GSL: No kobolds?

[pemerton]

Yeah, I don't know what the technical definition is, so by the untutored reading-words interpretation, it could. If you have specific info, feel free and share.

Well, I don't think that a simple verbal description would count as "derivative" for the purposes of US copyright law. But my legal expertise is not in IP law, and is not in US law - so my opinion is not especially definitive on the matter.

My point was that this is not something you can work out by untutored intuition. It's a technical matter with a technical answer.

 

[mxyzplk]

Sure. And hence most publishers are going to avoid the GSL - if you need to hire a damn lawyer to figure out what's up, it's not worth it to little bitty companies.

 

[Spinachcat]

While you can't redefine kobolds, I see no stipulations against you creating a sub-race of Kobolds called the Booger Kobolds with their own unique culture and even physical description - especially when you point out these are a mutated sub-race.

 

[Vague Jayhawk]

If you were to create a sub-race of kobolds can you import some of the Wizards stuff? Or does it have to be 100% original?

Say you built a sub-race and you wanted it to still have Shifty like the kobolds in the MM. Could you import the part of Shifty word for word in the stat block or do you have to just say Shifty (see Kobold, MM1)?

Also, could you keep a kobold stat block relatively intact if you just advance it?

 

[jmucchiello]

Say you built a sub-race and you wanted it to still have Shifty like the kobolds in the MM. Could you import the part of Shifty word for word in the stat block or do you have to just say Shifty (see Kobold, MM1)?

Shifty is in the 4e SRD. You can't print the definition, only refer to it.