Active Users:1080 Time:22/11/2024 10:15:41 AM
First, D&D 4.0 is marketed at WoW players. Arok Manok's Astral Projection Send a noteboard - 08/02/2010 07:44:47 PM
Second, you'll never get art like back in the day when the likes of Vallejo, Royo, Bell etc were doing art for D&D books and novel colors. The western world is too PC now and those images are all too offensive. Even the relative realism of the likes of Whelan, etc is showing up less and less.

Everyone today is a special snowflake, and everyone's character is equal, etc. So rather than draw something that reminds that the world isn't like that, D&D 4.0 and many current covers go for more of a silly look. It's a shame, really. I'm much more a fan of pulp-style art with muscles, blood, horrifying monsters and real emotion.

On the brighter side, while it's not Heavy Metal, animation in DC and Marvel straight to videos is starting to realize that they have a mature audience that can handle characters dying, etc, so we're getting more animation like Batman: TAS and Justice League clones.

Earlier today I found myself at Barnes & Noble doing some light magazine reading. Unfortunately I discovered that they no longer carried the American Conservative and was left with only the Spectator. On my way browsing around the store I happened to find myself noticing several new rulebooks and errata for the 4th edition of D&D. Now perhaps it is just the old curmudgeon in me (if it isn't thac0, its shit) but it appears to my sensibilities that the new, relatively speaking, art direction for D&D is one giant leap backwards. Perhaps its only a matter of taste but stylistically speaking it is very similar to that pioneered by World of Warcraft using bold saturated colors and distorted proportions. Unfortunately, I happen to instinctively despise such a format and find myself nostalgically pining for the good old days. Even as late as early 2000's, D&D still had character as seen from Icewind Dale series with it's lush use of watercolors and thematically fitting art direction. The illustrations in the books I flipped through today seemed almost sterile and derivative by comparison.

Perhaps it is only my unrealistic expectations based on an unwillingness to accept the younger target demographic that WoTC is courting now but it seems that in addition to a dumbing down of the rules, they have also stripped something of the essence from D&D. Perhaps it is unfair to expect every depiction of a warrior to be a world weary realist style where you can see the rust in his mail, nicks on his blade, the mud on his clothes instead of some colourful buffoon encased head to toe in impractical armor with glowing runes of power. Perhaps it is simply that my tastes are too old fashioned. It doesn't change anything though. The trend in contemporary fantasy art is still crap.


Edit: moved to scififantasy to promote more discussion.
Arok Manok's Astral Projection* is brought to you by the letters O, D and D.
*MySmiley*
Reply to message
Is it just me or is contemporary fantasy art crap? - 08/02/2010 02:37:40 AM 1002 Views
You might get a better response with this on the sci-fi/fantasy board. *NM* - 08/02/2010 06:50:24 AM 290 Views
Re: Is it just me or is contemporary fantasy art crap? - 08/02/2010 05:01:36 PM 624 Views
I don't know if it's crap, but I'm not sure I like it either - 08/02/2010 05:33:49 PM 721 Views
First, D&D 4.0 is marketed at WoW players. - 08/02/2010 07:44:47 PM 908 Views
Wait, you give Vallejo, Royo, and Bell as examples of art that shows something more believable? - 08/02/2010 08:00:53 PM 678 Views
my taste likes the art style... - 09/02/2010 01:41:18 AM 667 Views
Don't knock the naked barbarian chicks - 10/02/2010 02:18:09 PM 644 Views
Yes. I had an old Kull edition just like that - 10/02/2010 01:59:28 AM 632 Views
As far as D&D is concerned, yes. - 10/02/2010 12:53:46 AM 684 Views

Reply to Message