Check out the Savage Tide adventure path. That's more or less my attempt to get in everything I wanted or had to say about Demogorgon out of my system before I couldn't talk about him anymore... between that AP and the Demogorgon Demonomicon entry from Dragon Magazine, you pretty much have Demogorgon as he'd exist in Pathfinder anyway.If only they did that with Demogorgon. I really liked him and while Lamashtu is a good replacement, I'll still miss him.Necromancer Games' Tomes of Horror were a godsend. If I recall they were made before Hasbro bought WotC, and essentially made a huge number of iconic D&D monsters open content. Various demon/devil lords, for example, not the least of which was Orcus.IIRC it's also in the tome of horrors
not to mention WotC owns the trademark of the look but nothing else.
Ironically, umber hulks are based on a Chinese made plastic toy that ended up at Gygax's gaming table. I used to own one.
I didn't know the Umber Hulk was one of the china toys, but I did know the Rust Monster was originaly a toy from china. I expect in those early days there were not a lot of "monster minis" to chose from. LOL
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This blog is a really good unofficial resource for pathfinder conversions of D&D monsters, including trying to fit them in fluff-wise.
|
What about the Grell, are they still protected?Yup. Now and forever. Or at least until Wizards of the Coast decides to let them go free, which I doubt very much will ever happen.
Presumably, at some point in the distant future, the copyright will expire and the original Fiend Folio from ca. 1980 will enter the Public Domain. If the current rule is 70 years for corp-owned works, that would happen around 2050. (I think it's 70 years.)
Of course, I don't expect it really will. Experience has shown us that when certain things (e.g. Micky Mouse) are about to enter the public doman, Congress extends the terms of copyrights. (And, by then, there will probably be enough international trade agreements that make USA copyright terms universal.)
It's not just a matter of whether they're public domain or not though, if Wizards still owns other materials used under the OGL license. The Open Game License specifies not using Wizards stuff identified as Product Identity.
7. Use of Product Identity: You agree not to Use any Product Identity, including as an indication as to compatibility, except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of each element of that Product Identity. You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark. The use of any Product Identity in Open Game Content does not constitute a challenge to the ownership of that Product Identity. The owner of any Product Identity used in Open Game Content shall retain all rights, title and interest in and to that Product Identity.
If it's identified as Product Identity by Wizards of the Coast, and wasn't explicitly included as OGC (open game content) in their System Reference Document, or by special permission to make OGL in the Tome of Horrors, to use it violates the terms of the Open Game License.
|
|
Hmm, it'd be interesting to see if that legal interpretation held up. (Especially since I'll be surprised if WotC still exists in 2050. Nothing against them; lots of companies that existed in 1960 no longer exist today.)
In any event, once 3.0 falls into the public domain (which would be in the 2060s sometime, if Congress didn't extend the copyright deadline), the OGL becomes irrelevant to it. You can just use it under the public domain-- all of it. (I'll be dead by then, though.)
What about the Grell, are they still protected?Yup. Now and forever. Or at least until Wizards of the Coast decides to let them go free, which I doubt very much will ever happen.Presumably, at some point in the distant future, the copyright will expire and the original Fiend Folio from ca. 1980 will enter the Public Domain. If the current rule is 70 years for corp-owned works, that would happen around 2050. (I think it's 70 years.)
Of course, I don't expect it really will. Experience has shown us that when certain things (e.g. Micky Mouse) are about to enter the public doman, Congress extends the terms of copyrights. (And, by then, there will probably be enough international trade agreements that make USA copyright terms universal.)
That's because Congress might as well be bought and paid for when talking about the interests of an entity that large.
There are some benefits, though. If the copyright expired, we would soon be flooded by Mickey Mouse softcore porn, as fan fiction escaped from the dark depths to which IP laws have heretofore exiled them.
But seriously folks, every member of the Hasbro board should be stricken with a painful and incurable disease, preferably involving rectal trauma.
They never understood the idea of third-party publishing, or the fact that the more peripheral content that exists for your game (whether you own it or not) the more valuable the core game becomes. The only thing they really needed to keep under wraps was the D&D logo and the right to print and distribute the rules for leveling and character advancement. There's no reason Dreamscarred couldn't write a book of options for customizing illithid NPCs, or hell, have any third party adventure feature a beguiler or duskblade NPC.
