-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E Toward a new D&D aesthetics
- Thread starter Stefano Rinaldelli
- Start date
- Status
Uni-the-Unicorn!
Hero
Really? I hated most of the planescape art. Much prefer the art we have now.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
You might want to reread the post in question, which touches on rather a lot more than the hiring of a person who literally has nothing to do with DnD books.
the post in question
What's interesting is that a lot of people are saying they like the dnd art they grew up with. I relate to that, as it was that aesthetic (Elmore and then Diterlizzi, in my case) that drew me into these fantasy worlds.
As a child. Dnd drew me into its fantasy world as a child of 10 or so. Because dnd has been, from at least the late 70s, a game for children. All the basic sets are clearly written for an audience of children and early teenagers (it just turns out that simplistic style is exceptionally clear for explaining a game compared to 200 pages of Gygaxian prose). And older gamers complained about "kid dnd" back then too:
lichvanwinkle.blogspot.com
Ironically, the concern then was that these younger players weren't fully understanding the that the game was about role playing
Whereas today's grognards seem upset that younger and/or newer players are not more interested in just "getting powerful items and bashing things with them." You know, like they used to do when they were munchkins!
As a child. Dnd drew me into its fantasy world as a child of 10 or so. Because dnd has been, from at least the late 70s, a game for children. All the basic sets are clearly written for an audience of children and early teenagers (it just turns out that simplistic style is exceptionally clear for explaining a game compared to 200 pages of Gygaxian prose). And older gamers complained about "kid dnd" back then too:
When the Grognards Were Munchkins
A blog about table-top role-playing games after a break of two decades.
lichvanwinkle.blogspot.com
Ironically, the concern then was that these younger players weren't fully understanding the that the game was about role playing
Whereas today's grognards seem upset that younger and/or newer players are not more interested in just "getting powerful items and bashing things with them." You know, like they used to do when they were munchkins!
Hussar
Legend
It's kinda funny that Di Terlizzi gets held up as "adult" art when his other biggest claim to fame is using his art style for YA fiction, but, having a flying critter on the cover of a book is "Disneyfied" because it's purple?
Why is it so hard for people to just say, "Hey, I don't like this." and leave it at that?
Why is it so hard for people to just say, "Hey, I don't like this." and leave it at that?
Uni-the-Unicorn!
Hero
Ok, I see what you mean by disneyfied (not that I exactly agree), but that doesn’t seem like a strong departure from D&D of the last (which almost always been marketed as for 11or 12 and up. I mean the 1e books had actual cartoons in them!
Faolyn
(she/her)
So, uh, my very first exposure to D&D was from the Fantasy Forest board game (1983-ish) and AD&D cartoon (ditto), when I was 6-7. Both of these things were targeted directly to kids.
D&D has always been marketed in part to kids.
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
Just a turn of phrase. It ain't that deep.
We'll have to agree to disagree on that. All of those except Primus look extremely goofy to me. That ridiculous face on the quadrone in particular is just...what? It looks like a friggin' modern-day meme. Sans context, I would genuinely have thought it was a manipulated image, with someone having blanked the ordinary quadrone face and put in a variation of the "me gusta" meme face.
Interesting! Particularly given some of the ways D&D history is presented by people today, e.g. many lamentations about the existence of dragonborn or people choosing races purely for power, and conversely the emphasis on long-running personal character stories (incompatible with most high-lethality styles) that "takes the challenge out" etc. I've definitely had grognards, one of them having been a player at Gygax's own early games, tell me that they found all the narration of attacks and such to be incredible tedium, though, so there seems to have been something of a shift in what people think "roleplay" means. Kind of an ironic one, actually. Classic D&D was even more hard-coded for roles than 4e was, but people hold it up as a bastion of freedom to do anything--and the whole point was to "play your role," as in, to be the magical artillery or the meatshield or Brother Bactine etc.What's interesting is that a lot of people are saying they like the dnd art they grew up with. I relate to that, as it was that aesthetic (Elmore and then Diterlizzi, in my case) that drew me into these fantasy worlds.
As a child. Dnd drew me into its fantasy world as a child of 10 or so. Because dnd has been, from at least the late 70s, a game for children. All the basic sets are clearly written for an audience of children and early teenagers (it just turns out that simplistic style is exceptionally clear for explaining a game compared to 200 pages of Gygaxian prose). And older gamers complained about "kid dnd" back then too:
When the Grognards Were Munchkins
A blog about table-top role-playing games after a break of two decades.
Ironically, the concern then was that these younger players weren't fully understanding the that the game was about role playing
Whereas today's grognards seem upset that younger and/or newer players are not more interested in just "getting powerful items and bashing things with them." You know, like they used to do when they were munchkins!
- Status
Similar Threads
