Unearthed Art [Archive] - Wizards Community

Unearthed Art [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Edymnion
02-26-04, 10:31 PM Anyone else really like the art in this book?
Really seemed to be a cut above some of the other stuff thats come out recently.

I mean, it got me wanting to look into getting a Gnome cohort after seeing the illustration for the Jungle Gnome, and Lord knows I never thought about a Gnome twice before that.
Vaalingrade Ashland
02-26-04, 10:42 PM Count me in too.

My favorites:
- the variant necromancer
- the gaming group at the table
- the wild-shape variant druid
- the jungle gnome
- the pargon halfling

Ones that amused me:
- Gestalt Mialee
- The iconics crafting (looks like Mialee is going to deck Redgar)
- the paragon1/2 dragon (one of my players swears 'I'm so pretty' should be playing in the background)
- The desert elf.
Vysirez
02-26-04, 10:46 PM I just got mine yesterday and I havent had a chance to look at it much. However the few pics I have seen are pretty nice. I liked the pictures of the 3 paladin variants.

Also for another thread with people who liked the art:

http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=184176
Wil_Hyral
02-26-04, 11:17 PM Really, the thread is about art in general, whether it was liked or not. But I loved the art in this book.
NorthSaber
02-27-04, 12:03 AM Overall I'd have to agree - the art was fairly nice. Mostly I just ignore it, but some pop up as above or below average:

THE GOOD:
p. 175
p. 185
p. 199

THE BAD:
p. 109 (quite amateurish)
p. 215 (funny, but not very well done)
p. 218 (I like the half-troll, but overall quality is poor)

THE UGLY:
p. 17 (...)
p. 51 (what IS that creature?)
Kastas
02-27-04, 01:12 AM Funny, I had sort of the opposite reaction to the art in this book. I thought it was a little lower in quality than what I had seen in some other recent books (Draconomicon comes to mind). There were a few standout pieces, but overall I felt the artwork was a little lacking. But to each their own. The book would still rock if they filled it with stick figure diagrams.
Belegbeth
02-27-04, 11:56 AM I have to agree Kastas ... the art in UA is mediocre. Competely underwhelming stuff, to be honest (with a few exceptions, e.g. the picture for the generic classes).

WotC all aims to look the same (with varying degrees of success). Some stylisticvariety would spice things up.

Still a good book, though.
Soulmage
02-27-04, 12:04 PM I've had my UA for a week or so now, and I've read the rules in depth. I have to say though that I really can't remember much about the art at all.

Either the art is just unerwhelming, or I was so excited about the new rules that I forgot to look at it, or the art just isn't that important to me, so come combination of all three.

A lot of the new rules rock though!
Contrast
02-27-04, 06:05 PM Originally posted by Contrast
Much of the artwork was very dissapointing. Especially the absence of any works by Warren Reynolds (W.A.R.)

But then again, that mile-a-minute master deserves to take break now and again doesn't he?

And the chapter openers were done by Doug Kovacs, who is (in my oppinion at least) vastly inferior to Arnie Swekel

From the "Things you wished had been in UA but weren't" thread on this board.
Nikdo
02-27-04, 06:54 PM I also really like the Generic Classes piece on pg. 77.

I don't care for D. Crabapple's stuff. But that's just my opinion.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Edymnion 02-26-04, 10:31 PM	Anyone else really like the art in this book? Really seemed to be a cut above some of the other stuff thats come out recently. I mean, it got me wanting to look into getting a Gnome cohort after seeing the illustration for the Jungle Gnome, and Lord knows I never thought about a Gnome twice before that.
Vaalingrade Ashland 02-26-04, 10:42 PM	Count me in too. My favorites: - the variant necromancer - the gaming group at the table - the wild-shape variant druid - the jungle gnome - the pargon halfling Ones that amused me: - Gestalt Mialee - The iconics crafting (looks like Mialee is going to deck Redgar) - the paragon1/2 dragon (one of my players swears 'I'm so pretty' should be playing in the background) - The desert elf.
Vysirez 02-26-04, 10:46 PM	I just got mine yesterday and I havent had a chance to look at it much. However the few pics I have seen are pretty nice. I liked the pictures of the 3 paladin variants. Also for another thread with people who liked the art: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=184176
Wil_Hyral 02-26-04, 11:17 PM	Really, the thread is about art in general, whether it was liked or not. But I loved the art in this book.
NorthSaber 02-27-04, 12:03 AM	Overall I'd have to agree - the art was fairly nice. Mostly I just ignore it, but some pop up as above or below average: THE GOOD: p. 175 p. 185 p. 199 THE BAD: p. 109 (quite amateurish) p. 215 (funny, but not very well done) p. 218 (I like the half-troll, but overall quality is poor) THE UGLY: p. 17 (...) p. 51 (what IS that creature?)
Kastas 02-27-04, 01:12 AM	Funny, I had sort of the opposite reaction to the art in this book. I thought it was a little lower in quality than what I had seen in some other recent books (Draconomicon comes to mind). There were a few standout pieces, but overall I felt the artwork was a little lacking. But to each their own. The book would still rock if they filled it with stick figure diagrams.
Belegbeth 02-27-04, 11:56 AM	I have to agree Kastas ... the art in UA is mediocre. Competely underwhelming stuff, to be honest (with a few exceptions, e.g. the picture for the generic classes). WotC all aims to look the same (with varying degrees of success). Some stylisticvariety would spice things up. Still a good book, though.
Soulmage 02-27-04, 12:04 PM	I've had my UA for a week or so now, and I've read the rules in depth. I have to say though that I really can't remember much about the art at all. Either the art is just unerwhelming, or I was so excited about the new rules that I forgot to look at it, or the art just isn't that important to me, so come combination of all three. A lot of the new rules rock though!
Contrast 02-27-04, 06:05 PM	Originally posted by Contrast Much of the artwork was very dissapointing. Especially the absence of any works by Warren Reynolds (W.A.R.) But then again, that mile-a-minute master deserves to take break now and again doesn't he? And the chapter openers were done by Doug Kovacs, who is (in my oppinion at least) vastly inferior to Arnie Swekel From the "Things you wished had been in UA but weren't" thread on this board.
Nikdo 02-27-04, 06:54 PM	I also really like the Generic Classes piece on pg. 77. I don't care for D. Crabapple's stuff. But that's just my opinion.