Yeah! I'm in Dragon (again). Want to argue?

[coyote6]

I still don't get the "dungeonpunk" thing. I look at 3e's art, and I look at, say, the Warhammer RPG (printed how many years before 3e? with the mohawked dwarf on the cover?), and 3e just doesn't seem very "punk" or to be cashing in on some new style.

I dunno; maybe I just had too many biker neighbors as a kid.

 

[arwink]

Who are the fantasy authors of recent years who eclipse everyone from Homer...?

As someone who had to teach a class about the illiad to final year lit and writing students recently, I can assure you that Brad Pitt now owns Homer's soul.

The DnD look has always been a stylised hodge-podge of influences, taken in new directions every time a new artist started working on a project. I agree that original DnD took the best bits of Fantasy and mythology as its influences, but I also see the current look as a continuation of the same process.

 

[Mark]

It's like arguing about cat food. It doesn't matter what cats have eaten for thousands of years, nor what anyone thinks a cat should like. In the end, the cat decides and we just feed them...if we know what's good for us.

 

[Spatula]

- Genres evolve over time. Here's an example: go rent the original version of The Manchurian Candidate - this is not a rhetorical statement; I actually went and did it because all the critics said (of the remake) "It's alright, but you should go and see the original." I dare you to sit through the entire thing.

I have, and it's a great movie. I haven't seen the remake (didn't see any point). It's likely that there was "no suspense" for you because you already knew the plot when you watched it, thanks to the remake. I went through a similar experience with The Ring - I saw the original Japanese version after the remake, and was bored stiff by it. But then, I already knew what was going to happen. Evaluating different versions of the same work is difficult because you view everything through the lens of whichever version you experienced first.

I think people who say 'kids will like it for the style, then leave when style changes' are underselling contemporary youth, the way adults always do and always will (and I'm sure I will in another ten years). After all, the style of D&D clearly appealed to them, and much of that has changed, and they're still here.

Yes, but they're special. And they know what's best for today's kids. They always do...

 

[talinthas]

so i went back and looked at all the mystical art people spoke so highly of, ie Erol Otus and friends.

Dude, if i saw a book with a cover like that on the shelf today, it would stay there while i found something better to do with my time. It really looks terrible. Like a cartoon a 6th grader would draw or something.

I basically sat down with my collection and went chronologically from back to front to compare. For reference, i'm 23, and started gaming when i was 12, around 93 or so.

The old stuff- Tomb of horrors has some of the lamest interior art i've ever seen. ever. the covers on some of those other old mods sucked too. And god, the monster manual....

The slightly newer stuff- Caldwell didn't do it for me in 2nd ed, and doesnt do it for me now. Elmore was amazing on his dragonlance stuff right up till he had his stroke, around the tenth anniversary of DL. The art was more realistic and what i expect fantasy to look like. Of course, this is because i grew up with it, and it molded my image of fantasy for me, just as i suspect Otus and friends did for the older set.

the newest stuff- This is what i want fantasy to look like. Lockwood is amazing, Sam wood a close second. Jason Engle stuns me every time i see something he does in the new dragonlance. Matt Stawiki is a great cover artist. And damned if hennet isn't the character i most wanted to play when i saw 3e for the first time. If this is dungeonpunk, bring it on! I want more of it =)

 

[Olive]

Dude, if i saw a book with a cover like that on the shelf today, it would stay there while i found something better to do with my time. It really looks terrible. Like a cartoon a 6th grader would draw or something.

Totally. and I started with 1e, so this is the stuff I associate with fantesy art as well. And that's why I never liked fantasy art. I like WAR!

Anyway, it's also worth noting that psionics were part of AD&D from the begining Zander. I can't satnd them myself (anymore than I like magitech etc) it's silly to act is if these tendencies haven't always been part of DnD.

I liked Sennet's response a lot, and it more or less summed up the game to me!

(Oh yeah, since everyone else is doing it, I'm 28 and heavily tattooed)

 

[rkanodia]

I have, and it's a great movie. I haven't seen the remake (didn't see any point). It's likely that there was "no suspense" for you because you already knew the plot when you watched it, thanks to the remake. I went through a similar experience with The Ring - I saw the original Japanese version after the remake, and was bored stiff by it. But then, I already knew what was going to happen. Evaluating different versions of the same work is difficult because you view everything through the lens of whichever version you experienced first.

Not to sidetrack the thread, but I saw the original Manchurian Candidate before the remake. Still terrible. And I've only seen the Japanese version of the Ring, and I'll agree that boy, that thing was a yawner. Scarier stuff has come out of my lint trap

 

[Arnwyn]

I have to say, I'm pretty much apathetic to both the original letter and the Dragon Mag. editors' response.

Frankly, I don't care if we get more youth into the game/hobby. I couldn't care less. That's certainly not a factor in any decisions I make about the game. And really... why should it be? So the hobby won't "die"? As if I care.

The gaming police aren't going to come and take away my books if the hobby "dies". And I'm only interested in playing with close friends, so I don't care about the recruitment of already knowledgeable players.

Really, if the goal of "getting more youth into the hobby" results in a bunch of books for beginners and not a lot of books that I'm interested in (which, based on the results of such books that have come out, seems to be true), then that goal is, in fact, a bad one. (For me, duh.)

 

[SSquirrel]

Frankly, I don't care if we get more youth into the game/hobby. I couldn't care less. That's certainly not a factor in any decisions I make about the game. And really... why should it be? So the hobby won't "die"? As if I care.

The gaming police aren't going to come and take away my books if the hobby "dies". And I'm only interested in playing with close friends, so I don't care about the recruitment of already knowledgeable players.

Really, if the goal of "getting more youth into the hobby" results in a bunch of books for beginners and not a lot of books that I'm interested in (which, based on the results of such books that have come out, seems to be true), then that goal is, in fact, a bad one. (For me, duh.)

Now there's penty of folk out there happy with the current edition as it is and they have all the books they would ever want and stop buying. People have done that for ages, just look at Diaglo, he still stands by OD&D. Yes no gaming police willshow up to confiscate your books, but there's always something new that can come from the industry and I (and presumably many others) are eager to see what will come next.

I want to see more youths play simply b/c I feel fantasy gaming is a worthwhile activity and I want others to be able to experience the joy I did growing up with D&D and other games.

There are always some books specifically for beginners, but they hardly fil up a massive chunk of the gaming spectrum. You'll continue to see a few of them and that will be pretty much it.

My current gaming group I met thru meetup.com. None of them (besides my gf and myself) had played 3 or 3.5 before and one girl had never played any RPG period. We all jumped into 3.5 (small upgrade for the 2 of us as we'd been playing 3.0 since it was released) and everyone is doing great. The girl who had never played an RPG before had played old school Might and Magic comp games and such and enjoyed fantasy and she's become a pretty good RPer. In her late 20s or so. I want to see more of this in all age groups myself. Rarely does it affect us personally, but when it does its nice to see.

Hagen

 

[Samothdm]

Frankly, I don't care if we get more youth into the game/hobby. I couldn't care less. That's certainly not a factor in any decisions I make about the game. And really... why should it be? So the hobby won't "die"? As if I care.

Just curious - which version of the game are you playing now? And, how many books do you use to play?