“A board game is a game in which counters or pieces are placed, removed, or moved on a pre-marked surface or "board" according to a set of rules. Games may be based on pure strategy, chance or a mixture of the two and usually have a goal which a player aims to achieve.”
Introduction - The History of Board Games
Introduction - The History of Board Games
Initial research began predominately with the origins of board games, from which largely religious sources and ‘simulations’ of human conflict seem to define much of the early concepts (much the same as a culture’s art would reflect things of great importance to a civilization; war and religion were central ‘factors’ to this idea.)
The Ancient Egyptian game of ‘Senet’, for example, whilst its rules aren’t entirely clear, has been depicted in such a way so as to show a “religious significance” amongst those who played it; the Ancient Egyptian belief in determinism (that all events are ‘pre-determined’, structured in such a way, with little or no choice or ‘free-will’ involved) coupled with the sense of chance, or ‘luck’ associated with the game led often to the belief that the success of the player was more to being under the protection, or ‘favour’ of the Gods than it was based on any sense of strategy alone. Many games proceeding this seem to follow suit, with either an element of chance combined with strategy, or simply just strategy involved; the Ancient Chinese game of “Wei-qi” coincides with this idea of conflict and conquest between two opposing ‘factions’, this of course would have been common during Bronze-age China, around the time the game was developed, a period of political turbulence and constant military gain as wealth increased and population pressure enacted a desire for expansion. Conflict, as a game mechanic, seems to have been immensely popular amongst board games, not only in the ‘media’s’ earliest examples, but also throughout history and up into the most contemporary of games (clearly military conquest as a form of competition lies not only as a ‘tradition’ passed onto to each generation of ‘gamers’, but at the very heart of the human psyche, as some of histories’ most prominent and respected games throughout the world features this very concept at it’s core, ‘Chess’ and ‘Risk’ perhaps are good examples of this.)
‘Games’, however, in the broader sense of the word, would have of course originated around the same time that humans mastered their surroundings, long enough to obtain ‘leisure’ time, time enough to indulge in pursuits not directly necessary for survival (the improvement of communication amongst human beings would have also facilitated this evolution in human behaviour.) To this end, perhaps it’s obvious also that early man would have chosen to depict violence or religious content in a form of entertainment (if for nothing more than enjoyment, the game could have also provided a rudimentary form of training in both strategy, patience, or other forms of learning, perhaps even amongst children etc.)
Brief Introduced - Initial Research (Continued) and Development Begun
Brief Introduced - Initial Research (Continued) and Development Begun
Though playing the game itself did not seem appropriate, nor a necessity to the group, 'Citadels' was an important part of our research in that not only did it 'provide' the premiss for which we were to later base our game, the genre (first Medieval, then with an element of fantasy) initiated much of our early 'brain-storming' and idea-sharing; the cover artwork and packaging (at least for me) also seemed to standout more so than the other board-games which we had gathered for initial research (the others being aimed at a younger target market, with equally forgettable results.) In terms of the early conceptualising of our game, it was clear that perhaps the genre of 'Medieval fantasy' had little room for competition amongst an already very well established market, but our intended gameplay mechanic (the idea of literally building/constructing the map, or 'board', itself, from scratch) was something, that again, was almost an instantaneous decision for us, and lent itself well to the genre, leaving room for future expansions or titles should we wish it so. 'Dungeons & Dragons', however, whilst it does feature the ability to create almost everything from scratch; terrain, characters, gameplay etc. featured a far too complicated design and we essentially wanted to confine this to a largely 'pick-up-and-play' ruleset, simplistic and accessible, yet both a rewarding and enjoyable experience.Deliberation amongst ourselves (the group) led not only to the formation of individual roles (I was to be given the responsibility of producing the character art alongside another of my group, one other was to design the aesthetics of the ‘board’ itself, another for the basic design behind game play etc.) but also to our intended target market; again, very early on, we all decided against a board game targeted at young children for the simple fact that we all desired a reasonable challenge at aiming the game at a slightly more mature audience (at the very least, aged ten and above) and from an artistic point of view, I personally sought to not only produce artwork that interested me, but something I to would find challenging. Due to the nature of my role (having now decided that we were to have four characters, with the work divided fifty percent between the two ‘character artists’) I had also chosen to focus my research primarily on possible artistic styles, to aid in the potential aesthetics of the ‘character cards’ themselves.
Whilst we all offered our own ideas as to how the game should be played, my main focus was on the 'character cards', each of which were to represent the various playable characters associated with the game. The 'character cards' was an idea I had the at the beginning of the process, as at this stage I had imagined only very simplistic 'squares' as representative of what the player would be 'using'; coupled with colours and symbols the cards offered a very simplistic, yet fairly intuitive way for the player to engage with his or her own individual character. In terms of the artistic styles available to us, we again wanted to maintain a more 'mature theme' with the aesthetics, and so to ensure a certain continuity between the artwork, Ilze and I (the other 'character artist' within the group) decided on the look and 'feel' exuded by much of the artwork seen in 'Magic: The Gathering' (an example of which can be seen to the left.)
The game itself (the game that we intend to design) isn't really a card based game at all (focusing predominately on the 'laying down of tiles', with the occasional drawing of 'chance' cards) essentially, the game is a sequential rolling of the die, of which the movement from point 'a' to point 'b' is the ultimate objective, though minimal combat is also an included element in the gameplay mechanics available to the player. Due to the nature of the game we were designing (and the limitation as to how much 'artwork' would, or even could be featured in the final board game) it was important that the artwork reflected the dedication the team/group had already placed in the how the game was to be played, also because of the simplicity of the 'pieces' themselves (we have yet to design an actual 'look' to the physical character pieces, with them being, at least at the present moment, simple 'coloured squares') the artwork needed to give the player a sense of depth and intrigue (at least from a 'role-playing' point of view) as to the character that they are playing.
Further Primary Research Into Local 'Game Stores' and Board Games of a Similar Theme
Due to the lack of a 'working' camera, the images provided were taken either by Denisa Ilie (a photography student I took with me for the purpose of documenting my research at "Toyz & Gamez") or Dan Capon, a member of our design team who's in charge of contextualising the rules whilst also providing input for the rules themselves (Dan provided the photographs of the "Kerrison Toys" store and subsequent board games.)
The toy stores themselves were fairly informative, in that they provided an opportunity to see both a wide variety of the types of games available on the market right now, whilst also collecting in one area, the games that would compete with our own (if our board game were to be distributed) within an active 'targeted market' or type of genre.
Of the types of board games we found whilst visiting this particular shop ("Toyz & Gamez") the board game in which, essentially, you traverse a maze (aptly named 'Minotaurus') seemed to be the only resonating quality in comparison to our own board game, of any of the other games amongst the shops 'selection'. From a point of research, however, what I did find particularly interesting, was the sheer number of games to which the board game itself was in all 'categories', the exact same game (Monopoly being the most evident example of this form of marketing, in what feels like an infinite variety of interpretations) but basically the Toy Story version of 'Buckaroo' (featuring Bullseye as the rodeo 'equine') or the Shrek 'edition' of 'Operation' were some of the games that caught my attention at the time (again, other good examples of 'reconstituted marketing', or an idea revisited, re-packaged, and targeted at a new, in this case younger, target market;) on that note, the aesthetics, or design concerning the 'look' of the board game, packaging, advertising etc. seems to be a role that both Joyce Brabban and Niqi Chasseaud, two other members of our group, seem to be 'leaning' towards in terms of their roles within the design team; something that will likely inform their own individual research.
Again, 'Minotaurus' features similaritites in that it is a board game, whereby each player's goal is to reach the centre of the board (much like our own game) whilst trying to avoid both the minotaur and the other players. The striking similarity to our own game and this, is in the customisation of the board itself, and how this directly affects gameplay. The game we have developed features a 'maze-like' path that winds through a dense forest (which forms the terrain accross the entirety of the board) the board is then divided into a grid featuring a set amount of tiles, and each of these 'tiles' are then further sub-divided into sections that the player can or cannot move 'through'. The purpose of this, was that as the player moved towards the centre of the board (essentialy the 'goal' or victory requirement, completion of the game being the first player to successfully do so) was that each game would ultimately be unique, in that no two 'boards' would ever be exactly the same. This leads to a higher re-playability value, whilst also offering a further opportunity for strategic play in how the players would choose to lay their 'tiles', to both aid in their own characters ability to traverse the board, whilst hindering others.
Similarly, 'Minotaurus' also features a customizable board at the beginning of the game (I suppose this was to be expected considering the intellectual property the game is drawing upon) though other than the ability to 'shift' openings in the maze to block players the familiarity ends here, for the 'terrain' featured in 'Minotaurus' is built before the gameplay commences, where as our game relies on the ability of the player to form his or her own path as they move forward while they play.
The "Kerrison Toys" game store (picture taken by Dan Capon) offered much more in the way of board games, not only in terms of the size and variety of the selection available, but also in terms of the actual board games of use within our own, immediate research.
Games such as "Warrior Knights" offered (at least for my own personal research) interesting and pleasing aesthetics of the type I hope would reflect my own artistic sensibilities (the cover art itself for that matter, produced by artist Tomasz Marek Jedruszek, was featured on the verso of the 'Citadels' manual first collected by me at the beginning of the project, and so immediately 'struck a chord' as to the type of art I myself had the intention of producing.) In terms of the rules found within "Warrior Knights", our game largely differs; though still retaining a degree of customisation, the rules focus more so on the player's ability to amass 'strength', both socio-economically, politically, and militarily, with the ultimate objective being to capture the region and 'emit' dominance over it (whilst preventing the other players from doing the same.)
The larger of the two game shops I visited in Norwich,"Kerrison Toys" provided more in the way of board games 'offering' either a similarity in the intended style for which we were aiming/developing towards ('Warrior Knights' being an example of this) or in fact strong comparisons to the types of game play we had already decided upon; out of all the games available, only two really contained the latter (perhaps a testament to the marketability, or room for competition our game could possibly provide/fill) with the two board games being 'Carcassonne', and 'Labyrinth.'
'Labyrinth' (also known as "The aMAZEing Labyrinth") was a game that Joyce (a member of our group) had mentioned very early on in the design process, perhaps more suggesting, or providing reference to this particular game (she couldn't remember the exact title of the product so much as she could remember it's rules or form/style of gameplay) than she was giving a thorough outline of game's core-game mechanics, this insured that any potential 'similarity' ended with the simple concept of 'shifting tiles in a maze-like format'.On the first day, having roughly established the type of game we wanted create, it was then in this context that Joyce provided the afore-mentioned information.
Upon discovering the name of the said game, we were then confronted with what was largely, a very similar game (at least from a very rough, initial understanding.) Having researched further into the mechanics of how this particular game played, you soon realise how different it is. To begin with, the board has all it's tiles (except for one) placed before the beginning of the game (and this remains so throughout gameplay) this differs from our own concept in that the board remains predominatly empty, untill each of the players adds their own 'tiles' in place (to construct a path towards the middle.)
The main objective for the player in 'Labyrinth' is to shift the tiles (and thus the available 'pathways') in the maze, revealing certain treasures to be collected; the player then moves his/her piece with this mind; whoever acquires these treasures, coupled with returning them back to their 'homebase' first, wins. Similarities to this game, and our own, include the 'cap' of four players at it's maximum, the board's 'maze-like' design is also a concurrent feature; the starting location of each piece (though not in the corners as in this game) is similar, and of course the tile-based 'shifting' concept also shares a familiarity to our own. The 'Labyrinth' art design, I believe, is also an example of perhaps a game featuring an out-dated 'visual style'. I understand the game was created in 1986, but the artwork remains almost entirely the same as the original, and could be an example of how the success of a game can literally be in it's ability to attract a potential customer from a distant (the appeal of which adheres largely to it's aesthetics overall artisic design; this, coupled with sustainable gameplay, should make a successful game.)
'Carcassonne' was a game I myself had been directed to by a friend of my brother's, whom I knew had both a deep passion for, and a sensitive knowledge towards board games (and similar media.) I sent Jake the e-mail on the same day that we were given the brief (after having already established with my group a basic premise for which the core-game mechanics were going to be established/'built-around'.) In the e-mail (which you can see the print-screen of above and below) I outlined this very same concept (along with the description of a game I felt retained similarities to this form of gameplay, of which I knew he'd know of, 'Dungeon Dice Monsters';) and whilst our group had seperated to go research into possible board games that shared, similarly, this idea; we all returned later that day with little to no research as a result (this process was 'conducted' on the first day of our project briefing, and so proceded any of the information/research presented above.) Following this, I suspected that Jake would have knowledge of this type of gameplay and that he would then be able to suggest a 'list' of board games (as a starting point to our research) as a result. Even with Jake's expansive knowledge of this form of media, 'Carcossonne' was the only game that initially 'came to mind' and so 'armed' with this information, the next day I returned to the group with this example to research further into (whilst Joyce returned having remembered 'Labyrinth' as the game she originally mentioned.)
'Carcassonne' I feel is a game that resonates succinctly with our own (in comparison to other board games 'sharing' similarities; although much like the others, any reference to our own game is purely coincidentle, and so only certain elements retain close comparison.)
Carcassonne's rules, consists firstly of the placement of a tile (from which you recieve one each turn) following this action you can then place your "Meeple" (character piece that represents either a knight, farmer etc.) from which the 'resources' of each tile will be drawn from. The idea behind the game is entirely based around a points scoring system (there are no combat elements, or any other forms of gameplay involved.) Simply, you place down your tiles, which on each represent either a road, castle, farm etc. (depending on the 'map' or variation you are playing/using.) The objective is to then establish complete 'clusters' of these individual features (to which there are differing points associated/awarded for both the size and type of 'feature' you have formed.) The success of the player is down to his or her's ability to place the tiles so that they not only match (which is a requirement of the game anyway) but that they compensate also for the limitation of the tiles and 'space' available. The player who can develop their land the quickest, and to the greatest extent, wins. Featuring natural topography, much like our own (in this case a forest) the games 'roads' offer no movement to the player, nor do the castles offer much in the way of 'protection' or anything similar to the player and his/her 'pieces'. Literally, this game is unique from the others that I have included in this research in that it is essentialy, in all aspects, a resource 'collecting' game. Where earlier I mentioned the 'inspiration' behind some of histories oldest, and most documented games ('Wei-qi's' emphasise on territorial gain, through military conquest, for example, which is essentially based on humanities need to expand and acquire more, in this case the land's resources, for often this is the insentive for 'invasion') this is relative also to Carcassonne's 'interpretation' of the population pressure, and need to expand prevelant through out much of the history of Medieval Europe, and the game (at least in my opinion) presents the player with the challenge of not only controlling, and maintaining (in this case property) but having the insight to plan and expand in the 'face' of competition (which is what I find particularly appealing about this game; a mechanic which features heavily also in digital games, often in 'Real-Time Strategy Games' such as the 'Age of Empires' series, or 'Medieval Total War Two' for example.) Continuing with this idea, "Warrior Knights" focuses on the complexities inacted by the Feudal System in Europe, particularly Britain, during the 11th-14th centuries (with all the 'political intreagues' that come with this period in history) where as something like Risk would focus on 'man's' inability to 'settle', but to conquer and dominate those around them.
Further Research Into the History of Board Games (Revisited)
The beginning of the second week saw me travelling to 'Norwich Castle' (a Norman keep located amidst the city centre.) The nature of my visit was not only to 're-establish' my knowledge of Medieval history, but was also out of a greater sense of intrigue, really, for the history of the building and the surrounding area (I definitely have a great passion and broad interest for history and culture, and in fact the city of Norwich itself, and that very history was one of the deciding factors in my choosing to come to this University.) Having been provided free access to the castle due to my being a student (something I intend to exploit on a regular basis) I spent most of the day within the castle itself and up until its closing; within that time I simply walked around, 'soaking' in what knowledge I could of the place whilst admiring also its architectural detail and splendour. What I didn't intend to find (and what a 'find' it was) were two Medieval board games on display (available to be used by the general public) and alongside each, a set of instructions as to its individual rules and gameplay.
To the left are various notes I quickly established on paper featuring the two games in question; though due to time constraints (I had about twenty minutes before closing) I simply drew each game from observation, and very quickly wrote down the descriptions as seen on the display.
The first of the two board games, "Nine Man's Morris" (also known as 'Nine Men's Morris') only became popular within Europe towards the beginning of the 15th century (with its origin believed to have been in Ancient Egypt around three-thousand years ago.) Again, much like Chess, it appears the Europeans changed the concept ever so slightly, and the board game has since retained these 'rules', or this interpretation, with the game still enjoying moderate 'success' in modern times amongst enthusiasts (though obviously nowhere near the sought of popularity Chess has gained, and continues to obtain, since its original inception.)
The second of the two games, "Fox and Geese" is actually native to Europe, and was believed to have been developed by prisoners "some time in the medieval period" who 'scratched' this particular game design into the floor and walls of their cells, as a form of 'pass-time.'
Both games 'enjoy' modern interpretations, and each have seen adaptions and refinements over the centuries, as new generations have learnt to play the game (a contemporary example of this would be the 'recent' Apple Application that features "Nine Man's Morris" as a playable game, as depicted in the two images to the left; you can see in the example to the left that the games basic design hasn't changed at all since the Medieval version I roughly sketched above.) With further research I learnt that both games are very 'loosely organised' under a 'group' of Ancient Germanic boardgames (as developed also by the Celts) known as "Tafl Games."
"These games originated in northren Europe and are miniature battles fought between unequal forces." - Bell (1980, p.75.)
Played over a latticed (or chequered) board, the games (as described by Robert Charles Bell in the quote above) featured two opposing forces, with a number ratio of 2:1 (roughly) between them. The games themselves are very similar in 'style' indeed, as to how the core gameplay mechanics are implemented into each of their rules. Whilst a large number of varients do exist (perhaps 'Hnefatafl', the Saxon 'interpretation', being one of the more popular amongst Ancient Europeans (Bell 1980, p.77.) the board game, in almost all its variaties, features either a single 'piece' (played by one of the two players) of which has to escape from the much larger opposing force (as is the case in 'Hnefatafl', which simulates the King escaping from a foriegn invasion force, after having been trapped by them.) Or, alternatively, the game 'sees' the larger 'force' attempting to flee from the opposing player's single piece (as is the case in "Fox and Geese".) The game's rules do share similarities and can be compared to, 'Tick-Tack-Toe', in that the player with the larger force will attempt to 'line-up' their individual 'pieces' so as to form a 'Mill', by doing this they are limiting the opposing player's potential spaces to which he or she can move; but at the same time, like in 'Checkers', the opposing player can you use his/her singlular piece to 'jump' over the opponant's piece into an empty space (thereby 'eliminating' that specific piece from play.) If the player with the larger force has created a 'Mill' without considering the opposing player's pattern of movement, he/she could essentially lose more than one piece per turn, and so on...
"Tafle" games no longer hold the popularity they once did, but their importance in the history of board games is a significant one, for it was only through the introduction of 'Chess' throughout northern Europe that the game began to see a decline in popularity amongst the peoples of Europe; but, like in our own game, it seems as if conflict (symbolic of 'physical' combat) has always retained a very significant popularity with those who play board games...
Research Into The Genre of Fantasy, Fantasy Art, and Its Various Sub-genres
"Fantasy role playing grew out of wargaming with miniature figures. These are battles fought with little armies of toy soldiers on a table top." - Holmes (1981, p.62)
Romanticising about the past is something that humanity has nearly always seem to have done. We do it with music, history, art etc. and the same can be said about narrative, and this is especially significant in boards games when viewed objectively, as a seperate form of media.
It has been interesting to see the 'evolution' of fantasy as a theme in board games, particularly games featuring a strong role-playing element. I've been reading a book entitled "Fantasy Role Playing Games" by John Eric Holmes, and in it, he describes that very history, and notably, it began with the release of that "epic adult fairy tale" that even young audiences today can now relate to, J.R.R. Tolkien's book "The Lord of the Rings." With the huge popularity that came with the release of (what was to become a series of books) was the obvious 'niche' that appeared in the market for re-creating the large-scale battles, featured in the narrative of these books.
The 'history of miniature wargaming', really, came about with the advent of board games such as "Wei-qi" or "Chess" (both of which are explained earlier on within my research) which are both essentialy games that sought to re-create the types of conflicts that were 'common-place' during their individual times. Miniature wargaming (in the way we understand it now) was formed initially by a man named "Helwig" in 1780, who produced the first game that featured 'squares' representative of large regiments or units of men (or cavalry), with differening 'movement values' to suit. Wargaming then shifted from a purely entertaining practise, to having an involvement in the military (something actually that 'carries over' today with digital gaming and first person shooters used by various armies of the world) with a game (and set of rules) developed by a "Prussian father-son team" in 1811, of which the "father" is "Baron von Reisswitz." The game conformed to a specific scale and unique map type, but little else and it wasn't untill his son ("Lieutenant George Heinrich Rudolf Johann von Reisswitz") created his own interpretation of his father's work in 1824, entitled "Instructions for the Representation of Tactical Maneuvers Under the Guise of a Wargame.")
"The gamers move the armies according to elborate movement roles... across a map-like terrain, and resolve rifle fire or the clash of swords by die rolls of varying complexity." - Holmes (1981, p.62)
The inclusion of rules specificing the use of combat within the game, whilst also providing a "topographical" representation of the map, was highly innovative, and led to the game's presentation to a General of the Prussian army, to which his response was "This is not a game! This is training for war! I must recommend it to the whole army!" As stated, the game was to be released to the armies various regiments (the components of the game being 'suplied' in "a wooden box 10 inches long and 6 inches wide." From this continues the 'history of miniature wargaming', and it's relevence lies in that eventually, as a result of this, 'we' were given perhaps one of the most highly aclaimed, and greatest exponents of the fantasy genre in games, I of course refer to "Dungeons & Dragons."
Officialy released in 1974, "Dungeons & Dragons" is largely considered the archetypal 'fantasy board game' (much the same as J.R.R. Tolkien would be considered the "Father of Modern Fantasy") atleast this was what came to my mind immediately upon discussing to my group, about possibly using a 'Medieval-type fantasy theme' as the premiss for developing our own board game around. The board game we have in fact been creating does differ from the complexities of the "Dungeons & Dragons" I.P. (or 'intellectual property') but also draws heavily on the influence of both this game and the works of J.R.R. Tolkien's fantasy worlds, but don't many contemporary adaptions of historical, mythological, or 'sword-and-scorcery' themes into a fantastical setting give homage to both such sources in one way or another? Either way, our group has already 'defined' our game a sort of 'Medieval fantasy', possibly very cliché, but is the sought of game we desired to produce, and so my research continues further into 'types' of fantasy that exist...
I've recently been performing research concerning the 'categorising' of fantasy, and the possible 'sub-genres' that are the result of this and what I've found has been extremely mixed and overlapping, with the discussion being highly opinionated and based on little 'fact' or definitive statements; and so in-light of this, I thought I would offer my own opinion as to what it is I view as 'the types of fantasy', whilst looking also at artwork I believe reflects these views. I feel it's also important to note that I will be focusing on the more 'traditional' fantasy categories (the older, more 'well-established' form of fantasy that takes much from history, particularly Medieval or Classical, and develops this further; as opposed to 'Science-Fiction' fantasy, which has no relevence to the form of fantasy that we, as a group, have in fact 'pursued' in our own work.) You could argue that the very effort is as vague as the genre it attempts to categorise but I will endevour to do so none-the-less. Again, I must stress that this section is based on my own opinions in what feels like a highly obscure 'discussion', with no obvious 'right or wrong' answers, and so, whilst there are articles 'out there' publishing alternative 'suggestions', often contradictory to my own, I'll attempt to describe how I believe (in a highly 'condensed' fashion) the 'categories' are defined...
'High' or 'Epic' Fantasy
'High' (or 'Epic') Fantasy is one example, whereby human imagination has led to the creation of fantastical and 'whimsical' worlds with very little basis or reference to the 'real world', as we understand it. Possibly the most celebrated (or influential) examples (atleast that come to mind) that use this type of fantasy throughout their narrative and artistic style, would be the 'intellectual properties' of both 'Warhammer' and 'World of Warcraft' (both of which intergrate Medieval and historical themes as a basis, but include little else in the way of real-world 'references' as a form of realism or in any way pertaining to historical accuracy.)
These are examples of some notable artists in this 'field' of work, reflecting the nature of "High Fantasy" as one where magic seems to be freely used, affecting anything and everything, with little boundaries or 'constrictions' on the sorts of characters or creatures that feature in the narrative.
'Warhammer Illustrators' and Their Artwork
Adrian Smith
Arguably, Adrian Smith's work could also be included in another 'sub-category' (or 'sub-genre') within fantasy, which is what you would call 'Dark Fantasy' (something that is in all accounts 'fantastical', but features horror or 'gritty', dark themes, often related with evil or malice, which is exuded throughout the piece of work.) Adrian Smith's work is actually a personal favourite of mine, and depicts somewhat of the 'old-school' illustrative style prevelent throughout the late nineties and early twenty-first century artwork of comics, graphic novels etc. Although 'realistically' rendered, and with a high believability to it, you can quite clearly see the extreme 'over-the-top' elements to the work that features often throughout many of the pieces produced in "High Fantasy". The work will almost always reflect the style of the narrative, with which Warhammer, can only really be described as highly exagerated and 'extreme' in the way it interprets, and 're-invents' much of what we understand as fantasy (orcs, goblins, elves, wizards etc.)
Alex Boyd
Again, Alex Boyd's work reflects this idea of a 'gritty believability' but then takes it one step further and 'blows it up' into this immense, highly imaginative world where everything is big, bold, and exagerated (and yet refined, and 'contained';) it's only through artwork such as this and the highly ellaborate story that we can believe, even for an instant, that this world 'could' exist.
