Varsovian |
As I mentioned in the post title, this might be a weird question, but here goes...
The art in Pathfinder books (both in 1E and 2E) is obviously very nice. Still, it has a certain... flavour. Not sure how to describe it best: exaggerated? Cartoony? Comic-booky?
Being a person who's strongly influenced by art in the RPG books, I wanted to ask: does the art in PF books translate into what kind of RPs are to be run with Pathfinder? For me, the art in the books seems to suggest that PF is intended for light, fun, cartoony RPs. Not exactly serious stories, with colourful characters having cinematic and zany adventures in a bright, happy world.
Obviously, some actual Golarion role contradicts such an assessment (the Nidal stuff, for once). That said, I must admit one problem I have with PF is squaring the idea of serious fantasy stories with the (again, objectively excellent) art in the PF books.
So, what's your take on this? Is PF, so to say, only a Pirates of the Caribbean kind of game - or can you do Conan or Game of Thrones with it, too?
Conscious Meat |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have you been introduced to the Irnakurse ( https://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=670 ) yet?
Or the gogitech ( https://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=237 )?
Or thulgant ( https://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=777 )?
There's some pretty horrifying creatures, should you wish to run them. There's some pretty nasty areas, too, like the domain of the Whispering Tyrant (a fairly persisent lich); or the devil-worshipping tyranny of Cheliax.
When it comes to published adventures, I might note as an example that the "Abomination Vaults" comes with the following content warning:
While Abomination Vaults contains typical Pathfinder action and adventure, it also presents themes of suicide, ableism, body horror, and human experimentation. Before you begin, understand that player consent (including that of the Game Master) is vital to a safe and fun play experience for everyone. You should talk with your players before beginning and modify descriptions or scenarios as appropriate.
It's definitely not all bright and cheery down there. They're really not kidding when it comes to the body horror and human experimentation, in particular -- if it were a Call of Cthulhu adventure instead of a Pathfinder adventure, there'd be a lot of sanity checks.
Ruzza |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The art in Pathfinder books (both in 1E and 2E) is obviously very nice. Still, it has a certain... flavour. Not sure how to describe it best: exaggerated? Cartoony? Comic-booky?
Pulp!
I can't speak to how Paizo does its art direction, but Wayne Reynolds has certainly helped shape the look and feel of Pathfinder since the beginning. He's also, to my mind, the artist with the most fingerprints over the original Eberron setting - a genuinely pulpy setting.
While pulp as a genre began when describing cheap and low-quality stories, it was quickly the birthplace of some of the greatest adventures! Conan, Lovecraft, Tarzan! I could be reading too much into art, but Reynolds' style has always sort of brought me into that world. Tales of derring-do, but also of dark and terrible secrets not meant for man. Obviously you tell the stories you want to tell, but the artwork of Pathfinder tends to put me in a place of pulp fantasy - the kind where the villain would jab a finger at the heroes hissing, "I had not believed you to live after my trap, but I much prefer to do this with my own hands!" before launching a sizzling lightning bolt at the party.
Captain Morgan |
Yeah, I think the art that shows up in any given adventure path is probably a pretty decent indication of it's tone. Pathfinder has a baseline of PG-13, but it also has plenty of content which deviates from that baseline. PF2 is less edgy than PF1, but the edge is still there, it just has content warnings in front of it now like the aforementioned Abomination Vaults example.
The rules also lend themselves to fantasy super heroics, which is definitely a vibe. But you can dial that up or down to based on the level of play--flight, 30 foot verical leaps, and wall running all kick in around level 7 or 8. Just keep it below that if you want a grittier narrative vibe. And consider proficiency without level if you want a grittier mathematical vibe.
Varsovian |
Thanks for your input, guys!
I guess what I mean to say is that my personal tastes in fantasy don't exactly fit with Wayne Reynolds' art (or other PF art similar to it). I apologize for mentioning Paizo's competition, but for reference's sake: I'm more drawn to the art in Modiphius' Conan and Dune books, or in (again, I apologize) some of the official D&D 5E books. Or 3rd party 5E games, like NightFell or Planegaea. And the most awesome art I've seen was in Degenesis: Rebirth Edition...
Just some examples as to what I "see" in my head when thinking of fantasy stories. And the mood I look for as GMing. Not sure if it's OK to run Pathfinder with such a mood / style, though?
I might be hopelessly visual-minded, but I have this moments when I try to come with my own setting to use in PF... and, then, I look at the art in the PF books. And I'm hit with "You're doing it wrong! Pathfinder is supposed to be more cartoony and fairty-taleish! You need to add more colourful fashions and cute goblins!"
Hmmmmmm. :\
And yes, I know that the setting described in the text can be brutal and visceral... But the art kind of... tones it down? And even places like Geb don't look as scary in the art as my imagination would like it to look.
Again, not a criticism of the art, which is objectively excellent. Just describing a problem I have.
Captain Morgan |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Something that might be throwing you off about Wayne's art is how visually cluttered it is. Pathfinder iconics can almost look like Rob Liefield characters with all the pouches, amulets, lanterns, and knicknacks. The people in the 5e Player's handbook tend to have their clothing, armor, weapons in hand, a dagger on their belt... And not much else. Maybe a small side satchel or a class specific tool like a holy symbol or spell component pouch. The Dune art you mentioned looks very clean. I don't even see belts on these robed figures. And of course Conan and his various love interests are essentially nude. There's certainly an aesthetic appeal to these images when viewed in a vacuum.
But objectively, they don't look like adventurers, or at least Pathfinders. Consider how much stuff goes into the basic adventurer's kit: a backpack, a bedroll, 10 pieces of chalk, flint and steel, 50 feet of rope, 2 weeks' rations, soap, 5 torches, and a waterskin. Then consider for hardcore camping you probably want a tent, additional rations, cook ware... Bags of holding are a thing but they are still one bulk saçks you need to carry.
Then consider what you might want access to in a fight. Everyone wants an emergency potion or two on their belt. Martials want a main weapon(s), a back up ranged option with accompanying ammo, something light in case they are swallowed. That's without touching alternative materials or damage types. Casters should have a staff in one hand and a bandolier full of scrolls, and probably a wand or two in their belt.
And that's just a basic d20 adventurer. Pathfinder adventurers have significantly more because of its magic item economy. You have 10 investiture slots and by level 10 you've probably filled most of them with magic amulets, rings, boots, belts, headbands... The Christmas Tree effect is alive and well. We might like to picture Conan for our player characters, but they look more like Cable and Deadpool when you visualize their actual inventory. Wayne's art reflects this.