PF2R Drow

[Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti]

HolyFlamingo! wrote:

So, just got the news, and I gotta say, this is a huge bummer. Not that I disagree with the reasoning behind it--the more Pathfinder becomes Its Own Thing, the better it gets, and I wouldn't want a potential future WOTC lawsuit hanging over my head, either--but I just... really love drow. Not for what they were in the old, SUPER awful lore, but for the potential they had to be something more.

I think the biggest letdown for me is that I was really looking forward to seeing Paizo revamp and recontextualize the drow to better fit with Golarion's continuing evolution. I wanted to see them grow into something that was more complex and less side-eyeable, and got a lovely taste of that in Abomination Vaults. In fact, I was SO hyped by their potential that I made a drow revolt against demonic rule one of the core running plots in my homebrew campaign.

I guess I just gotta do the work of bringing these svelte, purple freaks into the 21st century myself. I mean, I've already been doing that for over a year, but it just sucks to do it without the guidance of experienced professionals who have more creative breadth and system mastery than little old me.

Thanks to the creative team for all that they've done. While my problematic faves may not have made the cut, I'm still excited for everything else in the works, and appreciate James Jacobs for talking to fans one on one. I respect the honesty and willingness to shoulder the heat, and am eager to see my favorite pretend elf dice game blossom into something truly its own.

There is a Pathfinder Infinite drow ancestry. It is pretty good. I just bought it a few moments ago.

[keftiu]

I sympathize with anyone sad to see Drow go, but lashing out at Paizo over moves they *have* to take to avoid legal action from a giant corporation down the road isn't helping anybody.

[HolyFlamingo!]

Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:

There is a Pathfinder Infinite drow ancestry. It is pretty good. I just bought it a few moments ago.

I actually haven't looked at Infinite much, but this is cool to hear! Who's the author? Also--and sorry for swerving a little off-topic, here--are there any other must-haves I should know about?

[Cydeth]

James Jacobs wrote:

But it had to be done, for the health of the company and the game going forward. I hope Darklands fans who stick around will be happy with what we do to that part of Golarion going forward—it remains one of my favorite parts of the setting—and I apologize to those folks who like drow a lot and feel betrayed by this decision.

Personally, I understand that they had to be removed. I respect the work you've done personally, James. You signed my copy of Red Hand of Doom, which I treasure.

I just hoped that it wouldn't be something where you decided to wholesale replace them, and the method chosen is... not what I prefer. I would've rather the drow cities were replaced with some neutral cavern elves or something along those lines.

I've been holding out hope that some of the mistakes regarding the elves and drow would be adjusted since Second Darkness. For me, personally, it was just the last straw in a lot of other things that'd been making me less happy with Pathfinder.

Thank you for the entertainment you've given me over the years, I appreciate it.

[Paladin of Baha-who?]

I am slightly confused as to why the creative commons licensing of the 5e SRD doesn't make Drow free game, but as I am not a lawyer I assume Paizo's legal department has good reasons for what they are doing.

Hey Mr. Jacobs, how does this affect Starfinder? The Drow are a slightly greater part of that setting than Pathfinder's, and they're also pretty different from the D&D version. Any idea how that's going to be handled?

[The Gleeful Grognard]

Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:

I am slightly confused as to why the creative commons licensing of the 5e SRD doesn't make Drow free game, but as I am not a lawyer I assume Paizo's legal department has good reasons for what they are doing.

Hey Mr. Jacobs, how does this affect Starfinder? The Drow are a slightly greater part of that setting than Pathfinder's, and they're also pretty different from the D&D version. Any idea how that's going to be handled?

Creative commons licensing doesn't let you just use anything in any license without any consideration. It lets you use some things under the creative commons license that it is shared under.

Paizo wants to move to using Orc, doing that and including creative commons licensed elements would be a poor choice legally. CC afaik doesn't do nearly as much to shield product identity, it would just be a bad move all around.

[bugleyman]

James Jacobs wrote:

...we made the decision to be transparent about the change at the earliest opportunity after it became apparent that moving out of the OGL publishing business was best for all of us.

As understandably disappointed as some people are with the outcome, I think transparency was the right decision. Thank you for being straight with us.

[nothinglord]

While I really think Drow could've been reworked since WotC doesn't own the concept of a dark elf, I do like the idea of the underground Serpentfolk empires. They're able to fill similar roles.

