# Draconomicon Art Gallery



## doctorhook (Nov 14, 2008)

Draconomicon Art Gallery

I already have this book ordered, and all I've got to say is that, if this gallery is any indication, it can't arrive fast enough! 

Seriously, I'm finding this artwork very inspiring!

EDIT: Although the more I look at it, the more strange, dragon-y creatures I find! I'm getting very curious... And what the heck is with #2? Is that a Copper Dragon? A Red Copper Dragon? I don't understand.


----------



## Derren (Nov 14, 2008)

This gallery looks more interesting than all excerpts combined.

I guess picture #2 is about dragon crossbreeds and it was commissioned before it was decided to leave good dragons out of the core books.

But whats with that iconic party in this book? A dragonborn and two girls? Not really that impressive.
And the monsters could have used some more work.
There are 5 skeleton dragons, a dragon pig (#41), a slimy worm thing (#42), dragon dragonborns, a ugly dog dragon (#47) and some sort of ironman dragon (#65).
The wyrmlings look a bit goofy and not really threatening. And I wonder what the Coatul (At least I guess its one) and the fairy dragon are doing in this book as they are neither chromatic nor evil and according to the designers stats are not needed when you don't fight it. I just hope they changed that policy instead of making them semi evil just to give the PCs an excuse to fight some iconic D&D creatures.


----------



## Rechan (Nov 14, 2008)

I'm very curious about #1, what the entity that Dragon is having a conversation with.


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Nov 14, 2008)

It seems like the blues and reds are most photogenic.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Nov 14, 2008)

Rechan said:


> I'm very curious about #1, what the entity that Dragon is having a conversation with.



My guess some manner of elemental (probably fire... but there is lightning too).

Also the little dragons, are quite cute 

It definitely looks like we will have quite a vast quantity of different creatures in this book. I am wondering what number 46 is, looks to be some kind of aquatic one. But also seems like something that be in a urban-environment; the stone-wall, has a dagger, seems to be trying to stifle the scream of the Drow.


----------



## Angel Tarragon (Nov 14, 2008)

So does this mean there are art galleries for other 4e books?


----------



## frankthedm (Nov 14, 2008)

doctorhook said:


> And what the heck is with #2? Is that a Copper Dragon? A Red Copper Dragon? I don't understand.



Red Dragon doing a chi release, represented by the red lightning. The copper-like fins are just artistic license.







Derren said:


> But whats with that iconic party in this book? A dragonborn and two girls? Not really that impressive.



I think the reader is supposed to be rooting for the dragons. It seems the two females have had some 'enhancements' between #8 and #22. 


Derren said:


> The wyrmlings look a bit goofy and not really threatening



. White Hatching from egg was ok. Blue and brown were too cute. Thankfully they don't have the bulgy eyes like from the 3E Draconomicon. I just hope they are minions.


Derren said:


> And I wonder what the Coatul (At least I guess its one) and the fairy dragon are doing in this book...



Hopefully that is not a Couatl. The Fae in 4E are now wildcards at best, so a Faedrake is by _no_ means a guaranteed friendly.







Rechan said:


> I'm very curious about #1, what the entity that Dragon is having a conversation with.



Looks like an _Extreme_ Purple Dragon is talking to an cataclysm / elemental dragon.

And is it me or does the Tiamat pic look like the Artist got a _little_ lazy using the black to mask the area where the heads join together? Though I do think it would look good as a black velvet painting.


----------



## Klaus (Nov 14, 2008)

frankthedm said:


> Red Dragon doing a chi release, represented by the red lightning. The copper-like fins are just artistic license.I think the reader is supposed to be rooting for the dragons. It seems the two females have had some 'enhancements' between #8 and #22.
> . White Hatching from egg was ok. Blue and brown were too cute. Thankfully they don't have the bulgy eyes like from the 3E Draconomicon. I just hope they are minions.
> Hopefully that is not a Couatl. The Fae in 4E are now wildcards at best, so a Faedrake is by _no_ means a guaranteed friendly.Looks like an _Extreme_ Purple Dragon is talking to an cataclysm / elemental dragon.
> 
> And is it me or does the Tiamat pic look like the Artist got a _little_ lazy using the black to mask the area where the heads join together? Though I do think it would look good as a black velvet painting.



That's not red lightning, those are lava leaks in the Red Dragon's lair.


