Huge Cover Images from CNET article

mhacdebhandia

Explorer
http://www.news.com/8301-13772_3-9913329-52.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5

4E-PH.jpg


4E-DMG.jpg


4E-MM.jpg
 

log in or register to remove this ad


*Off-color* cover images from C-Net article.

The dragonborn's expression looks alot less doofy, now that I can actually see it.
 



1.) At least the red dragon doesn't have nipple rings;)
2.) I think of them all the Monster Manual cover is the best. A bit more comic bookish styling than I'd prefer but it's pretty much how I always envisioned Orcus (Although FC1 had the best Orcus pic ever IMO). I've always stated the Demon Lords as Gargantuan creatures.
3.) The head still looks a bit off on the dragonborn, thought it may be perspective. And it definitely needs a tail, without the tail reptilian humanoids just don't look right.
 

Interesting. Notice the subheader on the PHB?

"Arcane, Divine and Martial Heroes"

Does this mean that the PHB2 and 3 and 17 will be fully developed player's manuals instead of a few new classes and some optional rules like the 3.5 PHB2? As in, could I say, play a sorcerer from the PHB2 without ever needing to pick up the PHB?
 

Fallen Seraph said:
That different people worked on different books?

:p

Aside from that. I mean, didn't all the 3.5 books have the same names on them? I don't have them handy to check... but it seems sort of awkward.

Like - Mearls' name is only on the MM, and not on the PH. That seems a little strange to me, because I guess I've been under the impression that he's put some work into the PH.
 

With the bigger pictures, I like the PHB and MM a lot more, but the DMG (which I liked a lot) a bit less.

Still think the Dragonborn looks kinda dumb, but the MM cover looks a lot better than I was expecting, wish the skull wasn't green, though. ;)
 

GnomeWorks said:
:p

Aside from that. I mean, didn't all the 3.5 books have the same names on them? I don't have them handy to check... but it seems sort of awkward.

Like - Mearls' name is only on the MM, and not on the PH. That seems a little strange to me, because I guess I've been under the impression that he's put some work into the PH.

I imagine they probably list the Key-Designers or Heads of Design for that book, while others be listed inside the book.
 

Remove ads

Top