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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Darth Shoju" data-source="post: 3238052" data-attributes="member: 11397">Why should it look like Gimli? I can't see how it is a bad thing that it doesn't. That dwarf looks like it would be far more capable in combat than many other renditions I've seen.Yeah well when you use extremely derogatory and condescending terms in description of the art of 2ed and 3ed, it tends to imply a lack of respect for those who enjoy that style.Well I'd suspect there were a lot more modules released in the 1st edition than have been done in the 3rd. 3ed hasn't been known for it's proliferation of modules. Besides, I'd hardly consider relying on module cover art alone to be a strong example fo the art of an entire edition.I wouldn't count on that. Also, I find it odd that you can claim realism=quality on one hand, then espouse the virtues of Otus on the other, while also claiming that realism "hurts your immersion". Frankly, after looking through my 3ed PHB and DMG the other night, I don't see any examples of "overly-muscled" characters. I see hardened, well-equipped adventurers. The only real dungeon-punk I see is Hennet, and I'm not a fan of his picture anyway. To me, seeing an average slob that looks like me (not fat but certainly out of shape) descending into a dungeon is far *less* realistic than seeing someone like Jozan or Tordek or Lidda or Regdar doing so. An adventurer should look strong and capable, not like some bloody jabroni.Further, your examples provided above prove nothing of your point IMO. The first three I don't even recognize (the first does seem to be a Lockwood piece, but I'm not sure where from). The last is easily recognizable but proves nothing objective about the quality of the work, just that it does not meet your own personal taste. You make claims of bland backgrounds and post pencil scetch pictures as supposed proof. I second the idea that you try the actual wizards site for pictures and use those to build your case for mohawked elves and such. The bottom line is that 1ed art is not "fine art". It was decent art that suited the game it accompanied. It was no more accomplished than that of any other edition. Frankly there hasn't been any convincing argument made to disprove that any of this "magic" of 1ed art is anything more than personal opinion.</blockquote>

Verification