Spiderwick D20

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Anyone got the issue of Dragon with the article about Tony DiTerlizzi's Spiderwick in it? I'm a big fan of the book, and I think the Spiderwick Field Guide may be my favorite statless Monster Manual ever, and was wondering how much crunch the article had.

And is it just me, or would a slim Spiderwick tome giving stats for the creatures, spells and so on be a really nice companion piece to the books?

 

[bento]

I hadn't heard of Tony before when I read the Spiderwick article, but it interested me in picking it up for my daughter. She read it in two days! Never saw her read any book so fast!

I looked at the Field Book at my local B&N, and it's a beautiful book. The only issue I had was one of the foldouts is creased at the top, and I accidentally ripped it when I was folding it back into the book (ouch!).

I've recently bought the Farie Tales rpg and the Field Book would make a great visual aid when playing!

As for Tony's art, I like it so much that it's a big reason I recently picked up two of the Planescape box set pdfs. That and all the good stuff about the setting on these boards.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Heh, I slightly tore the dragon foldout myself. That seems to be epidemic with any book that has foldouts.

 

[bento]

You would think they'd cut the page a 1/8th inch in from the spine to avoid that problem.

Maybe this will mean a lot of slightly damaged copies will end up in the remainder section!

 

[theria]

The Novel Approach article appeared in Dragon #331. It spends two or so pages simply discussing the themes of Spiderwick Chronicles and an interview with Tony and Holly. The only real crunch is the monster writeup of the House Brownie.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The Novel Approach article appeared in Dragon #331. It spends two or so pages simply discussing the themes of Spiderwick Chronicles and an interview with Tony and Holly. The only real crunch is the monster writeup of the House Brownie.

Too bad. Thanks.

 

[bento]

Doh! That's what you asked about.

From what I recall the jist of the article was "hey - this author used to play D&D and the artist drew for us. Look what they're doing now!"

Very tangental to the game. Definately no crunch.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Looking through the Field Guide, it seems pretty blatant that Holly and Tony have backgrounds in D&D.

Besides the whole turn-to-stone thing, the water troll piece might as well have been an ecology section snipped from the Monster Manual, and the art would have fit the standard description of a D&D troll as well.

In very few cases did the monsters in the Field Guide not line up almost perfectly with D&D, and where they didn't, it was usually a case of Spiderwick having more flavor and variation than D&D -- I'd love to see the Spiderwick approach to mermaids added to D&D, where every merfolk is the same as every other one, despite the wild variation in fish in the oceans.

The Spiderwick gargoyles would also be a great fit into D&D as "lesser gargoyles," and I loved Tony's art on the elves and dwarves in the books.

And that doesn't even touch on the "true" fey in the book.

 

[JustKim]

It's great to hear from others who enjoy DiTerlizzi's work, and I'm sure you mean well, but I can't help but feel your links between Spiderwick and D&D are misguided. DiTerlizzi has an interest in fairies and fey creatures that goes well beyond D&D, and his inspirations include the likes of Norman Rockwell, Arthur Rackham and Brian Froud. It's much more likely that DiTerlizzi and D&D had some of the same influences, and not that DiTerlizzi was directly influenced by D&D.
I do think you're right about the troll nose, though.

If you want to make a d20 Spiderwick, I think picking up Fantasy Flight Games' Grimm would be a big leap in the right direction.