[ELH] Is the art in this book utter crap?

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Did Otis do the pic of Juiblex in the MM1?

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I agree with you to some extent. I do think that there is way too much art in current RPG books. The fact that color is used - while very nice - simply makes the books more expensive. I do like some art, but I like actual usable content more.

*clap, clap, clap*
Bravo!! I can imagine cheaper, and thinner books. I have to lug a duffle bag of hardcovers, a bunch of softcovers, my big binder, a ton of dice & pencils, papers, the Greyhawk boxed set, and the various other things like mags that get transported to the gamesite for D&D. Add in my laptop case and the GW miniature case and I'm about to break down. Try and lug a twelve pack along with that! I think the old books set mood just fine with the more limited artwork. There were still lots of little pics, but they didn't suck up so much space. They did have the great "A Paladin in Hell" pic that was a nice full page pic though. I can't remember how much art was in the 2e books, they were lost/stolen soon after I got them.

Another question. Do people actually use the "limited edition" high price editions that some companies are putting out?

 

[JohnClark]

But c'mon, guys, that picture of the Epic Level Blackguard? That's awesome, especially compared to the fat evil paladin in the DMG.

Amen to that, I saw that pic and it actually inspired me to play a blackguard.

 

[Tewligan]

But c'mon, guys, that picture of the Epic Level Blackguard? That's awesome, especially compared to the fat evil paladin in the DMG.

Hey, I love that fat, evil paladin! I like to think that he's coming up with a diabolical scheme to bilk the town out of their winter supply of pastries and lard.

 

[rackabello]

Did Otis do the pic of Juiblex in the MM1?

No, that was Dave Trampier. Otus did alot of illustrations for modules. Reveiwing some of his cover paintings, I realize I shortchanged him a bit in my earlier comment. It isn't that the people in his drawings were drawn poorly, but that they tend to be highly stylized; his fighters typically wear odd winged helmets, his female adventurers almost always have legs like chorus gals and the outfits to bare them, and there's this curious, er, vegetal look to his monsters and landscapes.

some of my favorite Otus covers (note that the captions are my own and not the artist's):
tentacles!
sea beastie, sorceress, and spear (both winged helmet and long-legged wizard woman in full evidence here!)
deities & demigods
behir trouble

 

[kenjib]

I like Erol Otus too. He's probably my favorite. His stuff really reminds me of the old Wierd Tales magazine covers. I wouldn't be surprised if he was actually intentionally going for that look, although he does add a bit of a psychadelic edge to it.

 

[Plane Sailing]

This is what I imagine what the Epic Assasin should have looked like.


This is what I imagine the Epic Loremaster should look like.


This is what I imagine the Paragon Illithid should look like.

.

Just wanted to say that I *loved* your visualisations, and I'm tempted to try and draw them myself

 

[Sammael99]

I think artwork is necessary at least to break the text in an RPG book and make the reading easier. Anyone who doesn't believe that, buy an old copy of Aftermath RPG and die of word overdose

That being said, I like artwork to contribute to the mood of a game. As such, I dislike the artwork in 3E mostly because it doesn't contribute a mood to the game, or if it does, it's a mood of pulpy superhero fantasy, which is definetely not what I like in D&D (although it could be argues that 3E has that in it too, to some extent...)

RPG artwork I like : planescape was wonderfully moody. Tribe 8 has artwork that helps evoke the game world. Jorune is perhaps the best example of how artwork makes a game alive.

 

[Zarrock God of Evil]

I'm with Flexor...I'm not a fan of the vast majority of the 3E art period...though I do think there are a thing or two in each book I like....

I liked the ELH art much better than the PHB for the most part, and barring afew of Wayne Reynolds' pics in the DMG, that was pretty bad too..

I think the Mind Flayer and Goblin though in the MM are the best representations of those monsters I've seen yet...I care for little for the rest....

Some the FR art is great some is not..generally I think the quality of the FR art is better, except for the horrible pics of the demi-human gods in F&P....Lockwood's Sune on the other other hand..... now THAT's A GODDESS

I'm not sure I'd call it anime style though...other than there's lot's of "wild" costumes/armor that the anime style entails..

And heck I'd love to see some D&D iconics that were as good looking as some of the girls in the Tenchi series for example...

Mialee=Sakuya
Alejandra=Kiyone
Lidda= well....hmm..Ryoko has to be in there SOMEWHERE!

grrrroooowwwwllllll

Some of the best art I've seen in DnD at all were the Nightshade in MM, the Shades in the FR books and the Githyanki and Githzerai in PsiHandbook...

Generally, I'm a great fan..

-Zarrock

 

[rounser]

Well, the styles of these artists looked exceptionally good in the pages of Duelist. I'm not sure why some of it doesn't seem to fit D&D so much.

I suppose it's because there's not one, but two hurdles to jump:
a) Must look aesthetically nice.
b) Must meet people's preconceived notions of what D&D art should look like.

Magic: the Gathering was a lot more "anything goes" in terms of art style and experimentation, whereas with D&D, a lot of the audience already knows what they think a displacer beast or an epic level wizard should look like, and they resent having their mental imagery adjusted.

As a Magic: the Gathering player, you think "cool new artwork!" and welcome it when a completely different take on Unholy Strength comes out. With D&D, the same acceptance doesn't apply, because the visual vocabulary of the game is less abstract, more integral to gameplay, and already established.