The race to achieve nothing having any reference to anything in real life is impossible to win. All this because the mental gymnastics it takes to think that any of this is racist in the first place. I agree, Wizards of the Coast has gone way too far.
Me who is half Mexican: orcs are Mexican now? ………….. *proceeds to make a half orc gunslinger fighter, college of valor bard while listening to mariachi music as I come up with the dopest revenge backstory ever for the character.*
If there's anything I dislike about D&D artwork it's the fact that it's comic-like now compared to AD&D times. When flipping through a rulebook the first thing I soak up is the art and it gives me an impression and a feeling for the setting and atmosphere the game wants to convey. Back then it was adventure in a rather realistic fantasy world. Now it's comic fantasy in a very exaggerated, overly vibrant comic world. Some might like that, but I really don't.
@@quantus5875 Trash is not what I mean actually. The quality of the pictures is another thing entirely. I specifically dislike comic presentation in RPGs. It's not how I want to picture the story I am playing. It's really just preference. I didn't make up my mind about the new pictures yet, but since I don't like D&D as a system in general, and I sure as Hell won't buy any Hasbro/WotC product, I don't really have to. I was kinda interested in the art though, because, you know, it's fantasy art. And it's a bit less comic-like than the old 5E, so that's a plus. Looks all a bit generic though. Nothing exciting. There's SO MANY RPG books with gorgeous artwork nowadays, I own a lot of books only because they are beautiful to look at, actually. None of it is D&D. :D
The AD&D art felt like it was a snap shot of something going on. The rogue kneeling down working on the trap while the warrior stands at the ready, facing the darkness.
The common denominator to the pieces here-box checking or box ticking. It's like the direction to artists (and I'm not knocking their skill here) is "must include blah relationship, blah race, blah color, blah genders" and the rest is secondary.
Oh man, can we also talk about the terrible "Weapon Mastery" art that has what I guess is an orc holding a massive two headed axe by its twig stick middle? 😳 Fantasy art should be evocative in every sense of the word. When it's confusing, there's no fantasy to enjoy.
@@intuitivealchemist you are too right. So many turds to choose from. Choices were made and I wanted to share some examples of good art without making the vid too long.
I remember a game last year where my Lv. 8 players needed to sneak past a red dragon. A few bad decisions and rolls later and they're in life-or-death combat. Do a quick image search for a visual while drawing the map. The first WOTC Pic was a dragon with the worst praporions and perspective I've ever seen, in a defensive posture. Across the frame, a Drow riding a jaguar, a flying wizard flinging lighting and a fire genasi monk and druid pulling off their best avengers pose. A pencil sketch of a dragon shape above the trees would be infinitely more effective and versatile. Not every encounter is a finale or hero moment. Hell, a GMs job is to balance the power fantasy with progression and growth. It like they're marketing to problem players who want to start every game at Lv 40.
I really appreciate the focus on the *art* and not the politics. Not liking the 2024 art is not about being anti-woke or racist or any other -phobe or -ist. It's about not liking the *art.* What I've seen so far feels bland, sanitized, G-rated and absent any drama, story, or menace. It doesn't evoke adventure and doesn't feel worthy of the game's 50th anniversary.
@conmacmara2743 That's what I'm saying! I've always had lots of diversity in all my games, from all the colors, genders, and etc. I didn't need WOTC to force me into it or tell me how to run it.
Wow you are so right about the artwork! I used to drool over the gorgeous paintings on the cover of Dragon. The two examples you showed were so namby pamby, and frankly the Mexican orcs were an insult to Mexicans, orcs and falcons all at once. Shocking! Instead, give us a pic of a falcon flying up close and personal, talons outstretched and RIGHT in your face. As well pointed out, great art requires a focused center, a play of light, a feeling that SOMETHING is happening RIGHT NOW, even if we don't fully know what it is. Sadly I'm saying goodbye to D&D. WOTC has murdered it into the dust. I'm moving on to DC20. Same feel (or even more magical) as the game we loved, with clearer/better rules and none of the bullshit that undercuts the community that made it HAPPEN. Incidentally, regarding art, my writing was featured in two issues of Polyhedron, and both included some pretty fun and amazing artwork. My ex actually turned the drawing from Skully's Bar and Bait into a t-shirt for me, because it was just that good.
Elmore and Caldwell are two of my absolute fantasy artists of all time. I can spend hours just staring at their paintings trying to absorb every detail.
I am less bothered by the large number of monsters in the DnD cartoon picture. I can think of several pictures in various rpg rulebooks that splash lots of monsters together. I think most of them should have been hidden from the humans in the picture though.
I don't understand why every race needs to be represented in one picture. It's like one dwarf hold is in downtown San Francisco. Anthropology is my hobby and it breaks my brain. At least Pathfinder has dark dwarves coming from another continent.
So instead of Ork wardrums, we'll get The Mexican Hat Dance? And it looks like Dwarves are now...Squat Bears? (the hairy gay guy in case you're confused). The shot does look forced, it cones off as some kinda ad and not a fantasy game art piece Who is this for? This isn't even the same game the kids in Stranger Things are playing anymore (they're probably playing 2E). There's other TTRPG's out there and it's time for them to fill the hole WOTC seemed to intentionally created with dumb decisions in the name of DEI and tourists
13:18 Always saw this as Takhisis battling Paladine (I know only red dragon head, but that's how it played in my mind). There is an amazing book from the 90's called the worlds of TSR. Pure art! I highly recommend it!
The image of the adult kids from the 80's show. They forgot to fix his bow string, which makes me think it was AI generated and 'fixed' a bit. (The string should be BEHIND his left arm (the arm on the right) not in front... Additionally, the fact that the mimic and the Owl-bear are both facing the same direction is jarring. The mimic should have been facing them, similar to how all the other creatures are facing them.) Last note; the 'artist' seemed to pick odd spots to skip on details. (Trees. The tree the dragon is curled around gets blurry further up. It's not a distance thing, as trees further back are fully detailed right up to the edge.)
all the new art is being filtered through a branding gauntlet. There's too many "conscious" constructions of the new brand appealing to younger players for the most part for my liking and it lacks the evocativeness and darkness that I think inspired myself to and others to buy the products. In my mind, the Easley covers of all the orange-spine manuals are arguably the best covers ever produced by TSR/AD&D though there's great stuff by Parkinson and Elmore among others. The cover of the Moldvay set by Erol Otus stole my imagination in 1981. No other pieces of art produced since has done it quite the same. Despite the fact that Otus's style is not hyper-realism, it is evocative and looks like it might even be painted by an artist living in the world of D&D itself. The new art doesn't show characters in mortal danger it shows reaffirming family portraits. You'd think the game is about LARPING coffee shop talk and family excursions to the Grand Canyon based on the two main pieces of art you showed from the new edition. That's not a knock on the rules system, I'm just talking about the art. The nostalgia pieces are devoid of movement and emotion -- maybe because the artists weren't even connected to the subject matter? Anyway, I could continue to rant but I will say, despite the fact that much of the older art was pen and ink and sometimes crudely drawn it was always evoking something and made you feel like you could also participate in the creation of art ( which many of us did and do to this day) no matter what our skill level -- being creative as a player was encouraged by the art itself.
