D&D 50th Anniversary Miniatures

[tdenmark]

Wizkids announced they are making miniatures based on classic D&D art to celebrate the 50th anniversary.






link

[Zenopus]

Nice!

In case any one missed it, the Dragon, Blue Wizard and Green Knight are from the cover of Holmes Basic, the Paladin and Fiend are from the Paladin in Hell illustration in the AD&D PHB, each by Dave Sutherland.

[tdenmark]

I have to say, they look very accurate. Especially that red dragon.

[Morandir]

They're really nice, but from the looks of it only the dragon can be purchased individually. The rest are in random booster packs so the only way to get exactly what you want is on the secondary market at inflated prices. That makes it a no for me, sadly.

[DungeonDevil]

Mar 9, 2024 22:09:18 GMT -6 Morandir said:

They're really nice, but from the looks of it only the dragon can be purchased individually. The rest are in random booster packs so the only way to get exactly what you want is on the secondary market at inflated prices. That makes it a no for me, sadly.

For the official record, I vehemently despise random assortment products and the companies that foist this trend upon the public. SMH.

Otherwise, the pix of the figs look cool. If I had any disposable income* I'd love to have a few adorning littering my bookshelves.








_____________
* a few days ago my family of three just blew close to six hundred dollars just buying groceries.

[Parzival]

I’d love the Holmes ones. The paladin and devil are neat, too, from an iconic piece of art, but the Holmes cover figs definitely top them in the “cool” factor.

[DungeonDevil]

I wonder if they will also do the Moldvay Basic cover, too. After perusing the Wizkids site, I'm going to need medication for sticker-shock. Crikey!

[flightcommander]

Historically speaking, were shields ever used that paladin-in-hell way? It looks upside down.

[Parzival]

Mar 14, 2024 12:05:37 GMT -6 flightcommander said:

Historically speaking, were shields ever used that paladin-in-hell way? It looks upside down.

As depicted in the art, it’s clear the artist expected the shield to be point down when “at rest.” I don’t think this is accurate for a “heater” shield. On the other hand, the paladin is wearing a late medieval/early Renaissance suit of full plate, from a time when shields would largely not have been used in melee as the armor was sufficient protection, and really were only used in mounted jousts.

[tdenmark]

Mar 14, 2024 12:05:37 GMT -6 flightcommander said:

Historically speaking, were shields ever used that paladin-in-hell way? It looks upside down.

It is incorrect. There wasn't much attention paid to historical accuracy in the art back then.

[Parzival]

Yep. Shields were “cool” (and boosted any AC, even when they probably shouldn’t), so a paladin in full plate carries a shield when he’d be better off wielding his sword two-handed. The latter brings up another possible error in the art— a knight in the era of the armor depicted (14th-15th centuries) would most likely be using a sword with a longer hilt— a true “longsword.” medievalbritain.com/type/medieval-life/weapons/medieval-longsword/
What this fellow is wielding was by that time called an “arming sword,” and was considered a secondary weapon. Of course, we can rationalize that his weapon is a magic one of great antiquity and legend, and thus is a design from an earlier time, but always effective against the vile legions of Hell.

[hamurai]

He's probably wearing feather-light plate armour, too.

[robertsconley]

Mar 14, 2024 12:05:37 GMT -6 flightcommander said:

Historically speaking, were shields ever used that paladin-in-hell way? It looks upside down.

While uncommon kite shields were gripped that so they can be used for punching with the point. Yes, it is less protection, but the paladin is wearing full Plate Armor, to begin with. Probably opted to maximize his attack options.

From the Bayeux tapestery

[Parzival]

The heater and the Norman kite shield are two different kettles of fish. The Norman kite shield was not intended for either jousting or individual combat, but rather as general protection either mounted or dismounted and acting as military unit (as a shield wall or cavalry wedge). The shape protected the upper body and lower extremities, but with the tapering a way to reduce overall weight. Consider also that the mounted warrior is attacking from his right side (and the right side of his horse), but his left side is exposed. The long Norman kite shield protects that left side all the way down along the left leg, without the warrior looking in that direction— but it doesn’t have to (and can’t) protect the right leg. A foot, it could be rested on the ground until the enemy came into melee distance, when it could then be lifted.

As for the tapestry, the depicted moment is not battle, but rather the moment when the Norman scouts and Saxon scouts spot each other. The warrior is using his shield not to attack, but to point in the direction of Harold’s army. It is indeed the only moment in the tapestry where the kite shield is depicted as being held in this manner. In the rest of the tapestry, particularly the battle scenes, the shields are depicted as being either almost horizontal with the point to the rear, or angled mostly upright. In these cases, the shield is always on the horse’s left side.

Of course, the tapestry was created solely by women, none of whom were present for the battle (if they were ever present at any battle). So it’s an artistic piece, but a bit questionable as a source of actual battlefield tactics or martial training or purpose.

Interestingly, the grips on the shields appear to have two designs (possibly two straps). The horizontal, perpendicular one shown here, and a curved “S” shape located higher on the shield. Is the latter a grip designed for holding the shield in different positions with the same grip, or an artistic attempt to show a looser leather strap?

The later heater shield, however, is designed primarily for cavalry charges against mounted opponents, with the warrior having the ability to switch from a lance attack (possibly destroyed in contact) to a close-in melee weapon as a sword, mace, flail, axe, etc., with which the wielder would be expected to attack or defend from both sides of his mount (an impossibility with a lance). By this point, the lower legs were fully encased in at least mail, if not with plate greaves and foot-protection. The shallow heater design, with the tapered point, allowed for easier transition of the shield behind the horse’s head, if necessary, and allowed for a tighter, cross chest hold when receiving the blow of a lance. Again, the tapered point also saves weight compared to a square shield. It also allows for the wielder to make stabbing attacks from underneath his own shield, either when raised high or when held in front. The 12th century shield was also now developing the importance as the holder of heraldry depicted on its surface.

I’m not saying that the point couldn’t be used as a weapon strike— shields have always been weapons as well as defense (a factor D&D tends to ignore). But I don’t think the shield would have been worn in the manner depicted in the “Paladin in Hell” art.

[tdenmark]

Mar 18, 2024 15:17:39 GMT -6 Parzival said:

Of course, the tapestry was created solely by women, none of whom were present for the battle (if they were ever present at any battle). So it’s an artistic piece, but a bit questionable as a source of actual battlefield tactics or martial training or purpose.

That was my thought too upon first seeing it. Art is highly subjective and misleading. Many of the most influential imagery in our society are outright lies. For example, the apes-to-human poster. It suggests a smooth orderly transition from an ape like ancestor to modern human. Regardless of where you are at on evolution, it is a complete fabrication that doesn't remotely resemble the actual scientifically recognized human evolutionary tree. But it is in nearly every school science classroom in America. (I teach ape anatomy at a University, so this one particularly galls me)