# So THAT's why Regdar gets no love...



## Remathilis (Jul 7, 2008)

Monte Cook posted the ignoble creation of Regdar, the Iconic Human Male Fighter and talks a bit about gender and racial equality.

http://montecook.livejournal.com/150303.html

Might explain why he seems to die an awful lot in D&D artwork


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jul 7, 2008)

Don'tcha just _adore_ preconcieved notions?

As in, hate them?


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Jul 7, 2008)

Heh, I wondered why there were two Fighters.  Still, it kinda worries me how the people on that site talk gleefully about seeing Regdar maimed and dead in the artwork.  Like violence is the solution to perceived...I'll stop there.  Forum rules and all.


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 7, 2008)

I think the crowning ignomy is that Regdar is The Fred. He has a 13 Charisma and is a leader type.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Jul 7, 2008)

I always liked Regdar. 
I guess that makes me racist/sexist.

Though now I see him as more of an iconic Warlord instead of a Fighter. That seems to have been his original intent, as the apparent leader of the iconics group.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jul 7, 2008)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> Don'tcha just _adore_ preconcieved notions?
> 
> As in, hate them?




Indeed. 

I am a white male in a predominantly white country. But after watching Andromeda, cool warriors are black.  So, I reject your stereotypes and substitute my own!

Marketing can be so incredibly ridiculously sexist and racist...


----------



## Dragonbait (Jul 7, 2008)

Strangely enough, I never knew Regdar was supposed to be white until all these race threads started cropping up.

I figured that whenever he was clearly white, like his 1st mini or in the 4E book, people were confusing Jozan with him or they just made a mistake.


----------



## Rodrigo Istalindir (Jul 7, 2008)

Geez, for once I'm on the side of the marketing weasels.  I feel like I oughta go take a shower or something.


----------



## CountPopeula (Jul 7, 2008)

I think, avoid race and gender because we've already been in that minefield recently, that the dead Redgars are a statement about marketing interfering with the creative vision.

I find it comparable to Battlestar Galactica, when marketing asked them to have "a birthday party or something" and they did the 1000th landing ceremony where like 7 people were killed. I think the dead Redgars are a message to marketing that says "If you force us to change our vision, we don't have a choice, but you're not going to like the end result."


----------



## kenmarable (Jul 7, 2008)

Ashrem Bayle said:


> I always liked Regdar.
> I guess that makes me racist/sexist.



Liking Regdar doesn't make you racist/sexist by any means. Marketing people saying "we need a white male to be front and center" *is* racist and sexist. Very big difference there. Don't go looking for insults that aren't there. If you re-read it, Monte Cook never claims that fans who like the character are racist and sexist. 

Individual fans making a choice to like a character is a far cry from marketing people presuming that ALL fans will ONLY like the character as long as he's a white male. Very different things. So feel free to gladly like Regdar without believing the Monte is condemning you.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Jul 7, 2008)

CountPopeula said:


> I think, avoid race and gender because we've already been in that minefield recently, that the dead Redgars are a statement about marketing interfering with the creative vision.
> 
> I find it comparable to Battlestar Galactica, when marketing asked them to have "a birthday party or something" and they did the 1000th landing ceremony where like 7 people were killed. I think the dead Redgars are a message to marketing that says "If you force us to change our vision, we don't have a choice, but you're not going to like the end result."




If it were simply a case of this, the dead Regdar thing wouldn't have gone on so long, even extending into the 4E book -- where there are no pre-built characters! (far as I know, only read the opening chapters, races, classes, skills, feats, items, equipment, and combat chapters)

No, to me, there's clearly more malice going on than just getting back at the marketing people.  Unless the thing in the Rituals chapter was just more re-used artwork.


----------



## Cadfan (Jul 7, 2008)

Mixed feelings.  On one hand, the reasoning was terrible.  On the other hand, the frat-boy jock stereotype IS awfully iconic, and if your goal was to make the iconics as generic as possible, it does make sense to have the white guy be the fighter.


----------



## CountPopeula (Jul 7, 2008)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> No, to me, there's clearly more malice going on than just getting back at the marketing people.  Unless the thing in the Rituals chapter was just more re-used artwork.




I don't think so. He's like Jar Jar Binks to the creative team, and I think that's the beginning and the end of it right there.


----------



## Rodrigo Istalindir (Jul 7, 2008)

kenmarable said:


> Liking Regdar doesn't make you racist/sexist by any means. Marketing people saying "we need a white male to be front and center" *is* racist and sexist. Very big difference there. Don't go looking for insults that aren't there. If you re-read it, Monte Cook never claims that fans who like the character are racist and sexist.




No, it's not.  It's saying that the face of the game needs to be as universally appealing as possible because that's what sells.  Marketing is nothing if not mercenary; if they thought they'd sell more books with a one-legged Asian albino on the cover, you'd bet your ass that's what'd be on there.

Someone not buying the game because one of the iconics was a minority (or not buying it because they *weren't* a minority) is racist and/or sexist.  

The content guys are the ones that broke 'The Understanding' by intentionally tweaking the composition of the iconics to fit their pre-conceived notions of egalitarianism and what should appeal to gamers.  They peed in Marketing's cornflakes, not the other way around.


----------



## Propagandroid (Jul 7, 2008)

So, since Regdar always appears dead, we can infer that all D&D designers want white men dead, right?


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jul 7, 2008)

I loathed Regdar. He was dull as ditchwater and he had one of those ludicrous chin-beards w/o mustache that only a strange subsection of Americans between the ages of 21 and 30 seem to think is even remotely cool. Yeah, I hate characters for bad facial hair? Is that a problem? In a game with so much quality facial hair, he stood out as a beacon of bad beardage. He also reminds me of that unspeakably dull wanker who is the lead "character" in Gears of War and I use the term "character" advisedly because he has No Percievable Personality (apart from "Badass" in the most retarded way possible) and was evidently designed for maximum quasi-frat-boy appeal. When I saw Regdar dead in the rituals chapter I have to admit, my mouth quirked up into a little smile.

Then again when I saw stone'd Regdar in the MM. It really made my day actually.

I had no idea he was a marketing addition, but it makes sense now. 

*StreamoftheSky* - Dude, you've _clearly_ never met artists. Any illustrator or artist I know would have given him a harder time than the WotC artists have. Marketing imposition alone is more than enough to explain the hate, though I think him being extremely dull inspired yet more hate.


----------



## Barastrondo (Jul 7, 2008)

Rodrigo Istalindir said:


> The content guys are the ones that broke 'The Understanding' by intentionally tweaking the composition of the iconics to fit their pre-conceived notions of egalitarianism and what should appeal to gamers.  They peed in Marketing's cornflakes, not the other way around.




Last I checked, there were several white males among the iconics before you factored in Regdar.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Jul 7, 2008)

kenmarable said:


> Liking Regdar doesn't make you racist/sexist by any means. Marketing people saying "we need a white male to be front and center" *is* racist and sexist. Very big difference there. Don't go looking for insults that aren't there. If you re-read it, Monte Cook never claims that fans who like the character are racist and sexist.
> 
> Individual fans making a choice to like a character is a far cry from marketing people presuming that ALL fans will ONLY like the character as long as he's a white male. Very different things. So feel free to gladly like Regdar without believing the Monte is condemning you.




I was just kidding.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Jul 7, 2008)

Ruin Explorer said:


> I loathed Regdar. He was dull as ditchwater and he had one of those ludicrous chin-beards w/o mustache that only a strange subsection of Americans between the ages of 21 and 30 seem to think is even remotely cool. Yeah, I hate characters for bad facial hair? Is that a problem? In a game with so much quality facial hair, he stood out as a beacon of bad beardage. He also reminds me of that unspeakably dull wanker who is the lead "character" in Gears of War and I use the term "character" advisedly because he has No Percievable Personality (apart from "Badass" in the most retarded way possible) and was evidently designed for maximum quasi-frat-boy appeal.




I have a "ludicrous chin-beards w/o mustache" and I thought Marcus Fenix was cool. :/

I was never a frat boy so...


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Jul 7, 2008)

Ruin Explorer said:


> *StreamoftheSky* - Dude, you've _clearly_ never met artists. Any illustrator or artist I know would have given him a harder time than the WotC artists have. Marketing imposition alone is more than enough to explain the hate, though I think him being extremely dull inspired yet more hate.




My fiancee actually graduated college with an art degree...  Granted, she hasn't done any work in the field, but I just found that funny.



Propagandroid said:


> So, since Regdar always appears dead, we can infer that all D&D designers want white men dead, right?




Nice hyperbole.  All I'm saying is, the way the illustrators apparantly have reacted to the slight, and the way people seemed to be joyously reacting to seeing the white guy getting killed is just as bad as what the marketing people did, if not worse.  And for the record, I never really cared for Regdar.  Or Tordek.  The whole free pass dwarves got in overpoweredness and bland stereotypes as people continued to levy complaints against elves for those very things (mostly from injustices in past editions) annoys me (as a gamer) more than the racist/sexist inclusion of Regdar.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jul 7, 2008)

Rodrigo Istalindir said:


> The content guys are the ones that broke 'The Understanding' by intentionally tweaking the composition of the iconics to fit their pre-conceived notions of egalitarianism and what should appeal to gamers.  They peed in Marketing's cornflakes, not the other way around.




Because Jozan and Hennet weren't enough white human dudes? What you even talking about? Kerwyn too. Jesus, how many white human men do we need exactly before it's not "peeing in marketing cornflakes"? I guess "more than three!". Seems like your position is untenable to me.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jul 7, 2008)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> My fiancee actually graduated college with an art degree...  Granted, she hasn't done any work in the field, but I just found that funny.




Have you tried crossing her, art-wise or dictating what EXACTLY she should be drawing/painting? Because I'm going to advise you right now against doing that 

I think what you need to get, and you half-get already, is that a lot of bloody loathed Regdar regardless of his ethnicity or gender, so crying about how it's "KILL THE WHITE MAN! BOOYAKASHA!"-type stuff seems bogus to the max to me. It's just _Yet Another Reason To Hate Regdar_.

For the record, I'd also have been happy to see Mialee, Lidda (yes that little twonk Lidda), Nebin, Tordek (like we'd even know that extra-generic dwarf was Tordek) and/or Gimble dead on the floor. Maybe I just hate short people or something though.


----------



## hamishspence (Jul 7, 2008)

*dragon magazine Birth of the Dead article*

Thats one example of gleefully killing off Regdar.

That said, wasn't especially interested in the iconic characters.


----------



## buzz (Jul 7, 2008)

Kudos to Monte for posting that, and kudos to the various artists who have kicked Regdar's ass over the years.


----------



## Terwox (Jul 7, 2008)

Yes, it is racist, and sexist, that Regdar is a white male human fighter in the center of the art.  Yep.

What it isn't is evil, or even necessarily wrong.  Racism and sexism are very loaded terms.

Catering to an audience does not make you evil.  More poignantly, it isn't even necessarily misguided...

I do disagree with their marketing decision, but at the same time, I think 4E was a good move forward, although it was certainly less than perfect.


----------



## Cadfan (Jul 7, 2008)

I used to hate the iconics, until I started watching the Dungeon and Dragons PSAs.  Now I think they're awesome.  Including Regdar.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jul 7, 2008)

Cadfan said:


> I used to hate the iconics, until I started watching the Dungeon and Dragons PSAs.  Now I think they're awesome.  Including Regdar.




What are these Dungeon and Dragon PSAs you speak of? I really _really_ hate the iconics, so I am particularly interested to know.


----------



## Voadam (Jul 7, 2008)

Cadfan said:


> I used to hate the iconics, until I started watching the Dungeon and Dragons PSAs.  Now I think they're awesome.  Including Regdar.




D&D PSAs?


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 7, 2008)

Starting out with a blatant falsehood and sweeping generalization is not the best way to make a point about diversity. 







> but the powers that be believed that our audience was entirely white males and they needed someone that they could identify with on the cover.



 Implying everyone who called the shots thought _only_ white makes played the game is quite different from the powers that be recognizing that the ‘white male’ was a large portion of the market share.

As for the notion that Redgar getting slain repeatedly was racially motivated, those whose job it is to be on the front line, do die a lot. 

Also, it generally is safer to depict a male being killed than a female, from a marketing perspective. Depicting a kill on a female runs the risk of someone claiming the art is advocating violence against women. Kerwin got a good amount of abuse too.


----------



## danbuter1 (Jul 7, 2008)

I'm just glad to see that the DnD developers didn't want any white males in their game. Nothing like reverse racism.


----------



## ShinHakkaider (Jul 7, 2008)

danbuter1 said:


> I'm just glad to see that the DnD developers didn't want any white males in their game. Nothing like reverse racism.




Wow. Just seriously WTF? 

We'rent there like 4 other white characters in the iconic party? Where did you get this from? So ANY representation of anyone who ISNT white is reverse racism?


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 7, 2008)

danbuter1 said:


> I'm just glad to see that the DnD developers didn't want any white males in their game. Nothing like reverse racism.



I sure hope the white males manage to succeed despite this devastating setback.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Jul 7, 2008)

danbuter1 said:


> I'm just glad to see that the DnD developers didn't want any white males in their game. Nothing like reverse racism.




I hate that phrase. It implies that racism normally only goes one way. Just because the media only pays attention to racism directed toward minorities doesn't mean that an equal amount of racism isn't directed back toward the majority.

