MShipley88 wrote:Since there has been a lot of discussion of the art and artists of gaming, I thought I would raise this topic: The artwork of D&D (all versions) once had a very distinct flavor, and it was different from the Freudian book covers of Frank Frazetta and similar artists that appeared on books about Conan, and series such as the Gor novels. (I stared a lot at those covers back in the day!) Erol Otis strongly influenced the gaming art genre, but other artists also contributed as time passed and for a number of years they all tended to look very similar...as if a concensus had been reached about how things should basically look. As gaming publications became more professional, a game art style emerged that I would describe as "stylized realism." The action was generally depicted in a realistic manner that still managed to look imaginary. It was a distinctly masculine look, although some of the artists were women. The most recent Roslof drawing, posted to this web site, is a good example of the era's basic style. There was also another phase of game art that I date to the Dragonlance modules. These adventures were illustrated with a much more adult (and yet still juvenile) style and subject matter...sexual traits exagerated and a greater emphasis on attractive people and romantic themes...unrealistic weapons and armor...hot women with chainmail tanktops, swords and bikini bottoms. Hips, breats and thighs were almost always the dominant features. Male characters usually resembled Fabio in plate armor...in a distinctly different way than Conan or Elric were depicted. This became the basic style of game art for some time. It was certainly the standard for Dragon magazine covers. Outside of D&D there was a style of art that I think of as "cartoon gaming art." This was the style of games like Paranoia. The emphasis was on humor and funny-looking people. There was also a distinctive British style. Back in the early days you could almost always tell when an RPG product originated in the United Kingdom. They would generally be more lurid, violent and just plain strange...at least to American readers...especially the artwork. The Fiend Folio is one example, but there were others. With the popularity of Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000, the distinctive British style crept more deeply into American gaming and its influence can especially be seen in the way monsters such as ogres, goblins and orcs are now depicted. Today Japanese cartoons have had an even stronger influence on American youth...but actual examples of Anime art are rare in game publications. Or are they? Games from Japan have this look, but I have not seen loads of it in American or British publications. Anyway, what are your thoughts? :? Do you have the same general impressions? Am I right on or way off? How else might you categorize the history of gaming art?Mark 8)
MShipley88 wrote: This coincides with the bad PC decision to (rather self-consciously) intermix "he" and "she" pronouns in the text. It often makes the rules hard to read because by standard convention "he" can mean anyone while "she" means a specific person. (As Winston Churchill once said when his diction was corrected in public, "The male form embraces the female." :lol: )Mark 8)
Badmike wrote:That's not just the dumbest decision WOTC ever made...it's in the top five of bad decisions EVER made in the last 30 years by any company producing an RPG.
MrFilthyIke wrote:Badmike wrote:That's not just the dumbest decision WOTC ever made...it's in the top five of bad decisions EVER made in the last 30 years by any company producing an RPG. I first saw it in White Wolf books. They were heavy into using the femine in their books, and that was WELL before 3e.
MShipley88 wrote:I had forgotten the 2nd Edition AD&D artwork! My first impression of it was that TSR had made a conscious decision to portray older people in their arwork. It was like they decided that their average gamer was older so the people should look older. However, my strongest impression of 2nd Edition is of the goddamned SILLY HAT FESTIVAL in the core rulebooks. :x Beginning with knight on the cover who was wearing silly wings, the the idea seemed to be that imagination=silly hats. As one turns the pages one finds ever more nutty helmet designs. Ladies and gentlemen! Who can wear the most ridiculous hat? My favorite was the dwarven fighter who was essentially wearing an inverted bar stool on his head. I still wonder if the artists of the period had ever seen real armor. Certainly, they considered horns or wings or a combination of horns, wings and (possibly) snow globes to be essential to fantasy character helmets. Go back and look and you will surely see what I mean. I remember one dude whose hat of ludicrous evil included horns sticking out from a skull...complete with glowing eyes. I think I considered him the champion. The same silly characteristics can be seen in the BIZARRE POSTURE of 3rd Edition characters. Probably the best example is the half-orc barbarian, whose spine appears to curve backward in order to permit him to walk about like a crab.Mark :lol:
