This is inspired by seeing one of the preview books of the new edition of Dungeons & Dragons.
I get that the look of it is probably referring to all kinds of video games and anime that I don't know about, but -
I would've thought that Harry Potter was more popular than most of those things, and it doesn't seem to be trying to evoke that.
Ditto the Lord of the Rings films. That was a while ago, but again, pretty popular, and unless they're going for really young kids you'd think that there'd be people in their target market who'd have seen them, and would think of D&D type adventures as 'looking like' that.
And for that matter it doesn't look much like Order of the Stick - OK it's obviously satirical, but then so are a lot of games - and anyway is there a serious fantasy comic that more people read than read Order of the Stick?
I'm not one of these guys that thinks that old D&D looked better, and I'm assuming they have actual qualifications and know what they're doing, and I get that it's not meant for me, but...my uninformed layman's idea would be that they'd think about "what stuff in popular culture are our target market going to want to replicate", and then have art that gets across that you can do that.
My kids-who range from six to eight, one boy, two girls-see the Spiderwick Chronicles, the LoTR video games, and movies, as well as Harry potter as the modern face of fantasy-with a little Disney and Japanamation mixed in for the good.
My nephews, who range from 6 to 11, numbering 4 I think, agree with those choices and added Strong Hold Crusader, which is some video game apparently.
World of Wacraft, Lineage... that sort of thinks, so it's not suprising, tah WoTC brings up some demon-like and dragon-like races as core races, while cutting out boring races like gnomes...
Not having gnomes doesn't strike me as weird. Having half-dragon/demon babes seems to make sense. But having halflings who don't look Lord of the Rings-y I don't get.
Oh yeah, I forgot about Disney. And on that note I guess the first Narnia film must have done OK because they're making another one - so the lack of talking animals (along those lines - half-dragon babes being a seperate thing I think) can be added to the list.
The fantasy genre is evolving indeed. Western fantasy is influenced with east fantasy (anime/manga), the new medias like computers have its influence. But some anchors - like Lord of the Rings still stays which means the evolution is still quite slow, because some basic archetypes and clichés stays which provides continuity and common ground.
I also don't mind neither WoW influence nor dragonborn and thiefling races in D&D 4e. They both have it own aesthetics.
High School Musical. Most of the kids here watch those movies. It ain't no Fame if you ask me .
Edit: Sorry not really fantasy....for the fantasy stuff it's Harry Potter and Anime.
Regards,
David R
Quote from: AlnagI also don't mind neither WoW influence nor dragonborn and thiefling races in D&D 4e. They both have it own aesthetics.
My :confused: isn't the presence of those things, it's the absence of other things.
Age of Fable: Absence of what...?
Quote from: FritzsAge of Fable: Absence of what...?
The Lord of the Rings films, Harry Potter, Order of the Stick, Buffy, fairies, Pirates of the Carribean, The Chronicles of Narnia films (do kids watch Doctor Who?)...
In general, things that a reasonable number of their target audience presumably likes that could be a way of selling the idea of Dungeons & Dragons to them.
Presumably that's why they put World of Warcraft and anime in there, I'm wondering why the same idea wasn't applied to various other things.
And yes, the result of doing so would be a strange mish-mash. But no more so than combining Lord of the Rings, Conan, and martial arts movies (then setting it underground, and adding monstrous Jello).
QuoteWorld of Wacraft, Lineage... that sort of thinks, so it's not suprising, tah WoTC brings up some demon-like and dragon-like races as core races, while cutting out boring races like gnomes...
It's kind of funny that WoTC is cutting out a race D&D used to have, but WoW still has- gnomes...
feralwolf: Gnomes from WoW are a lot different from DnD gnomes...
Fritzs: Indeed they are different. I did not mean to imply they were the same; I meant to say that WoTC was getting rid of a player race called "gnome", while WoW still has a player race called "gnome." :)
The only fantasy my kid brother really into is ./hack, Final Fantasy, and Kingdom Hearts.
Quote from: Age of FableNot having gnomes doesn't strike me as weird. Having half-dragon/demon babes seems to make sense. But having halflings who don't look Lord of the Rings-y I don't get.
