Post/Author/DateTime	Post
myusernameis 03-27-07, 04:10 AM	Ok, it's pretty obvious that the art styles in the dnd books have changed through the editions, first edition was different than second edition which was different than third. Now I'm curious, which of the editions do you think had the best art, not necessarily the most talented artists, but the art that you think best captured the feel of dnd. Personally, I'd have to go with the older stuff, I look at the old art they put in the Tomb of Horrors and it just feels better, less like they're trying too hard to be new and original and more like they're just going with a hey what the heck philosophy in their art, if that makes any sense whatsoever. Anyhow, as I said, which edition had the best art?
Pet_Sounds 03-27-07, 04:19 AM	That's a tough one; all I can do is offer which artists throughout all editions I think are quite nifty: 1st edition: Jeff Dees, The Dragonlance guy (damn, I forgot his name!) 2nd edition: Brom, DiTerlitzi (sp?) 3rd edition: Wayne Reynolds Just keep anything by Clyde Caldwell (revolting gems on everything) and Baxa away from me.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 03-27-07, 12:07 PM	This is impossible to answer as D&D never has or had a single "feel." The game, owing to its very nature, is unique to every player and group. The work of Wayne Reynolds typifies the D&D of my imagination as it has been for 15 years. While artists like Elmore and Easley did fine work it was always too "pretty" and "soft" for my taste.
Bruunwald 03-27-07, 12:19 PM	Everytime this gets brought up, it ends up being so divisive. The younger kids get angry that the older kids won't declare all new art to be in every way superior to anything drawn or painted before 2001, and the older kids get miffed that the younglings dont understand that pure technique is not the only quality in art that matters. So let me just sum it all up now, if I can. OLD TIMERS: The art back in the day was so atmospheric. It really created and set a mood that I miss from the old stuff. YOUNGLINGS: Really, old man? Well that stuff sucked! It was never good because nothing old ever is! OLD TIMERS: What? You arrogant pup! Just because something is older doesn't mean it isn't quality! YOUNGLINGS: I love the new stuff because it looks like Anime. All stuff from Japan rules! All stuff from America sucks! OLD TIMERS: Yes, I thought that way when I was in high school, but now I've grown to accept that there are more valid forms of art in the world--- YOUNGLINGS: Shut up old man! There was no Anime when you were in high school! It's mine! ALL MINE! Only I count!!! OLD TIMERS: You little whelp! Yours isn't the only generation to ever play the game! Ours was the one that really mattered! YOUNGLINGS: No, ours is the only one that matters! And our art rules! The new stuff is far superior in technique! It just looks better by far!!! !!!! Oh, and !!!!!3pron3!! OLD TIMERS: Well, everything has to start somewhere. The older stuff might seem primitive, but there wouldn't be any new stuff without it. YOUNGLINGS: Pathetic... Yeah, there would. And it would be better! Like it is! Tsh. OLD TIMERS: Sigh... I can't talk to you. You just refuse to understand the issue on more than one level. YOUNGLINGS: It is, or it isn't, old man. It either sucks or rules. The old stuff sucks. The new stuff rules. Deal with it. OLD TIMERS: Whatever. YOUNGLINGS: Whatever.
Tequila_Sunrise 03-27-07, 12:39 PM	Toni DeTerlizzi is the best artist that ever painted for the game, period.
Pandaemoni 03-27-07, 12:55 PM	I like third edition art best, with the exception of Wayne Reynolds, so I don't think I'd hold him up as the paragon of 3e artists. Reynolds stuff (in fact, often as not Eberron stuff in general) looks like he's drawing for comic books, and I prefer a higher degree of realism and less comicbookishness.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 03-27-07, 12:57 PM	Toni DeTerlizzi is the best artist that ever painted for the game… …in second edition. Tony is great, but WAR's work blows even his, DiTerlizzi's, away.