@@seanferguson-th6ny oh my, I forgot about the sensitivity censors. We attribute them to the writing in the manuals but they are likely shaping all outward facing content.
My favorite TTRPG game cover will always be David Trampier's cover of the 1st Ed PHB. And love Elmore's and Caldwell's work -- why can't they do art like that anymore? My two favorite D&D artists are Bill Willingham and Larry Elmore. That's the other thing -- you can tell who drew the art back then (in most cases) just by looking at it. Parkingson, Truman, Willingham, Otus, Halloway, Sutherland, Trampier, Jeff Dee, LaForce -- o man -- what they are doing now is such a shame. I'm not sure if I'm going to buy these books -- the art is so awful. Don't want that garbage on my bookshelf.
I LOVE your comment and I agree. The older art gave me feelings. Feelings of tension, happiness, mourning, etc. That's what dnd art should inspire. The emotional journey
Much of the original art was a little ad hoc and limited to black and white pen & ink. it had varying levels of skill. It was also produced in a relatively unfiltered manner and most of it relied heavily on movement, shadow, and context to give it gravitas. The current "fluff" is devoid of that, maybe because The Company has a stranglehold on the branding but mostly I think because older D&D under TSR was community-built and influenced and now we are being told what the game looks like.
So did they only buy one pose for dark-skinned female casters? They all seem to be posing arms akimbo - or as my kobolds would call it "easy target". It looks more like Magic the Gathering cards rather than D&D art. Also, the modern Tumblr Diversity Strixhaven style is tiresome. It reminds me of the "Reject Modernity, Embrace Tradition" meme.
@@elliotvernon7971 I would also mention 'The House On The Borderland' by William Hope Hodgson, published in 1908 and credited as an inspiration for H.P. Lovecraft's later works. The gist is that a horde of brutish pigmen enter our world from somewhere else, and many believe that this premise influenced the look of the pig-faced Orcs in the AD&D Monster Manual.
"There's no reason that we need to fit everything into one picture like some kind of anxious child." You hit the nail on the head here, Dracoya. The people infesting these companies now are exactly that. Political and social activists first, and gamers second. They are - by and large - privileged, infantilized adults who wear their various mental diagnoses on their sleeves like they're badges of honor. There's a reason that fantasy art writ large has become a frenetic mish-mash of childish themes and madness-soaked whimsicality.
There's nothing I've seen in the new rules that has me excited to play, so this is the first edition of DnD I won't be buying. The art is awful across the board. There's one with the Goliath Barbarian climbing out of a dragons mouth, and the barb has the most Zen expression I've ever seen. The blood on that one looks fake and something just feels off about the Axe.
I have always held the opinion that WOTC 5e art was the worst of any edition of D&D. Then wotc 6e comes along and says, "Hold my beer." Other than the Dragonlance painting, the rest of the art in the new phb is as Dracoya stated, uninspiring. Thats the nicest way to describe the art. I also agree that in games art is super important, it's what typically first draws me to a game. I did not plan to buy the new edition, but had I intended too, this art would have put me off on buying it. BTW, you guys used great examples of what D&D art should be.
Yes!!! Couldn't agree more! It could be the best game ever, but if the cover is boring and monotone, people are far less likely to buy it. "Hold my beer" had me laughing. 🤣 🍺 🍻
@@thepickleddragon8590 Agreed, nothing about it screams adventure to me. Instead of appealing to players sense of adventure they chose to pander to a vocal minority. If people like it and buy it good for them. It's not for me.
BTW, in the painting with the Gold Lion, the fighter is wielding a sword with half a hilt. Half of it isn't there. I think AI explains why the Dragon looks like a Lion. The AI knows a Gold Dragon is Chinese inspired, and there is a Ki-rin in the Monster manual. I wonder if it confused the concepts...?
I don't think Tyler Jacobson would use or need Ai he was an oil painter before swapping to digital, but I really like his new PHB, its the first PHB with an actual party on the cover!? That said, I prefer Wylie Beckert's alternates for the new core-rulebooks... I just love her more oily-sketch style, all of her Magic cards look amazing too. But my favorite artist for all of Magic/D&D is Wayne Reynolds, his shapes, textures, and edges are just crazy! He'll never use Ai, he cant, everything he does is pencil and acrylic. Maybe you just prefer oil and acrylic? Because there's a lot of old stuff that's very amateur, overcrowded, and goofy as hell...
Wayne Reynolds is an absolute master. It is true that there is some bad old art out there but I don't see in places of prominence in or on the sourcebooks. I don't think its just oil that I like. Composition, emotion, and details are what do it for me. Could be any medium.
@@thepickleddragon8590 Idk I see it everywhere, even great artists like Jeff Easley... look at the dragon on his AD&D Monster Manual (The one with the Pegasus), the snout is misaligned with the back of the head, there's a huge tangent across the neck, and if you look where the neck and chest meet the neck is completely offset to his right side, and the right hind leg is basically coming out of the center of the stomach. The anatomy is terrible.
@@DigitalinDaniel I dunno, when I look at that painting I see a creature twisting its body to breath fire. In fact, that is one of my least favorite paintings by him as I dont really like how he captured the fire. Oh, I saw one thing I wanted to point out. There were actually multiple PHBs with adventurers on the cover. Dave Trampier's 1e cover being the very first.
I 100% agree with your comment about art in RPG books drawing you into a game. I have said many times, I was drawn to the Palladium (Fantasy 1st edition) book cover and inner illustrations the first time I laid eyes on it. I still love that book and the game.
downfall of wotc/dnd when, cuz my unused, unwritten, true sorcerer is waiting to find the right ttzone to be unleashed... still havent figured out his personality during the group portion of his story/journey.
What was the context of the orc image? Was that supposed to be the picture next to the orc stats/description or something? That would make it a lot worse in my mind than if it were just a throwaway example of a single group for a setting or something. I haven't followed anything D&D since the Pinkerton thing, and that controversy with the AI art in the book about the giants and it shows.
1-For alk the problems with the business side of the card game Magic: the Gathering, I sincerely feel the nearly 30 years of art I have absorbed from it has enriched my life. Same goes for RPG art but I had to mention the M:th art first because it has so many more pieces every year, even back when we would only get about 600-700 new art cards a year back then, boy have times chamged! 2-I have to admit I liked the idea of the two dwarves with tat of the beards. Seems like something dwarves would do. Maybe it would have been better accepted if one of them was a female and the guy had a tat of extensive braiding of the back of the female's head. I also liked hearing someone suggest they could be blood brothers.
