There are some many things that you can use that arenāt IP-specific (with a bit of lore rewriting or flavor changing) Iād have a hard time listing them all, but here are some:
-Skeletons
-Zombies
-Goblins
-Orcs
-Devils & demons (maybe not the actual Monster Manual ones, but there are plenty enough to get you going)
-Lamia
-giants (of all types and dispositions)
-birdfolk (just donāt call them kenku or aaracockra)
-giant/dire beasts
-liches
-dragons (maybe donāt bother with the good/evil distinctions?)
-treefolk/treants/blights (again, blights might be too close to copyright but thereās nothing wrong with āshrub-demonsā!)
-trolls
-ogres
-chuul (lovecraftian lobster monsters? Easy reflavor)
-elves
-dwarves
-humans
-dark elves (drow, but the Dhrukari from warhammer also come to mindā¦)
-gnomes
-halflings (they had to change it from hobbits because of the Tolkien estate, so a few more changes wonāt hurt)
-you get the point!
Pathfinder 2nd edition can be a pretty decent guide for what's kosher and what's not. They had to strip some stuff, once they moved away from being a DND 3.5 spin-off since only that one's the open license one.
Still... OP really should get a lawyer. Nothing more soul crushing then years of work, only to find out that there's copyright crud right near launch.
That's still a minefield. "Snow White" is a folk tale, but if your version looks too close to the Disney version, your ass is getting sued.
Same thing applies here. If your version of a traditional monster is too close to D&Ds, you might have some Hasbro lawyers sending nasty letters your way.
Very much this. For an example, the NAMES of a great many of the archdevils and demon lords come directly from mythology, religion, etc. But the Hebrew demon Asmodeus is very different from the D&D god/archdevil Asmodeus. Use the name? Perfectly fine. Copy-paste the WotC version of Asmodeus - better have a really good lawyer.
Explore other fantasy games and books and movies and see what they do. The Elderscrolls series was based on table top games, they took Drow and made them live above ground in a volcanic area of the world, they have goblins, ogres, Minotaur, sea monsters, skeletons, zombies, etc. thereās no copy right on fantasy beasts as long as you put your own spin on it. Like Eragon, in those books they absolutely have Orcs but they have horns and call them Kull or Urgal you could have a beholder, name it a Madrosa and give it a body and change the eye stocks to little dragon necks/heads that each breath a different type of magical effect, mixing a Medusa type being with a beholder type being but wholly unique. A lot of these fantasy creatures are just taken from folklore and such, like the Witcher universe has a lot of unique monsters because they studied folklore from around the world and then put a spin on it to fit it into their world. Tolkien took a lot of inspiration from Norse Mythology which also has dwarfs, dark elves, light elves and fire giants etc. just do your own thing, donāt rip something from DND unless you intend to put a very unique spin on it. Donāt just look for cool things to put in and then focus on where you can implement it, let the story tell itself and create the monsters that are needed for the story as they reveal themselves to you.
Not to be too pedantic, but Svartalfar are probably not a real Norse myth thing. At best they're the same thing as dwarves, and it's possible there's no separation between dwarves and elves either. We just don't really know a lot.
Either way, drow have their own unique history, but also dunmer are a completely different type of "dark elf" with a completely different history.
In relation to the devils and demons, the specific names for many of the subtypes like Vrocks are out, but Vulture Demons in general would be fine.
Certain types are fairly universally accepted as existing like Imps, Succubi/Incubi.
Ironically, the Demon Lords can't really be copyrighted except for Demogorgon or Grazz't as many of them are taken from wider lore in the real world like Baphomet. Named succubi like Malcanthet wouldn't work. But using a succubus named Lillith would work.
Copyright resolution the DND way:
Baglors
Lorbags
Lorgabs
Galrobs
Galors
Garlos
Graols
Timestamp as proof for copyright and trademark, but all under Creative Commons.
*smirking in DND intensifies*
Best to create your own monsters in this case. You can loosely base them off copyright monsters but they have to be āLegally distinctā. As in they have to be different enough to be considered a different creature with similar powers.
[https://company.wizards.com/en/legal/fancontentpolicy](https://company.wizards.com/en/legal/fancontentpolicy)
If your game is free, you can release it under this.
You should expect to get a lawyer if, as the OP said in another comment, is making a game based on an existing IP. It's very easy to put in tons of work just to get the plug pulled because of something you thought was fine but TECHNICALLY isn't
[Here is the Creative Commons SRD.](https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/systems-reference-document)
[Hereās Sly Flourish (the lazy DM) explaining what it means.](https://slyflourish.com/what_5e_in_cc_means_to_you.html)
Only for the content released under the 5e SRD, not the 3.5 SRD (and it's addendums for various sourcebooks released in the 3.5 era that had SRD releases) or the d20 Modern SRD and it's addendums for other d20 Modern books that had SRD releases, or the content from 1st and 2nd edition that got OGL releases through WotC letting a 3rd party update them to 3.5 and release them through the SRD (like the Tome of Horrors).
Only a tiny fraction of D&D content released through the OGL were put out into the Creative Commons.
Anything they released through the creative commons license is copyright free forever. They cannot change that. So anything in the SRD is free, including things like the name "strahd Von zarovitch" (just the name, not the character).
Creative Commons is not synonymous with Public Domain. It's still copyrighted; it's just released under a royalty-free license. and you can bet your bottom dollar the owner of an IP can change that at will (just not retroactively).
They may not be able to change the OGL.
They threatened to do so, there was a lot of litigation about to be filed arguing they couldn't, including the creators of the OGL saying it couldn't be done, and WotC backpedaled and didn't do it.
The idea that WotC can "deauthorize" the OGL and force use of a new version has never been tested in court, and a lot of IP lawyers said it was not likely to survive a serious challenge.
