Where does this version of Swords & Wizardry fit in its art timeline - before the Erol Otus one? It was one of my favorites, and I don't even play Retroclones. (Rick Sardinha was the artist, I think).

[ATTACH=CONFIG]435[/ATTACH]

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;923475Am I the only one who sees that it's pretty clearly an ungulate skull being lifted off the rest of the carcass by semi-sinister nature magic that is replacing lost parts with plant matter? It looks like an old school Magic The Gathering card for a regeneration or reanimation effect.

You're right, it's obviously the skull of a deer, elk, moose whatever.  What people have described as a uterus is the skull, with nostrils and eyesockets clearly defined.  What people are calling fallopian tubes are some magical plants/branches, taking the place of the antlers.  Hard to tell what the three weird energy things are, but maybe the source of the power?  You can clearly see the ribcage of the skeleton the skull is rising from.

Quote from: K Peterson;923523Where does this version of Swords & Wizardry fit in its art timeline - before the Erol Otus one? It was one of my favorites, and I don't even play Retroclones. (Rick Sardinha was the artist, I think).

[ATTACH=CONFIG]435[/ATTACH]

Thats interesting. Doesnt fit the style of the others.

A quick search shows it was a Kickstarter edition in 2012.

Theres also a few more versions of the cover out there.

Quote from: CRKrueger;923536You're right, it's obviously the skull of a deer, elk, moose whatever.  What people have described as a uterus is the skull, with nostrils and eyesockets clearly defined.  What people are calling fallopian tubes are some magical plants/branches, taking the place of the antlers.  Hard to tell what the three weird energy things are, but maybe the source of the power?  You can clearly see the ribcage of the skeleton the skull is rising from.

Yes, its clear what elements comprise it, in the same way that its clear that it is a vaginal image, in the same way the washington monument is clearly a spire composed of iron and concrete, but is also very clearly a phallic image. I'm ...highly skeptical...that the imagery of the cover was accidental, especially in context, but if that is the case its almost endearingly self-unaware on the part of the artist.

All that aside, the difference between good and bad art in an rpg specifically, from my personal POV, is whether the art is inspirational and either tells a story or presents a situation that draws one into the spirit or world of the game, technical ability aside. The art presented here is technically adequate, but it doesn't lure me into the gameworld in any way.

But none of that matters. I'm not the target audience for this game. I could care less about another D&D retroclone (I still have my original books if I was so inclined, and I'd rather enjoy trying out RedBox Hack or something of that nature). So, there's a bit of puzzlement on my part perhaps on the distancing of this retroclone from the Old School aesthetic its original covers captured so well, but I wish them the best.

Among internet dwelling rpg players (or people who just like to talk about it), it is established that there is a collective of people who have invested a lot of themselves into women and "&" (insert your favorite group) issues.

Since this group does exist (exact numbers unclear), and the OSR game market has matured to the point that it is really, really hard to differentiate a particular D&D clone, it makes sense to do whatever you can to incite as much talk about it as possible and provoke controversy. This isn't Blue Rose, so the game didn't already have a history of it to draw on. But maybe you can guilt some people who have very vocally jumped on this particular political bandwagon as a self appointed champion into buying it, or give them an illusionary feel-good-about-themselves tingle that buying an unnecessary leisure product is somehow making the world a better place.

It does make a lot of marketing sense. It is a hard thing to market a product in a mature market space, especially when your product has no substantially differentiating features.

Quote from: TristramEvans;923544The art presented here is technically adequate, but it doesn't lure me into the gameworld in any way.

It doesn't tell me much about the game BUT, I think if it were on a store shelf I would probably pick it up and have a look... because the image is intriguing and non-specific... mysterious even. Unlike previous editions.
I'd probably be expecting something more horror-related, or more slanted toward romantic fantasy (not in the Harlequin Romance sense).
I might be disappointed once I find it's just another D&D clone, but maybe the cover would inspire me to approach the game from a different angle.

1. Stacy seems okay. I don't read her blog or whatever.

2. S&W Complete is a good game and I'm thrilled it's getting a new printing.

3. Cover is shit and not in the least evocative, to me.

4. I am skeptical towards the idea that hiring more women creators will get more women to game. I'm pretty sure the best way to do it is, I dunno, for people not to be dicks to newbs? But then I'm not even sure this is the point? Ah well, whatever floats FGG's and Stacy's boats.

Quote from: K Peterson;923523(Rick Sardinha was the artist, I think).

[ATTACH=CONFIG]435[/ATTACH]

I don't have my copy with me right now but I think Jon Hodgson is the artist.

