http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/npacover_scrnps.pdf

Hi folks,

I've posted a low low res pdf of the npa cover. let me know what you think.


-L

This cover leaves me scratching my head.

First, and most importantly, I don't "get it" visually speaking. YES, there's text explaining. I recognize that, of course.

But, when I see this cover, I'm not sure what the heck it is. "No Press." Hmm, ok, so why is there a press there on the cover? And even if this was called "Yes Press," what does the press image have to do with gaming at all?

I'd much rather see some treatment of the illustrations like you have set up for the back cover. I can see that, Aha!, there are a diverse variety of visuals, and hence, stuff to do in this book. Right now, it "feels" like some kind of non-fictin manual on how to get your RPG printed.

In designing a cover, you've got 15 seconds, probably less, to grab somone's attention, make them pick it up, and start making decisions (about whether to look inside, about whether to buy, etc.). I'm not especially compelled to make decisions about this book. I think it can be more colorful, even if it is a 2-color process, for example.

And, don't get me wrong. I know ALL TOO WELL how often we designers hear deconstructive criticism. I joke all the time about my most common feedback: "I don't know what I want, but I know it's not this." Thanks, schmuck. So, take this as commiseration, not raining on parades.

I looked at it and thought "Hey! That's totally hip! ...but the '8' should be bigger on the cover."

Then I came back and read Matt's comments and went back to look again. This time, I covered up the back and spine with a book and looked only at the cover. I kind of think the back cover has more grabbing power too. The front is quite eye-catching (and I like the level of color) but as informative as the back. (And that 8 is still too small.) And now that I'm being picky, it seems like original and unique are mildly redundant.

Chris

How hard would it be to turn the gear shape into the classic red circle with a slash "no" symbol (see the Ghostbusters logo) Putting that over the press logo would make the no press title make more sense and red is eyecatching. Although I don't know how practical it would be with the number of color/cost, etc.

Not rocking my world I'm afraid.
I do know what I don't like about this cover (at least some of it)
I'm going to be seriously harsh here, but I mean it in the best way.
(and I'm pretty sure you can take it)

I'm not really into iconic covers generally (though I think the NPA would actually be suited for one), but I think this falls short even on that level.

This is not an eye-catching cover.
If this was on a store shelf, I wouldn't glance twice at it.

Some specific problems I see:

Your most important information is in green, while the black is what contrasts most with the white background. That makes the secondary stuff stand out more than the primary title and such. Your biggest color contrast needs to be on the most important things, you can't rely on just the simple presence of a color to make that draw the eye. Black on white is too powerful to be over-shadowed by the green.

And... white background? It makes it look amateurish. I can understand wanting to do a two-color cover to save some money, if that's the goal, but please print it on something besides white (even if you go with black on a single color background it would be an improvement)

As was said before, there's nothing on the front cover (other than text) to indicate what this is about. That's a mistake. The cover should tell you what is inside the book. Books (like it or not) are judged by their covers. The cover needs to tell me that I have to buy this book... even if it's a lie.

I'd knock down the size of the big wheel logo. Like Matt, I also question whether it makes sense for a "No Press Anthology". But mainly it's just too much, stuck onto too little. Shrink it down, & keep it to the top of the page. (I'd even pull the title out myself. Just make the printing press in the wheel a logo & place the title seperately)

For a peek at what's inside, try lining up a row of tall & narrow images (slices of the interior images for each game, sort of like your little cubes on the back cover, but taller) along the bottom half of the cover.

Hope that helps more than it annoys.

I suggest taking the 8 pictures for the 8 games and blending them together for the cover similar to the pictures on the cover for the upcoming GURPS 4e: http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/basic/img/basic1_lg.jpg

Hi All,

Regarding the NPA: Well, there definitely is an issue with the title and the concept. I chose to have a logo designed that emphasized the conceptual process and also offered a bit of irony: If it's the No Press RPG Anthology, it shouldn't be in print now should it?

Personally, I like conceptual stuff rather than image-specific stuff. More open designs allow the viewer to interpret to their tastes, and often allow for a depth of meaning that one cannot easily evince from a fully formed or realistic image.

