|
5 months ago ::
Feb 01, 2013 - 1:31PM
#151
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2006
|
1st Edition: I'm not really a fan of. As others have posted, I too feel that it depicts little ACTION in a sense that the character's are milling about after battle. For a Player's Handbook, I want to be inspired to delve deeper and making one of those characters. I just don't really feel anything that pulls me into the game with the cover art there.
2nd Edition: As "cheesy" as I feel the artwork is here, depecting a sort of '80's cartoonish image IMO, it feels more exciting. As a Player's Handbook I feel the urge to create an exciting character thats a mounted warrior. What it does lack is any sort of fantasy edge or magical in nature. A dragon in the sky or maybe Zombies, Goblins, Lizardfolk attempting to take down the riders might envoke a more Fantasy-ish image to me.
3rd Editon: As the odd-man out, I still like it's timeless appearance. It draws me in as it appears to be a fantastic tome with wonder behind it's cover. Though I freely admit that there is nostalgia at work ecause this was truely my first edition that got me to play D&D consistantly.
4th Edition: I like the amout of Cover space both the image and the Logo share. To me, this screams FANTASY RPG both due to who's on the cover (a Magician and a Dragon warrior wielding a HUGE sword). I personally enjoy such fantastic elements in my D&D. Magic seems prominent from this cover as the Sorceress is wielding a fireball, waiting for possibly another target to present itself. The Dragonborn, posed as he is, depicts a defensive stance that tells me he's just waiting for the opportunity to cut an opponent in half or maybe he's preparing to charge. The sword is a big garish but I tink it fits well with the fact that he's a Dragonborn and possibly uncivilized to obtain a more formalized weapon. Even those both characters looked "posed" I think there's a lot of action going on that envokes me to pick up this book and read through it's pages.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 01, 2013 - 5:02PM
#152
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2009
|
Personally, I want my books to look like books. My favorite covers are the recent AD&D reprints and the leatherbound collecter's edition covers from third edition.
I don't really want action on the cover. For me, D&D isn't about action. It's about adventure, setting, and mystery. I believe that the book itself is the symbol of those things. That's why the 3.0 books spoke to me, and in part why the 3.5 books felt like two steps to the absurd.
Which isn't to say I'm against having art on the cover. But I would prefer some sort of grand vista. A fantasy landscape instead of a battle or a cramped cavern.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 6:34PM
#153
|
|
|
On the age thing, as many women tend to go for “success appeal” rather than “sex appeal”, many of the popculture men tend to be established, and therefore around their late 30s.
As such, catering to statistical tendencies, in addition to the “obligatory female pornstar”, there should probably also be an “obligatory distinguished gentleman”. But these tendencies, of course, dont represent everyones tastes.
To avoid stereotyping and to broaden appeal to more people, the art should also include the “male pornstar”, the stud on the college campus, and the athlete. Plus, the “distinguished countess”, possibly a blend of professional business women, socialite, and milf.
While my descriptions are a bit flippant to make the nature of “marketing appeal” clear, I of course assume that all depictions of characters - perhaps especially the male and female “pornstars” - are to be heroic, thoughtful and courageous.
I still feel, the art should tend toward the 20s as the age of health and adventuring. Because, you know, few people hate it if the heroes are both successful and hot.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 02, 2013 - 6:54PM
#154
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2009
|
The thing is...artwork/artstyle, marketing and design from the 80s and 90s won't work on 2013/2014 at all...hell, it will go as far to make people avoid it
I absolutely agree with this. People who've been into the game for a while may hate to hear it, but fantasy artwork doesn't tend to age well in terms of broad appeal to newer audiences. It strikes them as overtly and almost exceedingly retro. What appeals to the younger audiences today is going to be artwork more similar to or reminiscent of comic book or anime styles or stuff from M:tG, styles that are more dynamic and some would say exaggerated or over the top. Proportions just don't need to be realistic as long as they look cool. The person who did 3.5 Eberron and Pathfinder seems to be consistently praised among the newer and younger players that I know.
But my point is: It isn't the art style that I want to see return.
It is the art themes.
(OK, that's not entirely true. I really don't like the style of some of the 4E art either. But that is a secondary issue to the themes of the 'art').
And that is as true now as it was forty years ago and four hundred years ago.
No more 'I'm awesome' poses and lets get back to actual attempts to show characters with a connection to both the story and the world. And if at least some of them also connect to the idea that this is a group activity, so much the better.
Carl
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 12:59AM
#155
|
Date Joined:
Jul 29, 2012
|
Works for me. There are multiple D&D artists I like.
Jeff Dee for black & white art, his work in the 1st Ed Deities & Demigods really sucked me in.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 1:06AM
#156
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
The thing is...artwork/artstyle, marketing and design from the 80s and 90s won't work on 2013/2014 at all...hell, it will go as far to make people avoid it
I absolutely agree with this. People who've been into the game for a while may hate to hear it, but fantasy artwork doesn't tend to age well in terms of broad appeal to newer audiences. It strikes them as overtly and almost exceedingly retro. What appeals to the younger audiences today is going to be artwork more similar to or reminiscent of comic book or anime styles or stuff from M:tG, styles that are more dynamic and some would say exaggerated or over the top. Proportions just don't need to be realistic as long as they look cool. The person who did 3.5 Eberron and Pathfinder seems to be consistently praised among the newer and younger players that I know.
But my point is: It isn't the art style that I want to see return.
It is the art themes.
(OK, that's not entirely true. I really don't like the style of some of the 4E art either. But that is a secondary issue to the themes of the 'art').
And that is as true now as it was forty years ago and four hundred years ago.
No more 'I'm awesome' poses and lets get back to actual attempts to show characters with a connection to both the story and the world. And if at least some of them also connect to the idea that this is a group activity, so much the better.
Carl
This. I'm awesome poses are OK in moderation but they were overused to much in 4th ed and 3.5 to an extent. I liked the 2nd ed style with back grounds and adventurers doing things like sitting around a campfire or riding horses across a plain.
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Feb 03, 2013 - 1:14AM
#157
|
Date Joined:
Aug 28, 2005
|
It isn't the art style that I want to see return.
It is the art themes.
Would you like to elaborate on what it is that distinction actually means to you here?
No more 'I'm awesome' poses and lets get back to actual attempts to show characters with a connection to both the story and the world.
Unless you can somehow back this up, this sentence is meaningless to me. I see plenty of "I'm awesome" poses in the classic fantasy artwork as well as characters in connection to story and world in the modern artwork. Regardless of whether or not it's true, you have to reaize that vague statements like this make it seem like you're reaching for some contrived explanation when there really isn't any other than that it's not what you're used to.
Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TMSpeaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
|
|
|
