Tome of Horrors overlaps with new Fiend Folio

[BOZ]

This majorely suck. What about light aasimon, agathinon, sword archon, tome archon, warden archon, ursinal guardinal, equinal guardinal, bralani eldarin, coure eladrin, noviere eladrin, shiere eladrin, tulani eladrin ? If they wanted to put celestials in a book about fiends, there was a host of them we were still waiting for.

yeah, but you know where you can find most of those.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

So what? I'm still not getting why this is an issue, especially considering everyone agrees that they have done what you want them to do: include other companies' content in their products. It's just a matter of not being satisfied with how much they've done.

Highlight mine, to indicate where your lack of comprehension lies. Reread my posts; If you finally decide to to take the time to understand what I've written, maybe this side-issue will stop plagueing the thread. Otherwise, you're making a mountain out of a mole-hill.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

yeah, but you know where you can find most of those.

That be where I go.

 

[Numion]

I don't know if there was a written agreement or not, but for WotC to say, "you can do these and we won't do them" - and then do them anyway - is bad form at best and breach of contract at worst. THAT is the issue here... not that WotC can't do them because someone else didn't do them first, but rather that WotC told someone else, "go ahead and do them and we agree not to" - and then reneged and did them anyway.

I don't know. If it was a real contract and NG had paid for the use of the old monsters (which I guess were WotC's IP to begin with, correct me if I'm wrong), I'd be more willing to make a big deal out of this. As of now it sounds just like that they got together on a meeting, decided it would be nifty if each did their own things, but then WotC wanted to do FF. With a few repetitive monsters.

Anyway, as NG's guy was pissed that WotC had broken a promise he had given on ToH (no repetitive monsters) . . true, WotC did wrong on that. But as a general rule one shouldn't make promises one isn't in position to keep. Applies in RL

 

[seankreynolds]

... back and forth until they had a finalized list. The agreement seems to have been "NG gets to do X, Y, and Z, and WotC won't touch those - and WotC gets to do A, B, and C, and NG won't touch THOSE. Plus D and E (e.g., Orcus) will be done by both."

Hmm, wasn't there a "we don't _guarantee_ we aren't going to ho these" aspect of the agreement? I thought I heard about that at some point.

Of course, I'm also seeing this now from the outside. At the time, many of us in R&D were thinking, "You gave them WHAT???"

 

[Vocenoctum]

Hmm, wasn't there a "we don't _guarantee_ we aren't going to ho these" aspect of the agreement? I thought I heard about that at some point.

On the other board, Orcus does mention that the agreement was only for what was actually in production at that time. Also said he wasn't sure if Fiend Folio was started at that time.

The only thing I don't like from that other thread is that they keep saying people have been blaming NecroGame, but on all these threads, I've really only seen Wizards bashing and some people saying "maybe there's more than we know." Very few people have uttered anything blaming NG that I saw, but that could be me.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I don't know. If it was a real contract and NG had paid for the use of the old monsters (which I guess were WotC's IP to begin with, correct me if I'm wrong), I'd be more willing to make a big deal out of this. As of now it sounds just like that they got together on a meeting, decided it would be nifty if each did their own things, but then WotC wanted to do FF. With a few repetitive monsters.

Anyway, as NG's guy was pissed that WotC had broken a promise he had given on ToH (no repetitive monsters) . . true, WotC did wrong on that. But as a general rule one shouldn't make promises one isn't in position to keep. Applies in RL

It's like removing the mind flayers and such from the SRD when they went from the Gentleman's Agreement. I think the problem is that people tend to consider too much of it eternal. Wizards as a company can change minds, and it's possible that others within the company won't agree with. It's not an absolute.

Only thing I didn't like with Tome of Horrors was on the back cover is said no reprints ever, then on the inside it said no reprints (well, just a few) or whatever, but that's just advertising hype.

 

[BOZ]

Hmm, wasn't there a "we don't _guarantee_ we aren't going to ho these" aspect of the agreement? I thought I heard about that at some point.

Of course, I'm also seeing this now from the outside. At the time, many of us in R&D were thinking, "You gave them WHAT???"

LOL! i can only imagine...

 

[Olive]

Hi Olive mate!



Are there many CR20+ monsters in the book?

Also is the art good (?) any Wayne Reynolds or Brian Despain peices?

Hi UK,

I'm ansering questions in this thread here: http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46403

I'll repost your question and my answer there as well.

a) There's 1 CR20 (Crawling Head), 2 CR21 (Demon, myrmyxicus & Thunder Worm), 1 CR 22, (Devil, paeliryoth) and 1 CR 25 (demon, klurichir)

b) No Brian Despain that I can see, but a couple of nice WAR. Most of the art is pretty average I'm afraid, and there's some really odd random B&W almost clip arty type pieces which don't seem to fit any where. I'm pretty sure some of them are reused from MM2 or BoVD...

 

[Wolf72]

I know one thing WotC will never duplicate ... ME! and all the other commentors and contributors that Scott & Gang gave thanks to in the ToH.

Thanks guys!