| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Tamsar
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
141 Posts |
 Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 23:48:39
|
quote:
Solars just for their sheer rarity, majesty, and power. I don't think I have ever seen solar in a forgotten realms Novel...
Al Dimeneira was a Solar in The Crystal Shard, at the very beginning he throws the shard across the planes to land in Icewind Dale.
One of the first monster I think of is a carrion crawler, up there with the trusty old Rust monster at least. |
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light |
 |
|
|
Kiaransalyn
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
762 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jun 2012 : 22:06:22
|
Has to be dragon really, since it is in the name.
Actually, that said 'Dungeons and Beholders' has a certain, slightly voyeuristic S&M charm. |
Death is Life
Love is Hate
Revenge is Forgiveness
Ken: You from the States?
Jimmy: Yeah. But don't hold it against me.
Ken: I'll try not to... Just try not to say anything too loud or crass. |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 02:57:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
There is an old piece of art that shows a party opening a chest, with a Dragon rearing up behind them, unseen.
THAT is iconic D&D.
A Dungeon, and a Dragon.
Aye.
Methinks a lot of people are misunderstanding what the word "iconic" means.
It does not mean "original", "distinctive", "unique", "most common or frequently encountered", "popular", or "my personal preference".
It means "related to the image of", or "representative of".
What is iconic of "D&D"™ is the image that comes to mind when you read or hear of that abbreviation.
When I read "Dungeons", I don't think skyscraper. I think of a dark, dank, basement to a castle or fortress. I think of skeletons, and bugs, and things that go bump in the night.
And when I read "Dragons", I don't think beholder or drow or rust monster. I think of giant, scaly, yuck-stuff-breathing reptiles. I think of dragons. Um . . . duh?! 
(I find the thought process whereby someone reads or hears "D&D" or "Dungeons & Dragons" and immediately thinks of anything other than dragons quite odd. Clearly, people's personal histories and biases are kicking in, here, big time, in order to detour their minds down less-than-logical alternate paths. Rorsach ink blots come to mind. I am reminded of that joke, "If you hear hooves, don't think 'unicorns'." If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably ain't a kitty-cat. If CSIs roll up on a scene, and see a dead body in the middle of the street, with a couple of holes in its head, and spent bullet casings over by the curb, the logical working assumption would not be alien abduction and anal probes.)
Color me simple. Call me unimaginative and pedestrian.
But specifically, I think of a great red dragon, Larry Elmore-style:
<1>
<2>
<3>
<4>
<5>
<6>
Now, I fully realize that that last image could just as easily be a pic of Smaug enroute to flame another town. It doesn't necessarily scream "D&D". So a red dragon certainly is not distinctive, or original.
But it is absolutely the image, or icon, that comes to my mind when I encounter "D&D".
Perhaps I am approaching this from the wrong direction. I am thinking of the monster that comes to mind when I hear "D&D". But maybe I should be thinking of which monster, when seen or imagined, immediately makes me think of "D&D".
When I see any of those Elmore reds, I think "D&D".
When I see a drow, I first think "RAS"--not "D&D".
When I see a beholder or rust monster, I think "obscure monster from the worlds of D&D". Neither creature is representative, or iconic, of the worlds or the system to me.
It's fascinating to me how subjective and arbitrary this all is. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
Edited by - BEAST on 26 Jun 2012 03:17:49 |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4253 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 03:52:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
<1>
<2>
<3>
<4>
<5>
<6>
Thanks for the trip down Elmore Lane Beast!
I think the lass that just killed the babies is about to have a very bad day! |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 14:05:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
There is an old piece of art that shows a party opening a chest, with a Dragon rearing up behind them, unseen.
THAT is iconic D&D.
A Dungeon, and a Dragon.
Aye.
Methinks a lot of people are misunderstanding what the word "iconic" means.
It does not mean "original", "distinctive", "unique", "most common or frequently encountered", "popular", or "my personal preference".
It means "related to the image of", or "representative of".
What is iconic of "D&D"™ is the image that comes to mind when you read or hear of that abbreviation.
When I read "Dungeons", I don't think skyscraper. I think of a dark, dank, basement to a castle or fortress. I think of skeletons, and bugs, and things that go bump in the night.
