D&D 5E I hope this isn't 5E...(art that screams "not this, not this!")

[CM]

I hate anime, it's a very big turn off for me I think that the best art in any edition was the one in 2e player handbook and DMG.

Warder

I love anime but I also don't think it belongs in D&D. I like WAR's monsters, but his adventurers leave me cold.

 

[Siberys]

[MENTION=55985]mkill[/MENTION] - DiTerlizzi's good, but if you're talking about proportions, he's not exactly a paragon. Look at that tiefling's forearms! Yeesh. I actually prefer O'Connor's work in that example...

 

[billd91]

I wouldn't be a huge fan of a D&D edition dominated by anime style art. But I can tolerate a little bit here and there. In fact, I'd like a LOT of different styles of art from different artists popping up here and there in an effort to keep the game's art from being dominated by any single artist I didn't like.

For example, I really don't like Tomas Baxa's style of art. In fact, I kind of hate it. And while I can appreciate Clyde Caldwell's use of color and technique better, I don't like most of his scene compositions, stiff poses, and over-abundance of passive damsels needing to be rescued. But I can handle a little bit of them as long as they don't dominate the products. And I'm willing to accept product lines not totally dominated by art from Jeff Easley, Tony DiTerlizzi, and the late Keith Parkinson because I'm sure there are people out there who aren't as fond of their work as I am.

Variety, as far as I'm concerned, has been good, better than use of a single artist or style. If they didn't capture your imagination with Dave Trampier, maybe they got you with Erol Otus, or Bill Willingham, or David S. LaForce, or Jim Roslof, or Jim Holloway, ... do I really need to go on?

EDIT: On further reflection, if WotC convinces Rob Liefeld to do all of their art, I'm SO gone...

 

[I'm A Banana]

I don't really mind WAR's anime influence, but it is divisive. I think it would be fine if it was part of a bigger melieu, but as one of the only artists, it casts a certain shadow.

I would like to avoid characters with face tumors:

I would also like to avoid Larry Ellmore's T&A-with-big-hair style of ladyfolk, but I get that a lot of people regard his stuff fondly, and I do like how he draws dragons.

 

[Scribble]

I would also like to avoid Larry Ellmore's T&A-with-big-hair style of ladyfolk, but I get that a lot of people regard his stuff fondly, and I do like how he draws dragons.

Well I can agree on the half nekkidness, but the big hair I think was just because that was really the hairstyle type of the time... Check out my old yearbooks from then... Big hair galore.

 

[ahayford]

I really don't see "anime" in any of the given artwork. If anything, I'd call it a little more comic book then anything....Which I'm sure is equally offensive to some.

Honestly, besides stuff that is just horrendous scribbles or offensively misogynistic, why do people care so much? How often do you even use the stock art at the table?

 

[Scribble]

I really don't see "anime" in any of the given artwork. If anything, I'd call it a little more comic book then anything....Which I'm sure is equally offensive to some.

Honestly, besides stuff that is just horrendous scribbles or offensively misogynistic, why do people care so much? How often do you even use the stock art at the table?

True I don't use it at the table, but art is really important to me. When I pick up a book and it has artwork I really like, it instantly gets my mind flowing, and puts me in the right "mood" for writing an adventure or making a character.

 

[BriarMonkey]

Ya know, I like most of all of it. Sure, some of it's wonky, but all in all, all the art evokes the time it was created (in some way) or the style that can be had with the game.

It all works for me.

 

[I'm A Banana]

the big hair I think was just because that was really the hairstyle type of the time

That's fair, but I guess it leads into: how much modernism should creep into D&D art? I wouldn't want to see a big '80's hair on a character in today's D&D books, but would I want the pop icons of today to serve as models for today's D&D books? Should assorted normal characters have piercings and tatoos and asymmetry and Beiber Hair because this is a modern style? I'd lean toward "yes," but there's a lot of people (who might even dig the big '80's hair of Ellmore or WAR's anime influence) who'd be against it...

 

[Scribble]

That's fair, but I guess it leads into: how much modernism should creep into D&D art? I wouldn't want to see a big '80's hair on a character in today's D&D books, but would I want the pop icons of today to serve as models for today's D&D books? Should assorted normal characters have piercings and tatoos and asymmetry and Beiber Hair because this is a modern style? I'd lean toward "yes," but there's a lot of people (who might even dig the big '80's hair of Ellmore or WAR's anime influence) who'd be against it...

Totally agree. I think I'd lean towards it as well, simply because then you make characters modern people can more readily identify with.

(That said I think Elmore kind of over did it with how much influence he let in at times. I think it's possible to be influenced but maintain a more classic look that never goes out of style.)

But then again I tend to skew towards pieces that have a more "realistic" and detailed look to them. Pieces like that give me a sense of "place" that I can imagine existing. I can imagine being in that place and seeing what is going on. That's why I've always hated the out of proportion weapons look... I just can't identify with those characters.

I do ALSO like the really weird trippy stuff like Otus and Diterlizzi though because they're SO weird...