In short, racism is racism.

Back on topic...

I don't get it. There are other white male iconics. Why is Regdar the focus of all of this attention? Just because he got a cardboard display?


----------



## Barastrondo (Jul 7, 2008)

ShinHakkaider said:


> Wow. Just seriously WTF?
> 
> We'rent there like 4 other white characters in the iconic party? Where did you get this from? So ANY representation of anyone who ISNT white is reverse racism?




No, he's right. This is absolutely "nothing like reverse racism."


----------



## MadMaxim (Jul 7, 2008)

Jeebus! He's just a fighter and I don't mind him or any of the other iconic characters. The only thing that can really annoy me is when the artwork is bad (in my opinion, of course).


----------



## danbuter1 (Jul 7, 2008)

I know there are other iconics. It just ticks me off that a developer just HAS to point out that he didn't want the main character to be a white male, and it must really piss him off, as he is still bothered by it. Political correctness gone mad, or racism?


----------



## Darrin Drader (Jul 7, 2008)

You know, this is one of those things where I was always completely in the dark. I never looked too closely at the cover art when it depicted to iconics, so I always assumed that Regdar was black. Even after 'playing' the interactive DVD, I still assumed he was black, and I was totally cool with it.

My personal preferences are usually to play the meat shield, usually as a white guy, but not for any particular reason. One of my friends in a D20 Modern game I ran played a black man. He's not black in real life. Another one of my friends always plays a female with red hair in any game we play, whether it be an RPG or an MMO. Yet another friend of mine always plays a male character who is quite a bit older (I think the median age he plays is about 45). My wife likes to play axe wielding foul-mouthed dwarves.

My point here is that I agree with Monte that players can and do see beyond themselves, and that it is absolutely a good thing to use characters of a variety of ethnicities and races as iconics.


----------



## mlund (Jul 7, 2008)

Marketing wants a "Big lug with a big sword" on the front cover. This is perfectly legitimate if you think you need to reach back to Conan and Elric or go to the FFVII well for as close as you can get to a Buster Sword in the PHB.

So who do you hand the "Big lug with a big sword," job to, exactly? If you give it to anybody other than the white guy you get accused of racist overtones by depicting "persons of color" as unintelligent / savage / defined by physicality.

Same thing goes for making a certain character "Kenny," by the way. If you put a female character or a "person of color" through all the abuse and mutilation heaped upon Regdar you risk being accused of racial intimidation or misogyny.

If you need a character to be extensively abusive, abused, depraved, or depicted as a "lug" of some sort without much in the way of special enlightenment your go-to-guy is always the random white dude - that's how people play it safe. No one who counts is allowed to be offended so you catch less flack that way.

Fantasy settings are generally well equipped to avoid this trope, though. They've got so many trans-racial options (non-human species) that you really don't need to go there. In 4th Edition they can easily make a Dragonborn be the Conan stand-in or have random Eladrin and Tiefling deaths and not have to worry about racial overtones.

- Marty Lund


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jul 7, 2008)

mlund said:


> Marketing wants a "Big lug with a big sword" on the front cover. This is perfectly legitimate if you think you need to reach back to Conan and Elric or go to the FFVII well for as close as you can get to a Buster Sword in the PHB.
> 
> So who do you hand the "Big lug with a big sword," job to, exactly? If you give it to anybody other than the white guy you get accused of racist overtones by depicting "persons of color" as unintelligent / savage / defined by physicality.




Bull. If he'd been East Asian-styled no-one would have made such allegations. Black, maybe.

The rest of what you're saying is somewhat correct, except that you seem to think that it's an accident that in an iconic-free edition of the game, the iconic character of the previous game is being killed repeatedly.


----------



## aurance (Jul 7, 2008)

I'm a Gnome in real life, imagine how I feel.


----------



## CountPopeula (Jul 7, 2008)

danbuter1 said:


> I know there are other iconics. It just ticks me off that a developer just HAS to point out that he didn't want the main character to be a white male, and it must really piss him off, as he is still bothered by it. Political correctness gone mad, or racism?




Shouldn't you be calling it "white liberal guilt"?

Far be it for me to put words in the designer's mouths, but it seems like the goal was to make a multi-ethnic, multi-racial group of iconic characters working together and sharing the spotlight, and marketing decreed that there would be a group of multi-ethnic, multi-racial sidekicks to the heroic white tough guy. Sort of a D&D Superfriends.

They already had a fighter, he was a dwarf. They had white males, Jozan and Hennet. Marketing wanted a strong, white male warrior front and center, above the other characters, and that was Redgar, and that's why he's the whipping boy.


----------



## ShinHakkaider (Jul 7, 2008)

mlund said:


> Marketing wants a "Big lug with a big sword" on the front cover. This is perfectly legitimate if you think you need to reach back to Conan and Elric or go to the FFVII well for as close as you can get to a Buster Sword in the PHB.
> 
> So who do you hand the "Big lug with a big sword," job to, exactly? If you give it to anybody other than the white guy you get accused of racist overtones by depicting "persons of color" as unintelligent / savage / defined by physicality.
> 
> ...




Huh. I think back to all of the times where my black and latino friends used to ask me "why do you play that white boy game" and I'd get offended and reply "It's NOT a white boy game. ANYONE can play if they have an imagination (losers...)". 

After some of the responses to this thread and the previous art / diversity thread I guess those ignoramuses were right after all. 

Who knew? Seriously it's threads like this that make me seriously wonder about my hobby and whether I actually have a place in it.


----------



## Henry (Jul 7, 2008)

It's amazing what people get worked up over.

Regdar has had a hell of a lot of face-time in the various D&D books, not always getting smashed to bits, either. The PHB2 in 3rd edition has at least two shots I can think of with him in the limelight, or at least front and center. So if someone wants to smash him to bits to prove a point, too, more power to 'em. Even Todek got crunched in a dragon's mouth at least once...


----------



## mlund (Jul 7, 2008)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Bull. If he'd been East Asian-styled no-one would have made such allegations.




Only if he had an "obviously superior to European blades" sword in his hand, though. Then you'd just get accused of "making D&D too Anime!!!!11111shiftone."

Damned if you do - damned if you don't. 



> Black, maybe.



Or non-White Hispanic or resembling Native American in some way.



> The rest of what you're saying is somewhat correct, except that you seem to think that it's an accident that in an iconic-free edition of the game, the iconic character of the previous game is being killed repeatedly.



Regdar got killed a whole lot in 3rd Edition too, and I really wouldn't call him "the iconic character" of the edition. Frankly I remember a lot more memorable living depictions of Tordek, Gimble, and Liddia than Regdar. The only one that really stuck with me was in the retraining section of the PHBII where he's trying to learn the Spiked Chain. Of course, I was always more partial to Dwarves, Bards, and Rogues in the first place. 

- Marty Lund


----------



## CountPopeula (Jul 7, 2008)

Ruin Explorer said:


> The rest of what you're saying is somewhat correct, except that you seem to think that it's an accident that in an iconic-free edition of the game, the iconic character of the previous game is being killed repeatedly.




This is another really good point, I think he's meant to represent everything "bad" about 3rd edition that's being "killed off" with the new edition. Just my take.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jul 7, 2008)

CountPopeula said:


> This is another really good point, I think he's meant to represent everything "bad" about 3rd edition that's being "killed off" with the new edition. Just my take.




That what I was assuming too, though they do appear to be res'ing him in the Rituals Chapter. I mean, maybe the Dark Elves are going to stop them, but maybe we're going everything that was bad about 3E back in future! 

Oh reading too much into things, how I love it 

Seriously though, love seeing Regdar die, but love seeing all the iconics die, fall off things, catch fire etc. Maybe it's Oppositional Defiant Disorder.

WotC: Here are some heroes for you to love!

Me: They're a bunch of wankers and I hate them all! Except the Gnome Bard.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jul 8, 2008)

Ruin Explorer said:


> What are these Dungeon and Dragon PSAs you speak of? I really _really_ hate the iconics, so I am particularly interested to know.






Voadam said:


> D&D PSAs?




Ah, you'll be wanting the youtube D&D PSA's  

If I put the link it will auto-embed it, which I don't want since it isn't exactly grandma-friendly, but if you go to youtube.com and append the following to the domain name

/watch?v=yHl16n7noXs

You'll be able to see it.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jul 8, 2008)

Do you want to know the REAL reason Regdar gets no love?

You ought to dig up (contact)'s Liberation of Tehn storyhour.

Just sayin'


----------



## lutecius (Jul 8, 2008)

I’m not sure I understand how a clearly white/nordic dwarf  means more diversity than a human of ambiguous ethnicity.

Saying that dnd races have no identifiable ethnicity seems a bit hasty. Interestingly, the most intolerant and chauvinistic gamers i've met often played dwarves, with an emphasis on the race's already strong celtic or norse feel.

I get that designer wanted iconics to fit favoured classes and that Tordek was visually more striking than Regdar. But the lack of racial diversity seems like a weird reason to hate the character or abuse him in the illustrations.
If the artists had such liberty, why didn’t they just make Regdar look less european, like Lockwood did?


----------



## Mad Mac (Jul 8, 2008)

> Seriously though, love seeing Regdar die, but love seeing all the iconics die, fall off things, catch fire etc. Maybe it's Oppositional Defiant Disorder.




  Oh I dunno. I kind of miss having the iconics to kick around. I mean sure, they were all completely lame, but that's what made them so much fun. We could all come together as a community to mock Hennett or talk about how Mialee was the ugliest elf wizard ever conceived, or make Krusk talk in the 3rd person and ponder how Kerwyn was the least popular iconic ever. 

  Then again, having cool, diverse character designs is better for sparking the imagination, and I never have to fear flipping through an arcane book and running into a full-page Mialee picture in some akward pose some poor artist apparently thought was sexy for someone who didn't look like a bug. 


  Surely, some compromise can be found? An introductory book full of cheeserific iconic characters that we can all laugh at? Another irressistably bad novel line written under pen names, so no one has to admit they wrote that book where Hennet and Ember hooked up? Hmmm....


----------



## BryonD (Jul 8, 2008)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Because Jozan and Hennet weren't enough white human dudes? What you even talking about? Kerwyn too. Jesus, how many white human men do we need exactly before it's not "peeing in marketing cornflakes"? I guess "more than three!". Seems like your position is untenable to me.




His position is perfectly tenable.  They needed exactly one.  But they needed that one to be the classic warrior frontman.  Not because a woman or any other race would not be accepted, but because a white male would be the most universally accepted amongst the target audience.  Yeah, there are lots of other  demographics, no one is doubting that.  But if you don't think young white males are greatly over-represented amongst gamers with respect to their pure population numbers, then I think you haven't been around much.  

The only other optimal marketing choice would have been a white female in skimpy clothes, and that would have been much worse.  

And truly, once you get past all the PC BS, it isn't even about any kind of racial quality comparison.  It is about making it as absolutely easy as possible for the would be customer to look at a cover or walk past a stand up and see their self in the picture.  A young white male could think Will Smith's Hancock is the absolute coolest hero character ever to grace the screen and still find it easier to identify with Peter Parker.  Perception of relative racial quality has nothing to do with it.    

To the contrary, I get sick of the BS "more enlightened than thou" attitude that tries to force social injustice into anything and everything, regardless of how misplaced that view may be.


----------



## boerngrim (Jul 8, 2008)

Darrin Drader said:


> You know, this is one of those things where I was always completely in the dark. I never looked too closely at the cover art when it depicted to iconics, so I always assumed that Regdar was black. Even after 'playing' the interactive DVD, I still assumed he was black, and I was totally cool with it.
> 
> My personal preferences are usually to play the meat shield, usually as a white guy, but not for any particular reason. One of my friends in a D20 Modern game I ran played a black man. He's not black in real life. Another one of my friends always plays a female with red hair in any game we play, whether it be an RPG or an MMO. Yet another friend of mine always plays a male character who is quite a bit older (I think the median age he plays is about 45). My wife likes to play axe wielding foul-mouthed dwarves.
> 
> My point here is that I agree with Monte that players can and do see beyond themselves, and that it is absolutely a good thing to use characters of a variety of ethnicities and races as iconics.




I thought Regdar was racially ambiguous, but if I had to call it, I would have said he looked black in the PHB. When I watched the Scourge of Worlds interactive DVD, Regdar definitely seemed like a black man to me. I thought that was cool.


----------



## Cadfan (Jul 8, 2008)

Ah, someone else has already posted the D&D PSA link.  My advice- start with the first one.  Later ones build a bit on inside jokes established in the earlier episodes.

Just to throw fuel on the fire, may I remind everyone that we just had a lengthy thread in which multiple people repeatedly explained to me (I've a thick skull, they had to keep explaining and I still don't get it) that default D&D ought not to have black people in european styled armor?


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 8, 2008)

danbuter1 said:


> I know there are other iconics. It just ticks me off that a developer just HAS to point out that he didn't want the main character to be a white male, and it must really piss him off, as he is still bothered by it. Political correctness gone mad, or racism?



Did you read the first part of Monte's post, where, for _years_ the only characters that could be depicted on the front of a TSR module was a white male?

Did you read the middle part, where he ticked off the reasons why this was a stupid policy?

Did you read the end part, where he said that there was an agreement that this nonsense was dead and gone, and marketing -- because they believe that white dudes will only pick up products featuring white dudes, which raises some interesting questions about rap music's popularity in the suburbs -- forced it on them?

