Getting Monster Manual II added to the SRD

[Man-thing]

Why? Quite simple, Besides Atlas Games, WotC is the only company that adds Monster Names to the canon of Open Game Content. Everyone else hoards their Monster Names like it was the plague.

Does all of Bastions work not count?
What about the 3 Tomes of Horror from Necromancer Games?
The vast majority of Green Ronin's monsters?
Mongoose has a couple monster books that are all OGC, are they not?

 

[Sir Elton]

I stopped believing in that possibility when WotC failed to add any material from the 3.0 splat books.

Actually, check the feat list above. All of those feats came from the 3.0 splat books.

elton.

 

[Sir Elton]

Does all of Bastions work not count?
What about the 3 Tomes of Horror from Necromancer Games?
The vast majority of Green Ronin's monsters?
Mongoose has a couple monster books that are all OGC, are they not?

Some times I wonder about those.

 

[Mark]

Actually, check the feat list above. All of those feats came from the 3.0 splat books.

elton.

Funny guy. Of course, you understand that not adding the splat book material back when the book came out was the point of my post. Silly, Elton.

 

[Nellisir]

Mongoose has a couple monster books that are all OGC, are they not?

It's a little ambigious, but by my reading, Mongoose's monster names are not OGC.

 

[Crothian]

General question that I always think of when we talk about this OGL stuff: Why do people care if the names are OGL? I understand why the writers and publishers care because they actually can potentially use the stuff in their own products. But as a fan why are people concerned? If d20 showed us one thing it was that even when publishers don't have to reinvent the wheel (ie use OGL stuff already out there) it seems to me the reinvent the wheel anyway.

 

[Hussar]

Mark, sorry I forgot yours. I actually liked them. Then again, 5 adventures in four or five years is hardly taking the market by storm.

 

[Sir Elton]

General question that I always think of when we talk about this OGL stuff: Why do people care if the names are OGL? I understand why the writers and publishers care because they actually can potentially use the stuff in their own products. But as a fan why are people concerned? If d20 showed us one thing it was that even when publishers don't have to reinvent the wheel (ie use OGL stuff already out there) it seems to me the reinvent the wheel anyway.

I care because I don't want to make up a new name for something that is essentially the same monster. If I want to use an Ophidian (Yaun-ti like creature from Ari Marmell's bestiary), I want to use the name "Ophidian" to identify it. It's easy, its cool, and its instantly identifiable.

I care, because if I use a name for a creature from some other source in an adventure, said publisher would have the right to sue me if the name is protected. So, it's safer to use monsters whose names are part of the OGC. The publisher declared those names as OGC, so the names are instantly recognizeable.

When I wrote my part of Occult Lore, I made sure all the spells and spell names *and* the two monster names for the parts that I wrote would be included as OGC. And I'm glad Atlas honored that.

Elton.

 

[Nellisir]

When I wrote my part of Occult Lore...

Which part was that?

 

[Nellisir]

General question that I always think of when we talk about this OGL stuff: Why do people care if the names are OGL? I understand why the writers and publishers care because they actually can potentially use the stuff in their own products. But as a fan why are people concerned? If d20 showed us one thing it was that even when publishers don't have to reinvent the wheel (ie use OGL stuff already out there) it seems to me the reinvent the wheel anyway.

OGC names allow for a common "palette" of monsters across publishers and campaigns. Taking snake-men as an example, WotC has yuan-ti, Ari has ophidians, Necromancer has inphidians, and Mongoose has scalefolk - all variants on the same really basic theme. It's probably to the publisher's advantage, at least in the short term, to rename monsters, but common terminology would be to the consumer's advantage, and ultimately to the gaming community's advantage. IMO.