4E - Iconic Character Feedback

770 posts / 0 new
Last post
The iconic characters (Tordek, Lidda, Mialee, and co.) were pretty prominent in 3E/3.5. There's been some speculation that some of the concept art shows iconics for 4E.

How would you like to see them handled in 4E?

WotC_Logan has specific instructions for how you should reply to make his data collection easier.

A. Choose one of the following:

- Bring the 3.5 iconics to the new edition.
- Create new 4E iconics.
- Iconics don't matter to me.
- Please get rid of iconics totally.

B. If you had to pick one race/class combination for an iconic, who would you pick? (And don't just use your own character. :P)

As this is our discussion forum, please discuss and support your response. Thanks!

-Mike
I like the use of iconics, particularly as a way to spare us from the neverending, overblown "gender pronoun" debates of the 1E/2E era.

I'm not all that strongly attached to the current iconics, and IIRC most of them appeared in short novels that were set in the GH setting. If the new "default" setting is world-neutral, that would seem to make new ones appropriate.

So, A.: option #2


As for race/class combos, that would depend on what races and classes there are, wouldn't it? Hard to choose when we don't even know the choices yet. {roll eyes}
Bring in new iconics. A new edition calls for a new iconics. Maybe switch up the class race combos a bit. This would be especially good if favored classes have been done away with. So maybe an elf cleric, a half-orc fighter, a human barbarian, a halfling wizard, and a dwarf rogue for example.
Create new 4E iconics - KILL MIALEE!

Iconic race - Humans - D&D has always been humanocentric and should remain so.
A. Create New Iconics

B. Dwarven Cleric

At first I was tempted to say something along the lines of Elven Warrior or Gnome Warrior, but in the end figured for a new player its better to stick with something that seems a bit more "typical".

Dwarven Cleric works good (assuming Moradin is still a God) because they do have such a strong tie to their Creator. Humans are more aloof with religion - not having one specific patron diety.
Welcome to ZomboniLand - My D&D Blog http://zomboniland.blogspot.com/
A - Create new 4E iconics.

In my opinion, the 3.5E iconics have little traction, and there's not much point carrying them across to the new version. Iconics are valuable for providing live examples of the rules in action, for inspiring new players, and even for providing quick-play characters for groups in a hurry.

However, any new iconics should be so cool they hurt, and they should smell like 4E. Nothing less will do. You want new players to say "I want to play a character who rocks like Gunther the Rogue." and existing players to say "Arbeille the Wizard can do that? Wow! So long, Mialeee."

B - That's tough, without knowing just what the races and classes will be. But any selection should satisfy my requirement above. It should say 4th Edition loud and clear. I'd go for a blend of the old and new - a tiefling fighter. A class that's been around as long as D&D, in a new (for core D&D) race - an old dog with some fiendish new tricks.
my stance is a wishy washy one, as I want somewhere between "Bring the 3.5 iconics to the new edition" & "Create new 4E iconics"

Some of the Iconics are fine as is, But I feel there needs to be like 3 iconics for each class, and a good mix races and sexes for those Iconics.

something like for Fighter: Regdar, Human Fighter, Tordek, Dwarf Axe-Fighter, Flara, Halfling knife-fighter.
So you have two very typical race class combos, and one that is a little less common. on each class page instead of having just the one "typical" class member you have all three. And maybe a two paragraph "example history" for the characters, hopefully that will help new players to go ahead and start thinking of non-typical race/class combos and also a basic history for their new character ('why is this halfing a fighter, what made them decide on the marital path?")

Basically all the human iconics pretty much are terrible... Hennet (sorc), jozen (cleric), the rogue who I can't remeber his name off hand... all terrible. Pretty much the only exception is Regdar and maybe Alhandra the Paladin.
The non-human iconics were the good ones for the most part, Lidda, Vanadia, Gimble. Even Mialee has her moments.
A. Please Get Rid Of Iconics Totally - they really only exist to be extra art, and the art I find most valuable is that of the atypical class/race combos.

B. Gnome Sorcerer. SAVE THE GNOMES!
All new iconics! Include a pic in one of the preview books of the old iconics having a retirement party. Oooh: Do a Last Supper parody!
:D
What with Jozan turning undead (pun intended) I vote

A 2


I'd also like to see a dwarven cleric and a halfling paladin
A. - Please get rid of iconics totally.

B. - If there must be an iconic: human fighter.
Haiku Police
A. 2, here as well please. All new Iconic characters.

If we can't convert our characters, neither should you.