@@mrcatchingup the dwarves didn't bother me. It was the overall confused composition. A distracted forge with a Starbucks drive up window serving sushi and a dwarven cookie baker.
I have a handful of AD&D and 2nd edition books just because of the covers. I started with 3e and while there's some really good artwork in that edition, there's something magical about the previous books.
13:30. If that was reprinted in this PHB, 100 professionally bothered 'fans' would say it's AI... That's my problem. SOME people are just coming to complain.
I do agree with everything you point out, but I think it's fair to say that this is not only a wotc problem. I think artwork in general (at least following any mainstream) has become more "sanitized". There's a real push for inclusivity for inclusivity's sake and it is so exaggerated that it just looks like a carricature more than anything. The first example really stood out to me - what used to be a mysterious dwarven forge, full of the spirit of the reclusive underground race now looks like almost a child's playground where we even have one dwarf bringing in cookies as if the mother brings snacks to the children who are playing on the playstation. And if that is the vibe that you are looking for, then that's fine I guess, but the sad thing is that we lost the more serious and immersive drawings in the process. Not only that but there is just a general lack of quality that permeates all over. Just a very broad weakness in composition, color complexity, contrast which all stems from the overall direction of illustration over depiction (meaning that the image is attempting to showcase features of a product, rather than the natural and emotional point of view of the artist). It's just not dramatic. They're so careful not to offend anyone that indeed, nobody gets offended, but what great story happens without drama? And dungeons and dragons is about a story, right? But it's not all doom and gloom. Wherever wotc fails others will pick up surely - the fact that people talk about it means that someone sooner or later is going to fill that void for quality art.
D&D's art direction has been on a downward slide since 1st edition. Back then, we had Erol Otus, David Sutherland, Dave Trampier, Darlene...and now we have this, whatever this is supposed to be. Why does everything in the new art look shiny and happy and cute? Is there still EVIL in D&D?!? Would they ever publish a book like The Book of Vile Darkness for the new edition? Would they even feel comfortable using a phrase like "vile darkness" in something they would publish now? D&D's aesthetic used to look like heavy metal album covers, or like the science-fantasy magazines you'd find for sale at head shops...now it looks like the latest pablum from the Walt Disney Company. Makes me glad I parted ways with 'official' D&D back in 2008, when 4th edition reared its ugly head. I'll stick to older editions of the game (pre-WotC), to the OSR, and to Rifts, thanks (which is like super D&D times a thousand). And for the record, the greatest cover art on a D&D product ever remains Trampier's cover painting for the 1st edition Players Handbook (the one with no possessive apostrophe in the title, LOL), for all the reasons that James Maliszewski has argued.
Tolkien's orcs are akin to other mythological bestial humanoid monsters (hobgoblins, gnolls, grues, ogres, trolls -- take your pick). They represent the aspect of humanity capable of predatory selfishness, destructive brutality, treachery, fear and murderous psychopathy. They are the Cain aspect of humanity, in contrast to it's Abel. It's the part of us that reacts to suffering and fear by choosing the low road, and saying, "How come my neighbor has more than me? It's not fair, and it must be his fault, so it's ok if I just kill him and take his stuff. The consequences to everyone be damned." They don't represent any one group of people, but the natural capacity for evil that exists within us all. The WOTC woke sensitivity readers believe that they are enlightened revolutionaries that possess special knowledge that makes them pure--morally superior to than us poor proles. They appear to think they have a "duty" to teach the rest of us the "error of our ways". Anyone who questions this agenda is a heretic, and a bad person, who deserves punishment through false accusations of the worst kinds of bigotry, and eventual banishment from society. Do it or else. This is called "liberation" to make it seem ok. Once we all mindlessly agree in lockstep with their collective view, it will magically call into being some kind of never-never land utopia, where no one ever suffers or something. That's why they have such a thing about orcs being racially coded--orcs are a reminder that *everyone* has the capacity for evil, that none of us are morally superior to others, and each of us has a duty to recognize this and be careful not to give in to their "darker" impulses. He who is without sin, cast the first stone--remove the mote from thine own eye, before trying to remove thy brothers, and do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Sometimes the "Woke" act like orcs, and they don't like to be reminded of it. It's like looking in a mirror. So they censor orcs, and hurt anyone who tries to stop it.
They tried so hard to pander and be inclusive that they insulted everybody. Every piece is trying to do too much while also looking like an AI render. As Dracoya pointed out - way too many creatures in every picture. A hodgepodge. I may be old school, but I also dislike that WotC's current "fantasy/medieval" style is stuffed with characters that all have the contemporary haircuts of a soccer team. Art is supposed to inspire and suspend disbelief. Coupled with composition, technical skill and color theory, it should evoke emotions. Not forcefully pander to demographics.
it is my opinion that the artwork of the old it has nothing to do with the art served by the majority of TTRPG's today, with very few exceptions. Most of the old artwork simply has a soul, a thing that now days seems to be missing...
Much of this book’s art is all about pandering. And they don’t even do that very well. Feels like the whole book has the professionalism of a high school group project. Oh yes and Dracoya - Orcs should just be “orcs”. Nothing in a fantasy world should be a direct analogue or allegory for our world. Tolkien disliked allegory and so should we when it comes to fantasy.
1:05 The funny thing is, gay dwarves aren't that weird when you consider that in some settings (I forget which ones) dwarves are like 70% male and a vast majority are infertile anyway. I mean in that environment it'd be sort of like "ok, and? If those two are making each other happy and productive to the clan than leave then be." Relationships of *any kind* aren't the morn for dwarves in theses settings anyway. Not that I don't hate the push they're going for, and this artwork still annoys me, but of all races other than the elves it's kind of an non-issue. Least, i see it as such. Edit: Also drinking ale in the forge is common practice or dwarves. Putting aside the very 'dwarf' nature of it, ale in the medieval sense wasn't that alcoholic in the first place and drunkenness would be frown upon regardless of where it was.
The problem with the first piece is exactly what you mentioned with the cartoon characters grown up piece: too much STUFF. The dwarven one would be cool if it were separate things, but somebody decided "DWARVES = FORGE!" and so everything has to happen by the forge. And it's ridiculous. Who eats sushi in front of the guy adorning their hammer?? The Mexicorcs piece is fantastic, minus the random giant axe wielding woman who has to be there because "ORCS = FIGHTERS". Just like humans and elves have distinct cultures within their races, so should orcs. Give me Latin-flavoured orcs. Give me orcs that draw from Byzantine history. Give me purple orcs that dwell underground in some forgotten corner of the world and have no analogous real-world counterpart. That piece is great as a slice-of-life example that can be used to flesh out an orc beyond the generic "green and violent World of Warcraft barbarian" that a new player might be familiar with.
finally, a nuanced opinion beyond "its all bad". why does it feel people look at that picture and think they are reflavouring the orcs to SPECIFICALLY latin?. i personally want to see orcs in napoleanic looking gear like the giff cuz that's just fun
@@thepickleddragon8590 Sorry to hear about the wheelchair. I lost my right leg in a subway accident in 2020, so I’m there with you. However, I have no desire to play a character with my limitations in a game. Even if I did, I wouldn’t want my fantasy art filled with cripple people going up a wheelchair ramp to fight the lich. To each their own, but if I can’t kick ass anymore, I still want my character to be able to.
