Ugly cover for Lankhmar

[Cowboy]

Artwork is really not that important.

To you.

But I think it's pretty clear from the reactions that it's a great deal more important to some. Me included.

The front cover is supposed to send a message to the buyer about what they can expect to find inside. I know, "you shouldn't judge a book by its cover" but you shouldn't judge a person by his or her appearance either, yet we all do that.*

The cover of the book is supposed to sell the book. Unfortunately, this particular cover looks roughly like what I'd expect to find gracing the cover of an RPG book from the late seventies or early eighties, and my reason would have a hard struggle against my instinct in order to tell me that this is not the kind of quality I can expect to find inside as well.

Once the book has been bought, the interior art also serves the importannt purpose of telling me what the imaginary world described in its pages actually looks like. Again, this may be of little or no importance to you, but it's important to me and, judging by the number of threads we see on RPG art on forums, to a great number of other people as well.

Besides, if I blow 350,- DKr on a book so thin that the hard cover makes up a significant part of its total thickness, everything about that book had better be top-notch. Writing, binding, printing, editing, the works.

Because there's plenty of other RPG books out there competing for my money and many of them are very, very attractive to look at and have excellent writing.

*As Oscar Wilde put it: "It is only shalllow people who do not judge by appearances."

 

[Kagan Altar]

I'm actually surprised by the amount of negative input regarding the Lankhmar cover myself. I don't think it's a great piece of art, but I don't hate it either. I really like the logo and the overall "darkness" of the cover. It could be much better, no question about it.

Now, it seems the opinions of the fans (not only here but elsewhere on the usenet, like on RPGnet) are overwhelmingly negative. It looks like the cover has to be changed, if at all possible. Also, I've read Mongoose has been known to put placeholders as "covers" of future publications. Maybe this is the case here?

 

[soltakss]

You don't mention inner illustrations. There is usually one on each other page (or at least one for 3 pages). You don't only read an RPG book like a common pictureless book as illustrations and arts belong to the fantasy you want to give to your world.

Well, I like maps and anything with some nice black and white or even colour maps gets my vote. Apart from that, a couple of little box illustrations can set the tone of the supplement.

Mythic Russia (HeroQuest) had some nice illustrations that did capture the feel of medieval Russia, so I see what you are getting at. I prefer the pen and ink illustrations of early RQ and the WBRM/NG games as they are dynamic and show an interesting version of Glorantha.

But, given the choice between a picture book such as the excellent Path of the Damned comic book series and an unillustrated book with a lot of detail, then I'd take the unillustrated book any day.

But, cover art? I honestly can't see what people are getting so riled about. Having said that, I can't see why people don't care about simple factual errors either, so it is clear that different people have vastly different criteria as to what is important in a FRP supplement.

For me, the most important things are:
1. Interesting and useable information
2. Factual accuracy
3. Consistency with earlier supplements, except where something has
specifically been clarified/changed
4. Nice maps
5. Well laid out and clearly readable
6. Reasonably priced
7. Well Illustrated internally
8. Cover art

I'd rather everything be softbacked and the size of the Gloranthan Classics, personally. So, If they'd have put the core rulebook, companion and monsters in one volume and charged 35 quid for it, I'd have been satisfied.

 

[Exubae]

For me, the most important things are:
1. Interesting and useable information
2. Factual accuracy
3. Consistency with earlier supplements, except where something has
specifically been clarified/changed
4. Nice maps
5. Well laid out and clearly readable
6. Reasonably priced
7. Well Illustrated internally
8. Cover art

Agree with your ordering - but if your going to have art you might as well have art that correctly reflects the setting. (Which on a whole it does)
On the cover perspective, the better the cover the more likely you'll catch the eye of casual buyers... it'll stand out from the usual overly endowed cover pics.
If you put amaterish pics on the cover you tend to assume amaterish content (which hasn't been the case so far)
We want something that catches the eye of people to attract new blood, so Mongoose can rake in the cash and produce more books.

So far I've been a little disappointed/surprised at the cover art:
Core books are ok... dull, but ok.
Lankhmar looks like a good preliminary sketch - I get the feel that the finished piece should be really cool. Its a good composition - it does capture the feel of Lankhmar ... it just doesn't look finished.

