Forum

First of all I want to say that I just recently got hooked on Coriolis - the world and rule set is phantastic, but especially the artwork blew my mind. it makes it easy (at least for me) to be immediately drawn into the world of Coriolis, which is something I really appreciate. I really love the whole game and setting so far - and can't get enough of it.

So, of course, I was quite keen on seeing how the Icons would be depicted in the book. I flipped through the book to the pages of the Icons...
...and was completely and utterly disappointed.
Please accept my apologies, as I sure don't want to critisize the artist who drew the Icons. And I probably am missing something, something I'm not aware of yet or had false expectations...
But, apolgoies again, the drawings - especially the Gambler - look like if Eddie Murphy in "Coming to America" and Lionel Ritchie had a lovechild in the 80s and took that as inspiration for the artwork.

Maybe I am blinded by a european upbringing in regards of catholic iconography - and therefore don't see the true meaning/valor in the depiction of the Icons in Coriolis.
Maybe it is as a contrast to the amazing immersive artwork of the rest of the book, so the Icons seem more mundane and "working class" (is that how icons should be depicted?).

Anyway, I seriously expected the depiction of Icons so much differently and therefore was wondering if I and my group are the only ones who see it that way?

I'm happy for any other opinions and views though! So thank you in advance!

Cheers,
Shed

Hello, I think they fit. To me these are diegetic illustrations, as in existing in the world of Coriolis, whereas most of the artwork is realistic illustrations aimed to the players outside of the game. Personally I felt that they most closely reminds me of Byzantine art. Having the icons depicted as symbolic and simplistic "holy cartoons" leaves more to the imagination, which I think fits with personal faith, interpretation and ambiguity.

First of all thank you for your reply - and yes, of course, everyone may have a different opinion about it.
I also get your point of diegetic illustrations and the reminding of Byzantine art.

But, let's pick the mentioning of Byzantine art. This art happened during the Byzantine empire, I presume, and at that time, I reckon, the depiction of art was at it's peak for that time.
But art evolved since then... so I guess no-one would create art on a Byzantinian level anymore nowadays - unless as some sort of hommage maybe.
Now, in Coriolis - they're thousands of years in the future. I guess the quality of art has evolved and improved till then. So why would they use art that's not even ancient - Byzantine art for example, carried over from gernation to generation (still wouldn't make much sense as we, today, hardy use ancient art to depict icons, but evolved art - unless it's for exhibits in museums) - but only ancient as in "it was made on ancient PC computers on Microsoft Word and kept till today".

Also, the "holy cartoons", in my opinion, don't leave much to the imagination. They look like a simple drawing of my neighbour on Coriolis station. There is nothing holy about them (ok, yeah, maybe the "flaming eyes" on the Messenger...), there is nothing abstract, nothing that inspires faith.
In theory, if a boy comes to me on Coriolis station and says he's the Messenger, I'd reply with: Ok, you definitely look like him. I believe you.

So yeah, still doesn't make much sense to me.

I too would like to see more, different interpretations of the icons. I don’t mind the versions in the book, but they should not be the only ones. As it happens I have been working with artist of this parish John Salquist on a a calendar and he has created nine beautiful, and dare I say it, more "iconic" portraits. We made a beautiful thing https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/32 ... id=2652262

But, let's pick the mentioning of Byzantine art. This art happened during the Byzantine empire, I presume, and at that time, I reckon, the depiction of art was at it's peak for that time.
But art evolved since then... so I guess no-one would create art on a Byzantinian level anymore nowadays - unless as some sort of hommage maybe.
Now, in Coriolis - they're thousands of years in the future. I guess the quality of art has evolved and improved till then. So why would they use art that's not even ancient - Byzantine art for example, carried over from gernation to generation (still wouldn't make much sense as we, today, hardy use ancient art to depict icons, but evolved art - unless it's for exhibits in museums) - but only ancient as in "it was made on ancient PC computers on Microsoft Word and kept till today".

Looking at human art history we can see how things change depending on taste and does not really evolve in a straight line. For example the Assyrians and Ancient Greek both mastered sculptural techniques that were very naturalistic/realistic, but those styles were dropped later. Sometimes we see a resurgence to classical ideals, like the European Renaissance where they again looked back to Ancient Greece and resurrected ideas and ideals that had been dormant for over 1000 years (kept alive by Arabic scholars though). And in our own time we've just experienced a decade of 80's romanticism/nostalgia with stuff like Stranger Things, humans seem to love looking backwards.

Add that to the fact that Free League very clearly takes inspiration from the Middle East from the Islamic Golden Age and the caliphates. Architecture, patterns, ancient star names etc. etc. You can make the same argument about why it's reasonable that the people of the Third Horizon have taken queues from architectural styles developed from Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia and then perfected by the Arabs from the 7th century onwards. The most on the nose thing would be The Faceless that is not allowed to be depicted and is only hinted at with architectural empty space or patterns, just like Allah, and Christian icons before the iconoclasm(s). I see no problem with artistic licence to look at ancient art and evoke something with it.

I think Coriolis is mainly a game about Westerners trying to understand the Ancient Middle East and human history and also extrapolate how different cultural ideas can evolve into the future. As such it's like a historical science fiction game to me. I respect that's not everyone's perspective, but that's my POV. That's all I have to say, thanks for a nice discussion, take care.

I too would like to see more, different interpretations of the icons. I don’t mind the versions in the book, but they should not be the only ones. As it happens I have been working with artist of this parish John Salquist on a a calendar and he has created nine beautiful, and dare I say it, more "iconic" portraits. We made a beautiful thing https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/32 ... id=2652262

Ah, thank you for that link!
That already looks better, thank you : )

I actually found a site where the icons aren't replaced but rather complented with a different aspect. (the site is in German though)
https://www.worldanvil.com/w/coriolis-- ... n-category

The Emissary Lost cover art has a face in it, which presumably the face of an icon. It would be great to have illustration of all icons in that cosmic mysterious style. Hope you’re reading, Free League!