And when I read "Dragons", I don't think beholder or drow or rust monster. I think of giant, scaly, yuck-stuff-breathing reptiles. I think of dragons. Um . . . duh?!
(I find the thought process whereby someone reads or hears "D&D" or "Dungeons & Dragons" and immediately thinks of anything other than dragons quite odd. Clearly, people's personal histories and biases are kicking in, here, big time, in order to detour their minds down less-than-logical alternate paths. Rorsach ink blots come to mind. I am reminded of that joke, "If you hear hooves, don't think 'unicorns'." If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably ain't a kitty-cat. If CSIs roll up on a scene, and see a dead body in the middle of the street, with a couple of holes in its head, and spent bullet casings over by the curb, the logical working assumption would not be alien abduction and anal probes.)
Color me simple. Call me unimaginative and pedestrian.
But specifically, I think of a great red dragon, Larry Elmore-style:
<1>
<2>
<3>
<4>
<5>
<6>
Now, I fully realize that that last image could just as easily be a pic of Smaug enroute to flame another town. It doesn't necessarily scream "D&D". So a red dragon certainly is not distinctive, or original.
But it is absolutely the image, or icon, that comes to my mind when I encounter "D&D".
Perhaps I am approaching this from the wrong direction. I am thinking of the monster that comes to mind when I hear "D&D". But maybe I should be thinking of which monster, when seen or imagined, immediately makes me think of "D&D".
When I see any of those Elmore reds, I think "D&D".
When I see a drow, I first think "RAS"--not "D&D".
When I see a beholder or rust monster, I think "obscure monster from the worlds of D&D". Neither creature is representative, or iconic, of the worlds or the system to me.
It's fascinating to me how subjective and arbitrary this all is.
Dungeons and Dragons is the name of a game and what people perceive as an iconic monster for that game depends on how they play it and what they encounter. This shouldn't be surprising but MOST PC's don't run around all day slaying dragons. |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 22:36:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
Dungeons and Dragons is the name of a game and what people perceive as an iconic monster for that game depends on how they play it and what they encounter. This shouldn't be surprising[...].
You wrote "what people perceive" and "what they encounter". That right there goes to show that you, and others, are approaching this from an insular, personal, narrow perspective. You're taking your personal game sessions and casting them as representative or iconic for the entire game system as a whole. That's entirely subjective and arbitrary.
Now, sure, you can certainly take the D&D rules and adapt them for your local situation. Of course, you can--it's often recommended and encouraged!
But you should still recognize that that's what you're doing. You're not playing it literally from the rulebooks, but rather, the way you prefer to. So whatever phenomena you encounter in your games can hardly be said to be iconic or representative of "the" game, but rather, are only iconic or representative of "your" game sessions/style/etc.
I'm not hatin'. I'm not discriminatin'. And I'm not blamin'.
I'm just 'splainin' and elaboratin'. 
I try not to think that way (projecting my narrow personal preferences as the mega-view of the entire system), or to approach it that way, or indulge or dignify that way of thinking, whenever I catch myself doing it. I question my hunches and first impressions, and ask myself whether they make sense.
It surprises me that so many here haven't done that, themselves. They've read "D&D" and thought "D&B". No matter what you say, if you stop and think about it, that is surprising.
I don't play the game. So I don't have past gaming session encounters to lead me to form that kind of a bias.
And I don't even know if I have a personal favorite monster. I like a whole lot of them.
And while I love RAS's books, and particularly his dwarf characters, I don't for a second think that his fiction is iconic or representative of all of D&D. His stories only represent those parts of D&D that he wishes to set to narrative, and in the particularly modified manner that he likes to use. So I don't think that the D&D monsters which I, personally, encounter most often (the ones featured in his stories), are iconic or representative of all D&D, either.
I'm trying to get at something deeper than any of that.
quote:
[...] MOST PC's don't run around all day slaying dragons.
Well, I would hope that most D&D PCs don't go around slaying anything "all day". There ought to be more to your games than just whacking stuff. 