Honestly the art is perfect in that it captures the essence of the edition. A very milquetoast rules set without any core identity, designed in such a way to be as minimally offensive for all D&D players, but really not having any soul of its own. The bland generic fantasy artwork captures that. Notice how it's pretty much all about the PCs too, there's no effort spent to make the monsters look fearsome at all. The owlbear looks so inquisitive. It's not some feral beast looking to eat the adventurers, it's just a cuddly teddy bear that wants to be your friend.
Honestly this is crap I don't want my family to get involved with. WOTC can go to hell in a hand-basket, but don't push homosexuality on conservatives.
I dont understand the complaint about having art of scenes, and not just specific monsters. The only point of the art is to get your imagination warmed up and inspire some ideas. Wotc has lots of issues but I think this is mostly nostalgia for an older style.
w8t w8t the fuck do i se asian dwarfs for? and arent black dwarf followers of some demon good and thats why dy are black and gray dwarfs the same whit elfs arent black elfs drows that live in the underdark the fuck happen to dnd ?
The dwarf image seems almost fine... almost... the old master chiseling a pattern with, my guess, a grand kid that is watching him work.. he turns about the same time as the other dwarf at the entrance of the cookie bearer.. that implies some story, one could write a short scene with that dynamic.. the window seems to exist for better lighting, fitting for a workbench of finer craft... its that duo having a casual snack (would dwarves have an osha?) at a worktable while all that is happening that is alien to this image.. removing that duo and spacing things out a bit and that image could be a slice of life. The orcs falconing... thats fine-ish.. without everything else. - they could have created a cultural theme if their intent was to try and move from the "evil" theme of warmongering brutes (waagh! much?).. alas their choice was to make it.. racist ? ..thats... not fine.. the rest.. the compare with the older art shows it very well, the new ones lack the balance and composition, they just tryed cramming as much as they could everywhere, no focus, too much noise..
Think what you want but the forced diversity and inclusivity IS the problem for me. Fantasy is about escape, it's not hearing everyone else's weird fantasies...
Yes! Thank you! If a table wants to have nothing but LGBTQ dwarves then have at it. If another wants all dwarves to have Mohawks, have at it. But forcing it onto everyone is where it becomes a problem for me.
@@dracoyaminiatures5143 Then what are you supposed to put for the art? Like, no matter what WOTC puts, it technically “forcing” that idea of the fantasy on everyone.
@@Kronosaurus-1924We gave lots of examples in our video. You should actually finish watching. 😂 The diversity is not the issue. It's the lack of creativity, fitting too much information into 1 photo, combining a smithy/bar/bakery, and the cartoon theme. Plus, the Latin themed orcs are incredibly offensive to a lot of people. There was a comment at the top of the feed that honestly worded things very well
@@deejaytee You’re in all of these comments contributing nothing. Diversity isn’t an issue. It’s forced diversity. It doesn’t make sense and it breaks fantasy immersion. The suspension of disbelief in a fantasy-based imagination game is a precarious thing, and it relies on grounding in reality to stay tenable. You can’t tell me in a world with horses, where it would take months to travel to other areas, that isolated races residing in the mountains and hills (dwarves) wouldn’t have some kind of genetic homogeneity? I don’t care if you make them black, but they need to all be black. It doesn’t make sense for a clan of dwarfs, who are known to be a suspicious and isolationist bunch, to look like a bunch of humans at a human port city. It’s senseless and unnecessary pandering just to check boxes. It screams of trying too hard and is bad world building. Sorry you can’t agree and your only defense is to call everyone ists and phobes for legitimate complaints about the believability (not realism, mind you, so don’t pull that-I know it’s not realistic) of their fictional worlds. Worlds in which we-as gamers-plan to spend many hours.
The art is a big part of what influences your imagination as a player to create an idea of the setting you’re in. It sets the tone. Bad art contaminates your understanding of the world you’re going to be adventuring in.
DnD is just becoming a grey paste as they try to appease everyone. No point in running the game as a GM either. Better TTRPGS out there.
The race to achieve nothing having any reference to anything in real life is impossible to win. All this because the mental gymnastics it takes to think that any of this is racist in the first place. I agree, Wizards of the Coast has gone way too far.
Me who is half Mexican: orcs are Mexican now? ………….. *proceeds to make a half orc gunslinger fighter, college of valor bard while listening to mariachi music as I come up with the dopest revenge backstory ever for the character.*
Antonio Banderas as a character portrait?
@@thepickleddragon8590 more Chalino Sanchez meets Robinhood.
@@tigaliga8942 i was thinking the movie Desperado which immediately came to mind when you described the character
Senõr Saruman, the trees started trimming us esé
Isn't that already a movie? I think the second and third ones have Antonio Banderas in them!
If there's anything I dislike about D&D artwork it's the fact that it's comic-like now compared to AD&D times. When flipping through a rulebook the first thing I soak up is the art and it gives me an impression and a feeling for the setting and atmosphere the game wants to convey. Back then it was adventure in a rather realistic fantasy world. Now it's comic fantasy in a very exaggerated, overly vibrant comic world. Some might like that, but I really don't.
The weird thing is comic-like can actually be good in some cases -- but yeah a lot of this new stuff is just trash.
@@quantus5875 Trash is not what I mean actually. The quality of the pictures is another thing entirely. I specifically dislike comic presentation in RPGs. It's not how I want to picture the story I am playing.
It's really just preference.
I didn't make up my mind about the new pictures yet, but since I don't like D&D as a system in general, and I sure as Hell won't buy any Hasbro/WotC product, I don't really have to. I was kinda interested in the art though, because, you know, it's fantasy art. And it's a bit less comic-like than the old 5E, so that's a plus. Looks all a bit generic though. Nothing exciting.
There's SO MANY RPG books with gorgeous artwork nowadays, I own a lot of books only because they are beautiful to look at, actually. None of it is D&D. :D
@@valorin5762I can understand that. I own a few books just for the art. Though, these aren't pictures that I would ever be proud to own and display.
@@dracoyaminiatures5143 And then you look at Free League's books, for example, where I'd put every single picture on the wall. Just gorgeous!
The AD&D art felt like it was a snap shot of something going on.
The rogue kneeling down working on the trap while the warrior stands at the ready, facing the darkness.
The common denominator to the pieces here-box checking or box ticking.
It's like the direction to artists (and I'm not knocking their skill here) is "must include blah relationship, blah race, blah color, blah genders" and the rest is secondary.
