D&D General D&D Red Box: Who Is The Warrior?

The Dungeons & Dragons Red Box, famously illustrated by Larry Elmore in 1983, featured cover art of a warrior fighting a red dragon. The piece is an iconic part of D&D's history.

WizKids is creating a 50th Anniversary D&D miniatures set for the D&D Icons of the Realms line which includes models based on classic art from the game, such as the AD&D Player's Handbook's famous 'A Paladin In Hell' piece by David Sutherland in 1978, along with various monsters and other iconic images. The set will be available in July 2024.

Amongst the collection is Elmore's dragon-fighting warrior. This character has only ever been seen from behind, and has never been named or identified. However, WizKids’ miniature gives us our first look at them from the front. The warrior is a woman; the view from behind is identical to the original art, while the view from the front--the first time the character's face has ever been seen--is, as WizKids told ComicBook.com, "purposefully and clearly" a woman. This will be one of 10 secret rare miniatures included in the D&D Icons of the Realms: 50th Anniversary booster boxes.

The original artist, Larry Elmore, says otherwise. (Update—the linked post has since been edited).

It's a man!

Gary didn't know what he wanted, all he wanted was something simple that would jump out at you. He wanted a male warrior. If it was a woman, you would know it for I'm pretty famous for painting women.

There was never a question in all these years about the male warrior.

No one thought it was a female warrior. "Whoever thought it was a female warrior is quite crazy and do not know what they are talking about."

This is stupid. I painted it, I should know.

- Larry Elmore​

Whether or not Elmore's intent was for the character to be a man, it seems that officially she's a woman. Either way, it's an awesome miniature. And for those who love the art, you can buy a print from Larry Elmore's official website.

 

[ezo]

Huh. Interesting.

I always thought it was the same Warrior on all of the boxed sets:

View attachment 361839

View attachment 361836

View attachment 361837

View attachment 361838

The boxed sets take you from Level 1 all the way to Level 36, so I figured that was what the artist was trying to illustrate on the covers: the Warrior's gear gets better, the dragons get larger, and the background gets broader and more fantastic as the levels of the game increase.

I guess that's why I've always assumed it was a male warrior, because on the cover of the final boxed set we can see the warrior's "final form," a king riding a gold dragon. That was my own interpretation, anyway.

I'm not wounded by someone else interpreting the artwork differently, though. Women are warriors too.

LOL I always thoought the same thing! You can even include the male from the immortals set:

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I just thought it was a funny and clever take on what the character's front might look like...

 

[Clint_L]

I love this miniature and I don't care what Elmore thinks, in the least. The meaning of art is up to the audience, not the artist, and in this case he was doing work for hire, anyway. Whatever he intended is irrelevant. On top of that, this miniature is not his art, it is a miniature based upon his art.

I think he's made himself look silly. Interpreting this art as a woman, rather than another typical Conan rip-off, makes it ten times cooler. He should have quietly taken the win.

 

[AstroCat]

The disrespect is stunning and grotesque. It is a male warrior as intended, and always has been. Everything must be ruined, right? That's the end goal, total wasteland.

 

[comrade raoul]

My only disappointment is that this will be another stupid thing for TTRPG reactionaries to be endlessly outraged about. In the past I would have found the nose-tweaking hilarious. I think now I just find it tedious.

The miniature is fine. Elmore's response is fine. WizKids is fine for making a miniature "purposefully and clearly a woman" and Elmore is fine for saying he intended the artwork to depict a man. Neither of these things are big deals, and in a sane world neither of them would be news.

But this is not a sane world.

But there are some sane posters!

 

[Yaarel]

Heh. When I look at the Red Box image, and am told the warrior is a woman, I cant unsee it.

The image does read as a woman. Regardless of the artists intent.

In this day and age, where about half the players are women, a serious adventurer who happens to be a woman is appreciated. That this is a classic image, even more so.

 

[Reynard]

Heh. When I look at the Red Box image, and am told the warrior is a woman, I cant unsee it.

It image does read as a woman. Regardless of the artists intent.

In this day and age, where about half the players are women, a serious adventurer who happens to be a woman is appreciated. That this is a classic image, even more so.

While I suppose it is possible to read that figure as female in 2024, in the context of the time it was created it absolutely does not read as female.

 

[Yaarel]

While I suppose it is possible to read that figure as female in 2024, in the context of the time it was created it absolutely does not read as female.

In the context of its time, especially with Elmore as the artist, one can presume the figure is a man. If the figure were a woman, she would be overtly gorgeous, even wearing a chainmail bikini.

But in our century today, we have all seen women wrestlers and combatants, and many women actors playing such roles.

When I look at the image, she does read as a woman. WizKids made good call.


For the record, I like sexy artwork. Heh, I frown on puritanical prudes.

WotC D&D needs to include sexy artwork, portraying men and women, heroically, in contexts where the image makes sense.

 

[Lidgar]

I like it but get where Larry is coming from given it’s his original creation. That said, the hubbub this causes I’m sure will benefit both parties in terms of sales…

 

[ezo]

Actually, why does it have to be a man or a woman??? We have so many options after all...