For example, if your DM is doing his/her job right, then you should be taking lots of rest breaks during your adventures for meals, drinks, and tending to wounds/ailments. So because you should be dealing with those sorts of things every day, does that somehow mean that bread, water, bandages, and bedrolls ought somehow to be seen as iconic of D&D?
Here, you seem to use the infrequency of battling reds as a rationale for not considering them as iconic of D&D. Well, have you considered that the 1E Monster Manual described red dragons and illithids as "rare", while describing beholders as "very rare"? Using your rationale, then wouldn't the infrequency of battling beholders bar them to an even greater degree from being rightfully deemed the iconic monster of D&D? So why did you choose beholders as the iconic monster of the game, then?
I notice that you mentioned illithids earlier in this scroll, before you chose beholders. Now, again, if the rarity of red dragons precludes them from being properly considered iconic of the game, then what have you to say about the fact that the 1E MM also described mindflayers as "rare": the exact same frequency as red dragons? Shouldn't that also bar illithids from being considered iconic, using your logic?
(I don't know how to determine the frequency or rarity of monsters in any of the other editions.)
Your choice doesn't seem to make sense, given your avowed logic. If rarity bars dragons, then it should likewise bar illithids, and it should certainly bar beholders most of all.
I say again: I don't think that the rarity or frequency of a monster should lead it to being deemed iconic of the game.
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
Methinks a lot of people are misunderstanding what the word "iconic" means.
It does not mean "original", "distinctive", "unique", "most common or frequently encountered", "popular", or "my personal preference".
It doesn't mean common. So just because red dragons aren't common in D&D, doesn't mean that they shouldn't be considered iconic or representative.
Nor does it mean unique. So just because red dragons aren't unique as parts of D&D versus the rest of all fantasy settings/systems, doesn't mean that they shouldn't be considered iconic or representative, either.
Common or unique really have little to do with it.
That brings up another point. People in this scroll seem to use wildly differing standards or frames of reference for determining the iconic monster. Some people go with unique, while others go with common. Do you realize that those are completely contradictory and diametrically opposed definitions for the very same word ("iconic")? And you say that this shouldn't be surprising?! 
I'll also point out that earlier in this scroll you seemed to dismiss dragons from consideration as iconic because you didn't think they were "special" or rare enough, but rather, are seen in almost all fantasy settings. But despite that alleged ubiquitousness, here, you dismiss them from being considered iconic because "MOST PC's" nevertheless don't encounter them frequently. You say they're not iconic because they're seen frequently in most gaming systems, but then you turn around and say that it shouldn't be surprising that a majority/pleurality of responders don't consider them iconic here because they don't see dragons frequently. Which is it? You don't seem to be able to make up your mind. Either way, you, yourself, seem to be using two different, contradictory standards for determining iconicity, within the very same scroll!
Are you at least surprised by that?  
Vote <"Big Red"> for President! Er, uh, Senator. Ah, I mean . . . Iconic Monster.  |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
Edited by - BEAST on 26 Jun 2012 22:41:30 |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2012 : 01:13:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
Dungeons and Dragons is the name of a game and what people perceive as an iconic monster for that game depends on how they play it and what they encounter. This shouldn't be surprising[...].
You wrote "what people perceive" and "what they encounter". That right there goes to show that you, and others, are approaching this from an insular, personal, narrow perspective. You're taking your personal game sessions and casting them as representative or iconic for the entire game system as a whole. That's entirely subjective and arbitrary.
Now, sure, you can certainly take the D&D rules and adapt them for your local situation. Of course, you can--it's often recommended and encouraged!
But you should still recognize that that's what you're doing. You're not playing it literally from the rulebooks, but rather, the way you prefer to. So whatever phenomena you encounter in your games can hardly be said to be iconic or representative of "the" game, but rather, are only iconic or representative of "your" game sessions/style/etc.
We are talking about a game where the entire experience occurs in each individual's imagination. How is a personal opinion poll about it going to be anything BUT subjective?? |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
LordXenophon
Learned Scribe
USA
147 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 23:48:35
|
If you want to know which monster is the most iconic of the game, ask a different question. When I mention Dungeons and Dragons, what's the first monster most people will think of? Whatever the answer, that will be the game's most iconic monster.
