I am aware that drow can have different skin tones, as they did in previous editions, but this is a major change from the previous depictions of their skin color. It's not ebon black or even a purply-grey in the new art, though. Here's a few examples the new drow art:
The hair and eye colors fit the 5e description of "Stark white or pale yellow hair. They commonly have very pale eyes (so pale as to be mistaken for white) in shades of lilac, silver, pink, red, and blue." However, 5e's description of their skin color being "Charcoal or obsidian," and stating that their name is somehow connected to their skin color makes it seem like this isn't a depiction of the variety of their skin tones, and more seems like them trying to undo the first depictions.
This is 5e's art of Drizzt Do'Urden:
His skin fits the 5e description. It's a charcoal black color. This is the PHB's art for moon elves:
I think that for the rest of 5e we're going to be seeing more art like the new drow than that of the core rulebooks. What makes me even more sure of this is that the skin color of all of the drow in this book appears to be more or less the same skin tone.
I am aware that drow can have different skin tones, but this is a major change from the previous depictions of their skin color. It's not ebon black or even a purply-grey in the new art, though. Here's a few examples the new drow art:
The hair and eye colors fit the 5e description of "Stark white or pale yellow hair. They commonly have very pale eyes (so pale as to be mistaken for white) in shades of lilac, silver, pink, red, and blue." However, 5e's description of their skin color being "Charcoal or obsidian," and stating that their name is somehow connected to their skin color makes it seem like this isn't a depiction of the variety of their skin tones, and more seems like them trying to undo the first depictions.
This is 5e's art of Drizzt Do'Urden:
His skin fits the 5e description. It's a charcoal black color. This is the PHB's art for moon elves:
I think that for the rest of 5e we're going to be seeing more art like the new drow than that of the core rulebooks. What makes me even more sure of this is that the skin color of all of the drow in this book appears to be more or less the same skin tone.
What is the problem? No seriously. If we get more artwork that is like the one in book, why is that a bad thing? Just a simple google search and I see about at least 10 different color variations and if I knew how to post pictures I could show you.
Indeed, but few people remember that anymore, all of BECMI, Mystara and in particular the Shadow Elves, although they were really cool at the time. That being said, the original drows were really badass adversaries back in AD&D, they were just (at least for me) very much ruined by Salvatore's drizzteries... :p
Yep. And it ruined Rangers in turn as well since Drizzt's use of dual scimitars had NOTHING to do with being a Ranger and everything to do with being a Drow since just about all Drow warriors in G3/D1-3/Q1 dual-wielded weapons (it was to set them apart from surface Elves that got a bonus of +1 to hit with bows & swords).
Dual-wielding was the Ranger’s thing in AD&D though. You know, back when you had to have good stats to even qualify for the stronger classes.
DW yes, DW long blades, no. Old 2e DW could not use anything larger than a shortsword in the offhand, and scimitars were a long blade (d8).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I am aware that drow can have different skin tones, but this is a major change from the previous depictions of their skin color. It's not ebon black or even a purply-grey in the new art, though. Here's a few examples the new drow art:
The hair and eye colors fit the 5e description of "Stark white or pale yellow hair. They commonly have very pale eyes (so pale as to be mistaken for white) in shades of lilac, silver, pink, red, and blue." However, 5e's description of their skin color being "Charcoal or obsidian," and stating that their name is somehow connected to their skin color makes it seem like this isn't a depiction of the variety of their skin tones, and more seems like them trying to undo the first depictions.
This is 5e's art of Drizzt Do'Urden:
His skin fits the 5e description. It's a charcoal black color. This is the PHB's art for moon elves:
I think that for the rest of 5e we're going to be seeing more art like the new drow than that of the core rulebooks. What makes me even more sure of this is that the skin color of all of the drow in this book appears to be more or less the same skin tone.
Except...it's not. Here's the art from the 2e Monster Manual that originally got me interested in drow.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I am aware that drow can have different skin tones, but this is a major change from the previous depictions of their skin color. It's not ebon black or even a purply-grey in the new art, though. Here's a few examples the new drow art:
The hair and eye colors fit the 5e description of "Stark white or pale yellow hair. They commonly have very pale eyes (so pale as to be mistaken for white) in shades of lilac, silver, pink, red, and blue." However, 5e's description of their skin color being "Charcoal or obsidian," and stating that their name is somehow connected to their skin color makes it seem like this isn't a depiction of the variety of their skin tones, and more seems like them trying to undo the first depictions.
This is 5e's art of Drizzt Do'Urden:
His skin fits the 5e description. It's a charcoal black color. This is the PHB's art for moon elves:
I think that for the rest of 5e we're going to be seeing more art like the new drow than that of the core rulebooks. What makes me even more sure of this is that the skin color of all of the drow in this book appears to be more or less the same skin tone.
