Eternal Champion Cover Art

[CharlieMonster]

I know I don't always make with the positive comment, but is the Cover Art for the Elric & Hawkmoon Rulebook's gorgeous or what? It's good to see what appears to be a great improvement in the quality of the cover art of late. Pirates was a good 'un to (Garrgh!).

 

[CthulhuFnord]

I quite liked the look of Pirates myself.

 

[Chardros The Reaper]

Yes, beautiful stuff indeed! I think, besides the artists' talent, a lot of that credit goes to the source materail. Moorcock's writings are so much more evocative than standard, D&D style fantasy. Just like the artwork for Conan is spot-on, so too is the Eternal Champion stuff.

 

[Rurik]

Three thumbs up here for the cover art.

 

[Tim]

the Conan Art is excilent which has made me wonder why the RQ (especially the Lankmar are was so bad. I'm glad to see Elric and Hawkmoon a step up from RQ.

 

[Vagabond]

Actually, the Elric cover is the one thing I can honestly say I do not like.
His face is too round, the ears are too round, and he looks too beefy.
Oh well, I can always out one of my trusty Miles Teves Chessex bookcovers
on it ...

-V

 

[Standing-Stone]

I agree with you there. He's meant to be sickly.

He just looks way to heroic in that picture there.

I would have used a picture like this.

 

[weasel_fierce]

I loved the covers on the old White Wolf publishing paperbacks.

But I like this one, and I love the hawkmoon one

 

[CthulhuFnord]

That last one is a bit cheesecake. Is that a thong he's wearing? :shock:

 

[Da Boss]

Hmm I agree was looking forward to yet another edition of the Elric / Stormbringer - game - i have all the others but thought the cover very un Elric.............

 

[Standing-Stone]

I realise and understand what you mean by the second picture I put up there. Though, it's his weakened posture, on his nees almost supporting himself with the sword that I want you attention drawn to. Not the revealing almost suggestive clothing he wearing.

Here's another picture, where the artwork is far superior. Wearing more clothing. His face looks more drawn, gaunt here. Despite the wirey muscalature of his physic. He is seen to have his sword lowered . Unable or unwilling to hold it up without actualley looking defeated.

 

[CthulhuFnord]

I was mostly joshing with you on that one.

I realise and understand what you mean by the second picture I put up there. Though, it's his weakened posture, on his nees almost supporting himself with the sword that I want you attention drawn to. Not the revealing almost suggestive clothing he wearing.

quote]

I do like his pose and expression while holding stormbringer in that one. It brings to mind the bit from the Fortress of the pearl. Something about regarding the blade with hatred and sensuality.

 

[Vagabond]

Moorcock and I had a brief discussion over the preview cover a while ago
(it was leaked on this site). He pretty concurred with me, even stating that
it looked like Elric needed a trip to jenny Craig. I hope he contacted Mongoose
and this is not the final ...

-V

 

[Rurik]

Moorcock and I had a brief discussion over the preview cover a while ago
(it was leaked on this site). He pretty concurred with me, even stating that
it looked like Elric needed a trip to jenny Craig. I hope he contacted Mongoose
and this is not the final ...

-V

This whole cover thing went on back when it was first leaked (thread here for reference - there are some other Elric Depictions from other sources as well).

General concensus back then I think was that he was a bit too beefy. That being said Elric is often depicted as way too muscular for his descriptions. The Quilliams cover for the mongoose book is not as bad as some I have seen. He may not be anemic looking but he's not quite Conan the Governator either.

I'd have preferred a more sickly looking figure myself, but really the cover art is quite good in all other respects, and better than some of the other RQ releases to date.

 

[Sabbak]

For what I have seen, artwork is often a problem in anglo-saxon RpG. I'm always impressed by the level difference (or is it just sensitivity?) between, for exemple french and US RpG artwork. In my personnal collection (and I have MANY RpG, both american, french and spanish...) the french artwork is roughly 2 to 3 levels higher!
And I'm NOT french! :wink:

But it is perhaps only a question of sensitivity and tastes...

I personnaly don't like the new Elric and Hawkmoon cover art (Hawkmoon is especially... er... let's say looking at the cover gives me headache!).
Even the interior art is globaly medium. Ranging from "good" to "very bad". :?

And PLEASE Mongoose staff: tell the artists that ornithopters DON'T have a propeller!!!
We all know this is completely illogical, okay, but Moorcocks ornis just use their wings like birds!
:evil:

 

[sidkfjjteidlkkf]

I do not understand these comments about art in the books. It is not the art we buyu, it is the info in the book...

 

[duncan_disorderly]

I do not understand these comments about art in the books. It is not the art we buyu, it is the info in the book...

...But we pay fo rthe art in the books (The artists don't work for free) and if there is art in the book, then we would expect it to match the descriptions in the book and/or other sources. A picture, after all is worth a thousand words, and if the picture is wrong, how reliable can we expect the text to be? This, for instance was the problem with the "pig faced" trolls - We have known for over 20 years what Gloranthan trolls look like, from the descriptions and Lisa Free illustrations in the original (RQ2) Trollpak. Pictures that looked like Orcs from the original AD&D Monster Manual do nothing to reassure "old hands" that Mongoose are "a safe pair of hands", and since a picture is easily seen on a quick flick through the book in a games store, and the text requires some time to read, you can see that art is very important when someone is making the decison as to whether or not to buy the book.

 

[sidkfjjteidlkkf]

I understand what you are saying, but which is more important - what a creature looks like or what the stats of the creature are, when it comes to game terms?

It is nice to have artwork (I admit), but lets assume someone buying a novel for its artwork...

I guess I am saying, I am creative enough to imagine what a creation looks like, but I am lacking in the abilty to create a game system....

 

[Sabbak]

I do not understand these comments about art in the books. It is not the art we buyu, it is the info in the book...

Partially wrong (IMHO of course...).

Of course the main thing is what is writen (good rules, background full of "flavour", if possible: good introductory adventure and so on...) BUT I consider that artwork IS important:

1) Artwork often gives the "mood" of a game (simply remember the first Vampire books).

2) A nice picture can make your brain and imagination take off! I have invented a whole adventure based on one drawing many times.

3) Poor artwork gives bad impression. It's juste like in the real life: try to pick up a job in the bank wearing dirty jeans and a full-of-tomato-sauce Slayer T-shirt. (err... it's perhaps not so damning in the game industry!!! :wink: )

4) As already said: we pay for good art and a nice product (otherwise the PDF "industry" would have destroyed the "real book printing industry" a long time ago).
It's always painfull to see my neighbour and RpG player drawing much better on a corner of a pizza box than some "professionnal" artists on a book I've paid 30 or 40 euros...

So, yes, definitely, artwork IS important!

 

[sidkfjjteidlkkf]

Yes, it is important, but not as important as the content. Though it may be misleading, many games and other things had bad artwork, but the games were actually very good...

Cover art is most important, interior art (to me) is not. For one thing, with border art in RPG books, it limits space for more information.

See what I am saying?