Oh man, can we also talk about the terrible "Weapon Mastery" art that has what I guess is an orc holding a massive two headed axe by its twig stick middle? 😳 Fantasy art should be evocative in every sense of the word. When it's confusing, there's no fantasy to enjoy.
@@intuitivealchemist you are too right. So many turds to choose from. Choices were made and I wanted to share some examples of good art without making the vid too long.
I remember a game last year where my Lv. 8 players needed to sneak past a red dragon. A few bad decisions and rolls later and they're in life-or-death combat. Do a quick image search for a visual while drawing the map.
The first WOTC Pic was a dragon with the worst praporions and perspective I've ever seen, in a defensive posture. Across the frame, a Drow riding a jaguar, a flying wizard flinging lighting and a fire genasi monk and druid pulling off their best avengers pose.
A pencil sketch of a dragon shape above the trees would be infinitely more effective and versatile.
Not every encounter is a finale or hero moment. Hell, a GMs job is to balance the power fantasy with progression and growth. It like they're marketing to problem players who want to start every game at Lv 40.
and players that never lose, worry about character death, and live in a bubble
I really appreciate the focus on the *art* and not the politics. Not liking the 2024 art is not about being anti-woke or racist or any other -phobe or -ist. It's about not liking the *art.* What I've seen so far feels bland, sanitized, G-rated and absent any drama, story, or menace. It doesn't evoke adventure and doesn't feel worthy of the game's 50th anniversary.
The new Orc is so racist. How did no one at WOTC notice this? Love the Pickled Dragon and Dracoya
SOO glad you see it too
Because they are the real racists? That's all they talk about, oh and skin color..
@conmacmara2743 That's what I'm saying! I've always had lots of diversity in all my games, from all the colors, genders, and etc. I didn't need WOTC to force me into it or tell me how to run it.
Because they're racists.
WoTC has checked ALL the Boxes. Including the one marked TRASH.
16:21 the amount of hours I've spent looking at this picture going through each of their stories in my mind... Used to love Dragonlance!
Wow you are so right about the artwork! I used to drool over the gorgeous paintings on the cover of Dragon.
The two examples you showed were so namby pamby, and frankly the Mexican orcs were an insult to Mexicans, orcs and falcons all at once. Shocking! Instead, give us a pic of a falcon flying up close and personal, talons outstretched and RIGHT in your face.
As well pointed out, great art requires a focused center, a play of light, a feeling that SOMETHING is happening RIGHT NOW, even if we don't fully know what it is.
Sadly I'm saying goodbye to D&D. WOTC has murdered it into the dust. I'm moving on to DC20. Same feel (or even more magical) as the game we loved, with clearer/better rules and none of the bullshit that undercuts the community that made it HAPPEN.
Incidentally, regarding art, my writing was featured in two issues of Polyhedron, and both included some pretty fun and amazing artwork. My ex actually turned the drawing from Skully's Bar and Bait into a t-shirt for me, because it was just that good.
Elmore and Caldwell are two of my absolute fantasy artists of all time. I can spend hours just staring at their paintings trying to absorb every detail.
I am less bothered by the large number of monsters in the DnD cartoon picture. I can think of several pictures in various rpg rulebooks that splash lots of monsters together. I think most of them should have been hidden from the humans in the picture though.
I don't understand why every race needs to be represented in one picture. It's like one dwarf hold is in downtown San Francisco. Anthropology is my hobby and it breaks my brain. At least Pathfinder has dark dwarves coming from another continent.
@@markcampbell4080 it is a bit of an eyeroll composition
Something similar has been said about today's fantasy TV series - every town on every continent has the same demographic as metropolitan Los Angeles.😩
Thank you! It was confusing to me as well and I think you worded it much better than I did.
A dwarf hold in San Francisco?! Proof at last! It’s the rumoured crossover with SHADOWRUN!
So instead of Ork wardrums, we'll get The Mexican Hat Dance?
And it looks like Dwarves are now...Squat Bears? (the hairy gay guy in case you're confused). The shot does look forced, it cones off as some kinda ad and not a fantasy game art piece
Who is this for? This isn't even the same game the kids in Stranger Things are playing anymore (they're probably playing 2E).
There's other TTRPG's out there and it's time for them to fill the hole WOTC seemed to intentionally created with dumb decisions in the name of DEI and tourists
Orcish War Maraccas..
.. I've been corrupted. When I hear the Mexican Hat Dance music, Cheryl Wheeler's lyrics come to mind. "Potato"
1:20 ... OSHA wants to have a word with all of them....
😂😂😂 that's hilarious.
13:18 Always saw this as Takhisis battling Paladine (I know only red dragon head, but that's how it played in my mind). There is an amazing book from the 90's called the worlds of TSR. Pure art! I highly recommend it!
The Elder Scrolls made better the idea of the orcs being portrayed as a pariah folk looking for a place to call home.
The image of the adult kids from the 80's show.
They forgot to fix his bow string, which makes me think it was AI generated and 'fixed' a bit. (The string should be BEHIND his left arm (the arm on the right) not in front...
Additionally, the fact that the mimic and the Owl-bear are both facing the same direction is jarring. The mimic should have been facing them, similar to how all the other creatures are facing them.)
Last note; the 'artist' seemed to pick odd spots to skip on details. (Trees. The tree the dragon is curled around gets blurry further up. It's not a distance thing, as trees further back are fully detailed right up to the edge.)
all the new art is being filtered through a branding gauntlet. There's too many "conscious" constructions of the new brand appealing to younger players for the most part for my liking and it lacks the evocativeness and darkness that I think inspired myself to and others to buy the products. In my mind, the Easley covers of all the orange-spine manuals are arguably the best covers ever produced by TSR/AD&D though there's great stuff by Parkinson and Elmore among others. The cover of the Moldvay set by Erol Otus stole my imagination in 1981. No other pieces of art produced since has done it quite the same. Despite the fact that Otus's style is not hyper-realism, it is evocative and looks like it might even be painted by an artist living in the world of D&D itself. The new art doesn't show characters in mortal danger it shows reaffirming family portraits. You'd think the game is about LARPING coffee shop talk and family excursions to the Grand Canyon based on the two main pieces of art you showed from the new edition. That's not a knock on the rules system, I'm just talking about the art. The nostalgia pieces are devoid of movement and emotion -- maybe because the artists weren't even connected to the subject matter? Anyway, I could continue to rant but I will say, despite the fact that much of the older art was pen and ink and sometimes crudely drawn it was always evoking something and made you feel like you could also participate in the creation of art ( which many of us did and do to this day) no matter what our skill level -- being creative as a player was encouraged by the art itself.
@@seanferguson-th6ny oh my, I forgot about the sensitivity censors. We attribute them to the writing in the manuals but they are likely shaping all outward facing content.