I can only think of two canditates. Either they think of Easley's Big Red Dragon (that specific dragon, not Red Dragons in general), or they think of Beholders. Almost nobody is going to say "pennangalan." |
Disintegration is in the eye of the Beholder. |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 05:17:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
We are talking about a game where the entire experience occurs in each individual's imagination. How is a personal opinion poll about it going to be anything BUT subjective??
Well, for starters, the poll might be about which monster/race best represents the game, as a whole. That would call on us to discuss aspects of the game as a whole, and then to describe how a given monster expounded upon those aspects.
It would certainly be less subjective than having us talk up our personal favorite monsters, or somehow taking the collection of monsters that we have encountered in our selective, narrowly-defined personal sessions and proclaiming those to somehow be representative of the game as a whole.
The game was named partially after dragons because dragons are an archetypal monster from literature and pop culture. "To slay the dragon" is a classic feat of adventure heroes, kinda like "facing one's demons". Beholders and such are merely variations upon that timeless theme.
Drizzt wrote in one of his Diary entries how a dragon is the perfect embodiment of evil, and a classic adversary. If Drizzt wrote it, then it must be true! |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
Edited by - BEAST on 29 Jun 2012 05:40:20 |
|
|
|
LordXenophon
Learned Scribe
USA
147 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2012 : 03:10:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
quote:
Originally posted by rhune
Beholder here as well. Did Easley do the cover of the 2nd Edition Monster's Manual?
Yes i am pretty sure he did the cover for the large hardback Monstrous Manual.
Confirmed (I keep a copy on my desk). The cover is painted by Jeff Easley and the biggest monster, right in the middle of the cover, is a Red Dragon. The Beholder is in front, though. Also in the painting are a Minotaur, a Lich and a Thri-Kreen. |
Disintegration is in the eye of the Beholder. |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2012 : 05:09:35
|
It took me a while to dig this up, but I finally found it:
quote:
I pray that the world never runs out of dragons. I say that in all sincerity, though I have played a part in the death of one great wyrm. For the dragon is the quintessential enemy, the greatest foe, the unconquerable epitome of devastation. The dragon, above all other creatures, even the demons and the devils, evokes images of dark grandeur, of the greatest beast curled asleep on the greatest treasure hoard. They are the ultimate test of the hero and the ultimate fright of the child. They are older than the elves and more akin to the earth than the dwarves. The great dragons are the preternatural beast, the basic element of the beast, that darkest part of our imagination.
The wizards cannot tell you of their origin, though they believe that a great wizard, a god of wizards, must have played some role in the first spawning of the beast. The elves, with their long fables explaining the creation of every aspect of the world, have many ancient tales concerning the origin of the dragons, but they admit, privately, that they really have no idea of how the dragons came to be.
My own belief is more simple, and yet, more complicated by far. I believe that dragons appeared in the world immediately after the spawning of the first reasoning race. I do not credit any god of wizards with their creation, but rather, the most basic imagination, wrought of unseen fears, of those first reasoning mortals.
We make the dragons as we make the gods, because we need them, because, somewhere deep in our hearts, we recognize that a world without them is a world not worth living in.
[...]
No, I would not want to live in a world without dragons, as I would not want to live in a world without magic, for that is a world without mystery, and that is a world without faith.
And that, I fear, for any reasoning, conscious being, would be the cruelest trick of all.
--Drizzt Do'Urden (Streams of Silver, Part 1)
Scoff if you will at the author of the sentiment. Chip away at his poetic use of hyperbole.
But I do believe that that, right there, says it all for me on this subject. Dragons it is! |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2012 : 14:59:21
|
| I don't think anyone would disagree that dragons are awesome creatures, but clearly more than half of the people voting think of a different creature first when they think of D&D. As noted previously, this is a personal opinion poll so there are no right or wrong choices. |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
Edited by - Artemas Entreri on 09 Jul 2012 14:59:58 |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2012 : 20:15:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
I don't think anyone would disagree that dragons are awesome creatures, but clearly more than half of the people voting think of a different creature first when they think of D&D. As noted previously, this is a personal opinion poll so there are no right or wrong choices.
