OK, who uses the portaits that come with the game? Who imports their own or makes custom portraits? Who selects a protagonists race and/or class based on a cool portrait? Who likes IWD portraits better than those of other RPG, like BG? Who doesn't think portraits shouldn't feature weapons because it limits that portrait characters possible class?

Personally, I didn't know much about IWD when I started, and I selected my protagonist based on what I thought was a cool portrait - that Human Male Barbarian-looking guy in the wolf-skin at the very end. I said, that's got to be an ass-kicking ranger. And so it was...

[ 10-26-2004, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: jmsteven ]

I always use the portaraits that come with the game... my question is...

In IWD series the portraits are made so that the small ones show head only while the large ones show whole body... In BG series both small and large ones show only head... which one you like better.... personally I like the BG better where only the head is shown..

BG1 had some good ones, but the portraits in BG2 looked a little cartoonish or "fruity" to me. Overall, I like IWD portraits much better. With some of IWD ones, I might prefer that they weren't weilding a sword since it feels a little "wrong" if that portrait is used for a cleric/ranger or fighter/druid. There's one that looks like it would be good for a mage or druid, but he's carrying a mace.

IWD (+HOW) portraits are better.

I prefer the IWD portraits.

<font color = mediumspringgreen>I think the IWD portraits are at least as good as the BG series in quality and selection. I could always go for a wider selection (who wouldn't?); but I have viewed some of the huge selection of third party replacement portraits, and didn't find anything that I thought was worth importing to replace an IWD portrait.

</font>--------------------<font color = mediumspringgreen>
What's a party,
without a song?
Bards ROCK!
Party On!!
</font>

<font color = lightgreen>Micah Foehammer has some links to sites with custom portrait galleries. Unfortunately, I don't have the links to those sites with me right now. </font>

I think the portairts suit the games, the IWD protraits show much war-hardy type characters seeing as IWD is extreamly battle orientated. They are also much darker and sinister, suits the game. Plus full body portraits I much perfer.

Oh and BTW:
I had trouble making my own protraits, the game crashes on the load/save menus. Must be something to do with the tiny portraits which it doesnt ask you to draw. THe other 2 portraits for each character work fine.

[ 10-25-2004, 05:52 PM: Message edited by: Soothsayer ]

I don't know if any of you have noticed, but there are about 1/3 less female character pictures than male in IWD. I'm not a feminist or anything, but it seems kind of unfair. It was more difficult to make an all female party while taking class and race into consideration with the more limited selections. That being said, I love/love/love the blonde with shoulder length hair, blue clothing, and a mace. She's making a great fighter/cleric, wearing my favorite color, and looks similar to me IRL. The other wicked pic is my fighter/illusionist...the brunette with the yellow dress and staff. Even though there aren't as many selections, I think the portraits for the woman are absolutely gorgeous. A little malproportioned from the neck down (you can tell the artists were men! :-D) but beautiful nonetheless.

Cary

I don't know if any of you have noticed, but there are about 1/3 less female character pictures than male in IWD.


Isn't it because among RPG players is less than one third womans??? Hmmm...Maybe? [img]smile.gif[/img]
I can affirm you, that when there will be more RPG woman players than men, same ratio will be for portraits. ;)