|
Who exactly are the party of adventurers we see every month in the artwork with each new adventure? Is this what Paizo considers as a good group to run through the series, or just a good group for the art?
We seem to have a female tiefling (horns and a tail, plus the spots) who fights with a broadsword and sickle, a human female cleric of Wee Jas in red armor, a male human (paladin?) in blue armor with a large shield and longsword, another male human (ranger?) in red armor who fights TWF-style using longsword/rapier and dagger, and the on-again, off-again fifth member of the party, a male drow bard (check the cover for #124 - tell me that's not a musical instrument on his back) who fights with a longsword and a whip.
So do these characters have names, backgrounds, personalities? Or are they just around for some consistency in the artwork? Will we see published stats for them at some point?
Does anybody else have any insights into this party?
I enjoy seeing those characters every month!
Each one of those guys has a cool and alluring style that makes me want to know more about them.
While it would be nifty to see stats for those adventurers I cant help but think that the hordes of geeks might take those very same statistics as "canon" and it would cause endless debates about who and what they could do/fight...
Imagine the horror:
"The cover of Dungeon #387 is totally bogus because tiefling-babe could never defeat a uber-lich-wyrm with her sword like that cover artist depicted!"
Maybe its better to just speculate over them ourselves?
I mean its fun just trying to decide which race and class they are!
I don't mind the "iconic" characters being depicted in the majority of the artwork. The only thing that really rubs me the wrong way is that the female tiefling is in every single one (usually totally spotlighted) and I don't personally believe she's iconic enough (in the most traditional sense) to get such attention. I was thrilled when I originally looked at Dungeon #127's cover. I almost said, right out loud in the middle of bookstore, "FINALLY! That stupid speckled demon-woman with the psycho eyebrows is absent!!" but then - Alas! She was merely lurking on the edges.
I'm happier with the female cleric of Wee Jas's depiction since they toned down that "wonder woman" thing. She's pretty cool and so are the other characters. But are the artist(s) having some secret affair with this lousy tiefling girl or under some bizarre contract to include her as the focus point of every scene?
Just my opinion.
Actually, I'm pretty annoyed with seeing that same female tiefling with the horns and that ridiculous sword and sickle combo in every issue. I'm not impressed. That sword annoys me. All those holes running down its length... How easy would it be to disarm or sunder that sword? I'd say easier than a regular sword. It doesn't seem practical. Like a female fighter wearing leathers with the cleavage exposed just because. It might look cool, but it doesn't make any sense.
Two words for you: IT"S FANTASY!!
w/ that said, IMO it would be better to erre on the side of uniqueness/style that on realism/practicality. Cool factor wins everytime.
|
Eye candy sells. Especially if it envolves cleavage and long, pointed objects held in people's hands. And I'm not talking about Power Attack and Cleave.
I like the iconic characters. Period. I look forward to seeing what predicament the characters are in with each issue. It's no different than seeing how Nodwick & Co. would cope with a Dungeon scenario in past issues. At least then there was a punch line. Now, I just create my own. I am in-tune with a previous poster's comments on the "metagame" of the iconic characters: who cares. Give me visual continuity and I'll build my own logic to suspend disbelief and enjoy the brilliant artwork for what it is: art. Frack the mechanics.
the iconics in the dungeon magazine are pretty cool, actually. i have often wondered what they are going to do in the situations depicted, like the teifling babe getting attacked by the mind flayer in a recent issue. you just know both of those characters are toast.
anyay, i statted up the tiefling babe, just for kicks based on the artwork. here's an idea. naturally it is just for starters, but you get the idea. comments are welcome.
Mellina Drakehorn
Female Teifling Fighter 5
Chaotic good
str: 16
Dex: 20
Con: 14
Int: 12
Wis: 11
Cha: 10
Hit Points: 42
Armor Class: 19
Feats: two weapon fighting, improved two weapon fighting,
weapon focus long sword, weapon spec, long sword,
weapon finnesse sickle.
darkvision 60 feet
Darkness
resist cold, electricity, fire 5
languages: common, infernal
armor: +1 breastplate,
weapons: Long sword +1, sickle +2
I like the new iconics also - although I wish they'd include the "male elf wizard" iconic every once in a while. Maybe he was in an older set of iconics, though?
Of the ones that have been featured lately, I like the paladin the best, followed next by the female cleric of Wee Jas.
|
|
I like the new iconics also - although I wish they'd include the "male elf wizard" iconic every once in a while. Maybe he was in an older set of iconics, though?
Of the ones that have been featured lately, I like the paladin the best, followed next by the female cleric of Wee Jas.
Yeah, where'd the Ranger wolf-headband babe get off to?
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Yeah, where'd the Ranger wolf-headband babe get off to?
She's my least favorite, so we don't include her in art orders very often. When a given situation calls for a ranger (such as the opener in "Fiendish Footprints," you can be sure we'll bring her out of mothballs.
--Erik
|
Creative Director
|
For the Age of Worms, we're focusing mostly on the cleric, the fighter, and the bard. We mostly use the paladin, rogue, sorcerer, and ranger for other adventuers (althoguh usually not for Forgotten Realms or Eberron adventures), but they make guest appearances in the Age of Worms now and then. We don't have an elf or a wizard iconic yet (we have a human sorcerer and a half-elf rogue), but chances are pretty good that elves and wizards will be represented eventually... (although probably not in the same character)
We don't have an elf or a wizard iconic yet (we have a human sorcerer and a half-elf rogue), but chances are pretty good that elves and wizards will be represented eventually... (although probably not in the same character)
Male Half-orc Monk! Male Half-orc Monk! Male Half-orc Monk!
An elf barbarian would be pleasing to me, give it dreadlocks and a greatsword. :)
how about a contest? Let the readers decide! Or even let the readers submit!
Male Half-orc Monk! Male Half-orc Monk! Male Half-orc Monk!
Half-orc Monk! Half-orc Monk! Half-orc Monk! Half-orc Monk!
Last one I played kicked some serious butt... it's the thinking man's half-orc ;)
Could we have the iconic paladin not getting clobbered in every single picture? I know that this is a running in-joke at Paizo, but I like to see heroism and victory in my iconics, not clownish defeat. Once is funny, twice is alright, etc.
|
Creative Director
|
Could we have the iconic paladin not getting clobbered in every single picture? I know that this is a running in-joke at Paizo, but I like to see heroism and victory in my iconics, not clownish defeat. Once is funny, twice is alright, etc.
Now that the age of worms is over, the paladin'll probably get more opportunities to look heroic. In fact, his last appearance in the Age of Worms, in "Dawn of a New Age," has him doing something pretty heroic—standing up against Kyuss without being at 2 hit points.
|
Creative Director
|
It seems like the non-AoW adventures have not had the iconics lately (in fact, they look a lot like the phb iconics). Is that intentional?
Not really. We generally use the iconics for non-adventure path adventures, with the exception of Forgotten Realms and Eberron adventures. Since these adventurers aren't in those campaign settings, they shouldn't show up in that art. Although they have done so now and then anyway.
One other reason this might be the perception is that the Age of Worms adventures have been recieving the lion's share of the art budget each issue. So naturally, the iconics show up there more often—there's just more art there.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Not really. We generally use the iconics for non-adventure path adventures, with the exception of Forgotten Realms and Eberron adventures. Since these adventurers aren't in those campaign settings, they shouldn't show up in that art. Although they have done so now and then anyway.
One other reason this might be the perception is that the Age of Worms adventures have been recieving the lion's share of the art budget each issue. So naturally, the iconics show up there more often—there's just more art there.
I wish I had my magazines in front of me - but it seems like Wingclipper's Revenge was a non-Fr non-Eberron adventure with non-iconic art. It really looked a lot like the elf ranger from the phb and the dwarf fighter. I was surprised when I saw it because I generally dig Paizo the iconics.
There have been a few other threads asking about the iconics.
In one such thread, I made my own comments on the characters.
Are there gonna be more iconics?
Actually, I'm pretty annoyed with seeing that same female tiefling with the horns and that ridiculous sword and sickle combo in every issue. I'm not impressed. That sword annoys me. All those holes running down its length... How easy would it be to disarm or sunder that sword? I'd say easier than a regular sword. It doesn't seem practical. Like a female fighter wearing leathers with the cleavage exposed just because. It might look cool, but it doesn't make any sense.
Magic.
It would be cool for Paizo to come out with miniatures of the iconics, with or without stats. If they were with stats, make them compatible with D&D Miniatures. If without, it wouldn't be hard to come up with exotic class/feat combinations. I like looking at minis and coming up with new characters to fit the look.
The tiefling annoys me. It might be the strange antler/horns, the sword with all the holes, or the sickle off-hand choice. It's just not right. ;-)
The tiefling annoys me. It might be the strange antler/horns, the sword with all the holes, or the sickle off-hand choice. It's just not right. ;-)
or all three. i'm not a particular fan of that Iconic either, but I don't really mind it.
And for the record, the tiefling's my 2nd favorite iconic. So don't expect her to go the way of the ranger anytime soon.
I actually like the tiefling; I think it's an interesting take on the race, and oddly reminiscent of the TV show Farscape, or just of the Jim Henson Workshop in general. While that may not be a plus for some people, I rather like it.
By the way, a sword/sickle combo isn't that ridiculous. I mean, free trip attack upon hitting them is pretty awesome. I've played a druid with two sickles and two weapon fighting. He was sick. Oh crud... no pun intended.
And for the record, the tiefling's my 2nd favorite iconic. So don't expect her to go the way of the ranger anytime soon.That poor ranger needs a makeover.
There was a ranger? No, really, I don't remember this ranger at all. The ones that stick in my head are the drow, the tiefling, pseudo-Abelard, and pseudo-Tyralandi.
|
Creative Director
|
There was a ranger? No, really, I don't remember this ranger at all. The ones that stick in my head are the drow, the tiefling, pseudo-Abelard, and pseudo-Tyralandi.
And for the record, the tiefling's my 2nd favorite iconic. So don't expect her to go the way of the ranger anytime soon.That poor ranger needs a makeover.
There's also the sorcerer (the dude with the bald head; he's cool!) and the ranger (the wolf-hat girlie with the pet cougar... I think her problem is probably her hat).