TheRPGSite

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/35740000

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/35760000

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/35750000

I can start my countdown :D

I love that they used the art from the black boarder versions for the preview. I hope that's the version they use for the reprint.

Those are my favorites (I know I'm alone there).

Not quite, although I often trollishly state that the designers of 2e obviously had never even played the game, I will give you this:

The Monsterous Manual is the best monster book any rpg ever got, period.

It's got just the right blend of numbers and art styles and humor and fluff.  It's a lovely book plain and simple.  Added to that, the art style matches up well.  Silly gets silly art, whimsical gets whimsical art, scary gets scary art, Kobolds get silly, whimsical, scary art.

Sadly, the 2e core rules clean-up is just a little too little and 3e is just a little too much as far as rules alterations go.

I jetisonned Castles and Crusades for the crappy port of the 1e weapon stats just like I jetisonned 2e about ten years earlier.  The crowing fault of 2e is elves with sheaf arrows and composite long bows.  But there's plenty of other things that needed a better revision.

Quote from: Piestrio;620034Those are my favorites (I know I'm alone there).

I actually liked the art of the black reprints better than the original versions.

And no, this is not the best version of D&D to me. Not even by a long, long shot. ;)

I will be buying these. 2e was a fantastic game. I easily have logged more hours with it than any other rpg I've played.

Quote from: Piestrio;620034I love that they used the art from the black boarder versions for the preview. I hope that's the version they use for the reprint.

Ugh.  That just killed it for me.  I hate the black cover versions.  I feel the cover art on the black cover PHB and DMG were just flat out ugly, and the interior presentation was inferior in every way.

I have a feeling it's because they don't have publication rights to all those Elmore, Caldwell, and Parkinson paintings from the original 2e prints anymore, and don't want to bother getting the rights for them.

I'm happy you're getting the cover version and interior presentation you prefer, but I can safely mark these off my wish lists.  At least I didn't need them anyway as I have 2 copies of each of the old books.

Bleah. Talk about false thread-advertising.

I've never seen the interior art of 2e Revised, but the cover art of both versions of 2e is shit.

I won't touch the "best edition" thing is but 2e is my favorite. Unfortunately I don't need these because I have multiple copies of the core books already, and slapping that awful art on them certainly isn't going to convince me.

But it's nice they're doing this. A few years ago I wouldn't have believed it.

for my money it is not the best version of dnd but i logged more hours with adnd 2e than any other edition so i will definitely be picking these up.

I remember this edition. I wouldn't know about best(never got to try it out), but it seemed to have more official supplements, campaign settings, and whatnot than any edition before or since. It was a bit overwhelming really.

Quote from: GeekEclectic;620059I remember this edition. I wouldn't know about best(never got to try it out), but it seemed to have more official supplements, campaign settings, and whatnot than any edition before or since. It was a bit overwhelming really.

opinions vary wildly on whether or not the rules supplements were good or god awful, but adnd 2e did spawn some of the best known and most loved settings of dnd (dark sun, planescape, spelljammer).

Quote from: Gabriel2;620047Ugh.  That just killed it for me.  I hate the black cover versions.  I feel the cover art on the black cover PHB and DMG were just flat out ugly, and the interior presentation was inferior in every way.

I have a feeling it's because they don't have publication rights to all those Elmore, Caldwell, and Parkinson paintings from the original 2e prints anymore, and don't want to bother getting the rights for them.

I'm happy you're getting the cover version and interior presentation you prefer, but I can safely mark these off my wish lists.  At least I didn't need them anyway as I have 2 copies of each of the old books.

I do not actually know what version they will be reprinting, just that the thumbnails for the website are from the black border version.

Quote from: ICFTI;620056for my money it is not the best version of dnd but i logged more hours with adnd 2e than any other edition so i will definitely be picking these up.

Ditto. For me, this will be a nostalgia purchase.
Shame about the art. I didn't care for the revised ed. artwork.

I hope low sales of some of these reprints don't give cause for WOTC to rethink whether reprints are viable before they get to BECMI or the RC. (I've seen D&D Basic listed as a best seller on RPGnow - though clicking on it leads nowhere - so it's on the way  - hopefully).

They really need to clean up the modules and sell 'em in bundles (entire lines) or as a single tome, and get 'em out there too. A new player to the hobby will look at these, read 'em, and wonder what the heck to do with them. Modules will sort that out.

Still, kudos for Wizards for doing this. 2e wasn't my favourite version of D&D, and by the time it came out our group was starting to split up and go their separate ways. It can also be had cheap on ebay (only the 3e books are cheaper) so $50 or whatever these are seems like its aimed at collectors only.

Quote from: Piestrio;620065I do not actually know what version they will be reprinting, just that the thumbnails for the website are from the black border version.

Page count of the PHB indicates that it's indeed the revised (black border) version. Shame. The interior art sucks harder than any other version of D&D.

Red-headed stepchild has birthday party. Nobody comes to visit.

Spoiler

Sorry! Sorry!

Quote from: Killfuck Soulshitter;620095The interior art sucks harder than any other version of D&D.

:eek: More than anime 3rd Edition and cool, WoW 4th; horseshit!

I saw the thread title and hoped briefly that the Moldvay/Cook boxes were being rprinted.

Too much to expect.

Quote from: Gabriel2;620047Ugh.  That just killed it for me.  I hate the black cover versions.  I feel the cover art on the black cover PHB and DMG were just flat out ugly, and the interior presentation was inferior in every way.

I have a feeling it's because they don't have publication rights to all those Elmore, Caldwell, and Parkinson paintings from the original 2e prints anymore, and don't want to bother getting the rights for them.

I'm happy you're getting the cover version and interior presentation you prefer, but I can safely mark these off my wish lists.  At least I didn't need them anyway as I have 2 copies of each of the old books.

I prefer the original covers, but not going to quibble over the art. My 2E phb is falling apart and I could use a replacement.

Are these the original books or the revised ones from the mid90s?

Quote from: Exploderwizard;620101I saw the thread title and hoped briefly that the Moldvay/Cook boxes were being rprinted.

Too much to expect.

Started to dream of Moldvay/Cook being reprinted as a single volume...or heck just reprint the two softcovers with no changes as a facsimile edition rather than these premium reprints with new cover designs.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;620107Are these the original books or the revised ones from the mid90s?

As I posted above, pagecount indicates the revised books.

Passed this on to my group since we're all 2e-era gamers and that's the version of D&D we've played the most. But it never was my favorite version.

Now that they're reprinting the red-headed stepchild of the D&D family, if the hallowed RC doesn't get a reprint it'll be a travesty.

Quote from: Piestrio;620034http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/35740000

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/35760000

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/35750000

I can start my countdown :D

I love that they used the art from the black boarder versions for the preview. I hope that's the version they use for the reprint.

Those are my favorites (I know I'm alone there).

Oh, for Pete's Sake, not the black cover version. The art in that version sucked so hard that not even I, a huge 2e fan, would buy it.

WotC, just screwing things up all the time.

Well, I know my distributor over ordered the 1e reprint and is blowing them out and I suspect that's not an uncommon thing.  I ordered three sets and have two left on the shelf at the store.  I'll probably order myself a set at the discounted price both because I'm that cheap and because it's something I think should be available on the shelves in the long term.

Anyhow, I'm guessing orders on 3.5 and 2.0 will have been a fair bit lower.

But I sure hope they'll reprint the RC and some adventures.

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure it was TSR that did the 1/4 size 1e reprints years ago including the basic and expert sets.

Quote from: Killfuck Soulshitter;620095Page count of the PHB indicates that it's indeed the revised (black border) version. Shame. The interior art sucks harder than any other version of D&D.

Agreed. Way to fail, WotC.

Fuck, I'm done with this company.

You all suck.

Just FYI.

Erw Yerr, Shercund Ahdershern! Mah fravrit berks! :cheerleader:
Gernah prarti lerkits nerntahrn erghteh-nern!
:thanx:

*ptooi* /spits retainer
:jaw-dropping:
Wha...? $50 a book!? What, are they edged in gold leaf and smell like incense?

:rant: P-(    (need a Colonel Klink animated emoticon)
Damn you, Wot Ceeeee!

Quote from: Piestrio;620137You all suck.

Just FYI.

And you're a filthy, filthy liar. And your fun is badwrong. And my D&D is better than your D&D. Plus, more vitriolic comments. :rant:

Aren't 2e rulebooks in good shape still available at reasonable prices on the used market?

I mean, I don't mind someone buying these at $50 a pop, if WotC can sell them.  I just have a hard time seeing that working.

Nonsense, it's such a small print run to please such a vanishingly small fanbase that WotC should be applauded for their dedication to pleasing everyone. ;)

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;620146Aren't 2e rulebooks in good shape still available at reasonable prices on the used market?

I mean, I don't mind someone buying these at $50 a pop, if WotC can sell them.  I just have a hard time seeing that working.

They are, but it isn't 100% and things are rapidly changing. You can get them at reasonable prices, but it is getting harder and the quality is very hit or miss (my current phb is a replace,ent I got through amazon and the binding is falling apart ----was listed as good condition). My DMG is in good shape though. These are the original 2E books, not the revised ones.

I was able to repurchase most of the complete books dirt cheap though and in good shape. Modules were a lot harder (some are available and some aren't-----twice when I bought 2E modules or boxed sets, I was ripped off, in one case just getting the module casing with no book, in another getting just a book with no boxed set material).

Personally I like the idea of being able to get spme fresh 2E books. Will buy these regardless of which ones they are, but I do hope they are the originals and not the revised (except for the monster manual).

I have copies of the original 2e books but they're pretty tatty - I would definitely buy reprints just so I could take them to a game without worrying about them falling apart.

But shitbox black cover retard edition? Fuck you Mike Mearls, no thanks

Quote from: K Peterson;620144And you're a filthy, filthy liar. And your fun is badwrong. And my D&D is better than your D&D. Plus, more vitriolic comments. :rant:

Rabble rabble rabble !

Quote from: Piestrio;620137You all suck.

Just FYI.

Personal attacks are against the rules.  You know this.  You are banned 1 day for personal attacks and another month for saying another edition but my own favorite is the best.

Oh, and this, because I hear these sorts of things are witty

(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/22020527.jpg)

speaking as an ardent supporter of the currently in-print and supported edition of D&D (AD&D, that is), I think it's great that they're throwing a bone to fans of out of print editions.  I mean I'm sure it'll be limited edition, collectors only stuff and while some may buy them, lord knows it'll never, ever get played.  Ever.  I mean, we've moved past such atrocious game design.  As if you could use "design" to describe how those books were written.

...

Did I nail all the cliches the 4vengers used last January?

The original 2nd edition Players Handbook was the best Players Handbook ever published for AD&D in any edition. The one they're reprinting here is not it. We used the 2ed PH with the 1E DMG, and 1E Unearthed Arcana.

Unfortunately, the art in MM for 2nd edition sucked. Well, the art in almost all MM's so far have sucked.

Of course, why I'd pay $60 for a reprint of books I can find in any used bookstore around town for 2 or 3 bucks I can't imagine anyways.

Quote from: David Johansen;620148Nonsense, it's such a small print run to please such a vanishingly small fanbase that WotC should be applauded for their dedication to pleasing everyone. ;)

Not gonna lie, I bought the 1e reprints for collector / interest reasons, not expecting them to hit the table - although I'd certainly be willing to throw down with them if I got the chance.

On the other hand, if they're really slow sellers, that's one more set than would have been sold otherwise, and was one more vote for "reprint more stuff!" than WotC would have seen otherwise.

I didn't get the 3.5 reprints, because frankly I don't give a shit - there's nothing interesting there.

Quote from: TristramEvans;620166Of course, why I'd pay $60 for a reprint of books I can find in any used bookstore around town for 2 or 3 bucks I can't imagine anyways.

Well, these are supposedly premium quality, I assume with all the nice things that entails (heavy paper, NotQuiteLeather covers, elfskin bookmark, etc.) so I guess they're aimed more at collectors and 2e fans who are more hardcore than you and me.

Plus they're something like 35% off at Amazon. That's a sizeable discount. It's almost enough to sway me back towards 'buy'. Almost.