I'd say this is mostly due to them wanting to clearly delineate their halflings from hobbits to avoid any legal wranglings. Elves, dwarves, gnomes, and even orcs have precedence in myth, legend, and literature, whereas Tolkien pretty much created hobbits out of whole cloth. D&D's creators and subsequent designers could easily point to any number of sources for their elves and dwarves that pre-date Tolkien; they really can't do that with halflings. I think it's pretty much that simple.
Quote from: ColonelHardissonI'd say this is mostly due to them wanting to clearly delineate their halflings from hobbits to avoid any legal wranglings. Elves, dwarves, gnomes, and even orcs have precedence in myth, legend, and literature, whereas Tolkien pretty much created hobbits out of whole cloth. D&D's creators and subsequent designers could easily point to any number of sources for their elves and dwarves that pre-date Tolkien; they really can't do that with halflings. I think it's pretty much that simple.
Except it really isn't, because that legal issue was settled long ago, so its not like they can fear renewed litigation over a matter that was already resolved.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPunditExcept it really isn't, because that legal issue was settled long ago, so its not like they can fear renewed litigation over a matter that was already resolved.
RPGPundit
Regardless, they seem to be making an effort to distinguish halflings from hobbits even more in recent years. The legal issue was resolved by TSR not referring to them as "hobbits" in their game books. Maybe with the movies so successful so recently, they want to head-off any possible appearance of infringement. :shrug: I mean, hell, Disney made Marvel put pants on Howard the Duck to make him resemble Donald less, and Marvel has changed the character's appearance even more in recent years, to the point he hardly resembles his old self, without any discernible pressure from Disney that I'm aware of. They probably just want to avoid any possible headaches.
Pauldrons. Huge ass pauldrons the size of box kites.
I don't get it with the gnomes either. If it were up to me, halflings would have been dropped and gnomes would have stayed.
Actually, those little watter rats... oh, sorry... I mean halflings... are pretty cute. 3E halflings were bit like gypsies... now they add another level of nomadism, I guess. Well, it is interesting.
Quote from: ColonelHardissonRegardless, they seem to be making an effort to distinguish halflings from hobbits even more in recent years.
I don't think it's really a concious effort.
I think it's due to the influx of different & younger, writing & artist teams over time.
I may not be totally clear in my line of thought, but I'll try...
D&D is slowly but surely moving away from is "pure" roots in Tolkien and
old school Sword & Sorcery.
Howard, Lieber, Moorcock, Vance and Ol' Tolky, are being supplanted by imagry from - the Jordans and Salvatores of modern fantasy, along with Final Fantasy, Warcraft, other PC games, and a dash of japanse anime.
Just campare the art of 1st and 2nd edition to 3.x and now 4e and you can see a shift. Yes, the quality of artist has gotten better, but they are also influenced by different things.
4e is more of a kitchen sink gonzo fantasy game than AD&D was. But this is an aspect of the game that is not new. The kitchen sink aspect of D&D has always been there, just that in the beginning its main influences were those I listed above.
But now D&D encompasses such a vast array of differing fantasy influences that the look of the game is bound to be different than it was in its earlier years.
.
Quote from: JaegerI don't think it's really a concious effort.
I think it's due to the influx of different & younger, writing & artist teams over time.
I may not be totally clear in my line of thought, but I'll try...
D&D is slowly but surely moving away from is "pure" roots in Tolkien and old school Sword & Sorcery.
Howard, Lieber, Moorcock, Vance and Ol' Tolky, are being supplanted by imagry from - the Jordans and Salvatores of modern fantasy, along with Final Fantasy, Warcraft, other PC games, and a dash of japanse anime.
Just campare the art of 1st and 2nd edition to 3.x and now 4e and you can see a shift. Yes, the quality of artist has gotten better, but they are also influenced by different things.
4e is more of a kitchen sink gonzo fantasy game than AD&D was. But this is an aspect of the game that is not new. The kitchen sink aspect of D&D has always been there, just that in the beginning its main influences were those I listed above.
But now D&D encompasses such a vast array of differing fantasy influences that the look of the game is bound to be different than it was in its earlier years.
.
