Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lizard I'm not sure how to interpret that, legally, but I *do* know that in the OGL days, some people at WOTC were annoyed that they had spent a lot of time/effort creating new, distinctive, visual looks for monsters (like bugbears or kobolds) and that other companies mimicked the new looks -- not directly copied the works, that would be blatantly illegal under any terms -- but used the MM art as a guideline, i.e, "That's a kobold. Paint us some kobolds for our cover." |
Sure, but that doesn't suggest that verbal descriptions are precluded.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lizard It's really, really, hard not to keep coming round to " WOTC felt somehow obliged to produce a license, but really doesn't know what they want from third parties". |
I don't know that it's quite as bad as you're suggesting, but it's certainly different from the
OGL.