Quote from: The Butcher;923577I am skeptical towards the idea that hiring more women creators will get more women to game. I'm pretty sure the best way to do it is, I dunno, for people not to be dicks to newbs? But then I'm not even sure this is the point? Ah well, whatever floats FGG's and Stacy's boats.

Honestly, I'm skeptical that "not enough girls game" is even a thing, besides an invented problem in the heads of the OB. For the 30 odd years I've been gaming there's always been plenty of girl players.

Quote from: AsenRG;923513But this wasn't the argument presented by Whitewings, he said the cover is "telling you nothing about the game's tone, setting, or really anything".

I agree with Whitewings on that.

I am coming from the belief that cover art is a form of advertising. The art should cause the casual reader to consider purchasing the book. This current cover does not do that.

Quote from: S'mon;923387So it's like an Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson type thing? Give them money so they stop complaining?

It seems a real stretch to see this as extortion. Who is being extorted? Frog God Games is funding this with a Kickstarter, and a successful one at that. Stacy is handling the layout and art. FGG gets their cut of the money. I'm having a hard time working up any outrage at FGG being shaken down here. They get to pull out an old manuscript and make money off it again.

As for the cover representing the book, how often do RPG books sit on store shelves in places where they will be seen by gaming neophytes in this day and age? It's mostly going to be bought online by people in the hobby. It's pretty rare for my first impression of a game to be seeing it sitting on a shelf.

Quote from: Lynn;923546Among internet dwelling rpg players (or people who just like to talk about it), it is established that there is a collective of people who have invested a lot of themselves into women and "&" (insert your favorite group) issues.

Since this group does exist (exact numbers unclear), and the OSR game market has matured to the point that it is really, really hard to differentiate a particular D&D clone, it makes sense to do whatever you can to incite as much talk about it as possible and provoke controversy. This isn't Blue Rose, so the game didn't already have a history of it to draw on. But maybe you can guilt some people who have very vocally jumped on this particular political bandwagon as a self appointed champion into buying it, or give them an illusionary feel-good-about-themselves tingle that buying an unnecessary leisure product is somehow making the world a better place.

It does make a lot of marketing sense. It is a hard thing to market a product in a mature market space, especially when your product has no substantially differentiating features.

That seems fair enough - so then it's a way to get SJW inclined gamers (mostly male, I suspect) to give the company some money, for very little work.

Quote from: Baulderstone;923587As for the cover representing the book, how often do RPG books sit on store shelves in places where they will be seen by gaming neophytes in this day and age? It's mostly going to be bought online by people in the hobby. It's pretty rare for my first impression of a game to be seeing it sitting on a shelf.

OK... then it will be seen, in passing, on DTRPG or somesuch. Probably a smallish image... so harder to make out what it is... might look more like a vagina, as some are saying. I might be disappointed it's not a vagina game... or not.

Quote from: jeff37923;923584I agree with Whitewings on that.

I am coming from the belief that cover art is a form of advertising. The art should cause the casual reader to consider purchasing the book. This current cover does not do that.

I strongly suspect that casual readers would be more likel to consider purchasing a book with that cover than with an TSR-era imitation.

Quote from: AsenRG;923611I strongly suspect that casual readers would be more likel to consider purchasing a book with that cover than with an TSR-era imitation.

Pick it up to look through, yes.  Purchase it?  I doubt it.

Quote from: TristramEvans;923583Honestly, I'm skeptical that "not enough girls game" is even a thing, besides an invented problem in the heads of the OB. For the 30 odd years I've been gaming there's always been plenty of girl players.

My anecdotal experience is similar to yours in a shorter time frame (20 years), but that's all it is, anecdotal. I wouldn't be surprised if the overall percentage of women in the hobby remains quite low.

My past self would have considered this an unacceptably unfair state of affairs that must have been mostly men's fault in some way. Women Are Wonderful* after all, gotta polish that pedestal for them, maybe make a big show of installing an escalator on it, I'm sure it won't feel awkward for anyone.

My present self wonders why I've never heard of any outrage or identity-politics fretting about the lack of men in hobbies like knitting or candle-making. Hmmm...
Amusingly, my mother is connected to the world of quilting and has mentioned that a small but influential influx of men into that hobby over the past decade has changed it... for the worse in her opinion. These men are apparently highly competitive and win a disproportionate number of quilting competitions. This then pushes everyone else to either become 'uncomfortably' competitive to keep up or withdraw a little from the scene.

But I suppose that's all anecdotal too.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22Women_are_wonderful%22_effect