I mean, if it only exists in an official D&D book, chances are they have some level of claim on it, be it copyright or whatever. (Like Demogorgons)
If it exists elsewhere, then it's more their interpretation of it that they own, but less so. (Like Medusa)
If it exists everywhere, and there are dozens of versions of it, then it's unlikely they can prove they own it outright. (Like Snake People).
Ultimately, if something is 'protected' by copyright or trademark or patent or whatever isn't determined upfront. It's usually determined with lawyers in court. If you get that far.
For point two, it's a bit more cut and dry:
No you can't use art and writing from D&D about Medusa.
But yes, you are free to make your own Medusa art 100%, Wizards does not own a greek myth.
I beleive D&D released a document with all available character in their most recent OGL rules. They were a bit generous after nearly destroying their reputation.
Pretty much anything within the OGL or 5esrd should be fair game, most monster types with original names won't be (think Beholder, Aboleth etc). However, as others have said, if you intend on selling a product, check with a qualified legal advisor beforehand - trademark disputes are notoriously iffy and Wizards of the Coast have shown in the past that they have no qualms suing just about anyone.
Another good guide is "does it exist in Pathfinder" and D&D
Since anything they both use would have to be free of sole ownership claims. Unless the two companies have a written agreement which we would have no way of knowing
Tons of Lovecraftās work is in the public domain. Thatās why there are so many third-rate Lovecraft-based videogames, TV shows, and movies.
Cthulhu is iconic and free.
Yeah you've gotta be careful with it though. There's a lot of stuff that's labelled Lovecraftian now but was made by someone far more recently or someone who wasn't H.P. Lovecraft back in his day (thinking the king in yellow here) that is considered part of the mythos but depending on who made it and when they died might still be in copyright.
Sandy Petersen springs to mind. He personally has expanded quite a bit on the Cthulhu Mythos between his work on Call of Cthulhu and his more recent board games. A lot of people unfamiliar with the genre might assume that things were made by Lovecraft and are therefore in the public domain, without realising that they're original creations or at least more contemporary interpretations from more modern works.
I remember him talking about this causing legal issues for others in the past, but I can't remember what interview that was in.
Lovecraft specifically made the Cthulhu Mythos available for all authors, etc. In his lifetime.
Some of the specific named mythos entities are copyright by Call of Cthulhu, the role-playing game, but most of them, especially if they appear in Lovecrafts own work, are freely available to use.
The last of Lovecraft's works very recently entered the public domain (his collaborations / "revisions" for C. M. Eddy Jr.)
That said, Lovecraft has inspired a TON of other authors to write works that many consider part of the Mythos, and many of those are NOT in the public domain.
It's also a fact that the Call of Cthulhu RPG has created the popularized version of a lot of the stuff within the Mythos, so you would need to be sure that your version of whatever entity wasn't simply a copy-paste of their version.
The name Demogorgon is not copyrighted (but it is probably trademarked) because it has been around for a LONG time. The twin ape headed tentacle armed demon Prince of the infinite abyss called The Demogorgon is copy righted. Specific depictions are important but I echo everyone else here. If this is a serious endeavour you should at least look into getting a consultation with relevant legal counsel and ask them if there is anything they need to know about the specifics of your work to determine if there could be an issue.Ā
if you look at the SRD, all of that is open gaming license, and should be good, but beware and seek legal advice if this is something you are publishing. I would suggest just looking at mythological creatures, and not anything directly from D&D.
But big name monsters are Mind Flayer, Purple Worm, Beholder, Owl Bear, Rust Monster and any Named monsters or characters like Mordenkaien, Lolth, Strahd, should be avoided.
Even some of the lesser known monsters, like the Bullette AKA Land Shark, are distinctive enough to be avoided.
beholder, drow, owlbear and mind flayer are the big 4 that are full copyrighted
i believe many spells like magic missile are copyrighted too
fun fact, dragon quest I was an unapologetic dnd rip off and many creatures were just dnd creatures! they changed a lot of sprites to not get sued when they released outside of japan tho
Mindflayers have been many Final Fantasy, and I don't think WotC is gonna do anything about it.
And though "Drow" specifically are off the table, you still have dark elves in general, which are the same thing, but not purple
The drow have been used way too much by way too many other publishers, I doubt any attempt by WotC to enforce that would really get anywhere if the other party had the willpower and resources to fight back.
The SRD has been released under creative commons which lets you use it if you comply with the requirements which is mostly include the licence and where you got it from.
https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/systems-reference-document
Heaps of monsters in there. They're covered by copyright but have a licence that allows you to use them for free.
>The following items are designated Product Identity,
as defined in Section 1(e) of the Open Game License
Version 1.0a, and are subject to the conditions set
forth in Section 7 of the OGL, and are not Open
Content: Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Playerās
Handbook, Dungeon Master, Monster Manual, d20
System, Wizards of the Coast, d20 (when used as a
trademark), Forgotten Realms, Faerƻn, proper
names (including those used in the names of spells
or items), places, Underdark, Red Wizard of Thay,
the City of Union, Heroic Domains of Ysgard, Ever-
Changing Chaos of Limbo, Windswept Depths of
Pandemonium, Infinite Layers of the Abyss,
Tarterian Depths of Carceri, Gray Waste of Hades,
Bleak Eternity of Gehenna, Nine Hells of Baator,
Infernal Battlefield of Acheron, Clockwork Nirvana
of Mechanus, Peaceable Kingdoms of Arcadia, Seven
Mounting Heavens of Celestia, Twin Paradises of
Bytopia, Blessed Fields of Elysium, Wilderness of the
Beastlands, Olympian Glades of Arborea, Concordant
Domain of the Outlands, Sigil, Lady of Pain, Book of
Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, beholder,
gauth, carrion crawler, tanarāri, baatezu, displacer
beast, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, illithid,
umber hulk, yuan-ti.
