Dnd beholder lawsuit1/3/2024 ![]() If WoC would even put dragon "under OGL licensing" i would reject the validity. ![]() Public domain by default overrides OGL and any other license. Is there anything similar and more solid than your words that can claim that mimics are in OGL? Dragons is a straw man argument really.ĭragon has ancient history lore. ![]() , proof and evidence on what you claim here? You can not end up to such a conclusion out of thin air. "and thus fall under the Open Gaming License. "Haha the one and only incredibly niche area of the law that I actually (probably) know more about than how about that. Just check for example the many cases of japanese youkai who have the forms of household items of various types, those are centuries old. That is the reason why they had to place their version of it in "open content" - not because they decided to give it away, but because the idea was never theirs to begin with. They could copyright monsters they invented themselves for use in D&D (and have done so, although in some cases it might be questionable if the idea was really theirs first or if it was only a variant of a folklore story).īut the concept and idea of a "Mimic" is also much older and does not come from them. And they couldn't copyright the name "halfling" either because that was not the original idea either, that would have been Tolkiens as well. And the original Final Fantasy was based fairly directly on the original Dungeons & Dragons all this comes down to is that you can only copyright things that you created on your own.Īs a much better example TSR (the original company owning D&D) had to name one of their races the Halflings because the original name Hobbit was copyrighted by the original creator, Tolkien. Considering that like every FF game had Mimics w/o it being an issue with TSR/later WotC. (I don't mean to be rude but this is definitely one of the sillier questions I've ever come across on here. Um also, yeah, does everyone remember how the makers of D&D sued From Software for including those terrifying Mimics that are like one of the top five most memorable things that kill you in the Souls games? Oh, that's right, they didn't. (My lack of respect for intellectual property rights isn't an across the board principle, by the way: D&D specifically took several monsters that existed in mythology or were clearly based on mythical creatures, and tried to claim them as IP, which is wrong. You could be using owlbears or a beholder or w/e and WotC is never going to sue you because WotC is never going to know, or care, about your RPG Maker game. ![]() Look up '5E Product Identity' if you really want to see the content that WotC is telling you not to use, but I mean, again.no one cares about your RPG Maker game, if you ascribe to realism there is a hard limit on the number of people that are ever potentially gonna care about your RPG Maker game even if you finish it (statistically unlikely) AND it's great.and sometimes it's a good thing that no one cares about your RM Game. WotC is fine with you using OGL Content, they just don't want you using the monsters and other proper nouns they've earmarked This makes sense because D&D "owning" mimics would make about as much sense as it "owning" dragons. This distinction was important back in the 3.X days and is important again now in the 5E era. The important distinction here is that unlike Illithids or Displacer Beasts or Beholders, Mimics are not part of the content that WotC defines as "Product Identity" and thus fall under the Open Gaming License. Haha the one and only incredibly niche area of the law that I actually (probably) know more about than how about that. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |