• 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!

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

A WizKids miniature reveals the iconic character's face for the first time.

Screenshot 2024-05-07 at 22.27.52.png


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.

Screenshot 2024-05-07 at 22.31.00.png

paladininhell.jpg

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.


redboxwarriormini.png




s-l1600.jpg

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.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad



Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
There is simply no debate to be had on this:
If 'intent of the author' overrides 'what's actually in the image/book/music etc.' in your mind, I assume you say 'Jiff? when referring to '.gif" files?

Whatever Elmore intended to paint, there is no gender in the painting. None whatevsoever. It's not there. Show me it. You can't. Because it's not there. That painting shows no gender.

The painting is the painting. No more, no less. It's not what's in Elmore's head, in your head, in my head, in my dog's head--it's what's on the canvas. That's it. That's why the phrase 'death of the author' was invented. Whatever the creator intended to create, that canvas is what they created.

That's how art works. You don't get to invent stuff not in the painting and declare that as objective fact.

Therefore, there is debate to be had on this, and on every other piece of art in the world. Because every piece of art is interpreted differently by every person. Yeah, sure, I always interpreted the figure as male. WizKids has interpreted it otherwise. That is, as I said, is how art works. Neither interpretation contradicts anything on that canvas. All they contradict is your interpretation.

Anybody who declares that there is no debate on art simply doesn't understand what art is. And, indeed, what the point of art is. It's there to make you think, feel, and... interpret.

Now there's no debate on that.
 




Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Anyone who was looking forward to having the actual character in the 50th celebration set is what I had in mind while typing.
Before you saw this article were you eagerly anticipating a male version of the character from the red box set in WizKid's 50th Anniversary Icons of the Realms booster sets?

Were you? Really?

And do you feel 'excluded'?

Do you? Really?
 

JEB

Legend
Have we seen the original press release? I was under the impression that the "reveal" was ComicBook.com being desperate for clicks.
I can't find any press release - if there was one, it's not from a place easily Googled. In fact, the few other sites mentioning this all cite comicbook.com as the source. So it appears this was something WizKids told just comicbook.com.

In any case, comicbook.com definitely attributed "purposefully and clearly" to WizKids in the article, it's a direct quote. The rest could indeed be clickbait-y spin, but unless they're intentionally misquoting them that's direct from WizKids.
 

Clint_L

Hero
It's not at anyone's expense. If you want a miniature of a sexy slender lady in a dress with a slit up to her waist, or in a chainmail halter top, WizKids and others have produced metric ***loads of them for you to buy. A burly barbarian woman is harder to find as a miniature, so this helps expand the options.

If you view greater diversity of representation as "exclusionary"... perhaps you should consider some other perspectives.
Staying out of the conversation about the correctness of this decision, as I already made my opinion clear. As a hardcore miniature collector, I couldn't agree more. I don't need another Conan-style warrior - I could probably fill a shoebox. A brawny woman is much more useful to me.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top