3E art and age

3E art and age...

  • I'm under 18

    Votes: 12 3.8%
  • I'm 18-21

    Votes: 37 11.6%
  • I'm 22-25

    Votes: 75 23.4%
  • I'm 26-30

    Votes: 74 23.1%
  • I'm 31-35

    Votes: 87 27.2%
  • I'm over 35

    Votes: 36 11.3%
  • Im very negative on 3E art

    Votes: 18 5.6%
  • I'm negative on 3E art

    Votes: 42 13.1%
  • I'm neutral on 3E art

    Votes: 58 18.1%
  • I'm positive on 3E art

    Votes: 127 39.7%
  • I'm very positive on 3E art

    Votes: 63 19.7%

I guess what bothers me the most about spiky armor and oversized weapons are how physically disadvantageous they would be in use. Some simple application of real-world physics reveals their improbability:

For example- any armor that has spikes, protrustions, or helms with horns, wings, etc would be a severe disadvantage to their wearer. If a blow strikes a horn projecting off someone's helmet, its going to transmit the force of the blow to their head (which would act as a fulcrum) yanking their head in the direction of the blow, which could snap the stupid sod's neck. Same thing goes for spikes projecting off armor- a spike on the shoulder, if hit right, would dislocate a character's shoulder, making him easy pickings for his enemy. There was a reason real-life armor (other than some ceremonial armor) looked like it did- it was functional, AND it protected the wearer from injury, instead of being a possible source of injury.

Weapons- some of the weapons pictured in the PHB just wouldn't be feasible to use. The ones that jump out at me are the warhammer, greataxe, orc double axe, dwarven war axe, urgosh, dire flail, and two-bladed sword. The way these weapons are shown, they would be too heavy, unbalanced, and require extensive effort to recover and ready again from a single attack. In addition, many of those weapons are oversized, and would result in injury to their user rather than the enemy. Again, through trial and error, people discovered what kinds of weapons worked and stuck with it. Maybe they weren't as pretty or interesting as those depicted in the PHB, but you can bet they were a lot more useful.

I'm not debating the fact that armor and weapons might have cosmetic differences between real-world and fantasy world cultures- they would. The armor of dwarves should be heavy and solid-looking but very well balanced, while the armor of elves would be light and not hinder movement. But by adding on spikes and oversizing these items, they would be made non-functional. And we have to apply real-world physics to fantasy world situations so we can understand what SHOULD happen. If you toss out the notion that real-world physics applies, then suddenly you have to rethink all of your weapons, from swords, to maces, and especially missile weapons. Of course we can always slap on the addendum that "magic makes it possible", but IMO, thats just dodging the issue.

Sorry, I don't mean to rant, but I just wanted to point out some things many people might not have considered. I'm very likely being too scientific about this (because I am a scientist), but it bugs me sometimes. I guess I would just like the art to reflect functionality (which is what adventurers would be concerned with- bottom line). JeffB is right, the LOTR movies have great looking fantasy armor and weapons that would work- and not a spike or oversized warhammer in the lot if it. :D

I agree with Sigil- the classic "black suit" medieval stuff is always in style and looks great. The artists WoTC has working for them now are undeniably artistically very skilled, I just don't care much for the current trend of "edgy goth-punk" that is prevalent now. My guess is that in 5 years when the 90's styles have gone the way of big hair, hot pants, and legwarmers, we're going to look at some of this art and go "HUH???"

PS- David Griffith: I really like your dwarves- they have such a wide range of facial expressions and great detail, that you really get the dwarf 'tude off them. I also thought the recent art you did for Monster's Handbook was incredible. Keep up the great work!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I like the 3e art, and I'm 26. (Just turned, stupid new age bracket. ;) ) I liked the 1e art, but 2e - not so much. 3e art is a little lacking in excitement, which is to say that it doesn't inspire me as much as 1e, but it's still nice to look at.

The pictures I like are the ones where you can see adventure all around it. Where something interesting is going on (like in the 1e DMG, back in the "random dungeon creation", where those adventurers are exploring some dungeons), and 3e doesn't have too much of that. It's still good, though.
 

for the gothy stuff, or specifically the terrible tribal tattoo stuff:

hennet, iconic sorceror
every single Red wizard fo thay in the FR stuff
Numerous pictures within the BoVD (which i love, i just hate the tattoos...)
 

Age 25 (minus a month)
Some of my Favorite D&D Artists:
Otis, Gerald Brom , Robh Ruppel (sp?), Elmore (line art more than paintings), Di'Terlizzi, Lockwood, and others I can't think of at the moment.

Some of my Least favorite D&D Artists:
BAXA!!! -at least he gave me hope. A. Swekel ugh!-The parchment concept in the PHB is great, but the big-breasted man at the beginning of chapter one is creepy.

Guy:"Uh... I'm here for the third edition playtest...yeah, I'll be playing "Boobsy the breasted boy"...."
Art Director: "I smell an iconic character!"
Guy(Thumbs up):"Aw-riiiight..."

(slowly stepping away from post..)
 
Last edited:

kenjib said:

Cool. I'm 30, and will be 31 in precisely 15 days.

Overall I dislike the 3e art style. It's both too comic book-ish and goth-cyberpunk for me.

[...]

My favorite old artists are Dave Trampier and Erol Otus.

... who are possibly the ones with the most stylised, comic-bookish artwork in the 1E books. I'm talking KODT and Dork Tower comics here.
 

32 and very positive at least for most of WotC's and Dungeon/Dragon/Poly's art.

Not that the poll on its own would tell you anything as you can't tell who voted for what. Unless the person adds a comment like this.
 

I'm over 35, and I'm neutral about 3E art. I think the tattooed and pierced look will look dated rapidly (and so will the real people who have done these things to themselves) but the 3E look is better than Elmore at al. I know he's popular, but I just can't stand his stuff. And why do all his women have to have a bad 80s long curly shag? Blech.
 

Though I no longer play 3e, I remember that I had to make a conscious effort to ignore the art before I gave it a try.

One of my single biggest complaints wrt 3e; and, while it may seem a superficial one, it truly ruins the "feel" for me.

I'll also join what others have said and say that I think the look WotC has chosen to go with will prove to be much less timeless than what has come before.

So...

35+ and with a really negative opinion of 3e art.
 

27 & very positive.

I don't think the 3ed art is too punkish, only some characters seems very modern to me. PHB, MM and MotP are very good IMO, while maybe the worst are Deities and Demigods and ELH (what? those are Gods and Epic heroes? they look much less than the PHB iconic 1st-level PCs IMHO :))

Sam Wood, Todd Lockwood and Wayne Reynolds my favourite: I though it was my own opinion, but when I arrive to this messageboard I found out that they are the most appreciated by all...
 

37 and am negative towards 3e art.

Too comic bookish, anime for my taste.

Some of it I actually really like, but most of it "ruins the feel"

In the same way a wand shaped like a gun, while having some practicality would also "ruin the feel" or a magical machine gun crossbow.

I find the classic styles more fantastical. Could be nolstagia but i think Sigil really hit the nail on the head for me, the new art tends to look dated to me while the older art seems more classic.

Oddly enough, i would say the best of the 3E art is probably better than the best of the 1E/2E art, but the percentage of 3E art that I like and find provocative for my gaming is far far less.

apoptosis
 

Remove ads

Top