Oooooing and Awwwing At The New PHB Cover

[Apok]

Why can't they make plain, sober covers ? Without cheesy art (will, without Easley art anyway; they could use all the Swekel art they want) ? And without all these gaudy fake gems ? Seriously, it's kitsch. It is possible to make beautiful covers. Look at Nobilis, for example. Ah, well.

I dunno, a Nobilis-style cover just wouldn't seem right for D&D somehow. Don't get me wrong, it's a gorgeous book. Hell, I'd use it as a coffee table book for people just to look at and browse through. It just doesn't seem to jive with the feel of D&D. A little too artsy, maybe. It's hard to describe.

The new cover is ok, nothing spectacular but ok. I probably would've preferred if they had done a pseudo-DiVinci style diagram art cover, like some of the ones inside the original 3e PHB.

 

[Clumsy Bob]

That T-shirt is just an invitation for someone to beat you up and take your lunch money.


LMAO

bob

 

[Ranger REG]

It's all shiny and bright.

My first reaction? Feh.

If the previous cover art does not look like a girl's diary, this cover will. Sorry, but that's my initial feeling on it. You guys overdid the gems and what do you call those "moons"? Bumps?

If you gotta go this route, then you might as well go all the way: paint the whole cover pink. LOL!

 

[John Crichton]

Re: Re: Oooooing and Awwwing At The New PHB Cover

If the previous cover art does not look like a girl's diary, this cover will. Sorry, but that's my initial feeling on it. You guys overdid the gems and what do you call those "moons"? Bumps?

If you gotta go this route, then you might as well go all the way: paint the whole cover pink. LOL!

Whoa.

I have never seen a girl's diary that looks like that.

No ribbons, no bows and no fancy designs of any type. Just a few red baubles. No big. I do see where you are coming from, tho, as it is a bit fancy. And being the fancy lad that I am, I dig it.

 

[Ranger REG]

Re: Re: Re: Oooooing and Awwwing At The New PHB Cover

And being the fancy lad that I am,...

I have no objection to that statement. LOL!

Kidding aside, I'd rather they use less "baubles" and more "runes." After all, there will be a chapter or two on spells and magic in the Player's Handbook.

 

[John Crichton]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Oooooing and Awwwing At The New PHB Cover

I have no objection to that statement. LOL!

LOL

Kidding aside, I'd rather they use less "baubles" and more "runes." After all, there will be a chapter or two on spells and magic in the Player's Handbook.

I can agree with that. A rune here and there may have been nice, maybe like a FRCS feel? I do like the cover but I never said it was perfect. Anyone know if this is the final proof or will it be tweaked?

 

[EricNoah]

Hmmm, my first reaction was "bleh." I think the FR books look great and wish they'd gone more that direction; I don't care for the 3e core covers or this revised mockup.

 

[JeffB]

Hmmm, my first reaction was "bleh." I think the FR books look great and wish they'd gone more that direction; I don't care for the 3e core covers or this revised mockup.

Exactly my thoughts, Eric.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

*shrug* I like it. I really dig the "ancient tome" look.

 

[mmu1]

I think it looks much better than the 3E PHB... Not great, but much better.

Personally, I would have preferred if it looked a lot older and travel-worn, like something that spent a few years in an adventurer's pack, but this will do.