My favorite TTRPG game cover will always be David Trampier's cover of the 1st Ed PHB. And love Elmore's and Caldwell's work -- why can't they do art like that anymore? My two favorite D&D artists are Bill Willingham and Larry Elmore. That's the other thing -- you can tell who drew the art back then (in most cases) just by looking at it. Parkingson, Truman, Willingham, Otus, Halloway, Sutherland, Trampier, Jeff Dee, LaForce -- o man -- what they are doing now is such a shame. I'm not sure if I'm going to buy these books -- the art is so awful. Don't want that garbage on my bookshelf.
I LOVE your comment and I agree. The older art gave me feelings. Feelings of tension, happiness, mourning, etc. That's what dnd art should inspire. The emotional journey
Much of the original art was a little ad hoc and limited to black and white pen & ink. it had varying levels of skill. It was also produced in a relatively unfiltered manner and most of it relied heavily on movement, shadow, and context to give it gravitas. The current "fluff" is devoid of that, maybe because The Company has a stranglehold on the branding but mostly I think because older D&D under TSR was community-built and influenced and now we are being told what the game looks like.
So did they only buy one pose for dark-skinned female casters? They all seem to be posing arms akimbo - or as my kobolds would call it "easy target". It looks more like Magic the Gathering cards rather than D&D art.
Also, the modern Tumblr Diversity Strixhaven style is tiresome. It reminds me of the "Reject Modernity, Embrace Tradition" meme.
Tiresome is right. Eyerolling is another way I would describe.
Orcs come from Roman mythology it was a curse for doing bad things to corpses.
I haven't heard of this! I need to look more into that and maybe we can add it to our Orc video.
@@dracoyaminiatures5143 "Fiery angels fell. Deep thunder rolled around their shores burning with the fires of Orc." - Roy Batty
@@thomriley1036 This actually sounds familiar. I'm so glad you told me. 😆
@@elliotvernon7971 I would also mention 'The House On The Borderland' by William Hope Hodgson, published in 1908 and credited as an inspiration for H.P. Lovecraft's later works. The gist is that a horde of brutish pigmen enter our world from somewhere else, and many believe that this premise influenced the look of the pig-faced Orcs in the AD&D Monster Manual.
Got to the Orc section and the first thoughts I had were on the Diggers and Digger Nobs in WH40k. It's BAD and NOT in a funny way.
I will look them up!
I love your comment. Perfect 👌🏻
"There's no reason that we need to fit everything into one picture like some kind of anxious child."
You hit the nail on the head here, Dracoya. The people infesting these companies now are exactly that. Political and social activists first, and gamers second. They are - by and large - privileged, infantilized adults who wear their various mental diagnoses on their sleeves like they're badges of honor.
There's a reason that fantasy art writ large has become a frenetic mish-mash of childish themes and madness-soaked whimsicality.
Beautifully said. 🎉
@@dracoyaminiatures5143 🥰
There's nothing I've seen in the new rules that has me excited to play, so this is the first edition of DnD I won't be buying.
The art is awful across the board. There's one with the Goliath Barbarian climbing out of a dragons mouth, and the barb has the most Zen expression I've ever seen. The blood on that one looks fake and something just feels off about the Axe.
we totally agree with you and that's why we created videos that focus on older editions and campaigns
1:45 I just noticed that this character is Samuel L Jackson.
I’m done just done with wotc. I mean wtf😂😂😂😂
I have always held the opinion that WOTC 5e art was the worst of any edition of D&D. Then wotc 6e comes along and says, "Hold my beer." Other than the Dragonlance painting, the rest of the art in the new phb is as Dracoya stated, uninspiring. Thats the nicest way to describe the art. I also agree that in games art is super important, it's what typically first draws me to a game. I did not plan to buy the new edition, but had I intended too, this art would have put me off on buying it.
BTW, you guys used great examples of what D&D art should be.
Yes!!! Couldn't agree more! It could be the best game ever, but if the cover is boring and monotone, people are far less likely to buy it.
"Hold my beer" had me laughing. 🤣 🍺 🍻
Its Adobe stock quality for the most part. Just not something that draws me into the adventurous spirit
@@thepickleddragon8590 Agreed, nothing about it screams adventure to me. Instead of appealing to players sense of adventure they chose to pander to a vocal minority. If people like it and buy it good for them. It's not for me.
BTW, in the painting with the Gold Lion, the fighter is wielding a sword with half a hilt. Half of it isn't there. I think AI explains why the Dragon looks like a Lion. The AI knows a Gold Dragon is Chinese inspired, and there is a Ki-rin in the Monster manual. I wonder if it confused the concepts...?
🤔🤔 this is interesting. I have not heard of this. We should look more into it
Interesting observations. I never noticed that but will go back and look.
Now you need to roll a d20 to check your Dwarf's gay powers.
I don't think Tyler Jacobson would use or need Ai he was an oil painter before swapping to digital, but I really like his new PHB, its the first PHB with an actual party on the cover!? That said, I prefer Wylie Beckert's alternates for the new core-rulebooks... I just love her more oily-sketch style, all of her Magic cards look amazing too.
But my favorite artist for all of Magic/D&D is Wayne Reynolds, his shapes, textures, and edges are just crazy! He'll never use Ai, he cant, everything he does is pencil and acrylic.
Maybe you just prefer oil and acrylic? Because there's a lot of old stuff that's very amateur, overcrowded, and goofy as hell...
Wayne Reynolds is an absolute master. It is true that there is some bad old art out there but I don't see in places of prominence in or on the sourcebooks. I don't think its just oil that I like. Composition, emotion, and details are what do it for me. Could be any medium.
@@thepickleddragon8590 Idk I see it everywhere, even great artists like Jeff Easley... look at the dragon on his AD&D Monster Manual (The one with the Pegasus), the snout is misaligned with the back of the head, there's a huge tangent across the neck, and if you look where the neck and chest meet the neck is completely offset to his right side, and the right hind leg is basically coming out of the center of the stomach.
The anatomy is terrible.
@@DigitalinDaniel I dunno, when I look at that painting I see a creature twisting its body to breath fire. In fact, that is one of my least favorite paintings by him as I dont really like how he captured the fire.
Oh, I saw one thing I wanted to point out. There were actually multiple PHBs with adventurers on the cover. Dave Trampier's 1e cover being the very first.
I 100% agree with your comment about art in RPG books drawing you into a game. I have said many times, I was drawn to the Palladium (Fantasy 1st edition) book cover and inner illustrations the first time I laid eyes on it. I still love that book and the game.
downfall of wotc/dnd when, cuz my unused, unwritten, true sorcerer is waiting to find the right ttzone to be unleashed... still havent figured out his personality during the group portion of his story/journey.
What was the context of the orc image? Was that supposed to be the picture next to the orc stats/description or something? That would make it a lot worse in my mind than if it were just a throwaway example of a single group for a setting or something. I haven't followed anything D&D since the Pinkerton thing, and that controversy with the AI art in the book about the giants and it shows.
