Tszii wrote in Displacer Beast prototype:Interesting and so cool for you to post!Can we get something on the label for Strange tales 167 from 1968? The cover of Men and Magic's 1-3rd print had "inspired/stolen" art. Flames at the bottom, fur saddle, short sword, cloak, crown, horse stance, dude's pose...
Philflound wrote in Displacer Beast prototype:Last week we got in a copy of Worlds Unknown #5 from Marvel Comics. This book was released in late 1973 with a cover date of February, 1974. In it is a story adapted from A.E. Van Vogt called "Black Destroyer". The submitter asked that we put in the key comments (which would show up on the label) that this is a prototype for the Displacer Beast. It does look exactly like one and this would have been released before Dungeons and Dragons. Thing is, I would think a handful of people in the world would actually know what we were referring to if we decided to do it, and even fewer would care or are even aware of it. If this happened to be a RPG magazine like Dragon or something similar, I think we would have actually accommodated the request. But we decided since this was a comic, we chose not to put the info on the label. It was cool though that the customer pointed it out. I put a link so you could view the cover. I pose the question, how many on here knew about this?PhilWorlds Unknown (1973 Marvel) comic books
DiscoDadda wrote in Displacer Beast prototype:It was in D&D Ecologies.... I am currently trying to get CGC to change the label as this was inspired by the Monster Manual... which was inspider by Vogt.Wish me luck.Disco
DiscoDadda wrote in Displacer Beast prototype:Sorry I was too quick to post. Please have them reconsider! It is my submission.... and yes I do care.Thanks, Disco
Philflound wrote in Displacer Beast prototype:We decided not to put it on the label. Like I said, if it was reversed, I may have referenced the comic in a D&D related item. Is the Monster Ecologies a softcover or hardcover?Phil
DiscoDadda wrote in Displacer Beast prototype:Hi Phil, TY for replying. However I think maybe it is being over thought. You said if it was a D&D mag then it would be considered... that seems backward logic to me. The MM stole the image from a comic book and ultimately from Vogt in the 30s where there was no image just words and refined it into Displacer Beast. This Comic Book is the source material for a Monster in the D&D realm and the first image of that creature.... TSR even spells out and by default knows and understands the link. It is even illustrated in such a way.... Comic Book then Displacer Beast in otherwords "prototype for" Please see the images....Futhermore, I have seen labels change when something is pointed out later. This is that case.Thanks Again, Best, Disco
JoeNuttall wrote in Displacer Beast prototype:You can see here the original illustration of the Coeurl:archive.org/details/Astounding_v23n05_1 ... 7/mode/2upThe face is clearly the basis for the image in the comic book - so MM could have copied either.The feet in MM however are distinctive and are clearly based upon the comic illustration (there is a second illustration in Astounding which shows the feet clearer).The suckers on the tentacles in MM on the other hand are not as per Astounding (which has appendages on the ends) or per the comic (where they are smooth).This change indicates that the MM artist was basing it on the revised version of the story, the first 6 chapters of "The Voyage of the Space Beagle" in which the tentacles end not in fingers but suction cups.That was released in a couple of variants but I can't find any cover illustrations which are relevant.So, from the design of the feet, it appears that the MM artist based it upon the comic, but changed to be more accurate to Vogt's revised description (adding suckers), but adding an extra pair of feet (!!).The comic itself, from the design of the face is based upon the original illustration in Astounding, but the fingers removed from the tentacles as per the revised description (but no suckers added).Personally I'd say that the illustration from Astounding is the original source that's being copied - once to the comic, and then (indirectly) again to MM.
DiscoDadda wrote in Displacer Beast prototype:Your logic makes sense. While I think the displacer beast was an "evolution" We do have documented evidence in Dragon Magazine Monster Ecologies which clearly shows Worlds Unknown 5 as the genesis for the current form of the DB. It does reference the Vogt Story.... I am thinking that each of the publications, at least with an image attached should at minimum also be "prototypes" from a CGC labelling standpoint. Worlds Unknown is by far the most refined.Question: Honor Among Thieves did not spawn a comic book series except for a one-shot by IDW that did not mention the DB. However we have to assume that there will be a sequel to Honor Among Thieves and perhaps we will get a corresponding comic book which will feature the Displacer Beast. Considering we now have crossover between comics and D&D which is now being influenced by CGC... Should CGC get ahead of this? As I am certain that we will be discovering more of these situations as time goes on.Disco
DiscoDadda wrote in Displacer Beast prototype:Phil, Regarding Worlds Unknown issue 5.... How about some Displacer Beast Art on the Label?Best, Tom
Philflound wrote in Displacer Beast prototype:We actually have not graded any of the first 3 printings of this, so there is no entry to write on the key comment. If someone submits one of these, I will put the reference for the Strange Tales #167. I showed it to a few people at the office and Shawn (VP of CGC Comics) definitely said to put it in the key comments.Phil
