Quote Originally Posted by Draz74 View Post
I dunno ... I think Morty's got a point. The character concepts people come up with if they're not already familiar with Fantasy RPG tropes are significantly different than out-of-the-box D&D "Fighters," "Wizards," "Clerics," and "Rogues." They tend to be inspired more by fantasy literature.

The most blatant example in my own mind would be Rogue-type characters who, instead of backstabbing their enemies repeatedly, make themselves useful in combat by improvising -- coming up with a wide variety of clever tactics depending on situation and terrain. The 3e Factotum started to make this possible, but it didn't go far enough -- and it's the closest that any D&D Edition has gotten.

The flashy, non-stealthy Swashbuckler (a la Scarlet Pimpernel or Three Musketeers) is another classic archetype that has generally been neglected in Core D&D (every edition except 4e).

The Aragorn-style Ranger (minor magic or no magic, no animal companion, main fighting style neither archery nor TWF, yet still unquestionably a Ranger) is probably the most blatant and most often-requested "iconic" archetype that D&D hasn't always done a great job of representing.

Powerful "priest" type characters who aren't battle-hardened templars (comfortable on the front lines in their plate armor) is another oft-requested example. Or witches (wizened females who prefer isolation, cats/spiders/toads, alchemy ...), or other arcane casters who get their power from some other source than nerdy scholarship. I could go on and on ...

All of these are "iconic" in fantasy, but not "iconic" in D&D.
Pathfinder