Quote from: soviet;620153But shitbox black cover retard edition? Fuck you Mike Mearls, no thanks

I will still buy it, but I have agree with the underlying sentiment here. I really don't understand what compelled them to re-issue the black revised editions. It may be an art issue like a few have suggested, but still, these are not the books most 2E fans have in mind when they think of the edition. To be honest though, I am not sure I even remember how much different the black books were from the originals (seem to recall some changes to specialist wizards). I pretty much used my original 1989 2E books the whole run, and the only black book I used (I did have the others though) was the MM.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;620194I will still buy it, but I have agree with the underlying sentiment here. I really don't understand what compelled them to re-issue the black revised editions. It may be an art issue like a few have suggested, but still, these are not the books most 2E fans have in mind when they think of the edition. To be honest though, I am not sure I even remember how much different the black books were from the originals (seem to recall some changes to specialist wizards). I pretty much used my original 1989 2E books the whole run, and the only black book I used (I did have the others though) was the MM.

The difference is basically just errata and a bit of reorganization.

Too rich for me. I'm not willing to even pay $40 for these reprints, especially being the revised books.

My copies of the originals are still in good shape.

Okay, so I've never seen the art inside the black-cover versions of the 2e books.  Can anybody tell me what sucks about it?  

(Granted, I didn't think the art in the original printings of the 2e books was great stuff.)

Also, paying $50 for the 2e DMG is laughable.  It's a pretty terrible waste of paper.

(http://timkanebooks.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/indy-book-burning.jpg)

Here. Hitler autographs one of those black-border AD&D books.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;620194I will still buy it, but I have agree with the underlying sentiment here. I really don't understand what compelled them to re-issue the black revised editions. It may be an art issue like a few have suggested, but still, these are not the books most 2E fans have in mind when they think of the edition. To be honest though, I am not sure I even remember how much different the black books were from the originals (seem to recall some changes to specialist wizards). I pretty much used my original 1989 2E books the whole run, and the only black book I used (I did have the others though) was the MM.

The black abortion books also look a bit like the player's option books that ruined 2e. They print these and the next thing you know they'll print those too and they get to ruin 2e a second time and THAT CAN'T HAPPEN

Quote from: Benoist;620207(http://timkanebooks.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/indy-book-burning.jpg)

Here. Hitler autographs one of those black-border AD&D books.

Even Hitler wouldn't sign black book 2e. He's evil, but not that evil.

I'd love this as the cover for the 2nd Edition Player's Handbook reprint:

(http://i49.tinypic.com/es3p1k.jpg)

But at those prices, and with them being the 1995 editions I'd rather go to ebay get the originals and pick up Legends and Lore and Tome of Magic for about the same cost of more likely less (if I didn't already have them!).

Quote from: misterguignol;620205Okay, so I've never seen the art inside the black-cover versions of the 2e books.  Can anybody tell me what sucks about it?

It is in colour, but cheap in a bad way.

I was so looking forward to them, but with the black border art? Meh. I hope they find something better.

Quote from: elfandghost;620213I'd love this as the cover for the 2nd Edition Player's Handbook reprint:

(http://i49.tinypic.com/es3p1k.jpg)

But at those prices, and with them being the 1995 editions I'd rather go to ebay get the originals and pick up Legends and Lore and Tome of Magic for about the same cost of more likely less (if I didn't already have them!).

That was a Dragon Mag cover, wasn't it?  I think I've got that one around...

Quote from: soviet;620209The black abortion books also look a bit like the player's option books that ruined 2e. They print these and the next thing you know they'll print those too and they get to ruin 2e a second time and THAT CAN'T HAPPEN

I am not too worried. As I recall the content of the black books were mostly the same (could be wrong about that), it is mostly a cosmetic issue.

If they want to release the skills and powers books, that wont bother me. I just wont use them.

Quote from: misterguignol;620205Okay, so I've never seen the art inside the black-cover versions of the 2e books.  Can anybody tell me what sucks about it?  

(Granted, I didn't think the art in the original printings of the 2e books was great stuff.)

Also, paying $50 for the 2e DMG is laughable.  It's a pretty terrible waste of paper.

I liked the 2E original art. I just thought it looked nice and naturalistic. The black book art wasn't bad, it just didn't stand out. It isnt the end of the world.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;620225I liked the 2E original art. I just thought it looked nice and naturalistic. The black book art wasn't bad, it just didn't stand out. It isnt the end of the world.

Heh, if there is one thing I don't like in art...it's naturalism.

Not that it matters much to me, I still have my copies of the 2e PHB and MM.

Quote from: misterguignol;620205Okay, so I've never seen the art inside the black-cover versions of the 2e books.  Can anybody tell me what sucks about it?  

(Granted, I didn't think the art in the original printings of the 2e books was great stuff.)