And then there's the fact that such an endeavour needs a logo, something to kick off the brand identity of the project. A logo always seems a little awkward in the beginning, but the meaning becomes embedded through use. Take nearly any logo out of context and you'll see what I mean.

I guess I am sort of rationalizing, but there is also another reality at hand -- it's what I've got to work with. So I'm going to try to make the best of it.

As for "more color" and "do it like Steve Jackson", I must respectfully decline. Simple and graphic are the way to go, especially in a market soaked with SJG-derivitive images.

That said, the cover does need reworking. It's a bit kludgy. I'll work up another version on it tonight. Chris is right, that 8 has got to be bigger!!

thanks!
-Luke

PS the logo concept was "Pixel to Press to Paper", not that that is important.

I had just fiddled with the front cover using PSP. I took the green out of the title and made the whole gear green and left the title and the press graphic white, inspired a bit by Luke's comments and it's 200% better.
I also but a larger 8 on a star shape, as is available in PSP. It looks good, too. Not bad looking for a Q&D job.

I'm saving the file for now. Just contact me if you want to look at it. Please specify the format.

round 2.

http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/npacover_only.jpg

http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/npacover_sprd.jpg

How can you beat "Fun and Good?"

I'm pretty happy with these. But I can still see some room for tweaking. Thanks everyone for your feedback. (Also got feedback from my friend Mike Morel of Cthulhu Sex Magazine, who is an excellent designer.)

-L

PS I can't really justify my use of green, white and black aside from my suspicion that these colors will stick out like blood on the white linens in a game store.

I hate to be difficult but except for the bigger eight, I like your first cover better. The background gears work on the back and spine, but I think they're too much on the cover. Also, it looks like several of the eight iconic images from the games are transparent and they look crisper on the original cover with the white background.

If you can have the background gears transition from the way you have them to completely invisible over the front half of the spine and the first inch or so of the cover, that might make a nice effect that draws the eye around to the back of the book. Or what if it said

Pick me up, bitch!

on the cover...or something...I mean, it could be more polite, but still grabby.

Chris

A couple of musings, might not be much help:

The green is a bit too sickly. Maybe alter the hue to be more bluey?

The typeface for the title needs to be cleaner and sharper. See it at a distance and you don't get much more than a green splodge at the moment. Maybe more letter spacing?

My urge would be to simplfy things. Keep the cogs and maybe use the press not as a central focus, but as a small logo in the corner.

-Matt

Luke,

What is up with the negativity around here? Whiny bitches, all of ya.

I love this cover. I'm an audience that's already been sold, obviously, so my opinion may be as useful as a colander in a cup store.

The press is a great image, and works well against the very clean cover.

My non gamer girlfriend who generally nit picks apart the illustrations I buy for games and makes me send them back for fiddling little tweaks here and there, liked the cover just fine.

Her biggest complaint (somewhat ironically) was that the "8" was far too big and led the eye away from the important stuff.

She also didn't realize it was an "8" until I told her. She thought it looked (on the front cover, likely because of the overlap) more like an "&" and kept asking "and what?" until I figured out what she was talking about.

Other comments: she didn't understand what the stripe was through the gear on the cover until I told her it was the slash to say "no" as in "no press" at which she announced

"then it needs to be dark like the gear and over top of the thing in the middle, or else it just looks like a stripe...and then why isn't there one through the gear on the back cover...they should be the same...oh and why does the 8...I still think it looks like an 'and' overlap on the front cover but not on the back...?"

Other than that she thought it would be suitably appealing to motivate the typical attention deficit gamer type to pick up and look at.


For myself I'd go with the "original short form" tag line from the back cover over the "original and unique" tag line from the front...I agree that's pretty redundant. And tag lines gain strength through repetition.

"Original Short Form RPGs" is pretty much your branding statement. You should use that frequently and in exactly the same grammatical structure repeatedly throughout the book. Perhaps as part of a page footer. That's what tells you what "No Press" is all about.