Paul Dainton
Paul Dainton is another good example of how the dark (and quite often horrific) world of the Warhammer universe, is 'transported' through these majestic, highly cinematic, and very surreal pieces of artwork; that serve not only the purpose of describing what, and how these particular characters interact or affect the world around them, but the 'extremes' by which they do so (the completely stylised and imaginative sky, featured in the background in this particular piece to the right, is almost 'Turner-esc' in it's realistic, yet entirely abstract qualitites.)
The Warhammer (fantasy) franchise, originally released in 1983, is one of the most concurrent of the 'miniature wargaming' forms of games; and although technically considered a 'table-top' form of gaming, it's relevence and impact on other forms of gaming (both fantasy and otherwise) I feel is prevelent. In terms of the game our team is designing (atleast from my own point of view) it remains a strong influence over my own work within this project, and how I will choose to develop it (although this isn't in anyway a 'direct influence', it does remain a constant sub-conscience thought, whenever I consider the fantasy genre as a whole in this way.) Considering the game from it's gameplay mechanics, it's success in popular culture today (I feel) is integral to not only it's artistic style and form of marketing, but that it appeals to both male and female audiences (though particularly male) due to it's violent content and the ability of the player to 'act-out' large-scale, set-piece battles that with otherwise be impossible (not to mention dangerous.)
The Art of 'Warcraft'
The following artists are all part of a design team, known within the business as the "Sons of Storm" (with the 'group' comprising of "Chris Metzen, Samwise Didier, Glenn Rane, Rene of Twincruiser, MG, Thammer, and Peter Lee.") Their individual styles, when placed together, have become synonymous with the almost 'ludicrous caricature' of the industry understood, 'quintessential' and archetypal fantasy 'norms' (e.g. elves orcs, trolls etc.) yet the style heightens this and exaggerates it much much further. In comparison to the 'Warhammer artwork' featured above, the characters, for a start, are alot less figurative or based on a sense of realism or naturalism, but are instead much more in the way of the, not cartoony, but graphical style featured in alot of today's comic-book art. The colours chosen are far less mute, or subdued, featuring a palette of bright, bold and exemplified colours (often avoiding dark, or monochromatic palettes in favour of 'primary colours' and other colours of a similar nature.) The 'visual cues' seen throughout the artwork produced by the 'Blizzard team' share key features that tie one into the other, possibly the most evident of these being the 'blocky', bold (and quite simplistic) shapes that comprise the forms of the characters themselves, and there is a reason behind this...
The original 'Warcraft' digital games featured this 'blocky' style, that again, has become so famous, and recognizable with the I.P. today, but originally, that would have been due to the constraints of the technology available, meaning that the character designs couldn't be too elaborate, due to the modelling programs that would have to translate this content across into the digital 'realm'; and so the design had to be consistent and visually 'to the point.' The Franchise's most popular and financially successful output (namely the "World of Warcraft") still needs to consider these constraints, due to the form of media that they are developing in (online "Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games, or, MMORPGs.) Therefore the designs themselves are simplistic enough to be modelled 'effectively' (using digital '3D software' such as 'Maya', 'Mudbox' or 'Zbrush') yet also the artistic style has since developed (and retained) a popularity of it's own amongst its audience and 'fandom', and so this remains a consistant design element or 'specification' that each artist 'conforms to' throughout the process, up into the finished pieces.
'Dungeons & Dragons' Artwork
Very briefly, this is the work of Tyler Jacobson, who has produced images (in my mind) for both "High Fantasy" (as I consider/interpret it) and "Low Fantasy" sub-genres, here I'll show you some of his illustrations for the "Dungeons & Dragons" I.P. and later I'll post other pieces of his work I feel reflect a more 'low fantasy' tone.
There are many, many more franchises that I could list here (with atleast double that number for the artists who supply work for them) with 'Magic: The Gathering' perhaps as the next obvious I.P. to include in this section concerning the artwork that 'falls' into the category of fantasy 'sub-genres' I've outlined in this post. Though the examples I've provided I feel are enough (atleast for now) in illustrating my point.
'Low Fantasy'
'Low Fantasy' (which is by no means at all refering to the quality of the work) is the other large 'category' I feel is encompassed by the fantasy genre as a whole. I would describe (very briefly) this type of fantasy as a much more 'subdued' form of the fantasy presented above. Often more mature in it's content (but not always) this form of fantasy (to me) takes place in either the world we know now, the world as it once existed, or an alternate reality that draws heavily on our history or the contents of our reality (in away, a form of 'real-world fantasy.')
Most literary sources that I've read have almost always described "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy as 'epic' or 'high fantasy' (of which in terms of the sheer scale and scope of the work, I'd agree) however, I cannot help but disagree, in that I feel it's far too rooted in 'real-world history' and with far too strong a sense of realism and 'grounding' to be considered (atleast in my opinion) something of this type of sub-genre, with it being more akin to "Low Fantasy", than anything else. This particular franchise (from a point of bias I might add) is without a doubt one of my favourite forms of fantasy of all time (the books alone are one of my favourite just from a literary point of view) though before this blog quickly turns into a rant about my opinions, interpretations, or understanding for that matter of the books; I'll very very briefly just mention afew of these 'real-world' examples that is referenced, and of which I speak of. The 'Rohan' culture, as featured in the books, is heavily based on Tolkien's own understanding of Anglo-Saxon history, and were a result of how he (Tolkien) felt the Saxons (when inhabiting Britain) should have developed as a culture (if given the chance) before the Norman invasion by William the Conqueror in 1066. J.R.R. Tolkien's extensive use of linguistics throughout the books, are also a testament to his own extensive knowledge of the world's languages, both widely used today (and some not.) Many of his Elven languages (or 'Elvish') was heavily based on Welsh, for example. In summary, "Middle-Earth", as it is known (the fantasy world that Tolkien bases many of his characters and events in) is considered (obviously fictitiously) as part of our own history, and pre-dates recorded history, and man's eventual and un-contested 'dominion' over the planet.
The more recent "Harry Potter" franchise is another example of this 'world within a world' idea. Though still based heavily on our own world (in this case, placed literally within our own world, albeit 'hidden') the fiction relies, extremely heavily, on pre-exisiting myths and legends (with almost no re-imagining or 're-interpretation' of these said "myths" save for the artistic style chosen for the beasts or fantastical creatures.) The 'originality' within the I.P. lies with "Harry" and the other characters featured in J.K. Rowley's 'world' and how these myths interwine with the fiction outlined within the story.
With further research, I discovered a terminology that covers all of the a fore-mentioned examples of "Low Fantasy", which was originally coined by J.R.R. Tolkien himself, the word (or 'term') being "Mythopoeia."
"Mythopoeia" refers to the fictious use of recorded historic events and cultures; or myths, legends and mythologies (as developed throughout history within these said 'cultures')as a means of adding credibility, or 'believability' to the works in question; a definiton as provided by "Academic dictionaries and encyclopedias" states...
"mythopoeia aims at imitating and including real-world mythology, specifically created to bring mythology to modern readers, and/or to add credibility and literary depth to fictional worlds infantasy or science fiction books and movies...It is invented mythology that, rather than arising out of centuries of oral tradition, are penned over a short period of time by a single author or small group of collaborators."
Below, I'll briefly post several examples of artist's work (some of who have provided illustrations for the examples as given above) concerning "Low Fantasy." To begin with, I thought I'd choose two pieces by Tyler Jacobson, both of which are based on two classic/famous literary myths or 'legends' that have been passed down through the ages...
Tyler Jacobson
The two pieces of work presented above are both from the artist Tyler Jacobson (one depicting the pivotal scene in the 'Moby Dick' tale, whilst the other is from the historical epic, old-English poem, 'Beowulf', the scene depicted is of Beowulf's encounter with the creature 'Grendel.') Compositionaly, actually, it is interesting to note how the artist has composed the two images, the first depicting the 'action' as it ensues on the canvas, whilst the other reflects the moment before 'battle', with all the suspense and drama that encompasses this.
I've chosen these two paintings (both of which are created traditionally using oils, perhaps there is a link there to this genre of fantasy?) because I feel there are in fact, two different, yet often 'consistent' styles to the types of work produced between the 'high' and 'low' fantasy genres. Comparing these two pieces of Tyler Jacobson's work, to his other work I presented above in the 'high fantasy' section of my blog, whilst there are similarities (other than the fact the artistic style will of course be similar, having both being produced by the same artist, a realistic 'rendition' along with elements of fantasy being the prevelent examples of this) I still think there are reflected subtle, but important differences (something I think is also relevent to other artist's work I will be presenting in this section of my blog) which is the fact that the artists has constrained or 'held-back' the fantastical elements to the work, in favour of greater believability in comparison to our own sense of 'realism' or the world as we understand it (of course this is still highly exagerated however.) The two pieces of work directly above (particularly the piece that features 'Moby Dick') are highly reminiscent (in both style and composition) of the art of 'History Painting' (that is to say the form of art made famous during the classical period, later refined in the Renaissance, and further continued into the nineteenth-century by artists such as the 'Pre-Raphaelites.') Described often as 'epic' or 'grandiose', this form of art is admired usually for its scale or 'scope', but also due it's depiction of famous 'scenes' in the classical style.
Frank Frazetta
Frank Frazetta, is one of those artists whose influence seems to be cited by many (if not most) of contemporary artists in the fields of illusration or conceptual art (as related to the game, comic and movie undustries) today. His methods of working (although widely unknown) make use of traditional painting techniques, along with the classical knowledge of 'Fine Art' that consisted of the intense study of nature, colour theory, perspective and of course an intimate knowledge of anatomy (which he subsequently combined with fantastical elements to 'arrive' at the style to which he did.) For me, personally, it was his dramatic and bold use of lighting (remindful of the chiaroscuro technique developed during the Renaissance, artists such as Caraviggio in particular was a great 'executor' of this style) that he used to model and shape his 'scenes' (often his nudes) that helped to create such powerful imagery. I think Frank Frazetta's influence over Tyler Jacobson's work, for example, is also quite evident.
The works of Frank Frazetta (some of which I've included below) were illustrated for a variety of different fantasy stories (each of which I would include under the 'low fantasy' heading) encompassing such titles as 'Conan the Barbarian' and 'Tarzan' (who for many believe, Frank Frazetta's style redefined and 'renewed' popularity for both these titles, to the point where the 'aesthetics' of his artistic technique became almost synonymous with the knowledge of the literary works.)
Alan Lee
Alan Lee's work (as with Frank Frazetta's art on the 'Conan the Barbarian' and 'Tarzan' stories) has become synonymous with the visual 're-imagining' of Tolkien's world of 'Middle Earth', through his unique creative style. Again, another artist that works with traditional mediums, Alan Lee made use of his extensive knowledge of water colours in particular, this, along with his mastering technique of drawing with pencils provided the 'canvas' from which his fantastical elemtns were to 'spill-out' onto (culminating in him becoming of the great masters of fantasy illustration.) His efforts on the Lord of the Rings trilogy of feature films also saw him being awarded an Academy Award for Best Art Direction (under the category of 'Set Decoration'.) In addition to this, in 1998, Alan Lee also achieved the 'Best Artist Award' at the 'World Fantasy Awards.'
John Howe
John Howe is another artist who is noted for his contributions in illustrating the works of J.R.R. Tolkien's fictituous "The Lord of the Rings" series of text. Working alongside Alan Lee, John Howe was responsible also for producing an extensive 'body of artwork' for Peter Jackson's film adaptations of 'The Lord of the Rings' books.
Artists tend to choose work (or 'themes') that best reflects or 'exhibits' their individual styles (often with little need for adaption or further development to that 'style', due to the nature of potential employers commisioning work based on the style or aesthetics of previous pieces.) To this extent, it's clear as to why I chose a group of artists whose body of work are intimately linked to (or famous for association with) literary works that in my opinion, 'reflect' the idea behind 'low fantasy' as a sub-genre of fantasy.
Art and narrative are very often intricately connected, and this is true really for most art, whether that art attempts to 'figuratively' depict the events of something, or even if it's meaning is far more obscure; this is why, although my primary focus was on the differing types of art in fantasy (of which now I look back on my research, could have been far more objective and perhaps could have included a greater variety of 'styles') I never-the-less needed to place this into a 'context', which, essentialy, encompassed some of the history of 'fantasy' in the genre as we understand it today and ultimately, how, between literature and boardgames (and the art that helped 'inform' them) the genre recieved the expansive audience it has today.
Development of the Board Game (Continued)
The first week ended with our group having established the premise for our game idea, as well as sketches for initial designs and concepts; Paul Blackham, for example, his concentration was on the design of the board itself, this included both the 'practical' design that affected gameplay, whilst also being the person who would produce the final aesthetics the player would see on both the board itself and the tiles to be placed on the board. Paul returned at the end of the first week with a sketch for the board layout (Paul studied Maths at A level, so it made sense for him to be the person who calculated the measurements for the board, for which he did.) The artwork that was to go onto the board was a collaborative process by the whole team, a forest theme for example we had decided on, and I offered my advice as to how the forest may look like from an aerial view/perspective, looking directly down, I contributed also to the idea itself and the rules for the two 'watch-towers' and 'road-blocks' that were to be put into the game, offering players alternatives to simply rushing straight to the middle.
From Paul's designs we began to 'flesh-out' the bulk of the rules for the game (the rules of which have changed since 'play-testing' but the original rule set we had established on this day became a strong foundation for that in which you see in the final game/product.) At this stage, I had suggested the character cards as a way of identifying with the small square 'counters' that the player would be using as 'pieces' in the game, through colour co-ordination and symbols that would be displayed on both the character cards that Ilze and myself would be designing, and the 'pieces' themselves; though at this stage Paul expressed a very strong interest in including actual three-dimensional 'figures' that would closer represent 'who' the player would be playing as. This of course was a great idea, though I orginally 'scrapped' this concept early on in my head as it seemed a time-consuming process, and something that would have largely not been necessary in the grander scheme of things when still developing, at this stage, the game from an initial concept, into a working board game/design (which is why I suggested the original, highly simplisitic concept of square 'counters', the fact that I also desired to produce artwork in the form of 'playing cards' did also enter my mind, and was in fact an intention in 'driving' this idea.) Later, however, Paul was in fact to pursue this idea further, producing 'figures' that really added something to the game, and still is a major contribution to the success of the final product. To the right I have included the notes (which I've scanned in) of the information we worked through that day. The board design (that you can see I scribbled down in the image above) Gavin Cassels also copied from this (Paul's basic design) and took this home with him with the intention to build the 'proto-type' of the board so that we can not only see what the game looked like it (albeit this was a scaled-down version however) but also so that we could begin play-testing the rules and develop the idea further before any serious 'visual' design work was done on the game (in terms of the artwork etc.) just in case something was to change and it would mean 'scraping' this work (which of course would have been a waste of time.) Dan Capon was also a major influence in alot of the rules that were to be established (he naturally wrote these down quite extensively as each of us conveyed our own ideas to the group, and it was at this point that his role of creating the manual, or instruction 'booklet' for the game, began to take shape, becoming ultimately his main contribution to the design of the final game. The core-game mechanics had been established during the first week, and Gavin was in fact to return during the second week with the proto-type, and some of the tiles created out of paper, Paul was also to return on the Monday of the 'second week', with something that offered much to our board game...
The sketches to the left depict the figures that Paul created over the 'first' weekend, to be broguth in Monday (you can see, very crudely, I've drawn the pieces from direct observation from both the front and in profile, whilst next to the figure drawings were even 'cruder' sketches from my head on the intial character concepts as based on Paul's own designs.) Paul, did not in fact inform anyone that he was planning on producing these player 'pieces' (atleast were unaware as to his intention to pursue the idea, that he had suggested very briefly in having three-dimensional playing pieces, any further, past those intial 'suggestions.') It therefore came as quite a surprise (and a pleasent one at that) when he turned up with this latest work on Monday of the second week, the same time when Gavin 'presented' the proto-type of the board game he had created (something that, whilst we were expecting, was as equally beneficial in moving the development of the project further.) The character 'concepts' (that would finally form the 'character cards' in their completeed state) was something that I initally was going to develop, entirely on my own, in terms of the complete 'look' of the visual design of the characters themselves. Fortunately, however, I had yet to establish anything substantial on paper concerning this (as I was busy working on my initial research.) Paul, since he had placed quite alot of time and effort into these figures (and because the pieces had a fairely strong design to their aesthetics) I thought it would be nice to keep the artwork between the team as consistent as possible, to this end, I decided to 'cater' my own designs around Paul's figures (the "Thief", for example, would feature the iconic 'Highwayman hat', the archer would have his/her bow, the mage a staff etc.) It was at this stage also that we began to discuss the possibility of providing a 'choice' to the player, in the form of both male and female 'variants' to each of the characters.
The pieces themselves were simplistic (which I feel is one of the main factors contributing to the success of their design.) Due to this 'simplicity', it was up to both Ilze and I as to how 'close' we were going to keep our character designs to this idea (I think, due also to the nature of our board game, it was important that everything was easily identifible, and didn't require too much 'effort' on the player's behalf, having targeted our game at the younger demographic, around the age of ten, as well as an older audience meant that that first 'target market' needed to be reached first.) For me, personally, I also wanted to produce artwork pertaining to (or 'retaining' the qualities of) more of the "Low Fantasy" 'end' to the fantasy 'spectrum' as a whole (primarily this meant instilling my work with a sense of realism and 'grounding' it to the real-world.)
'Simple' character designs, led to simple visual 'cues' that are farely recognisable throughout the genre from which our game was set (the elven archer with bow and quiver, the sly and heavily disguised thief character, the mage with his or her magical staff and the 'muscular' warrior, with the two-handed great weapon or sword/axe and shield.) Whilst the designs themselves were easily recognisable, I did decide that when it came to painting them (within a digital medium) that I would experiment with the colours, creating subtle 'combinations' that perhaps weren't as equally recognisable.
Later I was able to recieve photographs of both the board 'proto-type' and Paul's figures (which Gavin Cassels was kind enough to photograph) on the first Monday, of the second week that they were first brought in (the pictures of which you can see below.) This stage of our developmental process (or stages of the natural 'progression' in the iterative process) was a defining one (atleast for myself) as we got to see for the first time the board game, as not just a concept, or an idea on paper, but the beginnings of a tangible product.
The board (and figures) that you see in the images above were accompanied also by various cardboard and (once we had run out of cardboard) paper 'tiles' that meant that our game was in fact playable (though obviously still in a primitive form/state.) Initially, the board, tiles and figures were used by ourselves (the 'team') to play-test our game, through the rest of the second week (by this point I had in fact begun the process of creating my artwork for the project, though for the purpose of clarity I'll include this later on in this blog all under one 'heading' for the entirety of the artwork itself.) Later (namely during the 'third week') the proto-type was used in play-testing amongst the other groups on our course (this was after having directly presented, or 'pitched' our board game concept to the tutors and the other groups present and likewise, the other groups did the same.) In terms of the 'pitch' itself, in all honesty, our team was 'caught' completely unprepared (without board, pieces, any finished artwork, or even a plan or approach as to what we were going to talk about, who was going to talk and in what order.) Avoiding naming specific person, we (including myself) were all under the impression originally (which was in fact correct) that we would be presenting our work (so far) on the first Monday, of the third week; a member from another team/group, however, informed us of our 'mistaken' dates (well atleast that person said this to one member of our team, who in turn relayed this to the rest, which was, however, not in any way their fault) and so believing this 'new-found' information to be true, we arrived on the Monday to find that we did in fact have a presentation to 'perform.' Although this was the case, we didn't really have an exuse for not double-checking and so we were forced to adapt quickly to the situation. Luckily, our team worked together well, and that we shared 'resources' or our ideas openly, so that when it came to our turn in presenting our work, we were able to speak naturally and relatively fluidly on our board game and 'iterative' process. I had also with me my initial sketches and under paintings on a USB 'stick', which I in turn projected onto the large screen behind us, just so the 'audience' was aware of not only the visual design or 'look' to the board game we were developing, but also, very simply, to have something to 'look at' (appealing to those who are primarily 'visual', as opposed to kinesthetic or audio, learners, and considering most if not all of them are artists, this was in fact a very important part of the presentation, I felt atleast.)
Overall I felt the presentation was relatively successful, with the play-testing that followed being almost equally so (as our board game 'garnered' some interest from the other groups based on our pitch.) It's interesting to note also that this was the first time our 'team' had seen what the other groups had produced (both in terms of their ideas and also the work that they had created towards this project brief) and from what we had seen, there were some interesting concepts...
There was some talk by one member from another group play-testing our game of possibly adding more 'depth' to the characters themselves (such as extra abilities, or the possibility to 'level-up') but whilst an interesting idea, it wasn't really necessary for the type of game we had created, for the combat was introduced primarily to add an element of strategy and friendly 'conflict' towards the game (if my research into the history of board games has highlighted anything in particular, it was that conflict in games seems to resonate rather well with people, usually.) The rules, therefore, from here on remain largely un-altered from the final product...
The Board Game's Rules and Components
Joyce Brabban and Niqi Chasseaud (two members of our team that were primarily involved in the marketing aspects of our project) took on the responsibility of naming our board game (after a series of 'failed' attempts, by the group, to do the same) the result being the title "The Key to Victory." As the title suggests, the board game's main objective requires the player to take and hold a key, of which there is only one and then from their starting location (marked as an 'X' in the diagram below) the player proceeds to construct a path, using the tiles available, to the middle of the board (marked as a 'V' in the diagram) the 'V' in fact represents 'victory' and the player simply needs to stand on this tile (whilst holding the key) to achieve victory within the game. The 'B's that you see present in the diagram below, represent 'blocks' to the player (meaning that there is a natural feature on the board, such as a mountain or hill-top etc. that is preventing the player from laying down a tile there, or moving through that location.) Present at these 'block' spaces are also four unique locations (a fox, a boar, pieces of an armoured-suit and a shrine) these locations can be 'teleported' to by the player, should he or she draw a 'chance card' that states so. The 'block' tiles/spaces cannot be moved in any way by the player, and remain in these fixed positions at all times throughout the game. The purpose of these 'blocks' was ultimately to add an element of strategy to the game, by 'forcing' the players into travelling towards these narrow 'openings' surrounding the victory space, you're effectively encouraging the players to interact (in the form of combat.) This adds a 'risk factor' to the game in that the player is aware of these 'hot-spots' and that he or she will eventually have to traverse through these areas in order to have a chance at victory.
The game's components consist of a board (56x56cm) that comprises 53 individual 'squares' (of which four are 'starting locations', another four are 'blocks' and one is the 'victory' space; this leaves the player with fourty-four available spaces for laying down 'tiles.') The game also comes with 44 individual 'tiles' (many of which depict an entirely unique design for the purpose of adding strategy to the game in how the player chooses to construct their paths, as the 'tiles' will be randomly drawn from a pile; each of these 'tiles' is divided further, and comprises of 9 squares the player must move through; note also that there are 2 'watch-tower' and 2 'road-block' tiles within that number.) Four character pieces (that have been specifically sculpted to represent each character 'class) one die, an instruction manual (designed by Dan Capon, Gavin Cassells also provided his concept for this before we decided on Dan's) 8 'character cards' (that Ilze and I designed, both in the layout and the original artwork featured, the purpose of these cars again providing useful information about the name and ability of the character, whilst also offering the player further 'emersion' into the role-playing element of our game through the drawings/paintings) and finally 28 'chance cards' (5 switch places with another player, 4 move to 'landmarks', 6 swap any two unoccupied tiles, 3 miss a go and 3 go back to the start.) The purpose and method of play for the 'chance cards' I'll briefly explain in more detail, further on this blog.
Simplistically, our board game consists of the sequential rolling of a die (both to establish who holds the key and the 'order of play' at the start of the game, representative of the highest number rolled whilst also affecting the distance of movement or 'action' available to the player.) Combat is also an element in the game, and is the primary (and only) means by which other players may obtain the key from the player who is holding onto it. Essentialy, combat involves both players rolling a die, first the 'attacking' player rolls to see how successful his/her attack was, whilst the 'defending' play rolls to defend, the higher of the two numbers decides the outcome of combat and if the player who 'lost' was holding the key, the key then passes on to the successful player, either way if the player lost combat he/she returns to their starting location, 'X'; but if they defended successfully, the attacking player is forced back one space or movement 'square' and it's then the next player's turn. The 'statistics' in combat are affected also by the various 'abilities' available to the player (depending on the character he or she is playing.) These 'abilities' can only be used to interact with the other players (namely in combat.) There are in fact four characters that the player can choose from (each of which consist of both male and female options/'varients') these are the archer, the mage, the knight (or 'warrior') and the thief. The abilities of each character 'class' are:
Sequence of Play
The board is empty at the beginning of the game (save for the 'block' spaces, the starting locations and the 'victory' tile in the centre.) The players then choose their characters (and collect the individual 'character cards' that come with them) and place them at one of the four starting locations. Each player then roles a single six-sided die, the player with the highest roll recieves the key (needed to enter the victory tile) and then the 'order/sequence of play' is then established as clock-wise from the player who holds the key (if two or more players roll the same number, they simply roll again untill it is clear that one player has the highest number.) The player who rolled the highest number at the beginning and subsequently recieved the key, begins the game with his character located in the 'starting area' opposite the way the 'victory' tile is facing (basically if the 'V' is pointing downwards, the 'key-holder' would begin the game at the 'X' at the top of the board, as depicted in the diagram above; this rule was implemented to the benefit, or the 'advantage' of the other players, as the 'key-holder' is forced to take a longer route around the board before he/she can achieve 'victory'.)