Even the polished cover of GTSA, the artist's understanding of anatomy seems muddled. (dodgy stances and twisted arm positions)

It both cases it might be an idea for the artist to get some models/friends to pose for them rather than just relying on imagination, especially when concerning human form. Otherwise you just end up with odd/unnatural/wooden poses as can be seen in both pics.

 

[The King]

I'd rather everything be softbacked and the size of the Gloranthan Classics, personally. So, If they'd have put the core rulebook, companion and monsters in one volume and charged 35 quid for it, I'd have been satisfied.

Personaly I find for instance the covers of all Avalon Hill's RQ3 books very enjoyable with an excellent note for "River of cradles" to depict the life by the river as well as the rulebook who shows us a magnificient picture of Griselda and her friend as described in Big Rubble.
Not that is a matter of life and death (I exagerate somewhat) but a great cover belong to the whole which make a sourcebook unforgettable.
If I played with minis I would expect the same, not just grossly sculpted tin figures but with a lot of details.

 

[mthomason]

My personal opinion: I couldn't care less whether it was plain black (or white) with white (or black) text on the cover, as I tend to have my purchases planned before the cover pic even goes online. Even if I get the chance to see the cover, it could be bright pink and green stripes and not put me off buying a rulebook I wanted.

My business sense however tells me that a good cover helps sell the game to impulse buyers. Again, personally I've never bought a book on the strength of the cover... but I know some people will.

The problem of course is that one person's "good cover" is someone else's "ugly mess".

EDIT: One occasion I did buy a book on the strength of the cover - the special edition Call of Cthulhu rulebook that was out a few years back (not the limited one unfortunately).

 

[The King]

EDIT: One occasion I did buy a book on the strength of the cover - the special edition Call of Cthulhu rulebook that was out a few years back (not the limited one unfortunately).

I thought you would state you were enticed to purchase the Playboy'special edition because the cover was great. :roll: :wink:

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

As for the Lankhmar books shown cover.. it doesnt do much for me I have to say, but I also have the benefit in this instance of knowing ahead of time that the content is good and well written.

Which brings me to my point. This brilliant book (and I say that unseen, but I have seen this guy's writing before, and snippets of this very book on this very forum) deserves some brilliant art - inside and out.

Holy hell! Thanks for that, guys.

Made my day.

 

[Ahokko]

Well, well...

Ehem, I find it very strange that people are downgrading the importance of the art. If you have got a date with a girl it is very important what you say, but it's also important how do you look (sorry about the bad english), got it?

Everybody can see that the sketch of the cover and the lay-out is very bad. If you like it you just havent seen better. But the professional opinion is that it is just a sketch. Dont worry, I think after the MRQ core rulebook Mongoose has learned something. Or they'll have learn.

The role of the visuals are very important. Put all the systems in a line. What would be the best system ever? Rolemaster? DD? …hmm, Boothill? WFRP? – Never. WFRP? - But it was very succesful. One of my favorite games. THe system? Bad. Bad. The combat is even worse than DD. The feeling? 10+! Thanks to visuals.

This is Lankhmar. It's not a small unknown, distant, small village somewhere. It's our city of adventure! So, let's demand that MP will invest some money that it deserves to the game!

 

[Kagan Altar]

I for one think that art is very important as far as my purchases are concerned. A great cover goes a long, long way to convey the ambiance I want to feel when I am reading the rulebook (this is not a paradox: the cover prepares me psychologically to like or dislike what's in there. I don't consider it to be naive or picky. I just think it's human).

However, calling the Lankhmar cover is -I think- over the top. It's spite indeed. It may not be up to the modern standards in terms of covers on the RPG market today (and let's be frank: I think it is not, at least the way it is layed out), but calling it "ugly" is an extreme.

 

[Trifletraxor]

Yes, don't buy Lhankmar, buy Glorantha supplements. RuneQuest is meant for Glorantha, not other places!

8)
SGL.

 

[burdock]

just drik rotgut



it hrelps


it helps alot


(hic)

 

[weasel_fierce]

I play GURPS, I dont mind bad art

The RQ art has been improving though. Legendary heroes and Glorantha 2nd age are both very nice looking.


Is this the actual cover though, or is it just a placeholder kind of thing ?

 

[Quire]

calling it "ugly" is an extreme.

I wouldn't use the word 'ugly' myself either Ben, but it's hardly extreme. 'Grotesque' or 'repellent' or 'abhorrent' would be over the top, but 'ugly' merely indicates you don't find it to your taste.

- Q