@@HaughtyToast that is what wotc says is an orc
@@thepickleddragon8590 Weird.
George? George Carlin posed for Easley for the cover?😜
1-For alk the problems with the business side of the card game Magic: the Gathering, I sincerely feel the nearly 30 years of art I have absorbed from it has enriched my life. Same goes for RPG art but I had to mention the M:th art first because it has so many more pieces every year, even back when we would only get about 600-700 new art cards a year back then, boy have times chamged!
2-I have to admit I liked the idea of the two dwarves with tat of the beards. Seems like something dwarves would do. Maybe it would have been better accepted if one of them was a female and the guy had a tat of extensive braiding of the back of the female's head. I also liked hearing someone suggest they could be blood brothers.
@@mrcatchingup the dwarves didn't bother me. It was the overall confused composition. A distracted forge with a Starbucks drive up window serving sushi and a dwarven cookie baker.
I have a handful of AD&D and 2nd edition books just because of the covers. I started with 3e and while there's some really good artwork in that edition, there's something magical about the previous books.
13:30. If that was reprinted in this PHB, 100 professionally bothered 'fans' would say it's AI... That's my problem. SOME people are just coming to complain.
This is why I picked up the 5e core rule books. I predict they will be hard to find.
21:20 A forge that's just a forge!
I do agree with everything you point out, but I think it's fair to say that this is not only a wotc problem. I think artwork in general (at least following any mainstream) has become more "sanitized". There's a real push for inclusivity for inclusivity's sake and it is so exaggerated that it just looks like a carricature more than anything. The first example really stood out to me - what used to be a mysterious dwarven forge, full of the spirit of the reclusive underground race now looks like almost a child's playground where we even have one dwarf bringing in cookies as if the mother brings snacks to the children who are playing on the playstation. And if that is the vibe that you are looking for, then that's fine I guess, but the sad thing is that we lost the more serious and immersive drawings in the process. Not only that but there is just a general lack of quality that permeates all over. Just a very broad weakness in composition, color complexity, contrast which all stems from the overall direction of illustration over depiction (meaning that the image is attempting to showcase features of a product, rather than the natural and emotional point of view of the artist). It's just not dramatic. They're so careful not to offend anyone that indeed, nobody gets offended, but what great story happens without drama? And dungeons and dragons is about a story, right? But it's not all doom and gloom. Wherever wotc fails others will pick up surely - the fact that people talk about it means that someone sooner or later is going to fill that void for quality art.
Only women have weapons in most of the images.
D&D's art direction has been on a downward slide since 1st edition. Back then, we had Erol Otus, David Sutherland, Dave Trampier, Darlene...and now we have this, whatever this is supposed to be. Why does everything in the new art look shiny and happy and cute? Is there still EVIL in D&D?!? Would they ever publish a book like The Book of Vile Darkness for the new edition? Would they even feel comfortable using a phrase like "vile darkness" in something they would publish now?
D&D's aesthetic used to look like heavy metal album covers, or like the science-fantasy magazines you'd find for sale at head shops...now it looks like the latest pablum from the Walt Disney Company.
Makes me glad I parted ways with 'official' D&D back in 2008, when 4th edition reared its ugly head. I'll stick to older editions of the game (pre-WotC), to the OSR, and to Rifts, thanks (which is like super D&D times a thousand).
And for the record, the greatest cover art on a D&D product ever remains Trampier's cover painting for the 1st edition Players Handbook (the one with no possessive apostrophe in the title, LOL), for all the reasons that James Maliszewski has argued.
Tolkien's orcs are akin to other mythological bestial humanoid monsters (hobgoblins, gnolls, grues, ogres, trolls -- take your pick). They represent the aspect of humanity capable of predatory selfishness, destructive brutality, treachery, fear and murderous psychopathy. They are the Cain aspect of humanity, in contrast to it's Abel. It's the part of us that reacts to suffering and fear by choosing the low road, and saying, "How come my neighbor has more than me? It's not fair, and it must be his fault, so it's ok if I just kill him and take his stuff. The consequences to everyone be damned." They don't represent any one group of people, but the natural capacity for evil that exists within us all.
The WOTC woke sensitivity readers believe that they are enlightened revolutionaries that possess special knowledge that makes them pure--morally superior to than us poor proles. They appear to think they have a "duty" to teach the rest of us the "error of our ways". Anyone who questions this agenda is a heretic, and a bad person, who deserves punishment through false accusations of the worst kinds of bigotry, and eventual banishment from society. Do it or else. This is called "liberation" to make it seem ok. Once we all mindlessly agree in lockstep with their collective view, it will magically call into being some kind of never-never land utopia, where no one ever suffers or something.
That's why they have such a thing about orcs being racially coded--orcs are a reminder that *everyone* has the capacity for evil, that none of us are morally superior to others, and each of us has a duty to recognize this and be careful not to give in to their "darker" impulses. He who is without sin, cast the first stone--remove the mote from thine own eye, before trying to remove thy brothers, and do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Sometimes the "Woke" act like orcs, and they don't like to be reminded of it. It's like looking in a mirror. So they censor orcs, and hurt anyone who tries to stop it.
They tried so hard to pander and be inclusive that they insulted everybody.
Every piece is trying to do too much while also looking like an AI render. As Dracoya pointed out - way too many creatures in every picture. A hodgepodge.
I may be old school, but I also dislike that WotC's current "fantasy/medieval" style is stuffed with characters that all have the contemporary haircuts of a soccer team.
Art is supposed to inspire and suspend disbelief. Coupled with composition, technical skill and color theory, it should evoke emotions. Not forcefully pander to demographics.
@@saltedllama2759 they certainly should have stuck to what made D&D popular, adventurous exciting art.
I LOVE your response and we couldn't agree more. There's a point where you're trying so hard that it's coming across as offensive and overcompensating
The artwork is lame, but I think people are adding things to be outraged about that aren't in the pictures
*yawn* I feel bad by giving this attention.
it is my opinion that the artwork of the old it has nothing to do with the art served by the majority of TTRPG's today, with very few exceptions. Most of the old artwork simply has a soul, a thing that now days seems to be missing...
This is what happens when they try to pander instead of just being natural
Much of this book’s art is all about pandering. And they don’t even do that very well. Feels like the whole book has the professionalism of a high school group project. Oh yes and Dracoya - Orcs should just be “orcs”. Nothing in a fantasy world should be a direct analogue or allegory for our world. Tolkien disliked allegory and so should we when it comes to fantasy.
1:05 The funny thing is, gay dwarves aren't that weird when you consider that in some settings (I forget which ones) dwarves are like 70% male and a vast majority are infertile anyway. I mean in that environment it'd be sort of like "ok, and? If those two are making each other happy and productive to the clan than leave then be." Relationships of *any kind* aren't the morn for dwarves in theses settings anyway.