This isn't political correctness: This is fighting against a wrong-headed and stupid marketing-driven decision about what appears in your D&D books.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 8, 2008)

mlund said:


> So who do you hand the "Big lug with a big sword," job to, exactly? If you give it to anybody other than the white guy you get accused of racist overtones by depicting "persons of color" as unintelligent / savage / defined by physicality.



I call. Show me such a complaint by someone other than random_usenet_flamer_01.

I don't buy this argument at all, especially since Monte, _who was there_, says that it's because marketing doesn't believe white guys will buy a product not featuring white guys prominently.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 8, 2008)

Mad Mac said:


> Surely, some compromise can be found? An introductory book full of cheeserific iconic characters that we can all laugh at?



I LOVED the 1E Rogues Gallery. I would love to see something comparable, featuring the best-realized playtest campaign characters.


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Jul 8, 2008)

This thread got really _weird_ really fast.

There wasn't any "reverse racism."  They were just tired of always being mandated to put the big white male lead everywhere, so they finally said "Screw it, this is BS.  We're making it a dwarf."

Then marketing said "HAH HAH OR SO YOU THOUGHT!"

So the disgruntled artists did what disgruntled people across the centuries have always done - they were snippy little pricks about it and made sure the marketing poster child was killed and maimed as much as they could.

I don't really see the "reverse racism."  Marketing was the one demanding racism/sexism, and the artists were irritated and showed their disgust by humiliating the character they hated.  if you see "reverse racism" in this, good lord do you have too much time on your hands.


----------



## Piratecat (Jul 8, 2008)

A little perspective, folks; please don't drag in racism where a marketing decision was made to circumvent the creative team. It's a different kettle of fish, and we'd rather not have the thread shoot off on a tangent.


----------



## Imaro (Jul 8, 2008)

This...



			
				Monte Cook said:
			
		

> When I worked at TSR, there was always basically a truism in cover art--the central figure had to be a white male. Most of us actually helping to create the cover art, either by conceiving it or actually creating it, hated that kind of outlook, but the powers that be believed that our audience was entirely white males and they needed someone that they could identify with on the cover.




Now my question is... isn't this a self perpetuating attitude?  If you believe white males will be turned off from a game by having a different ethnicity grace the cover of a book... well logic says the opposite is also true.  I mean if you aren't trying to grow or expand your market... then it makes perfect sense.  However if you are, then not so much.

As a black gamer it disturbs me that, while I hadn't given much thought to this issue until I happened upon Todd Lockwood's comments, it was a conscious decision on the part of marketing to take this approach.  I ask myself if I and those like me are looked at as so marginal that we are not a consideration in marketing the game, then why support the game.  Especially when there are so many that do in this day and age.  

I will admit, it's kind of soured me a little towards WotC and D&D in general.  On the other hand I can make a conscious choice to support companies who apparently, through their decisions, feel that I am not so marginal when it comes to being a part of their customer base as to not even be a consideration.


----------



## Ahglock (Jul 8, 2008)

I consider things like the Iconics and the cover to be almost 100% a marketing decision.  I really don't think the "creative team" should be involved in it at all.


----------



## Glyfair (Jul 8, 2008)

frankthedm said:


> As for the notion that Redgar getting slain repeatedly was racially motivated, those whose job it is to be on the front line, do die a lot.



I do remember someone from WotC gleefully pointing out what sort of torture all the iconics went through in the art from *Dungeonscape*.  They seem to have this focus on torturing all the iconics.  Redgar certainly would get the brunt of that as one of the center stage iconics (even after the initial focus on him at the beginning of 3E).

Any other focus on Redgar certainly deals with the fact that he was "unwanted" and forced into the position rather than just his race (which is a factor, but a tangential one).  So, I agree that such focus is only incidentally racially motivated.


----------



## the Jester (Jul 8, 2008)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> Heh, I wondered why there were two Fighters.  Still, it kinda worries me how the people on that site talk gleefully about seeing Regdar maimed and dead in the artwork.  Like violence is the solution to perceived...I'll stop there.  Forum rules and all.




Dude, you're talking about a game whose basic theme is killing things & taking their stuff.


----------



## Leatherhead (Jul 8, 2008)

Interesting, so marketing gets to make decisions over creative teams, and artists "fight back" with passive aggressive behavior.


----------



## Barastrondo (Jul 8, 2008)

Plane Sailing said:


> Do you want to know the REAL reason Regdar gets no love?
> 
> You ought to dig up (contact)'s Liberation of Tehn storyhour.
> 
> Just sayin'




Hahahahahaha!

Oh, he got love. Spindly, wheezy, unctuous love.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jul 8, 2008)

StreamOfTheSky said:


> ...even extending into the 4E book -- where there are no pre-built characters! .




When all is said and done, the lack of "iconic" characters is the greatest 4e mystery to me.

Given how helpful they are to art orders and branding and how easy it is to license and merchandise their images, their absence is an enigma.

Someone must have put their foot down on this matter, and that person made the wrong call.

--Erik


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 8, 2008)

Leatherhead said:


> Interesting, so marketing gets to make decisions over creative teams, and artists "fight back" with passive aggressive behavior.




"Here's what I think of your dear little Regdar," is not what I would call passive aggressive.


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 8, 2008)

BryonD said:


> The only other optimal marketing choice would have been a white female in skimpy clothes, and that would have been much worse.




Four words: Samus is a girl.


----------



## Ahglock (Jul 8, 2008)

pawsplay said:


> Four words: Samus is a girl.




Power armor does not equal skimpy clothes.


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 8, 2008)

Ahglock said:


> Power armor does not equal skimpy clothes.




Exactly.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jul 8, 2008)

Erik Mona said:


> Given how helpful they are to art orders and branding and how easy it is to license and merchandise their images, their absence is an enigma.



I'll grant you the first, but Jesus, Erik! When did Wizards of the Coast ever license or merchandise the iconics? A short series of unsuccessful _D&D_ novels and a couple of named droplets in the collectible miniatures ocean? Maybe a calendar or two?

Paizo with its _Pathfinder_ iconics has already beaten out everything Wizards of the Coast ever did with the _D&D_ iconics except writing them into a novel or two.

It would be pretty trivial to turn the Fourth Edition class portraits into iconics, if you wanted to do that. I hope they *don't*, because they're pretty boring: all white-skinned (if they can be, and even the tiefling warlock looks less red-skinned than white with firelight casting a colour shadow), 75% male (only the ranger and warlock are female), _et cetera_.


----------



## hong (Jul 8, 2008)

aurance said:


> I'm a Gnome in real life, imagine how I feel.



Bah, your picture looks NOTHING like a gnome.


----------



## Glyfair (Jul 8, 2008)

Erik Mona said:


> When all is said and done, the lack of "iconic" characters is the greatest 4e mystery to me.
> 
> Given how helpful they are to art orders and branding and how easy it is to license and merchandise their images, their absence is an enigma.
> 
> Someone must have put their foot down on this matter, and that person made the wrong call.



I'll note that after 4E was announced there was a thread on the WotC forums asking whether there should be 4E iconics, and if so whether any or all of the 3E iconics should make the leap.  The sentiment in that thread was heavily against having any iconics (to my regret, being pro-iconic).


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 8, 2008)

4e does have one iconic, but he's a monster.


----------



## Amphimir Míriel (Jul 8, 2008)

mhacdebhandia said:


> It would be pretty trivial to turn the Fourth Edition class portraits into iconics, if you wanted to do that. I hope they *don't*, because they're pretty boring: all white-skinned (if they can be, and even the tiefling warlock looks less red-skinned than white with firelight casting a colour shadow), 75% male (only the ranger and warlock are female), _et cetera_.




You think so? I thought the Cleric was kinda asian-looking, on a weird way


----------



## Amphimir Míriel (Jul 8, 2008)

pawsplay said:


> 4e does have one iconic, but he's a monster.




Rawrr!! Iconic indeed


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Jul 8, 2008)

I appreciate Monte's post on a level nobody's mentioned yet: I _love_ glimpses like this into the inner workings of a game company.

Oh, and Regdar is also being devoured by the original Ochre Jelly from the D&D Miniatures line.  Pretty funny before I knew this back-story, and funnier now.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jul 8, 2008)

Amphimir Míriel said:


> You think so? I thought the Cleric was kinda asian-looking, on a weird way



Eh, *kinda*, or he could just be grimacing in the midst of combat. It's pretty ambiguous, and that's the point: they all look white, there's no explicit diversity.

It's the same way with the races themselves: the dwarves have rare non-human skin tones (grey or sandstone red); eladrin have human skin tones but are overwhelmingly fair-skinned; elves are supposed to be "tan or brown" but are presented as white; half-elves have "the same range of complexion as humans and elves" but are presented as white, one of the halflings looks like she was modelled after a young *Penny Johnson Jerald* (which is cool); both humans look white (although the woman looks like an attempt to do Asian eyes on a white girl); tiefling skin "covers the whole human range and also extends to reds" but both of them are white.

The issue is slightly confused by the fact that William O'Connor does not use naturalistic skin tones for his illustrations anyway, of course. Both humans, for instance, are pale-skinned and obviously so, but because the artist doesn't paint people's skin to look like people's skin it's impossible to say for sure what he was intending. Maybe the human woman was *supposed* to look totally Asian (though the European colour of her hair suggests not).

Hell, apart from the halfling, the female dwarf fighter with geisha makeup at the beginning of the next chapter (p. 50) brings more diversity into the illustrations than the whole races chapter.


----------



## Leatherhead (Jul 8, 2008)

pawsplay said:


> "Here's what I think of your dear little Regdar," is not what I would call passive aggressive.




If that is all there was too it I might be inclined to agree, however there is far more to it than that.


----------



## Leatherhead (Jul 8, 2008)

pawsplay said:


> Four words: Samus is a girl.




Samus wore a bikini in her first game, take that as you will.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jul 8, 2008)

Glyfair said:


> I'll note that after 4E was announced there was a thread on the WotC forums asking whether there should be 4E iconics, and if so whether any or all of the 3E iconics should make the leap.  The sentiment in that thread was heavily against having any iconics (to my regret, being pro-iconic).




Which is why it would be stupid to run a business based off an EN World poll.

--Erik


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 8, 2008)

hong said:


> Bah, your picture looks NOTHING like a gnome.



It's the world of ILLUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSION!


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jul 8, 2008)

Erik Mona said:


> Which is why it would be stupid to run a business based off an EN World poll.




...or even a WotC forum poll


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jul 8, 2008)

Barastrondo said:


> Hahahahahaha!
> 
> Oh, he got love. Spindly, wheezy, unctuous love.




See, _somebody _got it!


----------



## Mathew_Freeman (Jul 8, 2008)

CountPopeula said:


> Far be it for me to put words in the designer's mouths, but it seems like the goal was to make a multi-ethnic, multi-racial group of iconic characters working together and sharing the spotlight, and marketing decreed that there would be a group of multi-ethnic, multi-racial sidekicks to the heroic white tough guy. Sort of a D&D Superfriends.
> 
> They already had a fighter, he was a dwarf. They had white males, Jozan and Hennet. Marketing wanted a strong, white male warrior front and center, above the other characters, and that was Redgar, and that's why he's the whipping boy.




This, I completely agree with. Redgar is a completely pointless, late-addition to the group and he is put there due to marketing rather than any other consideration. The gleeful revenge of artists and designers who are in a position to do something about this insult to gamers intelligence is something to be applauded.


----------



## Ander00 (Jul 8, 2008)

I always liked Regdar, as the intelligent fighter guy (likewise Roy from OotS). I never envisioned Regdar as white though, and any artwork that clearly depicted him as such was, to me, clearly in error.

I'd take Regdar over Tordek any day, and Eberk over Jozan, for that matter.


cheers


----------



## Klaus (Jul 8, 2008)

I too always saw Regdar as non-white. In fact, to me he was pretty much Vin Diesel with a goatee. The whitest I have seem him depicted is precisely in the 4e Rituals chapter (look at him in the warlord chapter, looking non-beaten up).

So "3E designers" tried to circumvent "TSR policies". "Marketing" tried to circumvent "3e designers". And "Artist" managed to circumvent "Marketing".


----------



## Jedi_Solo (Jul 8, 2008)

Ander00 said:


> I never envisioned Regdar as white though, and any artwork that clearly depicted him as such was, to me, clearly in error.




Same here. With the images of Redgar that come to mind I remember a lot more where he isn't white than ones where he depicted as white.

There is also a statement by Lockwood somewhere that he purposely made Redgar ambiguous in his racial identity so I always took the verying shades of his skin tone as part of that ambiguousness. (Is that even a word?)


----------



## CountPopeula (Jul 8, 2008)

Klaus said:


> I too always saw Regdar as non-white. In fact, to me he was pretty much Vin Diesel with a goatee. The whitest I have seem him depicted is precisely in the 4e Rituals chapter (look at him in the warlord chapter, looking non-beaten up).
> 
> So "3E designers" tried to circumvent "TSR policies". "Marketing" tried to circumvent "3e designers". And "Artist" managed to circumvent "Marketing".




I know Vin Diesel has a multi-racial background, but he's always looks exceptionally white to me. Like he could have been on Friends he looks so white.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 8, 2008)

I have no useful opinion about Regdar's race. I don't even remember his hair color. He's a face in a helmet so far as I recall.

