D&D 3.5 Reprints in September?

Stormonu · Apr 26, 2012

Seeing a reprint of Dungeon! would have been really nice.

I'd be all for a reprint of the major rulesets (1E, 2E, Cyclopedia, 3E) on principle, but frankly, I still have my old copies and they're in good condition. However, if there ever are reprints, I might encourage my gamers to get a set so we could play a campaign...

kitsune9 · Apr 26, 2012

Umbran said:
I wouldn't be surprised if they think there's just more desire for 1e and 3.x than for 2e.

I have a feeling that's what the decision is based on - marketing demographics in which they think there's a stronger market for 3.5 (with 1e) than with 2e. But still, unless 2e is so much at the bottom of the barrel for past edition markets, I would still release the books in chronological order.

_NewbieDM_ · Apr 26, 2012

It appears to all be fake.
The board game was denied by a Wizards rep. and B&N has removed the 3.5 books.

Nellisir · Apr 26, 2012

ruemere said:
Is it April the 1st already?

Weird. Seriously weird - to what purpose WotC would print an obsolete version of the system?

A straight-up run at the Pathfinder market, to perk their interest and get them looking at WotC products again. Particularly if you slip a few pages of ads for D&D Next in the back.

I agree that September seems awful quick for D&DN, but I also think talking about it for, what -- A year-and-a-half? Two years? -- doesn't make a whole lot of sense either. Either they're trying to bump up a little revenue for the lean times, or D&DN is coming out sooner than we know.

Kremnorac · Apr 26, 2012

Monte has proven to love the 3.5e system better than any other. I am sure his reasons for leaving was because he wanted D&D to stay more traditional with its rules and lore, as opposed to 4E which muddled it all up. The 1st 3 editions have a continuous lore with it, despite a few big changes here or there (AKA the cosmology change in 3E).

These books some might be interested in, but I am more interested in whether they'll be providing new books for each of the four editions than I am in reprints of core edition books. It makes sense with D&D Next, right? Supporting the 4 editions to be used in 5th Edition kills two birds with one stone --- D&D Next and those not moving to D&D Next will both enjoy the new material.

But smart and sound business tacts is WotC's biggest flaw, sadly.

Grogg of the North · Apr 26, 2012

DMKastmaria said:
The Plot Thickens:

BARNES & NOBLE | "Provolone" by Wizards RPG Team, Wizards of the Coast | Hardcover

Now what would be hysterical is if Provolone was just a big book of Prestige Classes.

ACGalaga · Apr 27, 2012

I just threw down some mad cash to pick up a few Pathfinder books. What would be the purpose of me investing in 3.5e books now?

Shemeska · Apr 27, 2012

Kremnorac said:
The 1st 3 editions have a continuous lore with it, despite a few big changes here or there (AKA the cosmology change in 3E).

I wouldn't call that a big change at all. They de-emphasized the deep ethereal, didn't describe the para and quasielemental planes as distinct elemental planes (just as border regions of the elemental planes later on), and the 2e demiplane of shadow became a full transitive plane. There's not a huge difference there, unlike the 1e/2e/3e Great Wheel versus 4e's completely new cosmology.

Nothing prior to 4e even remotely approaches the level of abrupt changes in lore that 4e introduced.

Warunsun · Apr 27, 2012

ruemere said:
Is it April the 1st already?
Weird. Seriously weird - to what purpose WotC would print an obsolete version of the system (yes, I know that there are people out there who still play 3.5 instead of its several descendants but the numbers should not be sufficient to justify an entirely new edition)? Especially since there are handy electronic equivalents already...
Regards,
Ruemere

Greetings
While Wizards of the Coast has never kept two versions of D&D in print at the same time the original company TSR, Inc did. They continued to print Advanced Dungeons & Dragons hardcover rulebooks (from first edition) after AD&D Second Edition was in print. My personal copy of the AD&D Player's Handbook was from the 17th printing done in July of 1990.

It makes sense for Wizards to make available third edition core rulebooks (in limited quantities) if they believe that people would buy them. It could also be noteworthy if they sold out quickly. They seem to be in an experimentation phase. First the "Essential" version in cheap paperback editions (like a Savage Worlds RPG book) and a short and limited release of "boxed sets" like the Master Sets, the Madness at Gardmore Abbey, and Gloomwrought. Then the news of the First Edition limited set and a huge fan demand for it.

I came across the v3.5 listing when I was looking to see how wide the First Edition re-release was becoming.

It makes sense to go with 3rd edition reprints before 2nd edition because there is a huge active fan-base for v3.5 buying Pathfinder stuff. If these reprints work out you never know we might see a limited print run again of the Basic Cyclopedia and 2nd edition. I don't imagine that any of the reprints (including the first edition ones) will be in huge numbers.

OpsKT · Apr 27, 2012

Remathilis said:
I'd have killed for a D&D Rules Cyclopedia reprint w/errata.

So, a Rules Cyclopedia reprint, because I don't believe that ever got Errata. Maybe it did, that was pre-internet time after all. Did they hide some in the back of later Poor Wizard's Almanacs?