Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 4753149" data-attributes="member: 80487">I like those DiTerlizzi samples!I also like Willingham and Dee in such contexts as V&V -- but some of their work struck me as clashing with the feel of D&D at the time.I did not like the busyness of 3E design. I have grown quite accustomed to fairly "clean" and functional layout. Ease of reading fulfills the primary function of a rule book. A border might be a nice touch, so long as it does not cramp the text, but it's not something I miss. I think there are sound reasons why some practices have been widely adopted and endured for a long time.Again, I think the character of illustrations tends to be in tune with how the publisher intends people to view the game. WotC has gone for a focus on larger-than-life characters in a comic-book kind of world, and ramped that up in 4E.In the Monster Manual, the dragons stand out for being depicted in more traditional style, and within a view of a wider world. The latter has always been an exception, given the requirements of an MM. The efforts to make monsters look strange relative to established D&D expectations (green goblins being but a minor example) are interesting.Pretty thoroughly, D&D-land is presented as bizarre. Formerly, the prevailing approach (again, setting aside Otus!) was to contrast the other-worldly with familiar Earthly references.That seems to me quite in keeping with the general tenor of 4E. It is clearly meant as a departure from tradition, a break with the past, a new game for a new generation.</blockquote>

Verification