Update SRD - Critters

Re: Re: Why

Alzrius said:


*long string of expletives deleted*

I was just annoyed before, but now I'm really upset! Do they even care how many other companies are going to hurt for this? The societies of those two strata of monsters were my favorite thing to see! Now they're gone as a group, just relegated to being mere "demons" and "devils"! :mad:

Grrr!

It was also a functional feature with the grouping of tanari and baatezu qualities. Imps, Kytons, and Hellcats are devils but not Baatezu and Quasits, Bebilith and Retrievers are demons but not tanari.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mark CMG said:
I see what you mean but it has always been the case that some portions were going to go away. Everyone knew the proper names of characters (in spells and items), IP creatures (names if not also stats) and a number of other things were destined for the chopping block. That WotC trusted no one to over extend and take unfair advantage speaks well of the relationship between all parties.

I think this was the first time that anything mechanical was dropped in the transfer from draft to released srd.

I thought everyone was surprised when the spells came out without even the abbreviated name from the draft version. In fact I have a file I believe you wrote up to rename the spells so that they would still be in the same rough alphabetical order, although that was definitely derivative of the originals.

After that I thought everybody thought the individual character names would be removed but that the underlying stats would still be released as happened in the magic item and spell sections.
 

Hellhound, are you still able to release the Veiled Masters?

I definitely want to buy that product.

(Is it in print or on PDF? A lot of products don't make it in print to Canada, unfortunately.)
 

Ghostwind said:


Does anyone have a quote from this book that verifies the name or description of displacer beasts?

I have a copy of the story somewhere, I'll try to dig it up and get the relevant passages.

Until then, have a look at this cover from a Marvel Comics adaptation from February of 1974. My memory of D&D publishing history is fuzzy, but could displacer beasts have appeared in the game before then?

http://ksacomics.com/wu/wu5.htm

Here's another nice illustration by Bob Eggleton, though it postdates the D&D monster so may not be evidential:

http://www.bobeggleton.com/sfg001b.html

Unfortunately, the only images I can find of the 1939 Astounding cover are a bit darker than I remember the original as being:

http://www.mmedia.is/vanvogt/voyageof.htm
 
Last edited:

Ghostwind said:


Does anyone have a quote from this book that verifies the name or description of displacer beasts?

Etch! You caught me away from my S.F. collection for a week or so, this is from memory. If I had read this even a few hours sooner I could have given you quotes from the story.

The description was a large six legged black catlike being with tentacles ending in rough pads rising from its shoulders. It was never quite where it appeared to be, weapons missing it as a result. (No not just hard to hit, but the creature appearing 'displaced'. Unlike the displacer beast the creature feeds off of the id as well as the flesh of its victims.

While the word displaced was used in describing the beast's ability at no time is it refered to as a 'displacer beast.'

The story is part of the book 'Voyage of the Space Beagle', available as an e-book from Amazon.com.

The story 'Black Destroyer' was the first one published for van Vogt (1912 - 2000) and was only later added to the book 'Voyage of the Space Beagle' (1951).

Much of van Vogt's work seems a bit dated now, largely consisting of 'here's the monster, now what do we do?' situations, but they are still fun reads. I recommend 'Voyage of the Space Beagle' and 'The Weapons Shops of Isher' in particular.

The Auld Grump, who did some digging online while writing this reply....
 
Last edited:

Mind Flayer replacement

Well, i dug out an old GURPS Horror monster whos memory still gives me chills, and converted it to d20. It is in the "Teasers" section of my website, and it is mostly OGC (only the history and culture are reserved, I want to develop them in Shades of Black after I finish Lands of Molokai).

DaemonEye Publishing
 

Voadam said:
I think this was the first time that anything mechanical was dropped in the transfer from draft to released srd.

You have brought up a valid point that this recent revision from draft to finalized SRD section excludes mechanical material while others have only made cosmetic changes (names, how something is labeled, but not how something works). It appears that WotC's concerns about just changing things cosmetically are somewhat warranted, given the suggestions of some to simply use a different name and create new mechanics that do virtually what the removed ones did. It's my opinion that the creative energies used to reproduce or mimic that which has been removed would be better channeled toward creating new materials in other areas. I see no limit to imagination and don't feel that pursuing something that has been closed is worthwhile. Certainly others may see things differently and to each their own.

Voadam said:
I thought everyone was surprised when the spells came out without even the abbreviated name from the draft version. In fact I have a file I believe you wrote up to rename the spells so that they would still be in the same rough alphabetical order, although that was definitely derivative of the originals.

I like to think that was a stop-gap method to tide us over between 3 and 3.5. I'm fairly certain the intention on WotC's part was simply to remove the names from circulation (Mord****, Bigs***, etc) and not to disallow like-minded spells. If this hadn't been their intention, I believe they would have yanked the full spell with those names, rather than simply dropping the names from them. As you point out, my intention was to use common adjectives to maintain an alphabetic order to the spells (while things were sorted out through the next revision of the rules). It can be suggested that the spells with common adjectives are derivitive of the spells mechanics left in the SRD by WotC that excluded their IP (which I do not believe to be a problem nor against the intent of WotC), while a renaming of the spells with misspelt the proper names is actually deritive of the IP and spells in the draft version where WotC had proper names (IP) still included (which I felt/feel is less in the spirit of WotC's intent and concerns).

Voadam said:
After that I thought everybody thought the individual character names would be removed but that the underlying stats would still be released as happened in the magic item and spell sections.

You've hit the nail right on the head with this statement. It's a matter of trying to follow WotC's intent. I do not believe it serves anyone's best interest to try to find away around their method. In the case of the spells, their intent was to still include the spells but protect IP. In the case of these creatures they still want to protect the IP but they aren't intending to help other companies merely create knock-offs of their IP as may have happened with the spells where they merely removed the IP and left the mechanics.

In the case of the spells there was a school of thought that side stepping the intent, perhaps, by simply misspelling the names that were removed was a more useful way to go. I believe that this method was counter to WotC's intent and would prove to be deriative of the removed IP names rather than deriative of the spells' mechanics themselves.

Now with the creatures, if the stats had been left in the SRD but the names had been changed I have no doubt that some companies would be including "Mind Frayers" and other such side steps. I do not believe this is in the spirit of WotC's wishes or intent and it appears that they have removed the full mechanics of the creatures to leave no doubt this time around.
 

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
Hellhound, are you still able to release the Veiled Masters?

I definitely want to buy that product.

(Is it in print or on PDF? A lot of products don't make it in print to Canada, unfortunately.)

I'm not the person releasing Veiled Masters, (it is a Paradigm Concepts product - not Ambient Inc.) and I am not in a position to be able to discuss the release of said book at this time.

It isn't a PDF product, it's a print book.

I do believe that the book was en route to the printers already when the SRD was changed, but that all I know at this point.
 



Remove ads

Top