Each player begins with two tiles (and must always hold a maximum of two throughout the rest of the game untill all tiles have been 'played.') The player only can choose where he/she places the tile on the board, though they can only place tile once he/she has reached the end of the tile that they are moving on, and still has 'movement' left (for example, if the player rolls a 5 and they are 3 movement 'squares' away from the edge of the tile that they are on, they then place their next tile down and continue moving the remaining 2 'squares'.)
The player always begins by rolling the six-sided die first (on the roll of a 2-5, the player moves this set number of 'squares' on a tile, on the roll of a 1 or a 6, the player draws a chance card.) The player always recieves one 'tile' (randomly chosen) from the pile each turn (so that they they are always holding a maximum of two tiles at a time.) The player, when having reached the end of the tile with movement to spare, and having begun placing their tile, has the option of placing the tile in any available space and in any direction they choose (a 360 degree radius) meaning they can either create a path directly towards the centre, towards another player, or use their tile to try and block another player (note this would often mean sacrificing their own movement or path 'forwards' for that turn.) Note also that there must always be a path leading out of the 'starting area' within the first tile (so players cannot rotate the first tile adjoining the starting area if it means there is no available path for the player to leave the starting area, they can, however, rotate the 'first tile' if it means there is a path.)
Another of my contributions to gameplay and the rules of the game were the 'watch-tower' and 'road-block' tiles. There are only ever two of each and they are randomly shuffled in amongst the 'standard' tiles. These unique tiles allow the player to either place something beneficial (or 'positive') on the board, in the form of the 'watch-tower' tile, or something that hinders the players (or is 'negative') in the form of the 'road-block' tiles. If the player moves onto the 'watch-tower' symbol on that individual tile, on the board, they are granted the ability (for that turn) to rotate any tile on the board (including a tile that a player is occupying) what is significant about this rule is that this is the only opportunity the player has at rotating a tile that is occupied by another player (the 'rotate a tile' chance card doesn't allow this rule.) The 'road-block' tile is basically what it describes, it's a tile with a 'dead-end', essentialy blocking any further movement by the player along this particular path (the 'road-block' tile can be placed anywehre on the board, except infront of any of the starting locations or directly adjoining the 'victory' tile in the centre of the board, this is also the case with the 'watch-tower' tile.) These unique tiles, again, can be placed anywhere (except the locations mentioned previously) on the board and are treated like any 'standard' tile (except for their individual 'special' rules) but unlike any of the 'standard' tiles, once they have been placed, they cannot be further moved or 'shifted' in any way (this means rotating, or 'swapping' them etc.) so in this respect they are similar also to the 'block' tiles. This was done in an attempt to offer the player another choice that they can direct their individual paths (or move) towards, other than the centre of the board; again whilst also offering strategy to the gameplay, it also adds another sense of 'risk and reward' to the player, as the player can risk 'sacrificing' movement (towards the key-holder or the 'victory' square/tile) in order to prevent, or hinder another player (whilst play-testing the game, we found that what was often the case was that the players who weren't holding the key, often 'banded-together', albeit temporarily, against the 'key-holder', as they each recognised a common goal that could aid eachother towards achieving, which was obtaining the key; in this scenario, the 'watch-tower' and 'road-blocks' became a particularly useful element and an alternative strategy as one player used the 'watch-tower' to help another.)
Combat (when having reached another player) follows movement and once the combat 'section' of gameplay has been resolved for that turn, it is then the end of 'that' player's turn and the beginning of the next player's turn (and so on, untill somebody has 'won' the game.) Certain rules that we had discussed and play-tested (that didn't make it into the game or final 'rule-set') included the idea of giving each player a certain amount/number of 'lives' (originally being 3.) Another of my ideas (along with the life idea) was to have four seperate keys in each corner of the board, along with four seperate (locked) doors that blocked entry into the 'victory' square/tile. The idea was that the players would need to pick up a key each and then proceed in taking it to the locked door that the individual key opened (I had it so that each key would open the door that was opposite to it on the board, therefore naturally, each player would have to 'cross' one another to get to their individual doors, inacting the combat 'sequence' again.) The idea was later scrapped, but there were still suggestions as to possibly making this an alternate gameplay varient (or alternate difficulty 'mode') to be used in the game. The idea of different rules or difficulty settings (for example having seperate rules if you didn't want to play with the maximum amount/number of players, which is four, but instead wanted to play with two players etc.) 'sprang' from this concept and is still a possibility if we were to revisit the idea and produce future content for it.
The Artwork (my Initial Sketches, Underpaintings, 'Finished' Work, Artistic Processes and my Main Contribution to the Project)
Before I began, in earnest, to develop any artwork for the project, I knew what it was I wanted to create. I attempted to produce artwork in a 'style' associated more so with the 'low-fantasy' sub-genre (of the fantasy genre as a whole) 'instilling' my work with some sense of realism, of which you can see evidence of in how I was to 'go-about' the development process of my work.
I mentioned at the beginning of this project 'blog' that on the first day we all agreed upon differing 'roles' that we would work within and produce work for, that 'filled' that particular role. Naturally, this is the intended process behind team-work, whereby each member contributes their own ideas or content (essentialy their 'abilities') to the benefit of the team as a whole, to this extent my 'role' (or contribution) consisted of being one of two character artists (the other character artist being Ilze Cakste) that is to say, our primary focus was on designing both the aesthetics and content of the 'character cards' themselves, that the player would in fact be using in the game. Decision-making very early on the iterative process centred also around what the intended future content or the overal 'theme' would consist of, we knew the game would be a fantasy that drew heavily from the culture of Europe during the Medieval period, we then decided also that the game would feature entirely in a forested setting...
I was highly fortunate in that the halls of residence that I moved into (before the beginning of this course) is situated right next to the 'Mousehold Heath' forest (something that I was entirely unaware of when first moving in, yet 'there it was', hidden just behind the building, stretching over a 200 acre area.) Despite desperately needing to improve my observational drawing ability (having not drawn or painted anything since my 'Foundation' course, three or four months prior; the course of which was an entirely useless experience for me, in which I learnt nothing during and where my work was largely discouraged) I never-the-less had a strong curiosity about sketching the forest, such a wondering natural resource and having drawn very little from my head (atleast in a very long time) I thought it prudent that I first study and record the subject that I intended to re-create or even use directy in my own work, for this project. Three pages of sketches were the only things that resulted from that experience (apart from the cold I contracted that day from my inappropriate clothing combined with the unexpected rain and cold weather, though who am I to complain) it was definitely a most enjoyable one, however, and the work was useful in that two of the pages I scanned directly into the computer, to be drawn over with the characters I was to design for the 'character cards.'
I really wanted to produce alot more than I did that day, the rain eventually, however, started causing the ink to run but other than that, I have no excuse. Observational drawing is extremely important (in my opinion) if you want to begin to understand something (as the practise essentially sees you scrutinising a subject, observing it in all its intricacies and nuances and recording that information, sometimes very simplistically, onto paper or canvas.) The idea of drawing from life has to be objective, you should try to remain faithful in what you attempt to 'describe' infront of you (distorting the image, from what you see, as little as possible when transferring it from the subject, to your eye, brain and then onto the paper.) I talk as if I'm an expert, I'm clearly not but I do respect the idea behind it and it is (to me) often an intimate experience (whilst other times perhaps simply practise.) If I truly wanted to understand the twisting shapes and forms found within trees, I would have to draw them hundreds, if not thousands of times over (it's hard to say) before the knowledge of them really became engraved into my memory and understanding, though since I haven't drawn too many trees in my lifetime, again, it's difficult to say really how much repitition is needed or 'required' before one could truly 'master' drawing something entirely from his or her head, without aid (obviously with this differing from person to person.)
For those interested, I draw almost exclusively in pen these days (any pen would do, providing the 'nib' is to the size you want, the pens I use are biros and fine-liners, both of which can easily, in my opinion, re-create any of the 'effects' or quality of line a pencil can make.) For almost all my drawings in pen, I draw directly into pen (if I want a photo-realistic 'finish', however, I'll sometimes begin the initial outline/proportions in pencil, before erasing the lines and drawing/shading exclusively in pen, though other than this example, I draw everything using only pen and draw 'straight-in' with pen.) The reason why I do this is due partly to the immediacy and permanency to the medium and line produced (unlike with pencil, there is no temptation to 'rub-out', with pen, once you have 'placed' a line on paper, it's permanently fixed there, this 'forces' you, really, to concentrate on the forms infront of you, first fairley 'surely', before you commit to paper; however beginning directly in pen means that you are constantly exploring the tonal qualities and shapes that you see infront of you, on the papaer itself. In this way it feels as if each line has a purpose and place, perhaps more succinctly or clearly than perhaps it does with pencil (atleast for me) as each line cannot be removed or 'undone' (though the same, I would compare it the feeling of sculpting in marble and stone, or carving into wood, you are essentially 'chipping-away' into the paper, attempting to reveal a form.) The boldness and evidence in the variation of line are other qualities that contribute to my enjoyment and attract me to drawing exclusively in pen
The first of the two images above (the double-page 'spread' of my observational drawings of the local forest) was particulalry important in that it was used directly in my work (namely the initial sketch of one of the character card drawings/paintings.) It's important to note at this point, actually, that I hadn't produced any artwork, of any kind, for many months now before this course (save for two very, very rough digital 'sketches' that I created in aiding my game concept idea that I pitched during the interview process.) I hadn't worked digitally (created digital paintings) for over two years now at this point, so my 'artistic process' or methods of working were largely, essentially, 'unknown', so with this in mind I explored a number of different methods (each of which were through my own personal exploration of the 'resources' I had available to me, to help me create the images for my project.) Out of the four character design that I created (two archers, male and female, and two thieves, male and female) two of the images saw me reference my own face in a mirror in order to study how cetain lighting conditions affected the plains and shdows of the face (one moreso than the other) one painting had me reference two images off of the internet (which I'll include in my bibliography of course) which were done so to add realism and believability to my work, one of the four saw me a scanned image of a sketch drawn directly from life, whilst all other aspects were entirely realised from my own imagination (I'll explain how each drawing/painting was created further on in this project blog.) For now, these are the initial sketches (again, they are extremely rough, as they were simply to compose a scene and nothing more)...
Initial Sketches for the Thief and Archer Characters
The initial sketches were each created using different processes based on the composition I had envisioned for each individually. To begin with, the card designs needed to be able to 'frame' these images (drawings/paintings) quite 'comfortably', to this extent the format of each image was restricted from the beginning. In all honesty I was unaware of the 'correct' measurements to the cards themselves (this is something that as a team we hadn't really decided upon, as at this stage Joyce was still only considering possible designs for the 'chance' cards and had not settled on anything too 'concrete' or definitive in terms of finalising a possible design.) You'll notice, however, that after the second image to the left (the female archer character) that I had decided on a rough scale/measurement for the subsequent three character designs ( if you reversed the order of the first two images, then they'd be each within the order that I created them, the female archer, the male archer, the female thief and the male thief.) The 'format' for the male archer character design (the second of the four initial sketches I created for this project and as seen to the left) was created with an original idea of how I thought the cards were going to look like in the final design, though I admit also that I wanted to incorporate the general 'scene' that I had outlined in my observation drawing of the 'Mousehold Heath' forest, as much as possible, with the intention of 'cropping' the image within photoshop, where necessary, to fit the intended 'format' and to maintain continuity between the work (this was something that could have been discussed further between Ilze and I, as we largely went off and 'did our own thing' in terms of the character designs that we created, with her following her own process and style, the latter of which was of course unavoidable and expected, as we each have our own 'style' or technique.) The format for the female archer (the first of my 'initial sketches' for the four character designs) was basically a square, as I had, again, no idea as to the intended format or 'layout' of the character card designs (it's also important to note that Ilze and I did agree, however, on basing our character card 'layouts' on the design or style of card design as seen in the 'Magic: The Gathering' I.P.) These measurements, however, were later 'scrapped' in favour of the slightly more rectangular format I used in the 'male archer' character (and of course the subsequent 'thief' characters following this design.)
The artistic processes involved with each character design were relatively simple. The female archer 'composition' was created entirely from my head, without reference (which is fairly obvious based on the crudeness, and simplicity of the work at this stage.) The female thief character and the male varient were also created entirely from my own imagination (with the exception of the male thief's hand, which was drawn after my own having had a mirror next to me in which I posed for reference.) The design process concerning the creation of the 'male archer' character design, involved the combining of two scanned images; one, part of the observational/preliminary sketches of the local flora, whilst the other, believe it or not, an extremely quick and rough sketch that I do from my head of a possible pose adopted by the male archer (you can see the archer sketch, that I was later to draw over, develop and slighty refine in the final initial sketch, on the second page featuring pen sketches of Paul's figures/playing pieces, the drawing is in between the two sketches of Paul's archer 'piece' and the sketches of Paul's mage 'piece.')
Although I stated earlier that it had been years since I properly drawn or painted anything digitally (having stopped, really, to work on my traditional artistic skills to improve upon them and ultimately have this inform and affect my subsequent digital work, though I ended up enjoying the 'traditional style' to the extent that I didn't 'return' as quickly as I had planned) never-the-less I still remembered my use of the 'graphics tablet' and digital pen.
The 'tools' I used in the creation of these (extremely rough) digital sketches was a wacom Intuous 3 and the Photoshop Creative Suite 3 (CS3.)
Underpaintings
Due to poor time management I only ever ended up developing two of the underpaintings below into something that resembled a 'final' piece (the male theif and female archer) though I did create underpaintings for each of the character class varients (except for the male archer, of which I was confident the 'initial sketch' was already at a stage that meant I could render the image, fairley comfortably, further into a more refined picture/painting.)
As mentioned previously, each of these particular 'under-paintings' were created using a variety of techniques (more so than in the earlier initial sketch 'phase.')
To begin with, the female archer was simply created entirely from my head (continuing on from the initial sketch 'version') except for the addition of referencing two photographs (one was of a woman's face, the photographer's work can be found under the username 'iofoto' on the website '123rf.com', the other photo was of a wolf's face which was 'sourced' from a website displaying wallpapers, both links can be found, in full, at the end of this blog in the 'Bibliography' section.) Again, to add a sense of realism to the painting, the face of the female archer I had drawn based on photographic reference in the form of a single photo, displaying a woman's face (I do not own the rights to that photo in any way) and the wolf's face to, was also roughly drawn from the reference of a photo of a wolf's face 'snarling' (again, the rights of which for that photograph I do not own.) The remainder of the female archer 'underpainting' and final work did not make use of any other reference whatsoever and was entirely from my own imagination (the rest of my artwork for this project also did not use any photo-reference in any form; the only other form of reference used was either of my own face as seen through a mirror, in real life, or from other forms of observational drawing etc. again, I must stress, only two photographs were used as reference and only for the faces of the wolf and woman in the 'female archer' artwork for this project.) The composition behind the 'female archer' artwork, is actually rather unique, in that I attempted to add another 'nuance' to the work, as based on my research of the Medieval, European culture that our board games 'setting' drew heavily upon (of which I will explain in further detail, later on in the blog.)
The 'female thief' artwork, out of the four pieces of artwork, I was actually the most pleased with (not in terms of the final outcome of the work, of which it is fairly crudely drawn) but because I used no reference at all for it's creation (other than very briefly holding a light up to my face in a mirror in order to refine the woman's facial expression further, but this was a very minor 'activity'.) Again, the 'female thief' is entirely from my own head and imagination, and without reference, I was relatively pleased with the work in that for the first time (in around two years) I had drawn something from my head without the use of photo-reference or the heavy reliance on any other form of observation. The pose (whilst complicated) actually came extremely easy to me, and the challenge, really, comprised of shading the image based on the light-source I had established early on in the concept.I was disappointed that I didn't get to finish the work (due to poor time-management) but I'm fairley pleased with the sense of drama that is 'exuded' from the piece, it is by far the most dramatic of the four (in my opinion) and this is due to the fore-shortened perspective established in the drawing (fore-shortening is a particularly challenging technique to depict in art, and whilst my attempt isn't particulalry accurate, I'm quite happy with the how close I got to making the pose convincing, considering I had no reference.) I also think this particular sketch (or 'under-painting') successfully depicts how establishing a solid concept early on (no matter how crude, or primatively drawn) can allow for a very easy 'work-flow' for the remainder of the development of the piece; if it were not for the initial sketch of the 'female thief' (or more accurately the strong idea as it existed in my head) I would not have been able to develop the drawing to the extent that I did, especially without any reference (this 'under-painting' was also more than enough 'information' on the canvas to be used in developing the image/painting even further into a 'finished product' or completed work.)
The 'under-painting' of the 'male archer' character (in complete contrast to the deveopment of the 'female theif' artwork) has not changed at all since the initial sketch save for the fact tha in the 'under-painting' I have simply added tonal value (or 'shaded-in') the male archer's 'boots.'
The 'male thief' artwork, actually, was possibly the most challenging of the four characters to produce (but resulted in one of the more easier paintings to create.) I knew I wanted a close-up of the character's face (to add variety to the images in comparison to each other) and so this posed a challenge as I also decided to include a 'highway-man' type hat on the character (inspired by Paul's interpretation of the 'thief' character class as seen in the figure he sculpted.) I knew straight away what I wanted to do with the piece (a strong lighting, or form of 'chiaroscuro' seemed appropriate in adding a form of drama to the character, which I felt would highlight or emphasise the personality I had in mind for him.) I promised myself I wouldn't use any photo-reference whatsoever, but I also wanted a sense of realism to the piece (I could have drawn a fairly realistic face entirely from my head, but again I was under time constraints and this would have proved a time-consuming process) I instead turned to the only 'option' I felt I had left; if I couldn't find a suitable model to base my work on, I'd simply use the only model available, myself...
The main reason as to why I finally decided on (essentialy) a 'self-portrait' (though there was no intention on associating my likeness with the 'thief' character) was due primarily to the complications in how I was to (accurately) render or refine, in a fairly realisitic manor, the facial expression I had chosen for the 'male thief' character (the smirk/mischievous smile was chosen to add a little drama and perhaps comedy to the piece, reflective of the male thief's own 'un-trustworthy', sly, deceitful and generally 'twisted' personality.)
For the purpose of creating this image based on drawing my own likeness from observation, I had a small, portable (round) mirror available but I needed a constant light-source and something that would emit a strong enough 'beam' that would cause the sought of strength and types of shadows I desired to be cast upon the face. This issue was later exemplified (after having drawn the thief's initial face from my own, observationally from a mirror) as my desk lamps bulb had blown from previous usage (I actually held the lamp up above my face, pointing downwards, and drew with my other hand and through looking at my reflection in the mirror I was able to draw my face, as the thief's face, with this light-source in mind) I still had my hand to draw from observation as the thief's hand, however (with the complication arising from the fact that I need to immitate the same direction of light, with a different light-source) so I used a very small light that would fit comfortably into the palm of your hand (the light was switched on and off based on pressing your thumb on the light itself.) I needed to reference my left hand but I also needed another hand to hold the light (and maintain the source of light) so I would proceed in holding the light in my right hand and positioning it correctly (but very roughly) over my left hand, looking at the mirror I would then put down the light, and quickly draw what I saw. Section by section I eventually managed to shade my hand based on how the light interacted with my hand, from observation (it was a rather laborious process, however, in that I would constantly lose the light-source and direction of the light whenever I put the light down to draw what I saw in the mirror, this meant I had to constantly re-evaluate and judge, roughly, where the position of the light was previously, having to do this quite a number of times before I had enough information to work from.) This process would not have been as necessary (or as complicated) as it was, were it not for the complexity of the facial expression I chose to depict on the thief (which, again, was difficult to maintain throughout the drawing process, as whether you're aware of it or not, the muscles in your face begin to relax and slowly the facial expression changes, which of course affects not only what you observe in the mirror, but ultimately what you put down, or draw, onto the canvas.) Ofcourse other than the face itself and the hand, the rest of the drawing/image is entirely drawn from head without any reference used. The obvious additions to the underpainting of the 'male thief', when compared to the initial sketch, would be the addition of the index and middle fingers, 'holding-up', between them, a single coin, something I wanted to use as a sought of 'prop' or subtle visual 'cue' in describing to the player the nature of the thief character (whilst the female 'thief' varient reflects the dangerous qualities to the character) with the male thief I wanted to depict the sly and deceitful aspects to the thief character's personality (in that he/she would rather buy his/her way to victory, than achieve it through any sense of hardwork or honour, that the other character classes perhaps would.) The coin was later to be replaced with a key (not only was this more appropriate or 'revelent' to the title of the board game and the nature of the victory conditions of the game itself but I also wanted to depict the main ability of the thief character class, which is to steal the coveted key, needed for 'victory.') In all honesty, I write this reflective commentary afew weeks after having finished working on the 'male thief' piece, and as I look back on the completed work and see the 'coolness' in the colours from which I painted the flesh of my face, it seems more likely that I used the same small light-source (which emits a sought of 'blue-ish/white' colour) that I used for drawing my hand in the mirror, to draw the face also; instead of holding up the lamp (which I used to help me draw the facial expression of the female thief.) I cannot be sure, again, when exactly the bulb 'blew' in my desk lap, but I'm starting to think this was before I attempted to draw the male thief (I definitely know I used the small light-source for the hand, but I could have very well used my desk lamp to help draw the face instead, as I do remember some sense of reluctance and annoyance in needing to use the small light-source in drawing the hand, but not so much the face; either way I used a light-source and my own reflection in a mirror to sketch/paint from, this is exactly why I should make a note of what I'm doing at the time, which I usually do.)
'Final' Paintings
These are the 'completed' works (if you can really call them that) of which will be featured in the final product in the form of 'character cards.' I said 'if you can really call them that' due to the fact that they are un-finished or in-complete and also due to the incompetence of the 'artist' that produced them, I will not begin to mention the mistakes abound throughout both pieces of work, just know that other than the wolf's and woman's face (which I looked at two photographs to reference when painting them) and the fact that I referenced my own face and hand in a mirror when painting the male thief's face (technically I suppose a self-portrait) the rest of the work was created from my imagination (this includes, in the 'female archer' painting, everything except for the woman's face and the wolf's face, for the 'male thief' painting, this includes everything but the hand and the thief's face, which is to say the hair, hat, key, branch with web and spider and the background and their subsequent shadows/shading.)
I haven't painted anything digitally (save for two rough sketches used in my interview process and one during my 'Foundation') in over two years and my knowledge of the software (Photoshop) is extremely amateurish and limited in scope and understanding (something of which I need to rectify) and so my work-flow for both paintings was slow and disjointed as I struggled with the use of layers (of which there were barely any, leading to various complications later on if I needed to 'edit' or change my work.) Both pieces were produced basically in one 'sitting' or session, this was particularly the case with the 'male thief' character, of which I wanted to 'capture' the light affecting the plains of my face as quickly as possible; surprisingly, having only ever attempted to draw a self-portrait afew times in my life before, each met with minimal success, I found this 'self-portrait' a fairly quick and simplistic process, as I didn't spend very long on any one section of my face, instead very crudely 'fleshing-out' the main sections of my face, focusing primarily on the areas of 'strongest light' and the cast shadows resulting from this.
Again, I won't delve into the mistakes of each piece of work, they are already fairly evident and once again I wouldn't state either piece as being 'complete', yet part of being an illustrator and concept artist (the roles I specifically 'filled' in this particular project) means also that you must work to a deadline and often find yourself having to, perhaps, 'sacrifice' certain apects of your work in order to achieve something that can be presented or submitted to the client, to be used in the final product. This is what I found myself doing and I think an extreme example of this sought of process can be the witnessed in the comic-book industry; I have read quite afew articles and seen many interviews of artists who have had to deal with the fact that they have to see (often incomplete) work being mass produced and internationally 'exposed' or recognised, when unhappy with the results and this has been due to time-constraints and deadines affecting the final 'quality' of the work; this is an example of where art meets business, time is money etc. and most if not all professional artists are accutely and constantly aware of this.
These two images, along with the 'female thief' and 'male archer' underpaintings as depicted above, were the four final images to be used and displayed within the character card 'format.'
The Process
I've covered most of this in previous sections of this blog, however, I'll briefly collate my ideas and outline my methods and processes used behind my artwork for this project, below.
Through collecting the artwork together (above) you can see my 'iterative' or developmental process used in creating the images (some of which are refined to a further extent than others) concerning each of the four characters to be used as artwork on the final character cards. Again, the initial sketches and subsequent 'underpaintings' are extremely crude and primitive in their 'execution', this is entirely deliberate, as they were treated as nothing more than 'story-board-type' sketches as seen in the movie undustry, or simply 'thumb-nail' sketches, the primary purpose of which is to establish a composition before any detail (that might otherwise be removed) was added.
Seeing the work together, above, makes me, actually, really quite dissapointed that I didn't get to finish the work; not only because I let down the group but also because I let down myself, I failed to achieve a 'target' and I also would have liked to have seen the work in a completed state/form, primarilly so that others can see the ideas I had for the project and the artwork for this particular project, that alas I can only really describe with words. This 'failure' was due to poor time-management, something I feel has affected not only this project but the unit as a whole.
