|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 28, 2021 12:04:36 GMT -6
Is it bad that I like the original better? |
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Aug 28, 2021 12:43:34 GMT -6
The purple worm is pretty cool, though. Purple worms are always cool. They belong everywhere.  |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 28, 2021 13:09:47 GMT -6
Is it bad that I like the original better? I do too. I'm sure nostalgia is 90% of it- but I REALLY like Sutherland's art. Rushed, or not. I'd much rather see Greg Bell or DCS, or Tramp or....than Paizo style art where a barbarian's sword is 3 times as big as they are, or the 3.0 Half Orc/5E halflings where either the feet are 3 times bigger than their head, or their head is 3 times bigger than their feet and all the humanoids look like they have been taking cycle after cycle of dianabol. Perspective seems to be lost on many modern fantasy artists * I'd be 100% ok with old school 70s comic art for all my RPG books. *generalizing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2021 13:45:38 GMT -6
Me too. From Dice or Die... Digression: AD&D Monster Manual 1e cover art. It’s time now to review the front and back covers of the relevant monster manual. Note, what follows is intentionally stream of conscious. Beginning (with the AD&D MM 1e’s front cover): Red dragon overhead...Centaur with a club...Owlbear in a tunnel...Looking for those adjustments to a well-written RPG module, which moor the ecology or story more deeply into what the unicorn has provided? A new secret door, clever in application, which allows for a double-ended assassin’s attack, it’s no small encounter. This “assisted” giant spider doth sting so. A corpse chute or garbage bin, which collects the wretched or slain, maybe into an undead charnel pen or a more active, ambulatory undead laboratory, this capacity might in turn feature more squarely a keyed heavyweight. Underground hobgoblins are fed examples. Interject: what marks death from a stirge attack? Is it not of the glutton? Is it other than utterly and truly horrific, blood sucking gorging by deadly sized bastard birds from hell who are both aware of the feeding and savor the scarlet feast? Continuing (with the AD&D MM 1e’s back cover): Troll gnaws bone…Water, waste, and food…Shroom, magic, and chivalry… Image? Any early structure. Then rough-hewn, gameable saturate mood and striated themes roil the purple worm. From these, one may also advocate for a templated ortho-concurrency, its play stationary full-foreword, energetic, and antagonistic, like the roper in the tunnel. Or, again, if top awning has the screaming hippogriff, then toward what druid’s sentient elm canopy? Else, if bearded, then to what vicious manticore rapine and hunting ground? Or, if woolgathering, then obliged to what realm’s epic castle on yonder cloud? Of the unchanged form of the familiar of a chaotic evil spell caster, it's not an imp. Fetid wandering monster...That sprite with a stabbing blade... Decades of aging…  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2021 13:57:59 GMT -6
The purple worm is pretty cool, though. Purple worms are always cool. They belong everywhere. They *are* everywhere. Walk quietly! |
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Aug 29, 2021 0:44:49 GMT -6
The redo of the MM is freakin' amazing! 5/5 stars!
However, the PHB art, though technically very well-executed, is bland. And the lizard-men are replaced by alligators?!?!
|
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Aug 29, 2021 0:54:38 GMT -6
Purple worms are always cool. They belong everywhere. They *are* everywhere. Walk quietly! ...and without rhythm! |
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Aug 29, 2021 8:25:23 GMT -6
Personal pet peeve: medieval-esque fantasy artwork where people have uncovered hair. They'd be -2 to hit all the time from how itchy their head lice is.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 29, 2021 8:43:13 GMT -6
The redo of the MM is freakin' amazing! 5/5 stars! However, the PHB art, though technically very well-executed, is bland. And the lizard-men are replaced by alligators?!?! FWIW- I never saw the creatures on the original PHB cover as Lizard men until someone mentioned it online in the late 1990s. I cannot say I ever gave the cover much thought back then* but I'm pretty sure all of us in my group/s thought they were crocs/alligators. *Honestly, though I have grown to love them, I was not terribly enamored of the PHB or MM covers in my youth. I guess I felt they were pretty uninteresting. For my tastes, Sutherland's Holmes box/book cover was considerably better than the AD&D covers. of the AD&D covers, the DMG was definitely my favorite. Maybe I just prefer scenes where the adventurers are in the S***  |
|
|
|
Post by captainjapan on Aug 29, 2021 9:47:40 GMT -6
  I'm digging his takes on the Sutherland covers. The trampier players handbook homage - not so much. I was never a Sutherland fan, but a huge trampier fan. That's better, but what is up with that perspective? On this piece, the humans and the ship are at roughly the same scale to the giant efreet and his city of brass as they were on the original DMG cover. I see what you mean about Walton's curvilinear perspective, though. It's clever, in that the left(back cover) and right(front cover) of these pieces give you a fish-eye effect when seen as a whole. This is especially noticable on the Trampier PHB variant where Walton uses the arched vault of the temple to shift the perspective and give an expanded view of the crocodile coming down the stairs. |
|
|
|
Post by captainjapan on Aug 29, 2021 10:11:30 GMT -6
On the other hand, I think Walton really missed the mark with the lighting and scale of his scene. This:  VS. this: |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 29, 2021 10:25:44 GMT -6
^ Yep.