Not that I don't hate the push they're going for, and this artwork still annoys me, but of all races other than the elves it's kind of an non-issue. Least, i see it as such.
Edit: Also drinking ale in the forge is common practice or dwarves. Putting aside the very 'dwarf' nature of it, ale in the medieval sense wasn't that alcoholic in the first place and drunkenness would be frown upon regardless of where it was.
I've never heard of Ben Griggs nor do I care to research more. I would certainly avoid any product he was associated with.
God these two first pictures are terrible. Uninspired and so much I don't care about.
The problem with the first piece is exactly what you mentioned with the cartoon characters grown up piece: too much STUFF. The dwarven one would be cool if it were separate things, but somebody decided "DWARVES = FORGE!" and so everything has to happen by the forge. And it's ridiculous. Who eats sushi in front of the guy adorning their hammer??
The Mexicorcs piece is fantastic, minus the random giant axe wielding woman who has to be there because "ORCS = FIGHTERS". Just like humans and elves have distinct cultures within their races, so should orcs. Give me Latin-flavoured orcs. Give me orcs that draw from Byzantine history. Give me purple orcs that dwell underground in some forgotten corner of the world and have no analogous real-world counterpart. That piece is great as a slice-of-life example that can be used to flesh out an orc beyond the generic "green and violent World of Warcraft barbarian" that a new player might be familiar with.
finally, a nuanced opinion beyond "its all bad". why does it feel people look at that picture and think they are reflavouring the orcs to SPECIFICALLY latin?. i personally want to see orcs in napoleanic looking gear like the giff cuz that's just fun
Great insights.
I'm pretty sure I have seen better art floating in a toilet.
You're critizing the art and not talking about the wheelchair bound person holding a gun and an amulet from the Curse of Strahd campaign?
@@Falruk i had a whole video on wheelchair adventurers. I am in a wheelchair myself and find it ridiculous.
ruclips.net/video/kjUIA8kdfHg/видео.htmlsi=OKfodVWGoJzTlZ8y
@@thepickleddragon8590
Sorry to hear about the wheelchair. I lost my right leg in a subway accident in 2020, so I’m there with you. However, I have no desire to play a character with my limitations in a game. Even if I did, I wouldn’t want my fantasy art filled with cripple people going up a wheelchair ramp to fight the lich. To each their own, but if I can’t kick ass anymore, I still want my character to be able to.
Honestly the art is perfect in that it captures the essence of the edition. A very milquetoast rules set without any core identity, designed in such a way to be as minimally offensive for all D&D players, but really not having any soul of its own. The bland generic fantasy artwork captures that.
Notice how it's pretty much all about the PCs too, there's no effort spent to make the monsters look fearsome at all. The owlbear looks so inquisitive. It's not some feral beast looking to eat the adventurers, it's just a cuddly teddy bear that wants to be your friend.
😂😂 you bring up a valid point. The game hasn't been as fierce as it used to be in a long while. Broken class systems and weighted rules.
@@dracoyaminiatures5143 Good. Who wants to play a game where wizards die by falling 10 feet.
Solid observations here.
Yo…. It’s almost like it’s the PLAYER’s handbook…
Honestly this is crap I don't want my family to get involved with. WOTC can go to hell in a hand-basket, but don't push homosexuality on conservatives.
This edition looks more bland and lame than 5e; put these books next to 3.5 and see how creatively bankrupt WotC has become.
I dont understand the complaint about having art of scenes, and not just specific monsters.
The only point of the art is to get your imagination warmed up and inspire some ideas.
Wotc has lots of issues but I think this is mostly nostalgia for an older style.
w8t w8t the fuck do i se asian dwarfs for? and arent black dwarf followers of some demon good and thats why dy are black and gray dwarfs the same whit elfs arent black elfs drows that live in the underdark the fuck happen to dnd ?
😅 It's not making any sense. Most places do not have that much diversity in 1 room.
The dwarf image seems almost fine... almost... the old master chiseling a pattern with, my guess, a grand kid that is watching him work.. he turns about the same time as the other dwarf at the entrance of the cookie bearer.. that implies some story, one could write a short scene with that dynamic.. the window seems to exist for better lighting, fitting for a workbench of finer craft... its that duo having a casual snack (would dwarves have an osha?) at a worktable while all that is happening that is alien to this image.. removing that duo and spacing things out a bit and that image could be a slice of life.
The orcs falconing... thats fine-ish.. without everything else. - they could have created a cultural theme if their intent was to try and move from the "evil" theme of warmongering brutes (waagh! much?).. alas their choice was to make it.. racist ? ..thats... not fine..
the rest.. the compare with the older art shows it very well, the new ones lack the balance and composition, they just tryed cramming as much as they could everywhere, no focus, too much noise..
Think what you want but the forced diversity and inclusivity IS the problem for me. Fantasy is about escape, it's not hearing everyone else's weird fantasies...
Yes! Thank you! If a table wants to have nothing but LGBTQ dwarves then have at it. If another wants all dwarves to have Mohawks, have at it. But forcing it onto everyone is where it becomes a problem for me.
OH NO DIVERSITY MY WORLD IS RUINED
@@dracoyaminiatures5143 Then what are you supposed to put for the art? Like, no matter what WOTC puts, it technically “forcing” that idea of the fantasy on everyone.
@@Kronosaurus-1924We gave lots of examples in our video. You should actually finish watching. 😂
The diversity is not the issue. It's the lack of creativity, fitting too much information into 1 photo, combining a smithy/bar/bakery, and the cartoon theme. Plus, the Latin themed orcs are incredibly offensive to a lot of people.
There was a comment at the top of the feed that honestly worded things very well
@@deejaytee
You’re in all of these comments contributing nothing. Diversity isn’t an issue. It’s forced diversity. It doesn’t make sense and it breaks fantasy immersion. The suspension of disbelief in a fantasy-based imagination game is a precarious thing, and it relies on grounding in reality to stay tenable. You can’t tell me in a world with horses, where it would take months to travel to other areas, that isolated races residing in the mountains and hills (dwarves) wouldn’t have some kind of genetic homogeneity? I don’t care if you make them black, but they need to all be black. It doesn’t make sense for a clan of dwarfs, who are known to be a suspicious and isolationist bunch, to look like a bunch of humans at a human port city. It’s senseless and unnecessary pandering just to check boxes. It screams of trying too hard and is bad world building. Sorry you can’t agree and your only defense is to call everyone ists and phobes for legitimate complaints about the believability (not realism, mind you, so don’t pull that-I know it’s not realistic) of their fictional worlds. Worlds in which we-as gamers-plan to spend many hours.
Who cares. Its just a picture
The art is a big part of what influences your imagination as a player to create an idea of the setting you’re in. It sets the tone. Bad art contaminates your understanding of the world you’re going to be adventuring in.