B. Dwarven Wizard.
New Iconic: Wizards needs to bring in an iconic more relevant to today's audience. What do kids like today? Crazy hip-hop antics, that's what. Maybe one that surfs. And a dog. Maybe a werewolf. With cool shades.

New Iconic: Clippy the paperclip. Everyone loves Clippy. I bet Microsoft would give you the license free since you would be cross-branding.
The iconic character(s) need to be automatically associated with the game (like Laura Croft). Dungeons and Dragons has never really had that. No one character is instantly recognized as representing the game. Dungeons and Dragons have produced films, and cartoons and still nobody can really say that we as a hobby have the "face" of the game. Asking the question has loaded the pages of forums with a million answers most of which can not even agree what Iconic is, within the three major settings let alone the game itself. Like a comic strip character, the Icon needs to be posable in a variety of various settings. The figure should also be totally transferable from one setting to the next representing the "concept" of the game more than a particular favorite class or whatever. If you asked what an Elven Ranger looked like you would get a million differing answers and you can never please everyone.

I believe the new edition should change the iconic characters to include only two, a male and a female. A wizard and a warrior both of which are human. People can identify with who they are better than with what we role play. Wizards might also consider diversifying the iconic races as well so as to be more inclusive. The reaon for this is that the future will include more movies and more shows in which you might find actors and actresses that can also depict the iconics. It is my humble belief that the time for Mialee and Tordek as Elf and Dwarf is gone. The future is where Wizards is tryíng to take the game and we need to crawl out of the past. I believe Mialee and Tordek the names should remain.
The iconic character(s) need to be automatically associated with the game (like Laura Croft). Dungeons and Dragons has never really had that. No one character is instantly recognized as representing the game. Dungeons and Dragons have produced films, and cartoons and still nobody can really say that we as a hobby have the "face" of the game. Asking the question has loaded the pages of forums with a million answers most of which can not even agree what Iconic is, within the three major settings let alone the game itself. Like a comic strip character, the Icon needs to be posable in a variety of various settings. The figure should also be totally transferable from one setting to the next representing the "concept" of the game more than a particular favorite class or whatever. If you asked what an Elven Ranger looked like you would get a million differing answers and you can never please everyone.

I believe the new edition should change the iconic characters to include only two, a male and a female. A wizard and a warrior both of which are human. People can identify with who they are better than with what we role play. Wizards might also consider diversifying the iconic races as well so as to be more inclusive. The reaon for this is that the future will include more movies and more shows in which you might find actors and actresses that can also depict the iconics. It is my humble belief that the time for Mialee and Tordek as Elf and Dwarf is gone. The future is where Wizards is tryíng to take the game and we need to crawl out of the past. I believe Mialee and Tordek the names should remain.
I've been a very vocal opponent of iconics. They limit the apparent scope of the game. It's not impossible, but it's more difficult to teach new gamers that the game has limitless possibilities when the only WotC artwork of a wizard they ever see is a scantily clad female elf, for example -- and the same one, every time.

Second, it takes away from the creativity of the artists. I'd love to see official D&D artwork flourish with countless interpretations of what, say, "wizard" can mean. Iconics force every artist to draw the exact same character, in only variations of its original image.

D&D's strengths are its versatility and diversity. Iconics run away from them like no tomorrow.

I'm well in the minority here, but as long as I have a voice, I'll use it.
A: 2, nothing against the old ones, but new edition should have it's own characters.

B: A warrior-like Dwarven Cleric. It just fits like a glove.
Not too fond of iconics either, but at least this hasn't degenerated into a "kill Mialee" thread.

... Yet.
A: I vote new iconics!

B: As for suggestions... How about an an aasimar or half-elf sorcerer, a tiefling priestess of Artemis, halfling fighter, and human rogue? It would help more if we knew what was in the PHB for classes and races. ;)
A. Create new 4E iconics.

I imagine that race will play a significantly stronger role in choosing a class than it currently does, and I doubt that R&D is modeling their racial design choices off the 3.5e iconic characters (at least I hope they aren't :P). Further, everyone likes a little new material; that's how WotC makes money.

B. It is, as stated before, difficult to choose combo's without knowing available classes and races (as well as their new nuances) yet. However, from a purely cosmetic standpoint, I would like to see:
Dwarven Cleric
Gnome/Halfling Wizard
Human Fighter (kind of blah, I know)
Half-Orc Barbarian
Half-elf monk (?)
Elf Sorcerer
A: 2. New iconics for a new edition!

