3e WOTC Color Artwork

[MoogleEmpMog]

While there is room to dissent in terms of the quality of the artwork from piece to piece (I too miss Prakinson and Elmore a lot), I think this is a very different point than the overall art direction and graphic design of 3E books.

The overall consistency of presentatation and layout of the physical product is vastly superior to anything produced in any other version of D&D - or by any other publisher. There is, accordingly, a pride of ownership of 3.x books I have not ever felt before - and I've been gaming since the late 70s.

It's vastly superior to anything produced in any other version of D&D - that I'll agree with. But I don't agree about 'any other publisher.'

Arcana Unearthed is black and white only. It's also much, much more readable and, to my eyes, attractive. Mongoose's Conan the Roleplaying Game is a full color hardbound with superior cover art (IMO) and equal interior art, that is also much more readable. WotC's own Eberron and d20 Modern lines are much more readable than their core D&D line.

I find the 3.x core line's art direction and design sub-par for a major d20 company. Considering the vastly greater resources at Wizards' fingertips, and the superior layouts they've deployed in other products, there's really no excuse for that.

 

[Testament]

I actually like Dennis Cramer's work.

Me too. Well, I like his black and white work, his colour work is truly awful.

That said, all shall kneel before Ron Spencer. His Frenzied Beserker in CW, and his Dread Pirate in CV stand as two of current favourite pieces.

 

[Pants]

I find the 3.x core line's art direction and design sub-par for a major d20 company. Considering the vastly greater resources at Wizards' fingertips, and the superior layouts they've deployed in other products, there's really no excuse for that.

If by design, you mean layout, and overall design of the books, I'd very vehemenently disagree. I pick through my pile of 3rd party books and I see large font, large margins, poor tables of contents, and other little niggling issues. The only books I have that don't really seem to suffer from those problems are The Book of Fiends (though I still dislike some things about its design), the Tome of Horrors, and CCII. All IMO of course...

But, if by design, you meant something else, then I'll withdraw that comment.

 

[Akrasia]

The various WOTC books have had great artwork lately. A significant improvement over 1e and 2e.
....

Ugh. Sorry, this is incorrect. :\

Give me Trampier's PHB cover anyday over *any* 3E cover.

More generally, the whole 'dungeonpunk' look does nothing for me.

(YMMV of course. These threads rarely lead to constructive dialogue. Not that that prevents me from commenting, of course.)

 

[Eremite]

WOTC cannot hold a candle to the artwork in Fantasy Flight Games products. FFG has the best art I have seen in any edition.

How true.

I like WotC's layouts, generally speaking, but they use some really, really, really bad artists for some of their work. Crabapple, of course, springs to mind as someone whose work is woeful but Jeremy Jarvis is not too far behind.

If I had my way, I would probably reduce the roster to Wayne England, Todd Lockwood, Wayne Reynolds, Sam Wood and bring back Arnie/Arne Swekel for that fantastic B&W art he did in the latter days of 2E. In addition, I would get the FFG team in on the roster as well.

I would rather have good B&W art that continue to have the "luxury" of colour art by Crabapple, Jarvis et al. Both 2E and FFG have gotten this right, IMO.

 

[demiurge1138]

I do agree that the majority of the 3e artwork is superior to the previous editions. I also agree that DiTerlizzi's Planescape art rocked. But I don't agree that all his fiends were cute and cuddly. The manes, I'll grant. Dretches, as well. But some, like the vrocks, were extremely well done, and the maurehzi still creeps me out. And the alu-fiend and succubus are hot. That goes without saying.

But yeah, 3e artwork is usually really, really good, except, yeah, Crabapple. Some of his B&W is pretty good, and his color stuff is getting better. But a lot of it is just bad.

Demiurge out.

 

[Turjan]

If by design, you mean layout, and overall design of the books, I'd very vehemenently disagree. I pick through my pile of 3rd party books and I see large font, large margins, poor tables of contents, and other little niggling issues. The only books I have that don't really seem to suffer from those problems are The Book of Fiends (though I still dislike some things about its design), the Tome of Horrors, and CCII. All IMO of course...

But, if by design, you meant something else, then I'll withdraw that comment.

I don't see what a large font or large margins have to do with bad design. These details may result in a low word per cost ratio, but it's not negative for the looks of the book. Atlas Games' books have always be shunned for large headline fonts and lots of white space, but nevertheless their older books look quite beautiful, though a bit busy (just look at 'Touched by the Gods' ). The FFG books have a very clear design with good art. And I agree that Malhavoc's books have a crisp and very readible layout that let's me forget that it does not use any colour. Of course, there are true stinkers regarding layout in the d20 crowd, but most of them are gone.

 

[Li Shenron]

The various WOTC books have had great artwork lately. A significant improvement over 1e and 2e.

Presentation has really improved. Everything from creative dungeons (RTTOE, COSQ) to really nice artwork in the books (Complete X series, core books). And the Draconomicon has awesome Dragon artwork.

I have seen quite a few older-edition books compared to 3ed ones, but I had the impression than 3ed art was far superior.

It really depends on the artist however, there are some 3ed illustrations from a few authors that I have seriously disliked. Even in the Draconomicon I remember to have notices absolutely brilliant sketches (those dragons seen from below!), but also quite lame pics in the later chapters.

Also, while in general color artwork is IMHO definitely better, B&W can be amazing too. Actually some authors are much better at B&W, for example Sam Woods is one of my favourite, but I think he even surpassed himself in Legions of Hell which is B&W.

 

[Zander]

More generally, the whole 'dungeonpunk' look does nothing for me.

Or me. But then, my views on dungeonpunk are fairly well known already since Dragon published a letter I wrote a few months ago questioning whether the new art style is in the best interest of D&D.

 

[Berandor]

I agree about FFG art - it's great. Also, the art in Poisoncraft from BlueDevil Games was, though I'd have wanted some more of it, of excellent quality. I can't think of a single pic I disliked, and several that really made me go "wow". B/W, as well.