Also, paying $50 for the 2e DMG is laughable.  It's a pretty terrible waste of paper.

It's all weak-ass amateur watercolour bullshit.

Quote from: elfandghost;620213I'd love this as the cover for the 2nd Edition Player's Handbook reprint:

(http://i49.tinypic.com/es3p1k.jpg)

'cause that's all the fight 2e can bring to the table, baby.

Meanwhile, a fighter and a magic-user are beating the crap out of an Efreet. :)

Y'all are just jelious.

Quote from: misterguignol;620228Heh, if there is one thing I don't like in art...it's naturalism.

Not that it matters much to me, I still have my copies of the 2e PHB and MM.

I may have my terms mixed up, but I quite like art that is in this style (don't really know alot about art). Basically remined me of a lot of italian renaissance paintings.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;620223That was a Dragon Mag cover, wasn't it?  I think I've got that one around...

It's in the original 2e PHB, right after the table of contents. I don't think it was ever a Dragon cover, although Elmore was on quite a few of them.

There were other nice color pieces in there too, as well as some good pencils. Most complaints seem to be about the small blue ink ones scattered throughout but I never found them all that bad.

Quote from: Raven;620236It's in the original 2e PHB, right after the table of contents. I don't think it was ever a Dragon cover, although Elmore was on quite a few of them.

There were other nice color pieces in there too, as well as some good pencils. Most complaints seem to be about the small blue ink ones scattered throughout but I never found them all that bad.

They looked like little wood prints. I quite liked them.

Although by now I think we've established I have TEH BEST TASTE in art.

Quote from: Piestrio;620238Although by now I think we've established I have TEH BEST TASTE in art.

You misspelled "subhuman" and "craptastic". ;)

I am one more who thought you were talking about Moldvay by the title ;)

But I enjoy 2e as well.  The only reason I won't buy the reprints is because I have at least one copy of both versions right now.

Although, I will say I'd LOVE to see 2e become a relatively frequent game again.  I'd love to break out my Core Rules CD ROMs

Quote from: Sacrosanct;620242I am one more who thought you were talking about Moldvay by the title ;)

Plebeian. We're talking about ADVANCED Dungeons & Dragons here.

And SECOND edition to boot.

That's a bigger number than some other editions, B/X doesn't have any.

Therefore second edition is better QED.

Get with the times.

Of Elmore, Parkinson, and Easley the only one I like much is Easley, none the less Elmore's capable of good work but he does too much that looks like ren-faire bluescreen.  Pakinson's a bit of a hack IMO, his technique's actually a bit better than the other two in terms of color and perspective, there's never the painful bluescreen effect some of Elmore's paintings produce but somehow the content of his paintings seems even more off than Elmore's.  There was the Dragon cover with the mutant stretching horse behind the elf princess but no, I just find his work jarring.  Like it belongs on a royal family collectors edition plate in a china cabnet or something.

I don't think it's a mistake that their naturalism represents the period of TSR's descent into pandering to people who weren't buying their products.  It's very much in the style of religious tract artwork.

Quote from: David Johansen;620245Elmore's capable of good work but he does too much that looks like ren-faire bluescreen.

Elmore has the nostalgia factor going for him. Just looking at one of his illos makes me feel like I'm back in high school, skipping lunch so I can save the money to buy the red-cover Basic D&D boxed set.

The problem, now that I'm older, is too much of his work is static. None of it seems like illos of a living, breathing human being.

It lacks dynamism, a sense that the painting just happened to catch one moment of an ongoing scene. Instead, the figures seem carved from marble (or trapped in amber, take your pick).

Quote from: Raven;620236It's in the original 2e PHB, right after the table of contents. I don't think it was ever a Dragon cover, although Elmore was on quite a few of them.

There were other nice color pieces in there too, as well as some good pencils. Most complaints seem to be about the small blue ink ones scattered throughout but I never found them all that bad.

Okay, that makes sense.  I was confusing it with the last Paizo Dragon cover, which has a Green and a woman on it.

I like Parkinson and Elmore quite a bit. Easley I can give or take based on the piece. I tend to like his covers more than his interior work.

Hmm... the Easley covers in the 1989 versions were evocative.  The revised ones just look like he was phoning it in.

