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

EzekielRaiden · Mar 26, 2022

Hussar said:
That’s a bit inaccurate.

The point way back there was that the art was being Disneyfied to appeal to a younger audience. It wasn’t just that the art is Disneyfied but it’s also the infantilization of the game that it’s being paired with.

Compounded with the idea that somehow material for todays younger audience is less mature than what would be appropriate for a younger audience in the past.

While I get the point about dog piling. Sure. But this isn’t entirely unjustified. There have been some pretty broad brush claims being made that are pretty insulting to anyone who doesn’t agree.

Yeah. If it had been limited to just "seems like the new art is a lot more colorful, kinda reminds me of cartoons, that's not really my jam" I don't think it would have gotten nearly as much pushback. But it came as a bundle of four claims, arranged in order from least to most controversial:

1. The new books reflect a consistent, relatively new, trend of replacing a well-defined former art style with a well-defined a new style
2. That new style is (excessively) colorful, positive, clean, and high-fantasy (and that is a drop in quality or appropriateness)
3. That new style is specifically made for appealing to children, especially very young children
4. The effort to appeal to young children is coupled with an overall societal coddling of children in general, which will negatively affect D&D

All of these have gotten some pushback, and I personally have responded to each of them in different ways @Ulorian . I dispute that there ever was a single, well-defined former art style for D&D--rather, it has always been an eclectic mix of many, many different styles, and these new pieces aren't even necessarily breaking new ground. (The alt cover of Radiant Citadel is the closest to doing so.) Further, I dispute that there is any real trend yet displayed--at best, this is the absolute earliest first blush of some kind of change, and responding as some folks have in this thread sounds an awful lot like pearl-clutching alarmist rhetoric, which we've been hearing about D&D pretty much since the dawn of the hobby. As one person wrote, the players once vilified as "munchkins" have become the grognards of today, and many have incorporated some of their former "munchkin" interests into the way OSR gaming is now done.

The second point is mostly controversial for the parenthetical bits. "These are colorful, positive, clean, and very high-fantasy, and I don't really care for that" is a perfectly valid stance to take. "These are too colorful, positive, clean, and high-fantasy for D&D art, which is concerning" is rather a different beast. I can make similar points about the third and fourth claims, but I won't belabor the point (a shocking swerve from my usual posting style!)

Umbran · Mar 26, 2022

Alright folks, this thread is not about me. It is supposed to be about art.

If you have a concern, criticism, or complaint, please take it out of thread. Specifically, @Ulorian, you are free to talk to Morrus at any time if you are displeased with moderators. But in any case, it is time for this thread to go back to being about art, please and thanks, everyone.

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos · Mar 26, 2022

The way I operate: if you get under my skin, it is momentary and situational. I don't hold grudges. It's not my nature. But if you are currently getting under my skin, you will be made aware of it! I have never met a human being whose value I did not appreciate though. Do not take my coarseness as anything more than momentary.

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos · Mar 26, 2022

EzekielRaiden said:
Yeah. If it had been limited to just "seems like the new art is a lot more colorful, kinda reminds me of cartoons, that's not really my jam" I don't think it would have gotten nearly as much pushback. But it came as a bundle of four claims, arranged in order from least to most controversial:

1. The new books reflect a consistent, relatively new, trend of replacing a well-defined former art style with a well-defined a new style
2. That new style is (excessively) colorful, positive, clean, and high-fantasy (and that is a drop in quality or appropriateness)
3. That new style is specifically made for appealing to children, especially very young children
4. The effort to appeal to young children is coupled with an overall societal coddling of children in general, which will negatively affect D&D

All of these have gotten some pushback, and I personally have responded to each of them in different ways @Ulorian . I dispute that there ever was a single, well-defined former art style for D&D--rather, it has always been an eclectic mix of many, many different styles, and these new pieces aren't even necessarily breaking new ground. (The alt cover of Radiant Citadel is the closest to doing so.) Further, I dispute that there is any real trend yet displayed--at best, this is the absolute earliest first blush of some kind of change, and responding as some folks have in this thread sounds an awful lot like pearl-clutching alarmist rhetoric, which we've been hearing about D&D pretty much since the dawn of the hobby. As one person wrote, the players once vilified as "munchkins" have become the grognards of today, and many have incorporated some of their former "munchkin" interests into the way OSR gaming is now done.