However, I wonder why the creative team is being held up as some sort of holy infallible group. *They gave us Hennet*. That's proof enough that they err.

They even gave us man-face Mialee.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jul 8, 2008)

Imaro said:


> Now my question is... isn't this a self perpetuating attitude?  If you believe white males will be turned off from a game by having a different ethnicity grace the cover of a book... well logic says the opposite is also true.  I mean if you aren't trying to grow or expand your market... then it makes perfect sense.  However if you are, then not so much.




Absolutely it is, and that's classic TSR-logic.

*Erik Mona* - I'm not sure it's as "smart" a decision as you seem to be implying. WotC's iconics made me actually less likely to buy products from them, because, on some level, the art is part of why I buy a product, and I really hated seeing the same wankers over and over again. Exalted's wankonics are similarly irritating, though WoD iconics are bland enough to blend into the background, at least. I was really not happy, though, to go from the varied fantasy art of 2E, to seeing the same twonks over and over and over again, in 3E. I know I wasn't alone in this feeling. I'm not sure how much mileage you get out of merchandising something when some percentage of your player-base strongly dislikes it.

*CountPopeula *- Does that make 3E the "Friends" of RPGs? I could see that.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jul 8, 2008)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Absolutely it is, and that's classic TSR-logic.




I wouldn't really label it 'TSR-logic'. In the 80's and 90's you had mainstream  book publishers that would regularly 'white-wash' covers that featured black characters and not include author pictures with the back-flap bio if that author was black (unless that book was slated to sell in the African-American section). (And I say specifically black rather than 'non-white' because that's usually the only point things break down; you could find a number of asian characters on book covers in the same period since that was also the big 'japan-o-phile' phase of fantasty and SF).


----------



## Bump2daWiza (Jul 8, 2008)

I usually like Cook, but this is just cynical 90s nonsense. An attack on all things white and vaguely European. Diversity is great. Not being racist is great. But artificially engineered diversity is worse. Boo Monte Cook.


----------



## Imaro (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> I usually like Cook, but this is just cynical 90s nonsense. An attack on all things white and vaguely European. Diversity is great. Not being racist is great. But artificially engineered diversity is worse. Boo Monte Cook.




Yeah, because that's what he did... launch an attack "on all things white and vaguely European".  

Quick question, if marketing has an agenda that is counter to diversity... how does diversity come about except through someone having the resolve to engineer it "artificially".  Throughout history this is exactly how diversity has been achieved.  "Artificial" diversity, as you call it, is what sets the groundwork so that it starts to become more natural and organic as time goes on.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> Diversity is great. Not being racist is great. But artificially engineered diversity is worse.



 To be fair, the whole game is artifice -- it's not like they can just randomly sample real Dwarf Wizards.

- - -

I think I never really understood the role of the Iconics. Were they supposed to be bland, or exciting?

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Bump2daWiza (Jul 8, 2008)

Imaro said:


> Yeah, because that's what he did... launch an attack "on all things white and vaguely European".
> 
> Quick question, if marketing has an agenda that is counter to diversity... how does diversity come about except through someone having the resolve to engineer it "artificially". Throughout history this is exactly how diversity has been achieved. "Artificial" diversity, as you call it, is what sets the groundwork so that it starts to become more natural and organic as time goes on.




That is the problem with 90s racial thinking. It assumes marketing departments dictate race relations in the US. This is why white suburban people think racial tension is dissapating, but people like me who live in ethnically diverse neighborhoods know that is not the case. Hauling around your one or two ethnic friends to show what an enlightened person you are doesn't make the world a better place. Ignoring the truth behind racial stereotypes doesn't make for better race relations on the ground. A better approach would have been for the marketing department to accurately reflect the racial makeup of gamers. So instead of inflating the number of ethnic characters, something like 80% white to 20% non-white would have been more believable.


----------



## Barastrondo (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> I usually like Cook, but this is just cynical 90s nonsense. An attack on all things white and vaguely European. Diversity is great. Not being racist is great. But artificially engineered diversity is worse. Boo Monte Cook.




As a white guy, I have to say I'm not thrilled about someone saying that "not having a white guy be the number one character" is an attack on "all things white." I mean, really — it's "white" to insist to be the Number One Guy? 

Pass.


----------



## Bump2daWiza (Jul 8, 2008)

Barastrondo said:


> As a white guy, I have to say I'm not thrilled about someone saying that "not having a white guy be the number one character" is an attack on "all things white." I mean, really — it's "white" to insist to be the Number One Guy?
> 
> Pass.





As a non-white guy, I think there is nothing more pathetic and sad than self loathing white folk trying to impress minorities.


----------



## Barastrondo (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> As a non-white guy, I think there is nothing more pathetic and sad than self loathing white folk trying to impress minorities.




If the definition of "self-loathing" is "would also like to see stories about people who are not explicitly modeled on yourself."

Me, I think that's some heavy-duty projecting.


----------



## Bump2daWiza (Jul 8, 2008)

Barastrondo said:


> If the definition of "self-loathing" is "would also like to see stories about people who are not explicitly modeled on yourself."
> 
> Me, I think that's some heavy-duty projecting.




The whole notion of Monte Cook telling us what a good guy he is because he was upset that Redgar, the white fighter, would be the figure head of the artwork, is frankly a little insulting to all the real injustices we have had to endure. Come one. It is art for a game that mostly white folks play.


----------



## Bagpuss (Jul 8, 2008)

Remathilis said:


> Monte Cook posted the ignoble creation of Regdar, the Iconic Human Male Fighter and talks a bit about gender and racial equality.
> 
> http://montecook.livejournal.com/150303.html
> 
> Might explain why he seems to die an awful lot in D&D artwork




Weird because I look at the covers on MALHAVOC PRESS product page and....

The Night of Dissolution - white male warrior
The Temple of Mysteries - Undetermined male warrior
The Book of Roguish Luck - white male
The Banewarrens - white male warrior (although it could be a dwarf?)
Mindscapes - white male
Requiem for a God - white males
Cry Havoc - White male warrior
The Bonds of Magic - white male
Iron Heroes - white male warrior
The Book of Hallowed Might - white male warrior
Book of Hallowed Might II - white male warrior
Book of Eldritch Might III - white male warrior

He seems to have plenty of the stereotype, certainly more than half except for the Arcana Evolved, product line.


----------



## Imaro (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> That is the problem with 90s racial thinking. It assumes marketing departments dictate race relations in the US. This is why white suburban people think racial tension is dissapating, but people like me who live in ethnically diverse neighborhoods know that is not the case. Hauling around your one or two ethnic friends to show what an enlightened person you are doesn't make the world a better place. Ignoring the truth behind racial stereotypes doesn't make for better race relations on the ground. A better approach would have been for the marketing department to accurately reflect the racial makeup of gamers. So instead of inflating the number of ethnic characters, something like 80% white to 20% non-white would have been more believable.




So, how is this solution any less artificial than the one suggested?  Marketing believed white males would not purchase books with a non-white/non-male character on the cover, so how do you determine what 20% of covers get treatment and which don't?  If one with non-white's on it doesn't sell, is it because of the cover or because of the content?   

Again, you seem to be missing the point... diversity actually does start with conscious effort and conscious awareness (usually through the efforts of a few who are such), call it "artificial" if you want.  And even your solution is what you seem to be implying as artificial. The fact of the matter is... this is exactly how diversity in almost all areas have started in the U.S., and I for one would rather these type of things be implemented, regardless of how "artificial" they are,  than for people to sit back and wait for it to fix itself.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Jul 8, 2008)

Honestly, I always thought Regdar was black.


----------



## Bump2daWiza (Jul 8, 2008)

Imaro said:


> Again, you seem to be missing the point... diversity actually does start with conscious effort and conscious awareness (usually through the efforts of a few who are such), call it "artificial" if you want. And even your solution is what you seem to be implying as artificial. The fact of the matter is... this is exactly how diversity in almost all areas have started in the U.S., and I for one would rather these type of things be implemented, regardless of how "artificial" they are, than for people to sit back and wait for it to fix itself.




Diversity in the US? Where are you living. I live in a city where all the people are ethnic. Next door is a suburb full of white people. Every well-to do place I have been is full of white folks. Talking in the classroom about how great diversity is campus, how there should be more equal representation of races in media, how hurftul negative stereotypes are does little for the black man who can't afford a college education. By the way I am all for Affirmative Action. Because it is pro-active and it gets more black faces into the work force. But I find it insulting when a product (that appeals mostly to white people with a good education) pats itself on the back for throwing in some colored characters. They want diversity, give inner city kids a discount on the books. Stop putting out splat books every week so us poor folk can't even stay current on the hobby. Use language that appeals to people without a college education. But don't include a black monk and act like you are Malcolm X or something.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Jul 8, 2008)

I feel a thread lockdown coming any time now.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> As a non-white guy, I think there is nothing more pathetic and sad than self loathing white folk trying to impress minorities.



You can't love someone else if you can't love yourself?

But as a white male (and German) I say if self-loathing leads to the end of both sexism and racism, I am fine with it. 

If you say it doesn't work, okay. Then we need to get more creative.


----------



## Cadfan (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> I usually like Cook, but this is just cynical 90s nonsense. An attack on all things white and vaguely European. Diversity is great. Not being racist is great. But artificially engineered diversity is worse. Boo Monte Cook.



I agree with this completely.  Fictional minorities should have to compete on a level playing field against fictional whites in order to obtain fictional jobs.  Until said fictional minorities are equally qualified as said fictional whites, it makes sense that the fictional jobs go to the fictional whites.  Anything else is a fictional quota, which fictionally offends my fictional sense of fictional fair fictional play fictional fictional.


----------



## Barastrondo (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> The whole notion of Monte Cook telling us what a good guy he is because he was upset that Redgar, the white fighter, would be the figure head of the artwork, is frankly a little insulting to all the real injustices we have had to endure. Come one. It is art for a game that mostly white folks play.




See, to me that was less of a story about how awesome Monte is and how dinosaur-like the marketing department at WotC was.

To me, the concept of art for a fantasy world is about showing the fantasy _world_. It doesn't matter what the demographic of your actual players is: you're looking at showing characters that are representative of the world. Now if you're deliberately doing a setting that's based on a mostly-white area like Warhammer's Old World, where non-whites are rare and exotic — or something like Nyambe, where non-Africans are rare and exotic — then yeah, you should have a representative majority in the art. But if you're not zeroing in on one particular continent, then you're theoretically depicting a world. And if an entire world is 80% white — that's pretty weird. 

I find that it's the difference between depicting "the world as modeled on the demographics of a gaming group" and depicting "a believable world." And for marketing to insist on the former — well, I think that's bogus.


----------



## Psion (Jul 8, 2008)

Imaro said:


> So, how is this solution any less artificial than the one suggested?  Marketing believed white males would not purchase books with a non-white/non-male character on the cover, so how do you determine what 20% of covers get treatment and which don't?




Roll percentile dice. Are you even a gamer?

Anyway, IBTL.


----------



## Imaro (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> Diversity in the US? Where are you living. I live in a city where all the people are ethnic. Next door is a suburb full of white people. Every well-to do place I have been is full of white folks. Talking in the classroom about how great diversity is campus, how there should be more equal representation of races in media, how hurftul negative stereotypes are does little for the black man who can't afford a college education. By the way I am all for Affirmative Action. Because it is pro-active and it gets more black faces into the work force. But I find it insulting when a product (that appeals mostly to white people with a good education) pats itself on the back for throwing in some colored characters. They want diversity, give inner city kids a discount on the books. Stop putting out splat books every week so us poor folk can't even stay current on the hobby. Use language that appeals to people without a college education. But don't include a black monk and act like you are Malcolm X or something.





Where do I live...Chicago.  I'm a black male with a college degree in computer science, who grew up in the South Shore neighborhood.  Was it easy, nope... did I do it, yep because it was what I wanted  (and guess what... I wasn't the only black to do this.).  And yes I am all for affirmative action as well. 

 As far as the things you suggest above,   
"Language that appeals to people without a college education", (Why?  If anything D&D expanded my vocabulary when I was younger.) 

"discount on the books",  (You make a choice, I gave up certain things when I was younger so I could scrape together the money to buy my books.  The question is how to make this more appealing than xbox 360 or PS3 games?)

"Splat Books every month" (Now I make nice money, but even I find no need to purchase every splatbook, mini, dungeon tile or anything else WotC chooses to put out.  I make choices on what I want based within how much money I can afford to spend.)

It seems your suggestions, IMHO, do more to cater to negative stereotypes than they do to help promote the game to non-white's.  I don't get the impression Monte Cook is trying to portray himself as "Malcolm X".  He was on the creative team and there are only so many and then only particular things which they can do in order to promote diversity.  Everything you list above, except using dumber language, isn't something the creative team has any control over.


----------



## buzz (Jul 8, 2008)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> This isn't political correctness: This is fighting against a wrong-headed and stupid marketing-driven decision about what appears in your D&D books.



QFT.

I would love to see actual data that supports marketing's decision.



lutecius said:


> I’m not sure I understand how a clearly white/nordic dwarf  means more diversity than a human of ambiguous ethnicity.



