Knights & Knaves Alehouse

TheRedPriest wrote:I'm just going to remember him for this:



Best fucking cover for any gaming publication ever.

+2, +3 vs self-important assholes.

The rest is just personal bullshit that doesn't mean a hill of beans anymore. You know: RIP David, and all that stuff.

QFT.

The thing of it is that the covers of the DMG and PHB together (I enjoy them equally) say D&D. The later Easley covers just never did it for me, they were to posed and IMO did not tell a story, on the otherhand the DCS and Trampier covers spoke volumes to me.

I'm another fan of the original covers. I can see some technical flaws in the DCS cover of the DMG, but their importance is trivial compared to the overall impact of the cover. I think it's striking and conveys exactly the right tone or feel for AD&D. Because of that, I think the art works well. (I think the sea of fire and the City of Brass on the back is damn cool, too -- and again, screams "this is AD&D" to me.)

Semaj Khan wrote:+2, +3 vs self-important assholes.

I would really appreciate it (and this goes for everyone) if we could avoid resorting to personal insults to make our points in this thread. Thanks.

Just for the record, I do not hold WotC (or TSR, or Lorraine Williams) any ill-will - after 7 years, I wash away old grudges.

I doubt WotC would have hired Sutherland for his experience because they already had a ton of artists from their Magic card line, and if you look at the first sets of core 3e books, you could tell they wanted to go in a new direction - a vary pseudo-realistic/academic direction. And from what Satak said, his termination seem to be from TSR's internal politics.

As much as I like Sutherland's art, if the displayed '97 line art is any indication, his line art had not improved a whole lot since the old Monster Manual. I'm trying not to be critical or attack his style, but after 20 years, there should have been some change or development in his style. Is a shame he stayed conservative with his style, because I like to see good talent grow and develop.

As much as I wished he composed himself and moved on, he was a dedicated professional, and that is a trait I respect.

By the way, I remember an old toy from my childhood. How many details can you spot from David's classic art?

Hey -- I'd just like to offer my two bits here, as someone who did know Dave and liked him. I was at TSR from 1984 - 1989 and worked with Dave on many projects. I always found him to be very professional and responsive (in a good way) to any comments about his work.

The whole time I was there, Dave was a cartographer, along with Diesel and (I think) Dennis Kauth (Dennis did some cool 3D paper models too, the dragon on the cover of issue 200[?] was his). IIRC, Dave was the one who pioneered those isometric maps, at least at TSR. I always really liked his mapwork and as I said, he was very easy to work with.

Someone mentioned modeling and I know Dave did a bunch of that, mostly before my time. I think he worked for or had some connection to White Metal, a minis shop. There was going to be a line of draconian miniatures for the Dragonlance line (done by Ral Partha, I think). The line got canceled but Dave gave me a pewter master of each of the draconians. I ended up giving them away over the years, to people who really went ga-ga over them and appreciated them more than I did.

I am really vague about Dave getting fired from TSR. It would have happened about a year before I left there. I have no recollection of why it would have happened but I do remember him leaving. I stayed until May of 1999 when I finally got out, but I don't remember much talk about a sale to WOTC, so I don't know about the comment saying that TSR was cleaning house to make the company more palatable to WOTC. Dave always had pretty strong (and negative) opinions about management and often seemed kinda down about working at TSR, so maybe he said something or otherwise made his unhappiness known?

FWIW,
Mike

blackprinceofmuncie wrote:

Semaj Khan wrote:+2, +3 vs self-important assholes.

I would really appreciate it (and this goes for everyone) if we could avoid resorting to personal insults to make our points in this thread. Thanks.

I have no idea what you're talking about here.

I have no idea what you're talking about here.

Well, considering you outright told TDD to "ignore the asshole" on The Delver's forums, I suspect you're referencing me in that statement, which might make that a personal attack. (Which I followed because I can't fathom anything I wrote as directly or indirectly insulting or attacking TDD or Mr. Sutherland or anybody else, and wanted to know what his concern was).

Like I said, I certainly didn't wish to step on anybody's toes, nor wish for established people to leave because of anything I said, but it's really hard for me to figure out how making an honest opinion about an artist equals that.

JRT wrote:

I have no idea what you're talking about here.

Well, considering you outright told TDD to "ignore the asshole" on The Delver's forums, I suspect you're referencing me in that statement, which might make that a personal attack. (Which I followed because I can't fathom anything I wrote as directly or indirectly insulting or attacking TDD or Mr. Sutherland or anybody else, and wanted to know what his concern was).

Like I said, I certainly didn't wish to step on anybody's toes, nor wish for established people to leave because of anything I said, but it's really hard for me to figure out how making an honest opinion about an artist equals that.

My statement was directed to BPoM.

Mike,

Out of curiosity, in cartography in general, did Dave or others have to deal with computers in any way for Cartography? I'm curious what the process was, as I was sincerely wondering what skills would be involved in that department.

JRT wrote: Like I said, I certainly didn't wish to step on anybody's toes, nor wish for established people to leave because of anything I said, but it's really hard for me to figure out how making an honest opinion about an artist equals that.

I am not 100% sure about where exactly the offence lies, but I do know that some things at Knights & Knaves just are not really up for debate, rather they are assumed as a given and this forum is not the place to discuss their validity. That is partly because Knights & Knaves was founded as a haven to discuss things free from having to rehash old debates that resulted in factionalism on other more inclusive websites.

One of these unwritten agreements is that the art of the original Dungeons & Dragons manuals, as amateurish as some may feel them to be, have a weird and cool vibe that makes them better than the more professional artwork that followed, but there is also a strong sense that this raw art, apparently somewhat lacking in technical accomplishment, is in fact intentional in its style.

I am not a huge fan of the art of 70s D&D, though I have come to appreciate it more as I read opinions here, so I generally refrain from commenting about it in this context. I am just not really "tuned in" to the way others appreciate it, and would end up creating "noise" that would obscure the desired "signal".

That is not to say I never comment on art here, but I am aware that there are strong preferences in the community that individuals do not want to have to constantly explain, justify, or defend.

Yeah, I agree, but reading the rules of the forum, as well as seeing prior posts--I discovered this place from some of Grognardia's links and usually search Google for discussion of EGG--I assumed discussions about the rules are separate from the artwork. (After all, nobody plays D&D to look at the Efreeti cover of the Idol cover) And based on what I'm seeing, I'm not the only one here critical of the older art styles. But I'm certainly not going to beat my own opinion to death either.

JRT wrote:

I have no idea what you're talking about here.

Well, considering you outright told TDD to "ignore the asshole" on The Delver's forums, I suspect you're referencing me in that statement, which might make that a personal attack. (Which I followed because I can't fathom anything I wrote as directly or indirectly insulting or attacking TDD or Mr. Sutherland or anybody else, and wanted to know what his concern was).

Like I said, I certainly didn't wish to step on anybody's toes, nor wish for established people to leave because of anything I said, but it's really hard for me to figure out how making an honest opinion about an artist equals that.

I think you're being disingenuous regarding your motives, but that's just a hunch.

Also, what someone said on another forum, well, I don't see how that's pertinent on this forum.

Can you guys take this to PMs or something, please? Whatever personal issues various members (and ex-members, I suppose) may have with each other isn't something that needs to be discussed here because 1) you're extremely unlikely to actually resolve anything this way, and 2) none of the rest of us want to read it.

As Foster points out, the topic of this thread isn't who doesn't like who or why, it's about Dave Sutherland's life during and post-TSR.

We now have several ex-TSR people who apparently read and post here pretty regularly, so it seems like we have a golden opportunity to learn more about a very influential early D&D artist. Let's try to keep it on track.