Beholders

[Camris]

Where is the Beholder in the SRD? I can't find the stats anywhere and I know the're in the 3.5 Monster Manual I.

 

[hong]

Not in the SRD. WotC copyrighted.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Which is funny, given that every fantasy movie and TV show, and more than a few videogames rip them off with impunity.

But heavens to Betsy, allow D&D players to look at their stats when they don't have a book in their lap? NEVER!

 

[RedFox]

The following monsters are considered "Product Itentity" by Wizards of the Coast and are therefore not part of the SRD:

* beholder
* gauth
* carrion crawler
* displacer beast
* githyanki
* githzerai
* kuo-toa
* mind flayer
* slaad
* umber hulk
* yuan-ti

 

[Whimsical]

"That monster right there is Product Identity. It was never released to the SRD, and your encounter with it constitutes a violation of my client's intelectual property."

"Aren't you a violation of a certain popular fantasy author's intelectual property?!?"

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

The following monsters are considered "Product Itentity" by Wizards of the Coast and are therefore not part of the SRD:

* beholder- as mentioned before ripped off with impunity if you're a film-maker
* gauth- no one cares anyway
* carrion crawler- given that these came from a plastic toy EGG found in a dollarstore I don't see how they can claim to have any legal hold over its likeness.
* displacer beast- these were invented by D&D rename it and you're fine
* githyanki- see githzerai
* githzerai- these were invented back in the 80s by Charles Stross in one of his fiction pieces, I really think WoTC needs to lay off trying to claim other people's property
* kuo-toa- yay fish people (just rename the damned things and you can do whatever)
* mind flayer- nobody has seen the renamed Reaper minis of these, no of course not, they're WoTC IP.
* slaad- like gith these creatures were actually first invented by Charles Stross and have been appropriated by WoTC who really should back off the high horse when they're filching other people's creations
* umber hulk- D&D original, but how often do you see them anyway
* yuan-ti- Generic snake people, just rename them and its all cool.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

umber hulk- D&D original, but how often do you see them anyway

Not often. The box of crayons is way too large to be limited to umber. Just pick another colour and some cool sounding critter name and you're set.

Cornflower Juggernaught
Sepia Colossus
Cerulian Hercules
Mango Tango Fandango

 

[Arkhandus]

What's the gauth? I don't think I've ever heard of it...... A bit of description, please?

 

[Kae'Yoss]

What's the gauth? I don't think I've ever heard of it...... A bit of description, please?

A small beholder-kin. Not as many eyes, and the eyes aren't as powerful.

 

[Rothe]

The following monsters are considered "Product Itentity" by Wizards of the Coast and are therefore not part of the SRD:

....

That's the reason for it. They claim them as their intellectual property under product identity. In the US this is a common law doctrine,to the best of my knowledge, and falls under the broad umbrella of misappropriation cases and is similar to trade dress. It's not copyright and you can check the www.uspto.gov to see if they have a registered US trademark on the names for use in some specifc channel of commerce.

They may or may not have a valid product identity claim, but they are taking steps to make their case. Like copyright and trademark this product identity protection doesn't protect a general idea of a floating head with magical tentacles, it is likely rather narrow and strongly tied to the name. Change the name and some of the detals of the description and the "product identity" case gets weaker. It doesn't help that WoTC has regularily changed what a beholder looks like.