Given the corporate world's obsession with outsourcing, I'm surprised they didn't axe in-house development entirely and simply license the D&D logo to 3rd-party publishers that met some ad-hoc QA department's standards. The awesome thing about licensing is that all the flops and failures become simple externalities. True, too many flops would ruin the brand, but Hasbro wouldn't have to pay for any of it.
Hey James, just what was the story behind Hasbro buying out D&D? Was it a financial necessity, or did they stage a hostile takeover? Or did the WotC management seek out the arrangement? I'm curious.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the post I made above with the wizard stealing my glory after I crept up on the beholder, we actually fought and killed 5 beholders in less than 5 rounds at level 11ish. Myself (ranger barbarian) the rogue/trickster, and the cleric were all 10th level and the two wizards in the party were 11th level.
We started off with creeping down a tunnel (wizards, and cleric under silence and invisibility sphere, I was scouting and rogue was in the rear). I managed to sneak up on the beholder and managed to get a full attack off. I did a lot of damage, then the wizard (one who didn't cast the sphere) cast tossed the silence rock behind him, then cast disintegrate. Turns out the creature would have died even if he made his save because I got my full attack off. This triggered the other beholders in the room to turn and come at us, and stat fighting. That same wizard who stole my glory fired another disintegrate, and killed his second beholder, then the other wizard fired off her disintegrate and got the third beholder. Now there was only two left, and I managed to tag-team it with the Rogue and we both got crits on the thing and dropped it. The rogue cackled with glee because he had a 5d6 sneak attack and a short sword that once per day could deal 10d6 shock as part of an attack. Ended up rolling 17d6 + 10 while I only had 3d8 + 39. So now it was the 5th Beholders turn and he hit the rogue with a flesh to stone, and missed everything else. The Cleric had cast Righteous Might on the surprise round, and jumped up with me on the 5th beholder and we tore it to shreds.
We looked at each other and were all thinking, "Beholders? Cake."
So, 5 beholders just kept their anti-magic eyes closed so you could kill them.
Ironically, umber hulks are based on a Chinese made plastic toy that ended up at Gygax's gaming table. I used to own one.I didn't know the Umber Hulk was one of the china toys, but I did know the Rust Monster was originaly a toy from china. I expect in those early days there were not a lot of "monster minis" to chose from. LOL
Rust Monsters and Bulette/Landsharks were originally cheap plastic toys imported from either Japan or Taiwan back in the early/mid-seventies. (We weren't talking to the Mainland much in those days. ;) )You used to see boxes or jars of these silly-looking little plastic critters on convenience or liquor store counters as "impulse buy" items, usually for about 25 cents each. They were two of a whole assortment that were available, but those are the only ones I can recall from that source that were adapted into the game. The first metal Bulette mini produced (by Heritage? Grenadier?) was basically just a resculpt of the plastic one, at the same size (1 1/2 to 2 inches long) as the toy.
I don't doubt that the Umber Hulk came from a similar source, although that may have been from a different line of toys as I don't recall seeing those in L.A. That being so, it's rather amusing that a made-up name and bootlegged design are considered to be WotC's "intellectual property".
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hasbro owns Beholder and a trademark to Ilithid and Mind Flayer, but they do not own the concept of the Ilithid/Mind Flayer. The Ilithid came from H. P. Lovecraft, it's the D&D name for a Starspawn of Cthulhu.
So in actuality, the Ilithid concept is owned by the H. P. Lovecraft society and not Hasbro, though they may have a trademark on their unique name.
If Pathfinder would like to bring back the Mind Flayer, they'd just need to get permission/license from the Lovecraft Society, and call it what it is: a Starspawn, or Cthulhi.
1. Pathfinder already has Starspawn.
2. Illithid are human-sized, eat brains, don't have wings, and are evil. The members of Cthulhu's race are gigantic (hell, the size given to them by the RPG is actually far less than what I would ascribe to them...they are, after all, simply members of Cthulhu's race who are NOT the leaders. Obama didn't suddenly become monsterously huge when he was elected president), don't eat brains, do have wings, and are beyond the concept of morality.
