TSR TSR (2) Confirms TSR (3)'s Acquisition of Trademark (Updated!)

Jayson Elliot registered the TSR trademark back in 2011 and used it to launch Gygax Magazine along with Ernie and Luke Gygax. The two Gygax's left the company a few years later after Gary Gygax's (co-founder of TSR (1) back in the 1970s) widow, Gail Gygax, forced the closure of Gygax Magazine. Then, earlier this year, TSR (3) swooped in on the TSR trademark, after Jayson Elliot accidentally let it lapse, as TSR (2) confirms:

We have owned the TSR trademark since 2011. Last year, we missed a filing date, and another company registered it, though we are still using it in commerce. While we could win a lawsuit, we frankly don't have the money to litigate. So, we're licensing it back from them.

As a result, there are two companies now using the name TSR. You can tell when it's us because we're the only ones using the new logo.

They're opening a museum in Lake Geneva at the old TSR house, and we wish them success with it, it's important to celebrate the legacy that Gary Gygax created.

Ernie Gygax, formerly of TSR (1) under Gary Gygax, then working with Jayson Elliot as part of TSR (2), is one of the founders of of TSR (3), and confirmed in his (now infamous) interview --

The other TSR is a licensee because [Jayson Elliot] let it lapse. But he had absolutely ... love for the game and the products. There was no reason to say 'oh you've screwed up, oh it's all ours, ha ha ha ha!' Instead, Justin [LaNasa] came to him and said ... we love that you're doing Top Secret things, we have a much broader goal for the whole thing. But there's no reason for you to stop or even have any troubles. Justin said, I'll take care of the paperwork, you just give me $10 a year, and you put out all this love for old school gaming that you can. And we appreciate that you were there to try and pick up things, and you produced Gygax Magazine, for in its time that you're also working on a game that you love to play ... because Top Secret was Jayson's love, as a young man.

TSR (2), still run by Jayson Elliot, publishes Top Secret, and is not connected to TSR (3) other than now having to license it’s own name from them. TSR (3) has also registered the trademark to Star Frontiers, a game owned by and still currently sold by D&D-owner WotC.

In other news the GYGAX trademark appears to have lapsed.

UPDATE! TSR (2) has decided NOT to license its own name from TSR (3):

Update to our earlier tweet - we will NOT be licensing anything from the new company claiming rights to the TSR logos. We are not working with them in any fashion.

 

[Dausuul]

The description of a typical phylactery is definitely in 4e. The question is: was including that typical form of a phylactery intended to correct a perceived slight at the Jewish phylactery because previous descriptions didn't acknowledge that or is it a slight because it does?

Confirmed, the 4E Monster Manual has the same thing, almost word-for-word: "...typically takes the form of a fist-sized metal box containing strips of parchment on which magical phrases have been written."

5E is a little less on-the-nose, but retains the basic idea: "...traditionally an amulet in the shape of a small box, but it can take the form of any item possessing an interior space into which arcane sigils of naming, binding, immortality, and dark magic are scribed in silver."

As to the question of whether it's a slight, I'll just say it's a bad idea and they should have changed the name. Calling it a phylactery means you will almost always get one of two reactions when someone encounters it for the first time: Either "Whoa, that's kind of offensive" or "Phyla-what?" I'm not seeing the upside here. Just call it a soul talisman or something.

 

[Yaarel]

for the record they don't keep Torah scrolls in tefillin.

Heh, I took that phrasing as technically correct.

They are Tora in the sense of passage from Tora, and the are (very small) scrolls.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

My assumption would be that someone looked up phylactery or did some research, thought "oh, wouldn't it be neat if we used that in the game" without thinking whether it would be problematic or not. Maybe it was someone that just liked the imagery it evoked. Or maybe it was just trendy early 21st century occultism - it was around this time that Madonna, for example, was really into the Kabbalah.

If we were to change the name, I'd go for "soul jar." It says what it is on the tin, but also makes Acererak's Soulmonger sound that much more ominous. But like I said before, I'm not particularly worked up over it.

The description of a typical phylactery is definitely in 4e. The question is: was including that typical form of a phylactery intended to correct a perceived slight at the Jewish phylactery because previous descriptions didn't acknowledge that or is it a slight because it does?