For the 'male archer' character artwork, I was considering, originally, an 'emerald green' palette for the forest, bright and colourful with strong 'beams' of sunlight piercing through the canopy, I later abandoned this idea, however, as I deemed it abit to generic and 'cliche', instead, when deciding on potential palettes for each of the characters, I wanted to 'mix-up' the obvious combinations (the archer must be hooded and in green and brown, the cloaked thief should be dark colours only, blacks, purples etc.) and instead, reverse these (so I gave the thief character the typical colour scheme you'd expect for an archer, the archer recieved a redish colour to be perhaps abit more 'unique' etc.) to this extent, I very much wanted to paint a strong autumn 'theme' for the male archer artwork, deep browns, bright reds, oranges and yellows etc. a 'fiery' yet majestic and purely fantastical setting. I wanted to include bright, floating, shimmering lights sctattered throughout the scene, along with leaves and other small plants caught by the wind (with this piece depicting a more 'high-fantasy' theme as opposed to the other three works) I could have achieved this relatively quickly had I used a method or 'tools' I was oblivious to using or had yet to try, even though I did have previousl knowledge of it having seen it used in other artist's work, this is of course custom brushes. I would have actually liked to have used maybe some custom brushes or something 'pre-made' that I could have downloaded (this would have definitely increased my 'work-flow', ultimately reducing the time spent on each piece) yet not only was my internet not working at the time but I hadn't any knowledge of how to even use them, let alone download them or create them (I know now how to make them, though I still need to figure out how to download 'pre-made' custom burshes and put them into photoshop) and so everything was painted using either a hard or soft round brush (as seen in the default selection of brushes in Photoshop CS3.) I could have actually 'lit' the male archer scene at night (in a sought of 'misty' atmosphere like the one I had established in the female archer artwork) but I ultimately decided against this as I had already decided on three dark scenes for the other three character artwork pieces and so a bright, fantastical autumn day scene would have provided the sought of strong contrast 'needed' when compared to these.
For the 'female thief' character, however, I did intend to use colours that would coincide with an assassin or the sought of dark camouflage associated with 'shadowy' or mysterious figures. The lighting, however, was the focus for this particular piece. Obviously being at night, I wanted a strong back-lighting behind the character, whereby most of the scene is bathed in darkness, save for the moon-light reflecting off of the ground and a strong, bright white, 'rim' lighting around the character, picking her out from the rest of the scene and lending itself to the dramatic atmospheric quality of the scene. Painting this particular character artwork was something that I was looking forward to do, fortunately, however, I 'fleshed-out' the under-painting to enough of an extent whereby the idea behind the piece was clearly established (though this isn't the point, the art, once painted, would have had alot more to 'show' or offer the viewer; the final result being something that falls below the expectation and failing to depict the idea in its intended realisition.)
The 'path-building' mechanic behind our board game is perhaps its most notable feature (the whole 'driving force' behind the progression of the player, essentially) to this extent I wanted to include elements of that mechanic (or form of gameplay) in the artwork (or 'character cards'.) The male archer and female archer were the first concepts that I drew and you can see that the path was included in both of the backgrounds for each image, as seen in the initial sketches; whilst the path can still be seen in the 'final' male archer image (namely because it didn't progress past the initial sketch 'stage') it was unfortunately lost/excluded when painting over the underpainting for the final piece of the 'female archer' character artwork. The male and female varients of the thief character class both featured different angles, that meant that it could not only include the 'path' as an element in each painting, but simply didn't warrant it.
Looking back at the colour schemes for the 'completed' male thief and female archer 'pieces', it came to my attention that perhaps the blonde hair and green hat of the male thief suggested an almost 'Green Arrow' type aesthetic to his costume/character design, and the red of the female archer's cloak/clothing (when coupled with the inclusion of the wolves in the mid-ground and back-ground) also brings to mind a 'Red Riding Hood' type image. I'd just like to state that this was not my intention and is purely coincidental (when I told the other members of my team these 'similarities', they didn't notice it, or even seem to share my opinion concerning this observation, so perhaps it's not that noticeable, or even slightly a comparison to be made there.) The male thief character artwork was clearly not finished and left in-complete, though the lack of the shadow from the male thief character's hand, onto his face, was actually exluded intentionally, perhaps the male thief doesn't cast/'emit' a shadow? The twig, web and spider were also visual 'cues' to the player that they are in fact in a forest (this isn't so obvious with the male thief artwork, with the background being exluded) the spider was also used a visual 'metaphore' for the male thief himself and specific play-style.
The screen-shot/image above depicts not only the female archer character's development/progression (I almost always save each of my paintings at every stage of the process, not only to show that specific development, but also just incase I make a series of mistakes and need to return to a previous 'stage' in the painting, an option or ability that is extremely useful and something unique to working digitally) but also my comparing the two images together (namely comparing the work in progress, to the first painting I did of the male thief) so as to maintain a certain level of 'continuity' concerning the style of art that I had established, initially, in the 'male thief' painting. Whilst the female archer character was the second to be designed out of the four pieces of artwork (and the second to be painted) the male thief was the first painting I began (as opposed to the 'male archer' and the 'sequence I had established in the initial sketches stage and subsequent underpaintings.) The reason as to why I began painting the male thief first, was due primarily to the fact that I felt 'his' was by far the weakest of the four initial sketches and I had a certain hesitation and 'reluctance' in how I was going to tackle this particular painting, I felt this would be the most challenging of the four (yet it actually turned out to be a fairly simple painting to create, in terms of the process involved) so I decided to paint this to begin with.
The Square, the Circle and the Triangle in Medieval Art
The square, the circle and the triangle were a collection of powerful symbols at the disposal of the Medieval artist. Later, the artists of the Renaissance, particularly the High Renaissance (such as Raphael, Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo) were to use these to their fullest extent, in a (essentially scientific) balance or harmony resulting from the appliction of these shapes and the careful placement that this geomtery had (when situated 'correctly') in creating a visually 'pleasing' design to the sub-conscience of those who viewed the work of art.
Geometry was not only of grave importance to the Medieval architect in order to construct a balanced and rigid structure, but throughout Europe the geometric shapes of the square, the circle and triangle had an extremely important religious significance, something that was continued and further refined by the scientists and mathematicians that informed the work of the Renaissance artists (who recognised the importance of these shapes and 'symbols' in creating a harmonious and aesthetically pleasing composition within their paintings and sculpture.) Whilst the meanings of each symbol seperately (and when combined) have altered based on the culture or time of their usage, some of the most celebrated of European architectural structures were designed and built by architects and stone-masons who recognised the circle as heaven, the square as earth and the triangle as the 'bridge' between the two (the 'sun-dial' was often a metaphore of this, where the triangle would project and 'translate' the suns rays or the 'meanings' of the sky, acting as a medium between heaven and earth.) Another significant meaning amongst Christians in particular (something that I was much more aware of from have read various articles and watched documentaries on this particular meaning, as opposed to the aforementioned 'sun-dial' example, which I had no previous knowledge of ) was of course the holy trinity (God the father, God the son and God the Holy Spirit.) Perhaps the most universal understanding of these three symbols meanings (the square, the circle and the equilateral triangle) throughout Medieval Christendom, each would fit perfectly into one another (the square into the circle) and the triangle divide perfectly within these two shapes (again, the three aspects of the one God) this 'pattern' has been systematicaly used throughout many of Europes greatest gothic and Medieval cathedrals (as can clearly be seen in not only in the stone-work of the building itself but also through the detailed architectual schematics/plans for the structure.)
This subject matter is something that I personally find fascinating, and have seen 'crop-up' in art time and time again since I was made aware of these 'designs' and patterns (literally repeated in almost all of Christian art, even the most complex of cathedrals, masonary and paintings, throughout certain periods in particular) as whilst the significance of these shapes, again, withheld an intense religious importance to those who constructed these marvels (a process and the effects of which that can be traced back many thousands of years, before the iconography, paintings and architecture of Christian art, even before Christianity, to some of the most prevelent examples of this 'belief' and process today, the great pyramids of Egypt) the scientific and mathematical study of perspective and geometry during the Renaissance lead to the extensive knowledge and use of these simple symbols and combinations of symbols by artists such as Leonardo da Vinci. Da Vinci's illustration of the ancient Roman Vitruvius' study and theory on the proportion of man, in the form of the 'Vitruvian Man' sketch, is an obvious example of this correlation of shapes in signifying 'balance'; yet more commonly, in terms of Renaissance art (and often subsequent art throughout the centuries proceeding this) the shapes aren't so 'obvious' untill you are made aware of them. The fact that the Mona Lisa's pose fits perfectly into a triangle is something that Raphael was soon to learn from and copy in his own portraits and work, culminating in his 'Madonna and Child' series of paintings that reflected the importance of the triangle in a composition (again, the three sides of the Holy Trinity) Leonardo da Vinci's own Madonna and Child paintings (notably "The Virgin Of The Rocks") also uses the triangle extensively throughout his compositions, again, though, from a more mathematical and scientific stand-point, to enhance the 'appeal' of both his religious and non-religious artwork.I haven't had access to any form of live television, or haven't been watching television in general for that matter, but I did return home briefly, for the weekend, during October and I was fortunate enough that my Dad had recorded a documentary (by an art critic I'm familiar with from his past work) concerning this very subject. The programme was written and presented by Matthew Collings, entitled "Renaissance Revolution", the documentary is a three part series, for which I only had the first available to watch (though through further research, the first was in fact the one that suited my 'needs'/desire best, as it featured one of the artists I admire the most, Raphael.)
The focus of this particular 'episode' (part one) of the series, was on Raphael's "Madonna of the Meadow". Matthew Collings, using the latest in technology, sought to 'dissect' the piece of artwork, showing the viewers that, whilst indeed a very impressive piece of 'raw' and gifted talent, the painting was also highly structured and 'formulaic' in how Raphael was to choose the colours, the composition and the figures themselves. Matthew Collings used the example of placing the triangle directly ontop of the work, to emphasise to the viewer just how power, yet it extremely simplistic, this form of 'composing; and image, is. I did something similar in my own work, namely the painting of the 'female archer' character (I had researched into the various styles of art as seen in the 'contemporary' genre of fantasy, I also wanted to 'pay homage' to the period of art and culture that we were depicting in our board game, namely that of the Medieval, or 'Middle Ages' period of Europe and subsequently the Renaissance.) Below are the two paintings (Raphael's work and my own, which is in by no means a comparison in anything other than my own interpretation) 'high-lighting' this very Medieval style of composition, perhaps no longer synonymous with this period in the history of art but it's simplisitc nature 'owes' its origins largely to this time and place...
As Raphael has formed a triangle from the entire fore-ground composition, I have attempted to do something similar between the 'background wolf', the 'mid-ground wolf' and the 'foreground archer;' all was done in an attempt to create a 'balance' to the composition, something that is hopefully pleasing to the eye. The triangle was particulalry important in my work (again, concerning the 'female archer' character piece) namely because it saw me attempting to re-create this 'visual cue' as seen in the art of the Medieval and subsequent periods of the history of art. Many of the artists and artisans of the Middle Ages understood the power of these symbols (the 'square, the circle and the triangle') the artists of the Renaissance later observed and understood as to why this was, through scientific investigation, I wanted, however, to change simply having an 'object', subject or serious of subjects as simply displaying an obvious 'shape' (in this case a triangle) but literally focusing on the actual composition, (that is to say the relation of each 'subject' in the painting to one another and I feel I achieved this as illustrated above, to the left, in red.) The juxtoposition between the complexity, technical ability and the artistry of the drawing and painting itself, to the highly simplisitc composition, led to clarity in understanding how to 'read' the painting, as seen in Raphael's "Madonna of the Meadow" above; for after all, the majority, if not all of religious artwork during this period, was to convey the 'word of God', pictorialy, through the Bible's 'stories, to those who perhaps were unable illiterate and unable to read them, of course some others were for patronage and the rich etc. The 'blue triangle' picture above, illustrates the more common representation of simple shapes in compositions, although when I was painting this particular picture, I had in mind the 'triangle' established between the subjects each 'allocating; different spaces within the painting (the foreground, the mid-ground and the background.)
The Formatting of the Paintings and the Designing of the Character Cards
The idea behind the character cards was something that I suggested on the very first day, as at this early stage in the project, I was realistically considering the fact that the character 'pieces' would most likely not be an option, due primarily to the fact that at that point I was still meeting and getting to know the people in my group, assuming that everyone worked predominantly in two-dimensions and that us all being students, I was considering the financial 'limits' on what we could achieve (therefore the 'character cards' were to substitute, or represent the characters that would feature in our game, in a visual manner to the player.) I also very much desired to produce artwork for the project and I made this immediately clear at the beginning also (though had everyone wanted to do the same, it might not have been possible for me to have had the opportunity to produce art as my 'primary' contribution to the project, though ofcourse we all contributed to the rules of the game through a natural process of iteration, and we all provided artwork as a team, in some form or another, whether that was purely conceptual, or in fact as a piece of work to be featured or used in the final product.)
Whilst Ilze's and I's efforts were focused on producing the artwork for the characters, Joyce and Niqi had decided to concentrate their own work and research on the marketing aspects of the board game (this was also to include the initial designs for the cards, that is to say the 'chance' cards and the layout of the character cards themselves.) The result of which was to provide the basis for the design or basic layout for the 'character cards' that our digital paintings were to be placed into, the screen-shot blow highlights this process in the development of the character cards, as I take Joyce's design and place my own painting into the format, tweaking it slightly there and then.
The green to the left (in the image above) is Joyce's unedited work, to the right (to the right of the image) was something I quickly did on the spot, as whilst we did have character 'pieces' now, I still wanted to retain the idea of individual colours for each of the character cards, primarily to add variety and further unique 'quality' to each of the characters (both male and female) of the character classes. The image of the 'green' card above was Joyce's final concept for the character cards. Ilze and I, however, had our own ideas as to the layout and general 'aesthetics' of the character cards, so whilst Joyce concentrated on producing work for the 'chance cards', Ilze and myself took the basic design as seen above, and tweaked it much further to our own design. To retain a certain level of continuity between the pieces of work that we would each be producing, we both decided on 'Magic: The Gathering' as a sought of 'template' from which to base our own work (much the same as we did with the characters, though much like the character designs, there were expected to be slight differences in style and format, as we each offered own understandings and ideas in informing the work.) We had both decided to retain Joyce's idea of a background image that linked to the theme of 'nature' (namely the forest setting) and with this we both left that day and returned later with our own character card designs. Ofcourse I didn't to finish all four of my character designs, but I felt that the player still deserves to atleast see something (even if this is in the form of an initial sketch or underpainting) the final images include the female archer 'completed' work, the male thief 'completed' work and the underpaintings for the both the male archer and female thief characters, these were my reponse to the 'character cards' for the board game...
'Final' Character Cards
The 'final' cards themselves I felt were relatively successful, yet of course, there were in fact 'issues' with them also, each of which were a result of time constraints that would inevitably affect the quality, or 'finish' of the final product (you could only dedicate so much time to each card basically.) My main concern really, with the cards that I created, was that I feel that there is a strong inconsistency between the latter three and the female archer. Whilst other than an obvious difference in picture size (which I have no concern with) the middle two cards (the incomplete female thief and male archer cards) were created very quicky, 'on the spot', whilst our group had convened in order to assess eachother's progress and contributions, namely also to see what Ilze and myself and produced separately in terms of our own ideas for the cards (Ilze's 'response' can be seen further down below, again, along with my own cards.)
After having decided to create our own card designs (that whilst they would be designed separately, they would each have a similar 'idea' in mind as reflected in the 'Magic: The Gathering' series of cards) after agreeing that we each wanted to develop Joyce's initial card idea further, we then went our seperate ways that evening, and I returned the next day to show the rest of the group the 'male thief' and 'female archer' cards that I had created the night before (the designs above of which have not changed since then.) I had also created quite a number of colour 'variants' for the 'male thief' character card, though everyone agreed on the original image that I created (which you can see above) as the final design.
I mentioned previously the fact that I created the female thief and male archer character cards 'on the spot', infront of the group, I did this because (whilst I did intend to follow the format I had already established with the female archer and male thief character cards) I wanted the group's feedback on my 'interpretation' of how I felt the character cards should look like (or atleast what they could look like.) Most importantly, however, I wanted to check that my designs, and Ilze's (of which I had yet to see her own work on the card designs) were consistent. Time, however, was an issue and so I quickly completed the remaining two character designs in the colours that I had envisioned for both (purple and green, having using the autumn 'theme'already for the 'male thief' character card.)
The Design Process Behind the Cards (Continued)
The cards themselves (as you can clearly see) were a very simplistic design, and there was an important reason for this. I mentioned the layout behind the cards I created, was inspired heavily on the format as seen in the 'Magic: The Gathering' card sets, but looking equally so (and researching further) into the designs of other cards, from different companies of a similar nature (the 'Yu-Gi-Oh' series of cards for example) you are quickly aware of just how simplistic the designs are. The focus should be on the artwork itself, with the text simply there to display to the player the necessary information, as clearly and succinctly ('to the point') as possible (the typography should therefore reflect this.) It is very easy to make a design far too 'busy' and so I designed the layout of each card with this 'simplicity' and clarity in mind (sometimes less, is in fact more.) Considering also the scale at which we were to print the cards at, the text, if too complicated (or 'fanciful') in design, would then most likely become illegible, and the information obscured or 'lost' to the player (one must remember that the main 'objective' of these cards was to provide the player with information on his or her character, whether that is purely aesthetic or as a 'feature' necessary to the rules affecting gameplay.)
Four photographs were used (and subsequently manipulated in Photoshop) to achieve the card designs above; both the 'dagger' and 'bow and arrow' symbols were photo-manipulated from two images I had downloaded off of Google Images, there were two photographs of trees that were also used as 'background images' on the cards (behind my original character art) one photograph was used behind the 'female archer', and the other photograph of trees was used (and subsequently altered for each) on the remaining three character cards. The inside border (the layout of the borders framing the inside of the character cards) was also downloaded and manipulated from a 'Magic: The Gathering' card. All four of the images used are included in the Bibliography below.
In evaluating the final designs (avoiding the fact that two of the cards contained in-complete artwork) I was also unhappy with the similarity that the last three of the character cards (in the order as they are displayed above) had when compared to the first character card that I had created, which was of the 'female archer' character. Essentially 'copying and pasting' the design as seen on the 'male thief' character card (with the exception of altering the colours slightly) what resulted was three very similar looking cards (which whilst consistency, of course, was the prevelent idea in 'tying' the character cards together) that contrast that I was initially seeking to establish between the 'female archer' and 'male thief' cards (one with light text-boxes and dark writing, and the other the reverse of this) was lost as I ended up with three 'dark' cards and one 'light' card. The 'descriptions' (or piece of text pertaining to a role-playing 'element' associated with each character) were entirely original, and created by myself (for the characters that I did anyway) for this project (I knew, when first suggesting the 'character card' idea, what it was I intended to create, and this role-playing 'element' was a strong factor in this.) The 'descriptions' (whilst fairley inelegant) did have varying degrees of 'effort' involed in each one (like the character designs themselves, I feel the 'female thief' and 'male archer' descriptions required much less thought on my part, than the other two characters, as again, the descriptions were last-minute/'on the spot' also, created at the same time as the last two cards) despite this, the rest of the team seemed to 'warm' to the text (notably the first two of the descriptions that I created recieved a more 'reception' than the latter two.) My 'favourite' desciption of the four, however, is most likely the one I developed for the male thief character, as I feel it best suits his 'story' more so than perhaps than the others. The names for each of the characters (that I designed) equally so, were created by myself, even if they do perhaps display some what generic 'qualities'...
Below I have very simply illustrated the main 'components' that comprise my design for the layout of the character cards that I created...
The "Background image" and the "Symbol representative of the Character Class" (the bow and arrow and the 'dagger') were two images that I had downloaded from Google images (and for the symbol) subsequently altered. I've included the links to these below in my 'Bibliography' (also note that the inner border and text 'boxes' are in almost the exact same formula as seen in some of the older 'Magic: The Gathering' cards; well, one card in particular, which I have also included in my 'Bibliography.')
Further Artwork
Below you can see the box design that Ilze created for our board game (which at this point, is officially entitled "The Key To Victory", the titles of which both Joyce and Niqi worked on, though I believe this final title was of Joyce's conception, also note that Joyce had created her own concept for the box design, as did Niqi, but Paul and I had already added our own ideas to the design below and so the group eventually decided on this box design, to which we had developed to a further extent.)
The design itself was created on a template that Ilze had downloaded from the internet, to which she developed the design on top of (the front of the box design features a combined image of two of Ilze's character designs, the 'male knight' and the 'female mage.') In terms of my contributions to the box design (above) I offered my own advice as to the layout and lighting of the main title design (as seen along the edge of the box.) Originally, the title was not along the side of the box and there was no 'spot-light' behind the text. Ilze then placed the title onto the side of the box (as it appears on the front) I then suggested having the image of the key turned onto its side, placed centrally behind the text and then to have the 'spot-light' included, again centrally, behind the entirety (of the text) of the main title. I also contributed to the text on the back of the box (suggesting it to be white in order to 'compliment' my digital painting, featured behind the text.) I also wrote the introduction to the "Features" section of the text on the back (although it has come to my attention that a word is missing after "and" in the examples shown above.) The rest of the design (including the text written) was either Paul or Ilze (Ilze being the one who created the majority of the design, before I added my own painting and before we later refined the back and sides of the box, as a team, between Paul, Ilze and myself.)
The Last Processes in 'Completing' the Board Game
After rigorous play-testing and an extensive iterative process of design concerning the various 'aesthetics' of the project, the board game (entitled "The Key To Victory") was almost complete...
The two images above were provided by Gavin Cassels, one of his responsibilities to which (as documented in the two photographs above) was to cut out the final 'tiles' for the board game, to be mounted by Paul's printed designs (for the said 'tiles') in much the same way as he did when constructing the 'proto-type' for the board game, earlier on in the development process.
Paul, Ilze and myself spent some time actually getting each of the 'assets' printed (this is to say the 'chance cards', the 'character cards', the 'tiles' and the board itself.) To add a certain level of professional 'finish' to the cards, we had put Ilze's design for the back of the cards (that was to be used on both the chance cards and character cards, to 'tie' them together and add continuity to the 'look' of the cards) into 'In Design' (a program none of us had any knowledge of) we then proceeded to 'line-up' the front of the cards, to design used on the back, and then them all printed 'double-sided.' The images for the main board design and the tiles were then mounted onto 'mount-board' by the team. Gavin then cut out the tiles, I cut out the cards, and Paul (which he had actually completed earlier) painted the figures or 'character pieces' into a 'stone-like' aesthetic.
The Final 'Product'
The final images for each of the board games components (excluding the box above, which was later not printed due to lack of the necessary 'medium' we required for a professional finish, having decided against simply 'mounting' the prints onto a box) can be seen below...
Below is an image collecting both Ilze's and my own 'character card' designs (the top row features Ilze's own card designs and the bottom row features my individual card designs.) Whilst there are differences between Ilze's and my own designs, I do feel, however, that the cards are quite compatible, and consistent when viewed together. The image below was provided by Ilze Cakste.
Below is Ilze's final card design to be used for the back of each of the cards (both 'chance cards' and 'character cards.') The design features the 'logo' (or main title, as also designed by Ilze) for the final board game. The image below is provided by Ilze Cakste.
Below I scanned in the 'test-prints' for the final card designs. One page features both Ilze's and my own 'character cards' and beneath them (the green cards) are Joyce's designs for the 'chance cards', the other page features the backs to the cards (using the design as seen above.)
The photographs below (images provided by Gavin Cassels) depict the coming together of all of the final game components (except for the box design and Dan Capon's instruction manual design) for the final board game. This includes both Ilze's and my own 'character cards', Joyce's 'chance cards' and the tiles, board and 'character pieces' designed by Paul Blackham (again, Gavin did his own concept for the instruction manual and Niqi did her own concepts for the 'chance cards' and box design, but these did not feature in the final product.)
In the photograph (directly above) you can see the 'stone-esque' paint-job, that Paul had applied to the 'character pieces' that he had previously sculpted.
Conclusion
This particular project (being the first) was an interesting one, as not only did we each learn to work within the 'boundaries' of a team but we learnt also the benefits of teamwork (and that through organisation and with each member contributing equally to his or her given 'role' within the group, that much more can be accomplished, in a shorter space of time, than can ever be achieved alone) and for me, personally, I had the privilege of meeting, befriending and working with a fantastic, diverse (and equally interesting) group of people...
Unfortunately, Niqi Chasseaud and Joyce Brabban were not present for these two photos (above and below) the photographs of which were provided by Gavin Cassels. In the photograph above (from left to right) is Dan Capon, Ilze Cakste, myself and Paul Blackham.
In the photograph above (from left to right) is myself, Paul Blackham, Gavin Cassels and Dan Capon. The two photographs above were taken during our first 'play-through' of the board game ("The Key To Victory") in its completed state. I managed to get the key at the beginning of the game, and hold onto it for over an hour and a half (whilst constantly trying to stop the other three players, who at this point had teamed up against me) unfortunately, however, Dan Capon finally defeated me in combat (surprisingly, I rolled almost nothing but sixes throughout that entire game, at one point rolling atleast six or seven in a row, but alas it was not to be) and Dan was the victor that day.
Bibliography
Books:
History of Board Games:
Adrian Smith:
Tyler Jacobson:
The game itself (the game that we intend to design) isn't really a card based game at all (focusing predominately on the 'laying down of tiles', with the occasional drawing of 'chance' cards) essentially, the game is a sequential rolling of the die, of which the movement from point 'a' to point 'b' is the ultimate objective, though minimal combat is also an included element in the gameplay mechanics available to the player. Due to the nature of the game we were designing (and the limitation as to how much 'artwork' would, or even could be featured in the final board game) it was important that the artwork reflected the dedication the team/group had already placed in the how the game was to be played, also because of the simplicity of the 'pieces' themselves (we have yet to design an actual 'look' to the physical character pieces, with them being, at least at the present moment, simple 'coloured squares') the artwork needed to give the player a sense of depth and intrigue (at least from a 'role-playing' point of view) as to the character that they are playing.
