Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ColonelHardisson" data-source="post: 2323360" data-attributes="member: 363">Yup. It's "Erol Otus." No "i." <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> His stuff has a very definite look to it, very evocative. I don't know about it being "technically" bad - he's very consistent in his proportions, for one thing. Besides, Jeff Easley gets a lot of love, but I've often found his stuff to be "technically" poor - proportions are often off, for example, and his anatomy sometimes just looks outright bizarre if you look at it closely. But I think a lot of his earlier, black & white art in modules like Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth is spectacular.Anyway, I find the new edition's art to also be very good, much more consistent than it's given credit for. The Draconomicon, for example, has some truly wonderful art. Anything by Wayne Reynolds gets high marks from me. I, too, have never gotten why the newer art gets called "dungeonpunk" so often. The only thing that I can see that gave it that label was the art for the iconic sorcerer, Hennet. The disdain for armor having spikes has always seemed odd to me - spikes on armor make sense in a world where big critters like giants and dragons can pick up and squish adventurers.</blockquote>