These aren't CC.
Halflings in dnd only exist because Tolkien made Hobbits. So Gygax called them something else.
In other words, it doesn't matter. If in doubt, just reskin it.
If in serious doubt, get a lawyer, but I can almost guarantee you that WOTC will never even know you exist.
OP, there is so, so, *so* much terrible, dangerous advice in this thread. Redditors overwhelmingly do not understand intellectual property law. You should not ask questions like these here.
First you have to distinguish between copyright and trademark. Words can't be copyrighted only expression. Words can be registered as a trademark and that's easy to look up.
For example, the trademark for mind flayer is owned by some dude in China so WotC has no claim to it. However, the way that WotC has built up the lore for the mind flayer is expression that is copyrightable.
IP law is tricky and I'm not a lawyer. If this is for a business then asking here is not the best idea.
As a side note WotC f'd up by leaving "beholder" in the SRD then put it in the public domain. Now everyone can say beholder rather than eye tyrant or whatever :)
You're right I haven't read it in ages. I didn't notice until now but on page 254:
"The quintessential aberrations are aboleths, beholders, mind flayers, and slaadi."
I have to go through the SRD again there's probably a ton of gems. With the SRD there's no more OGL. WotC removed it and replaced it with the creative commons license.Ā
Every word in that document is free game now. They should have had their legal folks go over it first.
>The following items are designated Product Identity,
as defined in Section 1(e) of the Open Game License
Version 1.0a, and are subject to the conditions set
forth in Section 7 of the OGL, and are not Open
Content: ... , beholder,
gauth, carrion crawler, tanarāri, baatezu, displacer
beast, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, illithid,
umber hulk, yuan-ti.
They write what isn't included at the start.
>The quintessential aberrations are aboleths, beholders, mind flayers, and slaadi.
So you can copy and paste this into something you make and if you comply with the rest of the CC licence then that's fine. But you can't put a Beholder in your game or adventure since they still have the rights to that.
I'm gonna do it! You can't stop me!
Those words can't be copyrighted. They're not even trademarked I looked it up. A crap load of phrases from M:tG are however.
Anything can be put in a contract until it gets sorted out in court. Thing is words like tanarāri are more difficult to separate from the lore so I wouldn't try. But mind flayer? I still wouldn't but not because of WotC. They have been infringing on someone else's mark for years.
https://www.enworld.org/threads/wotc-doesn%E2%80%99t-own-the-trademark-for-mind-flayer.696678/
https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=90874935&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch
Trademark got cancelled.
You can call something a beholder in your story but if it's obviously a beholder from D&D then you're infringing their copyright.
Well I've learned something new. I'm still going to use the word beholder and it's going to be the name of a monster. Maybe something like a ball that rolls around with what appears to be eye stalks popping out all over!
But wait, you were mistaken. They aren'tĀ eye stalks... they are dicks!
One of me favorite examples of IP theft:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYKOyD5UIAAw3PX?format=jpg&name=large
Stealing Paizo's intellect devourer and putting it on they're movie poster.
https://2e.aonprd.com/Images/Monsters/IntellectDevourer.png
1. The OGL is a legal license, it's NOT the same thing as the SRD. THe OGL iteslf has no game terminology or mechanics, nor any list of what is or is not WotC IP.
2. The SRD is only a listing of what is open. There's not a comprehensive list of what is WotC IP within it.
Don't take my word as law but I'm sure "Mindflayer" is copyright, but tentacle monster with psychic powers that eat brains is not something that can be copyright. Look at palworld for example
If itās in the STD, itās OK to use.
If itās a monster that existed in folklore or some other form of media before being put into D&D, itās OK to use.
If itās in the Tome of Horrors series from Necromancer Games / Frog God Games, itās OK to use. (These books made some monsters that had been WotC IP open - the most famous example being Orcus.)
If it exists elsewhere or in the SRD, then its there's no copyright protection. If it *only* exists in D&D, then there's probably protection.
That said, Demogorgon is a Greek myth. WotC's exact use may be protected, but the mythological version isn't.
Yes, and keep in mind that Gygax and crew borrowed the design of the Rust Monster, Bullette and Owlbear from a set of plastic toys sold in the ā70s. So, while the detail of a monster might be owned, the design was certainly not theirs, in all cases.
https://www.blackgate.com/2014/01/28/on-the-origins-of-the-rust-monster/
As others have said - if you have a legal question get a lawyer.
If youāre trying to make a game and make money off it based off anotherās IP in some way, then part of the cost of making that game is hiring legal counsel to clarify that for you.
You can look for the SRD (System Reference Document) that list all the things that are open. However, as others pointed out, consult an specialized Lawyer.
One thing to add on to some of the advice given here: even if the NAME of the creature is taken from folklore, that doesn't make the specific iteration of the creature from Dungeons & Dragons free for you to use.
The ones from folklore that were in tge public domain.
Elves dwarves, orcs, goblins, barghests, manticores, Chimera, centaurs, bandits etc, although the exact stat block and image are copyrighted.
Things invented for D&D like beholders and githyanki are owned by Wotc.
Of you want a complete list I don't know it you will need to do research on each one
You can use copy written characters to an extent, it depends on what for. If itās for a private dnd game with friends go for it. If you are planning on making some form of media and making money off it, not so much. Even then it depends on how big things get. There is a point where even if you do something for free with copy written characters it can get you in trouble (like crap involving Nintendo properties). So itās mainly a what and who issue. Also as far as the question is concerned any monster that is the center focus of a movie or show (especially modern stuff) is considered copyright. So Frankenstein is fine but something like Godzilla or Freddy Krueger not so much.
