GSL: No kobolds?

[loseth]

I'm not a legal type, so I'll ask for clarification here. 'Kobold' is a defined 4e reference, and it's my understanding that as a third party publisher, I'm not allowed to extend the definition of 4e references. Does that mean that I'm not allowed to publish a stat block for a new type of kobold, say, a Kobold Brainbasher? Does it mean that I can't publish a product that expands on Kobold culture?

 

[The Little Raven]

I'm not a legal type, so I'll ask for clarification here. 'Kobold' is a defined 4e reference, and it's my understanding that as a third party publisher, I'm not allowed to extend the definition of 4e references. Does that mean that I'm not allowed to publish a stat block for a new type of kobold, say, a Kobold Brainbasher? Does it mean that I can't publish a product that expands on Kobold culture?

You can add to, but you cannot redefine. So, adding a Kobold Brainbasher is adding to, as is a supplement on Kobold culture (so long as it doesn't contradict anything).

 

[MatthewJHanson]

What your not allowed to do is change the basic nature of a kobold, such as by saying they are now giant spiders.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Or little dog people like in 1e.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

damn, I loved those little dog people!

Ken

 

[Lizard]

It's a bit confusing.

First, it seems clear that one can create new types of kobolds, devils, demons, and so on. However, as I asked in my Devil&Demon thread (and still want an official response on), there seems to be some issue over what "redefining" means, and whether it applies to fluff. It seems that the most restrictive reading of the GSL/SRD is that I can neither create my own culture for kobolds (this would 'redefine' the term), nor can I take the fluff text for kobolds in the MM and build upon it (as that would be referencing non-open content).

I'd like this clarified, as books of race/culture fluff are one of the things I most want to see coming out of the GSL. I'm concerned because it seems as if making sure all GSL products fit into the "assumed world" of D&D is one of the functions of the GSL, and that would be Seriously Depressing.

 

[webrunner]

It's a bit confusing.

First, it seems clear that one can create new types of kobolds, devils, demons, and so on. However, as I asked in my Devil&Demon thread (and still want an official response on), there seems to be some issue over what "redefining" means, and whether it applies to fluff. It seems that the most restrictive reading of the GSL/SRD is that I can neither create my own culture for kobolds (this would 'redefine' the term), nor can I take the fluff text for kobolds in the MM and build upon it (as that would be referencing non-open content).

I'd like this clarified, as books of race/culture fluff are one of the things I most want to see coming out of the GSL. I'm concerned because it seems as if making sure all GSL products fit into the "assumed world" of D&D is one of the functions of the GSL, and that would be Seriously Depressing.

You can't 'take' the fluff text for kobolds, but you can reference it, saying something like "the kobolds are as in the monster manual, they also have a patriarchal society etc etc etc"

 

[see]

Or little dog people like in 1e.

They were never little dog people. They were egg-laying, scaly lizards.

1). Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Monster Manual, 1977, p.57.

"If 200 or more kobolds are encountered in their lair there will be the following additional creatures there: 5-20 guards (as bodyguards above), females equal to 50% of the total number, young equal to 10% of the total number, and 30-300 eggs."

"The hide of kobolds runs from very dark rusty brown to a rusty black. They have no hair."

(Also see the kobold artwork on pp. 57 & 58, which clearly shows scales.)

2). Dungeons & Dragons Basic Set, 1981 (Moldvay), p.B37

"They have scaly rust-brown skin and no hair."

3). Dungeons & Dragons Basic Set, 1983 (Mentzer), Dungeon Masters Rulebook, p.32

"They have scaly, rust-brown skin and no hair."

4). Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Monstrous Compendium Volume 1, Kobold page

"Barely clearing three feet in height, kobolds have scaly hides that range from very dark rusty brown to a rusty black."

"In a lair there will be 5-20 (5d4) bodyguards, females equal to 50% of the males, young equal to 10% of the males and 30-300 (3d10x10) eggs."

5). Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia, p.187

"They have scaly, rust-brown skin no hair."

6). Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Monstrous Manual, p.214

"Barely clearing three feet in height, kobolds have scaly hides that range from very dark rusty brown to a rusty black."

"In a lair there will be 5-20 (5d4) bodyguards, females equal to 50% of the males, young equal to 10% of the males and 30-300 (3d10x10) eggs."

 

[Brown Jenkin]

I could have sworn the 1e illustration looked more doglike. Anyway there are dog kobolds out there.

 

[Alcamtar]

They were never little dog people. They were egg-laying, scaly lizards.

2). Dungeons & Dragons Basic Set, 1981 (Moldvay), p.B37
"They have scaly rust-brown skin and no hair."

5). Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia, p.187
"They have scaly, rust-brown skin no hair."

Moldvay B37 also says "...this small evil dog-like men..."

RC says "...small, evil doglike humanoids..."

So they are small, evil, brown, scaly, doglike humanoids.