com/hotchicks.php

The two HERO covers in question are far more subtle and tasteful than any of those AP covers. The HERO covers even passed the acid test: my fiancee likes them. :thumbup: (BTW, the AP covers shown on the linked page are a perfect example of what NOT to do if you're a gaming company and you want to elevate gaming above its image of hopeless geekdom). :tsk:

[Toadmaster]

I was a little surpised at the cleavage, but not disipointed at all.

Well done cover. The magic user could have been in a complete covered top and still be sexy.

I do wonder what some of our female posters think.

I don't know but the covers in the link to avalanche look about like the women my wife draws when she does fantasy art, I guess she's just another part of the conspiracy to reduce women to sex objects :tsk:


I guess Tim Allen is right

"Men are pigs, too bad we own everything, grunt grunt grunt"

[cyst13]

Being an American male, I like cleavage as much as the next guy, but I've always found it annoying in fantasy art. Breast fixation is a specifically Western fetish. And even in this hemisphere, it doesn't have all that long a tradition. Very little evidence of it before the Rennaisance. By placing decellotage fashions in fantasy art, it breaks the suspension of disbelief for me. I'm not looking at some fantastic exotic culture. I'm looking at modern American male wish fulfillment. Nothing especially wrong with that. It's just not fantasy. (well, actually it is fantasy, but not the kind I'm writing about)

[rayoman]

Well, considering how much complaints were issued back when C:NM first came out about the boob quotient I would say that I expected more people complaining about the way some of the women were drawn. Either the people complaining back in 1997 have left the boards or they are hypocrites and say nothing about the trend now. Personally, I don't care either way.
:)


{enter MCP mode}Why do you ask, are you complaining{/MCP mode}:D

[Hermit]

Well, usually, but not always, it seems to depend on who's the artist in question. Different ones have different tendancies in how they depict le femme le chest

[rayoman]

Using hemisphere in a reply to a thread named Increased boob quotient might be a little dangerous. I expect some comments about it. :snicker:


hemisphere

[keithcurtis]

Being an American male, I like cleavage as much as the next guy, but I've always found it annoying in fantasy art. Breast fixation is a specifically Western fetish. And even in this hemisphere, it doesn't have all that long a tradition. Very little evidence of it before the Rennaisance. By placing decellotage fashions in fantasy art, it breaks the suspension of disbelief for me. I'm not looking at some fantastic exotic culture. I'm looking at modern American male wish fulfillment. Nothing especially wrong with that. It's just not fantasy. (well, actually it is fantasy, but not the kind I'm writing about)

Well, depending on your definition of the Renaissance, a more-or-less five hundred year tradition is nothing to sneeze at. Our love tradition is younger than that and is pretty endemic to our culture.

And if your audience is primarily American Males, you're going to write and draw for them or you won't be in business long. People might enjoy the Iliad or the Faerie Queene, but in my experience, RPG characters don't act very much like those folks. It takes a conscious and extreme effort to accurately portray mores and traditons from the classical world. Most RPG characters abhore slavery, bigotry and misogyny, but these were normal behaviors back then.

I think the modern fantasy illustration tradition is less than a hundred years old, and the RPG fantasy paradigm only goes back to the 1970's. There is no category of fantasy literature that resembles D&D. It is it's own sub-genre.

All that being said, I like looking at beautiful bodies in my fantasy art. The whole over-genre is rife with idealized and symbolic forms, should the human body be portrayed differently? If you're creating for a modern audience, shouldn't those forms be something a modern audience finds ideal?

Keith "Nothing against boobs*" Curtis

*at this precise moment. Maybe later.


PS. How many times has this thread been done?

[Jhamin]

I for one am hoping this is a trend that does not continue.

While I do like the art in question, I think that you run the risk of having the "art babes" overwhelm the content and feel of the books. People who pick up a book and see lots of pneumatic women (no matter how well drawn) make judgements about where the games priorities are. While Hero has long had a reputation for putting substance over flash, I'd hate for it to gain a reputation as substance with some T&A.

[keithcurtis]

I think the whole thing is pretty much a non-issue. The flesh shown so far has hardly been erotic, only mildly revealing. Far less than the average comic book. Hero has no fears about falling into the silliness of the Avalanche Press link above.

I doubt it's going to make a serious impact one way or another. We hashed this issue out when the first preview pics from FREd were released and it was silly and inconclusive then.

It's a picture on a roleplaying book, no more corruptive or harmful than a thousand other images in your local bookstore.

Actually, I just re-read the list of posts, and feel my response was a little too strong. Most people whio have responded don't seem to see a problem either. Ah well, take this with two grains of salt and flame me in the morning.

