New cover art for the Revised PHB and DMG?

[Desdichado]

Since when are goggles "high fantasy", "low fantasy" or anything other than modern or sci-fi? If someone had shown me some of the 3E illustrations before the books were released and told me they were for Mad Max RPG, I would have believed them.

Goggles are neither scifi nor fantasy, since they actually exist. Even in stone age technological societies, in some cases, have goggles existed to prevent snow-blindness. I don't know what Mad Max has to do with anything.

I wouldn't describe the LotR as "low fantasy". D&D is very much in the LotR vein whatever Col Pladoh might say.

What exactly is the look of LotR? Tolkien didn't really ever describe clothing or armor with very much detail, really.

 

[Desdichado]

But Joshua Dyal's argument isn't valid anyway. The level of fantasy - high or low - makes no difference to whether a character who could have been in Beyond Thunderdome is appropriate in a fantasy setting - unless Joshua Dyal is saying Mad Max is high fantasy.

My argument only has no validity if you take it as a given that the new style of art looks like Mad Max leftovers. Since nobody but you seems to support that view, I hardly think you can take that as a given.

 

[Turgenev]

Since people were talking about Jeff Dee's art, I thought I would share this url:

http://www.paratime.ca/v_and_v/art_jdee.html

As for the potential art in D&D 3.5, I really don't care since I don't plan on buying it. For the record, I tend to prefer a more traditional/historical look for my D&D game, but I recognize the purely subjective nature of art and won't waste time arguing which is better.

Cheers,
Tim

 

[Sixchan]

Myself, I prefer having characters wear stuff that looks cool. But there has to be a level of functionality in there.

Incedently, with those shoulder spikes on her armour, how does Mialee get through doors?

 

[jester47]

Re: OT

I agree that the Dark Ages is better than it's name implies. It shares fate with the Medieval (Middle) Age and the Gothic style of the medieval age in that it was named thus in the renaissance where the litterature, architechture, law and science of ancient Rome was rediscovered and reinvented. The middle (medieval) age is thus the 1000-years between the end of the Western Roman Empire and the Renaissance.

However, the Dark Ages - colourful as they were - DID happen. The finer arts were largely forgotten and the dogmas of the church repressed academical science and litterature. Also a lot of know-how was lost. In Beowulf the huge stone constructions erected by the Romans is believed to have been created by Giants. The tools and skill were no longer available. Roadbuilding, masonry, concrete was forgotten, and had to be reinvented.

When I say there were no dark ages, I do not mean that there was not time inbetween the gradual decline of rome and the norman conquests. What I mean is that they were not uneducated times. Yes, bar barbarians did sac cities all over but if you look at it, what century has there not been whole sale sacking of cities?

Masonry was not a lost art in the so called dark ages. Road building was neither. My argument is supported by the construction of churches and cathedrals durring Charlemagnes time. Not to mention Constantinople, which Vikings travelled to quite regularly and so would not believe that large constructions were the results of giants.

The Roman church did not get its act together until the 6 or 700's and it was later that it finally was able to reach out and make people listen to the pope. This is because kingship seemed to be chaning hands almost yearly. The spread of knowledge was curtailed by the church because the academic knowledge was being used for war. To stabilise the region and get people back into making art and being happy the church first recognised certain warlords as divinely anointed. Then they got the engineering manuals out ofthe hands of the enemies of these kings. (keep in mind that in the 12 and 1300's There were catapults that could lob large rocks 5 miles. And they could be aimed with great accuracy. (oviously within the line of sight) Once things settled down a bit people started to build churches instead of roads. The tools and skills were there. Large constructions are not an indicator of know how, they are an indicator of political stability and wealth. Both of these were in short supply after 500 Ad because nomadic tribes killed everyone disrupted the political scene and took the wealth away from a civil model to one based on individual rulers.

The change in the "Dark Ages was one of priorities. Rather than civil works (aquaducts and roads) people were building fortresses, improving armor, and emphasising the religious in their constructive works because these things kept your king in power and made things better for you than they were for the previousgenerations of your family. The number of walls and churches built in Tuscany in 900 is astounding. No these were people with knowledge and skills, what is at question was thier priorities.

