Quote from: Eric Diaz;970951EDIT: it has something to do with the colors, I think. Everything looks like it was colored by crayons or pencils, and boring as hell.

A lot of the art from AD&D 2E Revised looks for all the world as if it was done in pastel chalks or colored pencils, which annoys me because it can't help but look amateurish, as if I was looking at the art class assignments of a particularly talented tenth grader.

The image you posted is actually one of the less irritating pieces in those books. There's a picture of an incorporeal wizard walking up behind a skeleton with a sword in the Player's Guide that sets my teeth on edge, because it looks for all the world like a high-school girl free-handed it on construction paper during lunch break.

EDIT: Fuck it, I'm scanning it for you guys. It's been annoying me for the last twenty-two years, so I'm sharing the pain.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1101[/ATTACH]

"Someone get me a Cleric, everything is going all soft and glowy, I think I'm going blind!"

Horrible, isn't it? Other guys buy D&D books and get sweet oil paintings, I finally shell out money for my own Player's Guide and I get crap like this.

I may scan something else later, there is plenty of suck to go around in this particular PG.

Quote from: Eric Diaz;970951I like a lot of old school art, and Russ Nicholson is probably my favorite, maybe because FF books. OD&D books have bad art IMO, but who can blame them at this point.

For me the worse art is 2e revised version. They already had better stuff to work with and they choose to go with this. I get actually annoyed by looking at it.


[ATTACH=CONFIG]1090[/ATTACH]


EDIT: it has something to do with the colors, I think. Everything looks like it was colored by crayons or pencils, and boring as hell. I can't explain exactly, but the picture above should suffice. I used to have a version of 2e that was all blue-ish inside, but I can't find that art anywhere nowadays, I would appreciate seeing a few pieces or a link if somebody has one.

This image appears to be a modified tracing from photographs. The elf on the left was most likely a teenager from a back-to-school advertisement with a backpack slung over his shoulder, judging by the invisible weight on it and how his hand in no way whatsoever fits the bow. At least Greg Bell could pick a cool drawing from a comic book to trace; whoever did this picked a Sears catalog.

The modifications the artist made are amateurish, resulting in an unnatural, paper-doll look to the clothes, weapons whose placement makes no sense whatsoever, and stiff, awkward poses. As critical as I am of Elmore, he's a billion times better than this.

Quote from: Barghest;971601A lot of the art from AD&D 2E Revised looks for all the world as if it was done in pastel chalks or colored pencils, which annoys me because it can't help but look amateurish, as if I was looking at the art class assignments of a particularly talented tenth grader.

The image you posted is actually one of the less irritating pieces in those books. There's a picture of an incorporeal wizard walking up behind a skeleton with a sword in the Player's Guide that sets my teeth on edge, because it looks for all the world like a high-school girl free-handed it on construction paper during lunch break.

The skeleton looks like he's trying his hardest not to urinate as the Lord Jesus Christ watches over the scene.

These are so incredibly bad that my guess is Williams was desperately trying to stop TSR from going under by cutting the royalties they were paying out to professional artists.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;971617This image appears to be a modified tracing from photographs. The elf on the left was most likely a teenager from a back-to-school advertisement with a backpack slung over his shoulder, judging by the invisible weight on it and how his hand in no way whatsoever fits the bow. At least Greg Bell could pick a cool drawing from a comic book to trace; whoever did this picked a Sears catalog.

The modifications the artist made are amateurish, resulting in an unnatural, paper-doll look to the clothes, weapons whose placement makes no sense whatsoever, and stiff, awkward poses. As critical as I am of Elmore, he's a billion times better than this.

I looked at that again (may my eyes forgive me) and I bet you're right! In fact, I think it was a photo of three teens posing for some catalogue. That's why their heads are all at the same level and the hobbit had to be standing on a convenient block. I would bet good money on it. Now we need someone to find the original photo!

Edit: And the guy on the left clearly had his left hand holding the strap of a backpack the artist then removed from the image.

