• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E D&D and who it's aimed at

Mercurius

Legend
Amiri.jpg
This picture inspired a thought, a hypothesis, if you will.

When I first encountered Wayne Reynolds' art back in the late Aughties, I thought "I love his unique comic-ish styling, but man, I sure wish he'd cut it out with the big swords and the worse excesses of anime-stylings. I mean, how many buckles do you need?" Or something like that.

Meanwhile, when I look at some of the old and simply amateurish art of the D&D I grew up with in the early 80s, it feels classic, or at least pleases my nostalgia sensibilities. I mean, let's be honest: Erol Otus wasn't a very good artist (at least in terms of technique), but he holds a special place in my heart as one of the iconic D&D artists when I first started to play. And don't get me started on the 1E Fiend Folio cover...

I started playing D&D just before the influx of professional artists: Easley, Elmore, Parkinson, Caldwell, etc, who brought an entirely new level of technical proficiency. For those who started much later, it is hard to explain the impact of such art: it was like seeing a technicolor film for the first time.

Here's the thought/hypothesis: back when Wayne Reynolds first appeared on the scene (or I noticed him), I was in my early 30s. If I had first encountered that art back in the early 80s when I was a kid, I might have loved it. But now I'm not so fond of it (or again, I like his technical style, just not a lot of his content).

Or in terms of music, while my tastes have evolved from my adolescence, I still enjoy listening to the Smiths or New Order or The The on occasion, even though there is music that I enjoy more, that resonates more deeply with me, both emotionally and aesthetically (I mean, thank the gods I don't still go to The Cure for emotional succor!).

My point is, we get imprinted at an early age - and the form or aesthetic of something when we first encounter it, holds a special place in our hearts forever. As a general rule. So while I enjoy the art of Erol Otus or Jeff Dee, or that awesome mult-page storybook of dungeoneering near the end of the 1E DMG, I can see why a younger person might think, to quote Luke Skywalker, "What a piece of junk!" They have no reason to be fond of it, because they didn't experience it at the time - it didn't imprint on them.

This doesn't mean we can't acquire a taste for older stuff. I love funk and jazz-funk from the early to mid-70s, and didn't get into it until when I was around 19-20 in the early to mid-90s. It also doesn't mean we can't acquire a taste for newer stuff; I didn't get into hip-hop until my early 20s and downtempo electronica and House music until my mid-20s. And I still occasionally find a newish popular band I like, though my main "locus of taste" is on more obscure stuff.

But my point is, again, that we "imprint" on certain eras, and in a way they become exempt from any refinement in our tastes. They become "classic" to us, while to someone that didn't imprint on them, they seem out-dated or amateurish.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Scribe

Legend
But my point is, again, that we "imprint" on certain eras, and in a way they become exempt from any refinement in our tastes. They become "classic" to us, while to someone that didn't imprint on them, they seem out-dated or amateurish.

Absolutely, and you can bring it right back to the topic of this thread (meandering as it is).

We imprint, at a specific point in time. A specific age if you will. If the content of what we are consuming changes from that imprint, then our age, certainly matters, in the final analysis no?

Its like a Chris Rock bit about the music we enjoy and other activities coinciding...
 

We imprint, at a specific point in time. A specific age if you will. If the content of what we are consuming changes from that imprint, then our age, certainly matters, in the final analysis no?
I mean, no? Not even restricting this to D&D now, but haven't your tastes and preferences ever changed? Even then, I can't imagine going back to 1980, seeing the 5e art -- any of it -- and thinking, "This sucks! It should look more like Erol Otus!"
 


Scribe

Legend
I mean, no? Not even restricting this to D&D now, but haven't your tastes and preferences ever changed? Even then, I can't imagine going back to 1980, seeing the 5e art -- any of it -- and thinking, "This sucks! It should look more like Erol Otus!"
Why not? I look at the art of the last few books, compare it to plenty of things from earlier, and think exactly that?
 


Scribe

Legend
Yeah, takes all kinds, man...
I mean, yeah, it does.

The point of this whole discussion is one of if we feel we are still being aimed at for Wizards products. I dont feel I am at all, and the art plays a big part in that, exactly because of the 'imprint' of what I enjoyed and look for still.

Can tastes change? Certainly. I listen to far more mellow music now, than the punk I did as a kid (even if I will still play punk...) but we all have our preferences, likes and dislikes, and that shouldnt be surprising?
 


Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I don't know about the half-naked part, but this is could very easily come back. Anime seems very popular amongst much of the fanbase now, and unbelievably large swords are kind of a staple of a lot of popular anime.
I'll point out that half-naked(and very often more) is also a staple of a lot of popular anime. :p
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
Yeah, takes all kinds, man...
I mean, yeah, it does.

The point of this whole discussion is one of if we feel we are still being aimed at for Wizards products. I dont feel I am at all, and the art plays a big part in that, exactly because of the 'imprint' of what I enjoyed and look for still.

Can tastes change? Certainly. I listen to far more mellow music now, than the punk I did as a kid (even if I will still play punk...) but we all have our preferences, likes and dislikes, and that shouldnt be surprising?
Yeah, I just cannot imagine how someone could see art as awesome as this:
1650923361650.png

1650923420893.png

1650923501530.png

. . . and somehow think that D&D would be better off with art looking like this:
1650923519504.png

1650923564455.png
1650923624249.png


Erol Otus is certainly a better artist than I am . . . but I also think that this art looks awful. D&D art is just waaaaay better now. I would never, ever want D&D's art style to go back to looking like that abomination.

Nostalgia is a hell of a drug.
 

Remove ads

Top