Illwinter's next project

[Foodstamp]

Originally Posted by Endoperez

I'm pretty sure "Beholder" name is not available for use without negotiating with Wizards of the Coast.
"They are one of the few classic Dungeons & Dragons monsters that Wizards of the Coast claims as Product Identity.[1]"

I understand it's legal to have an eye-monster that casts spell, as long as you don't call it a Beholder.

Age of Wonders has beholders; check out the level 3 unit on this page:

http://aow.heavengames.com/unitdata/...azracs_ts.html

[Gandalf Parker]

They might have asked.
But good point.

[brxbrx]

Originally Posted by Foodstamp

Age of Wonders has beholders; check out the level 3 unit on this page:

http://aow.heavengames.com/unitdata/...azracs_ts.html

I believe that HoMMIII also has a beholder unit. You need to upgrade it from Evil Eye.

[Edi]

Originally Posted by brxbrx

I believe that HoMMIII also has a beholder unit. You need to upgrade it from Evil Eye.

No, you upgrade beholders to Evil Eye in HoMM3.

Beholders also appear in the Might and Magic games, at least in M&M6, which is contemporaneous with HoMM3 in terms of the timeline.

AoW has indeed got beholders.

[brxbrx]

Well, the point's the same. Beholders are present in HoMMIII.

[Corinthian]

Originally Posted by Endoperez

I'm pretty sure "Beholder" name is not available for use without negotiating with Wizards of the Coast.
"They are one of the few classic Dungeons & Dragons monsters that Wizards of the Coast claims as Product Identity.[1]"

I understand it's legal to have an eye-monster that casts spell, as long as you don't call it a Beholder.

Wrong. You cant copyright fictional races or their names. In fact, Wizards of the Coasts themselves would not exist if it was not for this fact. WotC have replied in previous cases that races and rule-sets fall under the "you cant copyright rules and facts" exception in international copyright law. They do have copyright on characters, settings and similar things though.

[thejeff]

It may be wrong, I'm no expert on copyright law, but they do claim ownership of beholders (and mind flayers.). Probably other, less famous, monsters as well.

I don't know if anyone has challenged that in court, but games using the D20 content don't include them.

[Edi]

In any case it may pay to be prudent and avoid serious conflicts. Beholder as a name is interesting in that it's actually a word of the English language, so you can't copyright that, but the concept of the floating spherical monster with magic eyes that is called a beholder may in fact be specific enough to be copyrighted.

Mind flayers I'm not sure about, but that could depend a lot on how Lovecraftian their origins are. In Dominions they are mainly called starspawn and it's the same in CoE3. Illithid is a TSR/WOTC name, which appears in Dominions and it is more problematic.

[brxbrx]

Originally Posted by Edi

In any case it may pay to be prudent and avoid serious conflicts. Beholder as a name is interesting in that it's actually a word of the English language, so you can't copyright that, but the concept of the floating spherical monster with magic eyes that is called a beholder may in fact be specific enough to be copyrighted.

Mind flayers I'm not sure about, but that could depend a lot on how Lovecraftian their origins are. In Dominions they are mainly called starspawn and it's the same in CoE3. Illithid is a TSR/WOTC name, which appears in Dominions and it is more problematic.

Mind Flayers are only Lovecraftian in Dominions. In D&D, they're just creepy tentacle people.

But if you can't copyright monsters, then I'd say using mind flayers in-game should be fine.

[brxbrx]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beholder#Licensing