Matt wrote: A couple of musings, might not be much help:

The green is a bit too sickly. Maybe alter the hue to be more bluey?

I like the second cover. It grabs. The "Includes Discernment by..." blurb though is a bit confusing--it makes it seem like it only includes Discernment and Cell Gamma, which is extra wierd when comboes with the "8 entire games!" bit. Maybe change it to "including"? Or something like that.

And Complete, Original, and Unique.
--Jeff

Reactions from the family:

It's buisy.
WTF does a gear have to do with anything?
It takes studying to understand.
Is that supposed to be a "no" symbol?
If it's supposed to be a "no" symbol, it should be a "no" symbol, not a gear.
It's confusing.

So, take that as you will.
--Jeff

Jeph wrote: Reactions from the family:

WTF does a gear have to do with anything?

It takes studying to understand.

A vast improvement.
Not what I would have done, but there's nothing wrong with that.
(much) ;)

Adding the shadow gears in the background (and the gray within the gear logo) breaks the field of white up enough that it now seems much more of a thought-out design choice than a lack of ideas for a background.

And I think you have a point about the colors. This certainly won't look like anything else in the store, and in that context it should work as planned.

I don't think the slash mark in the logo works. The traditional circle & slash is red and overlaps the image. I think trying to eemulate that with something in gray, and behind the image, is not going to give the same impression. I think letting them wonder why there's a press on a "no press" is a better way to get them thinking that trying to figure out what the gray band is across the gear.

I think the eight is perfect.
A drop shadow, like in the title text, might help to punch it out. But I agree that it balances the cover.

abzu wrote:
Colors: The mission, and I chose to accept it, was to not use blue or red or gold in the cover design -- the most overused colors out there.

The new cover is an improvement.

I will say that the 8 is a bit too busy it it's design and difficult to recognize as an 8, like Ralph said. And the "no" slash is difficult to recognize as a "no" slash since it doesn't cover the press.

What are you trying to say with the gear in the logo? That is, what does it mean?

Luke already said the gear is supposed to represent game mechanics. Though I must admit I would have never figured that out if he hadn't told me.

I like the new cover better than the first one, and I like the "no" slash -- but it hurts my eyes behind the press like that. I agree with Jack and others -- shouldn't it actually be over the press?

Frankly, I think the big gear and slash should be turned into a big circle with the slash -- i.e. a traditional "no" symbol, tho in black, say, rather than red. The current one is too busy and it hurts, hurts, hurts. Did I mention it hurts?

And why is the logo the same as the original (i.e. no slash) on the back cover? Shouldn't the symbol on the front and back cover match?

Frankly, the grey gears gest the "mechanics " thing over fine without it having to be in the logo itself as well, and you get a nice combination of obvious and subtle that way. That's why I say use a normal "no" symbol and kick the gear to the curb for the front cover, except in those grey watermarks.

The rest if fine. I like the 8, but I'm a sucker for "stressed" fonts. Though I tend to agree the back cover kicks way more ass than the front cover.

A random thought: Would it look less busy if the press looked different? The checkered paper it's pooping out is where part of the hurt comes from.

All that said, I am not a graphic artist, or even an informed layman. This is just me speaking from my gut. But I do wish the main logo hurt my eyes less. The rest is either fine or awesome.

Now, if one wanted to go in a totally different direction: Hell, since most of the games have that strip on the side with art, why not have *that* on the front cover? That is, a strip of art, showing the gears, and then the rest just plain text, with no logo other than the strip. Very simple -- I liked that about the Burning Wheel cover, why not keep that simplicity? Keep the back cover, perhaps with the "no" version of the logo I mention above.

Oh, and I agree with the "includes" nitpick. How about having it say "includes (among others)" rather than just "includes"?

To end on a positive note, tho: I LOVE the "forged" quote on the back cover. That's spot on.

Sorry. Somehow missed Luke's explanation. Still not loving it. I think it makes the logo a bit too loaded. It already has the meaning of pixels to press to paper *AND* it has a gear to represent mechanics? Like I said, I'm not loving mechanics being represented at all. I don't think it's necessary. I also don't like the idea of using a machine part to represent it, but that's just me.