----------



## Klaus (Nov 14, 2008)

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/Draconomicon/117670.jpg

That's Io, the Ninefold Dragon, facing off against the King of Terror, IMHO. Awesome Steve Prescott art!


----------



## Phaezen (Nov 14, 2008)

Reveille said:


> So does this mean there are art galleries for other 4e books?




Art & Maps Gallery

At the moment it looks like just King of the Trollhaunt Warrens, DUngeon 159, Dragon 368 and Draconomicon.

Phaezen


----------



## SlyFlourish (Nov 14, 2008)

*More art*

I really wish they would put up more art for the other 4e books. I love to use them as handouts for my players; particularly the handouts in the published modules.

I do like the idea that a D&D insider subscriber can download the entire art pack.


----------



## questing gm (Nov 14, 2008)

The art is AWESOME! Is that a shadow dragon i see?


----------



## doctorhook (Nov 14, 2008)

questing gm said:


> The art is AWESOME! Is that a shadow dragon i see?



Nope, it's a Purple Dragon, formerly known as a Deep Dragon in 3E. (The confusing bit is that in 3E, Shadow Dragons were represented by a picture of a Deep Dragon on at least one occasion.)


----------



## catsclaw227 (Nov 14, 2008)

What in the holy heck is this thing?

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/Draconomicon/117748.jpg


----------



## catsclaw227 (Nov 14, 2008)

mshea said:


> I do like the idea that a D&D insider subscriber can download the entire art pack.



This is a nice touch.  Making littler things easy for insiders adds some good value.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Nov 14, 2008)

frankthedm said:


> It seems the two females have had some 'enhancements' between #8 and #22.



The silver haired one's outfit is certainly more functional in #22.

In #8 are they singing or just all talking at the same time?


----------



## Phaezen (Nov 14, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:


> What in the holy heck is this thing?
> 
> http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/Draconomicon/117748.jpg





Someones Spore creature?  *rimshot*

Possibly some kind of elemental chaos dragon abomination.


Phaezen


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Nov 14, 2008)

doctorhook said:


> Nope, it's a Purple Dragon, formerly known as a Deep Dragon in 3E. (The confusing bit is that in 3E, Shadow Dragons were represented by a picture of a Deep Dragon on at least one occasion.)



Oh?  I figured he was a misplaced gem dragon or something.


----------



## avin (Nov 14, 2008)

doctorhook said:


> Nope, it's a Purple Dragon, formerly known as a Deep Dragon in 3E. (The confusing bit is that in 3E, Shadow Dragons were represented by a picture of a Deep Dragon on at least one occasion.)




I can live with "purple" but "deep" was cooler... well, I like alias for D&D monsters.



catsclaw227 said:


> What in the holy heck is this thing?
> 
> http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/Draconomicon/117748.jpg




How's the name of that eye and mouth creatures?


----------



## Shroomy (Nov 14, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:


> What in the holy heck is this thing?
> 
> http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/Draconomicon/117748.jpg




I'm going to go with a planar dragon from the Far Realms, similar to that Abyssal White Dragon (I'm guess that the dragon was originally a red).


----------



## catsclaw227 (Nov 14, 2008)

avin said:


> How's the name of that eye and mouth creatures?



It must be like some Gibbering Mouther/Dragon abomination.  Very Far Realmsy.  Very Cool.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Nov 14, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:


> In #8 are they singing or just all talking at the same time?




"Hello..."
          "...Hello..."
                       "...Hello..."

*"Hello!"*


----------



## Verys Arkon (Nov 14, 2008)

I'm glad to see they are getting back to the art galleries - they are very handy resources.  I hope they go back and do at least the Core books.

I'd love to use some of this artwork as desktop images - I hope they make some available at higher resolutions.


----------



## doctorhook (Nov 14, 2008)

Phaezen said:


> Someones Spore creature?  *rimshot*
> 
> Possibly some kind of elemental chaos dragon abomination.
> 
> ...






avin said:


> ...
> 
> How's the name of that eye and mouth creatures?






Shroomy said:


> I'm going to go with a planar dragon from the Far Realms, similar to that Abyssal White Dragon (I'm guess that the dragon was originally a red).






catsclaw227 said:


> It must be like some Gibbering Mouther/Dragon abomination.  Very Far Realmsy.  Very Cool.