Further Primary Research Into Local 'Game Stores' and Board Games of a Similar Theme
The toy stores themselves were fairly informative, in that they provided an opportunity to see both a wide variety of the types of games available on the market right now, whilst also collecting in one area, the games that would compete with our own (if our board game were to be distributed) within an active 'targeted market' or type of genre.
Of the types of board games we found whilst visiting this particular shop ("Toyz & Gamez") the board game in which, essentially, you traverse a maze (aptly named 'Minotaurus') seemed to be the only resonating quality in comparison to our own board game, of any of the other games amongst the shops 'selection'. From a point of research, however, what I did find particularly interesting, was the sheer number of games to which the board game itself was in all 'categories', the exact same game (Monopoly being the most evident example of this form of marketing, in what feels like an infinite variety of interpretations) but basically the Toy Story version of 'Buckaroo' (featuring Bullseye as the rodeo 'equine') or the Shrek 'edition' of 'Operation' were some of the games that caught my attention at the time (again, other good examples of 'reconstituted marketing', or an idea revisited, re-packaged, and targeted at a new, in this case younger, target market;) on that note, the aesthetics, or design concerning the 'look' of the board game, packaging, advertising etc. seems to be a role that both Joyce Brabban and Niqi Chasseaud, two other members of our group, seem to be 'leaning' towards in terms of their roles within the design team; something that will likely inform their own individual research.
Again, 'Minotaurus' features similaritites in that it is a board game, whereby each player's goal is to reach the centre of the board (much like our own game) whilst trying to avoid both the minotaur and the other players. The striking similarity to our own game and this, is in the customisation of the board itself, and how this directly affects gameplay. The game we have developed features a 'maze-like' path that winds through a dense forest (which forms the terrain accross the entirety of the board) the board is then divided into a grid featuring a set amount of tiles, and each of these 'tiles' are then further sub-divided into sections that the player can or cannot move 'through'. The purpose of this, was that as the player moved towards the centre of the board (essentialy the 'goal' or victory requirement, completion of the game being the first player to successfully do so) was that each game would ultimately be unique, in that no two 'boards' would ever be exactly the same. This leads to a higher re-playability value, whilst also offering a further opportunity for strategic play in how the players would choose to lay their 'tiles', to both aid in their own characters ability to traverse the board, whilst hindering others.Similarly, 'Minotaurus' also features a customizable board at the beginning of the game (I suppose this was to be expected considering the intellectual property the game is drawing upon) though other than the ability to 'shift' openings in the maze to block players the familiarity ends here, for the 'terrain' featured in 'Minotaurus' is built before the gameplay commences, where as our game relies on the ability of the player to form his or her own path as they move forward while they play.
The "Kerrison Toys" game store (picture taken by Dan Capon) offered much more in the way of board games, not only in terms of the size and variety of the selection available, but also in terms of the actual board games of use within our own, immediate research.
Games such as "Warrior Knights" offered (at least for my own personal research) interesting and pleasing aesthetics of the type I hope would reflect my own artistic sensibilities (the cover art itself for that matter, produced by artist Tomasz Marek Jedruszek, was featured on the verso of the 'Citadels' manual first collected by me at the beginning of the project, and so immediately 'struck a chord' as to the type of art I myself had the intention of producing.) In terms of the rules found within "Warrior Knights", our game largely differs; though still retaining a degree of customisation, the rules focus more so on the player's ability to amass 'strength', both socio-economically, politically, and militarily, with the ultimate objective being to capture the region and 'emit' dominance over it (whilst preventing the other players from doing the same.)The larger of the two game shops I visited in Norwich,"Kerrison Toys" provided more in the way of board games 'offering' either a similarity in the intended style for which we were aiming/developing towards ('Warrior Knights' being an example of this) or in fact strong comparisons to the types of game play we had already decided upon; out of all the games available, only two really contained the latter (perhaps a testament to the marketability, or room for competition our game could possibly provide/fill) with the two board games being 'Carcassonne', and 'Labyrinth.'
'Labyrinth' (also known as "The aMAZEing Labyrinth") was a game that Joyce (a member of our group) had mentioned very early on in the design process, perhaps more suggesting, or providing reference to this particular game (she couldn't remember the exact title of the product so much as she could remember it's rules or form/style of gameplay) than she was giving a thorough outline of game's core-game mechanics, this insured that any potential 'similarity' ended with the simple concept of 'shifting tiles in a maze-like format'.On the first day, having roughly established the type of game we wanted create, it was then in this context that Joyce provided the afore-mentioned information.
Upon discovering the name of the said game, we were then confronted with what was largely, a very similar game (at least from a very rough, initial understanding.) Having researched further into the mechanics of how this particular game played, you soon realise how different it is. To begin with, the board has all it's tiles (except for one) placed before the beginning of the game (and this remains so throughout gameplay) this differs from our own concept in that the board remains predominatly empty, untill each of the players adds their own 'tiles' in place (to construct a path towards the middle.)The main objective for the player in 'Labyrinth' is to shift the tiles (and thus the available 'pathways') in the maze, revealing certain treasures to be collected; the player then moves his/her piece with this mind; whoever acquires these treasures, coupled with returning them back to their 'homebase' first, wins. Similarities to this game, and our own, include the 'cap' of four players at it's maximum, the board's 'maze-like' design is also a concurrent feature; the starting location of each piece (though not in the corners as in this game) is similar, and of course the tile-based 'shifting' concept also shares a familiarity to our own. The 'Labyrinth' art design, I believe, is also an example of perhaps a game featuring an out-dated 'visual style'. I understand the game was created in 1986, but the artwork remains almost entirely the same as the original, and could be an example of how the success of a game can literally be in it's ability to attract a potential customer from a distant (the appeal of which adheres largely to it's aesthetics overall artisic design; this, coupled with sustainable gameplay, should make a successful game.)
'Carcassonne' was a game I myself had been directed to by a friend of my brother's, whom I knew had both a deep passion for, and a sensitive knowledge towards board games (and similar media.) I sent Jake the e-mail on the same day that we were given the brief (after having already established with my group a basic premise for which the core-game mechanics were going to be established/'built-around'.) In the e-mail (which you can see the print-screen of above and below) I outlined this very same concept (along with the description of a game I felt retained similarities to this form of gameplay, of which I knew he'd know of, 'Dungeon Dice Monsters';) and whilst our group had seperated to go research into possible board games that shared, similarly, this idea; we all returned later that day with little to no research as a result (this process was 'conducted' on the first day of our project briefing, and so proceded any of the information/research presented above.) Following this, I suspected that Jake would have knowledge of this type of gameplay and that he would then be able to suggest a 'list' of board games (as a starting point to our research) as a result. Even with Jake's expansive knowledge of this form of media, 'Carcossonne' was the only game that initially 'came to mind' and so 'armed' with this information, the next day I returned to the group with this example to research further into (whilst Joyce returned having remembered 'Labyrinth' as the game she originally mentioned.)
'Carcassonne' I feel is a game that resonates succinctly with our own (in comparison to other board games 'sharing' similarities; although much like the others, any reference to our own game is purely coincidentle, and so only certain elements retain close comparison.)
Carcassonne's rules, consists firstly of the placement of a tile (from which you recieve one each turn) following this action you can then place your "Meeple" (character piece that represents either a knight, farmer etc.) from which the 'resources' of each tile will be drawn from. The idea behind the game is entirely based around a points scoring system (there are no combat elements, or any other forms of gameplay involved.) Simply, you place down your tiles, which on each represent either a road, castle, farm etc. (depending on the 'map' or variation you are playing/using.) The objective is to then establish complete 'clusters' of these individual features (to which there are differing points associated/awarded for both the size and type of 'feature' you have formed.) The success of the player is down to his or her's ability to place the tiles so that they not only match (which is a requirement of the game anyway) but that they compensate also for the limitation of the tiles and 'space' available. The player who can develop their land the quickest, and to the greatest extent, wins. Featuring natural topography, much like our own (in this case a forest) the games 'roads' offer no movement to the player, nor do the castles offer much in the way of 'protection' or anything similar to the player and his/her 'pieces'. Literally, this game is unique from the others that I have included in this research in that it is essentialy, in all aspects, a resource 'collecting' game. Where earlier I mentioned the 'inspiration' behind some of histories oldest, and most documented games ('Wei-qi's' emphasise on territorial gain, through military conquest, for example, which is essentially based on humanities need to expand and acquire more, in this case the land's resources, for often this is the insentive for 'invasion') this is relative also to Carcassonne's 'interpretation' of the population pressure, and need to expand prevelant through out much of the history of Medieval Europe, and the game (at least in my opinion) presents the player with the challenge of not only controlling, and maintaining (in this case property) but having the insight to plan and expand in the 'face' of competition (which is what I find particularly appealing about this game; a mechanic which features heavily also in digital games, often in 'Real-Time Strategy Games' such as the 'Age of Empires' series, or 'Medieval Total War Two' for example.) Continuing with this idea, "Warrior Knights" focuses on the complexities inacted by the Feudal System in Europe, particularly Britain, during the 11th-14th centuries (with all the 'political intreagues' that come with this period in history) where as something like Risk would focus on 'man's' inability to 'settle', but to conquer and dominate those around them.
Further Research Into the History of Board Games (Revisited)
The beginning of the second week saw me travelling to 'Norwich Castle' (a Norman keep located amidst the city centre.) The nature of my visit was not only to 're-establish' my knowledge of Medieval history, but was also out of a greater sense of intrigue, really, for the history of the building and the surrounding area (I definitely have a great passion and broad interest for history and culture, and in fact the city of Norwich itself, and that very history was one of the deciding factors in my choosing to come to this University.) Having been provided free access to the castle due to my being a student (something I intend to exploit on a regular basis) I spent most of the day within the castle itself and up until its closing; within that time I simply walked around, 'soaking' in what knowledge I could of the place whilst admiring also its architectural detail and splendour. What I didn't intend to find (and what a 'find' it was) were two Medieval board games on display (available to be used by the general public) and alongside each, a set of instructions as to its individual rules and gameplay.
The first of the two board games, "Nine Man's Morris" (also known as 'Nine Men's Morris') only became popular within Europe towards the beginning of the 15th century (with its origin believed to have been in Ancient Egypt around three-thousand years ago.) Again, much like Chess, it appears the Europeans changed the concept ever so slightly, and the board game has since retained these 'rules', or this interpretation, with the game still enjoying moderate 'success' in modern times amongst enthusiasts (though obviously nowhere near the sought of popularity Chess has gained, and continues to obtain, since its original inception.)
The second of the two games, "Fox and Geese" is actually native to Europe, and was believed to have been developed by prisoners "some time in the medieval period" who 'scratched' this particular game design into the floor and walls of their cells, as a form of 'pass-time.'
Both games 'enjoy' modern interpretations, and each have seen adaptions and refinements over the centuries, as new generations have learnt to play the game (a contemporary example of this would be the 'recent' Apple Application that features "Nine Man's Morris" as a playable game, as depicted in the two images to the left; you can see in the example to the left that the games basic design hasn't changed at all since the Medieval version I roughly sketched above.) With further research I learnt that both games are very 'loosely organised' under a 'group' of Ancient Germanic boardgames (as developed also by the Celts) known as "Tafl Games."
"These games originated in northren Europe and are miniature battles fought between unequal forces." - Bell (1980, p.75.)
Played over a latticed (or chequered) board, the games (as described by Robert Charles Bell in the quote above) featured two opposing forces, with a number ratio of 2:1 (roughly) between them. The games themselves are very similar in 'style' indeed, as to how the core gameplay mechanics are implemented into each of their rules. Whilst a large number of varients do exist (perhaps 'Hnefatafl', the Saxon 'interpretation', being one of the more popular amongst Ancient Europeans (Bell 1980, p.77.) the board game, in almost all its variaties, features either a single 'piece' (played by one of the two players) of which has to escape from the much larger opposing force (as is the case in 'Hnefatafl', which simulates the King escaping from a foriegn invasion force, after having been trapped by them.) Or, alternatively, the game 'sees' the larger 'force' attempting to flee from the opposing player's single piece (as is the case in "Fox and Geese".) The game's rules do share similarities and can be compared to, 'Tick-Tack-Toe', in that the player with the larger force will attempt to 'line-up' their individual 'pieces' so as to form a 'Mill', by doing this they are limiting the opposing player's potential spaces to which he or she can move; but at the same time, like in 'Checkers', the opposing player can you use his/her singlular piece to 'jump' over the opponant's piece into an empty space (thereby 'eliminating' that specific piece from play.) If the player with the larger force has created a 'Mill' without considering the opposing player's pattern of movement, he/she could essentially lose more than one piece per turn, and so on...
"Tafle" games no longer hold the popularity they once did, but their importance in the history of board games is a significant one, for it was only through the introduction of 'Chess' throughout northern Europe that the game began to see a decline in popularity amongst the peoples of Europe; but, like in our own game, it seems as if conflict (symbolic of 'physical' combat) has always retained a very significant popularity with those who play board games...
Research Into The Genre of Fantasy, Fantasy Art, and Its Various Sub-genres
"Fantasy role playing grew out of wargaming with miniature figures. These are battles fought with little armies of toy soldiers on a table top." - Holmes (1981, p.62)
Romanticising about the past is something that humanity has nearly always seem to have done. We do it with music, history, art etc. and the same can be said about narrative, and this is especially significant in boards games when viewed objectively, as a seperate form of media.It has been interesting to see the 'evolution' of fantasy as a theme in board games, particularly games featuring a strong role-playing element. I've been reading a book entitled "Fantasy Role Playing Games" by John Eric Holmes, and in it, he describes that very history, and notably, it began with the release of that "epic adult fairy tale" that even young audiences today can now relate to, J.R.R. Tolkien's book "The Lord of the Rings." With the huge popularity that came with the release of (what was to become a series of books) was the obvious 'niche' that appeared in the market for re-creating the large-scale battles, featured in the narrative of these books.
The 'history of miniature wargaming', really, came about with the advent of board games such as "Wei-qi" or "Chess" (both of which are explained earlier on within my research) which are both essentialy games that sought to re-create the types of conflicts that were 'common-place' during their individual times. Miniature wargaming (in the way we understand it now) was formed initially by a man named "Helwig" in 1780, who produced the first game that featured 'squares' representative of large regiments or units of men (or cavalry), with differening 'movement values' to suit. Wargaming then shifted from a purely entertaining practise, to having an involvement in the military (something actually that 'carries over' today with digital gaming and first person shooters used by various armies of the world) with a game (and set of rules) developed by a "Prussian father-son team" in 1811, of which the "father" is "Baron von Reisswitz." The game conformed to a specific scale and unique map type, but little else and it wasn't untill his son ("Lieutenant George Heinrich Rudolf Johann von Reisswitz") created his own interpretation of his father's work in 1824, entitled "Instructions for the Representation of Tactical Maneuvers Under the Guise of a Wargame.")
"The gamers move the armies according to elborate movement roles... across a map-like terrain, and resolve rifle fire or the clash of swords by die rolls of varying complexity." - Holmes (1981, p.62)
The inclusion of rules specificing the use of combat within the game, whilst also providing a "topographical" representation of the map, was highly innovative, and led to the game's presentation to a General of the Prussian army, to which his response was "This is not a game! This is training for war! I must recommend it to the whole army!" As stated, the game was to be released to the armies various regiments (the components of the game being 'suplied' in "a wooden box 10 inches long and 6 inches wide." From this continues the 'history of miniature wargaming', and it's relevence lies in that eventually, as a result of this, 'we' were given perhaps one of the most highly aclaimed, and greatest exponents of the fantasy genre in games, I of course refer to "Dungeons & Dragons."
Officialy released in 1974, "Dungeons & Dragons" is largely considered the archetypal 'fantasy board game' (much the same as J.R.R. Tolkien would be considered the "Father of Modern Fantasy") atleast this was what came to my mind immediately upon discussing to my group, about possibly using a 'Medieval-type fantasy theme' as the premiss for developing our own board game around. The board game we have in fact been creating does differ from the complexities of the "Dungeons & Dragons" I.P. (or 'intellectual property') but also draws heavily on the influence of both this game and the works of J.R.R. Tolkien's fantasy worlds, but don't many contemporary adaptions of historical, mythological, or 'sword-and-scorcery' themes into a fantastical setting give homage to both such sources in one way or another? Either way, our group has already 'defined' our game a sort of 'Medieval fantasy', possibly very cliché, but is the sought of game we desired to produce, and so my research continues further into 'types' of fantasy that exist...
I've recently been performing research concerning the 'categorising' of fantasy, and the possible 'sub-genres' that are the result of this and what I've found has been extremely mixed and overlapping, with the discussion being highly opinionated and based on little 'fact' or definitive statements; and so in-light of this, I thought I would offer my own opinion as to what it is I view as 'the types of fantasy', whilst looking also at artwork I believe reflects these views. I feel it's also important to note that I will be focusing on the more 'traditional' fantasy categories (the older, more 'well-established' form of fantasy that takes much from history, particularly Medieval or Classical, and develops this further; as opposed to 'Science-Fiction' fantasy, which has no relevence to the form of fantasy that we, as a group, have in fact 'pursued' in our own work.) You could argue that the very effort is as vague as the genre it attempts to categorise but I will endevour to do so none-the-less. Again, I must stress that this section is based on my own opinions in what feels like a highly obscure 'discussion', with no obvious 'right or wrong' answers, and so, whilst there are articles 'out there' publishing alternative 'suggestions', often contradictory to my own, I'll attempt to describe how I believe (in a highly 'condensed' fashion) the 'categories' are defined...
'High' or 'Epic' Fantasy
'High' (or 'Epic') Fantasy is one example, whereby human imagination has led to the creation of fantastical and 'whimsical' worlds with very little basis or reference to the 'real world', as we understand it. Possibly the most celebrated (or influential) examples (atleast that come to mind) that use this type of fantasy throughout their narrative and artistic style, would be the 'intellectual properties' of both 'Warhammer' and 'World of Warcraft' (both of which intergrate Medieval and historical themes as a basis, but include little else in the way of real-world 'references' as a form of realism or in any way pertaining to historical accuracy.)
These are examples of some notable artists in this 'field' of work, reflecting the nature of "High Fantasy" as one where magic seems to be freely used, affecting anything and everything, with little boundaries or 'constrictions' on the sorts of characters or creatures that feature in the narrative.
'Warhammer Illustrators' and Their Artwork
Adrian Smith
Arguably, Adrian Smith's work could also be included in another 'sub-category' (or 'sub-genre') within fantasy, which is what you would call 'Dark Fantasy' (something that is in all accounts 'fantastical', but features horror or 'gritty', dark themes, often related with evil or malice, which is exuded throughout the piece of work.) Adrian Smith's work is actually a personal favourite of mine, and depicts somewhat of the 'old-school' illustrative style prevelent throughout the late nineties and early twenty-first century artwork of comics, graphic novels etc. Although 'realistically' rendered, and with a high believability to it, you can quite clearly see the extreme 'over-the-top' elements to the work that features often throughout many of the pieces produced in "High Fantasy". The work will almost always reflect the style of the narrative, with which Warhammer, can only really be described as highly exagerated and 'extreme' in the way it interprets, and 're-invents' much of what we understand as fantasy (orcs, goblins, elves, wizards etc.)
Alex Boyd
Again, Alex Boyd's work reflects this idea of a 'gritty believability' but then takes it one step further and 'blows it up' into this immense, highly imaginative world where everything is big, bold, and exagerated (and yet refined, and 'contained';) it's only through artwork such as this and the highly ellaborate story that we can believe, even for an instant, that this world 'could' exist.
Paul Dainton
The Warhammer (fantasy) franchise, originally released in 1983, is one of the most concurrent of the 'miniature wargaming' forms of games; and although technically considered a 'table-top' form of gaming, it's relevence and impact on other forms of gaming (both fantasy and otherwise) I feel is prevelent. In terms of the game our team is designing (atleast from my own point of view) it remains a strong influence over my own work within this project, and how I will choose to develop it (although this isn't in anyway a 'direct influence', it does remain a constant sub-conscience thought, whenever I consider the fantasy genre as a whole in this way.) Considering the game from it's gameplay mechanics, it's success in popular culture today (I feel) is integral to not only it's artistic style and form of marketing, but that it appeals to both male and female audiences (though particularly male) due to it's violent content and the ability of the player to 'act-out' large-scale, set-piece battles that with otherwise be impossible (not to mention dangerous.)
The Art of 'Warcraft'
The following artists are all part of a design team, known within the business as the "Sons of Storm" (with the 'group' comprising of "Chris Metzen, Samwise Didier, Glenn Rane, Rene of Twincruiser, MG, Thammer, and Peter Lee.") Their individual styles, when placed together, have become synonymous with the almost 'ludicrous caricature' of the industry understood, 'quintessential' and archetypal fantasy 'norms' (e.g. elves orcs, trolls etc.) yet the style heightens this and exaggerates it much much further. In comparison to the 'Warhammer artwork' featured above, the characters, for a start, are alot less figurative or based on a sense of realism or naturalism, but are instead much more in the way of the, not cartoony, but graphical style featured in alot of today's comic-book art. The colours chosen are far less mute, or subdued, featuring a palette of bright, bold and exemplified colours (often avoiding dark, or monochromatic palettes in favour of 'primary colours' and other colours of a similar nature.) The 'visual cues' seen throughout the artwork produced by the 'Blizzard team' share key features that tie one into the other, possibly the most evident of these being the 'blocky', bold (and quite simplistic) shapes that comprise the forms of the characters themselves, and there is a reason behind this...
The original 'Warcraft' digital games featured this 'blocky' style, that again, has become so famous, and recognizable with the I.P. today, but originally, that would have been due to the constraints of the technology available, meaning that the character designs couldn't be too elaborate, due to the modelling programs that would have to translate this content across into the digital 'realm'; and so the design had to be consistent and visually 'to the point.' The Franchise's most popular and financially successful output (namely the "World of Warcraft") still needs to consider these constraints, due to the form of media that they are developing in (online "Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games, or, MMORPGs.) Therefore the designs themselves are simplistic enough to be modelled 'effectively' (using digital '3D software' such as 'Maya', 'Mudbox' or 'Zbrush') yet also the artistic style has since developed (and retained) a popularity of it's own amongst its audience and 'fandom', and so this remains a consistant design element or 'specification' that each artist 'conforms to' throughout the process, up into the finished pieces.
'Dungeons & Dragons' Artwork
Very briefly, this is the work of Tyler Jacobson, who has produced images (in my mind) for both "High Fantasy" (as I consider/interpret it) and "Low Fantasy" sub-genres, here I'll show you some of his illustrations for the "Dungeons & Dragons" I.P. and later I'll post other pieces of his work I feel reflect a more 'low fantasy' tone.
There are many, many more franchises that I could list here (with atleast double that number for the artists who supply work for them) with 'Magic: The Gathering' perhaps as the next obvious I.P. to include in this section concerning the artwork that 'falls' into the category of fantasy 'sub-genres' I've outlined in this post. Though the examples I've provided I feel are enough (atleast for now) in illustrating my point.
'Low Fantasy'
'Low Fantasy' (which is by no means at all refering to the quality of the work) is the other large 'category' I feel is encompassed by the fantasy genre as a whole. I would describe (very briefly) this type of fantasy as a much more 'subdued' form of the fantasy presented above. Often more mature in it's content (but not always) this form of fantasy (to me) takes place in either the world we know now, the world as it once existed, or an alternate reality that draws heavily on our history or the contents of our reality (in away, a form of 'real-world fantasy.')
Most literary sources that I've read have almost always described "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy as 'epic' or 'high fantasy' (of which in terms of the sheer scale and scope of the work, I'd agree) however, I cannot help but disagree, in that I feel it's far too rooted in 'real-world history' and with far too strong a sense of realism and 'grounding' to be considered (atleast in my opinion) something of this type of sub-genre, with it being more akin to "Low Fantasy", than anything else. This particular franchise (from a point of bias I might add) is without a doubt one of my favourite forms of fantasy of all time (the books alone are one of my favourite just from a literary point of view) though before this blog quickly turns into a rant about my opinions, interpretations, or understanding for that matter of the books; I'll very very briefly just mention afew of these 'real-world' examples that is referenced, and of which I speak of. The 'Rohan' culture, as featured in the books, is heavily based on Tolkien's own understanding of Anglo-Saxon history, and were a result of how he (Tolkien) felt the Saxons (when inhabiting Britain) should have developed as a culture (if given the chance) before the Norman invasion by William the Conqueror in 1066. J.R.R. Tolkien's extensive use of linguistics throughout the books, are also a testament to his own extensive knowledge of the world's languages, both widely used today (and some not.) Many of his Elven languages (or 'Elvish') was heavily based on Welsh, for example. In summary, "Middle-Earth", as it is known (the fantasy world that Tolkien bases many of his characters and events in) is considered (obviously fictitiously) as part of our own history, and pre-dates recorded history, and man's eventual and un-contested 'dominion' over the planet.
Robert E. Howard's "Conan" mythos, is another good example (in my opinion) of this type of fantasy. Again, based heavily on recorded history, it is almost a much darker, 're-imagining' (or juxtaposition) of our own history, and runs parallel to this idea. Many of the cultures featured in Howard's writing are almost directly related to cultures (often 'Classical') that are prevelent throughout our own history (the "Aquilonians" equating to the Romans, the "Cimmerians" are the Norse or Celtic influences present in the stories, and the "Stygians" refer heavily to the Ancient Egyptians.) The quote below largely discribes the possible reasoning behind this...
