Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bran Blackbyrd" data-source="post: 1416732" data-attributes="member: 1710">You big silly, that's just an all around bad picture. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I have no idea what the artist was thinking when they were drawing that, but they may have been at a cosplay event...EDIT: evildm duncov.jpg, love it. Love the brush strokes.I think background just takes up space where text should be. That's the bottom line. Full page art spreads eat up space where text could be. You can either keep the full page art and increase the page count and price, or you can leave the backgrounds out and leave the principle characters, which decreases page count and price.Personally I always thought the full page plates next to text looked hokey. I like the 3E way.Trampier: Some of his stuff from the AD&D Monster Manual was pretty interesting. I wouldn't want to see it in 3E, but for the time, it was neat. A lot of his pieces had a feel that fell somewhere between art deco and inuit/woodcut territory. Salamander, Remorhaz, Rakshasa, Homonculus, Dragonne, Dragonturtle, Displacer Beast, those were pretty good. Even the harpy wasn't too bad, and the fire giant, though it looked like the village idiot, had decent anatomy. The weretiger transforming was pretty wild too. Most of the remaining artwork (of his and anyone else's) pretty much stinks. Hey, it was a different era.A few of Sutherland's drawings are ok. A few of the Fiend Folio drawings are nice.I much prefer today's artwork, but I'll agree with what was said previously; when it's good, it tends to be really good. When it's bad, it tends to be horrible.</blockquote>

Verification