The second point is mostly controversial for the parenthetical bits. "These are colorful, positive, clean, and very high-fantasy, and I don't really care for that" is a perfectly valid stance to take. "These are too colorful, positive, clean, and high-fantasy for D&D art, which is concerning" is rather a different beast. I can make similar points about the third and fourth claims, but I won't belabor the point (a shocking swerve from my usual posting style!)

Wow, well put! Your points are very well-stated. Brilliant post. If your points received pushback in the past, I suspect it's because they weren't codified like they are here.

Honestly, I don't see the trend either. There have been previous bits of D&D art that have leaned into the style that the OP is complaining about. I'm happy to hear counterarguments though.

Uni-the-Unicorn! · Mar 26, 2022

Yora said:
I think D&D should return to medieval designs as the baseline again. Doesn't need to stick to it, but clothing, armor, weapons, and buildings should look like they could have existed somewhere in the world in the 12th century.

No thank you.

Uni-the-Unicorn! · Mar 26, 2022

beancounter said:
Thank you for that straight forward analysis Mythos.

Yea, I know about echo chambers, but after a few months without incident, I was just hoping that this place was a bit more mature than that other D&D forum.

people here are as mature or immature as pretty much anywhere else IME, you and me included

beancounter said:
Regarding the Mod team - this was new to me. When I was a mod years ago (in a non gaming forum), I only intervened when someone broke the rules. I never interjected my opinion, no matter how wrong or inaccurate someone was. It was strange how they took it upon themselves to respond to my post that wasn't even directed at them, nor a response to something they posted.

Mods here participate as well as moderate . Not sure how it is handled on other forums, but here you need to be able separate the poster from the moderator, even if they are the s

Faolyn · Mar 26, 2022

Yora said:
I think D&D should return to medieval designs as the baseline again. Doesn't need to stick to it, but clothing, armor, weapons, and buildings should look like they could have existed somewhere in the world in the 12th century.

"Ye Cleric rebukes a liche."

Malmuria · Mar 26, 2022

Faolyn said:
View attachment 154304
"Ye Cleric rebukes a liche."

Lich was probably trying to tell her about nfts

teitan · Mar 26, 2022

I preferred when D&D artists and worlds had stylistic variations. Erol Otus wasn’t Jeff Dee and you knew when you were looking at Elmore, Caldwell or Easley, Wayne Reynolds or Lockwood. Each had different styles of art and even each world had different art direction to help differentiate them and it went a long way to defining those worlds. Dragonlance didn’t not look like Forgotten Realms and that was intentional. 4 and 5e era has kinda of gotten technically better at art, sorta, but lost much of that lived in and cultural variation, it’s too clean and precise.

reelo · Mar 26, 2022

Ruin Explorer said:
Currently D&D is drifting into a particularly generic "modern fantasy" style that exists solely because there is so much fantasy now, and illustrators have sort of converged on this particular approach, which I've described before. I don't hate it, but it is boring. It's less irritating than some approaches for sure, and closer to the "imagined aesthetic" of most D&D sessions I've been involved in than some styles.

Very well summed up.

The problem—for me—is that most of the current digital fantasy art is in a sort of bland style that looks like all the artists have learned from the same old "digital painting" tutorials on DeviantArt and YouTube. And it's NOT just D&D, it's a pretty widespread occurence. I mean, it certainly takes skill, learning anatomy, perspective, composition, colour-theory, and then mastering the program(s) like PS, Krita, Clip Studio Paint, Affinity, or whatever.
But most of these artists don't have the slightest hint of a personal style. Their artwork remains completely interchangeable. It's utterly nondescript, and none of them dare to stand out.

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

What is your feeling about the changes in aesthetics of D&D illustrations?

I really enjoy those changes. The illustrations resemble well my ideal setting!

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

I'm uncertain about those changes

I'm not ok with those changes because it impairs my immersion in the game.

I hate those changes, I do not recognize D&D anymore

The art doesn't really matter to me either way. I don't buy/play the game for the art.

Change in aesthetics? Where? What?

EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way

Umbran

Mod Squad

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos

Legend

Ulorian - Agent of Chaos

Legend

Uni-the-Unicorn!

Hero

Uni-the-Unicorn!

Hero

Faolyn

(she/her)

Malmuria

Hero

teitan

Legend

reelo

Hero

Similar Threads