Basic Fantasy Field Guide Volume 1

[Dimirag]

Identifying the authors for BF1 has been hard after all these years, but I've now received consent from all but two and I'm pretty sure I've identified both of them.

Is there SRD content in BF1? I ran it a year ago and don't recall anything that could come from the SRD. What section(s) would be problematic?

I think most creatures on the FG aren't srd but either original or a new take on those monsters not covered by the srd.
But better to check to be sure.

[Boggo]

Identifying the authors for BF1 has been hard after all these years, but I've now received consent from all but two and I'm pretty sure I've identified both of them.

Is there SRD content in BF1? I ran it a year ago and don't recall anything that could come from the SRD. What section(s) would be problematic?

I think most creatures on the FG aren't srd but either original or a new take on those monsters not covered by the srd.
But better to check to be sure.

there were actually surprisingly more in FG1 than I expected

[coureur_d_bois]

This is because lots of the monsters in the FG are left over monsters from the SRD that didn't make it to the Core Rules. I played 3e for almost 15 years, so I saw them right away when flipping though (allip, ettercap, frost worm, etc.).

[Boggo]

This is because lots of the monsters in the FG are left over monsters from the SRD that didn't make it to the Core Rules. I played 3e for almost 15 years, so I saw them right away when flipping though (allip, ettercap, frost worm, etc.).

lol I like the three you picked are all 1e monsters

[Solomoriah]

1E-specific monsters were outside the coverage target of BFRPG with a very few exceptions. Even then I was expanding monster groups, such as the golems where I included both BX-equivalent and 1E-equivalent types.

[SmootRK]

Identifying the authors for BF1 has been hard after all these years, but I've now received consent from all but two and I'm pretty sure I've identified both of them.

You have my explicit consent, even if I haven't had the time to sit at my desktop computer to pound out that email. Been browsing via cellphone last several days between jobs.

[Solomoriah]

Thanks. Whenever you get a chance, please do send the email, but I don't think you're blocking anything I'm going to work on soon.

[SmootRK]

Is there SRD content in BF1? I ran it a year ago and don't recall anything that could come from the SRD. What section(s) would be problematic?

I think most creatures on the FG aren't srd but either original or a new take on those monsters not covered by the srd.
But better to check to be sure.

there were actually surprisingly more in FG1 than I expected

Many creatures came from an early Monster Supplement that covered a variety of "missing" creatures (primarily those that had become standard fare but originated in later editions of games). When I started the project, I got permission to fold that early Supplement into this project which didn't even have the name "Field Guide" yet. I strived for new content or totally original interpretation of creatures, but many entries came from other contributors which is where many of these "SRD" entries made their way in.

[Dimirag]

I know if Smoot is involved, 90% of what he does is original, and the 10% remaining is an original take.
I though FG2 was when OGL monsters started to appear, man, being a long road since FG1.

[SmootRK]

Oh I used other content at times.

I just always felt BFRPG was stronger with original and unique stuff... rather than porting in duplicates from other games/editions.

Hence Bisren, Anubians, Flederkatz, and such over the direct imports.