Dragonlance Takhisis Revealed In New Dragonlance Preview Art

WotC has shared some new art of Takhisis, Dragonlance’s 5-headed dragon queen.

 

[dave2008]

I definitely get your point. However, there has been some more creative freedom, in 5e at least. In particular red dragons. Just look at the new Dragonlance art:

And of course the MM red:

And this one from Fizban's:

And my personal favorite:

There was also this alternate take:

 

[Vaalingrade]

The older dragons tend to look like medieval drawings which... I don't feel are the kind of thing I would be excited to encounter; all floppy and slow-looking like inaccurate depictions of dionsaurs.

The new ones are all lumpy and sinewy like bodybuilders gone wrong and with the really dumb frills for the metallics and the beginning of what would become Warcraft's Leno-dragon chin. Black, Red and Silver are okay.

 

[darjr]

Ahem.

 

[Umbran]

now how many players/dms today can name the color of these...

Well, lets see. The original Monster Manual with that art came out in...1977. The Monstrous Compendium came out in 1989. So, we might start with anyone playing in that span.

Say you pick up D&D at 12 years old. Anyone born after 1977 probably picks up 2e, rather than 1e. So, we are looking for gamers born before 1977 - so gamers 45 and up, for the most part. And, from WotC, gamers 40+ are about 13% of the market today.

So, maybe 13% of D&D gamers today have a shot at it?

 

[Sacrosanct]

Ahem.

View attachment 266294

And it only took them 22 years after "the change"* to have some diversity in dragon bodies that existed originally

* WoTC change to musclebound dragons

 

[Vaalingrade]

And it only took them 22 years after "the change"* to have some diversity in dragon bodies that existed originally

* WoTC change to musclebound dragons

"Approximately two percent of my body weight is fat. Allow me to show you what 350 pounds tons of muscle is capable of."

 

[Weiley31]

I really like the Golden Dragon's catfish whiskers.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

The eyes definitely give me a "medieval manuscript" dragon vibe.

But I like the old dragon version better. (Though, 20+ years later, the eyes creep me out...)

Spoiler

View attachment 266239

Individually, I like the visuals of the 5E dragons, but when combined together, ugh.

I do love those 1e illustrations. One thing I find fascinating is that, in particularly with the chromatics, their main traits are still recognizable today. The horns of the black dragon, the blue dragon's horn, the crest of the white, etc., they're all here.

Well they have had distinctive characteristics beyond color since at least 1e:
View attachment 266260
If your curious:

Spoiler: chromatic

Top row, left to right: black, blue, green, red, white

Spoiler: metallic

Bottom row, left to right: brass, bronze, copper, gold, silver

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Well they have had distinctive characteristics beyond color since at least 1e:
View attachment 266260
If your curious:

Yeah the Modern ones look way better. How some of you can say the ones below look similar compared to the old ones is beyond me.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Yeah the Modern ones look way better. How some of you can say the ones below look similar compared to the old ones is beyond me.

It's the feline-inspired body shape combined with the lumpy rope muscles of 3e design direction. And the Leno-dragon chins, which are actually worse on the metallics.

I know where the former came from and WotC's love of it goes back to the MTG Anthologies... anthology, but I don't know where the later came from and for me was the only unwelcome part of the dungeonpunk aesthetic.