What do you find most Magical about 3E/3.5 art?

trancejeremy said:
Most of the art, though, I found seriously creepy.

Now that is something I've never heard before. What's creepy about it?

I like the character portrait depiction; I use a lot of the art from Dungeon (you can download it seperately for almost any issue) as character portraits. I want somethnig simple and clean that I can point to and say 'this is so-and-so'. The WOTC site 'PC Portraits' are useless; with less than a handful of exceptions they're universaly ugly and hideous.

I like the sheer difference. Wizards that aren't all in robes and hats. Fighters not in plate armor.

It all looks more professional, most of them like something I'd expect to find in an art book or on the cover of a novel.

Monster illustrations are particularly good. There are many depictions of monsters now that I can point at and say 'Man, I'd be terrified to see that coming at me'.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

GoodKingJayIII said:
I have to agree. I don't get Dragon Magazine so I can't say anything about the Eberron art in there, but I think the ECS has a nice collection of art, especially the pictures that open each chapter. It's got a very modern comic-book feel with great characters, lots of colors, etc. It's part of what sold me the book and is what really gave me the image of Eberron as a "pulp" setting.

The Dragon/Sourcebook art must be pretty different, as I wouldn't classify the book art as "cartoonish" in any way.

Check out the online supplement for Dungeon 133 (http://paizo.com/dungeonissues/133/DA133_SupplementLR.pdf) for an idea of the style change. Baron Trelib and the other portraits are just too...I can't even characterize it. They don't have the weight or the power of the sourcebook art.
 

The entire Draconomicon is magical.

One of the page-spreads from the PHBII, "Caves of Adventure" or something like that is right now my favorite piece of gaming art..
 


Personally, I don’t care for the overall style of art I’ve seen in the 3rd edition D&D books. It doesn’t look as awe-inspiring to me as some of the art that defined Dungeons and Dragons. I prefer the art of Elmore, Easley, Parkinson, and Caldwell, who all defined a generation of role-playing art, IMO. Not as “clean” of art as well.

However, I will say that there are a few artists from this current era that really strike me.

Wayne Reynolds is to Eberron what Brom was to Dark Sun. He defined the look of the setting. I love his two-page spreads on the inside covers of Eberron books.

Jason Engle has been seen in some Dragonlance books as well as Arcana Evolved. Friends and Familiars and Allies and Adversaries were two projects he did the art for, and they look stunning. The art alone sold me on those two. I love his vibrant colors, especially where magical energy is concerned. His pic of the Academy Sorcerer and his other pic of the Legion of Steel members in Age of Mortals are among my favorites.

Jennifer Meyer is another of my faves. She has worked on Dragonlance, Sovereign Stone, Blue Rose, and a ton of other products. What I like about her pictures is that she has a real feminine style to it, something you don’t normally see in D&D fantasy. Her female characters especially are great, and she draws some fantastic animals. Plus, she’s just a really nice lady.

Matt Stawicki is the modern day Dragonlance art guru. I don’t like his style quite as well as Elmore’s, but he does some amazing pieces, such as the cover of Amber and Ashes. He has done some gaming books as well, including the cover of Age of Mortals.

EDIT: I forgot to mention Todd Lockwood, who does some amazing dragons!

The current style in WotC’s D&D books isn’t my favorite, but they do have the occasional good piece. Third party companies tend to produce most of what I like these days. And, as always, art is in the eye of the beholder. The rest of the party is in the stomach. ;)
 
Last edited:

It's all about the action! In a lot of previous edition artwork, there's a lot of "standing around and posing" sort of stuff. In 3.X, the vast majority imply impending violence (or at least motion)...

and I love it!
 



Dragonhelm said:
Personally, I don’t care for the overall style of art I’ve seen in the 3rd edition D&D books. It doesn’t look as awe-inspiring to me as some of the art that defined Dungeons and Dragons. I prefer the art of Elmore, Easley, Parkinson, and Caldwell, who all defined a generation of role-playing art, IMO. Not as “clean” of art as well.

I am in full agreement. The older editions, especially 2nd ed, had far better artwork than 3.X.

Elmore, Easley and Caldwell will always be the artist's of D&D to me.
 

It's been downhill ever since Erol Otus and Dave Trampier stopped illustrating the D&D books.

The_Universe said:
It's all about the action! In a lot of previous edition artwork, there's a lot of "standing around and posing" sort of stuff. In 3.X, the vast majority imply impending violence (or at least motion)...

Umm ... what? :\

I'd take 1e illustrations like 'Emirikol the Chaotic' or 'Paladin in Hell' over the static 'poses' that afflicts many 3e books anyday.
 

Remove ads

Top