Tome of Horrors overlaps with new Fiend Folio

[Numion]

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.

In general companies should never provide anything for free. Because if they ever want to make money out of it people will bitch. If they had done it nonfree from the beginning, people would be happy.

This applies here in a sense, because now people consider all these things WotC has provided for public (free) as "their" property. And WotC can't mess with that!

 

[Derulbaskul]

Another angle to consider is that Necromancer Games has just got themselves a rather improved negotiating position when it comes to doing something else, as in, "Look, we've been really nice about you reneging on your agreement in respect of ToH... and now we want to produce a guide to illithids (not mind flayers) and yuan-ti", or something similar.

Perhaps this is not such a bad thing?

Cheers
D

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi UK,

Hi Olive mate!

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

Well I don't want to tax you more than once on a product, but thanks, I'm sure people are appreciative of you and the other scoopers.

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

Sure, might be someone else wanting to know the same answers.

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

Only five.

Monster Manual 2 had a dozen...and thats not counting the Gem Dragons.

Also I suppose thats the same Thunder Worm from the Dungeon Magazine Epic Adventure with the Cloud Giants.

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...

Usually I would buy the big releases sight unseen but I think I'll have to take a look at this one first.

Thanks again Olive.

 

[Grazzt]

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.

There was at one time a thread or two around here somewhere (I believe it was when the rumors of overlap between the ToH and FF began...like maybe when the Dark Stalker and Creeper appeared in Dungeon or something.) and some in the thread took to pointing fingers at Necromancer for the overlap (and possible future overlap with the FF). The aspect of that that is aggravating is pointing fingers at NG like we can control what WotC does

Ah well.....things happen I guess.

 

[Grazzt]

At the time, many of us in R&D were thinking, "You gave them WHAT???"

Heh- I seem to remember a similar feeling from our side.

 

[Olive]

Only five.

Monster Manual 2 had a dozen...and thats not counting the Gem Dragons.

Also I suppose thats the same Thunder Worm from the Dungeon Magazine Epic Adventure with the Cloud Giants.

yeah, but the focus was on higher CR monters in the mm2, and while I knw your game is different, not everyone has much use for monsters over CR 20. The focus of this book is definitely on the planes. A huge number of creatures are extraplanar.

Usually I would buy the big releases sight unseen but I think I'll have to take a look at this one first.

Thanks again Olive.

I really would recomend it. If you like fiends and extraplanar creatures, it's fatastic. The fiendish PrCs are really seriously great. It's funny, but every book I buy makes me think how i'd do my campaign differently if I was starting again... maybe it's time for TPK

edit: fixed tags

 

[The Sigil]

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.

I think the reason you aren't seeing much NG bashing is that they have said, from before they even released ToH, that they were very careful to "go through all the right channels" and "ask for permission." The general feeling is that they did everything they could reasonably be expected to do... they went directly to WotC and asked, "hey, we want to do this, can we get your permission to do so?"

IOW, it looks (to an outsider) like NG is doing all the right things, going through the proper channels, and generally being the "nice guys." WotC has never contradicted their claims to have done so. Therefore, it looks very much like WotC is the one "causing" the overlap by reneging on an agreement, rather than NG, who by all accounts were very careful to make every effort NOT to step on any toes. That, by my estimation, makes WotC in the wrong, since NG seems to have made it clear from the outset that they were explicitly trying to avoid overlap and took it so far as to check with WotC that there wouldn't be any.

That said, SKR's comment... "you gave them THAT?!?" is pretty darn funny.

--The Sigil

 

[Gez]

Hello Craig,

Only five.

Monster Manual 2 had a dozen...and thats not counting the Gem Dragons.

Yes, but some of these CRs weren't deserved. Fiendwurm, CR 28 ? A CR 28 beastie without SR, only one attack per round, and a mere Str 36 score... Demonic belch ? The name is fun, but vrocks and quasits aren't that impressive. It can't fly and it has no ranged attacks. CR 18 maybe, definitely not 28. I have similar doubts about the mountain giant (CR 26, no SR).

 

[Gez]

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

I think there was. Even without the Orcus exception, there were other duplicates -- I'm pretty sure Oriental Adventure was already published at these time, and it contained the Yeti. They also used "Groaning Spirit" and "Demonic Knight" to have their own version of the banshee and death knight. Finally, the arrangement covered the MM2 and the BoVD -- yet the Shadow Demon is found in both the BoVD and the ToH.

Anyway, even if a grand total of 40 monsters from the ToH have official reprints elsewhere (Unapproachable East will have the Taer, for example), that's still less than 10% of the content.

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???"

Flumph, flail snail, piercer, gambado. Nothing to swear at.

 

[Orcus]

SKR's comments seems to echo other sources I have saying that when WotC told me they were "running it past R&D" that that didnt really happen extensively. Of course I didnt know that.

I want to make a couple of important points.

1. I had a very pleasant time, and still do, dealing with AV and Mary and Co at WotC. I dont believe this was in any way intentional or mean spirited.

2. I think this was, perhaps, the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing.

3. We did not get some formal contractual promise they would not do monsters. I cant bind WotC to that. What I did was this: I sent them my list of monsters. I got and NDA for their upcoming products. We agreed to remove any monsters that were appearing in any books that were being published for WotC for the next year and a half (since I cant expect them to tell me about monsters they havent decided to use). I got a list from them and took those monsters out. I was told my list was "run by R&D" and that no book in the next year and a half would contain monsters from our list. In fact, I was told that WotC didnt really have much interest in those monsters, other than perhaps one here or there in a Dragon article or a Dungeon adventure. They knew my idea was to round up and bring back the monsters that were "left behind by third edition." I cant believe that FF was not in production when I discussed this with WotC. Had I known I would have gladly pulled the overlapping monsters.

4. My issue was just this: I was told it was run through R&D, they wouldnt be doing hte monsters and that they didnt much care about them. I put in our product that the monsters in ToH (other than a handful that WotC and I agreed would overlap--Orcus, for example) wouldnt be done by WotC as that was the information given to me. Now I feel like I am in a position where someone will think I lied about that. I dont like that. I removed plenty of monsters in good faith and would have taken them all out. I love the customers and I dont want anyone to feel they got "screwed" by getting the ToH only to later find (less than 6 months later) that WotC put out "official" versions. That bothers me.

I dont necessarily hold AV or Mary responsible in any way. I think the unfortunate reality is that my list of d20 monsters wasnt exaclty a priority for them and that some people looked at it, some didnt, it didnt seem that big a deal and I got the OK. My guess is that this was more of an oversight due to lack of interest in dotting i's and crossing t's by WotC. I just wish I had known that was the case or been told that WotC might redo them (which I was told wouldnt happen) and I would have pulled the monsters and not said there wont be official versions.

This isnt a contract dispute. This isnt some leverage thing (though I like the way you think ). I have one purpose only: to make sure the fans understand that when I said the monsters in ToH wouldnt be superceded by WotC that that statement was true and that is what I was told.

I dont have even a drop of ill will for anyone over at WotC and I dont want anyone here to take this as some example of WotC being evil.

Clark