Yup. Elves and dwarves are not racially diverse. They are tall, slender white people and short, stout white people. (As they are typically rendered, that is. I always liked how the Shield Dwarves in the FRCS were deep brown.)

Looked at in this light, the only "iconic of color" in 3e was Ember the monk, unless you want to somehow count Krusk (which, honestly, I wouldn't).

OTOH, they did a good job on gender diversity. And Alhandra even got real armor!


----------



## roguerouge (Jul 8, 2008)

Sounds like marketing does not play DnD. If they did play DnD, they'd know that the way to handle Chaotics is to not force them to do things, but to appeal to their interests (philosophical or personal). Make artists bend to your will? Bad move. Make it a challenge where they can test themselves? Possibly a better one.


----------



## buzz (Jul 8, 2008)

Imaro said:


> Now my question is... isn't this a self perpetuating attitude?  If you believe white males will be turned off from a game by having a different ethnicity grace the cover of a book... well logic says the opposite is also true.  I mean if you aren't trying to grow or expand your market... then it makes perfect sense.  However if you are, then not so much.



I think it's worth noting that White Wolf turned themselves into the second-biggest RPG company on earth, at least in part, by actively pursuing diversity in their art and fluff. Not to mention expanded into demographics that were not playing RPGs at the time.


----------



## Psion (Jul 8, 2008)

buzz said:


> I think it's worth noting that White Wolf turned themselves into the second-biggest RPG company on earth, at least in part, by actively pursuing diversity in their art and fluff.




Like how the Savant and Sorcerer cover appeals to female gamers by putting butterflies on the cover?


----------



## Barastrondo (Jul 8, 2008)

Psion said:


> Like how the Savant and Sorcerer cover appeals to female gamers by putting butterflies on the cover?




Now why does nobody ever mention the bulging loincloth dude on the cover of Houses of the Bull God that came out immediately afterward? I swear, it's like people _want_ to notice the cheesecake and not the beefcake.

Also, Harmonious Jade is the win.


----------



## buzz (Jul 8, 2008)

Psion said:


> Like how the Savant and Sorcerer cover appeals to female gamers by putting butterflies on the cover?



The exception that proves the rule.


----------



## buzz (Jul 8, 2008)

Barastrondo said:


> Also, Harmonious Jade is the win.



QFT. She certainly didn't prevent Exalted from being one of WW's most successful creations, either.


----------



## Matt Black (Jul 8, 2008)

Bagpuss said:


> Weird because I look at the covers on MALHAVOC PRESS product page and....
> 
> The Night of Dissolution - white male warrior
> The Temple of Mysteries - Undetermined male warrior
> ...




It's true! And the characters that aren't white males are mostly either white females or non-human (mostly white non-humans). There's a black woman on Ruins of Intrigue, but I can't tell if she's meant to be a drow.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jul 8, 2008)

Erik Mona said:


> Given how helpful they are to art orders and branding and how easy it is to license and merchandise their images, their absence is an enigma.
> 
> Someone must have put their foot down on this matter, and that person made the wrong call.



While I won't argue against the ease of making art orders for a business, the value of iconics to the _consumer_ is questionable.

Really, AFAIC, iconics are bland, boring, and - most importantly of all - completely and utterly _irrelevant_. What's the point to the consumer? Branding? Meh. Looks like, for example in Pathfinder's case, some giant nobody/schmoe just plastered on the cover and getting in the way of some artwork that's actually cool.

Sure, Seoni's got a nice rack, but who are these other schmoes? For me, at least, not only are the iconics completely irrelevant, it's getting to the point that it could be seen that we're getting them shoved down our throats (the aforementioned prominent ruining of covers along with two wasted pages of - again, irrelevant - stats of these nobodies in the book itself).

Sounds like WotC made the right decision for 4e, from this particular consumer's point of view.

(But sure - maybe art ordering would have been easier for their business. Meh.)


----------



## Psion (Jul 8, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> Really, AFAIC, iconics are bland, boring, and - most importantly of all - completely and utterly _irrelevant_. What's the point to the consumer? Branding? Meh. Looks like, for example in Pathfinder's case, some giant nobody/schmoe just plastered on the cover and getting in the way of some artwork that's actually cool.




I like the Pathfinder iconics:
1) Visually/conceptually
2) I like that if I decide to play a game and players are in attendance without ready PCs, I can just pull one of the iconics out.

Feature 2, BTW, is a significant improvement in the way Paizo does iconics than the way WotC did them AFAIAC.

So yeah. This consumer finds value.


----------



## Pinnacle (Jul 8, 2008)

buzz said:


> Yup. Elves and dwarves are not racially diverse. They are tall, slender white people and short, stout white people. (As they are typically rendered, that is. I always liked how the Shield Dwarves in the FRCS were deep brown.)



Dwarves are described as medium-skin tone (I think?) but are usually depicted as white.  Elves are described as usually fair-skinned, but Vadania is green and Mialee changes her skin color on a whim (usually orange-ish, but she's also been green and bright purple).



buzz said:


> Looked at in this light, the only "iconic of color" in 3e was Ember the monk, unless you want to somehow count Krusk (which, honestly, I wouldn't).



She's the only black iconic, but what about Regdar, Alhandra, Hennet, and Naull?
Jozan's the only white human, except maybe Kerwyn (I can't tell with him).


----------



## MrApothecary (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> The whole notion of Monte Cook telling us what a good guy he is because he was upset that Redgar, the white fighter, would be the figure head of the artwork, is frankly a little insulting to all the real injustices we have had to endure. Come one. It is art for a game that mostly white folks play.




This isn't a vanity article on Cook's part. He wouldn't need one, people worship him anyway.

What this is, however, is Cook explaining that the marketing team forced the creative team to make the lead iconic a white male human, because they have this stupid idea that white males will be appealed by him more. Which seems silly to me, this _is_ a roleplaying game.

So someone tries to help diversity, even a little bit, and you accuse them of insulting the injustice your ethnic group has gone through? If you want to help improve race relations, Bump2daWiza, you'll get nowhere fast with that attitude.

In response to this thread in general, most of the gamers are white males. But what most of the gamers are _not_ is racist or sexist. They probably wouldn't mind having, for example, Ember as the iconic lead. The vast majority of them would just look at illustrations of her doing some badass things monks do and go "Ooooo! That feat looks cool! I should have my character take it!" There would be some people who would be turned off by D&D because of a different race or sex, but if I was WotC, I'd not want their money. Marketing that takes into account intolerant attitudes does not help at all.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jul 8, 2008)

Bump2daWiza said:


> Diversity in the US? Where are you living. I live in a city where all the people are ethnic. Next door is a suburb full of white people. Every well-to do place I have been is full of white folks. Talking in the classroom about how great diversity is campus, how there should be more equal representation of races in media, how hurftul negative stereotypes are does little for the black man who can't afford a college education. By the way I am all for Affirmative Action. Because it is pro-active and it gets more black faces into the work force. But I find it insulting when a product (that appeals mostly to white people with a good education) pats itself on the back for throwing in some colored characters. They want diversity, give inner city kids a discount on the books. Stop putting out splat books every week so us poor folk can't even stay current on the hobby. Use language that appeals to people without a college education. But don't include a black monk and act like you are Malcolm X or something.




Way over the line in terms of "politics".

ENworld is for gaming discussion, not solving (or otherwise) issues of real life such as this.

Any more steps over the line and the thread will be closed.

Thanks


----------



## Arnwyn (Jul 8, 2008)

Psion said:


> I like the Pathfinder iconics:
> 1) Visually/conceptually
> 
> So yeah. This consumer finds value.



What value do you derive from that?


----------



## Erik Mona (Jul 8, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> While I won't argue against the ease of making art orders for a business, the value of iconics to the _consumer_ is questionable.
> 
> Really, AFAIC, iconics are bland, boring, and - most importantly of all - completely and utterly _irrelevant_. What's the point to the consumer? Branding? Meh. Looks like, for example in Pathfinder's case, some giant nobody/schmoe just plastered on the cover and getting in the way of some artwork that's actually cool.
> 
> ...





LOL, you are such a crank it is hilarious.

I can appreciate why a reader wouldn't care about the complexity of art orders, but a publisher should. 

And I can appreciate how some readers might not like the iconics, but I'm positive it is a minority opinion.

--Erik


----------



## Nifft (Jul 8, 2008)

Erik Mona said:


> I'm positive it is a minority opinion.



 In the racism thread?

_Tut, tut!_ -- N


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jul 8, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> While I won't argue against the ease of making art orders for a business, the value of iconics to the _consumer_ is questionable.
> 
> Really, AFAIC, iconics are bland, boring, and - most importantly of all - completely and utterly _irrelevant_. What's the point to the consumer?




I think what the Iconics offer to the consumer is consistency and a sense of continuation.

Sure, it can be boring, that consistency. On the other hand, it also means that they won't have to worry about tieflings that look like someone said "hey, make that random human in that artwork a tiefling" and then paint a demon mask there...

In addition, it serves to illustrate the situation rather than the character. If you want to show the new styling armor, Alhana can do so without drawing attention to the character, or worrying about the artist improvising with her looks. If you want an action scene, it's more about the action than the characters, as it were.




> Sounds like WotC made the right decision for 4e, from this particular consumer's point of view.
> 
> (But sure - maybe art ordering would have been easier for their business. Meh.)




Aside from artwork, WotC needed Iconics for the simple reason of examples to demonstrate character creation and combat. Using the same folks with consistent powers and such to illustrate how the rules work would have been of great assistance.


----------



## Scribble (Jul 8, 2008)

Iconics tend to make the art seem a bit repetative, but not enough in my eyes that I sit around thinking... "Grrrr hates me some iconics grrrrr!!!"


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jul 8, 2008)

For the race thing, I think it would have been a more useful comment had he posted BEFORE Lockwood revealed the same thing. Now it just seems like he's reacting to that in a sort of "ooh, me too!" way.

For racial diversity in artwork, you need to figure whether the setting has such racial diversity. In addition, you need to see if your artists can actually... you know, make racially diverse art that doesn't look horrible. I mean, if they can't even draw a white guy sometimes, trying to find more colors to use might be worse than just having the white guy. 

(I'd also like to note that gnomes were generally brown, but of course another race that was generally drawn as "tanned" rather than "african".)


----------



## Psion (Jul 8, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> What value do you derive from that?




Like any good RPG artwork, it helps me visualize the characters in the game and immerse myself in the world. A good illustration gives me ideas. A good characterter illustration gives me good character ideas and gives me a visual bead on the character.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jul 8, 2008)

Erik Mona said:


> LOL, you are such a crank it is hilarious.



 I criticize because I love! (No, really!)



> And I can appreciate how some readers might not like the iconics, but I'm positive it is a minority opinion.



WotC doesn't think so. (Yeah, yeah, I know - I'm on shaky ground with that assertion already...)



			
				Scribble said:
			
		

> Iconics tend to make the art seem a bit repetative, but not enough in my eyes that I sit around thinking... "Grrrr hates me some iconics grrrrr!!!"



Agreed. I didn't even know what an iconic _was_ until I read ENWorld for a length of time.

But yeah - I think that's the problem I have, that I couldn't put my finger on/articulate for the longest time. It was "why is artwork in the last little while so boring to me?". That's it!


----------



## WayneLigon (Jul 8, 2008)

buzz said:


> I would love to see actual data that supports marketing's decision.




Census data, probably. More than 75% of the US as a whole is white. I would feel safe betting that a significantly higher percentage of gamers are white; if I had to guess, I'd say 90-95% and feel I was being generous. 

They can take the safe route, which is to produce a book with a white male on the cover. A certain percent of whites will look less favorably on the book because of this, as will a certain percentage of non-whites. The gamble is: which is safer in terms of sales?


----------



## Alzrius (Jul 8, 2008)

I'd read a while back something, somewhere about how Regdar wasn't part of the original iconics. I've tried to track down that article many times, but can't remember anything else about it. Still, this is penetrating regarding WHY he was suddenly added in.

As to the value of iconic characters as a whole...I have mixed feelings. I was surprised to find that I did, in fact, derive some sense of enjoyment that the same characters were regularly featured in the art across the books. That said, I also took it for granted that there were stereotypes in there that would appeal to the largest demographics - it's something of a necessity (or perhaps necessary evil) when your product is a niche one, as RPG books are. Yes, Regdar is the white male that white males are supposed to identify with, and yes, Seoni is the scantily-clad big-boobed sex object said white males are supposed to lust after. I don't believe that there's any sort of sinister intent to belittle women or other ethnicities; it's just companies trying to appeal to the people who are already most likely to buy their products. 

(As an aside, I've often wondered if part of the requirements for each release of Paizo's _Pathfinder_ was that every book has to have at least one full-body piece of art depicting a sexy woman - not that I mind, personally. )

The real question, to me, is are these tactics inherently offensive (and harmful)? That is, is there a social effect to always showing the main fighter character as being a white male? Does it have an impact on women (and men's perception of women) when most of the females depicted look like a sex-fantasy? That, I think, is much harder to determine.


----------



## Matt Black (Jul 8, 2008)

I like iconics (or at least, I like the iconics that I like). One of the primary joys of D&D is watching your crew of familiar characters grow through their adventures. The use of iconics gives this feel, especially if the iconics evolve.

I'd also like to give a thumbs up for the Pathfinder iconics. They're more interesting than the 3.x ones. Even the white males among them.