Keith "No one complained about my (much more revealing) image in the first Grimoire :)" Curtis

[buzz]

All that being said, I like looking at beautiful bodies in my fantasy art. The whole over-genre is rife with idealized and symbolic forms, should the human body be portrayed differently? If you're creating for a modern audience, shouldn't those forms be something a modern audience finds ideal?
I think there's a difference between "idealized forms" and "lots of cleavage".

[buzz]

It's a picture on a roleplaying book, no more corruptive or harmful than a thousand other images in your local bookstore.
Isn't it possible that those thousands of other images add up to something, though? Is it okay just because "everybody else is doing it"?

Like I said, DOJ isn't much of an offender in this regard; I'm speaking more generally.

[Vanguard00]

Isn't it possible that those thousands of other images add up to something, though? Is it okay just because "everybody else is doing it"?

Like I said, DOJ isn't much of an offender in this regard; I'm speaking more generally.


Trying to put the breast quotient in fantasy art up as a social disease is not only wrong, in my opinion it's a highly contrived and unfounded statement. In short, it's just plain silly. Try and censor the art and you'll soon be censoring the content.

It's fantasy. Elves see in the dark and shoot bows. Dwarves drink and wield axes. Orcs are evil. Barbarians are big and muscular and wear furry underwear. Female fighters wear chainmail bikinis. Evil sorcerers are bald and laugh a lot. Evil sorceresses are hot but cruel looking. And so on...

Details vary from world to world and game to game, but y'all are making WAY too much out of this. Personally, I don't mind a little flesh in my fantasies--er, fantasy books. Art. I mean art.

Crap.

[tabascojunkie]

I don't mind the big boob fantasy art thing. But I can say, for me at least , it doesn't sell books. Awhile back at a game store I picked up a D20 supplement with a "hot chick " on the cover. And I'm 32 not an in the throes of raging hormones teenager. But the content of the book, aside from being D20 which I don't particularly care for, was not impressive at all, and therefore would not have been bought by me, cover notwithstanding. But in HERO some of the big boob art is pretty cool. I like Johnathan Davenport's artwork but just because to me it's a little different, with a semi-cartoon quality. And like Keith said it's nowhere near as provocative as a lot of comics.

[buzz]

Trying to put the breast quotient in fantasy art up as a social disease is not only wrong, in my opinion it's a highly contrived and unfounded statement. In short, it's just plain silly. Try and censor the art and you'll soon be censoring the content.
I generally disagree, and I'm not asking anyone to censor themselves. I'm just questioning the need for it to be so pervasive, and I'm letting DOJ know that it doesn't help them sell books to me. That's all.


It's fantasy.
So what? Why does fantasy (or supers, or SF, or horror, or crime drama...) mean "lots of gratuitous boobs and you gotta just deal"? What does it say about the hobby that Avalanche thinks (maybe even knows) it can sell more books about Viking Scandinavia by putting some squatting, leather-clad, '80s-looking chick with huge mams on the cover? Or that D6 Fantasy, WEG's new flagship FRPG, has a half-naked dominatrix on it's cover?

I find it kind of pathetic. But that's just me, and I know I'm in a minority in the gamer community.

[Vanguard00]

I generally disagree, and I'm not asking anyone to censor themselves. I'm just questioning the need for it to be so pervasive, and I'm letting DOJ know that it doesn't help them sell books to me. That's all.



DoJ has not been particular pervasive in their "breast quotient". Not even close. I have all the books right here and I'm not seeing anything particularly upsetting in any context. Most of the covers, in fact, don't even have a female on it (or the female is in a minor context). In sheer percentages, DoJ is not forwarding the boob quotient.



So what? Why does fantasy (or supers, or SF, or horror, or crime drama...) mean "lots of gratuitous boobs and you gotta just deal"? What does it say about the hobby that Avalanche thinks (maybe even knows) it can sell more books about Viking Scandinavia by putting some squatting, leather-clad, '80s-looking chick with huge mams on the cover? Or that D6 Fantasy, WEG's new flagship FRPG, has a half-naked dominatrix on it's cover?


I'm not talking about Avalanche or anyone else. I'm talking about DoJ/Hero Games. And I never said the fantasy genre (including sci-fi, supers, etc) requires "gratuitous boobs". What I said was that the well-endowed female is a staple of the genre. If DoJ printed all their covers with dwarves I'd be upset. If DoJ printed all their covers with Grond I'd be upset. If DoJ printed all their covers with large-breasted women I'd be upset. They don't, though. They included a couple because it seemed appropriate at the time, and as I've pointed out above, in terms of the number of books they've printed vs. cleavage shots, they're still way ahead of the game.


I find it kind of pathetic. But that's just me, and I know I'm in a minority in the gamer community.


