D&D 5E Meet Ravenloft's Harkon Lucas and Rudolph Van Richten

WotC has shared some artwork from Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, featuring the titular vampire hunter himself, and the darklord of Kartakass, Harkon Lucas.

"Rudolph Van Richten prepares for his next expedition, watched over by the spirit of his son, Erasmus."

"A born liar and shape-shifter, Harkon Lukas orchestrates elaborate manipulations.
He's rarely seen without his signature wide-brimmed hat; wolf's tooth necklace; and violin, which he calls Bleeding Heart."​

 

[Faolyn]

The argument some are making here is that D&D does not require any consistent art direction because it is a fantasy game. By that argument a modern motorcycle could just be a summoned magical horse in D&D. Jeans are just trousers. Baseball caps are just hats. Yet we never see those depictions in a D&D 5e core book specifically. So there is some art aesthetic, just more inconsistent and clueless than the well curated art styles in other well made fantasy games.

No, because D&D is "medieval-ish fantasy," not "modern-ish fantasy."

And they do have motorcycles. Ish.

The problem is, people expect D&D to have real-world aesthetic when it, in fact, has D&D aesthetic.

 

[Jaeger]

Dungeons and Dragons wants to be a generic ruleset that people can use for a multitude of fantasy style games. They are not going to pick a single aesthetic because D&D(or WotC more appropriately) doesn't want to have a single aesthetic.

I don't think WOTC ever thought things through to that extent. At all.

D&D has always been coy about its "setting". But the 5e default setting is the FR.

Nothing stopping WOTC from giving the FR a consistent art direction.

Specific settings might I suppose, but even their biggest setting, the Forgotten Realms is a hodgepodge of different countries with different styles to suit whatever style game people want.

Nothing wrong with the FR having a different 'style' for each country. No one ever said anything different.

And while I'm not an expert on the setting, Ravenloft seems like it's even less consistent domain to domain than Forgotten Realms is. So expecting a single style of clothing seems a bit odd.

Re-read my reply's to this very question. Some really selective reading going down.

Nothing wrong with the Ravenloft having a different 'style' for each domain. No one ever said anything different.

The problem is, people expect D&D to have real-world aesthetic when it, in fact, has D&D aesthetic.

When I've repeatedly used a Game of Thrones and the Conan films as examples of what can be done it is disingenuous to keep trying to present my argument as 100% real world or bust.

 

[Faolyn]

I disagree.

The Conan movies draw from lots of sources, so did GoT. It is certainly not mission impossible we are talking about here.

D&D isn't Conan or Game of Thrones, each of which are singular products. D&D is a mixture of multiple products. According to this Wikipedia page:

The theme of D&D was influenced by mythology, pulp fiction, and contemporary fantasy authors of the 1960s and 1970s. The presence of halflings, elves, dwarves, half-elves, orcs, rangers and the like often draw comparisons to the work of J. R. R. Tolkien. [...]

According to the original Dungeon Masters Guide in "Appendix N: Inspirational and Educational Reading", the "most immediate influences" were the works of Robert E. Howard, Edgar Rice Burroughs, A. Merritt, H. P. Lovecraft, Fritz Leiber, L. Sprague de Camp, Fletcher Pratt, Roger Zelazny, and Michael Moorcock.[10] Subsequently, Gary Gygax listed the "major influences" as Robert E. Howard, L. Sprague de Camp, Fletcher Pratt, Fritz Leiber, Poul Anderson, A. Merritt, and H. P. Lovecraft, with "slightly lesser influence" from Roger Zelazny, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Michael Moorcock, Philip José Farmer, and others.[11]

Monsters, spells, and magic items used in the game have been inspired by hundreds of individual works ranging from A. E. van Vogt's "Black Destroyer" (the Displacer Beast), Lewis Carroll's "Jabberwocky" (Vorpal sword) to the Book of Genesis (the clerical spell "Blade Barrier" was inspired by the "flaming sword which turned every way" at the gates of Eden).[12]

And that's only from the very beginnings of the game.

D&D is a mixture of literally dozens or even hundreds of different types of fantasy, science fiction, pulp fiction, horror, and real-world mythologies and belief systems... and you expect it to have one style?

You don't care about Consistency in art direction.

I'm an actual artist, so I do care about consistency in art direction. Clothing choices are not consistency in art direction. Type and style of artwork is. Having a bunch of serious pictures mixed with cartoony pictures is inconsistent. Having clothing from different real-world centuries but illustrated in roughly the same style is not inconsistent--especially for a game that doesn't actually take place in any of those real-world centuries.

I get it.

You really don't.

 

[Weiley31]

Because the standard D&D setting doesn't have modern technology, that's why.

If they come out with a D&D Modern campaign setting--they did have that Modern UA--then there would be elves with laptops and cars.

The Wizard's Spellbook is the Tablet.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

I disagree.

The Conan movies draw from lots of sources, so did GoT. It is certainly not mission impossible we are talking about here.

Well, this is live-action. So are you talking about costume direction? Because I would not call these two elements especially consistent.

And to be clear, I think that's ok! They are too very different cultures across the world! But D&D does that too. Legend of the Five Rings? Not so much.

 

[Jaeger]

D&D is a mixture of literally dozens or even hundreds of different types of fantasy, science fiction, pulp fiction, horror, and real-world mythologies and belief systems... and you expect it to have one style?

And here you misinterpret my position again.

The Conan stories have taken from dozens of influences - yet when they are put to comics or film they are given a consistent art direction.

Lots of influences does not = can't be given consistency.

The Default setting of 5e is the Forgotten realms, a consistent art direction could be done for the FR. ( An it seems I have to spell this out every time - the different kingdoms and cultures in the FR would each have their own unique consistent look within the setting of the realms.)