Except...it's not. Here's the art from the 2e Monster Manual that originally got me interested in drow.
No problem. I'm a huge drow fanboy, and that image is the one that got me interested in them initially. When I was in the army, we were getting ready to start a campaign, and my favorite class was rangers. I've also always been an elf guy. So I told the DM I wanted to be an elf ranger, but I wanted to be a dark elf. He very sarcastically said "I suppose you want to use two scimitars too" and I said "no, longsword and shortsword, why?" He said "Wait, you've never read the dark elf trilogy?" I said no, I hadn't.
He suggested I read it, and Homeland really got me hooked into the drow, but originally, I wanted to play one because I thought the dark elf chick in the monster manual looked cool.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
What is the problem? No seriously. Why are you so offended on the new Drow Art? If we get more artwork that is like the one in book, why is that a bad thing? Just a simple google search and I see about at least 10 different color variations and if I knew how to post pictures I could show you.
Reread my posts, please. Did I ever say that it was a problem? Did I say that I was offended by it? Did I say that it is a bad thing to get more artwork like this in future products? In order to make it easier for you, the answer is no. I did not state any offense or displeasure in this apparent change.
Both of my two previous posts before have been monotone, stating "this is what is/I think is happening." If my posts lead you to believe that I was displeased with this change, or even that I have any opinion on the matter, you are giving me a stance that I do not have and putting words into my mouth that I never said.
I currently have given no verdict on whether or not this is a good thing/change. Honestly, I don't think that it is my place to say whether or not this is a good change, or even state that this is a definitive and permanent change. I truthfully have no decision on what I think of this change.
I do think this art is well done and looks cool (but I appreciate almost all art, as I suck at all forms of it). It has already inspired multiple characters and campaign ideas for me (which is the point of having art in these books in the first place), and I would like to see more drow like this in better lighted scenery to get a better look of the differences. Even though I do appreciate the art and am intrigued enough to want to see more like it, I do not have enough of conviction or tenacity in the matter to defend or object to these changes.
I do think that if this is a permanent change, WotC should offer some official statement about drow being this way from now on, because I just want to know what to expect for the future. However, unlike what your post states my position may be on this subject, I do not hate this and do not see any immediate issues with this change other than the possibility of it being inconsistent with current 5e explanations and lore (that is, of course, unless WotC makes a decisive statement on if this will be the new norm).
P.S. Sorry, I truly, sincerely do not mean to sound arrogant or condescending. If you interpret it that way, I do apologize for any hurt feelings. I am just to drained and disappointed by the rest of Tasha's at the moment to try to mask better. Have a good day, and I'm sorry for any misunderstanding.
But. . . it is. That's from 2e, and the art of drow that is relevant to this change is all from 5e's status quo. All drow in official 5e artwork have had dark-gray, charcoal/ebon black, or purply-gray skin. This is a new change in the artwork for this edition, and all of the art looks more or less the same shade of gray/silver.
And, the art from that monster manual is much less detailed and colored than 5e's art. It is unclear as to whether or not they were just drawing them in that plain gray color due to a lore decision, or because it is easier to draw gray skin than pure black (for the purpose of distinguishing features).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I agree with GoodBovine, the text surrounding skin color hasn't ever really been important to artists. I brought up the example of tieflings earlier, for obvious reasons. Just look at the Tiefling page. It states right there "Their skin tones cover the full range of human coloration, but also include various shades of red" yet scroll up a tiny bit and there's art of a purple tiefling right there despite it being against RAW. I'm sure somewhere in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything there's a art of a purple tiefling as well, so I really don't see the big deal here.
Yeah nobody pays attention to the skin tone text, this is nothing new.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
I don't think they are changing the Drow's colours, just showing people that they aren't, and never have been, exclusively black/grey.
I would normally agree with you if it were only one or two depictions of that, especially if it was sprinkled in with the typically colored elves, but from what I can see, every depiction of drow in the book have the same skin color. If it was just one or two, I would say it's just the artist taking some liberties and personalizing the image, but with every drow in the book looking the same general skin tone and no examples of a normal, obsidian/charcoal black-skinned drow, it makes me feel that this was a coordinated decision.
(I just found another that's even paler and reflective than the others:)
If I find more, I'll post them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Here's the closest thing to a normally colored drow in the book:
It is a darker gray than the others, but only slightly. And, it is more "shiny" and "silvery" than other drow depictions, and I would still say that this drow is closer to the other drow in the book than drow in the PHB/MM/EGtW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
It's interesting that WoTC have decided to make the jump towards more silver colors, and Third_Sundering has now convinced me that this is probably a more permanent change and not just them ignoring flavor text as they usually do. However overall I really don't mind too much either way. I can see the reasoning behind WoTC doing this (some others had some good reasons a page or two back), and it doesn't really hinder anyone since it's just art.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
A friend of mine convinced me that the best way is Albino Drow.
