Search results

Bah! Haven't you people learned ANYTHING from 3rd edition D&D?! It would be: "Arcane Spellcasters of the Midwest". :p

Hey bub, that's "tCLoGNA". :D

I love the cover, I really do, but to me, the title and sky around it looks a bit... well, empty. What do you think of adding an old-style "sign" of sorts at the top of the cover, with the title recessed into it like it was carved, or some such?

Well, while I totally missed the thread in question and thus have no idea of what you're referring to, I will say that it takes a person of good character to 'fess up to their actions and apologize publically. You da man, KDL! ;)

Hey PC, any chance you could archive this thread when its ready? This stuff is too hilarious to be buried! :)

That Flash intro was just... NICE! I'm really glad to see DQG/N2P decide to go this route with advertising and I dearly hope that other publishers decide to as well. :) I would imagine so, since the N2P logo is on the product.

Hmm... perhaps he meant if WotC decided to allow Fluid to include OGC from d20 publishers in E-Tools? And besides, if it is OGC, then what can anyone really say about it? It would be very nice and polite if WotC contacted those publishers for permission, but technically, they really don't have...

Damn. Just when I already am a fanboy of the Cook family, they go and give us yet another valuable resource! You can be assured that I'll be pounding on your new forum's door very soon. Thanks again to you both. :)

As with other types of media, you can make one copy of the .pdf for back-up reasons and one for your printing pleasure (don't quote me -- IANAL). Hmm... maybe it is just one copy period, or as many as you like as long as it is for your own personal use. *shrug* However, while it is the right...

[/b] Ouch. Well, I truly wasn't meaning to imply that I think Otus' art sucks per se, because I really don't think that. My apologies, because I really hate saying that anyone's creative efforts "suck" -- when there is bound to be some good in even the most "horrible" effort. Now, if you're...

[/b] Hmm... either I didn't word it right, or you're just not getting my point. Let me try again! Picasso and Rembrandt painted COMPLETELY DIFFERENT things. Picasso painted produced a range of images from classical figures to radical abstractions to... you name it. Rembrandt painted portraits...

Hardly! You must have missed this snippet of text by me: Now at no point did I say, or even hint, that Otus' art "sucks" -- I even complimented it! Now, I did of course follow it up with a kind of "while he is/was good, I don't think he can be compared to X". But that is far from insulting...

Heh... I'm not falling for that one, my dear Colonel. ;) You can't truly compare the skill of Picasso vs. Rembrandt, simply because they didn't paint the same subject matter at all. Also, Picasso utilized many different styles throughout his career. When it comes to D&D artists, they're all...

Well, I for one didn't get into D&D with 2e or 3e, but at the same time, I can recognize the improved art with each new edition of the game. And it really doesn't matter *when* someone gets into D&D -- if they have seen samples of all artists involved, they are certainly capable of giving their...

I respect your passion about not liking someone taking subjective subjects and trying to come out with a clear-cut winner, but at the same time, we're all adult enough here to attempt to support why we believe one artist may be the superior of another, right? Well hopefully I've cleared up...

No, this poll is about which artist clearly defines D&D -- NOT when D&D was defined by an artist for you. Sure, Otus and others defined D&D in the days of 1e, just as Elmore and others did a fine job in 2e, while Lockwood and others have defined that in 3e for people. But out of ALL of the...

Simple -- Rembrandt. Picasso balked against the order that painting must mirror reality and thus presented objects represented simultaneously from several points of view. Rembrandt made portraits. Now, I'm not saying that the child in my example could mirror Rembrandt 100%, but he would come...

Before I go into a more precise reply, please show me how Otus' art "holds up very well today". If the standards of today are publishers seeking the style of a WAR, Lockwood, Brom, and the like, then how could the style of Otus possibly "hold up"? Also, given the average kid with a desire for...

Oh no, you didn't... BAXA?! As in TOM BAXA?! Ugh... I have to fight back the urge to puke whenever I look through my old Dark Sun books and see his art... *shudder*

I just have to throw this in the mix: "Hey MM2 design team -- Dark Sun called and wants their monsters back!" Why can't they just release the setting for third edition, as opposed to picking beasties piecemeal for books like the MM2 and Psi HB?