Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Red Box: Who Is The Warrior?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Nathaniel Lee" data-source="post: 9339885" data-attributes="member: 6948827"><p>I think Starbuck in the reimagined <em>Galactica</em> is a great example of when it's nonsensical to get outraged about changing an arguably significant aspect of a character's identity. I think another example of silly outrage is all the hate that the <em>Lord of the Rings</em> television series got from some quarters about the "audacity" of including non-"white" elves. Reinterpretations, updates, changes in lore (e.g. adding females to the previously "all male" unit in Warhammer 40k), etc. are all things that <em>should</em> happen to improve the sorry state of representation that's prevalent through much of our entertainment.</p><p></p><p>I don't think that's exactly an analog to this situation, though. This set hasn't been promoted as a "reinterpretation" of the classic NPCs and monsters. It's apparent that they're banking on the nostalgia factor, the 50th anniversary, etc. to get people to buy into this set, and they've strongly implied, if not necessarily outright said, that the "classic" miniatures in the set are the physical representations of all those iconic pieces of art. Even if they didn't literally say "this miniature is that very exact character on the red box cover," that's how many people are going to understand it. Not a reinterpretation or reimagination, but that character, which we know from Elmore's statement (if he's to be believed) was commissioned with the intent of being a man and that he created as a man.</p><p></p><p>Individuals of course can have interpreted that character any way they want, and there was a degree of intentional ambiguity there, but we know what Elmore's intent was, we know what Gygax's request was, and I don't think it's too much of a stretch to state that the overwhelming majority of people who viewed that artwork at the time interpreted it as a man (due to prevalent stereotypes, biases, etc., yes, but nonetheless that was the most likely interpretation of the audience in that era).</p><p></p><p>Personally, I think that a better analog for Starbuck, the elves, etc. would be the modern versions of classic modules, which are either reimaginations of the originals or are homages that are heavily influenced by them, but aren't supposed to be and don't purport to be the exact same adventure, despite the same title.</p><p></p><p>This appears to be the very first time that the character has been put into a physical statue/miniature. It's part of a set trying to take advantage of people's nostalgia, celebrating the 50th anniversary of the original game, included alongside tons of other miniatures that overwhelmingly seem to be leaning on accuracy to the classic artwork. It just seems like an odd choice, given (as others have brought up) so many other iconic female characters through the earlier history of the game, to decide to reinterpret this particular one.</p><p></p><p>But, hey, it's Wizard's IP, and obviously they can ultimately do whatever they want.</p><p></p><p>I'm definitely in the camp of this being not nearly as big a deal as some might make it out to be. I certainly understand Elmore's position on it. I certainly understand other's harsh positions on it. The decision doesn't make me hate the set or even the miniature. I'm still buying the minis when they come out, and honestly it's the first set in a pretty long time where I felt motivated to actually buy a brick.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Nathaniel Lee, post: 9339885, member: 6948827"] I think Starbuck in the reimagined [I]Galactica[/I] is a great example of when it's nonsensical to get outraged about changing an arguably significant aspect of a character's identity. I think another example of silly outrage is all the hate that the [I]Lord of the Rings[/I] television series got from some quarters about the "audacity" of including non-"white" elves. Reinterpretations, updates, changes in lore (e.g. adding females to the previously "all male" unit in Warhammer 40k), etc. are all things that [I]should[/I] happen to improve the sorry state of representation that's prevalent through much of our entertainment. I don't think that's exactly an analog to this situation, though. This set hasn't been promoted as a "reinterpretation" of the classic NPCs and monsters. It's apparent that they're banking on the nostalgia factor, the 50th anniversary, etc. to get people to buy into this set, and they've strongly implied, if not necessarily outright said, that the "classic" miniatures in the set are the physical representations of all those iconic pieces of art. Even if they didn't literally say "this miniature is that very exact character on the red box cover," that's how many people are going to understand it. Not a reinterpretation or reimagination, but that character, which we know from Elmore's statement (if he's to be believed) was commissioned with the intent of being a man and that he created as a man. Individuals of course can have interpreted that character any way they want, and there was a degree of intentional ambiguity there, but we know what Elmore's intent was, we know what Gygax's request was, and I don't think it's too much of a stretch to state that the overwhelming majority of people who viewed that artwork at the time interpreted it as a man (due to prevalent stereotypes, biases, etc., yes, but nonetheless that was the most likely interpretation of the audience in that era). Personally, I think that a better analog for Starbuck, the elves, etc. would be the modern versions of classic modules, which are either reimaginations of the originals or are homages that are heavily influenced by them, but aren't supposed to be and don't purport to be the exact same adventure, despite the same title. This appears to be the very first time that the character has been put into a physical statue/miniature. It's part of a set trying to take advantage of people's nostalgia, celebrating the 50th anniversary of the original game, included alongside tons of other miniatures that overwhelmingly seem to be leaning on accuracy to the classic artwork. It just seems like an odd choice, given (as others have brought up) so many other iconic female characters through the earlier history of the game, to decide to reinterpret this particular one. But, hey, it's Wizard's IP, and obviously they can ultimately do whatever they want. I'm definitely in the camp of this being not nearly as big a deal as some might make it out to be. I certainly understand Elmore's position on it. I certainly understand other's harsh positions on it. The decision doesn't make me hate the set or even the miniature. I'm still buying the minis when they come out, and honestly it's the first set in a pretty long time where I felt motivated to actually buy a brick. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Red Box: Who Is The Warrior?
Top