D&D monsters from comic books

[Shade]

Well, I'd say that beats Shining South by about 13 years! Cool.

[BOZ]

someone must have remembered it and decided to bring it back out into the spotlight.

[Echohawk]

Originally Posted by Alzrius

Note that since these are published by Kenzer, these are D&D, and not OGC.

Knights of the Dinner Table

#72 - “Dungeon of the Month: The Garden of Unearthly Delights.”
#79 - “Movies on the Battlemat.”
#80 - “Dangerous Denizens.”
#80 - “Movies on the Battlemat.”
#83 - “Movies on the Battlemat.”
#84 - “Movies on the Battlemat.”
#89 - “Rustlers of the Night.”
#90 - “Rustlers of the Night.”

I've just taken a look at these magazine, and I agree that the critters from #72 and the first article in #80 are officially D&D creatures. However, the other articles aren't D&D articles, and I don't think the creatures from those can really be counted as "D&D" creatures. In fact, the first "Movies on the Battlemat" article listed specifies that these are d20 System statistics, rather than D&D stats.

I do realise that probably no-one else is too bothered by this rather pedantic distinction, but since I was busy indexing these anyway, I didn't think a note to this long-dormant thread would hurt.

Also... I don't suppose anyone know which issue of the DC Dragonlance series that monster appeared in? Or am I going to have to hunt down and check the whole series...?

[BOZ]

sorry buddy, looks like it's all on you.

[Alzrius]

Echohawk, I don't have the comics in front of me, but the idea is that it's all source-based. There's no d20 logo on the cover of the KoDT comics, and there's no reproduction of the OGL anywhere in them. It stands to reason then that, like Kalamar, everything in them is allowed via specific agreement with WotC, making them second-party materials, which still falls under the D&D banner.

In other words, it doesn't seem like you can go through and pick which monsters in a book are D&D and which aren't; it's all or nothing.

[Echohawk]

Ah, gotcha. I didn't notice the absence of the OGL. They do differ in "officialness" by the absence or presence of the D&D logo in the article though, so I reckon those creatures would fall into two canon categories: "print, D&D logo, published by 3rd Party" and "print, no D&D logo, published by 3rd Party". At least that's where I'm going to file them in my almost complete monster index .

Also: Are those critters the only ones that have ever appeared in KotDT?

Boz: *sigh* Ebay here I come...

[Alzrius]

I'm a little behind on my KoDT issues at the moment, but I hope to have that (mostly) rectified by the end of the week, so I should be able to let you know if there's any more by then.