That said, I do hope that a possible replacement dark elf can eventually be added, ideally in a way that enables the original Pathfinder Drow origin to be worked in, along with any other lore that isn't to tied to OGL.

If only so the Starfinder Drow don't have to get clapped out of existence.

[The Raven Black]

TBT I was interested with how Drows could evolve into something less obviously similar to what they were in DnD and open new vistas. But I did not feel the attachement many posters felt for them. Likely because I stopped playing DnD before their hour in the sun and came back after.

It is still sad to say goodbye to that part of the lore but it had to be done and it lets Paizo really do their own thing in the Darklands without echoing DnD's mythology anymore.

Thanks a huge lot for what you gave us, James, for what you will be giving us in the future and for being so open about this, even though it is obviously very hard on you too.

[Zakon05]

Something I wonder is what this means for the entire concept of blue/purple skinned elves in Golarion.

It's an aesthetic I find pleasing, and many settings have found a way to create very distinct versions of that type of elf. Night Elves in Warcraft and Dunmer in Elder Scrolls come to mind immediately as very different takes on the concept of a dark elf from the drow.

So with the removal of drow, does this specifically mean the removal of evil, demon-worshiping, underground-dwelling offshoots of elves called the drow, or does it include any other possible future interpretation of a blue-skinned elf as well?

[James Jacobs]

Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:

I am slightly confused as to why the creative commons licensing of the 5e SRD doesn't make Drow free game, but as I am not a lawyer I assume Paizo's legal department has good reasons for what they are doing.

Hey Mr. Jacobs, how does this affect Starfinder? The Drow are a slightly greater part of that setting than Pathfinder's, and they're also pretty different from the D&D version. Any idea how that's going to be handled?

Creative commons aren't the right solution for us, since that offers no way for us to retain non-rules portions of what we do as our own intellectual property. It's that content that's REALLY valuable to us. Rules can't be copyritten anyway. The ORC FAQ goes into a bit more detail about why creative commons isn't a good solution for us.

As for Starfinder... it doesn't technically affect Starfinder in quite the same way, since Starfinder isn't getting remastered and for now is still an OGL game. That said, the lore of the two games IS entangled, so there IS going to be some adjustments to how Starfinder does things. Those revelations will be shared when the time is right for Starfinder. For Pathfinder, since the remastering step is imminent and since we're Right Now about to start releasing some Darklands-adjacent content, we had to go now. For Starfinder, what's going on with drow isn't a today problem to talk about in public.

[Berhagen]

Thanks for all the clarity and transparency James.

While I feel somewhat for the Fall of the Drow, my home made setting already made serpentfolk the dominant underempire, so it does not affect me negatively. (And then you also publishing centaurs and Minotaurs in the same year - almost feels like you are personally catering to me …..).

However I do feel for the people who are losing “their” Drow - but hope they can adjust and understand that this is part of the further evolution of Pathfinder away from its D&D origins into its own thing.

[NightTrace]

How will this impact Starfinder is my only real confusion atm. Lookng forward to learning more.

[nothinglord]

Berhagen wrote:

Thanks for all the clarity and transparency James.

While I feel somewhat for the Fall of the Drow, my home made setting already made serpentfolk the dominant underempire, so it does not affect me negatively. (And then you also publishing centaurs and Minotaurs in the same year - almost feels like you are personally catering to me …..).

However I do feel for the people who are losing “their” Drow - but hope they can adjust and understand that this is part of the further evolution of Pathfinder away from its D&D origins into its own thing.

To be honest I didn't actually think about Drow being that big of an OGL issue until this came out. I considered a name change, but the rest of the specifics never crossed my mind.

That said I not particularly attached to D&d Drow, so I'd actually like if Pathfinder has their own kind of dark elf (I'm partial to the name Hollow Elf).

[PossibleCabbage]

Cydeth wrote:

I just hoped that it wouldn't be something where you decided to wholesale replace them, and the method chosen is... not what I prefer. I would've rather the drow cities were replaced with some neutral cavern elves or something along those lines.

Well, the actual geography of the Darklands has always been kind of nebulous, but aside from the one city that's now a spooky ruin, I don't see any reason that you couldn't take every Drow settlement in the Darklands and make it an Ayindilar settlement. It's just that the Ayindilar as Darklands-dwelling Elves (who may even have lilac or cerulean skin) are a lot friendlier than the Drow were.

It's just that the role of "Evil Subterranean Empire" had to go to a group who's well, evil and imperious.

[The Raven Black]

I think anything that could evoke the Drow will not appear in an ORC Paizo product for a long long time.

Far better safe than sorry.

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

Since I ran Golarion first time 15 years ago, I have always presented drow as a kind of cryptids. Yes, there are rumours that somebody took a wrong turn in the dungeon and ended up in the evil kingdom of demon-worshipping dark blue-skinned elves, but have they ever presented any evidence?

My PCs never encountered a single drow in their campaigns. Now I can just relax and tell them that sometimes rumours are just this, rumours, and they can't trust every unreliable narrator they bump into.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

Totally Not Gorbacz wrote:

Since I ran Golarion first time 15 years ago, I have always presented drow as a kind of cryptids. Yes, there are rumours that somebody took a wrong turn in the dungeon and ended up in the evil kingdom of demon-worshipping dark blue-skinned elves, but have they ever presented any evidence?

My PCs never encountered a single drow in their campaigns. Now I can just relax and tell them that sometimes rumours are just this, rumours, and they can't trust every unreliable narrator they bump into.

You really played the long game and came out on top on that one. Bravo. Drow are cryptids and sasquatches are real.

[Nesba]

So what will become of fleshwarps? Not the ancestry, but the monsters created through alchemical torture. Driders, irnakurses, grothluts, gomnits, gublasks, etc.?

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

Nesba wrote:

So what will become of fleshwarps? Not the ancestry, but the monsters created through alchemical torture. Driders, irnakurses, grothluts, gomnits, gublasks, etc.?

Unclear, but we do know one thing: Despite the fact that the world at large seems to know a large population of elves went underground before Earthfall, and that some of those elves emerged in Tian Xia, and some more of those elves live in isolated caverns, the realization that there is no 'drow empire' beneath their feet casts a new and alarming mystery on all the irnakurse that have emerged from the Darklands over the years. Those irnakurse are still coming despite the exaggerated rumours of drow proving false, so what is making them?

In short, we know that fleshwarps as a concept still exist, but almost certainly driders as they exist now are gone and we don't know what, if not drow fleshwarping artisans, are creating them all.

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

Fleshwarps are easy, turns out, a Wizard did it.

[Vargock]

Just got the news — Must say, kind of hate it with burning passion. Seems like every good piece of news about Remaster is accompanied by something like... this. And for some reason, I feel like this isn't the case of "Can't keep", but "Won't keep" — especially considering how "controversial" the existence of drow is in the modern ever-changing political landscape.

I can only hope that Remaster at least succeeds in fixing some of the existent mechanical grudges of PF2e, otherwise it's gonna feel like getting hit with the stick, but with no carrot in sight.

[Omegon]

Hey, new poster here.

So I get that *drow* cant be used anymore, but why not reimagine them?

Call them Dark Elves etc. or make them a society of Nephilim Elves that worship demons. Change their look a bit if you must.

there are many ways to update drow to fit the move away from the OGL and D&D legacy without replacing them with lizards.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

Vargock wrote:

And for some reason, I feel like this isn't the case of "Can't keep", but "Won't keep" — especially considering how "controversial" the existence of drow is in the modern ever-changing political landscape.

The good news is you can direct this assumption at the words of the Creative Director himself just earlier this evening in this selfsame thread.

--

Oops, didn't expect to be running FAQ tonight, but let's give it a shot...

Omegon wrote:

So I get that *drow* cant be used anymore, but why not reimagine them?

Call them Dark Elves etc. or make them a society of Nephilim Elves that worship demons. Change their look a bit if you must.

there are many ways to update drow to fit the move away from the OGL and D&D legacy without replacing them with lizards.

The thing with American copyright law is that I'm pretty sure just changing the name and keeping all the details the same, or changing one or two superficial details doesn't grant immunity to copyright claims. Furthermore, it ultimately doesn't matter if WotC would never win the case, if they chose to make themself a problem, Hasbro has more than enough legal team to make it extremely painful for Paizo to toe too close to the line.

[Vargock]

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

Vargock wrote:

And for some reason, I feel like this isn't the case of "Can't keep", but "Won't keep" — especially considering how "controversial" the existence of drow is in the modern ever-changing political landscape.

The good news is you can direct this assumption at the words of the Creative Director himself just earlier this evening in this selfsame thread.

That clears things up, thank you. If we are to take corporate's reasoning at face value, the fact that the removal was not caused by self-censorship is a somewhat calming thought — despite the fact that the result is very much the same.

Considering that Pathfinder's drow have always been far more... "fleshed out" than their current D&D version, I will miss them dearly. The potential was there, as that little bit of drow in Abomination Vaults was probably the most interesting bit of the entire book.

[Omegon]

Omegon wrote:

So I get that *drow* cant be used anymore, but why not reimagine them?

Call them Dark Elves etc. or make them a society of Nephilim Elves that worship demons. Change their look a bit if you must.

there are many ways to update drow to fit the move away from the OGL and D&D legacy without replacing them with lizards.

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

The thing with American copyright law is that I'm pretty sure just changing the name and keeping all the details the same, or changing one or two superficial details doesn't grant immunity to copyright claims. Furthermore, it ultimately doesn't matter if WotC would never win the case, if they chose to make themself a problem, Hasbro has more than enough legal team to make it extremely painful for Paizo to toe too close to the line.

Okay but this thread is full of examples of things they are just gonna change slightly. Deep Gnomes, Duergar, Neolithids, intellect devourers etc. Why are drow different?

[FallenDabus]

Omegon wrote:

Omegon wrote:

So I get that *drow* cant be used anymore, but why not reimagine them?

Call them Dark Elves etc. or make them a society of Nephilim Elves that worship demons. Change their look a bit if you must.

there are many ways to update drow to fit the move away from the OGL and D&D legacy without replacing them with lizards.

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

The thing with American copyright law is that I'm pretty sure just changing the name and keeping all the details the same, or changing one or two superficial details doesn't grant immunity to copyright claims. Furthermore, it ultimately doesn't matter if WotC would never win the case, if they chose to make themself a problem, Hasbro has more than enough legal team to make it extremely painful for Paizo to toe too close to the line.

Okay but this thread is full of examples of things they are just gonna change slightly. Deep Gnomes, Duergar, Neolithids, intellect devourers etc. Why are drow different?

While I can't be certain, I can think of two reasons.

A) I don't think all those are just name changes. Looking at comments in other threads, Reddit, and Discord, it sounds like neolithids are also getting axed entirely and replaced with psychic cave worms - seems to have entirely different lore. Intellect devourers are apparently becoming octopus brains, which is rad as hell. Duergar and deep gnomes both have deeper roots in folklore/mythology and are getting their societies revamped.

B) Drizzt.

Not only is the expression of drow in Pathfinder rooted in D&D-isms, drow are also one of THE iconic features of Forgotten Realms and Drizzt is THE iconic protagonist for D&D. That likely means that WotC is going to be much more litigious about them and that they are much more likely to win in court. That's not a winning proposition for Paizo.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

Omegon wrote:

Omegon wrote:

So I get that *drow* cant be used anymore, but why not reimagine them?

Call them Dark Elves etc. or make them a society of Nephilim Elves that worship demons. Change their look a bit if you must.

there are many ways to update drow to fit the move away from the OGL and D&D legacy without replacing them with lizards.

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

The thing with American copyright law is that I'm pretty sure just changing the name and keeping all the details the same, or changing one or two superficial details doesn't grant immunity to copyright claims. Furthermore, it ultimately doesn't matter if WotC would never win the case, if they chose to make themself a problem, Hasbro has more than enough legal team to make it extremely painful for Paizo to toe too close to the line.

Okay but this thread is full of examples of things they are just gonna change slightly. Deep Gnomes, Duergar, Neolithids, intellect devourers etc. Why are drow different?

This is a valid question which I am not equipped to answer fully. If I were to hazard a pithy guess, I would say that the difference is people care about drow. Duergar are just evil underground dwarves, not an iconic D&D ancestry featuring prominently in a popular line of novels.

Oh, and what FallenDabus said.

[RiverMesa]

I, for one, am glad that cavern elves will no longer feel like a contextless elf heritage, despite being right there in the CRB/PC1 alongside the likes of woodland elf and arctic elf - looking forward to seeing some ayindilar buddies soon!

[Feragore]

James Jacobs wrote:

keftiu wrote:

I also loved the AV take and am sad to see them go, but I've made my peace with it. James confirmed that the Ayindilar are not taking over their role... so maybe in a few years we can get Protean-friendly blueish elves who are a little stranger than the Ayindilar.

Abomination Vaults remains an OGL book and we can reprint it as needed and so on—those drow are fine. And that Adventure Path exists in the current rules-set in hardcover, so we don't have to worry about how to "fix" that if we were to do an ORC version of that adventure. Which I doubt we will, because the game is compatible, and we can just keep the current version in print.

But what does this mean? If Abomination Vaults is OGL and you aren't changing anything in that AP because it's already under license, how does it line up with the new ORC Golarion lore-wise?

If drow don't exist, how is that actually compatible with the lore and events of that AP?

For all we know, if they are truly still drow, then that would make their presence ever more auspicious because they are now this mythical ancestry and seeing them should be a Big Deal.

[Gisher]

Zakon05 wrote:

Something I wonder is what this means for the entire concept of blue/purple skinned elves in Golarion.

It's an aesthetic I find pleasing, and many settings have found a way to create very distinct versions of that type of elf. Night Elves in Warcraft and Dunmer in Elder Scrolls come to mind immediately as very different takes on the concept of a dark elf from the drow.

So with the removal of drow, does this specifically mean the removal of evil, demon-worshiping, underground-dwelling offshoots of elves called the drow, or does it include any other possible future interpretation of a blue-skinned elf as well?

We haven't gotten a breakdown of the PF2 version of aquatic elves yet so blue/purple/green/etc. skinned elves might be a possibility there.

[The Raven Black]

Omegon wrote:

Omegon wrote:

So I get that *drow* cant be used anymore, but why not reimagine them?

Call them Dark Elves etc. or make them a society of Nephilim Elves that worship demons. Change their look a bit if you must.

there are many ways to update drow to fit the move away from the OGL and D&D legacy without replacing them with lizards.

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

The thing with American copyright law is that I'm pretty sure just changing the name and keeping all the details the same, or changing one or two superficial details doesn't grant immunity to copyright claims. Furthermore, it ultimately doesn't matter if WotC would never win the case, if they chose to make themself a problem, Hasbro has more than enough legal team to make it extremely painful for Paizo to toe too close to the line.

Okay but this thread is full of examples of things they are just gonna change slightly. Deep Gnomes, Duergar, Neolithids, intellect devourers etc. Why are drow different?

For the exact same reason more people feel bad about this than about those other creatures : the drows are very popular.

And since this popularity comes exactly from everything DnD did with them, they are iconic for that brand. No way Hasbro would let this fly away from their grasp without a fight.

[nephandys]

I was really hoping to see Paizo's updated take on the Drow. Maybe bioluminescent fungus worshipers with ties to the outer gods or who knows what else. This is honestly the worst of both worlds - removing Drow and leaving nothing or nonsensical oops all snake people in their place. Cavern elves aren't even close to a substitute especially if they're going to be heroes of the darklands. I'm sure I'll get over it but I don't think I could be more disappointed than this.

[CorvusMask]

I definitely think that the dark blue elves not existing in any form would be sad :'D

[Travelling Sasha]

Aw man, what a bummer. I get it, as it’s already been said, it had to be done for the health of the company... But I’m still kinda mourning it. My first AP ever was Second Darkness et all, so I had a really soft spot for them. Good news is, one of my players has already sold me on a premise for their new character: A drow that went on a pilgrimage and when returned to Zirnakaynin, found it in ruins, and all other drow cities now being ruled by the serpentfolk. :0

Ultimately, I’m still excited and curious for what Paizo has in store for us, though. I hope that the inclusion of the ayindilar doesn’t dismiss the role of <good guys> that the umbral gnomes have in the Darklands. One of my players played as one in the latter parts of SD and we have grown fond of them. I’d love to hear more about them!

I know two of my players have an actual collection of drow pictures to use as characters, so I hope that Paizo can squeeze in elves sometimes, or somewhere, having lilac or blue skin, too. :B

[Omegon]

FallenDabus wrote:

Omegon wrote:

Omegon wrote:

So I get that *drow* cant be used anymore, but why not reimagine them?

Call them Dark Elves etc. or make them a society of Nephilim Elves that worship demons. Change their look a bit if you must.

there are many ways to update drow to fit the move away from the OGL and D&D legacy without replacing them with lizards.

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

The thing with American copyright law is that I'm pretty sure just changing the name and keeping all the details the same, or changing one or two superficial details doesn't grant immunity to copyright claims. Furthermore, it ultimately doesn't matter if WotC would never win the case, if they chose to make themself a problem, Hasbro has more than enough legal team to make it extremely painful for Paizo to toe too close to the line.

Okay but this thread is full of examples of things they are just gonna change slightly. Deep Gnomes, Duergar, Neolithids, intellect devourers etc. Why are drow different?

While I can't be certain, I can think of two reasons.

A) I don't think all those are just name changes. Looking at comments in other threads, Reddit, and Discord, it sounds like neolithids are also getting axed entirely and replaced with psychic cave worms - seems to have entirely different lore. Intellect devourers are apparently becoming octopus brains, which is rad as hell. Duergar and deep gnomes both have deeper roots in folklore/mythology and are getting their societies revamped.

B) Drizzt.

Not only is the expression of drow in Pathfinder rooted in D&D-isms, drow are also one of THE iconic features of Forgotten Realms and Drizzt is THE iconic protagonist for D&D. That likely means that WotC is going to be much more litigious about them and that they are much more likely to win in court. That's not a winning proposition for Paizo.

I'm not suggesting they keep drow as is and just change the name.

But, like the concept of Elves or elf looking creatures that live deep underground and worship demons is not exactly something WoTC can sue Paizo over. That's what they should keep.

[Cori Marie]

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

keftiu wrote:

James Jacobs on the Into the Darklands stream just now: “We’re not gonna be doing much with the Drow going forward.”

Has talked about how the OGL situation means a ton of the Underdark/Darklands classics are now off-limits, and how the final volume of Sky King’s Tomb is going to offer some insight into how the Darklands will be going forward. There was mention of some old canon being presented now as deliberate misinformation by a brave Pathfinder who first explored the Darklands for the surface, meant to conceal some terrible threat.

Eando, you magnificent person!!

Can actually thank Koriah Azmeren not Eando for this!

[MMCJawa]

Omegon wrote:

Omegon wrote:

So I get that *drow* cant be used anymore, but why not reimagine them?

Call them Dark Elves etc. or make them a society of Nephilim Elves that worship demons. Change their look a bit if you must.

there are many ways to update drow to fit the move away from the OGL and D&D legacy without replacing them with lizards.

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

The thing with American copyright law is that I'm pretty sure just changing the name and keeping all the details the same, or changing one or two superficial details doesn't grant immunity to copyright claims. Furthermore, it ultimately doesn't matter if WotC would never win the case, if they chose to make themself a problem, Hasbro has more than enough legal team to make it extremely painful for Paizo to toe too close to the line.

Okay but this thread is full of examples of things they are just gonna change slightly. Deep Gnomes, Duergar, Neolithids, intellect devourers etc. Why are drow different?

Can't answer the gnome question, but the Duergar are pretty generic and don't have a whole lot that is especially iconic to them in DnD. They are just generic evil gray underground dwarves. Given that folklore is full of evil underground dwarves, and given the work Pathfinder is seemingly putting into giving them more of a distinct feel, they should be safe.

the Drow/Dark Elf concept in DnD is anything but generic, nor does most of the iconic aspects about them derive from folklore.

[The Raven Black]

Omegon wrote:

I'm not suggesting they keep drow as is and just change the name.

But, like the concept of Elves or elf looking creatures that live deep underground and worship demons is not exactly something WoTC can sue Paizo over. That's what they should keep.

Seeing how James Jacobs himself would have really preferred keeping the drows, I am really sure that Paizo's lawyers proved conclusively that the risk was real.

[FallenDabus]

The Raven Black wrote:

Omegon wrote:

I'm not suggesting they keep drow as is and just change the name.

But, like the concept of Elves or elf looking creatures that live deep underground and worship demons is not exactly something WoTC can sue Paizo over. That's what they should keep.

Seeing how James Jacobs himself would have really preferred keeping the drows, I am really sure that Paizo's lawyers proved conclusively that the risk was real.

Very much this. IANAL, but I’m not convinced that there isn’t an IP violation suite there. Further, it may not matter whether or not WotC can win said lawsuit - just having to fight it off may do significant damage to Paizo.

Clearly Paizo’s been willing to fight if there life is on the line: that’s why they said they were willing to defend the OGL in court if they had to. But they don’t need drow to survive. If the choice is “avoid likely litigation” or “do a bunch of work that may or may not be enough” why pick the latter?

No one is going to court over a revamped intellect devourer. Drow are in the popular consciousness, they are part of the D&D brand. I am high skeptical that WotC wouldn’t at least try. And frankly, I’m not sure I’d fault them over that.