This is why people in the middle ages did not take well to independant thought and alternative religion. They felt they did not have that luxery. After things started to calm down about the year 1000 it was time to get some cash. The only people with wealth to take nearby were the ones that had been making it off the europeans for the past 500 years. Those people that had become the muslims 5 - 200 years ago. Thus the first crusades. The loot from crusading gathered enough wealth to start an early renaisance in italy that spread out through europe.

I hopes this helps with visualising what a fantasy based on such times might look like. Don't mean to hijack the thread. I tink the art in 3e represents the priorities of the adventureers quite nicely.

Aaron.

 

[Davelozzi]

I vote against "dungeon punk" and the new elves look. I do prefer hobbit-like halflings but the new kender-like ones don't bother me that much anymore.

I'm not opposed to a tome look for the covers but I think the current books have too much ornamantation. They best covers in my opinion:

PHB - first 1e cover (idol)
DMG - second 1e cover (DM opening doors)
MM - second (I think) 1e cover - dragon & pegasi

I agree that Justin Sweet's work is pretty cool. My favorite for traditional fantasy is Elmore. Brom and to a lesser extent DiTerlizzi are good for more out-there settings like Dark Sun and Planescape.

 

[Left-handed Hummingbird]

Re: Re: OT

When I say there were no dark ages, I do not mean that there was not time inbetween the gradual decline of rome and the norman conquests. What I mean is that they were not uneducated times.

They were as far as litterature, philosophy and natural sciences were concerned.

Yes, bar barbarians did sac cities all over but if you look at it, what century has there not been whole sale sacking of cities?

Nobody has claimed otherwise.

Masonry was not a lost art in the so called dark ages. Road building was neither. My argument is supported by the construction of churches and cathedrals durring Charlemagnes time.

You misunderstand my point. Roman masonry and roadbuilding went out of use, medieval craftsmen came up with new solutions. A medieval craftsman wouldn't be able to recreate parthenon, just as a Roman craftsman wouldn't be able to recreate the Cathedral at St. Denis. You have to understand that the material of choice for Northern Europeans was wood, not stone. Wood was plentiful and easy to craft and used as the main material in from the mightiest castles, and grandest royal palaces to the lowliest peasant hut. Stone houses went out of fashion with the Romans. And when you don't build stone houses, you don't educate masons.

Not to mention Constantinople

Now you're cheating. Constantinople has never been part of the Europe of the Dark Ages. Neither has the enlightened muslim countries in Iberia and North Africa.

which Vikings travelled to quite regularly and so would not believe that large constructions were the results of giants.

True, though the vikings that travelled to Constantinople most likely had never seen buildings like that before, since there were no Roman stone buildings whatsoever in Scandinavia so they wouldn't have thought any building was made by giants in the first place. Beowulf is taking place in Britain - despite where it claims to take place. I'll repeat my argument that the people portraied in Beowulf could not recreate buildings such as the roman roads or the Wall of Hadrian - not because they were inherently stupid, but because they couldn't fathom an organisation that could provide the means to do these things. Whatever the reason, those particular skills went out of use.

The churches build back then had huge and heavy walls because that was the only way they could make them strong enough. The Romans had better solutions. The Romans was able to ship the right materials needed to the right place, thus they had different tools at their disposal. The Medieval craftsmen had to make do with local material and thus, they did it differently. They had to reinvent masonry, and the roman customs were forgotten.

The Roman church did not get its act together until the 6 or 700's and it was later that it finally was able to reach out and make people listen to the pope. This is because kingship seemed to be chaning hands almost yearly. The spread of knowledge was curtailed by the church because the academic knowledge was being used for war.

I don't disagree with this, but the end result was that no notable scientist from outside the church emerged in the period of the Dark Ages.

To stabilise the region and get people back into making art and being happy the church first recognised certain warlords as divinely anointed.

That was hardly their motive. The church did that because they gained an immense power by making the local lords, princes, and kings dependent of papal annointment.

Then they got the engineering manuals out ofthe hands of the enemies of these kings. (keep in mind that in the 12 and 1300's There were catapults that could lob large rocks 5 miles. And they could be aimed with great accuracy. (oviously within the line of sight)

Now we're obviously discussing two different things, since the 13th and 14th century is far from the Dark Ages, but other than that I agree that the military tactics and technology improved immensely during the entire medieval era.

Once things settled down a bit people started to build churches instead of roads. The tools and skills were there. Large constructions are not an indicator of know how, they are an indicator of political stability and wealth.

