Hate for new look for Green Dragon

[Asmor]

I strongly suspect to this day that a significant portion of the love people have for Planescape comes solely and completely from the powerful, whimsical and evocative Tony DiTerlizzi art.

Actually, my love for the setting is founded entirely on Planescape: Torment and the ideas I later learned about the setting after some research. I'd never even seen the boxed set or any other printed material related to the RPG until long after I started playing D&D with 3rd edition.

Back on topic, I originally popped into this thread to say that the green dragon in the pic was one of the few things I didn't like about what I've seen of 4e. However, this was based more on them changing the look of the dragons (I've always loved that they've given a distinctive look to each dragon), and perhaps I feared the loss of the distinction between species of dragons.

However, after looking at the green dragon detail pics in Draconomicon, I've come to a very different conclusion... I honestly don't think I've ever taken a good look at green dragons before, because right now they look terribly generic. I'm glad that the green's getting a face lift in the new edition, but I sincerely hope that changes to the other species remain minimal.

 

[ptolemy18]

I actually quite like it.

In fact, now that I compare them side by side, I actually really dislike the current green dragon. The colouration in the Monster Manual is actually very cool, but I hate the head - dragons shouldn't look like frill-necked crocodiles!

*ALL* dragons should look like weird-ass crocodiles, snakes, lizards, dinosaur-heads, eel-heads and so on. I *LOVE* the pure reptilian look.... it looks so much more savage. And I don't like the new Green Dragon very much for that reason, since I think the old one kicked ass... but whatever, in my campaign they'll look like whatever I want 'em to, as always.

Jason

 

[ptolemy18]

You think so? You know more about the tone of Fourth Edition than the people who are making it and hired Wayne Reynolds as pretty much the signature artist for the line, considering the covers of the core rulebooks will feature his work? Are you sure about that?

I'm not a huge Wayne Reynolds fan either. He's not a bad artist, but, well, out of all the artists for 3.0 onward, his work looks too American-comic-booky for me. Too much open-mouthed shouting ("YAAAAH TAKE THAT DRAGON!!!!!") and wild poses and angular character designs. The 3.5 DM's screen looked like the cover of an old Image comic.

And having said that, I will potentially sound like a hypocrite and say: if they're gonna go the open-mouthed shouting and wild action shots route, I wouldn't mind a manga-influenced iconic D&D artist....

Jason

 

[cthulhu_duck]

I don't care for the nose spike. Personally, this is what I prefer my green dragons to look like:

http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/setpages/setscans/basic8th.html

 

[TarionzCousin]

Other than that minor quibble, my only other problem with the pic is the Dwarf's hand holding the mace. The weapon's haft just looks too huge, and I don't see any fingers around it. Shouldn't we see knuckles from this angle?

I thought this too.

Maybe it isn't a Green Dragon. Maybe it's a Verdant Dragon, or an Emerald Dragon, or the new Red-but-you're-colorblind-Dragon....

 

[Asmor]

Hell, maybe it's a drake, wyvern, half-dragon horse or any number of different creatures.