D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

Wayne Reynolds. Cover art 4E and Pathfinder.

Very cartoons and oversized weapons.
Oversized weapons is a very Millennial focused art direction as most were teens and teens during the BFS and BFG age of cartoons, games, and anime of the mid 90s to mid 00s..

It's a very Xillennial-Millennial-Zillennial thing to have a normal sized slim guy wielding a sword, gun, or axe as tall or long as his height in your fantasy or sci-fi media.

That and dual wielders with longswords or meaty shiny handguns.

You can tell D&D isn't headed by people age 35-45. Someone would 100% ensure that Dual Wield Longswords and Oversized Greataxe/sword would be far and away the top DPR in 5e with Great Warbow Dual Wield Handcrossbow/pistol and Ultraheavy Crossbow being right behind as the range options.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't have much Pathfinder stuff so can't really comment on that. Such 4e art as I saw was IMO a very mixed bag, ranging from truly excellent to wtf and covering all the ground in between.

Who or what is WAR in this context?
WAR is an artist. WAR = Wayne Reynolds. He did D&D in 3e and 4e and a lot of Pathfinder 2e.

1744194414676.png

1744194494475.png

1744194527351.png

1744194539815.png

1744194586375.png

1744194618418.png

1744194665849.png

1744194678390.png
 

Attachments

  • 1744194635332.png
    1744194635332.png
    129.9 KB · Views: 13
  • 1744194552955.png
    1744194552955.png
    123.9 KB · Views: 12
  • 1744194902684.png
    1744194902684.png
    1.5 MB · Views: 13





LOL that was my reaction to the 2024 art... ;)
Like which ones? 2024 uses many different artists and styles. Which ones don't you like, because it is most definitely not uniform? WAR has a particular style (that some like and others, like Zard, do not), but it was not like his was the only style in 3e and 4e. Just as art varied wildly in 1e and 2e as well. Heck, there probably was never more variation in styles than in 1e/2e (some I like and others I most definitely do not!).
 


I will admit that I was not a fan of the 4e PHB cover when it came out, but I grew to appreciate it.
And now seeing the collection of his works displayed in @dave2008's post, I'm a fan. 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:

To wit, while 3e/d20 tried to consolidate everything into "one mechanic to rule them all" the proliferation of variations off the "roll a d20, apply modifiers, compare to target number, roll high" means that perhaps gamers DON'T want everything simplified. I think the real improvement of "adding numbers to a die roll" is something most people can do in their heads and means we don't have to carry around tables with us to consult (which THAC0 generally needed, at least for your pre-modifier number).

But I would contend "consult the table during character creation to find your THAC0" isn't that much different form "consult the PHB during character creation to find the rules for your spells/feats/skills/what have you." I'll bet most of us still have to consult tables to correctly know how many spell slots of each level our casters have (maybe not at first level, but your base THAC0 at first level was always 19 in 1e so that was easy)... and we don't poo-poo that table lookup and tell casters they need a better system (well, I suppose those that want a spell points system do, but you get the idea).
Thac0 's greatest sin IMHO is that it takes a one step equation (roll d20, add bonuses, compare to AC) and turns it into a two step equation (roll, add bonuses, subtract Thac0, compare to AC). That introduces two places where you can miscalculate your equation (especially when tired or not sober) and subtraction is often less intuitive than addition when doing mental math. Is it hard math? No, it's not the quadratic equation. But it's much more complicated for no real gain.
 

Remove ads

Top