----------



## Charwoman Gene (Jul 8, 2008)

MrApothecary said:


> But what most of the gamers are _not_ is racist or sexist. They probably wouldn't mind having, for example, Ember as the iconic lead.




I think you ahve a seriously deluded idea of the thoughts of most gamers.  It would have seriously hurt sales.  Tordek wouldn't have.


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 8, 2008)

Leatherhead said:


> Samus wore a bikini in her first game, take that as you will.




You don't see the bikini unless you beat the game. Up until that point, many players did not even realize Samus was female. Since then, sometimes you see Samus in armor, sometimes in a bikini, and it doesn't matter; Samus is still Samus, and we all know Samus is a complete badass. Samus's armor is cool. Etc. Samus is basically Iron Man. Sometimes we see Tony Stark with fewer clothes on, too, but it doesn't impinge on his iconic status.


----------



## Scribble (Jul 8, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> Agreed. I didn't even know what an iconic _was_ until I read ENWorld for a length of time.
> 
> But yeah - I think that's the problem I have, that I couldn't put my finger on/articulate for the longest time. It was "why is artwork in the last little while so boring to me?". That's it!




I think what bored me was the fact that the art was geared more towards illustrating something as opposed to just art.

Older edition artwork, to me, seemed like a momentary pause in what I was reading to see a scene that inspired my creativity... Made me think, hrmm  who are those characters and what are they doing in this place? 

3e stuff always tended to be too specific... Oh that's redgar, and he's cleaving... something... (as they also tended to lack any kind of a background.)

Not that it was "bad" just not my style.

Maybe it's the captions that did it?


----------



## beepeearr (Jul 8, 2008)

Chalk me up as another who always thought Regdar was black (but then again, I watched scourge of worlds though), I always thought Alhandra and Kerwyn where hispanic and Nial and Hennet where asian.  When I first looked at the PHB   I thought Jozan was the only white human Iconic.


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 8, 2008)

Scribble said:


> Older edition artwork, to me, seemed like a momentary pause in what I was reading to see a scene that inspired my creativity... Made me think, hrmm  who are those characters and what are they doing in this place?




That specifically reminds me of the demi-human art in the Red Box Basic set, three adventurers pausing to sit and converse on their way to... somewhere.

One of the things I always liked about Talislanta is that it's countries, cities, and folk were most often illustrated by _scenes_ rather than portraiture, or worse, model illustration.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jul 8, 2008)

WayneLigon said:


> I wouldn't really label it 'TSR-logic'. In the 80's and 90's you had mainstream  book publishers that would regularly 'white-wash' covers that featured black characters and not include author pictures with the back-flap bio if that author was black (unless that book was slated to sell in the African-American section). (And I say specifically black rather than 'non-white' because that's usually the only point things break down; you could find a number of asian characters on book covers in the same period since that was also the big 'japan-o-phile' phase of fantasty and SF).




Sorry, I think you missed why I was saying that. TSR's leadership didn't respect their readers at all, and didn't seem to feel that expanding the audience was a valid goal, which is why I say it's TSR logic. I had forgotten about the general "white-washing", though, that is a valid point, and something which I think most people are completely unaware of.



Erik Mona said:


> And I can appreciate how some readers might not like the iconics, but I'm positive it is a minority opinion.




I think you're right in very specific sense. For the people who like the Paizo Pathfinder series, most of them also like or are neutral to the Paizo iconics. However, I think this is largely because Paizo's iconics are pretty cool, and nowhere near as dull or irritating as WotC's ones. Also, they only pop up "where they should" as it were, which is to say, in books where they're the "default" PCs. Rather than making it so the vast majority of illustrations in every single book of a game have the same couple of dozen characters in them, over and over again. Personally I find that stifles my imagination (obviously not a problem with a pre-written adventure), and generally bores me rigid. Not a single one of my players likes any of the iconics, and indeed, it was one of them who brought up that this "Badly-dressed wizard with big hair" kept appearing in all their books and it was annoying them (regarding Mialee).

Also, even though you also have a white, male, human fighter as the "first" iconic, and he is perhaps the least interesting or memorable of them, he at least has the merit of not having a ridiculous chin-beard


----------



## GreatLemur (Jul 8, 2008)

I guess I never bought enough books, because I'm still used to thinking of Regdar as ethnically ambiguous.  I don't really remember white Regdar.  But, yeah, the tendency of artists to take an ambiguous character and skew them whiter and whiter with each iteration is a familiar one, particuarly from mainstream comics.  Angel Salvadore from X-Men comes to mind.

Also, for the record, I'm entirely disgusted with the idea that I, as a white male, can only identify with other white males.



Bump2daWiza said:


> Use language that appeals to people without a college education.



Oh, wow.  That was insulting to basically everyone.


----------



## beepeearr (Jul 8, 2008)

About 3rd editions artwork, I didn't like it either, but couldn't put my finger on why at first.  It was the lack of action scenes.  It seemed like everything was either a portrait, a pose or cut outs around the character (see Lidda shooting the crossbow bolt into the ogre's head).  There was hardly any full page pictures, and when there were it was usually the heroes posed like they were about to fight, but rarely showed what they were fighting.  I think that's why a lot of people liked Eberron, lots of dynamic art, with great covers.

It might also explain why more people like the Pathfinder Iconics more than the D&D ones.  Pathfinder usually has their Iconics depicted in the midst of battle, not posing before the battle begins


----------



## pawsplay (Jul 8, 2008)

Also, Krusk looks like the guy from Sin City wearing a cheap Halloween mask.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jul 8, 2008)

pawsplay said:


> Also, Krusk looks like the guy from Sin City wearing a cheap Halloween mask.




That's very true, and also scary. Because Marv (who I presume you are referring to) kind of looked like he was wearing a halloween mask at the best of times.


----------



## Voadam (Jul 8, 2008)

Matt Black said:


> There's a black woman on Ruins of Intrigue, but I can't tell if she's meant to be a drow.




Ruins of Intrigue is an Arcana Evolved book. There are no drow in AE. She also has black hair, not drow white/silver.


----------



## lukelightning (Jul 8, 2008)

Barastrondo said:


> Last I checked, there were several white males among the iconics before you factored in Regdar.




Like Mialee.


----------



## Darrin Drader (Jul 8, 2008)

pawsplay said:


> Also, Krusk looks like the guy from Sin City wearing a cheap Halloween mask.




I always thought Krusk looked more like Ernest Borgnine, who happens to be white.


----------



## Bump2daWiza (Jul 8, 2008)

Imaro said:


> "discount on the books", (You make a choice, I gave up certain things when I was younger so I could scrape together the money to buy my books. The question is how to make this more appealing than xbox 360 or PS3 games?).




My point is if they want to reach out to blacks, rather than talk about how great they are because they fought the marketing department to keep too many white faces on the cover, it would be more productive to do something where the racial disparity is real: wealth. Everyone has a different situation. But we didn't have enough money for me to buy a 20$ book when I was growing up (I think that is how much PHB for 2E cost). I had to go to the library and take it out, until someone stole it. Eventually I did get the players handbook for Christmas. With books priced as they are now, they are out of reach for many inner city kids (where most of the non-white population is). 





Imaro said:


> Everything you list above, except using dumber language, isn't something the creative team has any control over.




Not dumber language, but lets be honest black inner city kids use different language than white suburban kids. The books as written apeal more to upper middle class whites than the former.


----------



## Obryn (Jul 8, 2008)

Although I was never particularly fond of the iconics, I think they were a good marketing & art tool.

I think it was a poor decision to get rid of them, lame or not.

-O


----------



## antion (Jul 8, 2008)

What's the representation like in Pathfinder iconics?

I won't go into most of my thoughts on the race in art argument, because it was already masterfully (and for the most part politely!) done in the other thread, but as a Amerindian/Filipino gamer I could definitely see myself buying the Pathfinder books specifically for diversity in the art.


----------



## Darrin Drader (Jul 8, 2008)

antion said:


> What's the representation like in Pathfinder iconics?




Bard - white halfling male
Cleric - Black or possibly arab female
Druid - skin color indeterminate female gnome with gree spiky hair
Fighter - White male human
Monk - black male human
Paladin - black female human
Ranger - white male dwarf
Rogue - albino female elf
Sorcerer - skin color indeterminate female elf
Wizard - white old human with long silver hair


----------



## Chainsaw (Jul 8, 2008)

I always thought the original 3.0 Player's Handbook Regdar was either black, hispanic or some mix of those and white, but I couldn't quite tell. I figured the ambiguity was an intentional effort to avoid just these sorts of issues! Ha! 

In art (and politics), I suppose people often see want they want to see.


----------



## buzz (Jul 8, 2008)

WayneLigon said:


> Census data, probably. More than 75% of the US as a whole is white. I would feel safe betting that a significantly higher percentage of gamers are white; if I had to guess, I'd say 90-95% and feel I was being generous.



I think that's tangential; it says nothing about what that market will buy. If it did, books with cheesecake drow elf women wouldn't sell, either. 

The data WotC marketing would need to produce is sales figures for various books with different covers, and be able to demonstrate that covers featuring white males consistently sold more. (Just like they were able to justify _Dragon Magic_ because products with the words "dragon" and "magic" consistently sold better.)

Thing is, I don't really buy that their data backs this up.


----------



## buzz (Jul 8, 2008)

Pinnacle said:


> She's the only black iconic, but what about Regdar, Alhandra, Hennet, and Naull?



Regdar: white (most often depicted unambiguously so, otehr than Lockwood's initial work).

Alhandra: White.

Hennet: White.

Naull: who? (Googles around) Oh, her. Does she even count? I mean, yeah, but she's not really an iconic, is she?


----------



## buzz (Jul 8, 2008)

As to the value of iconics... I don't know if there's any obvious advantage. We all certainly seem to be able to identify them, and even have strong opinions. Does that really affect my enjoyment of the game? I'm not sure, other than the shared fan experience, like talking about Meepo.

The _Pathfinder_ iconics... I dunno. I have the first PF adventure path, and I couldn't even tell you their names. To me, they're just sample PCs at the end of the books.


----------



## Cadfan (Jul 8, 2008)

The pathfinder iconics aren't really iconics.  The point of iconics is that they're generic.  They're "iconic" of what the class is generically like.  This is why we often got pictures of the iconics in hypothetical future realities- you know, "Here's Mialee as she might have looked in a war campaign.  Here's Jozan in a horror campaign."  Etc.  The pathfinder iconics are really just pcs.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 8, 2008)

WayneLigon said:


> Census data, probably. More than 75% of the US as a whole is white. I would feel safe betting that a significantly higher percentage of gamers are white; if I had to guess, I'd say 90-95% and feel I was being generous.
> 
> They can take the safe route, which is to produce a book with a white male on the cover. A certain percent of whites will look less favorably on the book because of this, as will a certain percentage of non-whites. The gamble is: which is safer in terms of sales?



The overwhelming majority of rap music -- which overwhelmingly features black performers -- is bought by white people. This is not a new phenomenon: Run DMC'S "Raising Hell" album predates 2E.

This was not a good marketing decision on TSR's part. It was an indefensibly stupid and demonstratably ineffectual marketing decision.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 8, 2008)

Cadfan said:


> The pathfinder iconics aren't really iconics.  The point of iconics is that they're generic.  They're "iconic" of what the class is generically like.



Elminster is iconic. Drizzt is iconic. Tasslehoff is iconic. Raistlin is iconic. Mordenkainen is iconic.

"Iconic" does not mean generic.

I agree that WotC really wanted "generics," and they got them, which was bad news when they decided they wanted to do novels starring them. Even in house, the misused terminology tripped them up.

Personally, I like the 1E iconics (and Pathfinder iconics, although their gnome concerns me somewhat) a lot more than the 3E generics.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jul 8, 2008)

WayneLigon said:


> Census data, probably. More than 75% of the US as a whole is white. I would feel safe betting that a significantly higher percentage of gamers are white; if I had to guess, I'd say 90-95% and feel I was being generous.
> 
> They can take the safe route, which is to produce a book with a white male on the cover. A certain percent of whites will look less favorably on the book because of this, as will a certain percentage of non-whites. The gamble is: which is safer in terms of sales?




Well, the problem with this thread is that a lot of this topic was already covered when Lockwood mentioned something a week or three ago.

And, lets be honest, historically speaking there probably weren't a lot of "black knights". No one is writing about Rokugan's books not featuring enough racial diversity either.

So yeah, "put a white guy on the cover" is silly, but at the same time "because people can identify with it" doesn't just mean "because they're white".

I don't think D&D should be limited to replicating Earth's racial patterns, but that doesn't mean different ethnicities just appear togethor in a middle age setting either.


----------



## buzz (Jul 8, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:


> I don't think D&D should be limited to replicating Earth's racial patterns, but that doesn't mean different ethnicities just appear togethor in a middle age setting either.



D&D is not a middle age setting. D&D is D&D. If people can swallow elves and fire-breathing dragons easier than they can a racially diverse fantasy world, there is something fundamentally wrong.

(And it's not like medieval Europe was all blonde and blue-eyed, either. Moorish Spain, anyone?)


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 8, 2008)

buzz said:


> D&D is not a middle age setting. D&D is D&D. If people can swallow elves and fire-breathing dragons easier than they can a racially diverse fantasy world, there is something fundamentally wrong.
> 
> (And it's not like medieval Europe was all blonde and blue-eyed, either. Moorish Spain, anyone?)