Seriously, it's what always happens to animals that evolve underground for a while. Their eyesight deteriorates and sometimes they lose it entirely (since it's not as useful a sense underground), skin pigments go away (because there's no point to skin pigmentation undeground).
It's what's been my headcanon for drow for a while now, and it's a coloring that actually makes sense given where the Drow live.
It matters to D&D campaigns and worlds. Also, I'm not obsessing, just informing people of a major possible change to highly controversial race in D&D.
to your campaigns and worlds or all campaigns and worlds?
major and controversial. I don't see it. I wouldn't use those words. They're just drow. Or dark elves. They're shifty. Crafty. Evil (mostly). Drizzt and Jarlaxle are badass, otherwise, they're shifty, crafty, and evil. I'll slay them if I see 'em. Because they're drow. In 3 decades of what drow do and are, their reputation precedes them. This is for one reason only. Because they are drow. There's isn't more to it than that.
A friend of mine convinced me that the best way is Albino Drow.
Seriously, it's what always happens to animals that evolve underground for a while. Their eyesight deteriorates and sometimes they lose it entirely (since it's not as useful a sense underground), skin pigments go away (because there's no point to skin pigmentation undeground).
It's what's been my headcanon for drow for a while now, and it's a coloring that actually makes sense given where the Drow live.
The new blind fighting fighting style would cater nicely to that idea...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
I honestly can't even begin to fathom how thats remotely true.. Drow are evil bastards because Lolth and her fellow drow gods are completely psychopaths. Not because they are black.
Even if WOTC released a statement that All drow are grey now (which they haven't) it changes nothing in gameplay.
well if you think about it, nobody complains about the GREY dwarves being evil. if you change the BLACK elves to GREY elves, you don't have to completely gut your lore because some people confuse ancient norse svartalfar lore with brown people in the real world being erroneously called BLACK.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I am aware that drow can have different skin tones, as they did in previous editions, but this is a major change from the previous depictions of their skin color. It's not ebon black or even a purply-grey in the new art, though. Here's a few examples the new drow art:
The hair and eye colors fit the 5e description of "Stark white or pale yellow hair. They commonly have very pale eyes (so pale as to be mistaken for white) in shades of lilac, silver, pink, red, and blue." However, 5e's description of their skin color being "Charcoal or obsidian," and stating that their name is somehow connected to their skin color makes it seem like this isn't a depiction of the variety of their skin tones, and more seems like them trying to undo the first depictions.
This is 5e's art of Drizzt Do'Urden:
His skin fits the 5e description. It's a charcoal black color. This is the PHB's art for moon elves:
I think that for the rest of 5e we're going to be seeing more art like the new drow than that of the core rulebooks. What makes me even more sure of this is that the skin color of all of the drow in this book appears to be more or less the same skin tone.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
What is the problem? No seriously. If we get more artwork that is like the one in book, why is that a bad thing? Just a simple google search and I see about at least 10 different color variations and if I knew how to post pictures I could show you.
Like people even read the skin tones half the time. Just look at tieflings, I shouldn't even need to explain what I mean by that.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
DW yes, DW long blades, no. Old 2e DW could not use anything larger than a shortsword in the offhand, and scimitars were a long blade (d8).
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Except...it's not. Here's the art from the 2e Monster Manual that originally got me interested in drow.
http://dedpihto.narod.ru/games/Monsters1/MM00097.htm
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Thank you. I thought there was artwork from old manual that had them at that silvery color. I going crazy trying to find it.
No problem. I'm a huge drow fanboy, and that image is the one that got me interested in them initially. When I was in the army, we were getting ready to start a campaign, and my favorite class was rangers. I've also always been an elf guy. So I told the DM I wanted to be an elf ranger, but I wanted to be a dark elf. He very sarcastically said "I suppose you want to use two scimitars too" and I said "no, longsword and shortsword, why?" He said "Wait, you've never read the dark elf trilogy?" I said no, I hadn't.
He suggested I read it, and Homeland really got me hooked into the drow, but originally, I wanted to play one because I thought the dark elf chick in the monster manual looked cool.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Reread my posts, please. Did I ever say that it was a problem? Did I say that I was offended by it? Did I say that it is a bad thing to get more artwork like this in future products? In order to make it easier for you, the answer is no. I did not state any offense or displeasure in this apparent change.
Both of my two previous posts before have been monotone, stating "this is what is/I think is happening." If my posts lead you to believe that I was displeased with this change, or even that I have any opinion on the matter, you are giving me a stance that I do not have and putting words into my mouth that I never said.
I currently have given no verdict on whether or not this is a good thing/change. Honestly, I don't think that it is my place to say whether or not this is a good change, or even state that this is a definitive and permanent change. I truthfully have no decision on what I think of this change.
