Wednesday, August 14, 2019

Rulebook art?

What is the minimum necessary amount of art for an rpg rulebook? I know that (with the notable exception of the original "little black book" edition of Traveller) rpg rulebooks have traditionally included a lot of illustrations, and that certain types of products (bestiaries, adventures with scene-setting illustrations intended to be shown to the players, products aimed at beginners who aren't necessarily familiar with the genre and its tropes) need illustrations, but is this also true for a "standard" rulebook aimed at experienced players containing "crunch" info on classes, spells, magic items, and procedural stuff? Other than making the book more attractive to look at, are "filler" illustrations that just exist to set a mood (and fill white space) and aren't depicting anything practical really needed?

This isn't just idle navel-gazing, since I'm working on a product for publication that I am not capable of illustrating myself (at least up to a standard I would consider acceptable) so I'm trying to gauge how much art I'm going to end up having to buy (or beg) for this thing. A cover illustration is surely necessary, but what about the interior? RPG audiences are accustomed to seeing an illustration at least every 3-4 pages because that's what we've been given for the past 45 years, but if a book doesn't include that would it necessarily be seen as incomplete and unprofessional? Do I need little pictures of adventurer-types rappelling on cliffs in my section on wilderness adventuring, or a guy strumming a lute in the section on bard spells? And if I do need to include some interior illustrations, what is the minimum acceptable amount? Would 3 or 4 illustrations in a 128 page book be sufficient or if I'm going to have that few would I be just as well off not having any at all?

On the one hand I'd obviously prefer not to sink all of my potential dozens of dollars of profit (and more) into art, and I especially don't want to feel obligated to buy or accept a bunch of low-quality art because it's the only stuff I can afford, but on the other hand I think the text of this book is of high quasi-professional quality, and I'd like the presentation to be at a similar level if possible. If I'm going to expect people to pay real money for this then they should feel like their money was well spent, and I'm trying to get a sense of how important interior illustrations are to that determination.

I'm wondering how my 12 (!) readers feel about this. Given that a lot of good art isn't an option, what are folks' preferences between (a) no interior art at all; (b) a couple-three pieces of interior art; or (c) the book must be fully illustrated, even if the illustrations are of amateur quality?

14 comments:

  1. I'm of the opinion that it's an important part of an RPG book. Quality over quantity, though. One illustration per 10 pages.

    ReplyDelete
  2. For my part, I'd rather have a small amount of illustrations that are really good and give the book a distinctive feel; but my tastes have never accorded with the majority on much of anything. There was a great discussion of this recently over at Monsters & Manuals:


    http://monstersandmanuals.blogspot.com/2019/08/a-lot-of-rpg-books-are-too-expensive.html

    http://monstersandmanuals.blogspot.com/2019/08/bog-standard-capitalism-and-price-of.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'd say for a monster book, or the monster section of a rulebook, you'll need "more" than the rest. Other than that, a few tone/mood-setting illustration every 3 or 4 pages would be plenty for me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. My rule of thumb is one piece of art every 3 or 4 pages. Monster books are, as you say, an exception to the rule.

    I was originally of the opinion that art didn't matter, and then I realized that it has a purpose beyond simply making the book pretty. Art serves as an informal bookmarking system. To take a very conspicuous example, if I'm looking for the paladin section of the AD&D 1E PM, I just flip through the book 'til I see "A Paladin In Hell". Smaller pieces work just as well, but I try to put them on the outside edges of the pages (right or left) to make them more visible. I will also put themed art for spells or magic items adjacent to the description, for the same reason. If I flip through the DMG and see a guy pointing a snake at me, I'm in the "staffs" section of the magic items.

    It's an under-appreciated, but very real, feature of artwork in a rulebook.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I totally agree with that, and have been using the illustrations in my PH and DMG that way for decades - I know when I see that black-background to flip one more page for the start of the combat section, that the Otus illo of the dude getting zapped by a lich is the start of the spell explanations, that the guy looking at a gem is the gem values table (flip one page to the jewelry values...) etc. That said, while it's a handy shorthand, I wonder how necessary something like that is. Does everyone rely on visual cues in this way? Is it something inherent in the wiring of our brains?

      Delete
  5. For a rulebook that doesn't need to visually convey information that the reader otherwise would have a hard time conceptualizing, I think some nice older pics not under copyright would serve just as well.

    Breaking up the layout is important to give the mind a break. But RPGs are based on old fairytales and such; perhaps finding illustrations in books on these subjects which are out of copyright, mixed in with a few decent stock art pieces, would serve just as well for little to no money.

    I don't know if true S&S works are out of copyright or not, but fairy tales, wizards, priests, and men in armor should be easy to find in both still life and action scenes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's probably the direction I'll end up going in, since the consensus seem to be pretty unanimous that a fair number of illustrations are needed. Since the contents of my book are pretty traditionally-flavored (and, as such, very much out of the "OSR" mainstream) this would probably work. A combination of Celtic/fairy stuff, Arthurian stuff, "gypsy" stuff, and "oriental" stuff would pretty much cover my needs, I think.

      Delete
  6. My two cents about interior art:

    I think it is necessary only for illustrating new monsters. I myself do not need to see more drawings of adventurers, or towns, or stalactites, or mountains, or any of that sort of thing.

    But monsters? If a monster doesn't have a little illustration for it, it tends to get passed over. Consider the poor masher or the slithering tracker in the Monster Manual!

    In my experience, acquiring little "Monster Manual style" illustrations for new monsters is not that expensive compared to bigger, more complex pieces. The artists do not even need to draw backgrounds for the monster illustrations.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Somewhere between (b) and (c). Sine Nomine has a number of free stock art packs that can be useful if you don't mind the non-European themes.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think the voices saying monsters need it are on spot for me.

    I like to have monsters illustrated for myself so its easier to visualize. However bad illustration of monsters like in Gary's Lejendary Adventures series where it was stock images and poor visualizations really are frustrating especially the new races which didn't look anything like the text.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I like art that I can show to my players: monsters. I like art that facilitates making a choice: character classes during character generation, for example. I think art also gets to advertise to buyers, e.g. cover art. The rest of the art is for layout: you try to have sections start on new pages, or keep them on a spread, and if you can’t do it in text, add empty boxes until you can, and then use art to fill them. That’s how Kevin Crawford does it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Side-bar: I think it would be nice if more modules provided player handout art like Tomb of Horrors or unkeyed player maps like the Harn products. Especially in digital format this would be easy to do and I think it helps put the players into the world nicely.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Illustrations serve a number of purposes in a book. In a technical document - which is what rulebooks are in essence - the main purpose of pictures is to facilitate the written content. For example, if I am laying out an operator’s manual for an industrial hoist, my images will range from exploded diagrams to warning labels to photos showing its proper installation and maintenance. RPG products are more entertainment focused than OMs, but using art as part of the function and not as mere window decoration is a solid way to determine how much you need. Considering that you’ll have tables, bulleted and numbered lists, and possibly maps to help break up the wall of text, you may be able to get away with minimal additional art and still have a nice flow to your book.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think every 3 to 4 pages would be good, too much is distracting, too little is a bit bland.

    ReplyDelete