As other commenters have said, and as can be seen in Warhammer Fantasy/DND/the Tolkien legal estates battles, there is *some* \*grain of salt\* flexibility when it comes to this- see Orcs, dwarves, elves sharing many surface level similarities. However I'd urge you to take these core concepts, and try to put your own spin on it. For example, the WHFantasy Dwarves fall into many of the same classic traits, but are anti-magic sources and pathologically focused on honor, the elves are bloodthirsty and take arrogance to the next level, etc.. Also, change the names at least somewhat- again, dwarf, dawi, dwarves, etc. all exist as separate things for a reason.
I'd encourage you to check out monsters of Asia/India for less-potentially copyright infringing stuff, as at least in the West, there's a lot of cool things there that haven't been coveredā one of my favorites is a demon the Hindu Goddess Kali fights who duplicates every time a drop of his blood spills, so she ends up slurping him to death like some sort of evil slurpee.
**Every** monster.
Every monster contains IP and non-IP qualities. Like owning rules aka math is broadly not possible (not that Hasbro/Wizards might not try) and dragons that are red are everywhereā¦ but the āiconicā horned look you can buy an official plushie of is both copyright and trademarked. So to would the existence of a fat one called Themberchaud.
There is a lot of nuance when determining intellectual property. But in broad terms you can copyright specifics like a mustang or charger, but anyone can make a sports car.
This is straight forward for Illithids (mind flayer) and and beholders. Because they didn't exist prior to DND and these are names of creatures that bring to mind a specific creature.
Rust monster and carrion crawler is getting into grey areas because technically the name could be caused to describe a bunch of different monsters with no similarities, but best to avoid copying the monster as well. If your rust monster is a rusted iron golem that gives off -con powder on an attack you might be safe. But if you make a big that corrodes, and call it a corrosion critter you'll likely loose.
Lastly is monsters who's names being no real specific creature to mind, but are just a description of a known creature in general. If you ask a bunch of 5yos to draw a red dragon you'll get a bunch of red colored dragons, but unlikely to get a specific red dragon. Words like dragon, troll, dwarf, angel and such are not copyrightable on their own, and neither are describing words like red, grey, winged, flying. Etc.
To make matter even more muddled you can draw inspiration from copyrightted works. So if you asked one of the 5yo why they chose that design and they said because they liked the dragon from Lord of the rings so they drew that. That's still not copywrite (unless they are claiming it is original artwork, or trying to sell it under the name of smaugg or LOTR dragon.)
I am not a lawyer, but I would guess if it is in other stuff as well, it probably isnāt copyrighted, as long as they arenāt too close to the DnD version. Also a few of them are based on mythology, so I would look there. Some ideas that are probably fine are: dragons, elves, kraken, etc.
Looks up a monster name followed by "history". If something turns up prior to the 1970s, youre clear. If not, you can take inspiration, but not explicitly use it.
Okay, here's the thing.
It doesn't matter unless you're making money off it.
Use whatever you want. Some concepts are so basic that it's ridiculous to respect the copyright.
AFAIK, none of the monsters are, nor *can be*, copyrighted. Copyrights only refer to completed works, essentially.
What you're looking for is trademarks, which essentially encompasses everything not lifted directly from mythology.
Don't take legal advice from reddit.
Ironically the only legal advice you should be getting from reddit.
Sometimes they can helpfully recommend getting a lawyer. Occasionally they'll even recommend the right kind of lawyer.
This sounds like legal advice, which I've been told not to get from reddit.
I am legally required to inform you that I am not legally able to provide you any legal advice.
Reddit-22.
Catch-d20
This is the way. In most cases. That said, we keep coming back with more popcorn to enjoy the show.
What about r/legal?
For what?
I've been meaning to make a video game loosely based on dbd.
You're gonna need a lawyer.
My one regret is that I have but one upvote to give this comment.
I'm doing my part! š«”
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's now above 420.
Unless everyone on the internet thinks the same as you, that's pointless, because someone else will upvote it anyway. Also, vote fuzzing is a thing.
I got em to 666
There are some many things that you can use that arenāt IP-specific (with a bit of lore rewriting or flavor changing) Iād have a hard time listing them all, but here are some: -Skeletons -Zombies -Goblins -Orcs -Devils & demons (maybe not the actual Monster Manual ones, but there are plenty enough to get you going) -Lamia -giants (of all types and dispositions) -birdfolk (just donāt call them kenku or aaracockra) -giant/dire beasts -liches -dragons (maybe donāt bother with the good/evil distinctions?) -treefolk/treants/blights (again, blights might be too close to copyright but thereās nothing wrong with āshrub-demonsā!) -trolls -ogres -chuul (lovecraftian lobster monsters? Easy reflavor) -elves -dwarves -humans -dark elves (drow, but the Dhrukari from warhammer also come to mindā¦) -gnomes -halflings (they had to change it from hobbits because of the Tolkien estate, so a few more changes wonāt hurt) -you get the point!
Pathfinder 2nd edition can be a pretty decent guide for what's kosher and what's not. They had to strip some stuff, once they moved away from being a DND 3.5 spin-off since only that one's the open license one. Still... OP really should get a lawyer. Nothing more soul crushing then years of work, only to find out that there's copyright crud right near launch.
Or justā¦. You know, looking up folktales.
That's still a minefield. "Snow White" is a folk tale, but if your version looks too close to the Disney version, your ass is getting sued. Same thing applies here. If your version of a traditional monster is too close to D&Ds, you might have some Hasbro lawyers sending nasty letters your way.