"The reasons behind the invention of the Hyborian Age were perhaps commercial: Howard had an intense love for history and historical dramas; however, at the same time, he recognized the difficulties and the time-consuming research work needed in maintaining historical accuracy. By conceiving a timeless setting — "a vanished age" — and by carefully choosing names that resembled human history, Howard shrewdly avoided the problem of historical anachronisms and the need for lengthy exposition." - quote from Wikipedia, paraphrasing and 'sourcing' the book "The Coming of Conan the Cimmerian" by Del Ray, and the "Hyborian Genesis: Part 1" by Patrice Louinet (pages 429 to 453.)
The more recent "Harry Potter" franchise is another example of this 'world within a world' idea. Though still based heavily on our own world (in this case, placed literally within our own world, albeit 'hidden') the fiction relies, extremely heavily, on pre-exisiting myths and legends (with almost no re-imagining or 're-interpretation' of these said "myths" save for the artistic style chosen for the beasts or fantastical creatures.) The 'originality' within the I.P. lies with "Harry" and the other characters featured in J.K. Rowley's 'world' and how these myths interwine with the fiction outlined within the story.
With further research, I discovered a terminology that covers all of the a fore-mentioned examples of "Low Fantasy", which was originally coined by J.R.R. Tolkien himself, the word (or 'term') being "Mythopoeia."
"Mythopoeia" refers to the fictious use of recorded historic events and cultures; or myths, legends and mythologies (as developed throughout history within these said 'cultures')as a means of adding credibility, or 'believability' to the works in question; a definiton as provided by "Academic dictionaries and encyclopedias" states...
"mythopoeia aims at imitating and including real-world mythology, specifically created to bring mythology to modern readers, and/or to add credibility and literary depth to fictional worlds in
Below, I'll briefly post several examples of artist's work (some of who have provided illustrations for the examples as given above) concerning "Low Fantasy." To begin with, I thought I'd choose two pieces by Tyler Jacobson, both of which are based on two classic/famous literary myths or 'legends' that have been passed down through the ages...
Tyler Jacobson
The two pieces of work presented above are both from the artist Tyler Jacobson (one depicting the pivotal scene in the 'Moby Dick' tale, whilst the other is from the historical epic, old-English poem, 'Beowulf', the scene depicted is of Beowulf's encounter with the creature 'Grendel.') Compositionaly, actually, it is interesting to note how the artist has composed the two images, the first depicting the 'action' as it ensues on the canvas, whilst the other reflects the moment before 'battle', with all the suspense and drama that encompasses this.
I've chosen these two paintings (both of which are created traditionally using oils, perhaps there is a link there to this genre of fantasy?) because I feel there are in fact, two different, yet often 'consistent' styles to the types of work produced between the 'high' and 'low' fantasy genres. Comparing these two pieces of Tyler Jacobson's work, to his other work I presented above in the 'high fantasy' section of my blog, whilst there are similarities (other than the fact the artistic style will of course be similar, having both being produced by the same artist, a realistic 'rendition' along with elements of fantasy being the prevelent examples of this) I still think there are reflected subtle, but important differences (something I think is also relevent to other artist's work I will be presenting in this section of my blog) which is the fact that the artists has constrained or 'held-back' the fantastical elements to the work, in favour of greater believability in comparison to our own sense of 'realism' or the world as we understand it (of course this is still highly exagerated however.) The two pieces of work directly above (particularly the piece that features 'Moby Dick') are highly reminiscent (in both style and composition) of the art of 'History Painting' (that is to say the form of art made famous during the classical period, later refined in the Renaissance, and further continued into the nineteenth-century by artists such as the 'Pre-Raphaelites.') Described often as 'epic' or 'grandiose', this form of art is admired usually for its scale or 'scope', but also due it's depiction of famous 'scenes' in the classical style.
Frank Frazetta
Frank Frazetta, is one of those artists whose influence seems to be cited by many (if not most) of contemporary artists in the fields of illusration or conceptual art (as related to the game, comic and movie undustries) today. His methods of working (although widely unknown) make use of traditional painting techniques, along with the classical knowledge of 'Fine Art' that consisted of the intense study of nature, colour theory, perspective and of course an intimate knowledge of anatomy (which he subsequently combined with fantastical elements to 'arrive' at the style to which he did.) For me, personally, it was his dramatic and bold use of lighting (remindful of the chiaroscuro technique developed during the Renaissance, artists such as Caraviggio in particular was a great 'executor' of this style) that he used to model and shape his 'scenes' (often his nudes) that helped to create such powerful imagery. I think Frank Frazetta's influence over Tyler Jacobson's work, for example, is also quite evident.
The works of Frank Frazetta (some of which I've included below) were illustrated for a variety of different fantasy stories (each of which I would include under the 'low fantasy' heading) encompassing such titles as 'Conan the Barbarian' and 'Tarzan' (who for many believe, Frank Frazetta's style redefined and 'renewed' popularity for both these titles, to the point where the 'aesthetics' of his artistic technique became almost synonymous with the knowledge of the literary works.)
Alan Lee
Alan Lee's work (as with Frank Frazetta's art on the 'Conan the Barbarian' and 'Tarzan' stories) has become synonymous with the visual 're-imagining' of Tolkien's world of 'Middle Earth', through his unique creative style. Again, another artist that works with traditional mediums, Alan Lee made use of his extensive knowledge of water colours in particular, this, along with his mastering technique of drawing with pencils provided the 'canvas' from which his fantastical elemtns were to 'spill-out' onto (culminating in him becoming of the great masters of fantasy illustration.) His efforts on the Lord of the Rings trilogy of feature films also saw him being awarded an Academy Award for Best Art Direction (under the category of 'Set Decoration'.) In addition to this, in 1998, Alan Lee also achieved the 'Best Artist Award' at the 'World Fantasy Awards.'
John Howe
John Howe is another artist who is noted for his contributions in illustrating the works of J.R.R. Tolkien's fictituous "The Lord of the Rings" series of text. Working alongside Alan Lee, John Howe was responsible also for producing an extensive 'body of artwork' for Peter Jackson's film adaptations of 'The Lord of the Rings' books.
Artists tend to choose work (or 'themes') that best reflects or 'exhibits' their individual styles (often with little need for adaption or further development to that 'style', due to the nature of potential employers commisioning work based on the style or aesthetics of previous pieces.) To this extent, it's clear as to why I chose a group of artists whose body of work are intimately linked to (or famous for association with) literary works that in my opinion, 'reflect' the idea behind 'low fantasy' as a sub-genre of fantasy.
Art and narrative are very often intricately connected, and this is true really for most art, whether that art attempts to 'figuratively' depict the events of something, or even if it's meaning is far more obscure; this is why, although my primary focus was on the differing types of art in fantasy (of which now I look back on my research, could have been far more objective and perhaps could have included a greater variety of 'styles') I never-the-less needed to place this into a 'context', which, essentialy, encompassed some of the history of 'fantasy' in the genre as we understand it today and ultimately, how, between literature and boardgames (and the art that helped 'inform' them) the genre recieved the expansive audience it has today.
Development of the Board Game (Continued)
The first week ended with our group having established the premise for our game idea, as well as sketches for initial designs and concepts; Paul Blackham, for example, his concentration was on the design of the board itself, this included both the 'practical' design that affected gameplay, whilst also being the person who would produce the final aesthetics the player would see on both the board itself and the tiles to be placed on the board. Paul returned at the end of the first week with a sketch for the board layout (Paul studied Maths at A level, so it made sense for him to be the person who calculated the measurements for the board, for which he did.) The artwork that was to go onto the board was a collaborative process by the whole team, a forest theme for example we had decided on, and I offered my advice as to how the forest may look like from an aerial view/perspective, looking directly down, I contributed also to the idea itself and the rules for the two 'watch-towers' and 'road-blocks' that were to be put into the game, offering players alternatives to simply rushing straight to the middle.
From Paul's designs we began to 'flesh-out' the bulk of the rules for the game (the rules of which have changed since 'play-testing' but the original rule set we had established on this day became a strong foundation for that in which you see in the final game/product.) At this stage, I had suggested the character cards as a way of identifying with the small square 'counters' that the player would be using as 'pieces' in the game, through colour co-ordination and symbols that would be displayed on both the character cards that Ilze and myself would be designing, and the 'pieces' themselves; though at this stage Paul expressed a very strong interest in including actual three-dimensional 'figures' that would closer represent 'who' the player would be playing as. This of course was a great idea, though I orginally 'scrapped' this concept early on in my head as it seemed a time-consuming process, and something that would have largely not been necessary in the grander scheme of things when still developing, at this stage, the game from an initial concept, into a working board game/design (which is why I suggested the original, highly simplisitic concept of square 'counters', the fact that I also desired to produce artwork in the form of 'playing cards' did also enter my mind, and was in fact an intention in 'driving' this idea.) Later, however, Paul was in fact to pursue this idea further, producing 'figures' that really added something to the game, and still is a major contribution to the success of the final product. To the right I have included the notes (which I've scanned in) of the information we worked through that day. The board design (that you can see I scribbled down in the image above) Gavin Cassels also copied from this (Paul's basic design) and took this home with him with the intention to build the 'proto-type' of the board so that we can not only see what the game looked like it (albeit this was a scaled-down version however) but also so that we could begin play-testing the rules and develop the idea further before any serious 'visual' design work was done on the game (in terms of the artwork etc.) just in case something was to change and it would mean 'scraping' this work (which of course would have been a waste of time.) Dan Capon was also a major influence in alot of the rules that were to be established (he naturally wrote these down quite extensively as each of us conveyed our own ideas to the group, and it was at this point that his role of creating the manual, or instruction 'booklet' for the game, began to take shape, becoming ultimately his main contribution to the design of the final game. The core-game mechanics had been established during the first week, and Gavin was in fact to return during the second week with the proto-type, and some of the tiles created out of paper, Paul was also to return on the Monday of the 'second week', with something that offered much to our board game... The sketches to the left depict the figures that Paul created over the 'first' weekend, to be broguth in Monday (you can see, very crudely, I've drawn the pieces from direct observation from both the front and in profile, whilst next to the figure drawings were even 'cruder' sketches from my head on the intial character concepts as based on Paul's own designs.) Paul, did not in fact inform anyone that he was planning on producing these player 'pieces' (atleast were unaware as to his intention to pursue the idea, that he had suggested very briefly in having three-dimensional playing pieces, any further, past those intial 'suggestions.') It therefore came as quite a surprise (and a pleasent one at that) when he turned up with this latest work on Monday of the second week, the same time when Gavin 'presented' the proto-type of the board game he had created (something that, whilst we were expecting, was as equally beneficial in moving the development of the project further.) The character 'concepts' (that would finally form the 'character cards' in their completeed state) was something that I initally was going to develop, entirely on my own, in terms of the complete 'look' of the visual design of the characters themselves. Fortunately, however, I had yet to establish anything substantial on paper concerning this (as I was busy working on my initial research.) Paul, since he had placed quite alot of time and effort into these figures (and because the pieces had a fairely strong design to their aesthetics) I thought it would be nice to keep the artwork between the team as consistent as possible, to this end, I decided to 'cater' my own designs around Paul's figures (the "Thief", for example, would feature the iconic 'Highwayman hat', the archer would have his/her bow, the mage a staff etc.) It was at this stage also that we began to discuss the possibility of providing a 'choice' to the player, in the form of both male and female 'variants' to each of the characters.The pieces themselves were simplistic (which I feel is one of the main factors contributing to the success of their design.) Due to this 'simplicity', it was up to both Ilze and I as to how 'close' we were going to keep our character designs to this idea (I think, due also to the nature of our board game, it was important that everything was easily identifible, and didn't require too much 'effort' on the player's behalf, having targeted our game at the younger demographic, around the age of ten, as well as an older audience meant that that first 'target market' needed to be reached first.) For me, personally, I also wanted to produce artwork pertaining to (or 'retaining' the qualities of) more of the "Low Fantasy" 'end' to the fantasy 'spectrum' as a whole (primarily this meant instilling my work with a sense of realism and 'grounding' it to the real-world.)
'Simple' character designs, led to simple visual 'cues' that are farely recognisable throughout the genre from which our game was set (the elven archer with bow and quiver, the sly and heavily disguised thief character, the mage with his or her magical staff and the 'muscular' warrior, with the two-handed great weapon or sword/axe and shield.) Whilst the designs themselves were easily recognisable, I did decide that when it came to painting them (within a digital medium) that I would experiment with the colours, creating subtle 'combinations' that perhaps weren't as equally recognisable.
Later I was able to recieve photographs of both the board 'proto-type' and Paul's figures (which Gavin Cassels was kind enough to photograph) on the first Monday, of the second week that they were first brought in (the pictures of which you can see below.) This stage of our developmental process (or stages of the natural 'progression' in the iterative process) was a defining one (atleast for myself) as we got to see for the first time the board game, as not just a concept, or an idea on paper, but the beginnings of a tangible product.
The board (and figures) that you see in the images above were accompanied also by various cardboard and (once we had run out of cardboard) paper 'tiles' that meant that our game was in fact playable (though obviously still in a primitive form/state.) Initially, the board, tiles and figures were used by ourselves (the 'team') to play-test our game, through the rest of the second week (by this point I had in fact begun the process of creating my artwork for the project, though for the purpose of clarity I'll include this later on in this blog all under one 'heading' for the entirety of the artwork itself.) Later (namely during the 'third week') the proto-type was used in play-testing amongst the other groups on our course (this was after having directly presented, or 'pitched' our board game concept to the tutors and the other groups present and likewise, the other groups did the same.) In terms of the 'pitch' itself, in all honesty, our team was 'caught' completely unprepared (without board, pieces, any finished artwork, or even a plan or approach as to what we were going to talk about, who was going to talk and in what order.) Avoiding naming specific person, we (including myself) were all under the impression originally (which was in fact correct) that we would be presenting our work (so far) on the first Monday, of the third week; a member from another team/group, however, informed us of our 'mistaken' dates (well atleast that person said this to one member of our team, who in turn relayed this to the rest, which was, however, not in any way their fault) and so believing this 'new-found' information to be true, we arrived on the Monday to find that we did in fact have a presentation to 'perform.' Although this was the case, we didn't really have an exuse for not double-checking and so we were forced to adapt quickly to the situation. Luckily, our team worked together well, and that we shared 'resources' or our ideas openly, so that when it came to our turn in presenting our work, we were able to speak naturally and relatively fluidly on our board game and 'iterative' process. I had also with me my initial sketches and under paintings on a USB 'stick', which I in turn projected onto the large screen behind us, just so the 'audience' was aware of not only the visual design or 'look' to the board game we were developing, but also, very simply, to have something to 'look at' (appealing to those who are primarily 'visual', as opposed to kinesthetic or audio, learners, and considering most if not all of them are artists, this was in fact a very important part of the presentation, I felt atleast.)
Overall I felt the presentation was relatively successful, with the play-testing that followed being almost equally so (as our board game 'garnered' some interest from the other groups based on our pitch.) It's interesting to note also that this was the first time our 'team' had seen what the other groups had produced (both in terms of their ideas and also the work that they had created towards this project brief) and from what we had seen, there were some interesting concepts...
There was some talk by one member from another group play-testing our game of possibly adding more 'depth' to the characters themselves (such as extra abilities, or the possibility to 'level-up') but whilst an interesting idea, it wasn't really necessary for the type of game we had created, for the combat was introduced primarily to add an element of strategy and friendly 'conflict' towards the game (if my research into the history of board games has highlighted anything in particular, it was that conflict in games seems to resonate rather well with people, usually.) The rules, therefore, from here on remain largely un-altered from the final product...
The Board Game's Rules and Components
Joyce Brabban and Niqi Chasseaud (two members of our team that were primarily involved in the marketing aspects of our project) took on the responsibility of naming our board game (after a series of 'failed' attempts, by the group, to do the same) the result being the title "The Key to Victory." As the title suggests, the board game's main objective requires the player to take and hold a key, of which there is only one and then from their starting location (marked as an 'X' in the diagram below) the player proceeds to construct a path, using the tiles available, to the middle of the board (marked as a 'V' in the diagram) the 'V' in fact represents 'victory' and the player simply needs to stand on this tile (whilst holding the key) to achieve victory within the game. The 'B's that you see present in the diagram below, represent 'blocks' to the player (meaning that there is a natural feature on the board, such as a mountain or hill-top etc. that is preventing the player from laying down a tile there, or moving through that location.) Present at these 'block' spaces are also four unique locations (a fox, a boar, pieces of an armoured-suit and a shrine) these locations can be 'teleported' to by the player, should he or she draw a 'chance card' that states so. The 'block' tiles/spaces cannot be moved in any way by the player, and remain in these fixed positions at all times throughout the game. The purpose of these 'blocks' was ultimately to add an element of strategy to the game, by 'forcing' the players into travelling towards these narrow 'openings' surrounding the victory space, you're effectively encouraging the players to interact (in the form of combat.) This adds a 'risk factor' to the game in that the player is aware of these 'hot-spots' and that he or she will eventually have to traverse through these areas in order to have a chance at victory.
The game's components consist of a board (56x56cm) that comprises 53 individual 'squares' (of which four are 'starting locations', another four are 'blocks' and one is the 'victory' space; this leaves the player with fourty-four available spaces for laying down 'tiles.') The game also comes with 44 individual 'tiles' (many of which depict an entirely unique design for the purpose of adding strategy to the game in how the player chooses to construct their paths, as the 'tiles' will be randomly drawn from a pile; each of these 'tiles' is divided further, and comprises of 9 squares the player must move through; note also that there are 2 'watch-tower' and 2 'road-block' tiles within that number.) Four character pieces (that have been specifically sculpted to represent each character 'class) one die, an instruction manual (designed by Dan Capon, Gavin Cassells also provided his concept for this before we decided on Dan's) 8 'character cards' (that Ilze and I designed, both in the layout and the original artwork featured, the purpose of these cars again providing useful information about the name and ability of the character, whilst also offering the player further 'emersion' into the role-playing element of our game through the drawings/paintings) and finally 28 'chance cards' (5 switch places with another player, 4 move to 'landmarks', 6 swap any two unoccupied tiles, 3 miss a go and 3 go back to the start.) The purpose and method of play for the 'chance cards' I'll briefly explain in more detail, further on this blog.
Simplistically, our board game consists of the sequential rolling of a die (both to establish who holds the key and the 'order of play' at the start of the game, representative of the highest number rolled whilst also affecting the distance of movement or 'action' available to the player.) Combat is also an element in the game, and is the primary (and only) means by which other players may obtain the key from the player who is holding onto it. Essentialy, combat involves both players rolling a die, first the 'attacking' player rolls to see how successful his/her attack was, whilst the 'defending' play rolls to defend, the higher of the two numbers decides the outcome of combat and if the player who 'lost' was holding the key, the key then passes on to the successful player, either way if the player lost combat he/she returns to their starting location, 'X'; but if they defended successfully, the attacking player is forced back one space or movement 'square' and it's then the next player's turn. The 'statistics' in combat are affected also by the various 'abilities' available to the player (depending on the character he or she is playing.) These 'abilities' can only be used to interact with the other players (namely in combat.) There are in fact four characters that the player can choose from (each of which consist of both male and female options/'varients') these are the archer, the mage, the knight (or 'warrior') and the thief. The abilities of each character 'class' are:
- The archer - Add +1 square to the distance in which you may engage an opponant in combat. The archer also as the ability to 're-roll' if their initial attacks fails.
- The mage - The mage is granted a +1 modifier to the die, when rolling to attack.
- The knight - The knight is granted a +1 modifier to the die, when rolling to defend.
- The thief - Has the ability to avoid combat through 'sneaking' (and therefore must be engaged by another player.) The thief may also automatically 'steal' the key when in contact with the key-holder.
Sequence of Play
The board is empty at the beginning of the game (save for the 'block' spaces, the starting locations and the 'victory' tile in the centre.) The players then choose their characters (and collect the individual 'character cards' that come with them) and place them at one of the four starting locations. Each player then roles a single six-sided die, the player with the highest roll recieves the key (needed to enter the victory tile) and then the 'order/sequence of play' is then established as clock-wise from the player who holds the key (if two or more players roll the same number, they simply roll again untill it is clear that one player has the highest number.) The player who rolled the highest number at the beginning and subsequently recieved the key, begins the game with his character located in the 'starting area' opposite the way the 'victory' tile is facing (basically if the 'V' is pointing downwards, the 'key-holder' would begin the game at the 'X' at the top of the board, as depicted in the diagram above; this rule was implemented to the benefit, or the 'advantage' of the other players, as the 'key-holder' is forced to take a longer route around the board before he/she can achieve 'victory'.)
Each player begins with two tiles (and must always hold a maximum of two throughout the rest of the game untill all tiles have been 'played.') The player only can choose where he/she places the tile on the board, though they can only place tile once he/she has reached the end of the tile that they are moving on, and still has 'movement' left (for example, if the player rolls a 5 and they are 3 movement 'squares' away from the edge of the tile that they are on, they then place their next tile down and continue moving the remaining 2 'squares'.)
The player always begins by rolling the six-sided die first (on the roll of a 2-5, the player moves this set number of 'squares' on a tile, on the roll of a 1 or a 6, the player draws a chance card.) The player always recieves one 'tile' (randomly chosen) from the pile each turn (so that they they are always holding a maximum of two tiles at a time.) The player, when having reached the end of the tile with movement to spare, and having begun placing their tile, has the option of placing the tile in any available space and in any direction they choose (a 360 degree radius) meaning they can either create a path directly towards the centre, towards another player, or use their tile to try and block another player (note this would often mean sacrificing their own movement or path 'forwards' for that turn.) Note also that there must always be a path leading out of the 'starting area' within the first tile (so players cannot rotate the first tile adjoining the starting area if it means there is no available path for the player to leave the starting area, they can, however, rotate the 'first tile' if it means there is a path.)
Another of my contributions to gameplay and the rules of the game were the 'watch-tower' and 'road-block' tiles. There are only ever two of each and they are randomly shuffled in amongst the 'standard' tiles. These unique tiles allow the player to either place something beneficial (or 'positive') on the board, in the form of the 'watch-tower' tile, or something that hinders the players (or is 'negative') in the form of the 'road-block' tiles. If the player moves onto the 'watch-tower' symbol on that individual tile, on the board, they are granted the ability (for that turn) to rotate any tile on the board (including a tile that a player is occupying) what is significant about this rule is that this is the only opportunity the player has at rotating a tile that is occupied by another player (the 'rotate a tile' chance card doesn't allow this rule.) The 'road-block' tile is basically what it describes, it's a tile with a 'dead-end', essentialy blocking any further movement by the player along this particular path (the 'road-block' tile can be placed anywehre on the board, except infront of any of the starting locations or directly adjoining the 'victory' tile in the centre of the board, this is also the case with the 'watch-tower' tile.) These unique tiles, again, can be placed anywhere (except the locations mentioned previously) on the board and are treated like any 'standard' tile (except for their individual 'special' rules) but unlike any of the 'standard' tiles, once they have been placed, they cannot be further moved or 'shifted' in any way (this means rotating, or 'swapping' them etc.) so in this respect they are similar also to the 'block' tiles. This was done in an attempt to offer the player another choice that they can direct their individual paths (or move) towards, other than the centre of the board; again whilst also offering strategy to the gameplay, it also adds another sense of 'risk and reward' to the player, as the player can risk 'sacrificing' movement (towards the key-holder or the 'victory' square/tile) in order to prevent, or hinder another player (whilst play-testing the game, we found that what was often the case was that the players who weren't holding the key, often 'banded-together', albeit temporarily, against the 'key-holder', as they each recognised a common goal that could aid eachother towards achieving, which was obtaining the key; in this scenario, the 'watch-tower' and 'road-blocks' became a particularly useful element and an alternative strategy as one player used the 'watch-tower' to help another.)
Combat (when having reached another player) follows movement and once the combat 'section' of gameplay has been resolved for that turn, it is then the end of 'that' player's turn and the beginning of the next player's turn (and so on, untill somebody has 'won' the game.) Certain rules that we had discussed and play-tested (that didn't make it into the game or final 'rule-set') included the idea of giving each player a certain amount/number of 'lives' (originally being 3.) Another of my ideas (along with the life idea) was to have four seperate keys in each corner of the board, along with four seperate (locked) doors that blocked entry into the 'victory' square/tile. The idea was that the players would need to pick up a key each and then proceed in taking it to the locked door that the individual key opened (I had it so that each key would open the door that was opposite to it on the board, therefore naturally, each player would have to 'cross' one another to get to their individual doors, inacting the combat 'sequence' again.) The idea was later scrapped, but there were still suggestions as to possibly making this an alternate gameplay varient (or alternate difficulty 'mode') to be used in the game. The idea of different rules or difficulty settings (for example having seperate rules if you didn't want to play with the maximum amount/number of players, which is four, but instead wanted to play with two players etc.) 'sprang' from this concept and is still a possibility if we were to revisit the idea and produce future content for it.
The Artwork (my Initial Sketches, Underpaintings, 'Finished' Work, Artistic Processes and my Main Contribution to the Project)
Before I began, in earnest, to develop any artwork for the project, I knew what it was I wanted to create. I attempted to produce artwork in a 'style' associated more so with the 'low-fantasy' sub-genre (of the fantasy genre as a whole) 'instilling' my work with some sense of realism, of which you can see evidence of in how I was to 'go-about' the development process of my work.
I mentioned at the beginning of this project 'blog' that on the first day we all agreed upon differing 'roles' that we would work within and produce work for, that 'filled' that particular role. Naturally, this is the intended process behind team-work, whereby each member contributes their own ideas or content (essentialy their 'abilities') to the benefit of the team as a whole, to this extent my 'role' (or contribution) consisted of being one of two character artists (the other character artist being Ilze Cakste) that is to say, our primary focus was on designing both the aesthetics and content of the 'character cards' themselves, that the player would in fact be using in the game. Decision-making very early on the iterative process centred also around what the intended future content or the overal 'theme' would consist of, we knew the game would be a fantasy that drew heavily from the culture of Europe during the Medieval period, we then decided also that the game would feature entirely in a forested setting...
