Huge Cover Images from CNET article

[I'm A Banana]

I still think the PHB cover looks a bit like "Sudden Constipation On Awkward Rock: A Love Story."

It tells the story of an ugly stone-beast with no eyes and an underbite and the hooker with the cursed bustier of almost-bursting, and how they hurl their bottoms at each other full force in order to cement their love. But as they're about to have their moons collide, they suddenly realize that something is deeply wrong, and also that they can't balance very well, and they fall, perhaps to their untimely demise.

The other two are fine. The Dragon = DM metaphor is keen, and Orcus leaping off the page to smack you in the face with awesome is quintessential monsters, but the PHB cover lacks fu.

 

[Zulithe]

I do like WAR's art but I can't stand behind the PHB cover. Really bad. They should have used the cover from the 4e Deluxe Character Sheets as the PHB cover, or something better entirely

 

[Ahglock]

I still think the PHB cover looks a bit like "Sudden Constipation On Awkward Rock: A Love Story."

It tells the story of an ugly stone-beast with no eyes and an underbite and the hooker with the cursed bustier of almost-bursting, and how they hurl their bottoms at each other full force in order to cement their love. But as they're about to have their moons collide, they suddenly realize that something is deeply wrong, and also that they can't balance very well, and they fall, perhaps to their untimely demise.

The other two are fine. The Dragon = DM metaphor is keen, and Orcus leaping off the page to smack you in the face with awesome is quintessential monsters, but the PHB cover lacks fu.

I'm not sure I would have gone with that imagery but yes the PH cover lacks fu.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

As I understand it, some of WotC's European distributors balked at selling a product with "demonic imagery" on the cover.

Why the tiefling was a problem and Orcus isn't, I have no idea, but that's the story as I've heard it.

Maybe it's because it's titled "Monster Manual". *shrugs*

 

[HeinorNY]

And I am HATING that Orcus picture. WAR's musculature/proportions is always pretty ridiculous, but this is...well, more ridiculous. Who are Orcus' forearms modeled after, Popeye?

Those are not muscles but tumors actually.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

Why does both the PHB and the MM covers look like they're snippets of a larger painting, just cut down to fit as covers?

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Could be actually they wrap around too the back.

 

[Tewligan]

But let's be clear. Gygax's might have been the only name on many of the 1E books, but most of them were team efforts. Having James Wyatt's name alone on the 4E DMG is no different.

Oops! Yeah, I know Gygax wasn't the only one actually writing those - I meant to mention that point as well to allay any fear of the DMG being a one-man show, but I was swept away in the heat of my Orcus-rage.

 

[Foundry of Decay]

Ah, art. As tumultuous as politics, but more pretty to look at

I have to admit that I really do like all three covers, though my favorite has to be the Dragon. I know things like 'horn piercing' isn't everyone's favorite, but to me it evokes a sense of sentience or 'self' that the dragon displays. Yes, there are tons of dragons that are basically big powerful lizards, but with sentience wouldn't there be culture? Perhaps the horn-rings mark a rite of passage with the dragon becoming more powerful, or perhaps its just that its hard to wear rings on big stubby fingers. Either way I really do like it.

I do like the PHB cover as well. I know that some folks prefer a more traditional looking wizard sorcerer however I've always liked an evolution in the look. Yes, they could have slapped a plain robed dainty waif with a staff on the cover again without a solitary mark or earring on her, or more than a belt around her waist akin to the great art of the bygone 70's and 80's, but my personal preferences lean more towards the new look. I'm a junkie for all those little details and do-dads that adorn this sorceress (?)

The dragonborn does look a bit off though. I think its a combination of the head ridges not continuing down its neck (making the neck looks scrawny in comparison) and -dammit- not having a tail. I think critter races look utterly miserable without the tail. They look 'off' when so many of their features are bestial but the tail would have been 'too much' for some peculiar reason.

I do, however, really like the weapon and armor on that guy. Its got a sense of culture to it. Different looking than the armor and weapons that a human or dwarf would use for instance.

And lastly.. I may be unpopular for saying so, but I'm glad Orcus finally looks fierce. He's no longer the tubby git with a skull stick in the few past pictures I've seen of him. I will fully admit that I've only seen perhaps 2 images of him that I can remember though. One was the 1e Monster Manual image of him, and the other was a stand alone image on.. A cover, I think. I don't quite recall.

That's my toss of the copper anyway.

 

[Plane Sailing]

So, I guess I'm the first to notice that the PHB has a 4 person adventuring party on it, eh?

Good catch, I'd not noticed that!