_SIN_ 03-27-07, 01:01 PM	Brom is THE Daddy! I've not seen a better action painting since I first saw it back in the old Dark Sun (2nd ed I think)..... Absolute quality... http://fantasy.mrugala.net/Brom%20-%20Darkwerks/Brom%20-%20Darkwerks%20-%20015.jpg
Reinforcements 03-27-07, 01:02 PM	Brief summary of the art in each of the three editions: 1st: A few gems in terms of big paintings and covers - really good, genre-defining stuff. The vast majority, however, is crap. 2nd: A few more very impressive pieces, and more stuff that, while not GREAT, is certainly passable. Alas, the majority remains crap. 3rd: Many more artists with many different styles. Specific pieces can be at least as good as anything in previous editions, but unlike previous editions, is almost never BAD. That is to say, even if a particular artist isn't to your taste, 3rd Edition books are filled with works by competent artists - the same CANNOT be said of previous editions. That's how I see it.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 03-27-07, 01:17 PM	Brief summary of the art in each of the three editions: 1st: A few gems in terms of big paintings and covers - really good, genre-defining stuff. The vast majority, however, is crap. 2nd: A few more very impressive pieces, and more stuff that, while not GREAT, is certainly passable. Alas, the majority remains crap. 3rd: Many more artists with many different styles. Specific pieces can be at least as good as anything in previous editions, but unlike previous editions, is almost never BAD. That is to say, even if a particular artist isn't to your taste, 3rd Edition books are filled with works by competent artists - the same CANNOT be said of previous editions. That's how I see it. That I must disagree with. The only "artist" worse than the current edition's bog-awful Dennis Crabapple-McClain is 1st edition's Erol Otus. Every one of McClain's pieces is an artistic crime against humanity. Overall, however, current art is better. The best of current edition art is much better than the best of previous edition art, and the worst of current edition art is still not as bad as the worst of previous edition art.
Another Gnome 03-27-07, 01:23 PM	DiTerlizzi's work is great, but other than that I don't much care about the "old-timers". Elmore for example, a talented artist without doubt, but his style lacks diversity and quickly gets boring, especially apparent in his female characters that are practically interchageable regardless of what race they're supposed to be. Now, granted, the same could be said of Lockwood and Reynolds, but I don't think their style suffers as much from the out-of-the-same-mold appearance, probably because it's grittier. Yeah. Well, I can say Brom does some cool art too, if though I prefer his later work. Those He-Man characters are so 80's it's seriously not funny. Did someone mention Erol Otus? I will not speak of Erol Otus. I refuse to speak of Erol Otus. ... In short, I think 3E has the most fitting art overall. The style and quality varies as much as it did in 2E, but the current artwork has more internal consistency than before.
CCS 03-27-07, 02:14 PM	Brief summary of the art in each of the three editions: 1st: A few gems in terms of big paintings and covers - really good, genre-defining stuff. The vast majority, however, is crap. 2nd: A few more very impressive pieces, and more stuff that, while not GREAT, is certainly passable. Alas, the majority remains crap. 3rd: Many more artists with many different styles. Specific pieces can be at least as good as anything in previous editions, but unlike previous editions, is almost never BAD. That is to say, even if a particular artist isn't to your taste, 3rd Edition books are filled with works by competent artists - the same CANNOT be said of previous editions. That's how I see it. You actually LIKE the stuff in the current books (I'm reffering mostly to the pics of the various named characters)? Personally I'd rather see the pages be filled with the oddly stylalized stuff E.Otis did way back at the dawn of the game vrs. most of the current character stuff. I don't know if I'd call his stuff "good", but at least I didn't mind there being art on the pages.... .I'd also love to see the funny little cartoon-like illistrations found (at the bottoms of pages) throughout the 1st ed DMG return. They weren't great works of art by any means, but they were amusing and captured the spirit of the game... And WT** happened to the art for all the dragons in recent years? The old stuff by Caldwell, Easley, Fields, and even Brom was great. The new stuff? Somethings just lacking. And the new look doesn't translate well into minitures either...
Reinforcements 03-27-07, 02:43 PM	You actually LIKE the stuff in the current books (I'm reffering mostly to the pics of the various named characters)? Personally I'd rather see the pages be filled with the oddly stylalized stuff E.Otis did way back at the dawn of the game vrs. most of the current character stuff. I don't know if I'd call his stuff "good", but at least I didn't mind there being art on the pages.... This is probably not a conversation we should have if you somehow hate most of the new art so much that you can't even comprehend that someone else likes it. Because anyone preferring Erol Otis to the likes of Wayne Reynolds, Vinod Rames, and Sam Wood absolutely blows my mind.
_Jayne_Cobb_ 03-27-07, 02:56 PM	Because anyone preferring Erol Otis to the likes of Wayne Reynolds, Vinod Rames, and Sam Wood absolutely blows my mind. Anyone preferring Erol Otus to something scraped off the sole of a shoe blows my mind. To each their own.
CedricBrooks 03-27-07, 05:42 PM	The only good artwork I've seen in a 3rd edition book is the one where the dragon is half way eating Tordek, that's it. Now Tony, while I don't like his style, has some really nice work, such as the Cat Lord, I bought that book for that picture alone.