I was highly fortunate in that the halls of residence that I moved into (before the beginning of this course) is situated right next to the 'Mousehold Heath' forest (something that I was entirely unaware of when first moving in, yet 'there it was', hidden just behind the building, stretching over a 200 acre area.) Despite desperately needing to improve my observational drawing ability (having not drawn or painted anything since my 'Foundation' course, three or four months prior; the course of which was an entirely useless experience for me, in which I learnt nothing during and where my work was largely discouraged) I never-the-less had a strong curiosity about sketching the forest, such a wondering natural resource and having drawn very little from my head (atleast in a very long time) I thought it prudent that I first study and record the subject that I intended to re-create or even use directy in my own work, for this project. Three pages of sketches were the only things that resulted from that experience (apart from the cold I contracted that day from my inappropriate clothing combined with the unexpected rain and cold weather, though who am I to complain) it was definitely a most enjoyable one, however, and the work was useful in that two of the pages I scanned directly into the computer, to be drawn over with the characters I was to design for the 'character cards.'
I really wanted to produce alot more than I did that day, the rain eventually, however, started causing the ink to run but other than that, I have no excuse. Observational drawing is extremely important (in my opinion) if you want to begin to understand something (as the practise essentially sees you scrutinising a subject, observing it in all its intricacies and nuances and recording that information, sometimes very simplistically, onto paper or canvas.) The idea of drawing from life has to be objective, you should try to remain faithful in what you attempt to 'describe' infront of you (distorting the image, from what you see, as little as possible when transferring it from the subject, to your eye, brain and then onto the paper.) I talk as if I'm an expert, I'm clearly not but I do respect the idea behind it and it is (to me) often an intimate experience (whilst other times perhaps simply practise.) If I truly wanted to understand the twisting shapes and forms found within trees, I would have to draw them hundreds, if not thousands of times over (it's hard to say) before the knowledge of them really became engraved into my memory and understanding, though since I haven't drawn too many trees in my lifetime, again, it's difficult to say really how much repitition is needed or 'required' before one could truly 'master' drawing something entirely from his or her head, without aid (obviously with this differing from person to person.)
For those interested, I draw almost exclusively in pen these days (any pen would do, providing the 'nib' is to the size you want, the pens I use are biros and fine-liners, both of which can easily, in my opinion, re-create any of the 'effects' or quality of line a pencil can make.) For almost all my drawings in pen, I draw directly into pen (if I want a photo-realistic 'finish', however, I'll sometimes begin the initial outline/proportions in pencil, before erasing the lines and drawing/shading exclusively in pen, though other than this example, I draw everything using only pen and draw 'straight-in' with pen.) The reason why I do this is due partly to the immediacy and permanency to the medium and line produced (unlike with pencil, there is no temptation to 'rub-out', with pen, once you have 'placed' a line on paper, it's permanently fixed there, this 'forces' you, really, to concentrate on the forms infront of you, first fairley 'surely', before you commit to paper; however beginning directly in pen means that you are constantly exploring the tonal qualities and shapes that you see infront of you, on the papaer itself. In this way it feels as if each line has a purpose and place, perhaps more succinctly or clearly than perhaps it does with pencil (atleast for me) as each line cannot be removed or 'undone' (though the same, I would compare it the feeling of sculpting in marble and stone, or carving into wood, you are essentially 'chipping-away' into the paper, attempting to reveal a form.) The boldness and evidence in the variation of line are other qualities that contribute to my enjoyment and attract me to drawing exclusively in pen
The first of the two images above (the double-page 'spread' of my observational drawings of the local forest) was particulalry important in that it was used directly in my work (namely the initial sketch of one of the character card drawings/paintings.) It's important to note at this point, actually, that I hadn't produced any artwork, of any kind, for many months now before this course (save for two very, very rough digital 'sketches' that I created in aiding my game concept idea that I pitched during the interview process.) I hadn't worked digitally (created digital paintings) for over two years now at this point, so my 'artistic process' or methods of working were largely, essentially, 'unknown', so with this in mind I explored a number of different methods (each of which were through my own personal exploration of the 'resources' I had available to me, to help me create the images for my project.) Out of the four character design that I created (two archers, male and female, and two thieves, male and female) two of the images saw me reference my own face in a mirror in order to study how cetain lighting conditions affected the plains and shdows of the face (one moreso than the other) one painting had me reference two images off of the internet (which I'll include in my bibliography of course) which were done so to add realism and believability to my work, one of the four saw me a scanned image of a sketch drawn directly from life, whilst all other aspects were entirely realised from my own imagination (I'll explain how each drawing/painting was created further on in this project blog.) For now, these are the initial sketches (again, they are extremely rough, as they were simply to compose a scene and nothing more)...
Initial Sketches for the Thief and Archer Characters
The initial sketches were each created using different processes based on the composition I had envisioned for each individually. To begin with, the card designs needed to be able to 'frame' these images (drawings/paintings) quite 'comfortably', to this extent the format of each image was restricted from the beginning. In all honesty I was unaware of the 'correct' measurements to the cards themselves (this is something that as a team we hadn't really decided upon, as at this stage Joyce was still only considering possible designs for the 'chance' cards and had not settled on anything too 'concrete' or definitive in terms of finalising a possible design.) You'll notice, however, that after the second image to the left (the female archer character) that I had decided on a rough scale/measurement for the subsequent three character designs ( if you reversed the order of the first two images, then they'd be each within the order that I created them, the female archer, the male archer, the female thief and the male thief.) The 'format' for the male archer character design (the second of the four initial sketches I created for this project and as seen to the left) was created with an original idea of how I thought the cards were going to look like in the final design, though I admit also that I wanted to incorporate the general 'scene' that I had outlined in my observation drawing of the 'Mousehold Heath' forest, as much as possible, with the intention of 'cropping' the image within photoshop, where necessary, to fit the intended 'format' and to maintain continuity between the work (this was something that could have been discussed further between Ilze and I, as we largely went off and 'did our own thing' in terms of the character designs that we created, with her following her own process and style, the latter of which was of course unavoidable and expected, as we each have our own 'style' or technique.) The format for the female archer (the first of my 'initial sketches' for the four character designs) was basically a square, as I had, again, no idea as to the intended format or 'layout' of the character card designs (it's also important to note that Ilze and I did agree, however, on basing our character card 'layouts' on the design or style of card design as seen in the 'Magic: The Gathering' I.P.) These measurements, however, were later 'scrapped' in favour of the slightly more rectangular format I used in the 'male archer' character (and of course the subsequent 'thief' characters following this design.)
Although I stated earlier that it had been years since I properly drawn or painted anything digitally (having stopped, really, to work on my traditional artistic skills to improve upon them and ultimately have this inform and affect my subsequent digital work, though I ended up enjoying the 'traditional style' to the extent that I didn't 'return' as quickly as I had planned) never-the-less I still remembered my use of the 'graphics tablet' and digital pen.
The 'tools' I used in the creation of these (extremely rough) digital sketches was a wacom Intuous 3 and the Photoshop Creative Suite 3 (CS3.)
Underpaintings
Due to poor time management I only ever ended up developing two of the underpaintings below into something that resembled a 'final' piece (the male theif and female archer) though I did create underpaintings for each of the character class varients (except for the male archer, of which I was confident the 'initial sketch' was already at a stage that meant I could render the image, fairley comfortably, further into a more refined picture/painting.)
As mentioned previously, each of these particular 'under-paintings' were created using a variety of techniques (more so than in the earlier initial sketch 'phase.')
To begin with, the female archer was simply created entirely from my head (continuing on from the initial sketch 'version') except for the addition of referencing two photographs (one was of a woman's face, the photographer's work can be found under the username 'iofoto' on the website '123rf.com', the other photo was of a wolf's face which was 'sourced' from a website displaying wallpapers, both links can be found, in full, at the end of this blog in the 'Bibliography' section.) Again, to add a sense of realism to the painting, the face of the female archer I had drawn based on photographic reference in the form of a single photo, displaying a woman's face (I do not own the rights to that photo in any way) and the wolf's face to, was also roughly drawn from the reference of a photo of a wolf's face 'snarling' (again, the rights of which for that photograph I do not own.) The remainder of the female archer 'underpainting' and final work did not make use of any other reference whatsoever and was entirely from my own imagination (the rest of my artwork for this project also did not use any photo-reference in any form; the only other form of reference used was either of my own face as seen through a mirror, in real life, or from other forms of observational drawing etc. again, I must stress, only two photographs were used as reference and only for the faces of the wolf and woman in the 'female archer' artwork for this project.) The composition behind the 'female archer' artwork, is actually rather unique, in that I attempted to add another 'nuance' to the work, as based on my research of the Medieval, European culture that our board games 'setting' drew heavily upon (of which I will explain in further detail, later on in the blog.)
The 'female thief' artwork, out of the four pieces of artwork, I was actually the most pleased with (not in terms of the final outcome of the work, of which it is fairly crudely drawn) but because I used no reference at all for it's creation (other than very briefly holding a light up to my face in a mirror in order to refine the woman's facial expression further, but this was a very minor 'activity'.) Again, the 'female thief' is entirely from my own head and imagination, and without reference, I was relatively pleased with the work in that for the first time (in around two years) I had drawn something from my head without the use of photo-reference or the heavy reliance on any other form of observation. The pose (whilst complicated) actually came extremely easy to me, and the challenge, really, comprised of shading the image based on the light-source I had established early on in the concept.I was disappointed that I didn't get to finish the work (due to poor time-management) but I'm fairley pleased with the sense of drama that is 'exuded' from the piece, it is by far the most dramatic of the four (in my opinion) and this is due to the fore-shortened perspective established in the drawing (fore-shortening is a particularly challenging technique to depict in art, and whilst my attempt isn't particulalry accurate, I'm quite happy with the how close I got to making the pose convincing, considering I had no reference.) I also think this particular sketch (or 'under-painting') successfully depicts how establishing a solid concept early on (no matter how crude, or primatively drawn) can allow for a very easy 'work-flow' for the remainder of the development of the piece; if it were not for the initial sketch of the 'female thief' (or more accurately the strong idea as it existed in my head) I would not have been able to develop the drawing to the extent that I did, especially without any reference (this 'under-painting' was also more than enough 'information' on the canvas to be used in developing the image/painting even further into a 'finished product' or completed work.)
The 'under-painting' of the 'male archer' character (in complete contrast to the deveopment of the 'female theif' artwork) has not changed at all since the initial sketch save for the fact tha in the 'under-painting' I have simply added tonal value (or 'shaded-in') the male archer's 'boots.'
The 'male thief' artwork, actually, was possibly the most challenging of the four characters to produce (but resulted in one of the more easier paintings to create.) I knew I wanted a close-up of the character's face (to add variety to the images in comparison to each other) and so this posed a challenge as I also decided to include a 'highway-man' type hat on the character (inspired by Paul's interpretation of the 'thief' character class as seen in the figure he sculpted.) I knew straight away what I wanted to do with the piece (a strong lighting, or form of 'chiaroscuro' seemed appropriate in adding a form of drama to the character, which I felt would highlight or emphasise the personality I had in mind for him.) I promised myself I wouldn't use any photo-reference whatsoever, but I also wanted a sense of realism to the piece (I could have drawn a fairly realistic face entirely from my head, but again I was under time constraints and this would have proved a time-consuming process) I instead turned to the only 'option' I felt I had left; if I couldn't find a suitable model to base my work on, I'd simply use the only model available, myself...
The main reason as to why I finally decided on (essentialy) a 'self-portrait' (though there was no intention on associating my likeness with the 'thief' character) was due primarily to the complications in how I was to (accurately) render or refine, in a fairly realisitic manor, the facial expression I had chosen for the 'male thief' character (the smirk/mischievous smile was chosen to add a little drama and perhaps comedy to the piece, reflective of the male thief's own 'un-trustworthy', sly, deceitful and generally 'twisted' personality.)
For the purpose of creating this image based on drawing my own likeness from observation, I had a small, portable (round) mirror available but I needed a constant light-source and something that would emit a strong enough 'beam' that would cause the sought of strength and types of shadows I desired to be cast upon the face. This issue was later exemplified (after having drawn the thief's initial face from my own, observationally from a mirror) as my desk lamps bulb had blown from previous usage (I actually held the lamp up above my face, pointing downwards, and drew with my other hand and through looking at my reflection in the mirror I was able to draw my face, as the thief's face, with this light-source in mind) I still had my hand to draw from observation as the thief's hand, however (with the complication arising from the fact that I need to immitate the same direction of light, with a different light-source) so I used a very small light that would fit comfortably into the palm of your hand (the light was switched on and off based on pressing your thumb on the light itself.) I needed to reference my left hand but I also needed another hand to hold the light (and maintain the source of light) so I would proceed in holding the light in my right hand and positioning it correctly (but very roughly) over my left hand, looking at the mirror I would then put down the light, and quickly draw what I saw. Section by section I eventually managed to shade my hand based on how the light interacted with my hand, from observation (it was a rather laborious process, however, in that I would constantly lose the light-source and direction of the light whenever I put the light down to draw what I saw in the mirror, this meant I had to constantly re-evaluate and judge, roughly, where the position of the light was previously, having to do this quite a number of times before I had enough information to work from.) This process would not have been as necessary (or as complicated) as it was, were it not for the complexity of the facial expression I chose to depict on the thief (which, again, was difficult to maintain throughout the drawing process, as whether you're aware of it or not, the muscles in your face begin to relax and slowly the facial expression changes, which of course affects not only what you observe in the mirror, but ultimately what you put down, or draw, onto the canvas.) Ofcourse other than the face itself and the hand, the rest of the drawing/image is entirely drawn from head without any reference used. The obvious additions to the underpainting of the 'male thief', when compared to the initial sketch, would be the addition of the index and middle fingers, 'holding-up', between them, a single coin, something I wanted to use as a sought of 'prop' or subtle visual 'cue' in describing to the player the nature of the thief character (whilst the female 'thief' varient reflects the dangerous qualities to the character) with the male thief I wanted to depict the sly and deceitful aspects to the thief character's personality (in that he/she would rather buy his/her way to victory, than achieve it through any sense of hardwork or honour, that the other character classes perhaps would.) The coin was later to be replaced with a key (not only was this more appropriate or 'revelent' to the title of the board game and the nature of the victory conditions of the game itself but I also wanted to depict the main ability of the thief character class, which is to steal the coveted key, needed for 'victory.') In all honesty, I write this reflective commentary afew weeks after having finished working on the 'male thief' piece, and as I look back on the completed work and see the 'coolness' in the colours from which I painted the flesh of my face, it seems more likely that I used the same small light-source (which emits a sought of 'blue-ish/white' colour) that I used for drawing my hand in the mirror, to draw the face also; instead of holding up the lamp (which I used to help me draw the facial expression of the female thief.) I cannot be sure, again, when exactly the bulb 'blew' in my desk lap, but I'm starting to think this was before I attempted to draw the male thief (I definitely know I used the small light-source for the hand, but I could have very well used my desk lamp to help draw the face instead, as I do remember some sense of reluctance and annoyance in needing to use the small light-source in drawing the hand, but not so much the face; either way I used a light-source and my own reflection in a mirror to sketch/paint from, this is exactly why I should make a note of what I'm doing at the time, which I usually do.)
'Final' Paintings
These are the 'completed' works (if you can really call them that) of which will be featured in the final product in the form of 'character cards.' I said 'if you can really call them that' due to the fact that they are un-finished or in-complete and also due to the incompetence of the 'artist' that produced them, I will not begin to mention the mistakes abound throughout both pieces of work, just know that other than the wolf's and woman's face (which I looked at two photographs to reference when painting them) and the fact that I referenced my own face and hand in a mirror when painting the male thief's face (technically I suppose a self-portrait) the rest of the work was created from my imagination (this includes, in the 'female archer' painting, everything except for the woman's face and the wolf's face, for the 'male thief' painting, this includes everything but the hand and the thief's face, which is to say the hair, hat, key, branch with web and spider and the background and their subsequent shadows/shading.)
I haven't painted anything digitally (save for two rough sketches used in my interview process and one during my 'Foundation') in over two years and my knowledge of the software (Photoshop) is extremely amateurish and limited in scope and understanding (something of which I need to rectify) and so my work-flow for both paintings was slow and disjointed as I struggled with the use of layers (of which there were barely any, leading to various complications later on if I needed to 'edit' or change my work.) Both pieces were produced basically in one 'sitting' or session, this was particularly the case with the 'male thief' character, of which I wanted to 'capture' the light affecting the plains of my face as quickly as possible; surprisingly, having only ever attempted to draw a self-portrait afew times in my life before, each met with minimal success, I found this 'self-portrait' a fairly quick and simplistic process, as I didn't spend very long on any one section of my face, instead very crudely 'fleshing-out' the main sections of my face, focusing primarily on the areas of 'strongest light' and the cast shadows resulting from this.
Again, I won't delve into the mistakes of each piece of work, they are already fairly evident and once again I wouldn't state either piece as being 'complete', yet part of being an illustrator and concept artist (the roles I specifically 'filled' in this particular project) means also that you must work to a deadline and often find yourself having to, perhaps, 'sacrifice' certain apects of your work in order to achieve something that can be presented or submitted to the client, to be used in the final product. This is what I found myself doing and I think an extreme example of this sought of process can be the witnessed in the comic-book industry; I have read quite afew articles and seen many interviews of artists who have had to deal with the fact that they have to see (often incomplete) work being mass produced and internationally 'exposed' or recognised, when unhappy with the results and this has been due to time-constraints and deadines affecting the final 'quality' of the work; this is an example of where art meets business, time is money etc. and most if not all professional artists are accutely and constantly aware of this.
These two images, along with the 'female thief' and 'male archer' underpaintings as depicted above, were the four final images to be used and displayed within the character card 'format.'
The Process
I've covered most of this in previous sections of this blog, however, I'll briefly collate my ideas and outline my methods and processes used behind my artwork for this project, below.
Through collecting the artwork together (above) you can see my 'iterative' or developmental process used in creating the images (some of which are refined to a further extent than others) concerning each of the four characters to be used as artwork on the final character cards. Again, the initial sketches and subsequent 'underpaintings' are extremely crude and primitive in their 'execution', this is entirely deliberate, as they were treated as nothing more than 'story-board-type' sketches as seen in the movie undustry, or simply 'thumb-nail' sketches, the primary purpose of which is to establish a composition before any detail (that might otherwise be removed) was added.
Seeing the work together, above, makes me, actually, really quite dissapointed that I didn't get to finish the work; not only because I let down the group but also because I let down myself, I failed to achieve a 'target' and I also would have liked to have seen the work in a completed state/form, primarilly so that others can see the ideas I had for the project and the artwork for this particular project, that alas I can only really describe with words. This 'failure' was due to poor time-management, something I feel has affected not only this project but the unit as a whole.
For the 'male archer' character artwork, I was considering, originally, an 'emerald green' palette for the forest, bright and colourful with strong 'beams' of sunlight piercing through the canopy, I later abandoned this idea, however, as I deemed it abit to generic and 'cliche', instead, when deciding on potential palettes for each of the characters, I wanted to 'mix-up' the obvious combinations (the archer must be hooded and in green and brown, the cloaked thief should be dark colours only, blacks, purples etc.) and instead, reverse these (so I gave the thief character the typical colour scheme you'd expect for an archer, the archer recieved a redish colour to be perhaps abit more 'unique' etc.) to this extent, I very much wanted to paint a strong autumn 'theme' for the male archer artwork, deep browns, bright reds, oranges and yellows etc. a 'fiery' yet majestic and purely fantastical setting. I wanted to include bright, floating, shimmering lights sctattered throughout the scene, along with leaves and other small plants caught by the wind (with this piece depicting a more 'high-fantasy' theme as opposed to the other three works) I could have achieved this relatively quickly had I used a method or 'tools' I was oblivious to using or had yet to try, even though I did have previousl knowledge of it having seen it used in other artist's work, this is of course custom brushes. I would have actually liked to have used maybe some custom brushes or something 'pre-made' that I could have downloaded (this would have definitely increased my 'work-flow', ultimately reducing the time spent on each piece) yet not only was my internet not working at the time but I hadn't any knowledge of how to even use them, let alone download them or create them (I know now how to make them, though I still need to figure out how to download 'pre-made' custom burshes and put them into photoshop) and so everything was painted using either a hard or soft round brush (as seen in the default selection of brushes in Photoshop CS3.) I could have actually 'lit' the male archer scene at night (in a sought of 'misty' atmosphere like the one I had established in the female archer artwork) but I ultimately decided against this as I had already decided on three dark scenes for the other three character artwork pieces and so a bright, fantastical autumn day scene would have provided the sought of strong contrast 'needed' when compared to these.
For the 'female thief' character, however, I did intend to use colours that would coincide with an assassin or the sought of dark camouflage associated with 'shadowy' or mysterious figures. The lighting, however, was the focus for this particular piece. Obviously being at night, I wanted a strong back-lighting behind the character, whereby most of the scene is bathed in darkness, save for the moon-light reflecting off of the ground and a strong, bright white, 'rim' lighting around the character, picking her out from the rest of the scene and lending itself to the dramatic atmospheric quality of the scene. Painting this particular character artwork was something that I was looking forward to do, fortunately, however, I 'fleshed-out' the under-painting to enough of an extent whereby the idea behind the piece was clearly established (though this isn't the point, the art, once painted, would have had alot more to 'show' or offer the viewer; the final result being something that falls below the expectation and failing to depict the idea in its intended realisition.)
The 'path-building' mechanic behind our board game is perhaps its most notable feature (the whole 'driving force' behind the progression of the player, essentially) to this extent I wanted to include elements of that mechanic (or form of gameplay) in the artwork (or 'character cards'.) The male archer and female archer were the first concepts that I drew and you can see that the path was included in both of the backgrounds for each image, as seen in the initial sketches; whilst the path can still be seen in the 'final' male archer image (namely because it didn't progress past the initial sketch 'stage') it was unfortunately lost/excluded when painting over the underpainting for the final piece of the 'female archer' character artwork. The male and female varients of the thief character class both featured different angles, that meant that it could not only include the 'path' as an element in each painting, but simply didn't warrant it.
Looking back at the colour schemes for the 'completed' male thief and female archer 'pieces', it came to my attention that perhaps the blonde hair and green hat of the male thief suggested an almost 'Green Arrow' type aesthetic to his costume/character design, and the red of the female archer's cloak/clothing (when coupled with the inclusion of the wolves in the mid-ground and back-ground) also brings to mind a 'Red Riding Hood' type image. I'd just like to state that this was not my intention and is purely coincidental (when I told the other members of my team these 'similarities', they didn't notice it, or even seem to share my opinion concerning this observation, so perhaps it's not that noticeable, or even slightly a comparison to be made there.) The male thief character artwork was clearly not finished and left in-complete, though the lack of the shadow from the male thief character's hand, onto his face, was actually exluded intentionally, perhaps the male thief doesn't cast/'emit' a shadow? The twig, web and spider were also visual 'cues' to the player that they are in fact in a forest (this isn't so obvious with the male thief artwork, with the background being exluded) the spider was also used a visual 'metaphore' for the male thief himself and specific play-style.
The screen-shot/image above depicts not only the female archer character's development/progression (I almost always save each of my paintings at every stage of the process, not only to show that specific development, but also just incase I make a series of mistakes and need to return to a previous 'stage' in the painting, an option or ability that is extremely useful and something unique to working digitally) but also my comparing the two images together (namely comparing the work in progress, to the first painting I did of the male thief) so as to maintain a certain level of 'continuity' concerning the style of art that I had established, initially, in the 'male thief' painting. Whilst the female archer character was the second to be designed out of the four pieces of artwork (and the second to be painted) the male thief was the first painting I began (as opposed to the 'male archer' and the 'sequence I had established in the initial sketches stage and subsequent underpaintings.) The reason as to why I began painting the male thief first, was due primarily to the fact that I felt 'his' was by far the weakest of the four initial sketches and I had a certain hesitation and 'reluctance' in how I was going to tackle this particular painting, I felt this would be the most challenging of the four (yet it actually turned out to be a fairly simple painting to create, in terms of the process involved) so I decided to paint this to begin with.
The Square, the Circle and the Triangle in Medieval Art
The square, the circle and the triangle were a collection of powerful symbols at the disposal of the Medieval artist. Later, the artists of the Renaissance, particularly the High Renaissance (such as Raphael, Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo) were to use these to their fullest extent, in a (essentially scientific) balance or harmony resulting from the appliction of these shapes and the careful placement that this geomtery had (when situated 'correctly') in creating a visually 'pleasing' design to the sub-conscience of those who viewed the work of art.