Fair enough. It just seemed that you were looking for answers to the overall problem here, and my opinion is that there isn't a problem with DoJ products. Nor is there really a problem with the art. It's still art, after all, and thus subject to individual tastes. Personally I wouldn't own a Dali or a Picasso or a Rembrandt because I don't like the styles. I never have. But that's what the "cultured elite" think is art, so there ya go.

Within the context of the fantasy genre--and sci-fi and superhero, too--you're gonna see women with well-endowed breasts because that's a perceived ideal look, just like you see muscular men with six-pack abs. If they were playing these games back in the Renaissance Age you'd see the cover with a more Rubenesque female on the front (for example). And she'd probably be naked. But we're here now, with us, in the 21st Century, so you get well-endowed females with little clothing or a lot (but not naked).

Opinions vary, though.

[buzz]

DoJ has not been particular pervasive in their "breast quotient". Not even close.
Oh, I'm not syaing they have been. DOJ's signature artists have been very good about not making every "idealized" woman look like a pneumatic porn star. :) Seeing the boobage on two preview covers in a row just compelled me (however misguided) to post that I noticed it.


Within the context of the fantasy genre--and sci-fi and superhero, too--you're gonna see women with well-endowed breasts because that's a perceived ideal look, just like you see muscular men with six-pack abs.
I have no real problem with a genre tending to depict physical ideals. More that the "ideal" that makes the covers is too often the scantily-clad female version.

And it's not that I really have a problem with it, but rather that it's always a nice surprise to see publishers *not* do it. I'm merely raising some questions, but moreover jut telling DOJ that, as a customer, cleavage doesn't do much to sell me on products. Sometimes, it can even really turn me off.

It's all moot, though. I'll be buying both these books, regardless. I buy every HERO book, regardless. :)

[Enforcer84]

Boobs good.

games good.


Me happy.:D

[John T]

Boobs good.

games good.

Me happy.:D
You're just trying to stir things up, ain'tcha? :angel:

Anyhow, my own .02 is what you'd expect from most artists: big deal. It's either well- or poorly-executed art, and these days I don't (thankfully) see much of the latter on ANY rpg books. Believe me, there has been a LOT of D-grade art associated with rpgs over the years. Even AP's stuff seems well-crafted, though their marketing strategy and visual reference sources are painfully transparent. If they're trying to sell to hormonal teenage males, it'll work.

John T

[Blue]

While as a kid I have purchased Records, Cassettes and CDs for their covers, I honestly have never purchased a gaming book for it's cover. And I never will. And I've not seen anything that I thought was over the line.

In fact, when this post originaly came up, I had to go back and pull my copy to see what was being discussed. Maybe I'm just desensitized to the whole thing.

[buzz]

And I've not seen anything that I thought was over the line.
Have you seen Avalanche's stuff?

[Blue]

Have you seen Avalanche's stuff?
I should clarify: I was referring to Hero's covers.

But yes, I have seen Avalanche's covers, and while they're tawdry, I don't think they're obscene or anything.

[Tymothi]

in all of my 20 something years of rpging, never have I seen a debate that brings a tear to my eye. The comic super heroine or Comic Hotties have all been blessed with mammaries (political correct term for those that are PC oriented ) that could feed baby hippos, since the advent of the gen x er orientated comic (1985 - to present) and even somewhat before that (Frazetta's art is a good example of this). Does it bother me? no.. should it bother anyone? no..art is art, most people do not have a problem with the statue of david and his nude doodle hanging out.


now, what would be kewl is a splash page of the female members of champions, clad in bikini's fighting the most fearless of villians....>FOXBAT!<

[arcady]

Still, as used to it as I am in the RPG/geek-fandom universe, I always feel better about companies that don't use boobage to sell books.Then you'd hate women's magazines.

Sex sells - and it sells better to women than it does to men, especially when it is of women...

You can feed you 'hot-lesbian fantasies' on that for a few weeks... though it's very doubtful the connection is there in that manner.

But, the female form has along been a staple of western art and imagry, whereas the male form seems to have lost it's favor in the west with the ancient Athenians (yeah, I'm -way- oversimplifying here).

Beautiful women in art are frankly the best means out there for increasing sales to women. That it helps sales to men as well is secondary - it has less impact there. I could put action heros all over the covers and get the male buyers just as well - but I'd lose the women.

Women like beefcake, but not to the same degree they seem to like cheesecake. Trying to think here... most of the beefcake imagry I'm remembering that was made to appeal to women had some cheesecake draped around it somewhere - a tactic that works for men as well.