Understood, but not all opinions are equally supported by rational thought or evidence, or even thought out at all. Sometimes they're just off-the-cuff.
And popularity hardly qualifies as a good foundation for this sort of thing. Clinton became President based on popular vote. Then Bush turned around and did the same thing. Drizzt is arguably the most popular character in D&D & FR, but that doesn't seem to phase many/most around here.
As I previously stated, I am simply trying to demonstrate a reasonable grounds for my opinion. It's not just a kneejerk reaction, for me. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Derulbaskul
Senior Scribe
Singapore
408 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2012 : 03:40:56
|
| Dragons are clearly the most iconic, simply because of the game's name, but drow would have to be in second place due to the overwhelming (and completely baffling) popularity of the Drizzt novels and comics/graphic novels. |
Cheers
D
NB: Please remember: A cannon is a big gun. Canon is what we discuss here. |
|
|
|
Tren of Twilight Tower
Seeker
51 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2012 : 05:32:43
|
Go beholders! :D
Funny though, I do not recall that my first D&D adventure included a single beholder, but for sure it did include dragons. Still, when I hear about D&D I think of beholders. |
|
|
|
GRYPHON
Senior Scribe
USA
527 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2012 : 10:26:21
|
| Demon/Devil... |
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2012 : 00:58:24
|
The world without dragons is a boring world? I don't think so... |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2012 : 01:16:12
|
I've read a lot of fantasy novels where there are no dragons in them and still find them quite interesting and wonderful. Some don't even have fantastical creatures at all... |
Every beginning has an end. |
Edited by - Dennis on 11 Jul 2012 01:20:07 |
|
|
|
coach
Senior Scribe
USA
479 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2012 : 05:12:25
|
ummm. it's called Dungeons and DRAGONS
/thread
now if you said most iconic Realms monster/race i can see some other thoughts |
Bloodstone Lands Sage |
|
|
|
coach
Senior Scribe
USA
479 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2012 : 05:27:31
|
and i agree with Kivlan, when i started playing i wanted to fight a dragon (eventually)
and before we start talking about Dragons being non-original and beholders/illithids being original:
tentacles (beholders and illithids, heck even displacer beasts and rust monsters) do not make something iconic, they make it Cthulhu-ian, which was stolen from Kraken, which has been around for centuries
so tentacle based creatures are just as "old" and non-original |
Bloodstone Lands Sage |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2012 : 04:56:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
I've read a lot of fantasy novels where there are no dragons in them and still find them quite interesting and wonderful. Some don't even have fantastical creatures at all...
Do said alternative fantasy novels still have some sort of conflict, be it in the form of a personal enemy or precarious calamity?
Maybe the writers thereof were doing as RAS/Drizzt wrote: making the "dragons" as we make the gods? Like I mentioned before, the English language has that familiar phrase "to slay the dragon", which is often allegorical or metaphorical for something else. So maybe those other fantasy novels ultimately had their "dragons", after all? |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2012 : 06:06:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
I've read a lot of fantasy novels where there are no dragons in them and still find them quite interesting and wonderful. Some don't even have fantastical creatures at all...
Do said alternative fantasy novels still have some sort of conflict, be it in the form of a personal enemy or precarious calamity?
Of course.
I wasn't referring to allegorical representation of dragons, but actual dragons. You know, bloated, ugly lizards with bat wings?
And dragons are hardly the most powerful beings in any fantasy setting that one should refer facing the greatest threat as 'to slay a dragon.' Heck, in Feist's books, dragons are mostly transport animals. |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2012 : 14:39:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
I've read a lot of fantasy novels where there are no dragons in them and still find them quite interesting and wonderful. Some don't even have fantastical creatures at all...
Do said alternative fantasy novels still have some sort of conflict, be it in the form of a personal enemy or precarious calamity?
Of course.
I wasn't referring to allegorical representation of dragons, but actual dragons. You know, bloated, ugly lizards with bat wings?
And dragons are hardly the most powerful beings in any fantasy setting that one should refer facing the greatest threat as 'to slay a dragon.' Heck, in Feist's books, dragons are mostly transport animals.