Speaking of phoning it in, that's what WotC is doing with these.  The 95 version of the books are already revised, edited, and more importantly, available in (editable) soft copy, unlike 1e.  Just print and charge $50.  Easy.

Quote from: The Were-Grognard;620280Hmm... the Easley covers in the 1989 versions were evocative.  The revised ones just look like he was phoning it in.

Speaking of phoning it in, that's what WotC is doing with these.  The 95 version of the books are already revised, edited, and more importantly, available in (editable) soft copy, unlike 1e.  Just print and charge $50.  Easy.

I suspect that close to the truth.

Quote from: The Were-Grognard;620280Speaking of phoning it in, that's what WotC is doing with these.  The 95 version of the books are already revised, edited, and more importantly, available in (editable) soft copy, unlike 1e.  Just print and charge $50.  Easy.

I'd have to agree here with a caveat.

This is an attempt by WotC to buy time in order to put out a 5e that people will purchase and to demonstrate that past editions of the D&D game are still a marketable commodity.

Quote from: jeff37923;620283I'd have to agree here with a caveat.

This is an attempt by WotC to buy time in order to put out a 5e that people will purchase and to demonstrate that past editions of the D&D game are still a marketable commodity.

Oh yeah, but if you're looking for the biggest return on your investment reprinting the already computerized revised editions saves you the hassle of paying someone to incorporate errata into the older version (like they did with 3.5) or re-type it (like they did with 1e).

Quote from: Piestrio;620034Best version of D&D gets release date. All other editions hide in shame.

I'm happy that you're happy.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;620294I'm happy that you're happy.

Happiness is against the rules. Ten weeks off.

I'd like to think at this point in history, the "argument" between 1e and 2e fans* is kind of like Conan and Subotai's "theological" discussion while walking to Zamora.  

"My edition is 1e!  Strong in his mountain!  1e laughs at 2e!"

"My edition is greater!  My edition is the everlasting sky.  Your edition lives beneath him."

*glare*

...

*=except for 1989, who shouldn't have nice things, ever.

Truthfully I don't have too much of a preference, as long as the material is interchangeable. And to a large extent, everything pre-3rd edition is.

As much as I like the idea of 2e being reprinted, I'd really hope the back catalog will be available for POD/PDF. Since I put my highest premium on settings and their supplements, and still have little interest in modules, 2e's back catalog is what keeps bringing me back to D&D in the used RPG wall in bookstores.

Though the Gazeteers should be made available first. They're harder to get. You're welcome 1e fans.
;)

AD&D 2e reprints? Awesome. I wonder if they're going to reprint Birthright.

edit: or Skills & Powers <3.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;620310I'd like to think at this point in history, the "argument" between 1e and 2e fans* is kind of like Conan and Subotai's "theological" discussion while walking to Zamora.  

"My edition is 1e!  Strong in his mountain!  1e laughs at 2e!"

"My edition is greater!  My edition is the everlasting sky.  Your edition lives beneath him."

*glare*

...

*=except for 1989, who shouldn't have nice things, ever.

Best post in the thread.

Quote from: Opaopajr;620321Though the Gazeteers should be made available first. They're harder to get. You're welcome 1e fans.
;)

These are for B/X not 1E.

My copy of MM is still i perfect shape if a little bit scuffed so theres $50 i wont need to spend...not sure about the DMG or PHB though as i mainly use the MM as a bonus monster guide for my 1e campaigns.


I really hope they make Dark Sun, Planescape and other setting available via pdf/pod eventually though as i wouldnt mind picking up a full set of those books/modules.

AD&D2nd is probably my favourite edition, for a variety of reasons, but the black covers? I don't think I've ever met anyone that liked AD&D2nd and liked those, or even preferred them over the original AD&D2nd books. Personally, I hated them (aesthetically). Calling this boneheaded on WotC's part is probably a bit strong, but I doubt this was the best choice in any way but setup costs for WotC. Maybe this'll further tank the AD&D2nd secondary market prices so I can pick up a few more good condition 1st printing PHBs...

EDIT: Oh, and here's hoping they open up the setting back-catalogue. I have pretty much all I'd ever want, but it'd be nice if others could get a hold of the stuff for their own games.

Quote from: Bobloblah;620394AD&D2nd is probably my favourite edition, for a variety of reasons, but the black covers? I don't think I've ever met anyone that liked AD&D2nd and liked those, or even preferred them over the original AD&D2nd books.

