NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Stormonu" data-source="post: 5837539" data-attributes="member: 52734">I think this is a much needed topic.  Knowing what the "bad art"/style to avoid of D&D is as important as knowing what the iconic/good images of the game were.A half-dragon purple worm?Yeah, when Easley's doing Far Realms-like stuff, he's good.  His dragons ... not so much.The inside art is okay.  It's not of the quality of the BECMI books (and it's why I prefer the boxed sets to the Cyclopedia), but it could be much, much worse (look at the Player Option's books, for example). <EDIT>  What I think is so unsettling about the art in the Cyclopedia is that it isn't unified.  You can go from one page depicting a 14th century French knight in full plate to a Moorish wizard on the next page.  All these far-flung cultures and time periods are mushed together, often in the same picture.  It just looks wrong, even though Mystra is a kitchen-sink setting with this sort of cultural/time mix. </END EDIT>I think the art I dislike the most is Jean E. Martin's line drawings in the 2E PHB (the ones initialed "JEM" in the book).  I'd post some samples, but apparently they are so disliked, no one's bothered to put them on the web.Also, I'm in agreeance that I don't much like Wayne's adventurers.  He's decent with his monsters, but I'm tired of seeing so much of his artwork.  Give the guy a break and let some new artists in for a bit. (In a way, reaction to his artwork reminds me how people tended to dislike Erol Otus's art back in the 80's.  Perhaps after a few years of settling, people will think of his art more fondly).</blockquote>

Verification