Beholder | Elder Orb

[Agroagro]

sorry tikotribe I shouldnt have distracted from your idea. Ive always found the floating eye creatures very captivating myself.

[Tiko]

@Agro: No problem there, copyrights are not those things that should be ever taken lightly.

@Hyroen: Actually you may have a point there, but I think that it would be too easy for to use this card with above average efficiency with a straight sinergy already present like the kitty. is already powerful enough to handle most situations, and has no need for further CC. In other elements it just would look ??? . Still, as I mentioned, always felt someway 'alien' to me.. but that doesn't mean it couldn't be a subject to change.

As for the ability name, I found it strange for a beholder to "plant seeds" (the *unmentioned source* counterpart emits spell-like rays from each of its eyes). But if the name eventually has to be ditched, that can be changed too, if necesarry.

[Nadrin]

@agro, & @tiko not to insult you or anything, but copyrighting a common noun/name is bullshit. I get that the idea is changed, but here's the thing: If the art is used with permission, simply change the name the tiniest bit.

My suggestion, simply change the name to something similar to beholder. Art used with permission is fine.

[Agroagro]

@agro, & @tiko not to insult you or anything, but copyrighting a common noun/name is bullshit. I get that the idea is changed, but here's the thing: If the art is used with permission, simply change the name the tiniest bit.

My suggestion, simply change the name to something similar to beholder. Art used with permission is fine.

From my understanding they claim ownership of it in a conceptual sense. Its not the noun. so like giant floating eyes is their thing.

Itd be the same if you wanted to use a clown with a red afro to sell hamburgers. You could call him jimmy but ronald and the gang over at macdonalds arnt gonna let you go to far with it.

[Tiko]

Yes, it seems jimmy would have some issues with the law.

I'd really like to have someone close to the core of designing Elements, having a look at this dilemma, as the more I read through the licenses the more confused I become about the naming. My only excuse so far for leaving the card as it is, that we have a mind flayer/ultiharid in the game already (and maybe the otyugh).

This question is not (mainly)about the art, as it was used under permission - it stays as long as the concept can more or less maintained; it's more about the idea of the beholder and how is it protected (or not) by copyright, as all the licenses applying for the beholder applies for the mind flayer too.

Thanks in advance for a steady answer.

[Agroagro]

Well if it were up to me id say.

Hey this is a casual use forum and were just throwing ideas around. If the card gets choosen for use let the game developer worry about the legalities of it.

Id say that about the use of most art to tho...

And its not up to me so...

ps. lol the pic

[vrt]

You may forward a copy of the artists permission to vrt@vrt-designs.com or Verticae on deviantart, so we can get this in Crucible.

[vrt]

Thank you!

[Tiko]

No, thank You!

Shinies!

--  I discussed the copyright matter with some people on chat (thanks for your help!), and most said I shouldn't worry about it, so the card remains as it is. If it survives crucible, it may get another lookover.
Now for the attributes; any thoughts on that?

[TimerClock14]

CURATOR COMMENT:

Please type your

exact forum name in the IDEA section of your table:

tiko should be tikotribe
[/li]

[/li][/list]I like the card, namely the ability. Chaos ray......sounds like something you'd put in a spelunking deck

[Tiko]

Please type your

exact forum name in the IDEA section of your table:
[/li][/list]

Wow, didn't know that was necessary, thanks Timer :]

[HeartNotes]

Huh. Chaos Seed on a stick. Nice!  I approve of this creature.