Where do you like to see your art dollars in a ttrpg book?

[gamerprinter]

But with fantasy and cyberpunk particularly I see piles of hyperdetailed full colour maps which are often slightly or even extremely hard to make out, and which pin the DM to specific details and where the players seem to use their imaginations less than with simple maps and description and actually be less immersed (YMMV). I'd much rather stuff like Dyson Logos tends to do for fantasy and, well I've never seen good cyberpunk maps but I think it could be done.

Yes, I hate all those cyberpunk maps with neon glowing everywhere so that the "look this is cyberpunk see my neon" outshines the necessary details in the map that help you run a particular encounter. I use night lighting minimally, I don't avoid it, but I don't emphasize it.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

I am generally interested only in arts that is relevant to help my task as a GM. Maps, yes, whether in an adventure (potential tactical map) or in a setting (overland maps). The rest... meh. A text only cover would be... sparse but eminently bearable. This is especially true of PDF products as I won't consider the "be pretty on a bookshelf" factor. Everything else is discardable:

• Equipment: generally, I can figure what a net or a kite shield is. If you've something truely weird, a description will take less space than a picture. If there is a glue gun that project fast-cementing goo on the target, I might be interested to know they are easily identified from lethal because they are all yellow with a big bulb instead of a muzzle, but I can live without an illustration. The exact grip, size, handle, certainly change by manufacturer anyway ;
• Monsters, races and animals: only when they can't be described easily. I know what a werewolf is. I certainly don't have the exact same idea of what a werewolf is as my players, but the individual variations will make an illustration moot anyway. I want to know if in this world, the WV is full human, full wolf, or any intermediate state, but I can figure out what it is to be "mostly humanoid with wolf-like features" without ressorting to an illustration -- actually, I don't have a problem with two players at the table imagining slightly different version of the scene played out. If a describe a box of precious wood sitting on a desk, one will imagine sandalwood, another rosewood, and both of them will be right, even if it was mahogany. The time were misunderstanding have consequences are rare enough to be dealt by clarifying and occasional rewinding after the player decided to cast a fireball at the gazebo ;
• Character classes... Same. Individual variation between to monks are great. If a monk is accompanied by a Krilin picture, I won't stop a player from describing his character as a cistercian monk.
• Landscapes, ambiance... : I'll probably not be able to show them to players, so it's a lot less useful. I'll rely on words to describe them, so providing the words is enough.

I don't dislike art in TTRPG products, far from it. But since we're talking budget, I'd much prefer to have a monster described on a full page with information on how to use it in a campaign, instead of having a sparse stat block and a half-page illustration. I'd also prefer to have two sparse stat blocks on the same page. In every type of contest between contents, "art" comes out losing in my opinion.

Sure, if the difference between "gorgeous, evocative, stylish art everywhere" and "this book was published using the same style file as my PhD thesis" if a few dollars, I'd love more arts. But I fear it is not, so I'll push for content over art, except when directly applicable to gaming situation.