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.

 

[jayoungr]

Not exactly, no.

Didn't even imply it. My position is that, because of the nature of this particular project, they should have respected the vision of the original artist in this specific case.

 

[Bedrockgames]

More than one person in the thread has mentioned they interpreted the character as a woman. It is fair to extrapolate we didn't all seem to know the same thing.

We all knew it was a man, the same way all critics agree the Godfather is a great movie. Maybe three percent of critics think the the Godfather stinks, but that doesn't mean there has been a persistent debate about whether the Godfather is a great movie or not. I responded to people who posted that they thought the character was a woman. I am sure some people did. The issue I was taking was them acting like this was a big mystery or debate, when it was never a topic you heard anyone talk about (and everyone seemed to be in agreement it was a male fighter on the cover).

 

[Distracted DM]

I feel like OP needs to their his post to include Elmore's updated post- it seems like he was asked the question out of context and/or reconsidered what he had to say about it. Having folk see the updated post might clarify things.

View attachment 362119

@Morrus ^^^

 

[dbolack]

We all knew it was a man, the same way all critics agree the Godfather is a great movie. Maybe three percent of critics think the the Godfather stinks, but that doesn't mean there has been a persistent debate about whether the Godfather is a great movie or not. I responded to people who posted that they thought the character was a woman. I am sure some people did. The issue I was taking was them acting like this was a big mystery or debate, when it was never a topic you heard anyone talk about (and everyone seemed to be in agreement it was a male fighter on the cover).

Mystery or debate? No. Ambiguous enough that not everyone draws the same conclusion? Absolutely. It is unfortunate you can't seem to see that.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

We all knew it was a man, the same way all critics agree the Godfather is a great movie. Maybe three percent of critics think the the Godfather stinks, but that doesn't mean there has been a persistent debate about whether the Godfather is a great movie or not. I responded to people who posted that they thought the character was a woman. I am sure some people did. The issue I was taking was them acting like this was a big mystery or debate, when it was never a topic you heard anyone talk about (and everyone seemed to be in agreement it was a male fighter on the cover).

It insists upon itself.

 

[dbolack]

Didn't even imply it. My position is that, because of the nature of this particular project, they should have respected the vision of the original artist in this specific case.

You know, that's fair. I did respond to you though addressing the general sentiment that frankly used much more hyperbolic language than yours. I should have pointed that out more directly, and sooner.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Mystery or debate? No. Ambiguous enough that not everyone draws the same conclusion? Absolutely. It is unfortunate you can't seem to see that.

I wouldn't agree the piece looks ambiguous, especially for the time and the artist. But I would agree that not everyone would draw the same conclusion. I just think it is a little silly to assert there was large scale confusion over it

 

[CellarHeroes]

I've never been one for illustrations, unless it was a comic strip.
When I was a kid the only thing I really noticed was the big dragon.
Later on I was able to see the original print in Frank's living room. It was then that I really noticed the fighter, and I had commented on how cool it was that The Fighter's back is to the audience so we could imagine for ourselves who The Fighter is.

 

[Mistwell]

It has everything to do with it. The whole controversy in the OGL was lawyers saying that the D&D game was THEIR IP and they didn’t want people making more than they did off the IP. They were bringing everything back in house similar to the 3-4e transition. For a company like Hasbro it’s all IP.

Nothing you just said has anything to do with this topic. If you want to discuss the OGL, find another thread (like the currently active thread about that OGL issue, which isn't this thread). They have an active, actually profitable licensing agreement with WizKids, not a passive agreement like the OGL which sees no direct monies. Nothing about this topic relates to what you're mentioning.

We don't know if Wizards exercised approval authority over making this figure female rather than male. Anything else is speculation.

 

[Azzy]

I wouldn't agree the piece looks ambiguous, especially for the time and the artist. But I would agree that not everyone would draw the same conclusion. I just think it is a little silly to assert there was large scale confusion over it

Who is asserting such a thing?