SRD Update 2/13?

[DungeonKeeperUK]

Makes me go YIPEE!

Indeed, though, no Mind Flayers or Yuan-Ti...

....makes me wonder.....

I may be wrong but arn't Mind Flayers IP to WoTC in which case they won't appear in teh SRD, not sure about Yuan-Ti though.... just wondering.....

 

[Alzrius]

I may be wrong but arn't Mind Flayers IP to WoTC in which case they won't appear in teh SRD, not sure about Yuan-Ti though.... just wondering.....

I'm not sure about Yuan-Ti either, but I think that Mind Flayers should be okay.

This topic came up when If Thoughts Could Kill was first released. It had those monsters, but referred to them as "Illithids". Later, Monte mentioned that that was a mistake, since "Illithid" was WotC IP, and a patch was issued that changed it (and some other broken rules also) to "Mind Flayers". So, given that, I don't think that they're Product Identity for WotC. My guess is that it's a mistake, and will be ironed out real soon.

 

[Henry]

Alzrius is correct; "Mind Flayer" really SHOULD be in the SRD, since their stats are available in the MM, as are Yuan-Ti; but they could be having debate over the naming of these creatures - but should wotc hesitate releasing these over naming issues of "Mind Flayer" and "Yuan-ti" that would in my opinion should poor judgement. Those names are required for naming of the creatures in question, and releasing them with a name change would needlessly confuse the issue. But we shall have to wait & see what the final result is, I guess...

I DO know that the term "Illithid" only appears in the flavor text, and is IP - that I have no problem with.

 

[Leopold]

Gah! 2 of the biggest baddies and they took them out of the SRD. Why? Anyone got a link? Anyone posting to the WOTC boards for a big "WHY!?!??!"

 

[Ghostwind]

There were a handful of monsters that Wotc felt was IP and regretted making a part of the gentlemen's draft of the SRD. Beholder, Mind Flayers and Yuan-ti were among them. I'm still going through the official SRD to see what other ones were cut.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Mind Flayers are Cthonians, and the Yuan-Ti are at least mythological, if not also a nod to Lovecraft. That said, there's considerable IP in the way they have been developed for D&D.

My (uninformed) guess is that they'll protect the names but not the statblocks. They're easy enough to reconstruct without treading on WOTC IP.


Wulf

 

[reiella]

Page cannot be found. for any of the psionic entries.

Possibly they included too much information like was said above .

 

[Henry]

Mind Flayers are Cthonians, and the Yuan-Ti are at least mythological, if not also a nod to Lovecraft. That said, there's considerable IP in the way they have been developed for D&D.

My (uninformed) guess is that they'll protect the names but not the statblocks. They're easy enough to reconstruct without treading on WOTC IP.


Wulf

It's just my opinion, but protecting "Beholder" and "Mind-Flayer" would be just poor judgements. Why not protect "Grey Render?" "Athach"? "Aranea?" "Pit Fiend?" All of these are either names Wizard's or TSR's employees came up with, or are derivations of common words. Why protect them, when gamers have been using them for almost three years now as OGL? It just would not make sense to me.

 

[Echohawk]

Missing creatures

I've just posted this list on the other thread (http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=41043) but I'm posting it again here because, hey, I need the post counts

Based on my first read through the SRD, the following creatures all seem to be missing:

- Beholder
- Carrion Crawler
- Displacer Beast
- Kuo-toa
- Mind Flayer
- Slaad
- Umber Hulk
- Yuan-ti

Anyone like to confirm or correct this list?

 

[Aeolius]

So much for 2003 being the year of the kuo-toa