Ranger REG
Explorer
You could always ask Wizards for permission.
SRD Update 2/13?
- Thread starter Ruined
- Start date
Ranger REG said:
Yeah, but if WotC's intent was to not be in the module publishing business, what do they gain by keeping this subset of monsters (some of which are really staples, especially of underdark and higher level adventures) out of public usage?
Really, Displacer Beast is IP, but Blink Dog isn't?
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
This just seems counter-productive on so many levels. Both various d20 companies and players are going to be really upset at WotC if those creatures aren't released, or even if the names alone aren't released when just the stats are (what a mess that'd be).
I shudder to think of how many companies are going to have to issue reprints in various forms for a myriad of books.
I haven't checked the WotC boards, but I hope that we, the fans, can send up a loud enough public outcry that they reverse this policy and get these creatures back where they belong.
Hey, if we can get half of a new edition, we can get this.
I shudder to think of how many companies are going to have to issue reprints in various forms for a myriad of books.
I haven't checked the WotC boards, but I hope that we, the fans, can send up a loud enough public outcry that they reverse this policy and get these creatures back where they belong.
Hey, if we can get half of a new edition, we can get this.
Last edited:
Dinkeldog said:
As I see it, WotC's intent is not to abandon module publishing altogether, but instead just publish "prestige" modules - see City of the Spider Queen, Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil - and adventures via Dungeon magazine. Thus, they have a reason to keep these monsters closed content.
It is not just the names they're protecting - it's the entire concept. Beholders, Yuan-Ti, Mind Flayers are extremely important to WotC as defining creatures of D&D.
I bet they'd like to claim IP on drow as well, but although the drow are an invented species, they're not distinctive enough, and could be claimed as derivative by someone challenging IP rights. (just checked... yes drow are in the SRD.
)They haven't claimed everything as IP for the same reason they released the SRD as OGC in the first place - there has to be something for people to use!
With regard to blink dogs vs. displacer beasts... the former is a boring ally, the latter is a interesting enemy. Enough of a reason to keep one and release the other.
Cheers!
Alzrius said:
Very few indeed. I don't think there are many books that use these monsters that would get a 2nd print run even without these changes. Of course, WotC might be extremely draconian about the matter... but I really doubt they will be.
The one reprintable book that I believe may be affected is the Tome of Horrors, and I trust fully in Clark's ability to negotiate something with Wizards.
PDF publishers may be in a little more trouble, as they'll have to take down non-compliant pdfs and edit them so they are compliant, and/or get permission from WotC.
(I must check to see if my own meagre writings contain any of this closed content... perhaps a wandering monster or two, I guess).
Cheers!
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
Re: Missing creatures
Yes, add the terms "tanar'ri" and "baatezu" to that. The actual creatures are in there, but those two subgroupings are completely gone.
I don't know about other people, but this seriously pisses me off.
Echohawk said: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?
Yes, add the terms "tanar'ri" and "baatezu" to that. The actual creatures are in there, but those two subgroupings are completely gone.
I don't know about other people, but this seriously pisses me off.
KingOfChaos
First Post
Please PLEASE tell me the lich template is still in the SRD...I will have to murder someone if it's not or be forced to create an alternative 
Mouseferatu
Hero
MerricB said:
The entire purpose of the SRD was to allow other companies to make the D&D-compatible products that WotC wasn't going to make due to insufficient profit margins or other issues.
Every aspect of the game WotC disallows for us is that much less for us to work with. Just as an example, I had an idea for a supplement focused on mind flayers--so thoroughly that changing it isn't really an option. If the flayers are gone from my toolbox, the product isn't published.
It's bad for the D20 companies, because it drastically limits us. (And before you say that six monsters aren't drastic, keep in mind that they include some of the most popular critters in the game, and that any restriction is potentially drastic if it happens to impact someone's ideas.)
And frankly, anything that's bad for D20 companies is bad for WotC. After all, the only "true" purpose the D20 companies serve is to draw attention to D&D, specifically the core rules. To say nothing of the fact that WotC really doesn't want (or so I assume) the headaches of an entire angry horde of smaller companies complaining at them.
But what bothers me the most is the precedent. I always understood why WotC didn't want to include world-specific concepts, such as god names or Mordenkainen, in the SRD. But now we're starting to get into what looks an awful lot like arbitrary decisions? Why take out these creatures? It can't just be because they're D&D-unique; so are owlbears and blink dogs, just for example.
If WotC is going to start making arbitrary restrictions, where's it going to stop? And if it's not arbitrary, why haven't they explained their reasoning? They must have known this was going to cause a stir.
It's entirely possible WotC has a valid reason for this. I'd very much love to hear it. I've been defending them for months when other people complain about their behavior; I'd hate to start seeing them make arbitrary and harmful decisions now and prove me wrong.
Personally, I'm still hopeful that this is all just a big mistake...
Similar Threads