Hi, nice to meet you :)

Also I will point out that I have legions, LEGIONS, of supporters via PM (;) ).

Everything about "Black Border" D&D was a disappointment, including the covers, IMO.

Quote from: Piestrio;620396Hi, nice to meet you :)

Also I will point out that I have legions, LEGIONS, of supporters via PM (;) ).

Can't say I think of an online forum posting as "meeting" someone, but hey...cheers! Oh, and why are your tastes so awful?
:)

EDIT: Oh, and it's the old, "I have my sources, but I can't reveal them!" trick...

Quote from: Bobloblah;620398Can't say I think of an online forum posting as "meeting" someone, but hey...cheers! Oh, and why are your tastes so awful?
:)

Bad breeding in all likelihood.

Quote from: CRKrueger;620397Everything about "Black Border" D&D was a disappointment, including the covers, IMO.

I don't think they were that bad.  And at the time, I actually liked the Alchemist Font.

Unless Tome of Magic gets put out as well for 2nd, this is all for naught.

Wild Mage 4 life, yo.

Quote from: Danger;620446Unless Tome of Magic gets put out as well for 2nd, this is all for naught.

Wild Mage 4 life, yo.

God, you sound just like one of my friends ;)   All he ever plays are wild mages.  In fact, if we play a game that doesn't have a wild mage, he tries to figure out a conversion ;)

Quote from: thedungeondelver;620231'cause that's all the fight 2e can bring to the table, baby.

Meanwhile, a [1e] fighter and a magic-user are beating the crap out of an Efreet. :)

Yeah, baby.

Quote from: Piestrio;620396Also I will point out that I have legions, LEGIONS, of supporters via PM (;) ).

You and your legions could fit around one of the tiny tables at Starbucks. ;)

Quote from: Melan;620216It is in colour, but cheap in a bad way.

Now that's a tagline I'd buy into, for those reprints.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;620449God, you sound just like one of my friends ;)   All he ever plays are wild mages.  In fact, if we play a game that doesn't have a wild mage, he tries to figure out a conversion ;)

Your friend is Right and Correct Person and you would do well to emulate Him.

All Hail the Wild Mage*!

*For what it is worth, I honestly enjoyed the Wild Mage as I played him like Daffy Duck with a spellboook; more to tweak the nose of the guy running the game ("This shit is serious business,") than anything else.

Quote from: The Butcher;620120Passed this on to my group since we're all 2e-era gamers and that's the version of D&D we've played the most. But it never was my favorite version.

Now that they're reprinting the red-headed stepchild of the D&D family, if the hallowed RC doesn't get a reprint it'll be a travesty.

Well, its kind of sort of understandable why they've reprinted 2e and haven't yet announced the reprint of the RC: if you are a WoTC suit who knows nothing about the hobby's history or as it is today, and you look only at numbers on (old, TSR) paper, you see that the 2e books sold way more than the RC did in its time.  Thus you presume that's the one to go with, despite the fact that it did so because the RC was never very actively promoted in its day (and some say the heads at TSR had a dislike of it), and that today there's a huge hobby demand for the RC while there's very little if any significant demand for the 2e books.

My only hope is that the very same suit won't later look at the relatively poor sales of the 2e reprint and say "well, that's it, reprints are totally done now in terms of profitability!"


RPGPundit

Quote from: thedungeondelver;620310I'd like to think at this point in history, the "argument" between 1e and 2e fans* is kind of like Conan and Subotai's "theological" discussion while walking to Zamora.  

"My edition is 1e!  Strong in his mountain!  1e laughs at 2e!"

"My edition is greater!  My edition is the everlasting sky.  Your edition lives beneath him."

*glare*

...

*=except for 1989, who shouldn't have nice things, ever.

Above: every edition war ever.

wake me up when they reprint the Rules Cyclopedia...

Quote from: TristramEvans;620592wake me up when they reprint the Rules Cyclopedia...

Ditto.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Exploderwizard;620371These are for B/X not 1E.

Yes, but the Mystara gazeteers were really good books which went into great detail about creating specific types of kingdoms, and there was always stuff for the players in there too. I only have a few of them, but they are some of the best adventure books TSR ever put out.