Geometry was not only of grave importance to the Medieval architect in order to construct a balanced and rigid structure, but throughout Europe the geometric shapes of the square, the circle and triangle had an extremely important religious significance, something that was continued and further refined by the scientists and mathematicians that informed the work of the Renaissance artists (who recognised the importance of these shapes and 'symbols' in creating a harmonious and aesthetically pleasing composition within their paintings and sculpture.) Whilst the meanings of each symbol seperately (and when combined) have altered based on the culture or time of their usage, some of the most celebrated of European architectural structures were designed and built by architects and stone-masons who recognised the circle as heaven, the square as earth and the triangle as the 'bridge' between the two (the 'sun-dial' was often a metaphore of this, where the triangle would project and 'translate' the suns rays or the 'meanings' of the sky, acting as a medium between heaven and earth.) Another significant meaning amongst Christians in particular (something that I was much more aware of from have read various articles and watched documentaries on this particular meaning, as opposed to the aforementioned 'sun-dial' example, which I had no previous knowledge of ) was of course the holy trinity (God the father, God the son and God the Holy Spirit.) Perhaps the most universal understanding of these three symbols meanings (the square, the circle and the equilateral triangle) throughout Medieval Christendom, each would fit perfectly into one another (the square into the circle) and the triangle divide perfectly within these two shapes (again, the three aspects of the one God) this 'pattern' has been systematicaly used throughout many of Europes greatest gothic and Medieval cathedrals (as can clearly be seen in not only in the stone-work of the building itself but also through the detailed architectual schematics/plans for the structure.)
This subject matter is something that I personally find fascinating, and have seen 'crop-up' in art time and time again since I was made aware of these 'designs' and patterns (literally repeated in almost all of Christian art, even the most complex of cathedrals, masonary and paintings, throughout certain periods in particular) as whilst the significance of these shapes, again, withheld an intense religious importance to those who constructed these marvels (a process and the effects of which that can be traced back many thousands of years, before the iconography, paintings and architecture of Christian art, even before Christianity, to some of the most prevelent examples of this 'belief' and process today, the great pyramids of Egypt) the scientific and mathematical study of perspective and geometry during the Renaissance lead to the extensive knowledge and use of these simple symbols and combinations of symbols by artists such as Leonardo da Vinci. Da Vinci's illustration of the ancient Roman Vitruvius' study and theory on the proportion of man, in the form of the 'Vitruvian Man' sketch, is an obvious example of this correlation of shapes in signifying 'balance'; yet more commonly, in terms of Renaissance art (and often subsequent art throughout the centuries proceeding this) the shapes aren't so 'obvious' untill you are made aware of them. The fact that the Mona Lisa's pose fits perfectly into a triangle is something that Raphael was soon to learn from and copy in his own portraits and work, culminating in his 'Madonna and Child' series of paintings that reflected the importance of the triangle in a composition (again, the three sides of the Holy Trinity) Leonardo da Vinci's own Madonna and Child paintings (notably "The Virgin Of The Rocks") also uses the triangle extensively throughout his compositions, again, though, from a more mathematical and scientific stand-point, to enhance the 'appeal' of both his religious and non-religious artwork.I haven't had access to any form of live television, or haven't been watching television in general for that matter, but I did return home briefly, for the weekend, during October and I was fortunate enough that my Dad had recorded a documentary (by an art critic I'm familiar with from his past work) concerning this very subject. The programme was written and presented by Matthew Collings, entitled "Renaissance Revolution", the documentary is a three part series, for which I only had the first available to watch (though through further research, the first was in fact the one that suited my 'needs'/desire best, as it featured one of the artists I admire the most, Raphael.)
The focus of this particular 'episode' (part one) of the series, was on Raphael's "Madonna of the Meadow". Matthew Collings, using the latest in technology, sought to 'dissect' the piece of artwork, showing the viewers that, whilst indeed a very impressive piece of 'raw' and gifted talent, the painting was also highly structured and 'formulaic' in how Raphael was to choose the colours, the composition and the figures themselves. Matthew Collings used the example of placing the triangle directly ontop of the work, to emphasise to the viewer just how power, yet it extremely simplistic, this form of 'composing; and image, is. I did something similar in my own work, namely the painting of the 'female archer' character (I had researched into the various styles of art as seen in the 'contemporary' genre of fantasy, I also wanted to 'pay homage' to the period of art and culture that we were depicting in our board game, namely that of the Medieval, or 'Middle Ages' period of Europe and subsequently the Renaissance.) Below are the two paintings (Raphael's work and my own, which is in by no means a comparison in anything other than my own interpretation) 'high-lighting' this very Medieval style of composition, perhaps no longer synonymous with this period in the history of art but it's simplisitc nature 'owes' its origins largely to this time and place...
As Raphael has formed a triangle from the entire fore-ground composition, I have attempted to do something similar between the 'background wolf', the 'mid-ground wolf' and the 'foreground archer;' all was done in an attempt to create a 'balance' to the composition, something that is hopefully pleasing to the eye. The triangle was particulalry important in my work (again, concerning the 'female archer' character piece) namely because it saw me attempting to re-create this 'visual cue' as seen in the art of the Medieval and subsequent periods of the history of art. Many of the artists and artisans of the Middle Ages understood the power of these symbols (the 'square, the circle and the triangle') the artists of the Renaissance later observed and understood as to why this was, through scientific investigation, I wanted, however, to change simply having an 'object', subject or serious of subjects as simply displaying an obvious 'shape' (in this case a triangle) but literally focusing on the actual composition, (that is to say the relation of each 'subject' in the painting to one another and I feel I achieved this as illustrated above, to the left, in red.) The juxtoposition between the complexity, technical ability and the artistry of the drawing and painting itself, to the highly simplisitc composition, led to clarity in understanding how to 'read' the painting, as seen in Raphael's "Madonna of the Meadow" above; for after all, the majority, if not all of religious artwork during this period, was to convey the 'word of God', pictorialy, through the Bible's 'stories, to those who perhaps were unable illiterate and unable to read them, of course some others were for patronage and the rich etc. The 'blue triangle' picture above, illustrates the more common representation of simple shapes in compositions, although when I was painting this particular picture, I had in mind the 'triangle' established between the subjects each 'allocating; different spaces within the painting (the foreground, the mid-ground and the background.)
The Formatting of the Paintings and the Designing of the Character Cards
The idea behind the character cards was something that I suggested on the very first day, as at this early stage in the project, I was realistically considering the fact that the character 'pieces' would most likely not be an option, due primarily to the fact that at that point I was still meeting and getting to know the people in my group, assuming that everyone worked predominantly in two-dimensions and that us all being students, I was considering the financial 'limits' on what we could achieve (therefore the 'character cards' were to substitute, or represent the characters that would feature in our game, in a visual manner to the player.) I also very much desired to produce artwork for the project and I made this immediately clear at the beginning also (though had everyone wanted to do the same, it might not have been possible for me to have had the opportunity to produce art as my 'primary' contribution to the project, though ofcourse we all contributed to the rules of the game through a natural process of iteration, and we all provided artwork as a team, in some form or another, whether that was purely conceptual, or in fact as a piece of work to be featured or used in the final product.)
Whilst Ilze's and I's efforts were focused on producing the artwork for the characters, Joyce and Niqi had decided to concentrate their own work and research on the marketing aspects of the board game (this was also to include the initial designs for the cards, that is to say the 'chance' cards and the layout of the character cards themselves.) The result of which was to provide the basis for the design or basic layout for the 'character cards' that our digital paintings were to be placed into, the screen-shot blow highlights this process in the development of the character cards, as I take Joyce's design and place my own painting into the format, tweaking it slightly there and then.
The green to the left (in the image above) is Joyce's unedited work, to the right (to the right of the image) was something I quickly did on the spot, as whilst we did have character 'pieces' now, I still wanted to retain the idea of individual colours for each of the character cards, primarily to add variety and further unique 'quality' to each of the characters (both male and female) of the character classes. The image of the 'green' card above was Joyce's final concept for the character cards. Ilze and I, however, had our own ideas as to the layout and general 'aesthetics' of the character cards, so whilst Joyce concentrated on producing work for the 'chance cards', Ilze and myself took the basic design as seen above, and tweaked it much further to our own design. To retain a certain level of continuity between the pieces of work that we would each be producing, we both decided on 'Magic: The Gathering' as a sought of 'template' from which to base our own work (much the same as we did with the characters, though much like the character designs, there were expected to be slight differences in style and format, as we each offered own understandings and ideas in informing the work.) We had both decided to retain Joyce's idea of a background image that linked to the theme of 'nature' (namely the forest setting) and with this we both left that day and returned later with our own character card designs. Ofcourse I didn't to finish all four of my character designs, but I felt that the player still deserves to atleast see something (even if this is in the form of an initial sketch or underpainting) the final images include the female archer 'completed' work, the male thief 'completed' work and the underpaintings for the both the male archer and female thief characters, these were my reponse to the 'character cards' for the board game...
'Final' Character Cards
The 'final' cards themselves I felt were relatively successful, yet of course, there were in fact 'issues' with them also, each of which were a result of time constraints that would inevitably affect the quality, or 'finish' of the final product (you could only dedicate so much time to each card basically.) My main concern really, with the cards that I created, was that I feel that there is a strong inconsistency between the latter three and the female archer. Whilst other than an obvious difference in picture size (which I have no concern with) the middle two cards (the incomplete female thief and male archer cards) were created very quicky, 'on the spot', whilst our group had convened in order to assess eachother's progress and contributions, namely also to see what Ilze and myself and produced separately in terms of our own ideas for the cards (Ilze's 'response' can be seen further down below, again, along with my own cards.)
After having decided to create our own card designs (that whilst they would be designed separately, they would each have a similar 'idea' in mind as reflected in the 'Magic: The Gathering' series of cards) after agreeing that we each wanted to develop Joyce's initial card idea further, we then went our seperate ways that evening, and I returned the next day to show the rest of the group the 'male thief' and 'female archer' cards that I had created the night before (the designs above of which have not changed since then.) I had also created quite a number of colour 'variants' for the 'male thief' character card, though everyone agreed on the original image that I created (which you can see above) as the final design.
I mentioned previously the fact that I created the female thief and male archer character cards 'on the spot', infront of the group, I did this because (whilst I did intend to follow the format I had already established with the female archer and male thief character cards) I wanted the group's feedback on my 'interpretation' of how I felt the character cards should look like (or atleast what they could look like.) Most importantly, however, I wanted to check that my designs, and Ilze's (of which I had yet to see her own work on the card designs) were consistent. Time, however, was an issue and so I quickly completed the remaining two character designs in the colours that I had envisioned for both (purple and green, having using the autumn 'theme'already for the 'male thief' character card.)
The Design Process Behind the Cards (Continued)
The cards themselves (as you can clearly see) were a very simplistic design, and there was an important reason for this. I mentioned the layout behind the cards I created, was inspired heavily on the format as seen in the 'Magic: The Gathering' card sets, but looking equally so (and researching further) into the designs of other cards, from different companies of a similar nature (the 'Yu-Gi-Oh' series of cards for example) you are quickly aware of just how simplistic the designs are. The focus should be on the artwork itself, with the text simply there to display to the player the necessary information, as clearly and succinctly ('to the point') as possible (the typography should therefore reflect this.) It is very easy to make a design far too 'busy' and so I designed the layout of each card with this 'simplicity' and clarity in mind (sometimes less, is in fact more.) Considering also the scale at which we were to print the cards at, the text, if too complicated (or 'fanciful') in design, would then most likely become illegible, and the information obscured or 'lost' to the player (one must remember that the main 'objective' of these cards was to provide the player with information on his or her character, whether that is purely aesthetic or as a 'feature' necessary to the rules affecting gameplay.)
Four photographs were used (and subsequently manipulated in Photoshop) to achieve the card designs above; both the 'dagger' and 'bow and arrow' symbols were photo-manipulated from two images I had downloaded off of Google Images, there were two photographs of trees that were also used as 'background images' on the cards (behind my original character art) one photograph was used behind the 'female archer', and the other photograph of trees was used (and subsequently altered for each) on the remaining three character cards. The inside border (the layout of the borders framing the inside of the character cards) was also downloaded and manipulated from a 'Magic: The Gathering' card. All four of the images used are included in the Bibliography below.
In evaluating the final designs (avoiding the fact that two of the cards contained in-complete artwork) I was also unhappy with the similarity that the last three of the character cards (in the order as they are displayed above) had when compared to the first character card that I had created, which was of the 'female archer' character. Essentially 'copying and pasting' the design as seen on the 'male thief' character card (with the exception of altering the colours slightly) what resulted was three very similar looking cards (which whilst consistency, of course, was the prevelent idea in 'tying' the character cards together) that contrast that I was initially seeking to establish between the 'female archer' and 'male thief' cards (one with light text-boxes and dark writing, and the other the reverse of this) was lost as I ended up with three 'dark' cards and one 'light' card. The 'descriptions' (or piece of text pertaining to a role-playing 'element' associated with each character) were entirely original, and created by myself (for the characters that I did anyway) for this project (I knew, when first suggesting the 'character card' idea, what it was I intended to create, and this role-playing 'element' was a strong factor in this.) The 'descriptions' (whilst fairley inelegant) did have varying degrees of 'effort' involed in each one (like the character designs themselves, I feel the 'female thief' and 'male archer' descriptions required much less thought on my part, than the other two characters, as again, the descriptions were last-minute/'on the spot' also, created at the same time as the last two cards) despite this, the rest of the team seemed to 'warm' to the text (notably the first two of the descriptions that I created recieved a more 'reception' than the latter two.) My 'favourite' desciption of the four, however, is most likely the one I developed for the male thief character, as I feel it best suits his 'story' more so than perhaps than the others. The names for each of the characters (that I designed) equally so, were created by myself, even if they do perhaps display some what generic 'qualities'...
Below I have very simply illustrated the main 'components' that comprise my design for the layout of the character cards that I created...
The "Background image" and the "Symbol representative of the Character Class" (the bow and arrow and the 'dagger') were two images that I had downloaded from Google images (and for the symbol) subsequently altered. I've included the links to these below in my 'Bibliography' (also note that the inner border and text 'boxes' are in almost the exact same formula as seen in some of the older 'Magic: The Gathering' cards; well, one card in particular, which I have also included in my 'Bibliography.')
Further Artwork
Below you can see the box design that Ilze created for our board game (which at this point, is officially entitled "The Key To Victory", the titles of which both Joyce and Niqi worked on, though I believe this final title was of Joyce's conception, also note that Joyce had created her own concept for the box design, as did Niqi, but Paul and I had already added our own ideas to the design below and so the group eventually decided on this box design, to which we had developed to a further extent.)
The design itself was created on a template that Ilze had downloaded from the internet, to which she developed the design on top of (the front of the box design features a combined image of two of Ilze's character designs, the 'male knight' and the 'female mage.') In terms of my contributions to the box design (above) I offered my own advice as to the layout and lighting of the main title design (as seen along the edge of the box.) Originally, the title was not along the side of the box and there was no 'spot-light' behind the text. Ilze then placed the title onto the side of the box (as it appears on the front) I then suggested having the image of the key turned onto its side, placed centrally behind the text and then to have the 'spot-light' included, again centrally, behind the entirety (of the text) of the main title. I also contributed to the text on the back of the box (suggesting it to be white in order to 'compliment' my digital painting, featured behind the text.) I also wrote the introduction to the "Features" section of the text on the back (although it has come to my attention that a word is missing after "and" in the examples shown above.) The rest of the design (including the text written) was either Paul or Ilze (Ilze being the one who created the majority of the design, before I added my own painting and before we later refined the back and sides of the box, as a team, between Paul, Ilze and myself.)
The Last Processes in 'Completing' the Board Game
After rigorous play-testing and an extensive iterative process of design concerning the various 'aesthetics' of the project, the board game (entitled "The Key To Victory") was almost complete...
The two images above were provided by Gavin Cassels, one of his responsibilities to which (as documented in the two photographs above) was to cut out the final 'tiles' for the board game, to be mounted by Paul's printed designs (for the said 'tiles') in much the same way as he did when constructing the 'proto-type' for the board game, earlier on in the development process.
Paul, Ilze and myself spent some time actually getting each of the 'assets' printed (this is to say the 'chance cards', the 'character cards', the 'tiles' and the board itself.) To add a certain level of professional 'finish' to the cards, we had put Ilze's design for the back of the cards (that was to be used on both the chance cards and character cards, to 'tie' them together and add continuity to the 'look' of the cards) into 'In Design' (a program none of us had any knowledge of) we then proceeded to 'line-up' the front of the cards, to design used on the back, and then them all printed 'double-sided.' The images for the main board design and the tiles were then mounted onto 'mount-board' by the team. Gavin then cut out the tiles, I cut out the cards, and Paul (which he had actually completed earlier) painted the figures or 'character pieces' into a 'stone-like' aesthetic.
The Final 'Product'
The final images for each of the board games components (excluding the box above, which was later not printed due to lack of the necessary 'medium' we required for a professional finish, having decided against simply 'mounting' the prints onto a box) can be seen below...
Below is an image collecting both Ilze's and my own 'character card' designs (the top row features Ilze's own card designs and the bottom row features my individual card designs.) Whilst there are differences between Ilze's and my own designs, I do feel, however, that the cards are quite compatible, and consistent when viewed together. The image below was provided by Ilze Cakste.
Below is Ilze's final card design to be used for the back of each of the cards (both 'chance cards' and 'character cards.') The design features the 'logo' (or main title, as also designed by Ilze) for the final board game. The image below is provided by Ilze Cakste.
Below I scanned in the 'test-prints' for the final card designs. One page features both Ilze's and my own 'character cards' and beneath them (the green cards) are Joyce's designs for the 'chance cards', the other page features the backs to the cards (using the design as seen above.)
The photographs below (images provided by Gavin Cassels) depict the coming together of all of the final game components (except for the box design and Dan Capon's instruction manual design) for the final board game. This includes both Ilze's and my own 'character cards', Joyce's 'chance cards' and the tiles, board and 'character pieces' designed by Paul Blackham (again, Gavin did his own concept for the instruction manual and Niqi did her own concepts for the 'chance cards' and box design, but these did not feature in the final product.)
In the photograph (directly above) you can see the 'stone-esque' paint-job, that Paul had applied to the 'character pieces' that he had previously sculpted.
Conclusion
This particular project (being the first) was an interesting one, as not only did we each learn to work within the 'boundaries' of a team but we learnt also the benefits of teamwork (and that through organisation and with each member contributing equally to his or her given 'role' within the group, that much more can be accomplished, in a shorter space of time, than can ever be achieved alone) and for me, personally, I had the privilege of meeting, befriending and working with a fantastic, diverse (and equally interesting) group of people...
Unfortunately, Niqi Chasseaud and Joyce Brabban were not present for these two photos (above and below) the photographs of which were provided by Gavin Cassels. In the photograph above (from left to right) is Dan Capon, Ilze Cakste, myself and Paul Blackham.
In the photograph above (from left to right) is myself, Paul Blackham, Gavin Cassels and Dan Capon. The two photographs above were taken during our first 'play-through' of the board game ("The Key To Victory") in its completed state. I managed to get the key at the beginning of the game, and hold onto it for over an hour and a half (whilst constantly trying to stop the other three players, who at this point had teamed up against me) unfortunately, however, Dan Capon finally defeated me in combat (surprisingly, I rolled almost nothing but sixes throughout that entire game, at one point rolling atleast six or seven in a row, but alas it was not to be) and Dan was the victor that day.
Bibliography
Books:
- Holmes, J.E., 1981. Fantasy Role Playing Games. New York: Hippocrene Books.
- Piper, D., 2004. The Illustrated History Of Art. London: Bounty Books.
- Bell, R.C., 1980. Board and Table Games from Many Civilizations. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications.
History of Board Games:
- Opening quote - [online] Available at: <en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_game> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Secondary quote - [online] Available at: <http://www.xmission.com/~psneeley/shareware/senet.htm> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Paraphrase - [online] Available at: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/senet> [Accessed October 2010.]
- 'Wei-qi' and paraphrase of Bronze-age China - [online] Available at: <http://www.Localhistories.org/ancientchina.html> [Accessed October 2010.]
- 'Magic: The Gathering' image - [image online] Available at: <http://www.shockyatoys.com/2010/01/19/magic-the-gathering-2010-core-set-released/> [Accessed October 2010.]
- 'Citadels' image - [image online] Available at: <http://www.iguk.co.uk/products/citadels-includes-dark-city-1014.aspx> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Photographs of "Toyz and Games" store and associated board game imagery - Ilie, D., 2010. [photograph] (Toyz and Games store in Norwich.)
- 'Minotaurus' rules of play (paraphrasing) - [online] Available at: <http://www.amazon.co.uk/LEGO-3841-Games-Minotaurus/dp/B001u3Y5WK> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Photographs of "Kerrison Toys" store and associated board game imagery - Capon, D., 2010 [photograph] (Kerrison Toys store in Norwich.)
- 'Warrior Knights' - [online] Available at: <http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/22038/warrior-knights> [Accessed October 2010.]
- 'The aMAZEing Labyrinth' - [online] Available at: <http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1219/the-amazeing-labyrinth> [Accessed October 2010.]
- 'Carcassonne' - [online] Available at: <http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1> [Accessed October 2010.]
- 'Nine Men's Morris' Apple Application image - [image online] Available at: <http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/nine-mens-morris/id310205059?mt=8> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Tafle games - [online] Available at: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tafl_games> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Norse games - [online] Available at: <http://www.ravensgard.org/prdunham/ngames.html> [Accessed October 2010.]
- 'The Two Towers' book image - [image online] Available at: <http://www.letsbuyit.co.uk/product/29574643/books/the-lord-of-the-rings-the-two-towers> [Accessed October 2010.]
- The 'History of Miniature Wargaming' - [online] Available at: <http://www.hmgs.org/history.htm> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Tolkien quote - [online] Available at: <http://lighthousepatriot.blogspot.com/2010/08/jrr-tolkien-father-of-modern-fantasy.html> [Accessed October 2010.]
- 'Dungeons & Dragons' image - [image online] Available at: <http://netbook-experience.com/up-content/uploads/2009/12/dnd.jpg> [Accessed October 2010.]
Adrian Smith:
- [image online] Available at: <http://nnm.ru/blogs/filmmern/adrian_smith/page2/> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [image online] Available at: <http://adrian-smith.cghub.com/images/page:9/view:stream/> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [images online] Available at: <http://warhammeronline.com/art/index.php> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [image online] Available at: <http://tylerjacobson.blogspot.com/> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [image online] Available at: <http://tylerjacobsonart.com> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [images online] Available at: <http://conceptcraniopagus.deviantart.com/blog/30247263/> [Accessed October 2010.]
- 'Conan the Barbarian' - [online] Available at: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conan_the_Barbarian> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Definition of 'Mythopoeia' (genre) - [online] Available at: <http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/440147> [Accessed October 2010.]
Tyler Jacobson:
- [image online] Available at: <http://tylerjacobson.blogspot.com/> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [image online] Available at: <http://tylerjacobsonart.com> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [images online] Available at: <http://www.frankfrazetta.net/index.html> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [images online] Available at: <http://fantasy.mrugala.net?Alan%20Lee?Alan%20Lee%20-%20Minas%20Tirith%20%282%29.jpg> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [images online] Available at: <http://www.theonering.com/images/medialibrary/lotr_26.jpg> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [images online] Available at: <http://fantasy.mrugala.net/Alan%20Lee/Alan%20Lec%20-%20Rivendell.jpg> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [images online] Available at: <http://Ih6.ggpht.com/EITrivulzio/SDQYu16tKI/AAAAAAAAC4k/bUJHyWjdIvo/Gandalf%20secouru%20par%20Gwaihir%20Orthanc%20-%201999.jpg> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [images online] Available at: <http://www,ewetel.net/~klaus.ehlers1/_images/howe_mumak.jpg> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [images online] Available at: <http://tolkiengateway.net/w/images/thumb/a/ac/John_Howe_-_Helms_Deep.jpg/500px-John_Howe_-_Helms_Deep.jpg> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [images online] Available at <http://tolkiwiki.lydiafish.us/uploads/CompletedResearchPapers/MHowe.jpg> [Accessed October 2010.]
- [online] Available at: <http://www.Luo-shu.com/book/illuminated_books_carpenters_square> [Accessed October 2010.]
- A clip can be found here (illustrating the point) - NationalGeographic,2007.Engineering the Impossible: Chartres Cathedral. [video online] Available at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16zh6zPIX98&feature=related> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Photographs of the final board game, the process, and the team - Cassels, D., 2010. [photograph] (Private residence + NUCA Student Union Bar in Norwich.)
- Photographs of box art, character cards combined intonsingle image, and back of card - Cakste, I., 2010. [digital images]
- Woman's face in profile (original photographer 'iofoto' from the website www.123rf.com) - Iofoto, n.d. Pretty Redhead Young Woman Profile With Hair Streaming Out Behind Her. [photograph] Available at: <http://www.spiderpic.com/stock-photos/_123rf/2044455-pretty-redhead-young-woman-profile-with-hair-streaming-out-behind-her> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Wolf's face (snarling wolf in the mid-ground) - Bared Teeth, Grey Wolf. [photograph] Available at: <http://wallpaper-s.org/15_Bared_Teeth,_Grey_Wolf.htm> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Tree photo one - Shuyukoukin, n.d. Autumn Forest Sunset. [photograph] Available at: <http://s372.photobucket.com/albums/oo162/shuyukoukin/?action=view¤t=Autumn_Forest_in_the_Sun.jpg&newest=1> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Tree photo two - Graf, D., 2004. Mt Field National Park - Misty Trees. [photograph] Available at: <http://www.dualpulse.com/pics/mt_field_mist_bg.jpg> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Character card border - [Seat of the Synod] n.d. [image online] Available at: <http://www.coolstuffinc.com/main_viewCard.php?Card_Name=Seat of the Synod&viewtype=Magic the Gathering Cards> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Bow and arrow symbol - [Bow & Arrow Detail] n.d. [image online] Available at: <http://carypress.rit.edu/publications/gifts/letterpress-stationary-bow-arrow.html> [Accessed October 2010.]
- Dagger symbol - [Insurrection Katipunan Dagger] n.d. [image online] Available at: <http://www.arscives.com/historysteel/philippines.sword.htm> [Accessed October 2010.]
