Aboleths and Open Game License [Archive] - Wizards Community

Aboleths and Open Game License [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Wyrd Bearer
05-05-06, 06:17 PM A friend of mine was planning on starting the old premade campaign, Night Below, and I was joking that since it is in the Underdark, I already knew what kinds of monsters would be the main villians, since every Underdark campaign just has to have aboleths, illithids, beholders and drow, plus all their typical slave races like kuo-toa, chitins, slyphs, grimlocks, etc.; the only question would be which of those 4 would be the overall masterminds behind the ensuing campaign.

Now, I'm not playing in it, so don't go accusing me of being all metagamery, I know the game well enought to ID monsters by what clues DMs give, yet can still have a character play dumb about it.

Anyway, after rattling off all the monsters I fully expect his players to run into, I realized that the Underdark is the home of a majority of the monsters that aren't OGL. However, what I found odd was aboleths are OGL, even though I really cannot think of something from mythology that they could have been based off of.

So after that big preface, here's the point. Just what are aboleths based off of? The closest things I can think of are that they're based off something mentioned in a Lovecraft story, but other than that, I'm drawing a blank. Anyone have any ideas.

The second question concerns non-WoTC use of the aboleths. Besides being a DM, I'm also a writer who will be very soon getting out of college. My last campaign was a totally custom thing where I rewrote much of the fluff behind the "standard races" in fantasy (humans, elves, dwarves, you know, the ones no one cares about). However, I also reworked the aboleths to be the secret creators of the other races, that all the gods were just false concepts created to keep the lesser races deluded and that aboleths really created all other life on the world in which the campaign takes place.

Now, if I were to start writing up something that was loosely based off of the campaign I ran, just how much can I say about aboleths and how similar can they be to the standard WoTC property when being described?
TheChilliGod
05-05-06, 07:19 PM Aboleths were taken from H.P. Lovecraft's writings. Admitted as so in Lords of Madness (and possibly in previous interviews).

As for copying the aboleth's info, I'd say you should only go as far as the description in the SRD, and possibly the aboleth pictures in the Art Gallery. But really, I've seen beholders, drow, and even mind flayers in books and games other than that printed by TSR & WotC, so I don't suppose published material with an aboleth or two in them is going to hurt that much if you keep the description vague-ish, and unpublished material — heck — I don't even think you need to bother worrying about copyright infringement.
caeruleus
05-05-06, 07:42 PM Sounds like a great concept.

How much of the details of aboleths do you require for your storyline? The name could probably easily change, but what else? If it's all easy to change (and you're cool with that) then it might not be an issue.
Bruunwald
05-05-06, 07:43 PM But really, I've seen beholders, drow, and even mind flayers in books and games other than that printed by TSR & WotC...

Dark elves are from Norse and Celtic myth. As long as you don't call them drow you can make an elf as dark as you want and publish the heck out of it.

Neither did D&D invent creatures with lots of eyes and eyestalks or tentacles on their faces. It's really the names, backstories, specific artwork and game statistics that Wizards owns.

You can't copyright a basic concept or notion of something. For instance, you can't copyright the basic idea of a flying machine that has wings. We all can make pictures of our own ideas of airplanes and nobody can sue us, because nobody owns the "idea" of an airplane.

A more specific example would be this: I can create an exciting new four-winged spaceship and publish my artwork featuring it. If it is unique, everything is okay. However, I would not want to put red wing emblems on it, stick a blue-and-chrome-domed robot head on the back, a blond-haired farm boy inside, and call it an X-Wing.

Similarly, the new Pirates of the Caribbean movie can (and does) feature a squid-headed, tentacle-faced Davy Jones. As long as they don't call their concept an illithid and have it suck brains, blast minds and control thralls to serve the Hive Mind, they don't owe Wizards so much as an apology.

Now, story and content are a bit different than a simple rendering. I can't call my hero Luke Skywalker or send him to the Death Star. But I could write an original story about a farmboy who goes into space, with no worries.