This is especially true given what TSR was publishing in this period. Both the Forgotten Realms and Mystara, for instance, are explicitly multi-racial settings.

Al-Qadim, Planescape and Dark Sun have no reason to feature WASPs on the cover, either.


----------



## CountPopeula (Jul 8, 2008)

I have an opinion on the iconics in general. I don't care about them. This is a bad thing if you're a publisher. You know who I care about? Elminster, Drizzt, Alias and Dragonbait, Tenser, Bigby, Mordenkainen, Tasha, and so on.

If you want to have iconic characters in your product's artwork, give people a reason to care about them beyond "there's that hot barbarian chick again." Make them important to the game. Mialee was supposed to be an iconic wizard, so why was there never a spell called "Mialee's Inspiration" or some such. Why wasn't one of the tactical feats called "Redgar's Gambit?" Why were supposed to care about these characters? the mini-replays? Maybe if the characters were stars of a replay series that was printed every month in Dragon, then i would start to care about them.

But seeing the same characters again and again doesn't make me feel any particular fondness for them. Of course, this can be a double-edged sword, too... people hate Drizzt as much as they love him.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 8, 2008)

CountPopeula said:


> Mialee was supposed to be an iconic wizard, so why was there never a spell called "Mialee's Inspiration" or some such.



There was, but the material component consisted of an outfit made up entirely of pockets, and they realized that was too silly to demand of anyone.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 8, 2008)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> the material component consisted of an outfit



 I wish such a spell existed in the real world.

"_I cast PAR-TAY!_", -- N


----------



## beepeearr (Jul 8, 2008)

> Regdar: white (most often depicted unambiguously so, otehr than Lockwood's initial work).




I have no clue, the PHB and scourge of worlds both point to black or at least bi racial, but the original 3e Stand up was white.   



> Alhandra: White.









Maybe, but I still think she looks more hispanic then white.



> Hennet: White.









White, really?  



> Naull: who? (Googles around) Oh, her. Does she even count? I mean, yeah, but she's not really an iconic, is she?









Also not white, and yes she was technically an Iconic


----------



## Barastrondo (Jul 8, 2008)

buzz said:


> D&D is not a middle age setting. D&D is D&D.




Yeah, a genuine middle ages setting wouldn't have all of this "upward mobility" nonsense where a humble peasant can, a few hundred thousand experience points later, become some sort of cross between landed gentry, culture hero and rock star. The very level system that proclaims that anybody can become a world-shaker with enough experience points kind of gives the lie to a genuine Middle Ages Europe dynamic. It's _very_ modern First World in nature.

The whole wish-fulfillment factor of starting out a peasant and ending up a warrior-king is much more fairy tale than historical fantasy. And fairy tales are pretty dang universal.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 8, 2008)

For me, the real problem with the iconics was that they were, frankly, kinda lame. Almost none of them had any personality and attitude that made them interesting or distinctive.

Why was Regdar the default fighter? Well his armor and equipment was at least interesting to draw. Tordek was just an uninteresting character in the extreme.

Now in the PSAs, he's fantastic (see: D&D Debates: Elves Versus Dwarves).

Oh, and In Before the Lock! 

--Steve


----------



## I'm A Banana (Jul 8, 2008)

> Almost none of them had any personality and attitude that made them interesting or distinctive.




*sigh*

THAT'S THE FRIGGIN POINT, SON!


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Jul 9, 2008)

How is racism involving Monte still coming up?  It has NOTHING TO DO with racism.

I refer again to my comment of "Some people have too much free time on their hands."

Marketing tried to be snide pricks towards the designers and artists.  The artists decided to be snide pricks back.  _That's how jobs work_.


----------



## CountPopeula (Jul 9, 2008)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> *sigh*
> 
> THAT'S THE FRIGGIN POINT, SON!




Then the idea of iconic characters is a poor idea. "Here are some bland, generic characters. You'll be seeing them all the time, but they'll never be doing anything interesting."

There's a reason Star Trek was about Captain Kirk and Spock and Dr McCoy et al. and not about Ensign Ricky. Star Wars is about Luke and Han and Leia and Lando, not Bantha Handler B. So why should the iconic characters in D&D be bland, uninteresting background characters? Why not use the characters people actually care about to sell products?


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jul 9, 2008)

Pinnacle said:


> She's the only black iconic, but what about Regdar, Alhandra, Hennet, and Naull?
> Jozan's the only white human, except maybe Kerwyn (I can't tell with him).



Regdar was designed as mixed-race by Todd Lockwood but more often than not painted as white by other artists.

Alhandra is white in the _Player's Handbook_ - she might look Spanish or Italian with her dark eyes and hair, but she's still entirely European. Hennet is white in the _Player's Handbook_ - the novel cover upthread makes him look pretty different from his original portrayal, and other artwork hews closer to the original. Naull has some Asian features, but she has extremely pale skin. Kerwyn, again, looks Mediterranean French or Italian, but still completely European.

You just don't see people looking like this in most _D&D_ products, and I think that's a shame:





(Vietnamese)





(Swahili)





(Maya)





(Inuit)





(Austronesian)


----------



## beepeearr (Jul 9, 2008)

This is the picture from the PHB, if you'll look closely at the eyes and face you can tell it's the same picture as from the novel cover, but with the shading a bit lighter.  And by the way neither Italians or Spanish started off with dark hair and darker complexion, it wasn't until after the Moors (arabic) invaded southern Europe and occupied and interbred with the natives that they took on those features.  Before that they were pale haired and mostly fair skinned.  And hispanics by the way are nothing more then Native American (be it meso, or south american) mixed with european (ie spanish) stock in the first place.  So either way, regardless of whether they were designed to look Hispanic or Mediteranean they wouldn't be entirely european in either case.  

And by the way Asians can have pale skin, it doesn't make them white.  I think they made her pale because of the whole pierced goth look she had going on, I doubt it was to make her look more white.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jul 9, 2008)

beepeearr said:


> This is the picture from the PHB, if you'll look closely at the eyes and face you can tell it's the same picture as from the novel cover, but with the shading a bit lighter.



The face of Hennet on the novel cover has been *redrawn*. In the _Player's Handbook_ he's looking at the viewer, on the novel he's looking at the magic in his hand, and his face has been redrawn to darken his skin and make him look more Asian.

In the original, he doesn't look particularly anything, but his skin is quite light.

I'm aware of the historical reasons why various southern European cultures look darker than northern Europeans, but the point is the impression of the modern viewer, and to a *modern* viewer, Italians/Spanish/Mediterranean French are known for dark hair and eyes - and they're still considered "white" or "European" in ethnicity.

When people say they'd like to see more non-white people in _D&D_ illustrations, they don't just mean "non-Nordic". They mean "people that don't look like white Americans/Britons/Australians/whatever", and white Westerners are descended from people all over Europe - Scandinavia, Germany, the Mediterranean, the British Isles.


----------



## MrApothecary (Jul 9, 2008)

Charwoman Gene said:


> I think you ahve a seriously deluded idea of the thoughts of most gamers. It would have seriously hurt sales. Tordek wouldn't have.




Really, you think so? Really, the most they'd do is ignore her like some people ignore Regdar and look at the other iconics. The vast majority wouldn't go "Oh, my God! This black chick appears with some frequency! I won't be playing this game anymore." Normal people don't think like that.

No, Tordek wouldn't have. But he'd probably have the loyal fanbase like us grumbling "stereotypical dwarf fighters everywhere." While Ember most certainly wouldn't have people complaining about the frequent use of black woman monks, due to the fact that there is nothing frequent about them.


----------



## beepeearr (Jul 9, 2008)

Hennet is asian, here's another look






The PHB picture just has the shading washed out.  

Most hispanics I know who play D&D where thrilled by Alhandra and Kerwyn, they didn't see them as being europeans, but as Hispanics.  You say you want racial diversity in the art, but then say it isn't diverse enough, because the character still appears to of european descent.  All true hispanics are of european descent, those who are not, are not hispanic, but from Native american stock instead.  And there are a lot more Hispanics who play D&D then Mayans by the way.


----------



## Helfdan (Jul 9, 2008)

It seems to me that WotC tried to get people to care about the characters, thus the novels and the CGI movie (which was actually pretty good, a lot of fun to watch all possible endings).  They were obviously not as successful at this as they would have liked... probably because the setting was so vague.  The only thing that connected the stories was the presence of the characters, who would cameo in the other iconics' novels.  

Having said that, I have to say I kinda liked Regdar, meaning how he was portrayed in the novels and movie -- whatever his true ethnicity may be


----------



## roguerouge (Jul 9, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> Sure, Seoni's got a nice rack, but who are these other schmoes? For me, at least, not only are the iconics completely irrelevant, it's getting to the point that it could be seen that we're getting them shoved down our throats (the aforementioned prominent ruining of covers along with two wasted pages of - again, irrelevant - stats of these nobodies in the book itself).




Yeah, because nobody on the Paizo forums went bananas over Seelah, the black female paladin with the tear-inducing backstory. And the GNOME druid? Completely not playing to the third edition crowd.


----------



## roguerouge (Jul 9, 2008)

Ruin Explorer said:


> Also, even though you also have a white, male, human fighter as the "first" iconic, and he is perhaps the least interesting or memorable of them, he at least has the merit of not having a ridiculous chin-beard




Not according to a number of women on Paizo's boards. They think he's hot, with those doe eyes and manly scars. 

Oh, how I hates him!


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jul 9, 2008)

beepeearr said:


> The PHB picture just has the shading washed out.



He doesn't look Asian in the _Player's Handbook_, for whatever reason. Maybe that's why they had his face redrawn for the novel cover! But the fact remains.



> Most hispanics I know who play D&D where thrilled by Alhandra and Kerwyn, they didn't see them as being europeans, but as Hispanics.



That's great, but, you know, most Hispanic people I've ever met or seen on TV were a lot browner-skinned than the could-easily-pass-for-Spanish-or-Italian iconics. So, I will definitely concede that you can read Alhandra and Kerwyn as Hispanic, but you can also read them as just European, and I don't think the ambiguity is really a good sign.

Hell, we're arguing about how to interpret the illustrations - how could it *not* be better to have unambiguously non-Caucasian characters in the artwork? If Hennet in the _Player's Handbook_ looked like the novel cover, or the sketch you posted there, instead of the *whitewashed* version actually printed, I think everyone* would be a lot happier.

Ember is unambiguous: no-one argues about her ethnicity. I'm just saying I'd like to have seen these arguably Asian and Hispanic iconic characters painted as *obviously* Asian or Hispanic. That's all.

* Except racists and other jerks who don't want Asian-looking people in their _D&D_ books.


----------



## Ahglock (Jul 9, 2008)

MrApothecary said:


> What this is, however, is Cook explaining that the marketing team forced the creative team to make the lead iconic a white male human, because they have this stupid idea that white males will be appealed by him more. Which seems silly to me, this _is_ a roleplaying game.




It's funny to me, but to me I read the creative team tried to go around the marketing team and do marketing the creative team way.  And then the marketing team took back what was there job.  

   Art and covers are there to grab the attention of the guy walking by.  It is mainly a marketing tool.


----------



## Voadam (Jul 9, 2008)

beepeearr said:


> Hennet is asian, here's another look
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Who is Kerwyn?


----------



## roguerouge (Jul 9, 2008)

beepeearr said:


> Most hispanics I know who play D&D where thrilled by Alhandra and Kerwyn, they didn't see them as being europeans, but as Hispanics.  You say you want racial diversity in the art, but then say it isn't diverse enough, because the character still appears to of european descent.  All true hispanics are of european descent, those who are not, are not hispanic, but from Native american stock instead.  And there are a lot more Hispanics who play D&D then Mayans by the way.




I am a bad person. I never even considered that prospect for Kerwyn and Alhandra. Good show, person with vaguely naughty screen name!


----------



## beepeearr (Jul 9, 2008)

Human Rogue Iconic

Not Naughty, just my initials sounded out, B bee, P pee, R arr.


----------



## InVinoVeritas (Jul 9, 2008)

mhacdebhandia said:


> That's great, but, you know, most Hispanic people I've ever met or seen on TV were a lot browner-skinned than the could-easily-pass-for-Spanish-or-Italian iconics. So, I will definitely concede that you can read Alhandra and Kerwyn as Hispanic, but you can also read them as just European, and I don't think the ambiguity is really a good sign.
> 
> Hell, we're arguing about how to interpret the illustrations - how could it *not* be better to have unambiguously non-Caucasian characters in the artwork? If Hennet in the _Player's Handbook_ looked like the novel cover, or the sketch you posted there, instead of the *whitewashed* version actually printed, I think everyone would be a lot happier.
> 
> Ember is unambiguous: no-one argues about her ethnicity. I'm just saying I'd like to have seen these arguably Asian and Hispanic iconic characters painted as *obviously* Asian or Hispanic. That's all.




I greatly prefer the ambiguous look, myself. After all, this is a fantasy world. If I recognize someone as being distinctly from one real-world culture or another, it kind of breaks my suspension of disbelief. 

By the way, the Pathfinder iconics have names and backstories? I had no idea. Where could I find them? I've been searching the Paizo site...


----------



## Silverblade The Ench (Jul 9, 2008)

beepeearr said:


> And by the way neither Italians or Spanish started off with dark hair and darker complexion, it wasn't until after the Moors (arabic) invaded southern Europe and occupied and interbred with the natives that they took on those features.  Before that they were pale haired and mostly fair skinned.  And hispanics by the way are nothing more then Native American (be it meso, or south american) mixed with european (ie spanish) stock in the first place. .





Interestingly enough, in the Scots and Welsh Celts, there's a long history of "black Celts", folk with a very swarthy complexion, compared to the normal very pale Celtic skin. 
Alas that's been taken up by some folks claiming black African's ruled a mythic country here...oh boy ... Facts are more likey to be Phoencian and Greek traders and thier slaves as the root of that difference.

Likewise, the Anui of Japan are another ethnic oddity.

Races in fantasy worlds could have all kinds of natural or magical variations and adaptations.
-BLue-tinged humans who have copper for blood (or green if you like Vulcans ) 
-Smooth skin, they don't sweat (useful adaptation for Athas perhaps).
And so on. Colour is just one of the many variables.

Also, having race being an issue _is _logical. Not necessarily in the xenophobic ways of our world, but in taboos and abilities, for example: 
the Derial people have unusually large blue irises, and are the only folk who have the ability to be sorcerors.
or, by Imperial proscription, only the people of the island of Valmer maybe priests of the fire god, for their skin is black and have hair like copper, which pleases the god (well, pleases the Imperial culture's philosophy, in reality).

er, derail off


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jul 9, 2008)

InVinoVeritas said:


> I greatly prefer the ambiguous look, myself. After all, this is a fantasy world. If I recognize someone as being distinctly from one real-world culture or another, it kind of breaks my suspension of disbelief.



I didn't say anything about a real-world culture. Ember is an African-looking woman wearing Chinese-inspired clothing. There's no real-world culture there, any more than there would be if you saw a Vietnamese-looking man wearing European-style boiled leather armour.


----------



## roguerouge (Jul 9, 2008)

InVinoVeritas said:


> I greatly prefer the ambiguous look, myself. After all, this is a fantasy world. If I recognize someone as being distinctly from one real-world culture or another, it kind of breaks my suspension of disbelief.
> 
> By the way, the Pathfinder iconics have names and backstories? I had no idea. Where could I find them? I've been searching the Paizo site...




Seelah's here, in the blog, about halfway down under "Meet the Iconics," which is an ongoing blog feature: http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/2007/december


----------



## Staffan (Jul 9, 2008)

Erik Mona said:


> When all is said and done, the lack of "iconic" characters is the greatest 4e mystery to me.
> 
> Given how helpful they are to art orders and branding and how easy it is to license and merchandise their images, their absence is an enigma.
> 
> Someone must have put their foot down on this matter, and that person made the wrong call.



I'm pretty sure I saw someone in charge (can't recall who or where) say that it was at least partially listening to the artists, who said they were getting sick of drawing Mialee, Tordek, and Lidda.


----------



## Set (Jul 9, 2008)

Staffan said:


> I'm pretty sure I saw someone in charge (can't recall who or where) say that it was at least partially listening to the artists, who said they were getting sick of drawing Mialee, Tordek, and Lidda.




And from my side of the page, I'm pretty sick of seeing Mialee and Lidda in particular, especially since Naull and Kerwyn are much cooler looking.  (I liked the elven druid, 'though, so I'm not a complete speciest...)


----------



## Pinnacle (Jul 10, 2008)

mhacdebhandia said:


> He doesn't look Asian in the _Player's Handbook_, for whatever reason. Maybe that's why they had his face redrawn for the novel cover! But the fact remains.



This is the first time I've ever seen that cover, and I always knew he was Asian.  *Shrugs*
(Except for one picture in _Complete Mage_, I believe, in which he is white with blond hair and blue eyes--took me a while to realize it was even supposed to be him!  And that picture is so good except for that, too...)
If you look closely at the picture in the PHB, though, you might see the reason for the weird coloring.  It's an attempt to make it look like the glowing green energy in his hand is lighting up his face (and shoulder).



Set said:


> And from my side of the page, I'm pretty sick of seeing Mialee and Lidda in particular, especially since Naull and Kerwyn are much cooler looking.  (I liked the elven druid, 'though, so I'm not a complete speciest...)



She's only half-elf though.


----------



## wayne62682 (Jul 10, 2008)

Leatherhead said:


> Samus wore a bikini in her first game, take that as you will.




True, but the original manual referred to Samus Aran as "he", and it was only as a reward for completing the game quickly (or, for us cheaters, using the JUSTIN BAILEY password) that you found out the truth.

This clearly means they should have had a white "male" bishonen as the main character (or keep "him" helmed at all times), and reveal later on that "he" was really a woman.


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Jul 10, 2008)

wayne62682 said:


> bishonen




I'm not sure how being completely encased in a power suit with no skin whatsoever showing makes something "bishonen."


----------



## buzz (Jul 10, 2008)

beepeearr said:


> Maybe, but I still think she looks more hispanic then white.



She never came off that way to me, especially in other depictions.



beepeearr said:


> White, really?



I never thought Hennet was Asian. Heck, he looks like Heath Ledger to me.  Any tan he may have, or Asian features, certainly get whitewashed (no pun intended) in other depictions.


----------



## Voadam (Jul 10, 2008)

beepeearr said:


> Human Rogue Iconic




Thanks, it hit me later offline, "its probably that human rogue," one of the many iconics whose name I don't know or remember.

Tordek, Regdar, Lidda, Mialee, Hennet, Ember, Krusk, Vadania, Jozan, and Alhandra, that about taps me out. I know there's a gnome named Gimble but I'm shaky on whether he's the bard or the goggle wearing illusionist (though I think probably the bard).

I think I got all the PH ones attached to the class descriptions except that elven ranger guy with the leaf armor.


----------



## wayne62682 (Jul 10, 2008)

ProfessorCirno said:


> I'm not sure how being completely encased in a power suit with no skin whatsoever showing makes something "bishonen."




I meant for D&D (in place of Regdar), not Metroid ;-)  The implication was that while Samus Aran is a girl, the original Metroid acted like she was male until you got the "bonus" ending.  D&D therefore, instead of this 'white bread' stuff, should have had a bishonen-esque male Fighter, and later "drop the bomb" that "he" is really a woman.



Voadam said:


> I know there's a gnome named Gimble but I'm shaky on whether he's the bard or the goggle wearing illusionist (though I think probably the bard).




Gimble is the bard.  Nebin is the illusionist.



> I think I got all the PH ones attached to the class descriptions except that elven ranger guy with the leaf armor.




That would be Soveliss.


----------



## Staffan (Jul 10, 2008)

Voadam said:


> Tordek, Regdar, Lidda, Mialee, Hennet, Ember, Krusk, Vadania, Jozan, and Alhandra, that about taps me out. I know there's a gnome named Gimble but I'm shaky on whether he's the bard or the goggle wearing illusionist (though I think probably the bard).



There's also Erbek, the dwarf "other cleric". Erbek doesn't get any love at all.

I think they first made up one "iconic" for each class. Then they realized they didn't have a gnome iconic, and added Nebbin the Illusionist. Then they doubled up on the "main four" classes, with Regdar the other fighter, Kerwyn the other rogue, Erbek the other cleric, and that asian chick who's the other wizard - now each of the main four has one human and one non-human. 3.5 added Gimble the bard.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jul 10, 2008)

Once again, as a non-video game console gamer, I feel left out... What was Metroid again?


----------



## DandD (Jul 10, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Once again, as a non-video game console gamer, I feel left out... What was Metroid again?



Something about space squids that eat energy. And a space bounty hunter who was all cool and stuff... And then, it turns out, the space bounty hunter is a space girl. 

Who was trained by space birds to fight crab-like space pirates, and giant space brains in a jar. There were other space monsters. 

Space.


----------



## Dragonbait (Jul 10, 2008)

DandD said:


> Something about space squids that eat energy. And a space bounty hunter who was all cool and stuff... And then, it turns out, the space bounty hunter is a space girl.
> 
> Who was trained by space birds to fight crab-like space pirates, and giant space brains in a jar. There were other space monsters.
> 
> Space.




This post needs more space references.


----------



## el-remmen (Jul 10, 2008)

beepeearr said:


> And hispanics by the way are nothing more then Native American (be it meso, or south american) mixed with european (ie spanish) stock in the first place.





Unless they are like many Carribean "hispanics" and actually have more African heritage than indigenous.

For example, see the three attached pictures of Puerto Ricans and see our range.


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 10, 2008)

DandD said:


> Something about space squids that eat energy.



More of fanged space jellyfish that eat life force. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metroid_(series)


----------



## Staffan (Jul 10, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Once again, as a non-video game console gamer, I feel left out... What was Metroid again?



Metroid was one of the best adventure/shooter games on the NES console (80s). You played a space bounty hunter named Samus Aran, and Samus' job in this particular case was to stop the Space Pirates of Zebes, by killing their boss, the Mother Brain. In order to do this, you had to run around in the Zebes underground and pick up various powerups, as well as kill two mini-bosses. The game is known for having many "secrets", and for (unlike many shooters) your character being able to go back and forth instead of just endlessly moving forward (like in Kid Icarus, which was released at around the same time).

After you completed the game, you got a scene of Samus standing on the planet's surface, and taking off *her* helmet. Had you completed the game fast enough, she would take off her whole power suit, and wave at you wearing only a one-piece swimsuit or even a bikini (if you were *really* fast). Then the game started over from the beginning, although if you had completed it quickly she'd still be out of her suit and wearing the one-piece.

There were sequels to the game on the Super NES, the GameCube, and most recently the Wii (skipping the Nintendo 64).


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 10, 2008)

wayne62682 said:


> Gimble is the bard.  Nebin is the illusionist.




You assume they're two different gnomes.

_MWAH HA HA HA HA!_


----------



## Set (Jul 10, 2008)

Staffan said:


> There's also Erbek, the dwarf "other cleric". Erbek doesn't get any love at all.
> 
> I think they first made up one "iconic" for each class. Then they realized they didn't have a gnome iconic, and added Nebbin the Illusionist. Then they doubled up on the "main four" classes, with Regdar the other fighter, Kerwyn the other rogue, Erbek the other cleric, and *that asian chick who's the other wizard* - now each of the main four has one human and one non-human. 3.5 added Gimble the bard.




Naull. She's an Evoker. And, to my eyes, kinda Mayan-looking.

Her, Kerwyn, Eberk and Tordek are that other Iconic 'core four' party, that doesn't get blown up or dismembered or eaten by beasties all the time. Obviously, they are much more competent than the Regdar, Jozan, Lidda, Mialee group.



Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> You assume they're two different gnomes.
> 
> _MWAH HA HA HA HA!_




There is only one Gnome, and he has many names...

[whistling music in the background]


----------



## DandD (Jul 10, 2008)

frankthedm said:


> More of fanged space jellyfish that eat life force.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metroid_(series)



They can also transform into greater space monsters, and then shoot space fire out from their mouth. 

I think Samus Aran was the first video-game girl ever, but I could be wrong. 

Space.


----------



## Staffan (Jul 10, 2008)

DandD said:


> I think Samus Aran was the first video-game girl ever, but I could be wrong.



Ms. Pacman, 1981.
Others who beat Samus Aran to it were Thyra the Valkyrie from Gauntlet (1985) and Nana from Ice Climber (1985), but neither were the sole character in the game (Thyra competed with Thor the Warrior, Merlin the Wizard, and Questor the Elf, and Nana was the 2nd-player character while the 1st-player character was Popo).


----------



## ShinHakkaider (Jul 11, 2008)

el-remmen said:


> Unless they are like many Carribean "hispanics" and actually have more African heritage than indigenous.




Yes, like Dominicans as well who run the gambit from being Euro-looking to looking as dark as me.


----------



## ShinHakkaider (Jul 11, 2008)

Triple post


----------



## ShinHakkaider (Jul 11, 2008)

Double post.


----------



## Mathew_Freeman (Jul 11, 2008)

Staffan said:


> There's also Erbek, the dwarf "other cleric". Erbek doesn't get any love at all.
> 
> I think they first made up one "iconic" for each class. Then they realized they didn't have a gnome iconic, and added Nebbin the Illusionist. Then they doubled up on the "main four" classes, with Regdar the other fighter, Kerwyn the other rogue, Erbek the other cleric, and that asian chick who's the other wizard - now each of the main four has one human and one non-human. 3.5 added Gimble the bard.




It's mildly hilarious that in a thread about criticising the WotC marketing department for putting Redgar on the cover, you think it's appropriate to refer to a female character as "That Asian chick". Especially since I'm sure you could have found out her name with google or Wikipedia in less than a minute.

Double standards much?


----------



## Staffan (Jul 12, 2008)

Tallarn said:


> It's mildly hilarious that in a thread about criticising the WotC marketing department for putting Redgar on the cover, you think it's appropriate to refer to a female character as "That Asian chick". Especially since I'm sure you could have found out her name with google or Wikipedia in less than a minute.
> 
> Double standards much?



I don't have a horse in this race, and didn't feel like spending the time to look it up. If that upsets you, too bad.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 12, 2008)

A summery of what I've learned from this thread:
 Regdar dies a lot because the art dept. resents him.
 Regdar could be viewed as a male of almost any race.
 Therefore, the WotC art dept. resents men of all races equally.

Cheers, -- N


----------

