Night below spoiler pics

[Kae'Yoss]

The latest Night Below Preview showcased the Large Gold Dragon and the Large Shadow Dradon.

The article said they altered the Shadow Dragon to make it more distinct from the Deep Dragon, and made the Shadow Dragon more similar to the Blue...


... which ruined the mini for me, as I loved the Lockwood rendition of the Shadow Dragon.

They should leave the dragons alone. Or other monsters. Why change the look mid-edition just to accomodate the minis guys? It's not as if the sculpt would have been impossible.

OH, and that gold dragon is just plain ugly. Unless the guy who took the photo managed to find the worst possible angle, this thing looks like the sculptor went Cthulhu on its face.

 

[AntiStateQuixote]

Does the Greenspawn Zealot look like a Sleestak to anyone else?

Klaus wins the thread!

 

[Felon]

They should leave the dragons alone. Or other monsters. Why change the look mid-edition just to accomodate the minis guys? It's not as if the sculpt would have been impossible.

I suppose it's possible--likely even--that dragons of a certain type don't all look like the illustration provided by the artist. This one's a little huskier is all.

 

[frankthedm]

I suppose it's possible--likely even--that dragons of a certain type don't all look like the illustration provided by the artist. This one's a little huskier is all.

[imagel]http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/mi20070517a_lsd.jpg[/imagel]Each dragon type is supposed to have a specific look to it. Wotc has gone out of thier way on that. The shadow dragon doe not look that close to the upcoming mini. That mini does look a bit like the blue dragon however.

It is far more likely they had a large blue dragon sculpt ready already, made a change or two and used that cast in clear plastic. Possibly a blue that was being sculpted for the desert of desolation setbut got rejected. I like the shadow dragon mini though. It will make for an awesome mini for any undead dragon.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I don't like blue dragons because of the tusk, but don't really care for the sleek silver dragon/ deep dragon look. This new look could be quite nice for it. Hard to tell that and the Gold, neither photo is well angled.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

I wish they didnt have another otyugh. I don't think they need another one. The large gold dragon, large shadow dragon and frost gian jarl look great.

Mike

I was surprised to see the Otyugh in this set (in was previously in GoL). The Flesh Golem is another rescuplt that I was surprised to see (previously in Aberrations). I am happy about a Medusa (the first one was in Harbringer, is a poorly sculpted and painted mini, and still costs a lot to buy on the secondary market.

I thought that a Drider and an Umber Hulk would have been better options for this set. Both would fit the Night Below theme well too.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I don't understand the Oty part, either: The old figure isn't that bad, and I haven't heard anyone asking for a new one. I guess they're not used that often. The flesh golem, on the other hand, is widely regarded to be a bad sculpt (even though I personally like the old one).

Still, I agree that the Umber Hulk would have been a better choice, and I also would have preferred a drider over that scorrow thing. (shouldn't that be "scrow"?)

 

[Olaf the Stout]

I don't understand the Oty part, either: The old figure isn't that bad, and I haven't heard anyone asking for a new one. I guess they're not used that often. The flesh golem, on the other hand, is widely regarded to be a bad sculpt (even though I personally like the old one).

Still, I agree that the Umber Hulk would have been a better choice, and I also would have preferred a drider over that scorrow thing. (shouldn't that be "scrow"?)

I have 1 or 2 of the Otyughs and they are quite nice sculpts and paint jobs, especially considering that GoL were only the 4th set made so they were still early on in the learning curve.

I don't own any of the Flesh Golems (although I want 2) so I can't really comment on that mini. I'll probably get one of the old mini and one of the new one now. It's probably more realistic if they look different anyway!

Some of the resculpt choices have been a little strange in my opinion. We have had 3 Minotaurs, a Minotaur Skeleton and a Feral Minotaur so far. 3 Displacer Beasts, including 2 in the last 3 sets (at least there seems to be a demand for these).

Yet we have had no resculpt of an Umber Hulk. No Uncommon Large Spider (not even in a set called Night Below). We had to wait 11 sets for Kuo-Toas to get redone. We waited 9 sets for a new Large Red Dragon (and they ruined it by putting a Githyanki on top of it).

Some of the resculpt choices have been good. Others have really left me scratching my head.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Felon]

Each dragon type is supposed to have a specific look to it. Wotc has gone out of thier way on that. The shadow dragon doe not look that close to the upcoming mini. That mini does look a bit like the blue dragon however.

It is far more likely they had a large blue dragon sculpt ready already, made a change or two and used that cast in clear plastic. Possibly a blue that was being sculpted for the desert of desolation setbut got rejected. I like the shadow dragon mini though. It will make for an awesome mini for any undead dragon.

Meh. Things are "supposed to" be a certain way until they're not anymore. There's room for speculation as to why they'd drop the eel-headed loook. For instance, that look ws also used recently with some other black dragon they did a couple sets ago--the "deep dragon", I think. When it comes to dragons, there's so many variations of essentially the same thing that it's hard for me to get too worked up over taking artistic liberties. I almost breathed a sigh of relief about the gold being the last of the good dragon set, then someone brought up gem dragons. Now we'll wind up with green dragons that are "emerald" dragons and red dragons called "ruby".dragons. Arrrgh.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

For instance, that look ws also used recently with some other black dragon they did a couple sets ago--the "deep dragon", I think.

Yes. The two dragons look quite similar in the 3e books. (Before we knew it was a Deep in Underdark, there was some speculation whether it would be Deep or Shadow) The big difference is that the shadow dragon is cloaked in darkness.

I don't see why they're making such a big deal of making those two dragons different from each other. They're quite some time apart, and anyway, it's not like they didn't do figures that looked quite similar in the past *coughcoughmostdwarvescoughcough*

then someone brought up gem dragons. Now we'll wind up with green dragons that are "emerald" dragons and red dragons called "ruby".dragons. Arrrgh.

Nah. Unlike Deep and Shadow, those are supposed to look quite different from the Chromatic dragons. Especially since they're supposed to look like the gems they take their names from. Read: Clear plastic.

Yet we have had no resculpt of an Umber Hulk. No Uncommon Large Spider (not even in a set called Night Below). We had to wait 11 sets for Kuo-Toas to get redone. We waited 9 sets for a new Large Red Dragon (and they ruined it by putting a Githyanki on top of it).

Don't forget the gnomes. For quite some time, they didn't put any gnomes in the sets, and just ignored those who asked for more. Not even a "sorry, can't say when we'll get more of them". When they did respond, the first respond was making fun of those who kept asking for gnomes.

There's still some big gaps in the gnome line-up, especially the bard (after all, it's their favoured class)