Re: Radiant Dragona in Draconomicon

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 13:45:20 -0600, Static <eshum@????????.org> wrote:

>        Not at all.  I'm gonna continue calling 'em Radiant Dragons.
>As somebody else mentioned, SJ has its own names for things, and we
>should continue using those name.  (That's also why I don't refer
>to Arcane as "Mercane".)  I brought up the dragon's "Celestial" name
>since it's part of the entry, so we don't need to come up with other
>names for 'em.

WotC has this habit of re-using old materials once in a while.  The arcane
became the mercane.  The radiant dragon was redefined.  I understand why
they do this too.  Their goal is to have materials that appeal to a
broader (and more generic) audience.  They seem to not have as much
support for individual setting-specific monsters as they once did.

We may not always agree with the route that WotC takes, but it is their
right to take it, as this material is their intellectual property.

That being said, we as SJ fans should not feel that we have to redefine
the setting every time that WotC uses a portion of it for one of their
other books.  Yes, consistency with WotC products is good, but inner
consistency within the SJ setting is better still.

If we constantly redefine the SJ materials, we lose a bit of identity.  If
you want to provide distinction, then follow the example I mentioned
earlier (i.e. Radiant Dragon of the Known Spheres).

Trampas