It looks like a Squamous Spewer to me, which is basically what it sounds like most of you are suggesting.

A Squamous Spewer is a draconic version of a Gibbering Mouther, and (AFAIK) it first appeared 3.5E's Draconomicon. For your comparison, here is the artwork of it from that book:

[sblock=Squamous Spewer from the 3.5E Draconomicon (2003)]
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





[/sblock]

VS.

[sblock=Unknown creature artwork from Draconomicon I (2008)]
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




[/sblock]
Personally, I think we've got a match.


----------



## doctorhook (Nov 14, 2008)

mshea said:


> ...
> 
> I do like the idea that a D&D insider subscriber can download the entire art pack.






catsclaw227 said:


> This is a nice touch.  Making littler things easy for insiders adds some good value.



I didn't even notice this! Awesome!

You're totally right. These little things do make a big difference!



mshea said:


> I really wish they would put up more art for the other 4e books. I love to use them as handouts for my players; particularly the handouts in the published modules.



Agreed, they should get caught up! Pictures are great props.

FWIW, the first 4E Art Gallery posted was for _P1: King of the Trollhaunt Warrens_. That's encouraging.


----------



## Derren (Nov 14, 2008)

frankthedm said:


> Red Dragon doing a chi release, represented by the red lightning. The copper-like fins are just artistic license.




I don't think so. Its not just the fins which look like on a copper dragon, its also the horns and whole face. Basically its this in red.


> I think the reader is supposed to be rooting for the dragons. It seems the two females have had some 'enhancements' between #8 and #22.




Haven't animes taught you anything? When people get stronger the men become bigger muscles (and hair) while women get bigger breasts....





catsclaw227 said:


> What in the holy heck is this thing?
> 
> http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/Draconomicon/117748.jpg




I guess its a Squamous Spewer which also appeared in the last Draconomicon



catsclaw227 said:


> The silver haired one's outfit is certainly more functional in #22.




I don't think so. While she covered her upper body better she removed all protections from her legs.


----------



## garyh (Nov 14, 2008)

doctorhook said:


> It looks like a Squamous Spewer to me, which is basically what it sounds like most of you are suggesting.
> 
> Personally, I think we've got a match.




Good catch!  You're right, that's gotta be the same creature.


----------



## Kolvin (Nov 14, 2008)

Cool! there's a Dracolisk!


----------



## Cam Banks (Nov 14, 2008)

There is already a growing surge of fan-rage about the illustration of Cyan Bloodbane, who looks as if he just found out his mother was an illithid.

Cheers,
Cam


----------



## Derren (Nov 14, 2008)

Cam Banks said:


> There is already a growing surge of fan-rage about the illustration of Cyan Bloodbane, who looks as if he just found out his mother was an illithid.
> 
> Cheers,
> Cam




That (Picture 72) is supposed to be Cyan?
Ewww......


----------



## Cam Banks (Nov 14, 2008)

Derren said:


> That (Picture 72) is supposed to be Cyan?
> Ewww......




I think the only reason he's in this book is because nobody can think of another green dragon.

Cheers,
Cam


----------



## yesnomu (Nov 15, 2008)

The grey dragon above the battle, the celestial purple dragon, and the massive blind grey dragon are my favorites. The serpentine dragon coiled around the human was pretty great, too. This book seems worth it for the art alone.

The only thing I miss now is being able to turn into 'em...


----------



## Klaus (Nov 15, 2008)

That celestial purple dragon...

Faluzure, maybe? After all, he IS the Night Dragon...


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 15, 2008)

I'm not sure if this will be the book that "fixes" 4e for me, but there's reason to expect I'll be a fan of this. The art makes up for the re-hashed art in the core books. The focus on one monster, perhaps analyzing behavior and ecology and the like, might make up for the abysmal Monster Manual. 

Focusing purely on functionality, I could potentially get a lot of use out of this book. 

This has some potential. The excerpts haven't filled me with a whole lot of hope, but maybe we're not seeing the juicy bits.


----------



## Hawke (Nov 15, 2008)

Holy Smokes! I didn't have an ounce of me that wanted to buy this book - even with the previews. Now I'll be pretty hard not to in the next few dry months... combined with the cool encounters the maps preview seems to indicate, I'm pretty mad at wotc for making me so eager to part with my money.


----------

