Why is rpg rulebook art so notoriously bad? Pic related...

Why is rpg rulebook art so notoriously bad? Pic related, I don't know who they got to do the in-book artwork for Dungeon World, but comeon...it's not that hard to find a good artist.

Because good art is expensive and RPGs make fuck all money

...

I think that's great.

It's not universally the case. Check out Fantasycraft's art. Like 9/10 of it is some great shit.

that seems fine?
I don't understand the complaint.

Are you angry they aren't action figures?
I've seen books with art that was exclusively action figures.

But this is a drawing, which is my more cup of tea.

It’s really not as great as you say, though black and white books tend to look better. The only book that really stood out for its art that I have seen was Degenesis.

The real thing that no RPG book seems to ever get is how to layout a legible page. I think most books have colored texture behind the text, and frequently they print some of the text on top of art assets. I really hate how little effort seems to be given to make a easily read book.

>What is subjective taste?

Proving my point admirably. It's art, you dumb fucks. One man's masterpiece is another man's fridge art.

Don't come in here with "muh subjectivity" . Some art is obviously better than other art. There is good art and bad art.

Because nothing about Dungeon World is well designed? Why should the art be otherwise?

Also if you say that something like OPs pic is good art, then you have shit taste in art and need to read more Loomis and pick up a pencil sometime.

What if I think it's just okay?

Then you're a numale roastie cuck faggot and probably from [ANOTHER WEBSITE]

The later 1e and early 2e editions had great cover art. Granted some of the internal stuff wasn't great, it was at least good.

Same could be said for 5e. The cover art has been good, and there are a few standouts inside but most is middling.

>Why is rpg rulebook art so notoriously bad?
Money. Good artists will come at a premium. Bad ones won't. And since RPGs are mostly a rules-based hobby, too many devs think that book art doesn't matter.

This is something a lot of devs get wrong, especially when it comes to crowdfunding. I'm working on a project and honestly, we're pondering whether funding high quality artwork is actually higher priority than a printed book. We're planning on paying out of pocket for art assets to use during the campaign, but a lot of data suggests that having an attractive cover, layout and artwork massively increases the appeal of an RPG, regardless of the strength of its rules.

not strictly RPG but holy jesus this guy needs to get an artist in.

The art gets my vote.

Let me put it to you this way: would 40k have ever garnered the loyal following it has if it was a game played with cheap plastic board game tokens instead of miniatures meant to be painted up, and had rules books with absolutely no art in them?

But GURPS art is the best.

That's so quaint that I think its perfect

>not posting the halfling bard

But it's very hard to find a good artist who works cheap and meets deadlines.

It'd gather the following it deserves.

Some companies do it right.

But that's from The Autist's Guide to Glorantha, not a rulebook.

But what defines good art depends person to person, some people think the amount of time is the value of something, others think its about how well it emulates real life, manny the opposite. Some even argue that its the meaning that defines art and that a guy sucking his own dick is way better than a carefully sculptured dragon. Personally I find aesthetic imagery and good colour code to be paradime to good work, not complexity or time.

...

As someone who makes a lot of RPGs, I can guarantee that the cover art is your post important asset. Most people who would otherwise be interested in the game won't pick it up for the initial examination of the cover art doesn't grab them, and people who might not have even been interested in the game may become fans specifically because they like the cover art.

>rulebook art
>bad
You know nothing, OP. Look at this beautiful fucker.

I'm an artist and sometimes I look through a rulebook and I'm just thinking "how the fuck did this person get hired to do this? Is the creator blind?"

Pretty much this. Also, I’ve noticed a lot of these “freeform” RPGs then to have bad, tumblr-sequel art as a whole, like DW and FATE. Unsurprisingly, they also have a ton of bitchy social justice fanatics behind them as well.

FATE has good art, though? Some of the third party splats don't, but the primary books have really high production values.

Beggars can't be losers and most artists insist on 70 bucks per image.

>FATE has good art
Shhhh, user wants to live in a world where every game that doesn't require a three-hour resolution per fight scene is problematic.

todd lockwood is goat

The guy who did the cover and some of the internal art has a nice fun style. But then he quit and they got some Joe Fuck Nuts to do rest of the art like the one you posted and it's hideous as fuck.

Can you explain why the OP image is "hideous as fuck"?

>anatomy
>rendering
>proportions
>values

Pick one

Insufficiently thick armor, not enough pauldrons, not enough glowing bits.

Inversely, not enough tits, not enough thighs. Minimal ass. The list goes on.

That looks fine to me, user.

>freeform

>DW

Be a brainlet somewhere else.

...

5e's cover art is garbage.

The art for the 4e magic book are some real knee slappers

Is this Rick and Morty?

Then tell us your favorite cover so we can make fun of your shit taste.

good luck

>Beggars can't be losers
u wot m8

man, even OP was better.

How about this instead: you explain what, if anything, is good about 5e's cover art.

>ITT: Literally everything about systems I like is perfect, literally everything about systems you like shit
Just like ever other thread on Veeky Forums that isn't a general