D&D 4E Unnecessary monster appearance changes in 4e

[Stormtower]

I've collected since Harbinger and have a complete set to date. As I will not be converting to 4e, the minis beyond Desert of Desolation hold little interest for me. WotC and Hasbro have managed to drive away a very loyal customer with their recent marketing decisions.

I realize at a basic corporate marketing level that the line must move on and change with the edition shift, but this transparent "re-imagining" of certain iconic creatures seems inherently ridiculous given that we have about 3.75 Monster Manuals' worth of monsters that have yet to be rendered in plastic.

 

[Thurbane]

In an alternate universe, WotC releases 4E with no new art whatsoever, and people are up in arms about how they're being "ripped off".

Well, there is that, yes.

Although "new art" doesn't have to mean monster redesigns...

 

[Richards]

Agreed. I like new artwork, but for the most part I really disliked the "remake" of classic D&D monsters from 2E to 3E: the carrion crawler, displacer beast, and homunculus especially. I hope the 4E artists don't decide to change a classic monster's appearance just to put their own stamp on it.

Johnathan

 

[pawsplay]

Back in my day, we didn't even know if hydras had legs. And my lizardfolk, thanks to the single illustration I had available to me, had a lizard head on a human body.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Well, there is that, yes.

Although "new art" doesn't have to mean monster redesigns...

Could they redesign trolls, though? Because they've been just plain silly since 1E. I don't love 4E's, but they're the best we've had so far. (Truthfully, I think DeTerlizzi got it right in the Spiderwick Field Guide book -- a good mix of scary and a little silly.)

 

[Gentlegamer]

When I use minis, they are Reaper minis. I can't stand the "modern" design aesthetic of monsters in the current game as represented in its art or official miniatures line.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Although I've been playing since '79, when I was looking through Paizo's (awesome) Monstrous Ecologies book the other day, their timelines of the artistic depictions of various iconic monsters over the years really brought home that some of the classic looks were, well, terrible. Likewise, the evolution of the mind flayer has been pretty much all to the good. But I suspect there were people who were outraged when the beholder showed up in the 1E MM looking about 10 times more frightening than it did in OD&D (although, compared to the beholders of today, it looks like a refugee from the Smurfs or something).

I'm not wild about nosehorns, but I'm trying to keep an open mind about the redesign until we've seen more of them.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

Agreed. I like new artwork, but for the most part I really disliked the "remake" of classic D&D monsters from 2E to 3E: the carrion crawler, displacer beast, and homunculus especially. I hope the 4E artists don't decide to change a classic monster's appearance just to put their own stamp on it.

The homonculus change was inexplicable and bad, I grant you that, and the carrion crawler is debatable, but the displacer beast still looks like a dark pseudo-feline with six legs and barbed tentacles growing from its back.

The best change / "remake", IMO, was certainly the new looks for the dragons; I'd be interested in finding out whether or not Wizards is going to change them significantly. (I'm not going to draw far-reaching conclusions on the basis of one pic with a draconic-looking critter.)

 

[Bagpuss]

This makes appearance changes look like cheap up sell attempts because they serve no functional purpose

So you'd prefer to buy 4E MM books with no new art?

I'm sure less people will complain about that.

 

[Kwalish Kid]

It's a really pathetic attempt to make people buy the upcoming reboot of the minis line.

Everybody always joked that WotC would change the scale or base shape of the miniatures, what we will get is just as bad, an unnecessary change made with the sole purpose of making you buy the new minis.

If you're about to say that the new dragon looks better, slap yourself in the face, as they have already accomplished what they wanted. On the other hand if you're about to say that nobody is forcing me to buy the new minis, that is not my point, my point is, 4e should be about significant improvements that make the game better, not an blatantly obvious up sell of game accessories.

There are some crazy posts out there, but this is crazy enough to belong on the WOTC boards!

The WOTC people can, and have, sold different versions of miniatures without changing the art of any associated products.

One of the best ways to get people thinking of a new product as a new product in its own right is to use a different approach to art direction. In the case of fantasy RPGs, this will include changes to the appearance of monsters.

However, nothing in D&D, from its first publications back in the 1970s, has ever bound the players into a specific image for any aspect of the game. This is a game that encourages creativity. People can buy whatever miniatures that they want.

Heck, the new miniatures, even bought with unwanted random extras, are still cheaper than the old lead, unpainted miniatures! Even buying resold miniatures and trading for other miniatures is generally cheaper.