WotC has shared some new art of Takhisis, Dragonlance’s 5-headed dragon queen.
Last edited by a moderator:
Pictured- Tanis meets Kitiara.
"You know, when I talk to a bunch of adventurers half of me keeps thinking how much fun it would be to give them some fun items, show them to the nearest dungeon, tell them what the traps are and where all the best loot is."Ah yes, Tanis Half-Yuppie.
"Kitiara, you're gonna have the Flamestrike Chili and Otik's Spiced Fried Potatoes. Palanthas Matinee called it "a playful but mysterious little dish." You'll love it. And then the Shrimp Tarsis. I think that'll follow nicely."
I’m with you on this. Don’t care for the new super chunky dragon design…they look ponderous, sluggish and brutish rather than sleek, sinister and intelligent like the older stuff.I've always preferred the sleeker Caldwell version of the dragons, so I'm not a huge fan of that art and they way dragons are depicted in D&D now. Eh, I guess that boat sailed more than 20 years ago though...lol
Nah I love the design of modern D&D Dragons.But I’d hope we can all agree that D&D dragons have always been kinda bad, artistically?
Like…modern D&D dragons are too repetitive due to the specific design by color variant, gem dragons are meh, and the older ones tend toward the goofy. IMO
You must hate ThemberchaudI’m with you on this. Don’t care for the new super chunky dragon design…they look ponderous, sluggish and brutish rather than sleek, sinister and intelligent like the older stuff.
Everyone's different. For me, D&D dragons are the standard I put other dragons up too and I typically find most others lacking. On the other hand, my son thinks the GoT dragons (not HotD) are the gold standard.Very fair. What I really mean, I guess, is art direction. The design aesthetics of dragons in dnd have always, to me, fallen so far short of anything I'd call interesting and cool/good that I wonder who the heck is making these style decisions.