I do think this art is well done and looks cool (but I appreciate almost all art, as I suck at all forms of it). It has already inspired multiple characters and campaign ideas for me (which is the point of having art in these books in the first place), and I would like to see more drow like this in better lighted scenery to get a better look of the differences. Even though I do appreciate the art and am intrigued enough to want to see more like it, I do not have enough of conviction or tenacity in the matter to defend or object to these changes.
I do think that if this is a permanent change, WotC should offer some official statement about drow being this way from now on, because I just want to know what to expect for the future. However, unlike what your post states my position may be on this subject, I do not hate this and do not see any immediate issues with this change other than the possibility of it being inconsistent with current 5e explanations and lore (that is, of course, unless WotC makes a decisive statement on if this will be the new norm).
P.S. Sorry, I truly, sincerely do not mean to sound arrogant or condescending. If you interpret it that way, I do apologize for any hurt feelings. I am just to drained and disappointed by the rest of Tasha's at the moment to try to mask better. Have a good day, and I'm sorry for any misunderstanding.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
But. . . it is. That's from 2e, and the art of drow that is relevant to this change is all from 5e's status quo. All drow in official 5e artwork have had dark-gray, charcoal/ebon black, or purply-gray skin. This is a new change in the artwork for this edition, and all of the art looks more or less the same shade of gray/silver.
And, the art from that monster manual is much less detailed and colored than 5e's art. It is unclear as to whether or not they were just drawing them in that plain gray color due to a lore decision, or because it is easier to draw gray skin than pure black (for the purpose of distinguishing features).
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I don't think they are changing the Drow's colours, just showing people that they aren't, and never have been, exclusively black/grey.
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
I agree with GoodBovine, the text surrounding skin color hasn't ever really been important to artists. I brought up the example of tieflings earlier, for obvious reasons. Just look at the Tiefling page. It states right there "Their skin tones cover the full range of human coloration, but also include various shades of red" yet scroll up a tiny bit and there's art of a purple tiefling right there despite it being against RAW. I'm sure somewhere in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything there's a art of a purple tiefling as well, so I really don't see the big deal here.
Yeah nobody pays attention to the skin tone text, this is nothing new.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
I would normally agree with you if it were only one or two depictions of that, especially if it was sprinkled in with the typically colored elves, but from what I can see, every depiction of drow in the book have the same skin color. If it was just one or two, I would say it's just the artist taking some liberties and personalizing the image, but with every drow in the book looking the same general skin tone and no examples of a normal, obsidian/charcoal black-skinned drow, it makes me feel that this was a coordinated decision.
(I just found another that's even paler and reflective than the others:)
If I find more, I'll post them.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Here's the closest thing to a normally colored drow in the book:
It is a darker gray than the others, but only slightly. And, it is more "shiny" and "silvery" than other drow depictions, and I would still say that this drow is closer to the other drow in the book than drow in the PHB/MM/EGtW.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
It's interesting that WoTC have decided to make the jump towards more silver colors, and Third_Sundering has now convinced me that this is probably a more permanent change and not just them ignoring flavor text as they usually do. However overall I really don't mind too much either way. I can see the reasoning behind WoTC doing this (some others had some good reasons a page or two back), and it doesn't really hinder anyone since it's just art.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
It matters to D&D campaigns and worlds. Also, I'm not obsessing, just informing people of a major possible change to highly controversial race in D&D.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
A friend of mine convinced me that the best way is Albino Drow.
Seriously, it's what always happens to animals that evolve underground for a while. Their eyesight deteriorates and sometimes they lose it entirely (since it's not as useful a sense underground), skin pigments go away (because there's no point to skin pigmentation undeground).
It's what's been my headcanon for drow for a while now, and it's a coloring that actually makes sense given where the Drow live.
to your campaigns and worlds or all campaigns and worlds?
major and controversial. I don't see it. I wouldn't use those words. They're just drow. Or dark elves. They're shifty. Crafty. Evil (mostly). Drizzt and Jarlaxle are badass, otherwise, they're shifty, crafty, and evil. I'll slay them if I see 'em. Because they're drow. In 3 decades of what drow do and are, their reputation precedes them. This is for one reason only. Because they are drow. There's isn't more to it than that.
All things Lich - DM tips, tricks, and other creative shenanigans
The new blind fighting fighting style would cater nicely to that idea...
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
I honestly can't even begin to fathom how thats remotely true.. Drow are evil bastards because Lolth and her fellow drow gods are completely psychopaths. Not because they are black.
Even if WOTC released a statement that All drow are grey now (which they haven't) it changes nothing in gameplay.
well if you think about it, nobody complains about the GREY dwarves being evil. if you change the BLACK elves to GREY elves, you don't have to completely gut your lore because some people confuse ancient norse svartalfar lore with brown people in the real world being erroneously called BLACK.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha