tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724254580047847936.post6910555018624755989..comments2024-03-27T20:09:00.283-04:00Comments on Tenkar's Tavern: Of Simulacra, Emulations, and Transmogrifiers (Guest post by Richard J. LeBlanc, Jr)Tenkarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05159289652051155824noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724254580047847936.post-66042907969937878742014-09-17T16:55:29.535-04:002014-09-17T16:55:29.535-04:00You're right, my bad.You're right, my bad. Matt Finchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07678557558458924177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724254580047847936.post-46184371859406904682014-09-17T15:06:19.692-04:002014-09-17T15:06:19.692-04:00Names cannot actually be copyrighted, but they can...Names cannot actually be copyrighted, but they can be trademarked. However, the intellectual property associated with a name can be protected (thus the OGL protection afforded to the names for the mind flayer, ilithid, et al.) The intellect devourer is actually part of the SRD, so it has specifically been noted as open game content. The ustilagor is not part of the SRD under that that name (it is open game content under the name "intellect devourer larva"). This is actually one of the reasons I assumed the name "ustilagor" was protected, or that the use of that name would be verboten (because it's not explicitly stated as being open game content under the name "ustilagor"). Thus, I've chosen to go with "intellect seeker."New Big Dragonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02412016128904985180noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724254580047847936.post-66818470803041070172014-09-17T14:42:19.040-04:002014-09-17T14:42:19.040-04:00"Ustilagor" is still copyrightable, thou..."Ustilagor" is still copyrightable, though. It's not about what's on the "forbidden" list. That's just a couple of monsters. But if it's copyrighted and not in the SRD, then it's still protected. "Intellect Devourer" might or might not be copyrightable depending on how much creative expression there is in the marriage of two generic words.Matt Finchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07678557558458924177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724254580047847936.post-29816192724013062802014-09-17T12:15:00.342-04:002014-09-17T12:15:00.342-04:00What's in a name? Yeah there's a shakespea...What's in a name? Yeah there's a shakespearean quote in there somewhere... The last line before the footnotes is telling, isn't it? While I maybe looking up the stats for an "Eye Tyrant", my mouth is telling the players it's a Beholder. My players, at the least, aren't forced to drink Pepsi all night at the party.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09144083215714934418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724254580047847936.post-52539331204306841342014-09-17T12:05:25.673-04:002014-09-17T12:05:25.673-04:00I knew the intellect devourer wasn't. And for ...I knew the intellect devourer wasn't. And for some reason, I thought the ustilagor was (which is why I changed it to "intellect seeker.") But you're correct. The ustilagor isn't on the list.New Big Dragonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02412016128904985180noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724254580047847936.post-80806727091043549752014-09-17T12:02:30.424-04:002014-09-17T12:02:30.424-04:00Very interesting thoughts. There's also anothe...Very interesting thoughts. There's also another aspect to be taken into account, that the OGL license covers intellectual properties and not material properties. In order to have access to one's preferred soft drink, one requires its material presence. Similarly, if I prefer working in MacOS, but do not have access to a Macintosh, the only solutions I have require physical workarounds: purchase a clone computer, run the OS in an emulator, set up my PC as a 'Hackintosh'. Intellectual properties are not bound to these limitations. If the players of a given retroclone don't know what a 'beholder' is, it doesn't matter to them that the creature in their book is called a 'floating eye'. If, however, they ARE familiar with beholders, and want them in their game, then there's nothing stopping them from simply saying 'beholder' whenever the game says 'floating eye', and nothing is lost.<br /><br />Personally, I don't mind the sidestepping in terminology in order to include all of the standard creatures. The creatures and how the players interact with them, after all, are half of the game play, and so are half of the game. Simply not having beholders or whatnot because the term is under copyright would result in a game that is ruled similarly, but plays differently. I've never played a standalone retroclone at the table, having all the originals myself, but I imagine that if were to run one, if it were clear to me that a given term was merely changed to protect the innocent, I would simply substitute the term for the one the author's clearly wished they could have used.Starbeardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00108523049723509065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724254580047847936.post-84467187061901277102014-09-17T10:20:58.672-04:002014-09-17T10:20:58.672-04:00I don't see the ustilagor/intellect devourer o...I don't see the ustilagor/intellect devourer on the product identity list of verboten, non-OGL monsters.Tonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04006976826851198428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724254580047847936.post-18017741383896906202014-09-17T09:33:30.344-04:002014-09-17T09:33:30.344-04:00I was really looking forward to reading this, but ...I was really looking forward to reading this, but you lost me at Mac :-)foreshamehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05861824286390603313noreply@blogger.com