Sorry I'm so negative. I guess I'm taking "It's great except for..." approach.

Now, about the logo...

"Pixel to Press to Paper"

It actually doesn't flow like this in the picture because of the angle of the press. Visually, it flows from the stack of books behind it through the press to the stream of checkers coming out of it and towards the viewer at an angle.

Since the symbolism of the bress is unimportant, I suggest the following:

* Get rid of the books behind the press. It not readily apparent what they are and since for the proper flow they would need to be in fornt of the press, it's not worth redesigning the entire graphic.

* Ditch the gear idea and replace it with a simple, solid circle and slash "no" symbol. Be sure the slash covers the press.

* This is my personal choice her, but keep the stream of checkers and have this on top of the circle so it looks like the stream is coming out of the "no" symbol. This has the meaning of No press, but it's here anyway. It broke out of or broke free of the restrictions placed on it. In fact, the stream could continue to expand and wrap around the cover to the back. In a very driect way lead people to the back of the book. In fact, the little blurbs for each game could fit into the stream on the back. That may be stylistically difficult, but if it's done right it would be pretty. To help it contrast, the stream could also be green.

And I still don't like the 8. Its just too busy a character design to work, I think. At least not for the first NPA, anyway. Later, when people come to recognize future NPAs and expect a number for the number of games on the cover, you could even use weirder numeral like Arabic numerals.

Hi, Luke. I would have posted sooner, but I can't get burningwheel.org at work.

Generally I like it. A lot. THe white black & green rocks. The gears rock! The shaky font rocks! The logo grows on me by the minute. The remainder are nitpicks, but some nitpicks I feel strongly about. So when I yell, remember that it's in that spirit.

LOSE THE SLASH! Do not pass GO, do not collect $200, just kill that slash right this minute! It blends in with the paper on the press, making the logo harder to figure out, and means nothing. No offense to Jack, who first suggested it, but it was a completely unnecessary addition. The irony of No Press vs. picture of Press is good. The cleanness of the original was a strength and the slash takes that away while giving nothing back. As others have said, it doesn't even work as a slash. I hate it with an unreasoning passion that troubles me. It's gonna give me nightmares. It is wrong, wrong, wrong. Please make it GO AWAY.

I like the size of the 8, but the font is a bit too jaggy--is that the same font that "The No Press RPG Anthology" is in? 'Cause it's much harder to read. Just smooth it out a bit--especially the bottom counter where it overlaps the word "Roleplaying"--and it rocks!

My wife doesn't like the "Fun! Good!" on the back because it makes the logo appear off center, even though I know it's not. I dislike it because it seems to insult the intelligence of the prospective customer--it makes me think of magazine cover copy aimed at 8-year-olds.

I prefer "8 complete, short-form roleplaying games" or even "8 complete roleplaying games." The "short-form" is obvious. I think the word "complete" is our most important selling point. The "average" consumer measures games by page-count and will be surprised (and, I hope, intrigued) that 8 games can fit in a book the size usually alotted for 1. "unique" is as overused as red, blue and gold, I think.

Perhaps add "and six more complete RPGs" after mentioning Discernment and Cell Gamma. Hit them over the head with how much they're getting.

"Introduction by" should be more prominent, if we land a more prominent name.

I like the shaded box on the back--just make sure the whites in the images remain white--of course you will, I know this was a quick mock-up.

I kinda want the eight boxes on the back to have more ... I don't know. More visual interest and to be more closely visually tied to their game title. Maybe rectangular rather than square? But then you lose much of the detail, I know. They're fine now, I just can't help thinking that they could really soar!

In short, Good job, Luke! There's nothing like the NPA on the market, and the cover looks like nothing else on the market. It's a perfect fit!

... as long as you lose the God-forsaken slash.