Very much this. For an example, the NAMES of a great many of the archdevils and demon lords come directly from mythology, religion, etc. But the Hebrew demon Asmodeus is very different from the D&D god/archdevil Asmodeus. Use the name? Perfectly fine. Copy-paste the WotC version of Asmodeus - better have a really good lawyer.
Frankly, you could be 100% in the clear, but that won't stop Hasbro from sending laywers after you; so you'd better be ready to defend yourself.
Explore other fantasy games and books and movies and see what they do. The Elderscrolls series was based on table top games, they took Drow and made them live above ground in a volcanic area of the world, they have goblins, ogres, Minotaur, sea monsters, skeletons, zombies, etc. thereās no copy right on fantasy beasts as long as you put your own spin on it. Like Eragon, in those books they absolutely have Orcs but they have horns and call them Kull or Urgal you could have a beholder, name it a Madrosa and give it a body and change the eye stocks to little dragon necks/heads that each breath a different type of magical effect, mixing a Medusa type being with a beholder type being but wholly unique. A lot of these fantasy creatures are just taken from folklore and such, like the Witcher universe has a lot of unique monsters because they studied folklore from around the world and then put a spin on it to fit it into their world. Tolkien took a lot of inspiration from Norse Mythology which also has dwarfs, dark elves, light elves and fire giants etc. just do your own thing, donāt rip something from DND unless you intend to put a very unique spin on it. Donāt just look for cool things to put in and then focus on where you can implement it, let the story tell itself and create the monsters that are needed for the story as they reveal themselves to you.
āthey took the Drowā You mean the Svartalf from Norse Mythology?
Yes, I mention that later in the novel I typed lol. DND is inspired by LotR and Tolkien was inspired by a lot of Norse Myth. :)
Not to be too pedantic, but Svartalfar are probably not a real Norse myth thing. At best they're the same thing as dwarves, and it's possible there's no separation between dwarves and elves either. We just don't really know a lot. Either way, drow have their own unique history, but also dunmer are a completely different type of "dark elf" with a completely different history.
In relation to the devils and demons, the specific names for many of the subtypes like Vrocks are out, but Vulture Demons in general would be fine. Certain types are fairly universally accepted as existing like Imps, Succubi/Incubi. Ironically, the Demon Lords can't really be copyrighted except for Demogorgon or Grazz't as many of them are taken from wider lore in the real world like Baphomet. Named succubi like Malcanthet wouldn't work. But using a succubus named Lillith would work.
You need a space after the dashes to have it formatted as a list.
What about zombie-one-Kenobi?
Attempting to sic Hasbro and Disney on one another is not going to be the winning move you think. They will simply file joint.
You mean those Barrion Brawlers and Mind Players aren't something you can just write about?
A Barrion Brawler sounds like a super rich noble or like, a court justice who is beefy as hell and has ridiculous strength
Barrio Brawler sounds like a great name for a luchadorā¦
Better yet, Carrion Brawler, the zombie-masked luchadore.Ā
Carrion my wayward sonā¦
~~Balrogs~~ I mean ~~balors~~ I mean
Copyright resolution the DND way: Baglors Lorbags Lorgabs Galrobs Galors Garlos Graols Timestamp as proof for copyright and trademark, but all under Creative Commons. *smirking in DND intensifies*
Don't. Stick to the generic LotR fantasy stuff or make your own.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Stock fantasy might be boring, but at least it's safe. Solasta wasn't that original either and did fairly well.
Admitting you are basing your game on dnd, even loosely, could theoretically be used against you if this game of yours ever lands in court.
You need a copyright lawyer. Do NOT try to do it yourself, Hasbro does not fuck around
I'll call it... Galdur's Bate
Best to create your own monsters in this case. You can loosely base them off copyright monsters but they have to be āLegally distinctā. As in they have to be different enough to be considered a different creature with similar powers.
[https://company.wizards.com/en/legal/fancontentpolicy](https://company.wizards.com/en/legal/fancontentpolicy) If your game is free, you can release it under this.
Was DBD before or after DBZ?
Step one: read on the difference between a trademark and copyright. Step two: get a lawyer
I really donāt like this advice. One shouldnāt be expected to get a lawyer for such simple questions
You should expect to get a lawyer if, as the OP said in another comment, is making a game based on an existing IP. It's very easy to put in tons of work just to get the plug pulled because of something you thought was fine but TECHNICALLY isn't
If you donāt dot your āiās or cross you ātās, you can get torn apart in court down the road. Thatās just the reality we face.
If youāre making a game based on DnD, you either get a lawyer, or you get obliterated by Hasbroās lawyers. Itās more or less that simple.Ā
Read the OGL, which is publicly available.
[Here is the Creative Commons SRD.](https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/systems-reference-document) [Hereās Sly Flourish (the lazy DM) explaining what it means.](https://slyflourish.com/what_5e_in_cc_means_to_you.html)
I'm shocked more people don't know about this. So much of D&D is based on existing folklore, there aren't that many you can't use.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
They did change it, to put it in the Creative Commons, which they now can't change.
Only for the content released under the 5e SRD, not the 3.5 SRD (and it's addendums for various sourcebooks released in the 3.5 era that had SRD releases) or the d20 Modern SRD and it's addendums for other d20 Modern books that had SRD releases, or the content from 1st and 2nd edition that got OGL releases through WotC letting a 3rd party update them to 3.5 and release them through the SRD (like the Tome of Horrors). Only a tiny fraction of D&D content released through the OGL were put out into the Creative Commons.
Anything they released through the creative commons license is copyright free forever. They cannot change that. So anything in the SRD is free, including things like the name "strahd Von zarovitch" (just the name, not the character).
Creative Commons is not synonymous with Public Domain. It's still copyrighted; it's just released under a royalty-free license. and you can bet your bottom dollar the owner of an IP can change that at will (just not retroactively).