Also, "conflict" in storytelling has been around far longer than dragons. |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2012 : 20:24:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
I wasn't referring to allegorical representation of dragons, but actual dragons. You know, bloated, ugly lizards with bat wings?
I know that, Dennis.
I'm simply suggesting that those books' authors were substituting other types of conflict instead of the all-too-familiar "to slay the dragon" trope, as a way of reinventing the fantasy wheel. They may have been doing exactly what RAS/Drizzt described: creating their "dragons" in their own light, as they saw fit or needed. Seen in that light, then they could be said to have still had their "dragons".
quote:
And dragons are hardly the most powerful beings in any fantasy setting that one should refer facing the greatest threat as 'to slay a dragon.' Heck, in Feist's books, dragons are mostly transport animals.
Oh, I get that dragons are hardly the most powerful. Somebody mentioned the tarrasque earlier in this very thread.
And I can certainly appreciate a fantasy tale in which dragons are beneficent beasts of burden, rather than adversarial monsters. I fondly remember Anne McCaffrey's "Dragonriders of Pern" trilogy from when I was a kid.
But "iconic" doesn't require that the monster be the most powerful. I would imagine that excessively high power levels probably lead most gaming groups to avoid ever introducing such creatures into their campaigns. And an essentially unused, theoretical monster probably shouldn't be viewed as "iconic". It doesn't really represent D&D, if it's just some theoretical entry in a reference book, somewhere. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2012 : 20:37:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
Also, "conflict" in storytelling has been around far longer than dragons.
Quite true.
But when conflict is personified, or rather monsterified, the classic, archetypal, oft-repeated-down-through-history method is to figure it as dragon. That reptilian, fire-breathing, gigantic form resonates with people across almost all cultures, and all time periods. Some scribes were reluctant to cite dragons as being the iconic monster of D&D because they're overused throughout fantasy. But I submit that there's very good reason that dragons are used so often. I think we should all recognize that.
I believe that TSR, and then later WOTC, did just that in embracing this particular name of the game. Sure, part of it must've been the cutesy factor of the alliteration. "Ramparts & Tanar'ri" just doesn't have the same ring to it! "D&D": it just rolls right off the tongue--almost like "Double-D's"!  But part of it must've been a nod to the dragon's place throughout virtually all of fantasy as a pervasive, time-tested, enduring symbol of evil, fright, and destruction. The designers recognized that about dragons in choosing the game's name. It's only fitting that we do so in playing the game or reading the novelizations thereof, as well.  |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2012 : 20:56:49
|
quote:
That reptilian, fire-breathing, gigantic form resonates with people across almost all cultures, and all time periods.
Black, green, blue, and white dragons will be offended by this statement.  |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2012 : 22:21:50
|
| As would Bronze, Brass, Copper, and Silver, I'd imagine. And the entire spectrum of gem dragons, Steel, Mercury, Mist, Shadow, Deep- you get the idea..... On further speculation, although I've personally encountered or used relatively few of the mighty wyrms, they DO pretty much sum up the fantasy element of the game. Nothin says lovin like a giant, magical, destructive monster that flies, breathes some sort of nasty elemental emission, and is smarter and longer-lived than just about everything around it! |
The Goddess is alive, and magic is afoot.
"Where Science ends, Magic begins" -Spiral, Uncanny X-Men #491
"You idiots! You've captured their STUNT doubles!" -Spaceballs
Lothir's character background/stats: http://forum.candlekeep.com/pop_profile.asp?mode=display&id=5469
My stories:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/Mickeys_Comic_Tavern/index.php?showforum=188
Lothir, courtesy of Sylinde (Deviant Art)/Luaxena (Chosen of Eilistraee)
http://sylinde.deviantart.com/#/d2z6e4u |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2012 : 03:40:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
quote:
That reptilian, fire-breathing, gigantic form resonates with people across almost all cultures, and all time periods.
Black, green, blue, and white dragons will be offended by this statement.
Perhaps. But they don't resonate across the world and the ages like a flame-belcher. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Ozreth
Learned Scribe
229 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2012 : 10:20:34
|
| Not sure how Kobolds and Mind Flayers didn't make the list but I went with Beholder as well : p |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Most Iconic D&D Monster