Michael S. Miller wrote: LOSE THE SLASH! Do not pass GO, do not collect $200, just kill that slash right this minute! It blends in with the paper on the press, making the logo harder to figure out, and means nothing. No offense to Jack, who first suggested it, but it was a completely unnecessary addition. The irony of No Press vs. picture of Press is good. The cleanness of the original was a strength and the slash takes that away while giving nothing back. As others have said, it doesn't even work as a slash. I hate it with an unreasoning passion that troubles me. It's gonna give me nightmares. It is wrong, wrong, wrong. Please make it GO AWAY.

Hey all- I don't have much of an opinion either way, because my bias (the fact that I'll buy buying this book the INSTANT I see it) will just interfere with my claims.

However, I was thinking that I'd dig the cover if you did this:

Front cover: Keep the logo and all, but shrink it and move it onto the top half of the page, and in the bottom find a way to put the names and icons from the 8 RPGs (currently on the back cover) on the front. That would REALLY show the buyer, from looking at the cover, the "value for the dollar" of what the game is. Even if it upsets the graphic layout of the cover, it might be worth it. Showing the names of the games on the front cover I think would have a stronger impact.

On the back, where the game titles used to be, would be 8 1-sentence blurbs about the games found within.

That's all the feedback I have. I can't wait to pick it up, either way.

I know, take the slash off the logo, but then have a die-cut red celophane circle/slash symbol fixed to the cover in the exact size of the big gear...I'm sure that's cheap, right?

I really liked the way the big gear was jammed into the corner in the first draft. The only think the larger eight seems to need is enlarged negative spaces in the lobes of the figure...did you use a bolded eight?

The idea of iconic pictures on the front is nice, but I think it rocks the way it is now on back. I wonder if you could generate a series of eight tall and thin pictures to go on the front like slats of fenceposts or something. If it were intersperced with seven letters that spelled out a useful word (nopress? I think fungood, buythis, fungame, all suck) you might make it a useful graphic element.

Anyway, brainstorming.

Chris

As someone with no connection to the project, take my opinion for what it is. I *really* like the second draft, except for a few nitpicks.

Nitpick #1: The "8" on the front page is slightly too large. I think it draws a little too much attention to itself. I would keep it slightly larger than the three lines of text, but would reduce it slightly.

Nitpick #2: It doesn't seem 'right' to only list 2 games on the front. I would list all of them, or none of them.

Nitpick #3: The slash is too vertical, I think it looks a little awkward. I think if you adjusted it closer to 45 degrees, it would be easier to identify it as a 'no'-slash. I might think about making it darker, too.

Nitpick #4: This isn't that small. I have to say I don't like the press graphic. I like the idea of a picture of a press, but there's something weird about the press as it is now. I think there's something funny about the perspective of the press.

But again, I *really* like the second, except for those nitpicks.

Michael S. Miller wrote: "unique" is as overused as red, blue and gold, I think.

Andrew Morris wrote:

Michael S. Miller wrote: "unique" is as overused as red, blue and gold, I think.

Yes, oh god, yes, I agree.

Also, doesn't the slash in the "no" symbol traditionally run from bottom left to top right at a 45-degree angle?

My thoughts...

I prefer the original cover concept with the text inside the gear. It's looks more interesting to my eyes, and more connected - I also think it's much better without the slash.

The larger eight doesn't really do it for me - I also see it as a '&', perhaps if it was raised slightly, or in a less distressed font? I also find that the fact it sits behind the other text in the line makes it difficult to spot and read and makes it seem less important than it should.

The ghosted gears in the background are a big improvement.

I don't like the way two games are picked out in this way, it makes it seem a bit 'and there's these other games as well'. I'd use the text something like 'featuring games from the designers behind Fulminata and Universalis!'

I prefer the boxed layout of the second design but would loose the 'fun' 'good' tags - they just seem tacky to me.

And a final suggestion, rather different from the current conception. I'd be inclined to copy the eight mini-images onto the front cover, and place them in either a line down one side, or two lines at the top and bottom.

Jeph wrote: It, in fact, does not.

I like it. Only comment I can say to the negative is to make the slash the same shade as the gear. It doesn't stand out enough to tell what it is.