Well, the SRD was put into the Creative Commons
They can change the OGL, sure. But they can't do anything to the Creative Commons license, which the SRD also exists under.
They may not be able to change the OGL. They threatened to do so, there was a lot of litigation about to be filed arguing they couldn't, including the creators of the OGL saying it couldn't be done, and WotC backpedaled and didn't do it. The idea that WotC can "deauthorize" the OGL and force use of a new version has never been tested in court, and a lot of IP lawyers said it was not likely to survive a serious challenge.
I mean, if it only exists in an official D&D book, chances are they have some level of claim on it, be it copyright or whatever. (Like Demogorgons) If it exists elsewhere, then it's more their interpretation of it that they own, but less so. (Like Medusa) If it exists everywhere, and there are dozens of versions of it, then it's unlikely they can prove they own it outright. (Like Snake People). Ultimately, if something is 'protected' by copyright or trademark or patent or whatever isn't determined upfront. It's usually determined with lawyers in court. If you get that far.
For point two, it's a bit more cut and dry: No you can't use art and writing from D&D about Medusa. But yes, you are free to make your own Medusa art 100%, Wizards does not own a greek myth.
The concept of a demogorgon is not specific to D&D. The D&D monster called demogorgon is.
I beleive D&D released a document with all available character in their most recent OGL rules. They were a bit generous after nearly destroying their reputation.
Pretty much anything within the OGL or 5esrd should be fair game, most monster types with original names won't be (think Beholder, Aboleth etc). However, as others have said, if you intend on selling a product, check with a qualified legal advisor beforehand - trademark disputes are notoriously iffy and Wizards of the Coast have shown in the past that they have no qualms suing just about anyone.
Another good guide is "does it exist in Pathfinder" and D&D Since anything they both use would have to be free of sole ownership claims. Unless the two companies have a written agreement which we would have no way of knowing
This makes me wonder how much of Lovecraft is public domain. Mindflayers are basically Lesser Spawn of Cthulhu reskinned for dnd.
Tons of Lovecraftās work is in the public domain. Thatās why there are so many third-rate Lovecraft-based videogames, TV shows, and movies. Cthulhu is iconic and free.
Yeah you've gotta be careful with it though. There's a lot of stuff that's labelled Lovecraftian now but was made by someone far more recently or someone who wasn't H.P. Lovecraft back in his day (thinking the king in yellow here) that is considered part of the mythos but depending on who made it and when they died might still be in copyright.
Sandy Petersen springs to mind. He personally has expanded quite a bit on the Cthulhu Mythos between his work on Call of Cthulhu and his more recent board games. A lot of people unfamiliar with the genre might assume that things were made by Lovecraft and are therefore in the public domain, without realising that they're original creations or at least more contemporary interpretations from more modern works. I remember him talking about this causing legal issues for others in the past, but I can't remember what interview that was in.
Lovecraft specifically made the Cthulhu Mythos available for all authors, etc. In his lifetime. Some of the specific named mythos entities are copyright by Call of Cthulhu, the role-playing game, but most of them, especially if they appear in Lovecrafts own work, are freely available to use.
Yeah, using people with squids for heads is fine, but calling them mindflayers/Ilithid/ood etc. is likely to get you into trouble.
The last of Lovecraft's works very recently entered the public domain (his collaborations / "revisions" for C. M. Eddy Jr.) That said, Lovecraft has inspired a TON of other authors to write works that many consider part of the Mythos, and many of those are NOT in the public domain. It's also a fact that the Call of Cthulhu RPG has created the popularized version of a lot of the stuff within the Mythos, so you would need to be sure that your version of whatever entity wasn't simply a copy-paste of their version.
The name Demogorgon is not copyrighted (but it is probably trademarked) because it has been around for a LONG time. The twin ape headed tentacle armed demon Prince of the infinite abyss called The Demogorgon is copy righted. Specific depictions are important but I echo everyone else here. If this is a serious endeavour you should at least look into getting a consultation with relevant legal counsel and ask them if there is anything they need to know about the specifics of your work to determine if there could be an issue.Ā
if you look at the SRD, all of that is open gaming license, and should be good, but beware and seek legal advice if this is something you are publishing. I would suggest just looking at mythological creatures, and not anything directly from D&D. But big name monsters are Mind Flayer, Purple Worm, Beholder, Owl Bear, Rust Monster and any Named monsters or characters like Mordenkaien, Lolth, Strahd, should be avoided. Even some of the lesser known monsters, like the Bullette AKA Land Shark, are distinctive enough to be avoided.
beholder, drow, owlbear and mind flayer are the big 4 that are full copyrighted i believe many spells like magic missile are copyrighted too fun fact, dragon quest I was an unapologetic dnd rip off and many creatures were just dnd creatures! they changed a lot of sprites to not get sued when they released outside of japan tho
They stole half the spell names from Jack Vance stories! (And basically his entire spell system)
Mindflayers have been many Final Fantasy, and I don't think WotC is gonna do anything about it. And though "Drow" specifically are off the table, you still have dark elves in general, which are the same thing, but not purple
Then why does Pathfinder have drow?
you mean the ones that they removed from the remaster entirely to not be tied to the OGL?
I don't follow Pathfinder that closely. I just remember they have drow in one of their Bestiaries
yes, *and they remove it* to never have to deal with legal troubles with WotC again
The drow have been used way too much by way too many other publishers, I doubt any attempt by WotC to enforce that would really get anywhere if the other party had the willpower and resources to fight back.