I've read that little boys like looking at boys in action, and that little girls like looking at boys in action as well. But as adults, it seems to flip - men like watching women, and women like watching women, but men still continue to also watch men in action.


The pulp, fantasy, and super genres have always used strongly attractive imagry. There's nothing wrong with that unless you believe our natural sexuality is somehow morally wrong (an assumption I find absurd), and there's really no logical reason to break with tradition.

[arcady]

Either the people complaining back in 1997 have left the boards or they are hypocrites and say nothing about the trend now.Also, sometimes people's opinions change. 7 years is a long time - it is not at all unreasonable to expect a person to be different at the end of that time.

It is however, unreasonable to hold anyone to something they said that far back in the past.

[buzz]

Frazetta's art is a good example of this
Yeah, but Frazetta was good.

[buzz]

Then you'd hate women's magazines.
I generally do, but the nature of women's magazines and what society conditions women to buy brings in a whole 'nother element to this discussion that's probably way off-topic.


The pulp, fantasy, and super genres have always used strongly attractive imagry. There's nothing wrong with that unless you believe our natural sexuality is somehow morally wrong (an assumption I find absurd), and there's really no logical reason to break with tradition.
It's specious reasoning that would make the jump from my concerns about the use of ta-ta's to sell products that have nothing to do with ta-ta's to my having some sort of problem with human sexuality.

To break it down, it's like the difference between Buffy and Charmed. Charmed exists solely as a vehicle to show off (primarily) Alyssa Milano's admittedly gorgeous bod using a setting that's currently "hip" (becasue of Buffy). Buffy is s hip, genre-defining show with wonderful writing that happens to feature very attractive (some, like Willow, who are attractive in unconventional ways, not just because of boobage) people who do often focus, naturally, on issues of sexuality.

Having the opinion that former is lame doesn't mean that one has problems with expressing sexuality. It means one knows the difference between s@!t and shinola.

I know hot bods are a staple of these genres our games focus on. But there are cool ways to reflect this, and lame ways. I only have issues with what I see are the lame ways. I also don't see why it's a given that our approach to this should forever remain the same simply because of precedent.

REMINDER: This really has nothing to do with DOJ at this point. We're talking generalities now.

[Susano]

Yeah, but Frazetta was good.

Is good. He's not dead, y'know.

[Thag13]

I don't remember Frazetta's woemn being that overly busty.

That's just me

Its the wrong topic for me to post on, since I have an actual 5 point rep as a "boob" guy and at one time could look at a Playboy centerfold and tell you name, date of publication and issue.

kinda out of the game now. I save my money to get more RPG books.

is that sad??

[buzz]

Is good. He's not dead, y'know.
:checks Frazetta Web site:

Whew! This is good to know. My bad. :)

[keithcurtis]

[hands Thag13 a pair of glasses]
Look again.
Admittedly, their breasts may look small in comparison to their Gigantic Meaty Posteriors.

Keith "How could someone mistake his Eowyn for a man?!?!?" Curtis


I don't remember Frazetta's woemn being that overly busty.

That's just me

[bobrunnicles]

Of course one reason Avalanche might be taking the artistic approach they have is simply that their subject matter, while something I personally find quote fascinating (historical D&D), might not appeal to your average 16-24 target market male - and hence the covers. A beautiful girl lures them in, then WHAM - hit them in the frontal lobe with a dose of history :)

I mean seriously, it's reaching the point now where to put a female on the cover of a gaming product at all draws criticism or comment, which in DoJ's case is ridiculous. You want cheesecake (besides Avalanche), check out White Wolf's cover for Savant & Sorcerer - that's virtually porn....

Bob

P.S. Frazetta's women have big boobies, they just tend toward the Rubenesque in all their other proportions too.

[buzz]

I mean seriously, it's reaching the point now where to put a female on the cover of a gaming product at all draws criticism or comment, which in DoJ's case is ridiculous.
In DOJ's case, yes. In general, I don't think it's as bad as you say. I think there are just more gamers now who are justifiably annoyed by pandering.


You want cheesecake (besides Avalanche), check out White Wolf's cover for Savant & Sorcerer - that's virtually porn....
A very stylish cover, but, yes, quite lame. But, I guess Exalted is all about the anime feel, so they figured it was about time to branch into hentai... :)

[bobrunnicles]

A very stylish cover, but, yes, quite lame. But, I guess Exalted is all about the anime feel, so they figured it was about time to branch into hentai... :)

But there's no tentacles! How can it be hentai without tentacles?

One thing of note; the girl in question certainly inherited her thighs from Frazetta :)

Bob

[Susano]

I don't remember Frazetta's woemn being that overly busty.


Well, they weren't flat-chested either. For the extreme, look for Frazetta's pen and ink of Queen Sheba.