I tend to think visually, so rather than simply give feedback on the covers presented so far, I thought I would be bold and offer my own ideas.

I've been very inspired by the look of Luke's Burning Wheel books as well as Paul Czege's thoughts on rpg books as art objects. So, here are two takes on the No Press book style that are very different from Luke's.

I certainly don't think that these designs are better than Luke's. I just had some ideas after reading the back cover copy and felt compelled to share them.

http://www.shootingiron.com/feng/covers/nopress_spread_1.jpg
http://www.shootingiron.com/feng/covers/nopress_spread_2.jpg

John,
Your http://www.shootingiron.com/feng/covers/nopress_spread_2.jpg cover design is very nice to look at!

Easy on the eyes!

Nice that you kept the green going, and gear motif etc. too!

Maybe Luke can combine some of the best liked features of the proposed back cover, and your second design idea.(Altthough I like your's justt the way it is)

Heh. John's design with the public domain clip art is the way I would have gone, personally, for the graphics. I wasn't going to comment much on the graphic insofar as using something else since Luke has and apparently likes the press idea.

Oh. My. God.

No offense to Luke, but I love John's examples. I really, really like the first one, with the public domain woodcut art. But the second one is a much cleaner version of what I think Luke was going for, and I like it, much as I liked the Burning Wheel covers. I also wouldn't mind John's second font cover combined with Luke's back cover...

Again, gut reaction here, I am certainly no expert.

I also really like that cleancut, simple look of John's second example. Although the "you get lots of games" blurb should be more emphasized.

--Jeff

Nice one, John.

Personally, as a designer, I was trying to do something different from my standard ultra simple look and feel.

Honestly, I feel like the NPA should have a punk rock, grab you by the collar feel to it.

however, the masses have spoken and voted you official cover designer.

I will need press ready pdfs of the cover. Any of that public domain artwork has to be incorporated as 600-1200 dpi bitmaps. Nothing less is going to work. It will pixelate and look like amateur shit, and I will NOT allow that in anything I put my name to.

If you can't generate this resolution art from what you have, then go with the simpler design.

let me know if you need any of the files from me, I can collect and zip them your way.

One direction that I absolutely will NOT condone (nor print) is the "slices of images on the front cover". The look is simply OVER USED and it doesn't it cut it for the NPA.

And from underneath my editing hat: I'll need that hi-res cover yesterday. Preferrably as a quark 4.11 or indesign file including fonts and images.

-L

Well... okay. I'd be glad to make print-ready files. I honestly didn't expect my comps to be chosen as actual covers, but who am I to argue now?

If you have an InDesign file set-up to the correct size/bleeds, I'd love to have it. Should I pick a Pantone color for the green, or a CMYK equivalent?

I'm not sure if the masses have spoken clearly on a cover choice. Everyone seems to like the second one (with the gears) so maybe that's the way to go. I have another look that is more "punk-ish" though, which may be more like what you want, Luke. I'll post a comp shortly.

In the hopes that these comments are useful...

I do like the idea of a simple front cover. However, i do agree with Luke that it needs to grab some attention. The color scheme will help, but i would suggest something more along the lines of the John's second design since the bold lines seem to grab more attention than the more intricate woodcut graphic.

On the other hand, i really love the way Luke's second cover design gave each game it's own individualized font. It gave each game a sense of personality instead of just giving a set of labels.

I do like the idea of a graphic for each game, but the pictures that Luke used don't really mean anything to me. I can't really figure out what they are or what they represent. Unless graphics can be found for each game that provide that same sense of personality that the individualized fonts provide i would nix them.

Specifically regarding the fonts: the "p" and the "n" in "pretender" were difficult for me to read, that may be simply because it was a rough graphic. I do really like the font though. The font used for "WTF?" also seemed hard to read... but again, i like the general feel it provides.

I like the fact that Luke's logo fits well on the spine. I also like the fact that he has a purely graphic logo, which is good if there is ever an NPA 2 or 3... If a logo can incorporate the current volume number as well, all the better. If nothing else, i would suggest putting the volume number on the spine oriented towards the bottom of the book (if you've ever browsed through the Manga section of a bookstore you know what i'm getting at). If i get NPA 1, and then later get 2 i want to see a sequential set of numbers on my bookshelf.