Your story features a mushy fish-thing dwelling far beneath the earth, whose kind created the sentient beings of the world and silently controls their lives. Very Lovecraftian, and no more a copyright infringement that any other Lovecraftian effort, so long as you don't use specific names copyrighted by others. The reason being that your specific concept, and the overall content, is what determines its uniqueness, and therefore, protects your claim. One little similar bit doesn't matter.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Wyrd Bearer 05-05-06, 06:17 PM	A friend of mine was planning on starting the old premade campaign, Night Below, and I was joking that since it is in the Underdark, I already knew what kinds of monsters would be the main villians, since every Underdark campaign just has to have aboleths, illithids, beholders and drow, plus all their typical slave races like kuo-toa, chitins, slyphs, grimlocks, etc.; the only question would be which of those 4 would be the overall masterminds behind the ensuing campaign. Now, I'm not playing in it, so don't go accusing me of being all metagamery, I know the game well enought to ID monsters by what clues DMs give, yet can still have a character play dumb about it. Anyway, after rattling off all the monsters I fully expect his players to run into, I realized that the Underdark is the home of a majority of the monsters that aren't OGL. However, what I found odd was aboleths are OGL, even though I really cannot think of something from mythology that they could have been based off of. So after that big preface, here's the point. Just what are aboleths based off of? The closest things I can think of are that they're based off something mentioned in a Lovecraft story, but other than that, I'm drawing a blank. Anyone have any ideas. The second question concerns non-WoTC use of the aboleths. Besides being a DM, I'm also a writer who will be very soon getting out of college. My last campaign was a totally custom thing where I rewrote much of the fluff behind the "standard races" in fantasy (humans, elves, dwarves, you know, the ones no one cares about). However, I also reworked the aboleths to be the secret creators of the other races, that all the gods were just false concepts created to keep the lesser races deluded and that aboleths really created all other life on the world in which the campaign takes place. Now, if I were to start writing up something that was loosely based off of the campaign I ran, just how much can I say about aboleths and how similar can they be to the standard WoTC property when being described?
TheChilliGod 05-05-06, 07:19 PM	Aboleths were taken from H.P. Lovecraft's writings. Admitted as so in Lords of Madness (and possibly in previous interviews). As for copying the aboleth's info, I'd say you should only go as far as the description in the SRD, and possibly the aboleth pictures in the Art Gallery. But really, I've seen beholders, drow, and even mind flayers in books and games other than that printed by TSR & WotC, so I don't suppose published material with an aboleth or two in them is going to hurt that much if you keep the description vague-ish, and unpublished material — heck — I don't even think you need to bother worrying about copyright infringement.
caeruleus 05-05-06, 07:42 PM	Sounds like a great concept. How much of the details of aboleths do you require for your storyline? The name could probably easily change, but what else? If it's all easy to change (and you're cool with that) then it might not be an issue.
Bruunwald 05-05-06, 07:43 PM	But really, I've seen beholders, drow, and even mind flayers in books and games other than that printed by TSR & WotC... Dark elves are from Norse and Celtic myth. As long as you don't call them drow you can make an elf as dark as you want and publish the heck out of it. Neither did D&D invent creatures with lots of eyes and eyestalks or tentacles on their faces. It's really the names, backstories, specific artwork and game statistics that Wizards owns. You can't copyright a basic concept or notion of something. For instance, you can't copyright the basic idea of a flying machine that has wings. We all can make pictures of our own ideas of airplanes and nobody can sue us, because nobody owns the "idea" of an airplane. A more specific example would be this: I can create an exciting new four-winged spaceship and publish my artwork featuring it. If it is unique, everything is okay. However, I would not want to put red wing emblems on it, stick a blue-and-chrome-domed robot head on the back, a blond-haired farm boy inside, and call it an X-Wing. Similarly, the new Pirates of the Caribbean movie can (and does) feature a squid-headed, tentacle-faced Davy Jones. As long as they don't call their concept an illithid and have it suck brains, blast minds and control thralls to serve the Hive Mind, they don't owe Wizards so much as an apology. Now, story and content are a bit different than a simple rendering. I can't call my hero Luke Skywalker or send him to the Death Star. But I could write an original story about a farmboy who goes into space, with no worries. Your story features a mushy fish-thing dwelling far beneath the earth, whose kind created the sentient beings of the world and silently controls their lives. Very Lovecraftian, and no more a copyright infringement that any other Lovecraftian effort, so long as you don't use specific names copyrighted by others. The reason being that your specific concept, and the overall content, is what determines its uniqueness, and therefore, protects your claim. One little similar bit doesn't matter.