3. While the general outline of the illithid was obviously inspired by Lovecraft's works, that's where the resemblance ends. To claim that the illithid are simply renamed starspawn is rather unfair both to Gygax/Arneson and Lovecraft.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think some people are forgetting that WotC didn't have to make anything they created open content. Keeping a few choice monsters to themselves after having made all the other core rules available for other publishers doesn't make them (or Hasbro) somehow evil.
Besides, WotC was a part of Hasbro even before they released 3.0 (Hasbro bought WotC in september 1999, while 3.0 was released almost a year later).
the Phrenic scourge in Dreamscarred Press Psionics Unleashed, is essentially a mindflayer with the serial numbers filed off.
but while the names, "Illithid," "Mindflayer," and "Star Spawn" are copyrighted, the concept of a blue skinned and tentacle bearded brain eating space alien is still valid under alternative names.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Psst! Hey, kid! C'mere. You want off-brand beholders? Mind flayers? Githyanki? I got what you need.
The Pathfinder version of Rappan Athuk has a lesser gibbering orb statted up that's very beholdery...and took the place of one of the resident beholders in the 3.0 version.
Illithids were originally inspired by the cover art of The Burrowers Beneath by Brian Lumley, then elaborated on by Gygax.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IIRC, Green Ronin had done up an eye tyrant template as bonus content for their Advanced Bestiary. The pdf used an eye tyrant phase spider as the example critter. Aside from the anti-magic eye, you can customize which spells the eyestalks can shoot.
<tangent> For a Christmas in Candyland oneshot I ran, I had an Eye-Scream Tyrant Cookiesaurus Rex with cone of vanilla and atomic fireballs. </tangent>
I have a guess the Displacer Beast is probably PI for a reason that may be inobvious; it was originally deemed to have infringed the coeurl from Vogt's story "Black Destroyer" and TSR was forced to seek forgiveness, having failed to obtain permission. Wizards is probably using it by agreement and is forbidden to sublicense it lest they provoke legal action.
Ironically, umber hulks are based on a Chinese made plastic toy that ended up at Gygax's gaming table. I used to own one.
oh well for Displacer Beast, paizo magic cats are naster any way
Creative Director
|
Hey James, just what was the story behind Hasbro buying out D&D? Was it a financial necessity, or did they stage a hostile takeover? Or did the WotC management seek out the arrangement? I'm curious.
Hasbro didn't "buy out D&D." They bought Wizards of the Coast, which, among other things, owned D&D. The primary reason Hasbro bought WotC was for their cash cow at the time, the Pokemon card game, but also to pick up other significant and lucrative brands like Magic and, of course, D&D.
But make no mistake—it was the Pokemon leviathan that really drew Hasbro in to make the offer and buy WotC.
Which is why their main draw was the Pokemon CCG as Pokemon is a very lucrative IP (as are WotC's other CCG brands as well).
Isn't the D&D market a drop in the bucket to a Hasbro-sized company, though?
The rpg market as a whole is a drop in the bucket compared to hasbro. They don't even mention DnD in their annual report.
Probably Magic The Gathering alone outsells the whole RPG market, and it's a tiny part of Hasbro.
A distant relative works for H, sez there is a single executive who can literally extinguish D&D with a short email. The safety is that his kids play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Apologies for bumping an old thread, but this has been playing on my mind a lot lately.
I know that Beholder is a trademark of Wizards, but I've seen them in plenty of other games, just with different names. Just today I was playing Dragon's Crown on my Vita and came across a Gazer (http://dragons-crown.wikia.com/wiki/Gazer) - a Beholder in literally everything but name. Dragon's Dogma also has one, except it's called an Evil Eye (http://dragonsdogma.wikia.com/wiki/Evil_Eye)
The argument has always been that they are a trademarked monster, but if these guys can use them, why can't Paizo? What would be the difference if you just called them Gazers or something?
What about the Grell, are they still protected?Yup. Now and forever. Or at least until Wizards of the Coast decides to let them go free, which I doubt very much will ever happen.
World of Warcraft has Grell in it, so I'm gonna go out on a limb & say that those probably aren't on the list of exclusives.