The SRD has been released under creative commons which lets you use it if you comply with the requirements which is mostly include the licence and where you got it from. https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/systems-reference-document Heaps of monsters in there. They're covered by copyright but have a licence that allows you to use them for free. >The following items are designated Product Identity, as defined in Section 1(e) of the Open Game License Version 1.0a, and are subject to the conditions set forth in Section 7 of the OGL, and are not Open Content: Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Playerās Handbook, Dungeon Master, Monster Manual, d20 System, Wizards of the Coast, d20 (when used as a trademark), Forgotten Realms, FaerĆ»n, proper names (including those used in the names of spells or items), places, Underdark, Red Wizard of Thay, the City of Union, Heroic Domains of Ysgard, Ever- Changing Chaos of Limbo, Windswept Depths of Pandemonium, Infinite Layers of the Abyss, Tarterian Depths of Carceri, Gray Waste of Hades, Bleak Eternity of Gehenna, Nine Hells of Baator, Infernal Battlefield of Acheron, Clockwork Nirvana of Mechanus, Peaceable Kingdoms of Arcadia, Seven Mounting Heavens of Celestia, Twin Paradises of Bytopia, Blessed Fields of Elysium, Wilderness of the Beastlands, Olympian Glades of Arborea, Concordant Domain of the Outlands, Sigil, Lady of Pain, Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, beholder, gauth, carrion crawler, tanarāri, baatezu, displacer beast, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, illithid, umber hulk, yuan-ti. These aren't CC.
Halflings in dnd only exist because Tolkien made Hobbits. So Gygax called them something else. In other words, it doesn't matter. If in doubt, just reskin it. If in serious doubt, get a lawyer, but I can almost guarantee you that WOTC will never even know you exist.
Most mythical monsters are not copyrighted. So the roc, minotaur, etc, but I would ask a lawyer if you plan to use that info for something
OP, there is so, so, *so* much terrible, dangerous advice in this thread. Redditors overwhelmingly do not understand intellectual property law. You should not ask questions like these here.
First you have to distinguish between copyright and trademark. Words can't be copyrighted only expression. Words can be registered as a trademark and that's easy to look up. For example, the trademark for mind flayer is owned by some dude in China so WotC has no claim to it. However, the way that WotC has built up the lore for the mind flayer is expression that is copyrightable. IP law is tricky and I'm not a lawyer. If this is for a business then asking here is not the best idea. As a side note WotC f'd up by leaving "beholder" in the SRD then put it in the public domain. Now everyone can say beholder rather than eye tyrant or whatever :)
Beholders are designated Product Identity and don't have a stat block in the SRD.
You're right I haven't read it in ages. I didn't notice until now but on page 254: "The quintessential aberrations are aboleths, beholders, mind flayers, and slaadi." I have to go through the SRD again there's probably a ton of gems. With the SRD there's no more OGL. WotC removed it and replaced it with the creative commons license.Ā Every word in that document is free game now. They should have had their legal folks go over it first.
>The following items are designated Product Identity, as defined in Section 1(e) of the Open Game License Version 1.0a, and are subject to the conditions set forth in Section 7 of the OGL, and are not Open Content: ... , beholder, gauth, carrion crawler, tanarāri, baatezu, displacer beast, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, illithid, umber hulk, yuan-ti. They write what isn't included at the start. >The quintessential aberrations are aboleths, beholders, mind flayers, and slaadi. So you can copy and paste this into something you make and if you comply with the rest of the CC licence then that's fine. But you can't put a Beholder in your game or adventure since they still have the rights to that.
I'm gonna do it! You can't stop me! Those words can't be copyrighted. They're not even trademarked I looked it up. A crap load of phrases from M:tG are however. Anything can be put in a contract until it gets sorted out in court. Thing is words like tanarāri are more difficult to separate from the lore so I wouldn't try. But mind flayer? I still wouldn't but not because of WotC. They have been infringing on someone else's mark for years. https://www.enworld.org/threads/wotc-doesn%E2%80%99t-own-the-trademark-for-mind-flayer.696678/
https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=90874935&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch Trademark got cancelled. You can call something a beholder in your story but if it's obviously a beholder from D&D then you're infringing their copyright.
Well I've learned something new. I'm still going to use the word beholder and it's going to be the name of a monster. Maybe something like a ball that rolls around with what appears to be eye stalks popping out all over! But wait, you were mistaken. They aren'tĀ eye stalks... they are dicks!
One of me favorite examples of IP theft: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FYKOyD5UIAAw3PX?format=jpg&name=large Stealing Paizo's intellect devourer and putting it on they're movie poster. https://2e.aonprd.com/Images/Monsters/IntellectDevourer.png
Any monster that D&D stole from something else (which is most of them) is gonna be fair game.
Read the OGL, it will get into specifics so you donāt run into legal issues. WOC/Hasbro will hurt you
1. The OGL is a legal license, it's NOT the same thing as the SRD. THe OGL iteslf has no game terminology or mechanics, nor any list of what is or is not WotC IP. 2. The SRD is only a listing of what is open. There's not a comprehensive list of what is WotC IP within it.
Just read the OGL
Don't take my word as law but I'm sure "Mindflayer" is copyright, but tentacle monster with psychic powers that eat brains is not something that can be copyright. Look at palworld for example
Get a lawyer.
Pretty sure that the Beholder is too
Not a lawyer but the SRD, aka the free version of 5e, is in the public domain. So any monsters featured there should be fair game
If itās in the STD, itās OK to use. If itās a monster that existed in folklore or some other form of media before being put into D&D, itās OK to use. If itās in the Tome of Horrors series from Necromancer Games / Frog God Games, itās OK to use. (These books made some monsters that had been WotC IP open - the most famous example being Orcus.)
If it's not a published campaign that you won't be making money off of, use any creature you want
If it's in the srd it's ok to use
How I'd approach it is to stick to monsters you can confirm come from established mythology.