Quote from: Voros;971495This factionalism over minor variations in rules is reminscent of the various splinter denominations of the Protestant Reformation. Except extra silly. Is desecending AC the new Trinity?

Quote from: CRKrueger;971499What's not really all that silly is you being a geek who continually tries to jab geeks who annoy you by pretending they have some metaphorical relationship to real world groups and conflicts responsible for the deaths of thousands of people.

Quote from: Voros;971501... As for the metaphorical relationship to those responsible for death of thousands, I assume you mean the OSR Taliban?? Not sure that I ever used the term, just defended the idea that there are assholes out there who take the variations in the rules of D&D far too seriously. I compare them to the Church, the Pope and Protestant splinters for humour and irony. It is bathos to mock their earnestness about something so insignificant.

Oh I thought CRKrueger meant Christians (as in crusades, inquisitions, witch burning, etc...).

Quote from: fearsomepirate;971617This image appears to be a modified tracing from photographs. The elf on the left was most likely a teenager from a back-to-school advertisement with a backpack slung over his shoulder, judging by the invisible weight on it and how his hand in no way whatsoever fits the bow. At least Greg Bell could pick a cool drawing from a comic book to trace; whoever did this picked a Sears catalog.

The modifications the artist made are amateurish, resulting in an unnatural, paper-doll look to the clothes, weapons whose placement makes no sense whatsoever, and stiff, awkward poses. As critical as I am of Elmore, he's a billion times better than this.

Pretty much exactly what I was thinking. It looks like a view of teenagers as seen by a Sears or K-Mart catalog photographer, except with a combination of awful clothes and lame D&D props, but taking themselves seriously and trying to look cool and tough and failing horribly, and that the artist thinks the readers will think this is cool, maybe. It's painful and would be excellent trollbait for making fun of fantasy roleplayers.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;971618The skeleton looks like he's trying his hardest not to urinate as the Lord Jesus Christ watches over the scene.

These are so incredibly bad that my guess is Williams was desperately trying to stop TSR from going under by cutting the royalties they were paying out to professional artists.

Yeah, and yet I don't actually dislike that one.

I think merely amateur art tends to remind me of art a player or GM might do, and so can feel like it invites imagination to fill it in. I sometimes prefer it to overly-detailed art which seems to over-specify details (and so need to get everything right or it really is a flaw). The one shown above looks like a spectral ghost and skeleton having trouble walking (which makes sense) which look like they might look less dangerous than they might turn out to be.

Quote from: Skarg;971631Yeah, and yet I don't actually dislike that one.

I think merely amateur art tends to remind me of art a player or GM might do, and so can feel like it invites imagination to fill it in. I sometimes prefer it to overly-detailed art which seems to over-specify details (and so need to get everything right or it really is a flaw). The one shown above looks like a spectral ghost and skeleton having trouble walking (which makes sense) which look like they might look less dangerous than they might turn out to be.

"Jesus Watching Skele-Man Hold It In" has a bit more kitschy appeal than "Back To School...With Daggers!" I must say. This is interesting, as I never knew that the the revised 2e books (I assume the ones with black borders on the cover?) had different art than the original, which I always liked just fine.

The revised 2e art is pretty bad. But I still like the original 2e DMG and PHB art.

I've mentioned before that I'm a big fan of the 2e Skullport FR supplement but the cover is pretty terrible. Don't judge this book by its cover.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1103[/ATTACH]

Quote from: Barghest;971601A lot of the art from AD&D 2E Revised looks for all the world as if it was done in pastel chalks or colored pencils, which annoys me because it can't help but look amateurish, as if I was looking at the art class assignments of a particularly talented tenth grader.

You can do amazing work with colored pencils and pastels, so you can't blame the medium here.

Here is a colored pencil piece by a friend of mine.


And here is a random one I just found.


The problem with colored pencils is that it is incredibly time-consuming. Applying with a colored pencil takes a lot more time than with a brush. It's a terrible medium for a professional illustrator, a job where turn around time matters a lot. My friend that does colored pencils makes most of her money at it from teaching, not the pieces themselves.