B: As others have said, this is VERY DIFFICULT not knowing the choices. Regardless....
Shifter Barbarian
Dwarf Cleric
Halfling Druid
Orc Fighter
Aasimar Paladin
Elf Ranger
Tiefling Rogue
Half-Orc Sorcerer
Half-Elf Warlord
Human Wizard
4e D&D is not a "Tabletop MMO." It is not Massively Multiplayer, and is usually not played Online. Come up with better descriptions of your complaints, cuz this one means jack ****.
a - New iconics. Die, Mialee, die, die! Then we can put you in some actual clothes in your coffin!

As was suggested in the Astrid's Parlor thread, I'd like to see not one, but two icons per class - one male, one female, with different "takes" on the class shown with each icon. Along the same lines, each duo could show a "conventional" and unconventional class member. Here are some good combos:

Male half-orc and human female fighter
Female tiefling and male halfling rogue
Male elf and female dwarf wizard
Female half-elven and male gnome bard
Human male and female elf ranger

You get the idea. I think this helps to allay Dragonchild's concerns as well.
A. Definately create new iconics, if only for a new season of PHB PSAs.
The core races and classes will likely be prone to change anyways.
Sorry, but I never want to see a new picture of hennet, the leather fetishist/sorcerer again.
"I where belts on my chest to show off my chaotic nature"
Sooooo lame.

B. kobold barbarian
Bring in some new Iconics, and get them some better names. Tordek, Jozan and Mialee do not and never have inspired " Wow! " in me, same most the vast majority of the others.

Take a note from the Eberron Campaign Setting and put them into groups, give them levels and some backstory.

Give us the female tiefling rogue, and if they are in, female aasimar/eladrin cleric. Male half-orc or half-elf fighter, male dwarven wizard, male elf paladin. Male halfling druid. Female elf ranger, female human warlord. Something like that.
I say make new iconics.
Poe's Law is alive and well. Emerikol is right*
(like Laura Croft)

Lara Croft

A-2

keep the iconics fresh

Gnome Monk
I like the idea of iconics for continuity across the artwork. But I think that with the changes in classes and races, we need characters.
I'm okay with either new or old Iconics. Iconics make the rules explanations more interesting (as well as eliminating the pronoun issue). I actually like the "three iconics per class" idea, since it eliminates Dragonchild's "limiting the scope" criticism. Each class should have one Iconic that really stretches your definition of that class. I have a cool vision in my head of each class being a two page spread, with the three characters standing in the center.

Some iconics I'd like to see:

Half Orc Bard (with some awesome drums)
Gnome or Halfling Barbarian (perhaps standing in some really tall grass)

Tiefling Cleric appeals to me as well, but while some boundary pushing Iconics would be cool, they really need to showcase the stuff that's actually in the player's handbook. An evil cleric of some sort would be good, though.
A. I say use existing popular D&D characters as iconic characters:

1. Wizard - Raistlin Majere or Elminster
2. Ranger - Drizz't Do'Urden
3. Fighter or Paladin - Sturm Brightblade or Caramon Majere
4. Rogue - Jarlaxle Baenre, Artemis Entreri, or Tasselhoff Burrfoot
5. Cleric - Goldmoon, Fzoul Chembryl

You get the idea. Instead of spending time creating new iconic characters, why not use existing popular characters?

B. I say gnome or halfling fighter. Do you guys remember how cool Yoda was in Episode 2 and 3? Small humanoids for the win! I choose gnome or halfling because goblins (who are green) are unlikely to become part of the Player's Handbook.
All new iconics! Include a pic in one of the preview books of the old iconics having a retirement party. Oooh: Do a Last Supper parody!
:D

How many Iconics are there?

12 at a table, with Elminster in the middle?

As to decisions. I say New Iconics.

Female Tiefling Psion
I'm changing my vote. Give us new iconics. However, I'd like to see a few easter eggs - like what was done in the revised 2E books, where old 1E pictures were redone. The idea of a "3E iconics last supper" sounds like a great easter egg picture to slip in the back of the PHB.

It would also be nice to see iconics for the specialist wizards...

Also, let's seem some MULTI-CLASSED iconics - An elvin Fighter/Wizard, a dwarven Fighter/Cleric, a half-elvin Ranger/Cleric, a gnome Illusionist/Rogue or some other multiclassed characters to throw in with the single-classed iconics - someone or several someones for multi-classing examples.
> A. Choose one of the following:

- Create new 4E iconics.

I would rather have new iconics who are created to represent the new paradigm from the outset, rather than trying to shoehorn the old ones into new roles. I do think that having iconics is useful, if only for the sake of making flavor text easier to write.

> B. If you had to pick one race/class combination for an iconic, who would you pick? (And don't just use your own character. )

I would suggest a wizard. BUT...