As someone younger than many one the board, and someone who is not at all interested in Tolkien...I'll give you an idea of what fantasy looks like to me.
First of all: D&D 3. The first D&D with a signature "look".
Warcraft II was my first foray into Fantasy that I actually enjoyed quite a bit.
Final Fantasy: Men in weird clothes fighting colorful monsters with swords made out of water is standard fare. No justification...it just is.
Star Wars: It's as much Fantasy as it is Sci-Fi.
Fanatasy to me, is mostly style over substance. The Orcs don't need a reason to be killed, they just have to be killed in an entertaining manner.
Quote from: KrakaJakFirst of all: D&D 3. The first D&D with a signature "look".
:confused: Here's me thinking that OD&D, AD&D1e and BECMI D&D all had their own "signature looks"...Messrs Sutherland, Otus, Parkinson and Elmore, et. al. take your bows...
Quote from: JaegerHoward, Lieber, Moorcock, Vance and Ol' Tolky, are being supplanted by imagry from - the Jordans and Salvatores of modern fantasy, along with Final Fantasy, Warcraft, other PC games, and a dash of japanse anime.
(http://www.audiobooksonline.com/media/Wheel_of_Time_Book_7_A_Crown_of_Swords_Robert_Jordan_unabridged_compact_discs.jpg)
(http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~karlh/book9/bigcover.jpg)
These are a couple of Robert Jordan novels. To me, in D&D terms they look much more like Forgotten Realms (except without 'big 80s hair') than like D&D 4th or even 3rd edition.
It makes me think the same thing as with Harry Potter etc: you'd imagine that they'd want D&D to appeal to Robert Jordan fans, and yet they don't seem to have tried to do that at all.
They are not trying to appeal to a particular author fan base.
I think there are 2 elements at work. The influence of the designers. When D&D came out the designers were wargamers and linked into Tolkein the pulps and the whole post war sci-fi fantasy thing. When you design something as 'generic' as D&D (that is to say a general Sci-fi / fantasy game and not a conversion of a specific book or film) you own influences are going to be the drivers. The current crop of artists and designers are influences by all the stuff going on here they can't really get into the head of a 13 year old any more than they can get into the head of an old school 1960's wargamer. Its their own influences they are bringing to the table.
The second thing is the Computer Game/MMO/WoW imagery. This kind of fantasy graphic with heroes that carry swords 6 feet long and 4 feet wide and have size 23 feet and wear armour that must be a foot thick has come from Japanese animation and Computer Games, via Warhammer and those chunky citadel miniatures into Warcraft (I am sure the esthetic for the Orcs in Warcraft came out of White Dwarf/Warhammer and citadel infulenced orc figures) and from there into MMO and WoW. This is the fantasy standard for most people int eh game space I think and it makes sense for the art directors etc involved with 4e to look to that style as that is their target market.
Compare this dragonborn //www.wocstudios.com/images/4e12.jpg to this //www.freewebs.com/fonzys/aggghhh%20ork.gif to blog.cleverly.com/misc/coriantum40.jpg see anythign similar....
then compare them to a typical fantasy novel cover... say the Jorden book above or //www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/images/n5/n27924.jpg or whatever...
There is a govening esthetic here and its not one that comes out of the fantasy novel publishing world.
Quote from: jibbajibbaThey are not trying to appeal to a particular author fan base.
That would be a logical conclusion. If true, it seems a bit of a self-defeating move. Actually it seems a lot of a self-defeating move.
Quote from: jibbajibbaThe current crop of artists and designers are influences by all the stuff going on here they can't really get into the head of a 13 year old any more than they can get into the head of an old school 1960's wargamer.
Maybe not, but whoever makes the choice who to employ can employ people who can. Whoever did those covers is presumably out there and hire-able.
Quote:confused: Here's me thinking that OD&D, AD&D1e and BECMI D&D all had their own "signature looks"...Messrs Sutherland, Otus, Parkinson and Elmore, et. al. take your bows...
However, their artwork "style" was not unified, you had some semi-realistic artwork, like the covers, crossed with unprofessional looking sketchwork in the books. Some Sunday Comic stuff strewn thoughout...etc. Not to say some of it wasn't endearing, but it was all over the place in terms of style and quality.