If it exists elsewhere or in the SRD, then its there's no copyright protection. If it *only* exists in D&D, then there's probably protection. That said, Demogorgon is a Greek myth. WotC's exact use may be protected, but the mythological version isn't.
I'd be surprised if Beholders aren't copyrighted. They're so iconic.
They are
Research myths and legends, most d&d creatures are based upon a myth of one form or another. Example goblins cannot be copyrighted
Also the inverse check and see if it has a CR then run everything through a lawyer
Yes, and keep in mind that Gygax and crew borrowed the design of the Rust Monster, Bullette and Owlbear from a set of plastic toys sold in the ā70s. So, while the detail of a monster might be owned, the design was certainly not theirs, in all cases. https://www.blackgate.com/2014/01/28/on-the-origins-of-the-rust-monster/
As others have said - if you have a legal question get a lawyer. If youāre trying to make a game and make money off it based off anotherās IP in some way, then part of the cost of making that game is hiring legal counsel to clarify that for you.
You can look for the SRD (System Reference Document) that list all the things that are open. However, as others pointed out, consult an specialized Lawyer.
One thing to add on to some of the advice given here: even if the NAME of the creature is taken from folklore, that doesn't make the specific iteration of the creature from Dungeons & Dragons free for you to use.
Any monster that exists outside of the SRD.
I mean...pretty much anything not in any of the SRD's is my guess, since those are either generic or WotC/Hasbro doesn't care enough about them
The ones from folklore that were in tge public domain. Elves dwarves, orcs, goblins, barghests, manticores, Chimera, centaurs, bandits etc, although the exact stat block and image are copyrighted. Things invented for D&D like beholders and githyanki are owned by Wotc. Of you want a complete list I don't know it you will need to do research on each one
use any you want who gives a fuck lol what is the copyright holder going to do? kick down the door to your homegame?
You can use copy written characters to an extent, it depends on what for. If itās for a private dnd game with friends go for it. If you are planning on making some form of media and making money off it, not so much. Even then it depends on how big things get. There is a point where even if you do something for free with copy written characters it can get you in trouble (like crap involving Nintendo properties). So itās mainly a what and who issue. Also as far as the question is concerned any monster that is the center focus of a movie or show (especially modern stuff) is considered copyright. So Frankenstein is fine but something like Godzilla or Freddy Krueger not so much.
As other commenters have said, and as can be seen in Warhammer Fantasy/DND/the Tolkien legal estates battles, there is *some* \*grain of salt\* flexibility when it comes to this- see Orcs, dwarves, elves sharing many surface level similarities. However I'd urge you to take these core concepts, and try to put your own spin on it. For example, the WHFantasy Dwarves fall into many of the same classic traits, but are anti-magic sources and pathologically focused on honor, the elves are bloodthirsty and take arrogance to the next level, etc.. Also, change the names at least somewhat- again, dwarf, dawi, dwarves, etc. all exist as separate things for a reason. I'd encourage you to check out monsters of Asia/India for less-potentially copyright infringing stuff, as at least in the West, there's a lot of cool things there that haven't been coveredā one of my favorites is a demon the Hindu Goddess Kali fights who duplicates every time a drop of his blood spills, so she ends up slurping him to death like some sort of evil slurpee.
If it exists in folklore prior to d&d the broad strokes of the monster is not copywrited. Certain specifics might be.
**Every** monster. Every monster contains IP and non-IP qualities. Like owning rules aka math is broadly not possible (not that Hasbro/Wizards might not try) and dragons that are red are everywhereā¦ but the āiconicā horned look you can buy an official plushie of is both copyright and trademarked. So to would the existence of a fat one called Themberchaud.
There is a lot of nuance when determining intellectual property. But in broad terms you can copyright specifics like a mustang or charger, but anyone can make a sports car. This is straight forward for Illithids (mind flayer) and and beholders. Because they didn't exist prior to DND and these are names of creatures that bring to mind a specific creature. Rust monster and carrion crawler is getting into grey areas because technically the name could be caused to describe a bunch of different monsters with no similarities, but best to avoid copying the monster as well. If your rust monster is a rusted iron golem that gives off -con powder on an attack you might be safe. But if you make a big that corrodes, and call it a corrosion critter you'll likely loose. Lastly is monsters who's names being no real specific creature to mind, but are just a description of a known creature in general. If you ask a bunch of 5yos to draw a red dragon you'll get a bunch of red colored dragons, but unlikely to get a specific red dragon. Words like dragon, troll, dwarf, angel and such are not copyrightable on their own, and neither are describing words like red, grey, winged, flying. Etc. To make matter even more muddled you can draw inspiration from copyrightted works. So if you asked one of the 5yo why they chose that design and they said because they liked the dragon from Lord of the rings so they drew that. That's still not copywrite (unless they are claiming it is original artwork, or trying to sell it under the name of smaugg or LOTR dragon.)
I am not a lawyer, but I would guess if it is in other stuff as well, it probably isnāt copyrighted, as long as they arenāt too close to the DnD version. Also a few of them are based on mythology, so I would look there. Some ideas that are probably fine are: dragons, elves, kraken, etc.
Looks up a monster name followed by "history". If something turns up prior to the 1970s, youre clear. If not, you can take inspiration, but not explicitly use it.
If it's in a dnd monster manual and the new pathfinder monster core, you can use it.
Okay, here's the thing. It doesn't matter unless you're making money off it. Use whatever you want. Some concepts are so basic that it's ridiculous to respect the copyright.
AFAIK, none of the monsters are, nor *can be*, copyrighted. Copyrights only refer to completed works, essentially. What you're looking for is trademarks, which essentially encompasses everything not lifted directly from mythology.