As for pastels, my avatar is a quick pastel that another friend of mine did when I sat in a class of his as a last-minute model. He has stuff in the Smithsonian, so it is far from his best work, but it is a lot better than that 2nd Ed. Revised work.

I will agree that the skeleton one has some charm to it thought. The Sears catalog one is fucking awful though.

Quote from: Baulderstone;971750You can do amazing work with colored pencils and pastels, so you can't blame the medium here.

Wow. Okay, yes, I stand corrected.

Quote from: Baulderstone;971750I will agree that the skeleton one has some charm to it thought. The Sears catalog one is fucking awful though.

I don't deny that the pastel skeleton picture has a certain charm. It's just really, really not what I want my D&D to look like. And that's important--I can't draw worth a crap, so I need the art in any corebook as a visual aid to help me and my players get on the same page when I'm describing things to them. If I'm trying to describe a gritty, drippy, fungus-infested dungeon and they're picturing softly-glowing ethereal floating Jeebus-wizards in their minds' eyes, I'm working at a handicap.

Anyway--to really appreciate the Sears Dungeoneers, we need to see the other half of their membership. From two pages earlier in the same book:



You know that really cool Dwarven warrior one person in every group wants to play? The stone-cold armor-plated badass who cleaves skulls with his mighty war axe? Well, here is his dad.

And don't mind the unsettling thousand-yard stare of the Gnome, there--he just got back from Cracker Barrel, and his tummy is full, so that weird look on his face is probably just indigestion.

But the real hero of the party is the Douchebag Elf, complete with an Old Navy sweater tied around his neck.

Quote from: Barghest;971773I don't deny that the pastel skeleton picture has a certain charm. It's just really, really not what I want my D&D to look like.

That's fair. The picture really isn't in keeping with the overall look of AD&D 2E. which would make it jarring in context.

I'm a little glad I passed on the recent AD&D 2E megabundle as I heard it was the revised books. I almost went in on it as I passed on the whole 2E era of AD&D at the time. I was curious just to give the books a read, but everything I hear about revised makes it sounds bad.

Anyway--to really appreciate the Sears Dungeoneers, we need to see the other half of their membership. From two pages earlier in the same book:[/QUOTE]

What really turns my stomach with these is the colors. Someone really needed to give this guy a color wheel and lesson on color theory. That mint green sweater/cape on the elf, the hot pink cardigan on the gnome and the violet background is just nauseating when you put it all together.

As for the cape, the part at the top where he was copying a sweater is clearly rendered with shading. The parts hanging behind the elf are just an area of flat green without any contrast or line definition because he didn't have a reference. He also used the lightest shade of green, which looks wrong. He might have gotten away with making the whole area one flat color if he had gone with the darker shade of green he was using in the folds of the sweater portion.

Color theory was something that Erol Otus has a good grasp of. With his basic set cover, he was already working from a tough position with needing to match a magenta box, but that green dragon really pops against the muted purple dungeon background. Making the water green as well was a great choice to keep the palette simple. Then the sorceress is using the same green in her spell, which reflects on her cape and leg. Some of the red she is wearing can be seen in the dragon she is facing. The fighter down the bottom is wearing the same purple as the background in the top portion, creating a balance.

He is playing with some really risky colors, but it all comes together. It's a little garish, but in a pulpy way that suits the subject matter.

I want to adventure with The Sears Dungeoneers.

Quote from: Dumarest;972012I want to adventure with The Sears Dungeoneers.

With less experience and treasure to split up amongst those that make it out, you should come out ahead.  Assuming you didn't need more competent help to make it out yourself.

Quote from: Barghest;971773Wow. Okay, yes, I stand corrected.
You know that really cool Dwarven warrior one person in every group wants to play? The stone-cold armor-plated badass who cleaves skulls with his mighty war axe? Well, here is his dad.

I really want to know who did these. The worst artist on the 2e Revised credits I can find is David O. MIller, but none of the work he displays is anywhere close to this bad.