All that said, am I keeping evil undead elves in Shraen? Most likely. We’ll see. But expecting Paizo to that risk is unreasonable.

[MurderHobo#6226]

theLegend76 wrote:

Quote:

My favorite character I ever played in my 18 years of gaming was a drow. My second character ever was a drow. The character I played at highest level was a drow. My first campaign I ever ran centered...

And that leaves the wonderful world of Pathfinder Infinite open as our sandbox

My understanding was that anything Paizo won't put in print for legal reasons or ethical choices won't be allowed on Infinite, either (the Android Abolitionist Front in Starfinder being another example from their "ethical" side). Did I misunderstand?

[PossibleCabbage]

Omegon wrote:

But, like the concept of Elves or elf looking creatures that live deep underground and worship demons is not exactly something WoTC can sue Paizo over. That's what they should keep.

Since the Pathfinder Drow weren't really Demon worshipers, as they had made efforts to align the Drow more with the Proteans than Demons, it would be very surprising if they made the new underground elves demon worshipers, since that's more like the Forgotten Realms Drow than the Golarion Drow.

It's kind of funny how the new underground elven people being generally pretty friendly makes it so they're all kind of Drizzt-clones, though.

[The Raven Black]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

Omegon wrote:

But, like the concept of Elves or elf looking creatures that live deep underground and worship demons is not exactly something WoTC can sue Paizo over. That's what they should keep.

Since the Pathfinder Drow weren't really Demon worshipers, as they had made efforts to align the Drow more with the Proteans than Demons, it would be very surprising if they made the new underground elves demon worshipers, since that's more like the Forgotten Realms Drow than the Golarion Drow.

It's kind of funny how the new underground elven people being generally pretty friendly makes it so they're all kind of Drizzt-clones, though.

They are merely underground elves actually.

[PossibleCabbage]

I've never understood the difference between "Drow" and "Underground Elves" to be honest. Like Drow were just underground elves with a specific culture. They're less different from surface elves than like "Aquatic Elves" are.

[Cori Marie]

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I've never understood the difference between "Drow" and "Underground Elves" to be honest. Like Drow were just underground elves with a specific culture. They're less different from surface elves than like "Aquatic Elves" are.

If you know, you ignore the different colored skin and hair.

[Unicore]

One thing that has really impressed me about this whole remastery project is how dedicated to being ethical and responsible stewards for the whole hobby Paizo are consciously being. They are not really walking away from OGL content for purely legal reasons of whether they can be sued, they are recognizing that a company that put a lot of labor into developing some ideas that they used to be willing to share, have largely reversed course on that decision, and so Paizo is choosing to voluntarily walk away from those ideas, especially the ones where they recognize that the foundational work on those ideas is not deep folklore.

This is a pretty amazing level of respect and generosity being shown by Paizo, because a lot of folks at Paizo have put untold further hours of labor into making those ideas distinctly Golarion, but if the foundational idea was tied to IP that isn’t really intended to be free use for other companies and other games, than Paizo is choosing to respect that, rather than antagonize or resist that.

I have a lot of issues with US Intellectual property law, but I would probably not have many of those issues if more companies approached it this kindly and in a spirit of good will. Paizo is taking a massive risk in choosing not to just file off serial numbers and repaint ideas that they have already added a lot of their own time and energy into improving, as that would probably be how very many companies would approach it. But instead they are handing those ideas back over to the kid that has said they want them back and are asking us to give them the opportunity to prove that they can fill these things that feel like holes in the game world with new content that is even more Golarion-enhancing, culturally-rich, and awesome. High helm looks very promising for doing this well with many aspects of the darklands and the Sekmin have been this massively under developed story for a long time and I for one am excited for “trying to fix Drow mistakes” to be a story we don’t have to keep telling so we can start getting something new.

[PossibleCabbage]

Cori Marie wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I've never understood the difference between "Drow" and "Underground Elves" to be honest. Like Drow were just underground elves with a specific culture. They're less different from surface elves than like "Aquatic Elves" are.

If you know, you ignore the different colored skin and hair.

I mean, different skin and hair color doesn't make "two different humans" fundamentally different things, so I wouldn't assume it does for other sapient species.

[Benjamin Tait]

I will miss the Drow, but I can definitely see why they're being removed, it's too much of a big grizzly bear to poke. Though, I prefer generic Dark Elves to be perfectly honest.