Something to consider in relation to future editions. Should all NPAs have similar cover designs? If so the volume number should figure rather prominently on the front and back (my recomendation would be either in the gear or filling the space below "Press" and to the left of "RPG" and "Anthology" on John's second cover). If all future NPAs use the same color for the cover this is doubly true.

Thomas

Ok, time to rein the horses in.

While I appreciate the suggestions, this thread is spiraling well beyond its useful intent.

The interior of the NPA is done. Laid out, designed, finished, locked, finito.

Each game has two illustrations -- no matter the length -- and it's own title font. The Agency actually has two different title fonts, because it was so fun and easy to design (and it needed it). The title fonts for the games are the same as those used on the back cover.

The body copy is ITC Legacy Serif. All subsubheads are done in this font as well. The page numbers are done in the Poorhouse font that I used on the cover. Which is why I wanted to use that font for the main logo.

Consistency. The main danger of having John design the cover is that it going to look completely different than the interior. No visual connection at all. That's par for the course in RPGs, but not something I strive for.


Also, I have a bit of a cover philosophy which I intend to enforce here. A razzle-dazzle front cover is nice, but it's only half the battle. If a cover is tres kewl, but isn't consistent with the material presented within, then you have set up the reader for disappointment.

If you have an interesting cover that makes someone take a second look --without creating undue expectations-- then you've nearly won the battle.

My cover design is a deliberate two step process. Interesting enough to get the "huh" factor and get picked up. Then we hit 'em with the cool bits on the back cover, we draw them another step in with additional information (and cool graphics). It's at that point, fully prepared for what's inside]/i] that our audience begins to flip and has their collective suspicion confirmed -- this is a cool thing.

If you need an example of my logic at work, see the Burning Wheel covers. They prepare the reader for what is to be presented inside without overstating the case.

So enough nitpicking. Enough, enough, enough. Comments like that really aren't helpful.

John, I expect your next draft to be up shortly. I'll need an email address to send you the .zip of the cover.

-L

Sorry it took so long to get to this thread. I liked Luke's efforts, but I think I too would vote slightly in favor of John's designs. If he could just bend it slightly to the "punkiness" that Luke had tried to embody, I think we'd really have something.

I think that the idea for the titles of each game being in their respective fonts should be maintained. Each font says a little something about the game in question and gives them assembled a very mixed-bag feel.

Mike

Here's my stab at the punk-rock style.

http://www.shootingiron.com/feng/covers/nopress_spread_3.jpg

This cover certainly has more of a face-punching look than the other ones I did. :)

John Harper wrote: Here's my stab at the punk-rock style.

I really like John's first design with the woodcut artwork. I really really like it. Can I have it? Man, I like it.

The new "punk" version is also nice. Only thing I'd change is the Burning Wheel line at the bottom, I wouldn't do that one in italics, it just doesn't look right for me.

Also, I totally dig the "With an introduction by some guy" line. I'd leave it at that, even if [insert famous game designer] writes the intro.

Did I mention that I'm all for the woodcut design? (But I understand Luke objections to that one. But damn. It looks so good.)

That's great, John,

Then again, I'm not known for understanding art. :-)

Mike

Jurgen Mayer wrote: Also, I totally dig the "With an introduction by some guy" line. I'd leave it at that, even if [insert famous game designer] writes the intro.

Design 3 looks to me like every student publication that has ever tried to be punk, I doubt it'd grab my attention. I really like design 2 - although I second the suggestion that each game should have it's own font.

However, I'm not in the anthology so feel free to ignore.

Jack Aidley wrote: Design 3 looks to me like every student publication that has ever tried to be punk, I doubt it'd grab my attention.

Personally, I'm still kinda partial to Luke's cover version 2, minus the slash, of course.

