How fabulous are your villains?

>a straight man who happens to prefer women's clothing
So he's Eddie Izzard.

I do have a tiefling billionaire running around as a secondary bad guy. Not too far descended from a succubus, the guy is the biggest foppiest piece of eye candy that ever fopped. With a delicately cultivated goatee, dressed in the finest and most brightly coloured silks: deep reds and blues to match his skin and eyes. He has heterochromia because of course this special snowflake does with a blue eye so that it can match with his black hair (dark hair, light eyes being one of the 7 marks of beauty) and a golden eye as a nod to miss Meyer who made a lot of money describing pretty boys in her life.

Together with his lithe, svelte body and a tail with little concept of personal space, this befreckled devil is supposed to embody decadence, lust and hedonism and give you a bad case of the heeby jeebies at the same time.

>Isn't this discrimination?
Good for the goose is good for the gander.
It's a common thing for the cover to books/magazines/whathaveyou to expressly have a white male on the cover, or some manner of abstract art if the book's protags are not white.
user, kindly explain to me why you are offended someone is breaking trend and doing something that most publishers would tell them with lead to failure because people don't buy books that don't have a white dude on the front?
You know that the artists for the 3e D&D books found themselves thrown into the same problem, where they wanted the iconic fighter to be a dwarf, and were overruled by the suits to make the iconic fighter a human (white) male?

>user, kindly explain to me why you are offended someone is breaking trend and doing something that most publishers would tell them with lead to failure because people don't buy books that don't have a white dude on the front?

and when did you stop beating your wife

user, why are you asking deceptively leading questions to try and incriminate others?

If I read his post correctly, he's not offended by the lack of white straigth males (and he isn't offended at all, afaics), but he asks if the fact that the author refuses to include them is discrimination (it is). Anyways, absence of something and enforced segregation are different things; imagine if Gigax had said something along the lines of "I don't want any goddamn nigger in the art for my books".

It's disingenuous to cry discrimination the moment it's not working in your favor, and most people do not know the working policies of the publishing industry.
>imagine if Gigax had said something along the lines of "I don't want any goddamn nigger in the art for my books".
Gygax didn't say that, his publisher did.
Just as often, the author has no control over what the book cover looks like, and there has been more than one occasion where the author had to call the publisher to ask them what the fuck they were doing.
To answer it, the designer for Fellowship would need to adamantly demand for a white male to not be on the cover, lest it end up being the default anyway.
It's not less "discrimination", more "I know how you work, I'm telling you directly to not do that shit".

>It's disingenuous to cry discrimination the moment it's not working in your favor

It isn't disingenuous to call discrimination what it is, and to cast aspersions on people who do so.

False accusations, as you make, are unconscionable. Retract them immediately.

Uncited anecdotal evidence does not justify your accusing people who make objectively true statements regarding the nature of certain actions of hypocrisy or discrimination.

>there has been more than one occasion where the author had to call the publisher to ask them what the fuck they were doing.

Unproven and unsupported.

>To answer it, the designer for Fellowship would need to adamantly demand for a white male to not be on the cover, lest it end up being the default anyway.
>It's not less "discrimination", more "I know how you work, I'm telling you directly to not do that shit".

Potentially libellous accusations. Retract them.

I guess he's more dapper than fab. You can tell how far someone is up on the food chain by the quality of their suit

>Retract them.
Eat fucking dogshit, nigga.

>tl;dr for those without top hats shoved up their asses
>DELET THIS

My Anima villain has Style in the 200's, so... pretty fucking fabulous, I'd say.

More fabulous than this tragic fashion victim. Seriously, learn your color tones - his complexion in that outfit is the real villainy here.

>book cover
We're not talking about a cover, but about the art of an entire book.

Please try to stay on topic; we went from "Enforcing that there is no straight white male at all in the book is dicrimination" to "It offends you when there's no white male on the cover"
Btw, I've never heard someone complain about the cover of 4th ed. player's handbook, or AD&D second monster's manuel. Or the fact that early fantasy is based on classical myths and archetypes that went beyond skin color and sexual orientation... It would be more relevant to look at the fighter/thief/mage ratio on those covers. Science-fiction has always been way more inclusive

One of the minor antagonists in my Mutant Chronicles game is a Big Gay Uncle type of mob boss, runs his operation out of a 20s style whisky bar and lounge called the Darkstar Bar. He's flamboyant, gregarious, disarmingly charming, and has no qualms whatsoever about slitting your throat where you sit. I'm looking forward to seeing how my players end up dealing with him.

Before our hiatus the group was about to tack down and start leaning on one of his street bosses, a charismatic little shit name Micky "Blue-Eyes" Finn. Hopefully we can get back to playing after the Thanks Giving/Christmas/New Years period, things were just about to get crazy.

>I've never heard someone complain about the cover of 4th ed. player's handbook
That's because the artists never revealed what was going on behind the scenes.
The 3e artists came right out and said they were instructed by suits to make the poster child a white dude, and that is why every scene of him is him getting rekt as retaliation.
>early fantasy is based on classical myths and archetypes that went beyond skin color and sexual orientation
Those myths are overwhelmingly European and star caucasian men as a result. It's also why African/Middle Eastern/Asian myth rarely gets any attention.
Google search is more than enough to refute all of your "points" outright.
You are hedging on the claim that institutional racism doesn't exist, or self fulfilling bias is imaginary. That is the kind of disingenuous act I was referring to.

>Those myths are overwhelmingly European and star caucasian men as a result. It's also why African/Middle Eastern/Asian myth rarely gets any attention.
Yup. I'd even go as far as say they are majoritarily Celtic and Germanic. I'd put that on anglo american cultural hegemony rather than racism. You rarely see slavic myths or steampunk settings set in southern europe. I can't really blame it on the designers, they write what they know and their history is as valid as another, no matter how annoying the amount of redundancy can be.
Honestly, rpgs are pretty conservative setting-wise. I'm still waiting for a seafaring rpg that isn't about 16th century pirates.

>The 3e artists came right out and said they were instructed by suits to make the poster child a white dude
hmm, source? And are we speaking about the same book, where as far as I cn see the cover doesn't picture a single character and each member of the party was given equal screentime with a manic precision?