D&D 5E Toward a new D&D aesthetics

More examples would be helpful.

For example, as much as I love the realistic Dragonslayer’s picture from the 2E Player’s Handbook, you also have the “JEM” artwork spread throughout it as well, which has a VERY cartoon look to it:

I don’t really see any significant aesthetic change over the course of 5e. As others have observed, 5e art has always been pretty eclectic, but overall it tends towards very vibrant, stylized but not cartoony, the kind of stuff that would be at home in American comic books. Certainly this is a big change from the art of previous editions, but that’s been true of every edition as far as I can tell. Internally, 5e seems pretty stylistically consistent to me.

Undrave said:

That's a defendable position for sure. At the same time, everybody's imagination is going to render D&D adventure slightly different, isn't it? I think it fits D&D to have all these different styles to represent the same world, as a representation of how each of us has a different view in his mind's eye of what is going on, while still being valid. I like to hear from a variety of voices when it come to art.

Click to expand...

Art is one of the most powerful tool to define a setting, so a good artistic direction is essential to convey a coherent description. If you say steampunk, I expect an aesthetic that goes with the genre. Coherent art will also give me a clue on what the setting isn't. Or perhaps you deviate from the typical representation on purpose to sell your setting as "steampunk but with X" but again, art is one of the tools as your disposal to convey this.

Ultimately, I think were both saying the same thing except that I have a tighter focus of "coherent artistic direction". Art in D&D isn't incoherent per se, but as a whole it is too broad to give it any identity of its own. As a game this is fine, great even since you can show that your game can fit various different settings. And to a certain extent, the broad artistic representations of D&D becomes its own identity. It just becomes a soup with too many ingredients for me, even if I like every ingredient used in that soup.

Charlaquin said:

I don’t really see any significant aesthetic change over the course of 5e. As others have observed, 5e art has always been pretty eclectic, but overall it tends towards very vibrant, stylized but not cartoony, the kind of stuff that would be at home in American comic books. Certainly this is a big change from the art of previous editions, but that’s been true of every edition as far as I can tell. Internally, 5e seems pretty stylistically consistent to me.

Click to expand...

It's definitely the most stylistically consistent edition thus far. I find that the changes in the last two years (give or take) was more in terms of scope than style.

Scribe said:

And thats fine but thats kind of what I want. A clear difference between genres.

Theres a place for that futuristic, 80's neon style. I just dont think its Fantasy. Certainly not what I want Fantasy to look like, because...yes. I want it to be more evocative of a DIFFERENT type of Fantasy.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry to say this, which inherently risks disrespect, and I hope you can believe that I don't mean it disrespectfully.

Fantasy is allowed to be more than your specific preference, and your preference isn't better or truer than mine. I love Lord of The Rings. I view it as a better piece of prose art than most of the western literary "canon", and one of the foundational touchstones of modern fantasy. I am currently listening to it for the first time in unabridged audiobook format, and it has fired my imagination more than years and years of discussions online have ever done, which is saying something. It's one of the best works of fiction ever written.

Final Fantasy 7 doesn't take anything away from The Lord of The Rings. They're both incredible works of fantasy.

We aren't going to get 20 straight years of the same style of fantasy story from DnD. Fantasy has expanded. The ship you seem to want sailed decades ago.

I get loving the soft focus almost impressionist oil painting fantasy art of a bygone era. That stuff is cool as hell, at least as often as it sucks, which is an accomplishment.

But to paraphrase Jerry Holkins of Aquisitions Inc, DnD is best when a description of it evokes the art on the side of a van.

Scribe said:

I'm not saying you cannot have a neon planar Fantasy. Thats exactly what I would think of, but there's also a different more grounded Fantasy that doesnt really sit in the same place.

Click to expand...

And both are part of DnD, and have been for decades. And that is good for the genre, the hobby, and the game.

Scribe said:

Like to go back to the Forest. There is the one I like, and then we have from Kamigawa.


View attachment 154117

Sure, its a 'Forest' but is it anywhere in the same ballpark as the first one? Not for my money.

Click to expand...

Which ballpark are we discussing, here? Do we mean it isn't in the same genre? If so, then kinda yes but also no. It's fantasy. It's a forest that has some magical trees pumping magical nature energy out to a magically advanced city. It just isn't the same subgenre of fantasy as the other forest.

If we mean ballpark of quality, then yes. It is absolutely in the same ballpark.

Undrave said:

A Kamigawa Neon Dynasty book would be preeeeetty sweet.

Click to expand...

Every day where this hasn't been announced is a day that is at least 20% less cool than it could be.

Umbran said:

I mean...

View attachment 154121

Click to expand...

Exactly.

I may also be biased by the fact that I'm writing a game that is a mix of fantasy genres centered on a theme of worlds in conflict with an external existential threat looming all around, and the future era of the game's setting is very retro-futurist with a mix of neo-noir and fantasy neon cyber-futurism.

Your magic sword might be a hard-light construct created by your prosthetic hand, or it might be an ancient artifact imbued with power over a hundred generations of use by dedicated champions of an ideal, that you use alongside energy shields and a hover-bike that hovers via geomantic magi-tech directed by the will of the user, who is "meshed" with the operating computer of the bike and thus experiences the bike's sensors and system-inputs as if they were the user's natural senses.

To me, that is just as much what fantasy is, as Lord of The Rings.

Yeah no worries @doctorbadwolf no disrespect felt. I'm not making a comment on the quality/value of any one style or approach.

I don't know anyone that talks about DND art anymore. I think Disneyfication as mentioned earlier is a good way to describe it. It's just art for the purpose of being non offensive to everyone and an attempt to make it age neutral.

nevin said:

I don't know anyone that talks about DND art anymore. I think Disneyfication as mentioned earlier is a good way to describe it. It's just art for the purpose of being non offensive to everyone and an attempt to make it age neutral.

Click to expand...

Everyone I know that plays talks about the art.

nevin said:

I don't know anyone that talks about DND art anymore. I think Disneyfication as mentioned earlier is a good way to describe it. It's just art for the purpose of being non offensive to everyone and an attempt to make it age neutral.

Click to expand...

I mean...every release generates dozens if not hundreds of pages of art discussion...

nevin said:

I don't know anyone that talks about DND art anymore. I think Disneyfication as mentioned earlier is a good way to describe it. It's just art for the purpose of being non offensive to everyone and an attempt to make it age neutral.

Click to expand...

Personally, I'm deeply, deeply offended that D&D art doesn't offend me.