I agree that political stability is a factor. I agree completely that the lack of political stability or economic growth was the main reason that the Dark Ages looked as they did. But that doesn't change the fact that with the disuse of the skills of the ancient world a lot of those skills were forgotten. When the Renaisance began - which I would claim had much more to do with the economocal development in Northern Italy than any political stability that was surely completely absent from that particular region, the craftsmen had to relearn the old crafts again.

Both of these were in short supply after 500 Ad because nomadic tribes killed everyone disrupted the political scene and took the wealth away from a civil model to one based on individual rulers.Very true.

The change in the "Dark Ages was one of priorities. Rather than civil works (aquaducts and roads) people were building fortresses, improving armor, and emphasising the religious in their constructive works because these things kept your king in power and made things better for you than they were for the previousgenerations of your family. The number of walls and churches built in Tuscany in 900 is astounding. No these were people with knowledge and skills, what is at question was thier priorities.

Now, I agree completely with that. 100% I think our only difference in opinion is that I regard the change from Roman times to the Dark Ages and from High Medieval to the Renaissance as paradigm shifts for the craftsmen.

This is why people in the middle ages did not take well to independant thought and alternative religion. They felt they did not have that luxery. After things started to calm down about the year 1000 it was time to get some cash. The only people with wealth to take nearby were the ones that had been making it off the europeans for the past 500 years. Those people that had become the muslims 5 - 200 years ago. Thus the first crusades. The loot from crusading gathered enough wealth to start an early renaisance in italy that spread out through europe.

That sounds like a home brewn theory I think that is an unfair generalization. Besides crusades were taking place all over the place (Denmark led crusades into Germany and the Baltic for instance), the reasons were as much political as economical.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Alien? Giger? I don't know what pictures of halflings you're looking at, but they sound pretty freakin' scary.

I think what was being referred to was the full suit of leather armor that Lidda, the iconic rogue halfling wears. It looks more like a catsuit to me, though.

 

[Turgenev]

Re: Re: Re: OT

As far as I know, the term "Dark Ages" is disapproved of in the academic Middle Ages field. That period of history is generally refered to a low, middle and high Middle Ages. The Dark Ages is more a layman term these days than an academic one. Course this may have changed over the last ten years (since I was at university).

An argument can also be made that the Roman Catholic Church was a legitimate inheritor of the Roman Empire since the Church owes much of its existance and power to the Christian Roman Emperors (i.e. Emperor Constantine who forced all Roman citizens to become Christians) and the Roman bureaucracy. I know this is a simplification of the actual situation but I don't have the time or energy to dig out my old notes from my university Middle Ages History/Classic courses.

As for Constantinople - it was part of the Roman Empire and even became a capitol near the Empire's "end" (The Western Roman Empire was already in decline while the Eastern Empire flourished. Both were part of the greater Roman Empire). In fact, when Rome was ransacked Constantinople became the capitol and one can make the argument that the Roman Empire continued on - just not in Europe.

Such a debate is still controversial within academic circles. I knew Professors who stated that the Roman Empire never actually fell but just changed (or evolved) with the times.

As for the Renaissance... that's another controversy for another day. Scholars have argued over its starting date and its impact on Europe since study of it began. Since different areas of Europe experienced a "Renaissance" at different time periods (and in some cases more than once as in Italy) and these periods had different impacts on their respective cultures... some scholars have made arguments that a "renaissance" never actually occured. Again it was just an evolution of the trends that were in place since the low Middle ages (and before).

I know people like to put history in nice neat little packages but the way I see it is a more organic approach where it flows from one factor to another and you'll be hardpress to find where one factor starts and another begins.

Okay I've done enough rambling. That's what you get when you post with only three hours sleep. I hope that this post made some sort of sense.

 

[Illuminae]

Re: Re: AAAAAAAAARGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

I'd just like to note that someone posting a picture called "drawing the human head and comparing it to an elven arcane archer probably missed something important somewhere.

If you are implying that humans and elves are so different that their proportions can´t be compared, then I think that it is you whos missed something for almost a century, my friend.

Pointy ears are the difference.

Ear placement IS NOT.

You just have to compare that arcane archer to the hundred other billions of elves that were drawn and/or described in any D&D book of any edition and you will come to the conclusion that that piece of garbage is not an elf.

I just used an human head for comparison because I believe I wouldn´t find any books on elven anathomy anywhere.

Oh wait... I DO!