Confirmed, the 4E Monster Manual has the same thing, almost word-for-word: "...typically takes the form of a fist-sized metal box containing strips of parchment on which magical phrases have been written."

5E is a little less on-the-nose, but retains the basic idea: "...traditionally an amulet in the shape of a small box, but it can take the form of any item possessing an interior space into which arcane sigils of naming, binding, immortality, and dark magic are scribed in silver."

As to the question of whether it's a slight, I'll just say it's a bad idea and they should have changed the name. Calling it a phylactery means you will almost always get one of two reactions when someone encounters it for the first time: Either "Whoa, that's kind of offensive" or "Phyla-what?" I'm not seeing the upside here. Just call it a soul talisman or something.

 

[Yaarel]

Confirmed, the 4E Monster Manual has the same thing, almost word-for-word: "...typically takes the form of a fist-sized metal box containing strips of parchment on which magical phrases have been written."

5E is a little less on-the-nose, but retains the basic idea: "...traditionally an amulet in the shape of a small box, but it can take the form of any item possessing an interior space into which arcane sigils of naming, binding, immortality, and dark magic are scribed in silver."

As to the question of whether it's a slight, I'll just say it's a bad idea and they should have changed the name. Calling it a phylactery means you will almost always get one of two reactions when someone encounters it for the first time: Either "Whoa, that's kind of offensive" or "Phyla-what?" I'm not seeing the upside here. Just call it a soul talisman or something.

For plain English, maybe call the Lich’s amulet a "soul jar": "traditionally an amulet in the shape of a small clay jar ... into which the preserved heart of the lich is inscribed with arcane symbols".

Thus eliminate the small box, and avoid the term "phylactery".

 

[Yaarel]

If we were to change the name, I'd go for "soul jar." It says what it is on the tin.

Wow!

"Soul jar".

I wrote my post before I read yours.

 

[Retreater]

I prefer for my liches to use a "jar jar."

 

[Parmandur]

My assumption would be that someone looked up phylactery or did some research, thought "oh, wouldn't it be neat if we used that in the game" without thinking whether it would be problematic or not. Maybe it was someone that just liked the imagery it evoked. Or maybe it was just trendy early 21st century occultism - it was around this time that Madonna, for example, was really into the Kabbalah.

If we were to change the name, I'd go for "soul jar." It says what it is on the tin, but also makes Acererak's Soulmonger sound that much more ominous. But like I said before, I'm not particularly worked up over it.

My bet is that it phylactery used in an early 20th century pulp story about an undead "Asiatic" wizard.

 

[Zardnaar]

That idea is in Xanathar's, but it is notable that the equivalent - being a cleric that simply had an ethos about the subject of their spheres existed as a stated option back in the 3e PHB.

2E priests hand in 1990 covered it. First appearance afaik.

 

[Maxperson]

I prefer for my liches to use a "jar jar."

View attachment 139291

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

What about the other magical phylactery in the game? Those have nothing to do with the evil of a lich, such as from 3.5:

Phylactery of Undead Turning: This item is a boon to any character able to turn undead, allowing him to do so as if his class level were four levels higher than it actually is. Moderate necromancy [good]; CL 10th; Craft Wondrous Item, 10th-level cleric; Price 11,000 gp

Also from 3.5, this one sounds much more like a rip-off from Judaism:

Phylactery of Faithfulness: This item is a small box containing religious scripture affixed to a leather cord and tied around the forehead. ... The wearer of a phylactery of faithfulness is aware of any action or item that could adversely affect his alignment and his standing with his deity, including magical effects.

Also, just back in 2017, to go with Tales from the Yawning Portal, WotC had a "design your own phylactery" contest.

Tales from the Yawning Portal: Phylacteries | Dungeons & Dragons

dnd.wizards.com

And the Forgotten Realms Wiki has a lot of info too:

Phylactery

A phylactery (also sometimes called a jar) was the name given to the repository used to store the life force of a lich. A cleric or mage had to create such a phylactery in order to become a lich, and it was necessary for the lich to maintain its undead state and escape being destroyed...

forgottenrealms.fandom.com