D&D 5E Toward a new D&D aesthetics

[Guest 7034872]

But what has this to do with brighter colors and more blue than brown in the art, or with more characters in the art seeming to be people who enjoy adventuring or are generally happy people?

Perfectly fair and reasonable.

Really? The flying giant evil-red-crystal corrupted shark and the sand worm in the preview art doesn’t focus on danger? This is what people have been objecting to this whole thread.

Again, perfectly fair and reasonable (and ultimately right, I think). It isn't the case that the changes in the art just erase all sense of danger, nor would I want to say they do; mine is the much smaller claim that some of the changes in the art have, over the decades, lessened the feeling of menace and risk of swift, nasty death.

Show it. The claims being made seem to us to be wholly unsupported by what is actually in the books. We don’t understand what in the art makes you see what you’re describing. That’s it.

Well, here's the trick, isn't it? I could show you all sorts of images to support what I say is only a subtle trend in the art, but you easily could accuse me of cherry-picking and back that up by showing a bunch of images that do not fit the asserted trend. I then could counter-accuse you of cherry-picking and show more images. This, naturally, would be taken by you as a stubborn and uncharitable maneuver on my part, and round and round we'd go.

I prefer not to accuse people of nasty things unless I'm really sure of it and really sure it matters. On both counts this doesn't pass that test.

So let me explain what it is I've seen but also explain why it really doesn't bother me, yeah? What I've seen from 1e through 5e is a change in the art whereby freaky monsters abound, certainly (what would D&D ever be without them?), but frightened faces of totally-freaking-out PCs do not. Images of dying PCs do not. They are still there, but they don't seem to abound in the way they once did--that's all I mean there.

Tangential to that change has been the move to digital art instead of hand-drawn, and what I've noticed there is the cartoonish elements of 1e (and a bit in 2e, too, I guess) faded away and were replaced with the sort of stuff digital art naturally lends itself to: blue-skinned PCs, monsters, NPCs, or what-have-you whose blue skin looks oversaturated, but at the same time the shading of their faces and figures is quite detailed and precise. Now, my own take on this is that both the hand-drawn stuff and the digital stuff have a feeling of unreality about them, but they each yield a different kind of feeling of unreality. It's not so easy verbally to nail down in a description, but it's very easy to see. I myself have no great quarrel with either of these two styles of art: my only point was that when those who dislike the new style say it's not for them, we shouldn't just assume their reaction is a politically or morally loaded one. It very legitimately could be just a purely aesthetic one, couldn't it? And I see no reason why I should pillory them for having that aesthetic preference, right? Some people (God help them) just don't like the taste of coffee. I do. But my love for something they personally dislike doesn't and shouldn't serve to prevent our becoming friends, should it?

My complaint in Morrus' thread and then in this one has never really been about the art: it is and has been about the way we allow ourselves to treat each other. I think Mr. Rinaldelli deserved a more patient, welcoming reception than he was given, especially in light of English not being his first language. I think beancounter deserved a more patient and charitable hearing than he was afforded, and I most definitely think it was way, way out of line for a few members to accuse him of bigotry and racism, of all things. I mean, come on....

Catching up, so it's possible someone else has already said it, but... in your version of the game, you can emphasize or ignore whatever you want.

Of course. That's why I expressly put the "the" under erasure and replaced it with "my version of the..."

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

Except you then turned around and said:


And...

Which 1 Billion percent does not follow from the actual poll question

I'm ok with those changes, even if my ideal setting has a different aesthetics.​

Try to not be apodictic. What's the meaning of this phrase for you?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

This inflaction is typically appreciated by newcomers, the long time observer appreciate something more diluted, an artwork in which fantasy is present and evident, but not pervasive and shouted

This is a somewhat common, but very flawed, perspective on art.

European/Western tradition holds up minimalism as better than saturation, but outside that tradition many people with long years of artistic creation and appreciation behind them continue to enjoy Picasso more than Rembrandt.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm ok with those changes, even if my ideal setting has a different aesthetics.​

Try not to be apodictic. What's the meaning of this phrase for you?

That... I'm okay with the changes, even if they aren't my ideal?

And absolutely not that I don't want to play in that world.= or that they provide no inspiration.

If I only used official materials that followed my aesthetics, I'd only have Eberron ever.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

This is a somewhat common, but very flawed, perspective on art.

European/Western tradition holds up minimalism as better than saturation, but outside that tradition many people with long years of artistic creation and appreciation behind them continue to enjoy Picasso more than Rembrandt.

Curious because when I see Picasso I don't see saturation. I see colors, I see a full painted canvas but not saturation. Saturation is something different from fullness. Saturation has more in common with obsessive reiteration, repetition, fear of not being enough or not enough clear in the statement. This thread is saturated

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

Curious because when I see Picasso I don't see saturation. I see colors, I see a full painted canvas but not saturation. Saturation is something different from fullness. Saturation has more in common with obsessive reiteration, repetition, fear of not being enough or not enough clear in the statement. This thread is saturated

And also my message of course.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

That... I'm okay with the changes, even if they aren't my ideal?

So, if you were rich enough to commission your own illustration without effort, or simply you close the eyes and imagine your fantasy world, you would choose something different, right?

 

[Undrave]

This inflaction is typically appreciated by newcomers, the long time observer appreciate something more diluted, an artwork in which fantasy is present and evident, but not pervasive and shouted. My english do not permit to myself to express more clearly my toughts. Excuse me.

No, I get it, you'd rather the fantasy be more subtle and hinted at instead of giant explosions of magic light and bold crystals etc. You want something that feels more like every day life in a fantasy world without extravagance. There is beauty in everyday life, after all.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Curious because when I see Picasso I don't see saturation. I see colors, I see a full painted canvas but not saturation. Saturation is something different from fullness. Saturation has more in common with obsessive reiteration, repetition, fear of not being enough or not enough clear in the statement. This thread is saturated

I’m not going argue semantics.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So, if you were rich enough to commission your own illustration without effort, or simply you close the eyes and imagine your fantasy world, you would choose something different, right?

I assume that everyone would, regardless of what aesthetic that has ever been used for any game we are discussing.