PF2 Something about PF2's Art Bothers Me


Perhaps I'm in the minority. (It certainly wouldn't be the first time.)

For some reason, Pathfinder 2E's art style seems off to me. The quality of the drawings and such are fantastic; the production values are undeniably top notch. However, something just seems off about the style. I can't yet put my finger on what it is. I only recently gained access to physical books.

Some of the dragons seem too skinny, but that's a minor nitpick; something about the overall style just feels off.

Green Onceler

I haven't really liked the art too much either. Although, I admit, I haven't seen much of it. At a glance the PF1 Core Rulebook cover looks much nicer than the new edition. I don't like the orange/red tones. Reminds me of the fugly 5e PHB. The dragon looks odd to me. The iconics look odd.


I'm not a general fan of most Paizo art when it comes to the Iconics and people/humanoids of any sort (though scenes/landscapes are usually wonderful)

That said, I think the second edition core book, by far, looks nicer than the PF1 core book which was poorly laid out, difficult to use a s a reference and had a teeny font on a hard to read background. I also feel the PF2 Bestiary art is of higher caliber than the PF1 version (though I still don't like many of Paizo's aesthetics for classic D&D creatures).


isn't that kind of the thing with all art though? Some will like it, some will hate it, some are meh, and some will just not get it.
and all are fine, its just a personal opinion for each.


Let me help you - two words: "Wayne" and "Reynolds".

Personally I can't stand his figures, but Paizo seems completely enamoured by his style.
I wasn't aware he was an artist for the book. That's surprising because I liked his D&D 3.5 stuff.

Looking again, some things look okay. The art for the bear on page 40 seems fine. The Archons mostly seem okay too.

I think it's most of the reptilian or lizard stuff which looks weird to me. If this make sense, they look too... I dunno... too clean? This is subjective, but I also feel as though they're too sleek in places they should have some ruggedness and too rugged in places where they should be more refined. (Yeah, I know that sounds like some pedantic BS art critic, but...) Many of them seem more fish-like (or maybe froggy) than I feel they should. The kobolds are an example; they seem more like slaad or maybe a mutated grippli (with snakey shark heads).

The Demons seem mostly okay. I'm not sure how I feel about the Balor though. It's something about the head and face that bothers me... on further thought, that seems to be the area which seems most off to me for many of the pieces. Something just isn't quite right about how bodies connect to head and/or the style of head & face.

In contrast, the Derro seem fine.

I like most of the Devils.

The Bronze and Blue dragons look like they have rival instagram accounts, with a lot of duck lip and booty pop photos.

I like the Drakes. At first, I was unsure, but I like them now. I think the way they're drawn captures the idea that they're sorta the less smarty goofy cousins of dragons.

Overall, like I said, nothing is bad. The production values are great, and the artists involved are undeniably talented. Something just seems slightly off about the underlying (for a lack of better words) soul.


Let me help you - two words: "Wayne" and "Reynolds".

Personally I can't stand his figures, but Paizo seems completely enamoured by his style.
[does image search for "Wayne Reynolds]


That stuff.

Yeah - no thanks. This new information has just reduced the chances of me buying PF2 if/when I find a good deal on the core book.

His stuff's not awful or anything, it's just...not what I'm looking for when it comes to inspiration.
I feel much the same. A lot of the humanoid and character art, even some of the monster art, is too cartoonish. The landscapes, building and map art is very good though.