Quote from: GameDaddy;621227Yes, but the Mystara gazeteers were really good books which went into great detail about creating specific types of kingdoms, and there was always stuff for the players in there too. I only have a few of them, but they are some of the best adventure books TSR ever put out.

Yes, and they really flesh-out the cultures of Mystara and give it a unique setting feeling instead of a staple D&D trope setting.

The title of this thread is misleading. It sounded like it was about the re-release of BECMI/RC D&D. As it turns out, it was just about 2e.

Quote from: Doctor Jest;621349The title of this thread is misleading. It sounded like it was about the re-release of BECMI/RC D&D. As it turns out, it was just about 2e.

Well played, sir.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Doctor Jest;621349The title of this thread is misleading. It sounded like it was about the re-release of BECMI/RC D&D. As it turns out, it was just about 2e.

:hatsoff:

ATTENTION ATTENTION.

I have an announcement.

To all THERPGSITE posters.

You may, at a time and location of your choosing, eat a bag of dicks.

This has been an announcement.

You may return to your regularly scheduled WHARREGARRBLE.

Quote from: Piestrio;621486ATTENTION ATTENTION.

I have an announcement.

To all THERPGSITE posters.

You may, at a time and location of your choosing, eat a bag of dicks.

This has been an announcement.

You may return to your regularly scheduled WHARREGARRBLE.

Breaking news:  WotC to release bags of dicks in PDF format.  See //www.bagofdicksnow.com for further information.

Quote from: DestroyYouAlot;621489Breaking news:  WotC to release bags of dicks in PDF format.  See //www.bagofdicksnow.com for further information.

Man, they are really reaching out to the fans now.

Reaching out, or reaching around? :p

Quote from: Piestrio;621486You may, at a time and location of your choosing, eat a bag of dicks.

Bah.  The bag is only half full.

Quote from: DestroyYouAlot;621489Breaking news:  WotC to release bags of dicks in PDF format.  See //www.bagofdicksnow.com for further information.

You, sir, are very very lucky that didn't turn out to be a real porn site by accident.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;620491My only hope is that the very same suit won't later look at the relatively poor sales of the 2e reprint and say "well, that's it, reprints are totally done now in terms of profitability!"


RPGPundit

Well, the reprints in general represent a golden opportunity for the suits - reprinting complete, laid out and edited books at virtually no labor cost. This is probably in part what is driving this whole thing.

Quote from: RPGPundit;621840You, sir, are very very lucky that didn't turn out to be a real porn site by accident.

RPGPundit

What are the odds that'll be the case sometime this year?

Quote from: Kaiu Keiichi;621922Well, the reprints in general represent a golden opportunity for the suits - reprinting complete, laid out and edited books at virtually no labor cost. This is probably in part what is driving this whole thing.

Depends what you mean by "suits".

Quote from: RPGPundit;621840You, sir, are very very lucky that didn't turn out to be a real porn site by accident.

RPGPundit

True enough.  (Although, I suppose it'd be tough to expect anything else, were one to follow that link.)

Quote from: DestroyYouAlot;622395True enough.  (Although, I suppose it'd be tough to expect anything else, were one to follow that link.)

The point is posting the link in the first place (were it actual porn) would lead to the poster being banned. Posting porn images or links is not permitted here, one of the very few explicit (pardon the pun) and absolute bannable offenses.

RPGPundit

Pundit: just to make it clear, which pictures in this thread do you consider problematic? Just post numbers are fine if you don't want to link them again (for obvious reasons)?

Quote from: vytzka;622854Pundit: just to make it clear, which pictures in this thread do you consider problematic? Just post numbers are fine if you don't want to link them again (for obvious reasons)?

None, but I've noticed some escalation in the posting of links or pictures that kind of start approaching the line, so I thought I'd remind people, just in case some idiot later on tries to claim he didn't know that posting a double-penetration GILF pic was not allowed.

RPGPundit

I still have mine. I'll skip this! :D

The bag of dicks?

Quote from: Jason Coplen;623300I still have mine. I'll skip this! :D

bagofdicks.com is registered, but no site there yet.
bagofdicksnow.com is available!  Although it looks like "bag of dick snow".  Not sure if that's better or worse.
eatabagofdicks.com is a working site, but it's not a porn site.

Quote from: David Johansen;623340The bag of dicks?

They are known to last quite a while.