Forget the robes, and forget the staff - let's have a wizard who defies the cliches of what a wizard looks like. Though his dress code was rather bizarre, Hennet the sorcerer in 3E is a good example of an arcane spellcaster who doesn't fall neatly into the old-man-with-robes-and-staff stereotype.

Likewise, while a human or an elf may be the easiest one for people to conceptualize, it would be interesting if the wizard represented a race that old-E and even 3E typically didn't consider all that magical, such as a dwarf or a halfling. Again, busting stereotypes is good, and emphazies that the new edition takes the game in a new direction.
As was suggested in the Astrid's Parlor thread, I'd like to see not one, but two icons per class - one male, one female, with different "takes" on the class shown with each icon. Along the same lines, each duo could show a "conventional" and unconventional class member. . . I think this helps to allay Dragonchild's concerns as well.

It doesn't entirely, but it's an elegant compromise -- especially considering the consensus is strongly trending towards new iconics.

That said, let's also have more artist diversity. PHB2 featured male-female pairs but all pairs drawn by the same artists, invariably male. Hence, they were anything but conventional-unconventional pairs; rather, they were male and female variations of the same image. Have every pair of iconics drawn by different artists (one design each), and preferably have half the artwork done by female artists to get the full variety and diversity D&D has to offer.
I want new iconics.

I'd like them to be a bit more classic-looking, too. Give the Paladin some plate mail (there are some really cool female Paladin pics scattered around in the books, but I'm not a fan of the one in the pants with the semi-mohawk). Give the wizard some robes or... something instead of whatever that was. No chest belts for the Sorcerer.
Aasimar Paladin
Dwarf Fighter
Elf Wizard
Gnome Sorcerer
Halfling Druid
Human Warlord
Orc Ranger
Tiefling Rogue
Much as I LIKED the iconic classes, I really never felt like I, as a player of D & D, really owned the iconic classses like Tordek, Jozan, and crew, not that I didn't like them, I just never really got to know them. I liked reading about their adventures. I think read all of the over priced way too short D & D novels they put out there.But I never owned/knew them like I knew Mordenkainen or Bigby in 1st Ed, or Elminster or Peirgeron in second or like Raistlin or Caramon in Dragon Lance.

D & D has set this precident, a new edition needs new icons.

Ian
Give the wizard some robes or... something instead of whatever that was.

"Clothes". I believe the word you're looking for is "clothes". Whatever Mialee's wrapped in, it's definitely not clothes.
I'm all for new iconics. Regdar & Co had their day in the sun; time to see some new faces
The topic of 3e iconics makes me flash back on alot of the early talk I read when 3e came out, or particularly the FRCS, and how the pictures of Elminster had him carrying a sword. That tiny little thing right there gave you a hint at just how much 3e was distancing itself from 2e, and I think iconics, and of course art related to them, could play a similar role here.

So for starters, I do think we need new iconics, and I think they can and should be used as something of a glimpse of the world, as its governed by 4e rules. Have iconics of some of the new core races (Tiefling, whatever else) and classes, use them to give us an idea of just what the story is on these new concepts (both what role they play and what station they hold in the core world. Are Tieflings regarded as evil? Are they common enough to be generally accepted?).

In the case of the established settings (FR in particular), its got a whole host of iconics that definitely need reviving, but given the fact that 4e has no core setting exactly, it should come with its own iconics.
A: 2, New Iconics

Though I do agree that they don't have to be everywhere and the artists should have freedom to depict different characters.

B: Suggestions:

#1 Human Paladin. That's what I thought of when I saw the tall broad shouldered dude in the winged helmet. He looked pretty cool, badass even, like Lan from Wheel of Time as sculpted by Werner Locke. Besides, almost all Paladins are human anyway.

#2 Human Sorceress- how can you pass up a classic fantasy staple? I'm thinking red hair, green eyes.

Others:

Gnome Wizard- good place for the Gnome, they make excellent wizards.

Gnome Druid- just to show that they don't have to be arcanists.

Half-Orc Fighter- especially if Barbarian is being folded into fighter. I'm picturing a guy who looks a little more cunning than Krusk. Maybe he's not really wild at all, but very focused and disciplined.

Dwarf Cleric- good place for the Dwarf, for both RP and mechanics.

Half Elf Bard- good fit, better than Gnome I think.

Tiefling Rogue- if Tieflings are indeed in PHB, then the logical choice is Rogue, unless Warlock is also available.

Elf Ranger- seems like a good fit, though I also picture a bearded human ala Grizzly Adams.

Perfect Iconic Characters for 4th :D

IMAGE(http://povonline.com/images4/iaq14.jpg)