Successful original Marvel characters in recent years

[Captain Astounding]

Jessica Jones as well, though I don't see why tbh. Never thought her interesting enough to warrant a Netflix series. Only ever had one decent run.

I know, I can't believe we get that instead of a Daughters of the Dragon series.

[SSJMorales]

nevermind.

[LOSTie-chan]

Squirrel Girl. :3

[Of Atlantis]

I know, I can't believe we get that instead of a Daughters of the Dragon series.

That's the one I was really pulling for. Misty Knight and Colleen Wing have more history as a whole with Daredevil, Luke Cage and Iron Fist anyways but whatever. Maybe Netflix Phase 2.

[idisestablish]

For many of them, it remains to be seen. Spider-Woman (Drew) looked like a flop after her first series. She was virtually non-existent throughout the 80s and 90s, but today she is a popular character again. Gamora, Drax, Starbrand, and many more that prove only time will tell. Also, I'm really not sure why you count Silk as an original character, but not Spider-Gwen. I think Kamala Khan has a lot better claim to originality than Silk. Despite her different name, she is just another Spider-Man.

Any character created in the last 5 years or so is really way too new to determine if they're just a vapor in the wind or a real success. This includes characters like Spider-Gwen and Kamala. Their novelty could have an expiration date, but I think they're here to stay. I also think the Inhumans characters being introduced recently: Reader, Iso, Auran, Flint, Inferno, Naja, Lash, Unspoken, Lineage etc. will populate the Inhumans franchise going forward, much like the second genesis X-Men characters. I think at least most of these will have staying power. There are plenty of other recent characters Black Swan, for example, that you might not think of right off-hand

Manifold, Cosmo, and Abigail Brand are examples of character is a secure position that are relatively new. And, although they first appeared in another medium (like Firestar or Harley Quinn), Melinda May, Fitz/Simmons, and Phil Coulson, are all new characters that are sure to stick around.

[Immortal Weapon]

X-23...? She's been popular for while and was a character in MvC3.

[lorddominicus85]

The problem I've noticed when talking to owners at a few of the different comic book shops is that readers have a feeling of dread when a new character comes along, the dread steaming from a general feeling of "This won't last long" so instead of enjoying the ride and buying the book most readers skip over the book entirely and it dies a slow death.

My first choice is Sentry.

Go ahead, laugh, it's not sarcasm. He's had three mini series and was one of the central characters of Mighty Avengers and Dark Avengers during BMB's run and has a very loyal following of fans. Yes he tends to split the fan community down the middle but that's one of the problems with new characters is that some readers don't like it when a new character up stages their favorites. Like my brother is a huge Thor fan and HATES Sentry because Sentry rivals Thor in power and can provide him with a fair one on one fight. But if we're going by how long a character has been around, how many books they've been in and their status within the book I would say Sentry qualifies as a successful new creation from the last fifteen years.

Second choice would be Daken.

I don't consider him a legacy character, he has never to this point in his history made an attempt to carry on the mantle of Wolverine in the same vein of his father. Daken has always been the polar opposite on the moral scale of Wolverine and during the time he did wear a Wolverine mask it was simply to disgrace his father's legacy.

Third choice, X-23.

X-23 is probably the best non legacy Marvel creation in a few decades, her fans are passionate and her books always seem to sell steady (even if it's on the lower end of the scale).

And just to sort of agree with a few other people, the new Ms Marvel is a legacy character in name only, she has nothing to do with Carol, same with the new Ghost Rider, Silk, Spider Gwen, Miles, all very popular new characters in the comic world which I think Marvel is doing a great job of promoting.

I don't personally count characters as legacy just for using someone else's name when they have little to no connection to the previous incarnation.

Sam Wilson Cap is legacy, Female Thor is legacy but Miles adopted the name, Peter didn't give him the ok until much later into his story so I don't think Miles counts as a legacy. He isn't carrying on the mission Peter started, he's carrying on his own mission and just adopted the name.

[bubbalee33]

The last really successful original character is probably Deadpool, and he's not exactly a recent creation. Maybe to a lesser extent, Quinton Quire?

We'll see what happens with ANAD Marvel, I genuinely get a sense of anything could happen. I think Blue Marvel could be a break out star.

Deadpool would seem right. Quinton Quire would have to be a much lesser extend (I had to look him up just to be sure I was thinking about the right person).

