D&D 5E (2024) Here's The New 2024 Player's Handbook Wizard Art

 

[Chaosmancer]

YES!!!! Sort of. It is more I just don't understand why they would make that choice that way if they didn't have to. Which is why I just say it "Makes no sense to me", because it doesn't.

Okay. You don't need to understand it though to recognize that it is true.

Well, I still wear glasses when driving at night. I certainly don't need to, but it makes things "crisper". Sort of like going from HD to 4K.

And I know many people don't need classes to function. Most people in history dealt with poor eyesight before glasses were invented, after all!

However, something being blurry and indistinct could be to the point you cannot tell friend from foe at a distance, so who do you target with the spell? Or do you not realize two allies are fighting in that crowd of enemies, so you end up fireballing them as well? Ranged attacks would probably be with disadvantage if your eyesight is impaired enough.

If something to help is available, glasses OR a magical "cure", people generally use them.

Um... color, size and shape?

Like, if your paladin ally is wearing mithril platemail and you are fighting a 9 foot blue-ice devil... even at a distance I can tell the shiny person from big blue person. It could be a problem, and if it is a problem to that degree where you can't tell friend from ally... you can have multiple pairs of glasses? Like, I carry spare glasses in my bag.

It truly would not be difficult to deal with.

 

[Yaarel]

Semantics. Heal ends the “blind” condition. If you don’t have the blind condition it does nothing.

In 5e spells, the narrative description is as important as mechanical measurements. "Ends blindness" means any form of blindness whatsoever, not just the Blind condition.

Way to completely miss the point. People want to see people like them represented in the game. So, your message is, you can be an adventurer irrespective of your gender or ethnicity, but don’t even think about it if you wear glasses.

I never said that! I said I am nearsighted, I dont selfidentify with glasses, and I dont need to see them for the sake of representing me.

At the same time, the Wizard image in the original post wears glasses. That is fine. Apparently, eyeglasses in the sense of corrective lenses were invented in Italy during the 1200s? That is fully within a traditional D&D medievalesque setting.

Besides, when I see a Wizard wearing glasses, I assume they are a magic item, like Gems of Seeing, or perhaps granting Darkvision, seeing planar auras (Detect Evil/Good), or whatever visual enhancement. I assume the same thing when someone has a gem instead of an eye.

Frankly, I had enough of that bullying **** at school.

That truly is horrible − and criminal. I want to see more school officials who turn a blind eye to bullying be prosecuted for child abuse, wanton disregard, negligence, and similar.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

But part of that is because many of the old isekai shows aren't regarded as such, because they existed before the term.

And, like you could say the same thing about Urban Fantasy being all about toxic relationships and sexism. There is a lot of urban fantasy that follows those tropes... but that doesn't mean that Urban Fantasy is DEFINED by those tropes, they are just common.

I already pointed that out - Isekai doesn't have to be a bunch of sexist power-fantasy drivel about nothing - but just like most Urban Fantasy is sexist, toxic-relationship stuff or just creepy in a bad way, most Isekai is drivel.

And the same exact problem exists with Urban Fantasy recommendations - if you see an Urban Fantasy novel on a list of "good fantasy novels" (or equally, any fantasy novel which involves a female assassin in her teens through early twenties - they have a similar thing going on*), if you're an experienced fantasy reader, alarm bells, even sirens and flashing lights, should be going off for you, because there's an approximately 10% chance that is actually a good, genuinely interesting book with something to say, which is worth your time, and a 90% chance it's awful drivel that just happens to fit someone's fetish, and makes the porn-iest horn-iest Anne Rice novels look super-classy and cool..

Likewise with Isekai - if you see one on a list of good anime, there's a 5-10% chance it is good (towards the higher end if the main character is not a teen/twenties boy), and 90% chance it's awful pap/pablum/drivel that just happens to allow certain to turn off their brains and lather themselves in the gross, unoriginal and frankly interesting power fantasy it represents - and again I still haven't seen a single Isekai that had good fight scenes or animation even - that's like the minimum you could ask if you're going to make a power-fantasy-centric anime.

* = There are good novels which fit this description, but they are certainly outnumbered strongly by bad ones which lean hard into a few gross tropes, and so-called "BookTok" has made sure the terrible ones are successful and well-rated. BookTok in general has succeeded in promoting way more completely terrible writers who basically should have stuck to fan-fiction than it has in bringing forwards hidden gems.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

We are going to see a lot more art like this, than anything from prior era's. Its been a decade since 5e, the art of 'MTG Style' is likely the go forward.

Meanwhile I'm waiting for my Frank Frazetta style preference to rise once again...

I would be very interested to visit a world where the Frazetta art style would be seen as unremarkable representing a mainstream commercial product.

 

[Reynard]

A whole lot of people in this (public) thread are demanding to have their cake and eat it to regarding opinions. Protip: if you share yours, you are inviting people to share theirs regarding yours.

 

[Scribe]

A whole lot of people in this (public) thread are demanding to have their cake and eat it to regarding opinions. Protip: if you share yours, you are inviting people to share theirs regarding yours.

Me and the boys, waiting.

 

[Zardnaar]

Better than Forgotten Realms, that's for sure!

I really don't get the MTG complaint. Like I haven't player MTG for ages, but I still browse MTG art time to time, as it tends to be high quality, as well as imaginative and evocative. And some specific themes and concepts aside, I don't find it unfitting to D&D at all. D&D art style has varied from editions to edition, so there really isn't any specific art style I strongly associate with D&D anyway.

Magic style has changed drastically somewhere between Invasion and Ravnica block circa 2000-2005.

These new pieces look good but they're very CGI looking.

Magic art is also small panels on the cards vs a screen. Have to see it in the books.

It's not my preferred style as I prefer more gritty, realistic hand drawn/oil paintings.

Eg this type.



The new ones look fine but does look AI/generic as tgat style is also very common now. I've seen it on AI art threads elsewhere and the ENworld thread. It's executed well but doesn't really stand out relative to what's going on.

Art like beer is also very subjective. Animie for example does nothing for me along with most super hero type art, poses and action scenes.

I'm confident that overall 5.5 will likely be the prettiest edition ever though. Cherry picked individual pieces one might subjectively prefer are one thing but there's a lot of bad art in older editions as well.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I mean I guess it all depends on whether the standards is whether this is good, or whether it is exactly what I would have commissioned as an art director. For me answers to these are "yes" and "no", in that order.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

We are going to see a lot more art like this, than anything from prior era's. Its been a decade since 5e, the art of 'MTG Style' is likely the go forward.

Which is fine. It is decent art.

Meanwhile I'm waiting for my Frank Frazetta style preference to rise once again...

But TBH, yeah. He was the best.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Me and the boys, waiting.

Putting the sexy in SPQR.