In Walton's it's reversed- the Temple is more well lit and the figures are dull and of similar coloration as their background-everything washes out.
Tramp's seems like a very dark and eerie place illuminated only by fire. The party are mostly wearing bright clothing, which is in high contrast to their background.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 29, 2021 15:08:00 GMT -6
On this piece, the humans and the ship are at roughly the same scale to the giant efreet and his city of brass as they were on the original DMG cover. I see what you mean about Walton's curvilinear perspective, though. It's clever, in that the left(back cover) and right(front cover) of these pieces give you a fish-eye effect when seen as a whole. This is especially noticable on the Trampier PHB variant where Walton uses the arched vault of the temple to shift the perspective and give an expanded view of the crocodile coming down the stairs. I teach perspective drawing at a University. Every semester I get students try to cover up bad perspective with highly rendered detail. Sad thing is, basic perspective isn't even that hard to learn, there is a bit of a steep curve at first mostly due to terminology, after that not too hard. This would fail. I can point out one thing anyone can understand, no training necessary: the ocean cannot be above the Horizon Line, right? Yet the Horizon Line on the right is below the fire ocean on the left. (I guess you could argue it is a fire ocean tsunami...yeah, student's will make up any justification) I don't know for sure, but my guess is he photo bashes several references together, then renders on top of that. It is the most common way to work these days for a lot of illustrators - especially for this style. This is not a judgement call, I have no problem with photo bashing. All he'd have to do is line up the Horizon Line in each photo and the perspective would work. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 29, 2021 15:10:40 GMT -6
^ Yep. In Walton's it's reversed- the Temple is more well lit and the figures are dull and of similar coloration as their background-everything washes out. Tramp's seems like a very dark and eerie place illuminated only by fire. The party are mostly wearing bright clothing, which is in high contrast to their background. Those dull gray palettes are in style these days. I like it sometimes when it is well done. |
|
phantomtim
Level 3 Conjurer
13th Age Enthusiast
Posts: 87 
|
Post by phantomtim on Aug 29, 2021 21:49:09 GMT -6
Thanks for kicking off this thread, jeffb . It's fun to see these new takes on the classic covers. I appreciate the discussion around perspective and horizon lines, too. I could tell something looked a bit off, but couldn't put my finger on it. Leave it to the fine folks in this community to put it to words. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by asaki on Aug 29, 2021 22:07:19 GMT -6
I really like that new DMG art. MM is okay, but I was never a fan of the original art, to be honest. PHB... While more skillfully draw, the PHB remake goes wrong by shifting the focus of painting away from the adventure (AD&D PHB) to the characters standing at the bottom of the painting. The giant demonic idol is, by far, the more dominant aspect of the AD&D PHB cover. It is bright, fiery, and striking. My attention is instantly drawn to the two thieves attempting to pry the giant ruby from the idol's eye. The other adventures are covered by the words Player's Handbook, which tells me, as the player, to be like those daring thieves, not the boring dudes standing around looking at the map. The newer version, instead, places three boring adventures front and center. The stone idol is reduced to a bland piece of background ornamentation. The thieves are hardly visible.
I totally agree. The original is much more dynamic, and the remake is kind of boring. The original, you can barely make out what the torchlight isn't touching...did that lizardman just happen to die there, or was it sacrificed on that altar before the players got there? What's in that room beyond? What mysteries does that giant ominous statue hold?
The remake; "I know Petey boy is still wrasslin' gators, and could probably use our help, but I've gotta do a quick Captain Morgan for the camera. SHORT REST, GUYS! You can set my treasure down for a quick second, but don't ding it up!"
The original has a lot of teamwork going on, while the remake looks like the thieves can't wait to make off with those gems and ditch this party.
...the ocean cannot be above the Horizon Line, right? Yet the Horizon Line on the right is below the fire ocean on the left. Maybe it tunnels below the surface of the lava? |
|
|
|
Post by delta on Aug 29, 2021 22:30:56 GMT -6
My favorite thing about the MM take are the giant monsters partly lost in the mist in the far back. Those seem awesome. Interesting that the relative lack of detail seems to fire my sense of wonder more.