I think the previously mention Silk has the potential.

Blue Marvel and Miss America both have a shot at it because they are interesting characters so if the new Ultimates is a hit they could be too.

[Myetche]

And just to sort of agree with a few other people, the new Ms Marvel is a legacy character in name only, she has nothing to do with Carol, same with the new Ghost Rider, Silk, Spider Gwen, Miles, all very popular new characters in the comic world which I think Marvel is doing a great job of promoting.

I don't personally count characters as legacy just for using someone else's name when they have little to no connection to the previous incarnation.

Robbie has the same powers as other Ghost Riders. Silk, Spider-Gwen, and Miles all share the standard Spider-powers that Peter himself originally had. Therefore, they're still considered actual "legacy characters".

Only Kamala stands alone as she literally has NOTHING to do with Carol aside from using her old name and logo. Her powers are completely separate from Carol's and her origins have nothing to do with Carol (barring a single and very indirect tie-in to the Kree on account of being an Inhuman).

[bubbalee33]

Where as I like X-23 and am looking forward to the new Wolverine book, I tend to think of clones and spawn of other characters (who have very similar powers as their spawner, yes Daken I mean you) to really not be all that original. Doesnt mean they cant break away, but look at X-23. Has had a level of popularity, so to reward her for this, they make her the new wolverine, because in the end she is a legacy character.

[redrunner97]

Karnak!!!!

He's only been around since 1965. Totally new.

[bubbalee33]

I really dislike her, but someone mentioned Squirrelgirl, and there does seem to be a lot of love for her these days. (No idea how the book is selling)

[Immortal Weapon]

I really dislike her, but someone mentioned Squirrelgirl, and there does seem to be a lot of love for her these days. (No idea how the book is selling)

The book is selling below the cancellation range. I'm not sure how well it's doing digitally.

[idisestablish]

...
My first choice is Sentry.
...
Second choice would be Daken.
...
Third choice, X-23.
...
And just to sort of agree with a few other people, the new Ms Marvel is a legacy character in name only, she has nothing to do with Carol, same with the new Ghost Rider, Silk, Spider Gwen, Miles, all very popular new characters in the comic world which I think Marvel is doing a great job of promoting.
...

I agree that Sentry is a good example. He has waned, for sure, but he is firmly established. It may take 25 years for a resurgence like it did for Jessica Drew, but he is a good example.

While characters may not be "legacy" characters in the sense that they are carrying on the legacy of a predecessor using the same name, it doesn't mean they are original, which is what the OP is asking. X-23 is girl Wolverine and Daken is evil Wolverine. Of course, that doesn't mean they can't be made more than that, but neither of them would exist without the template from which they were forged. That's the point of the post. It doesn't matter how great (or not) these characters may be. You can be a clone-character and still be great (e.g. She-Hulk), but the point is, it's rare to see a new character introduced be successful that isn't anchored to an established character whether explicitly taking up the mantle (e.g. Scott Lang), nominally (e.g. Kamala Khan), having nearly-identical powers (i.e. Daken), or a combination of two or more of these factors (e.g. Kate Bishop, Miles Morales).

Also, I don't know what some of your guys' definition of "recent years" is, but Squirrel Girl and Deadpool are both from '91.

[dragonmp93]

I agree that Sentry is a good example. He has waned, for sure, but he is firmly established. It may take 25 years for a resurgence like it did for Jessica Drew, but he is a good example.

While characters may not be "legacy" characters in the sense that they are carrying on the legacy of a predecessor using the same name, it doesn't mean they are original, which is what the OP is asking. X-23 is girl Wolverine and Daken is evil Wolverine. Of course, that doesn't mean they can't be made more than that, but neither of them would exist without the template from which they were forged. That's the point of the post. It doesn't matter how great (or not) these characters may be. You can be a clone-character and still be great (e.g. She-Hulk), but the point is, it's rare to see a new character introduced be successful that isn't anchored to an established character whether explicitly taking up the mantle (e.g. Scott Lang), nominally (e.g. Kamala Khan), having nearly-identical powers (i.e. Daken), or a combination of two or more of these factors (e.g. Kate Bishop, Miles Morales).

Also, I don't know what some of your guys' definition of "recent years" is, but Squirrel Girl and Deadpool are both from '91.

24 years ago.