D&D 3+ look was unified,
For what its worth, Amazon has a list of its Top Selling Fantasy Books (http://www.amazon.com/Fantasy-Science-Fiction-Books/b/ref=amb_link_2?ie=UTF8&node=16190&pf_rd_p=236701601&pf_rd_s=browse&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_i=25&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=19ZMCZ193486VMPX3A7R).
Excluding vampires and other modern fantasy, top authors include Phillip Pullman (The Golden Compass & sequels), George R.R. Martin (Song of Ice and Fire), Patrick Rothfuss (The Name of the Wind), Joanna Rowling (Harry Potter), and Lois Mcmaster Bujold (The Sharing Knife).
Quote from: jhkimFor what its worth, Amazon has a list of its Top Selling Fantasy Books (http://www.amazon.com/Fantasy-Science-Fiction-Books/b/ref=amb_link_2?ie=UTF8&node=16190&pf_rd_p=236701601&pf_rd_s=browse&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_i=25&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=19ZMCZ193486VMPX3A7R).
It's noticeable that most of them seem to be about vampires/werewolves in modern times.
Quote from: KrakaJakHowever, their artwork "style" was not unified, you had some semi-realistic artwork, like the covers, crossed with unprofessional looking sketchwork in the books. Some Sunday Comic stuff strewn thoughout...etc. Not to say some of it wasn't endearing, but it was all over the place in terms of style and quality.
D&D 3+ look was unified,
OD&D had a very distinctive art style. It was all done by one or two artists. Yes, it was very amateur and unprofessional, but some old timers still get nostalgic about this "signature look".
AD&D1e was indeed more diverse, and had a mix of Sutherland and Trampier's cartoony stuff with more realistic styles. Diverse in style and quality, so this is probably what you are thinking about in the above comments. Still, it melded together into a whole, and most readers didn't consider the cartoons or sketches out of place. Different expectations at the time.
The Mentzer B/E and the thre box sets following them which make up BECMI had a distinct unified art style, defined primarily by Elmore. These books don't fit your characterisation at all, as the art is of generally uniform quality and similar in style. Clearly some art direction has gone on here.
The same applies for AD&D2e. Consistent quality according to the standards of the time, and a uniform look. Sometimes it's hard to tell what is an Elmore piece and what is a Parker piece.
So 3e was not the first edition to have clear art direction, presumably enforced by editorial oversight, consistent quality, and an attempt to portray a specific vision of the game. AD&D1e might have been the only prior edition to lack this, and this is arguable.
On the original question: I'm surprised nobody has yet mentioned Avatar: The Last Airbender (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar:_The_Last_Airbender).
Man, I can only hope that "kids these days" think of fantasy as being as rich and nuanced as Avatar. I'm a huge fan :D
Quote from: TonyLBOn the original question: I'm surprised nobody has yet mentioned Avatar: The Last Airbender (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar:_The_Last_Airbender).
Man, I can only hope that "kids these days" think of fantasy as being as rich and nuanced as Avatar. I'm a huge fan :D
Avatar is brilliant, and from what I understand has been very successful.
Its also really the next step of the anime-craze, with the western world taking anime and remaking it in a western mold (ironically, given Avatar's very "eastern" setting).
RPGPundit
Quote from: ColonelHardissonRegardless, they seem to be making an effort to distinguish halflings from hobbits even more in recent years. The legal issue was resolved by TSR not referring to them as "hobbits" in their game books. Maybe with the movies so successful so recently, they want to head-off any possible appearance of infringement. :shrug:
Or maybe it's just an organic outgrowth of wanting to expand their own vision and their own identity, without just being a Lord of the Rings rip-off. I don't have a periscope inside their heads; I'm only presenting a possiblity.
Quote from: EngineOr maybe it's just an organic outgrowth of wanting to expand their own vision and their own identity, without just being a Lord of the Rings rip-off. I don't have a periscope inside their heads; I'm only presenting a possiblity.
IMHO the job of a role-playing game isn't to rip off Lord of the Rings, or to avoid ripping it off - it's to give other people the tools to rip it off or not rip it off.