D&D 4E What period of D&D art would you most like to see 4E emulate?

[Nifft]

None.

Just make it good.

Cheers, -- N

 

[A'koss]

I looked at every image you posted a link for. Lots of beautiful and amazing work there. Very few were what I would describe as gritty or realistic.

Certainly not all of them are gritty (as I mentioned above, some of the links are just to show what quality of work is out there), but nearly all are more realistic than the work we find in D&D.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Certainly not all of them are gritty (as I mentioned above, some of the links are just to show what quality of work is out there), but nearly all are more realistic than the work we find in D&D.

I don't agree at all. There's lots of awesome art there, but it seems to fall into two distinct catergories:

1) Gritty and wildly unrealistic.

2) Realistic and romantic (and thus not gritty).

I mean, I mean, every piece I looked at from that list (nice collection btw), was A) at least good, in some cases great, and B) in ONE of those two catergories but not the other.

If you're saying a "fused" style incorporating both would be good, I agree, but if you're saying there are many pieces in there that are "gritty and realistic", then I'm left mystified as to which they are. Leaping barbarians fighting chained titans/gods is kind of gritty in a bloody sort of way, but the drawing style is about as "realistic" as Disney.

 

[Valiant]

How about, y'know, the artist don't "emulate" anything. I mean, the very concept sickens me, as an artist of a mediocre calibre myself, why the FUG would we be "emulating" some other, previous period of art?
QUOTE]

Ruin Explorer, I didn't mean completely emulate the artwork of any period, but rather what general direction would you like to see 4E going (I assumed originality was a given). For instance, do you like traditional (what we see in history books, as another poster mentioned, people used to believe in things like elves and gnomes etc.) or are you more of a fan of the more recent styles (which are less classic, more reflective of the present day).

 

[The Human Target]

I want 4E to look like 4E.

 

[Testament]

If we're going to use existing artists as a reference point, then 3.X is where its at for me. Especially work by Tsai, Daarken, Ron Spencer, Todd Lockwood, Wayne Reynolds, Lucio Parillio, William O'Conner, Michael Komrack (his covers for WW's Scion line are droolworthy) and Dean Hudnut are all work keeping. Hudnut, Spencer, Lockwood and Komrack in particular, at least for me.

Just, for the love of all that is holy, nothing from Erol Otus. Could someone PLEASE explain the love for him, seriously? I've got relatives with single-digit ages that do better art than him.

 

[Moonshade]

I expect the art will have some of the "modern" feel of 3E, but those preview images I've seen suggest the outfits might be more traditional (fewer spikes and other additions). That could be a good balance.

I'd be very happy if they got Michael Komarck to do something for the books.

 

[Klaus]

I think you guys already know what I'd like to see in 4e art, right?

Link in sig.

 

[Henry]

It's a personal pet peeve, but could I ask anyone posting large JPEGs to put them in [/SBLOCK] tags? For those with 1024 resolutions or smaller, it throws the whole page out of whack. Thanks!

 

[Henry]

As for me, I have always rather enjoyed the late 1st edition to mid-2nd edition style of art - the Elmores, the Caldwells, the Parkinsons, etc. If the 4th edition art were in that ballpark, I'd love it to pieces. Mind you, I have always loved Todd Lockwood's Work, and Wayne Reynolds' work, so that wouldn't hurt my eyes either. Fewer spikes, buckles, tattoos, and "naked adventurers gear" have always been my preference, and though I didn't see tons of it in the 3E stuff, I saw it enough to where it bugged me when I did.

No disrespect meant, but about the only D&D artist's work I've never really enjoyed was Tony Diterlizzi's work. Great guy, but his stuff just wasn't for me - too "gangly," for lack of a better term.