D&D 4E In terms of theme, tone, and spirit, I hope 4e . . .

[Asmor]

Gonna have to disagree.

I'll take stylish, evocative, impressive, full-color art over silly, bland, amateurish, black and white art any day.

I'm not saying all the old art is bad... Just that all the old art I've seen is bad. There, I said it. B-A-D. At best, I suppose you could argue that it's whimsical, but frankly I just think it looks like rejected art originally commissioned for a children's book about a happy elf who lost his pet unicorn.

Sure, 3rd edition has some stinkers, especially some of the earlier stuff, but especially recently I think the art is absolutely fantastic and I absolutely love the direction they're taking the game stylistically.

 

[Aus_Snow]

There is something to be said for "feel", after all.

That it is entirely subjective, perhaps?

For what it is worth (i.e., something to me, and most likely nothing to you) I quite like some of the "feel" in the artwork and general design of certain WotC books. Not to mention that found in a whole bunch of 3rd party books.

Either which way, I honestly hope that you thoroughly enjoy your nostalgia, d00d.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I say the Guard's picture wins. And actually, I'd rate the sorcerer second. The other picture is sizeist, suggesting that small people adventure only with other small people

Where is Equal Heights when we need them?

One of these days I'm installing a dead horse smiley on this board.

That would be useful.

 

[theredrobedwizard]

Does anyone ever consider that the buckles might just be set dressing? Maybe they're leather pants with unnecessary buckles on the outside for the look. Also, maybe being a dragon descended sorcerer makes you not grow body hair.

Creatively addressing issues and making something resembling logical conclusions, isn't that what our hobby is about? Well, that and killing the monsters and taking their nouns.

-TRRW (Is tired of all the hate on Dungeonpunk.)

 

[Teflon Billy]

Does anyone ever consider that the buckles might just be set dressing? Maybe they're leather pants with unnecessary buckles on the outside for the look...

Ahh, so you are postulating that Hennet is a Poser

 

[Sound of Azure]

Also, maybe being a dragon descended sorcerer makes you not grow body hair.

Electric Jolt, possibly Acid splash.

Good cantrips, those.

 

[Melan]

Edition Wars in 3... 2... 1...

That said, I prefer B&W line art, like in the old stuff and the 3.* DMG's dungeon features illustrations.

 

[Asmor]

the 3.* DMG's dungeon features illustrations.

You know, I actually don't mind that art at all. I guess black and white line art is fine for simple objects. Actually, I think it's kind of silly when, like in the Magic Item Compendium, a freaking amulet gets a fully detailed painting. Definitely overkill. So for mundane illustrations, black and white line art is definitely superior.

 

[Waldorf]

You know, I hardly look at any of the illustrations in the new books. Maybe the monsters a bit, but little else. So infused are the old images in my head.

I miss the simple black and white images of the 1e books. They were perfect in their feel.

 

[wedgeski]

There's an undeniable nostalgia value to me in all that old art. Every single illustration in the old sets/AD&D/2ed seems to bring back some memory or other. But you just can't get away from the fact that 3ed artwork - especially the stuff in the original 3e PHB - is lip-smackingly good.

What I miss, if anything, are the large full-page colour spreads of some adventurer or other getting himself into serious trouble (such as those in the 2ed PHB and DMG). Those pics made the 2ed books eminently browsable.