The same for ravenloft, the same for eberron. Each setting can have its own art direction.

...Having clothing from different real-world centuries but illustrated in roughly the same style is not inconsistent-- especially for a game that doesn't actually take place in any of those real-world centuries.

We obviously have very different definitions of what consistent means.

"Because D&D" is no excuse for lazy art direction especially since D&D has established settings with defined tones and themes. Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, Eberron etc...

The Conan stories or GoT do not actually take place in any of the dozens of cultures and influences or periods of time they pull from either.

You really don't.

Yes I do.

So are you talking about costume direction? Because I would not call these two elements especially consistent.

Within the Game of Thrones world they are absolutely consistent because as you go on to mention:

And to be clear, I think that's ok! They are too very different cultures across the world! But D&D does that too.

And my point has been that D&D has always been very inconsistent how it does that in its various settings.

.

 

[Shadowedeyes]

I think the problem is that I have no clue what you are arguing. Your initial complaint was that the clothing worn by Harkon Lucas and Van Richten didn't match the faux medieval setting of D&D.

I was thinking mariachi outfit myself...

Note that Rudolph Van Richten Is very 18th century in his wardrobe.

In fact I've seen that aesthetic in a lot of 5e art.

I get it, it's a fantasy world.

But D&D is still with classes, sells, armor, and weapons, a faux medieval implied setting.

I know D&D has never been great when it comes to having a consistent art direction for a given edition. But to see what people wore in any given era is only an internet search away these days.

It's gotten tot he point that they cannot even land the clothing with 300 years of the eras the game is ostensibly set in.

I can only imagine that it is due to a combination of Two things: Being influenced by the art of other fantasy properties who were influenced by D&D, yet have long since drifted from D&D's original medieval aesthetic. And basic historical ignorance of whomever is in charge of soliciting the art.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

It is not only action-live movies, but also videogames and anime+donghua. Have you seen those CGI wuxia videos with female warriors wearing kimonos and other "chain-mail bikini" a true fighter wouldn't use?

D&D could be steampunk, or clockpunk, if WotC wanted, but modern technology could break the power balance and the gameplay. Gunpowder could be too powerful and lethal against living beings, but becoming useless against supernatural monsters with bulletproof traits. A simple civilian vehicle could be used to run over a monster, a horde of zombies or a huge animal. A humanoid enemy nPC with a firearm could be too dangerous for his XPs value/Challenge-Rating. Shooter videogame players will understand what I mean. And we aren't talking about exosuits, powererd-armors or mechas (practically a construct monster mount).

Don't you remember when any production set in another century, but actors with 70's hair styles?

 

[Faolyn]

And here you misinterpret my position again.

No, you are continuing to state two different things as if they were one. So again:

Conan is a single entity. It has a specific style written into the stories by the original author.

Game of Thrones is a single entity. It has a specific style written into the stories by the original author.

D&D is not a single entity. It does not have a specific style. It does not have a single original author. Instead, it has two people who made some rules and lore and then hundreds upon hundreds of other people who, over the decades, expanded upon that and made their own rules and settings, many of which completely ignored other people's rules and lore, even that created by Gygax and Arneson themselves.

Lots of influences does not = can't be given consistency.

You have yet to show that it needs to be consistent.

The Default setting of 5e is the Forgotten realms, a consistent art direction could be done for the FR. ( An it seems I have to spell this out every time - the different kingdoms and cultures in the FR would each have their own unique consistent look within the setting of the realms.)

And again, you don't seem to know what consistent art direction actually means.

Here, look at the Dark Sun. They have a consistent art direction. It would be inconsistent if you suddenly threw art by, I dunno, Larry Elmore in there. Take a look at the 5e MM. Digital artwork along with some of the original pencil sketches. It would be inconsistent if they had a handful of done in the style LuisCarlos17f just posted, of the woman on the bike.

The same for ravenloft, the same for eberron. Each setting can have its own art direction.

And they do. You just don't like it because they look like "18th century fashion plates."

We obviously have very different definitions of what consistent means.

No, you simply don't understand what art direction means. You keep claiming you do, but all you're talking about is costuming, which is not art direction at all.

For instance, you talk about Ravenloft not having consistent art direction, but it's clear you don't understand how Ravenloft even works. If you did, then the difference in styles would be obvious.

A refresher: Ravenloft domains come from across the multiverse. Some were pulled from different D&D settings (Azalin is from the Flanaess; Harkon Lukas is from Cormyr; Hazlik is from Thay; Vlad Drakov is from Taladas). Others were brought from unknown worlds, were born in Ravenloft, or were even taken from (Gothic) Earth (the Masque of the Red Death setting).

Some of the domains contain big, bustling cities. Some are almost nothing but forests and mountains. Some are countryside. Some are a mixture of terrains. Some are desolate wastelands.

Additionally, the domains cover a level of technology from "Stone Age" (like the Wildlands) to "Renaissance" (like Lamordia or Dementlieu).

The domains are magically separated from each other, and all are built around the darklord's psyche.

There is zero reason for their domains to be "consistent" with one another.

And my point has been that D&D has always been very inconsistent how it does that in its various settings.

So then the fault is yours for realizing that's what D&D does. You may not like it, but D&D doesn't do "consistent" costuming. It does fantasy rule of cool. That is it's style, and it's pretty darn consistent with that. Like it or lump it.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

And my point has been that D&D has always been very inconsistent how it does that in its various settings.

Well frankly, I disagree. Unless you are talking about fairly cosmopolitan cities like Waterdeep or Baldur's Gate.