D&D Logo: Opinions?

[pukunui]

So what do you think of it?

As a graphic design student, I like the new logo. I think it is well designed and well thought-out (based on the reasons stated in R&C). First of all, the 3e logo had production issues - it couldn't be resized well and didn't fit on narrow-spined books well (how many of your 3e books just have "Dungeons & Dragons" written on the spines in a plain font rather than the "sword and board" logo?). This new logo is better because, being purely typographical, it can be condensed into a two-line version for book covers or stretched out into a one line logo for spines and the website and the like. I also like the look - it's cleaner and more professional than the 3e one. It says to me that WotC's graphic designers know what they are doing.

 

[A Passing Maniac]

Ugh, hate the new logo. Way too much anime influence! They might as well just give all 4e halflings spiky blue hair on their feet and create a minimum length of three meters for all sword blades.

 

[Voss]

As a graphic design student, I like the new logo. I think it is well designed and well thought-out (based on the reasons stated in R&C). First of all, the 3e logo had production issues - it couldn't be resized well and didn't fit on narrow-spined books well (how many of your 3e books just have "Dungeons & Dragons" written on the spines in a plain font rather than the "sword and board" logo?). This new logo is better because, being purely typographical, it can be condensed into a two-line version for book covers or stretched out into a one line logo for spines and the website and the like. I also like the look - it's cleaner and more professional than the 3e one. It says to me that WotC's graphic designers know what they are doing.

They just did a fancy font for the actual brand title. That isn't a logo, any more than the title or author's name is a logo.


Also: Farfegnugan!

 

[Bryntryst]

I confuse Keith Baker and Rich Baker all the time. Can we blame both of them, just to be sure?

So do I. That should have been Rich Baker. So I would vote yes, let's include them both.

 

[pukunui]

They just did a fancy font for the actual brand title. That isn't a logo, any more than the title or author's name is a logo.


Also: Farfegnugan!

Sure it is. Logos don't have to have pictures in them. They can be purely typographical. Besides, the draconic ampersand isn't just a "fancy font".

 

[Irda Ranger]

Besides, the draconic ampersand isn't just a "fancy font".

Some fonts are fancier than others. This one's an 8.


EDIT: Not to thread-crap a humor thread, but I would seriously love it if they released that font.

 

[pukunui]

Some fonts are fancier than others. This one's an 8.

It may have started out as a font, perhaps even a not-so-fancy one, but I highly doubt it's a font anymore (there's a good chance that they took an ordinary font, applied some text effects to it in photoshop, then rasterized the type - which would mean it's no longer a font).

But this is probably getting too serious for a humor thread, so I'll stop now.

 

[Raduin711]

It may have started out as a font, perhaps even a not-so-fancy one, but I highly doubt it's a font anymore (there's a good chance that they took an ordinary font, applied some text effects to it in photoshop, then rasterized the type - which would mean it's no longer a font).

But this is probably getting too serious for a humor thread, so I'll stop now.

Further serious debate will result in being hung by your pinkies over a pit of boiling hot emo tiefling hair gel (made from the tears of good drow and the toenails of dragons who have lost all magical power), while being tickled with feathers by anime-inspired halflings and being beaten with stone tablets inscribed with your own serious arguements until dead.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Needs Boobs!

 

[Raduin711]

Needs Boobs!

I see a whole forum full of boobs.