MM3 recycled art

[Bold or Stupid]

I don't mind recycled art, as long as it's art that I like. However, I do hate it when there's no clear pictures (or adequate descriptions) of monsters -- I still have no idea what a 4E mithral dragon is supposed to look like, even after reading Draconomicon: Metallic Dragons.

Umm P168 Draconomican: Metallic Dragons, look at the picture above the stats for Mithral Dragons.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I wouldn't mind 100% recycled art if they would provide it in the monster builder. Then, when I copy/paste stats into my Word docs for printing (or perhaps for display on a latop on the table or something), I get the images, too.

Can you post a link to some of his work? My google-fu is weak.

Here are a couple:

 

[doctorhook]

[sblock=Mithral Dragon]

[/sblock]

Couple usable pics in their ecology article - also more description, more knowledge checks, etc.

Awesome pic, and thanks for pointing out the article. That's exactly the kind of thing I'm looking for.

Seems they amped up the amount of flavor in the newer MMs, and I think the new stat block takes more room, so something's gotta give I guess.

Fair enough. Personally, I really like the new statblock format. As far as descriptions go though, I'm sorta of the opinion that a picture is worth a thousand words... and I'm certain there's lots of people who disagree with me.

Umm P168 Draconomican: Metallic Dragons, look at the picture above the stats for Mithral Dragons.

Haha I knew someone was gonna point that one out. Yes, I've seen that picture. It seems to be the only thing close to a clear picture of a mithral dragon in Draconomicon 2, and I don't think it's very clear -- the dragon is practically hidden in the shadows of that picture. We don't get a great view of its face and head, nor is it clear what shade its scales are supposed to be.

I think the worst part about that picture is that it doesn't seem (to me, at least) to match that book's physical description of mithral dragons. The book says that mithral dragons grow to have silver-coloured scales with white streaks -- this is ambivalent from the picture. The book says, "(a) ring of spikes crowns a mithral's head, and small spikes extend down its neck," a description which I don't think really fits the dragon in the picture. Most noticeably though, the book says, "The dragon's wings consist of radiant energy instead of flesh," which definitely doesn't match with the picture in the book.

After reading the ecology article linked above, I'm inclined to believe that the description in the book is wrong, or at least incomplete; the article talks about the radiance and shows a picture of it, but also shows several pictures of mithral dragons with fleshy wings. Suffice to say, I think this confusion could've been avoided with more pictures of this monster in Draconomicon 1... or at least a more carefully selected one, alongside a better description.[/tangent]

I wouldn't mind 100% recycled art if they would provide it in the monster builder. Then, when I copy/paste stats into my Word docs for printing (or perhaps for display on a latop on the table or something), I get the images, too.

Here are a couple:
[sblock]

[/sblock]

Oh, this guy. I remember him now. I don't like his art very much... it's just too plain for my tastes, I think. And I never liked that sunken-eyed goblin picture of his that seemed to be everywhere.