Recent Posts
As I flipped through the pages of PF #6 after receiving it and got to the pages of the bestiary, I was stunned.
The art there is absolutly fantastic!
Who the hell is the guy that did these amazing illustrations?
It is a shame that there's no 'art by'-tag anywhere in the article and that I don't even know who to praise for this outstanding work of art.
I love this guys style, his use of colours and his breathtaking designs.
This one's a keeper, I'd really love to see more of his/her work in PF.
I'm sure that there are some readers that don't like this, but I guess this is always the case when it comes to highly unique styles and design.
I remember the complaints when the first art by Reynolds appeared in WotC books...
I like to express my interest in seeing more art by this mysterious artist and I'd like to know who else likes (or dislikes) these illustrations.
It would be cool if there'd be some support for this guys art so that there'll be a chance to see more of his/her fantastic artwork in the pages of Pathfinder or other Paizo-products.
When I look at it, I can't help but think "The monsters can't possibly actually look like that. I wonder what they 'really' look like?"
I had the same reaction. And then I found the picture of Most High, and I *really* wondered; it's hard to see how the two pictures depict the same species.
I really like the harridan's hair, though.
Mary
The artist in question here is the talented Kevin Crossley; we used him first in Pathfinder #4, and I suspect we'll be using him again—his work is really amazing with all the detail he gets in there!
I loved his work for Green Ronin and Malhavoc, and I truly loved the look of it for the bestiary....but one caveat (sp?) applies.
I really could have lived without the skulls with bug-eyes leaping out and about in shock and horror at the creatures on some of the pages...it seemed far too cartoony, and not really appropriate for the venue (since illustrating creatures in a gaming book should be more "realistic" and less stylized IMHO).
Other than that I enjoy Crossley's work, and look forward to seeing it again soon (minus the over-the-top additions like frightened skulls).
Cheers,
Colin
When I look at it, I can't help but think "The monsters can't possibly actually look like that. I wonder what they 'really' look like?"I had the same reaction. And then I found the picture of Most High, and I *really* wondered; it's hard to see how the two pictures depict the same species.
I really like the harridan's hair, though.
Mary
I can see how they are the same species. There are obviously many variations between the same members of magical species; the lamia in the bestiary had a scaly back, while most high ceoptra, being a very beautiful lamia, had a silky panther back. I mean, that is a pretty minor gripe.
To me, making a Lamia (whichever one it is, I forget... but the one Most High Ceoptra is) "exactly the same as a Lamia, but Huge" seems... lame(ia).
Not to be narky, but tauric critters (to me, at least) should be about the same size as a human + the monster (therefore centaurs, driders etc = large), but having a huge tauric critter seems wierd. Maybe they relate better to giants that way, but it feels strange to me.
I think I might just replace them with extremely advanced Lamias, maybe with the divine guardian template (advanced bestiary) or something.
Just noticed, my previous post may have seemed a bit narky anyway (and threadjacked a little, too).
I don't mind the art, but I didn't really like the Rune Giant art in the bestiary. Front cover art=awesome. I'm currently building one of my Fimo minis (7"-8" tall, not really mini, but anyway) based on the main rune giant in this picture, but I found the bestiary art a little too... wishy-washy. For a gargantuan creature with 42 Strength, the ink-line style didn't wash (oops, art joke) with me.