I may be starting to be cranky-old-man, but the PHB jumps out at me for exchanging what I assumed were lizard men for non-humanoid giant lizards/alligators. (Maybe my interpretation is underscored by Trampier's connected art for the AD&D DM's screen, where the lizard men are more explicit -- including a central callback to the original TSR logo). But I start to get twitchy at the idea that depicting mortal combat with humanoids may be a no-go zone. Likewise, goblins are gone from the MM.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 29, 2021 22:48:17 GMT -6
Maybe it tunnels below the surface of the lava? No. The perspective isn't working. If you like it fine, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. (RANT redacted) |
|
|
|
Post by captainjapan on Aug 30, 2021 7:13:02 GMT -6
I dunno, tdenmark, I still think the result is interesting in juxtaposition and even justified if you consider that the two halves of the painting are separately framed (again, with the arches motif). It confuses my mind and I like it.  |
|
|
|
Post by captainjapan on Aug 30, 2021 7:26:17 GMT -6
My favorite thing about the MM take are the giant monsters partly lost in the mist in the far back. Those seem awesome. Interesting that the relative lack of detail seems to fire my sense of wonder more. I may be starting to be cranky-old-man, but the PHB jumps out at me for exchanging what I assumed were lizard men for non-humanoid giant lizards/alligators. (Maybe my interpretation is underscored by Trampier's connected art for the AD&D DM's screen, where the lizard men are more explicit -- including a central callback to the original TSR logo). But I start to get twitchy at the idea that depicting mortal combat with humanoids may be a no-go zone. Likewise, goblins are gone from the MM. the Tarrasque! Isn't it amazing that, with all the painstakingly detailed monsters upfront, you choose to linger on those wispy outlines on the distant horizon?. How enormous must those creatures be, in comparison?! It fires the imagination. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 30, 2021 8:25:58 GMT -6
I dunno, tdenmark, I still think the result is interesting in juxtaposition and even justified if you consider that the two halves of the painting are separately framed (again, with the arches motif). It confuses my mind and I like it. MC Escher was a master of perspective. While that may look distorted it is actually correct and masterfully done. I wouldn't use that as a comparison. It makes it worse. |
|
|
|
Post by captainjapan on Aug 30, 2021 10:57:03 GMT -6
The full Monster Manual cover would be awesome as a thousand piece jigsaw puzzle.
|
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Aug 30, 2021 18:22:25 GMT -6
But I start to get twitchy at the idea that depicting mortal combat with humanoids may be a no-go zone. Likewise, goblins are gone from the MM. Is that the current trend, to deemphasise -- or perhaps negate -- the concept of belligerence with humanoid antagonists?!?! Societal trends seems to support this portentious observation, but I still reserve the hope that I'm in the wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Aug 30, 2021 22:36:21 GMT -6
Humans are the best monsters.
|
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Aug 30, 2021 23:14:53 GMT -6
Humans are the best monsters. IRL, yes, but in a fantasy world the monsters must be externalised representatives of the worst of human nature, so that human PCs look relatively benign. (OoOoOoh, DeEp!  ) The more recent trend to sympathise with the enemy is quite teeth-grinding. One cover which I was puzzled by was that of the FF and the githyanki (sp?). Is is a skeleton with a kewl sword? WTH is that thing?! The brilliant B/W illo of the Grell (p.47), in colour, would have made a much more attention-grabbing, shelf-worthy cover artwork, IMO. The MM2 cover was also wonky and dusky. Needs a re-do. Another great concept for illustrating the three corebooks: each depicts the beginning, middle and end of an adventure session, where, properly, the art of the PHB should have been held back for last (on the last-published DMG): the victory, clean-up, removal of treasure and other portable assets. Thus, placed together on the table, would make for an epic triptych. |
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Aug 30, 2021 23:52:21 GMT -6
I still prefer humans themselves to represent the worst human have to offer. I prefer monsters to hold goals and ideals that humans cannot understand. I was my monsters to be monstrous. Lovecraft does this well.
In my game, one of the notable monstrous threats sees the world as a canvas. It desires to transform the world into a piece of art. Rendering the planet unfit for human survival is only an irrelevant side effect. Another is a artificial intelligence. The goal of the intelligence is purely janitorial. It seeks to sterilize. And to do so, it has built a cult around itself. The intelligence promises construct grand paradise for its followers. And it means to keep its word. Unfortunately, that paradise will be erected in its own image, not the image of its followers, who will likewise die a horrible death. The intelligence will mourn their loss and deify them as semi-divine heroes.
Still, I find humans to be the most compelling monsters. Just look at history. We can rise to the highest heights and descend to the more depraved depths. I prefer when fantasy encompasses the entirely of the human spectrum.
|
|
phantomtim
Level 3 Conjurer
13th Age Enthusiast
Posts: 87
|
Post by phantomtim on Aug 31, 2021 1:04:51 GMT -6
Likewise, goblins are gone from the MM. On the original cover, are the small figures at the bottom left, near the purple worm, goblins? |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Aug 31, 2021 3:58:09 GMT -6
I love all 3 of them. I'm a huge fan of Walton's art and specifically requested him to do the cover for Amazing Adventures 5e (and will probably request him for SIEGE AA 3rd printing whenever we get there). I think there's a lot of nitpicking and nostalgia going on here. But I may be biased.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2021 5:52:39 GMT -6
Likewise, goblins are gone from the MM. On the original cover, are the small figures at the bottom left, near the purple worm, goblins? I had them as hobgoblins but might be mistaken. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 31, 2021 7:33:06 GMT -6
Likewise, goblins are gone from the MM. On the original cover, are the small figures at the bottom left, near the purple worm, goblins? That was always my take Tim. |
|
)