But, as John's now Cover Designer, I gotta vote for his 2nd version. The 1st version is gorgeous, but it doesn't fit the NPA. I don't think the 3rd version quite fits, either. If I opened that cover, I wouldn't expect to see games like Discernment, Pagoda, WTF?, the Agency, or even Snowball in there.

I'd also really like to see each game's unique font return to the back cover.

I absolutely loathe the idea of leaving the words "Introduction by Some Guy" on the cover. The entire point of getting somebody else to write the introduction is for name-recognition value. The won't recognize the name if it's not on the cover! I'd put it on the front cover myself, but that's just me. If I saw "Introduction by Some Guy" on a book, I'd think "Oh, he got his gaming buddy to write the introduction. Lame." and put it back on the shelf.

I love John's third "punk" cover -- but as I've said before, I'm a sucker for distressed fonts.

Tho, as per my previous comments, as amusing as the "some guy" thing is, I'd almost rather the front be like John's punk cover, with a back similar to Luke's original back cover, with the different fonts. In this, I agree with Michael.

But as front covers go, I'd go with any of the ones John has posted so far, really. I do certainly think the "punk" one is a good kick in the face.

Back for more punishment...

These are directly based on john's third design, but less dark. The ultra distressed and dark feel is very evocative, but I really don't think it fits what we are trying to accomplish in the NPA right now.

a green one!
http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/npacover_r2.jpg

a white one!
http://www.burningwheel.org/pdf/npacover_r2_2.jpg

also, put in the full logo, which I really like with the NO on his t-shirt.

shred me,
-L

Wow, Luke.

Green, definately. And the "no" guy in the background is a brilliant answer to the unworkable slash. The background gears are much better on the green than on the white. I like this one best of all.

Chris (am I supposed to be opining as a non-participant?)

The background gears are much better on the green than on the white.

Hi, Luke.

These are both way cool. I definitely like NO-Dude. And the size, font, & positioning of the 8 is right on the money.

To me, the green one is fine, but the white one is truly an awesome cover. (Probably I still regret arguing for the green on the 1st Edition FVLMINATA cover, 'cause I now think that white would've looked better).

I still think if my name and Mike's are going to be on the cover, there should be "and 6 more complete RPGs" down there as well, but that's the only nitpick I got. Great job, Luke!

I want to develop the "no" shirt guy as an iconic character for future anthologies. He's awesome!

Other than that... I like the green one better, but either looks fine. And the "over the bar" picture box looks much better in this volume.

Note that I have zip in the way of graphic sense.

yrs--
--Ben

Jack Aidley wrote:

The background gears are much better on the green than on the white.

Wierd. I was going to say I liked the green but the background gears needed to be darker...

Wow, Luke. These are great. And I like the NO guy, too. I think I prefer the white one, but they're both cool. Either would be a fine choice.

I like the green version, and I'll tell you why: the white just looks like we're skimping on ink. That is, it looks like a cheaper printing process. The green says that it's more a finished product.

OTOH, if you had a green border around the white version, I'd probably be satisfied.

The green is intended to bleed, right?

Good stuff.

Mike

P.S. Chris, and anyone else, as potential customers, I for one am interested in what you have to say.

Both look quite good, Luke. This has been a fascinating thread in terms of cover design, marketing and overall graphic design, and I'm glad to see it work positively toward a better design.

I won't say which of any of the above I like. I will say I'm damned glad to see design-by-committee pretty much work for once! Now, just step up as editor-in-chief, pick one, and rock 'n roll!

Of Luke's new ones, I like the green one better.

I will also chime in with: the new logo is great!

I also like the green cover more. I'm not a big fan of white covers, especially if it's not a hardback... Even if it is i'm not much of a fan.

I still hold out for a volume number, at least on the spine, but that's really more of a personal preference for anything that might have multiple volumes with the same title...

Thomas

A "volume 1" is also a statement of hope that there WILL be more.

Of the latest ones, I like the green one better. I have to say I like these covers more than the previous ones from Luke, and the "no" guy makes me smile. That said, I'm not sure I like the font used for the title so much... I liked the font on John's "punk" cover better. Aside from that, the green cover is wonderful...

(usual disclaimers)