Cover Art for D&D v3.5 Reprint

[Mark CMG]

I like the 1E reprint covers better but these are fine enough. I'm just glad they are putting them out and hope they periodically do a new print run of both editions to help keep them alive. They might not ever draw some folks back into the edition cycle but they can keep people playing their D&D of choice if they take care of that customer base. Word of mouth can be a powerful thing for growing the fanbase with new editions, even if that word is coming from someone playing an older edition. WotC wants people saying good things about WotC and D&D in general.

 

[WheresMyD20]

I think it's great that WotC is reprinting older editions. So far we've seen 1e and 3.5e get the treatment, but how about the great-grandaddy of them all? Any chance at all that we'll see an OD&D reprint?

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I think it's great that WotC is reprinting older editions. So far we've seen 1e and 3.5e get the treatment, but how about the great-grandaddy of them all? Any chance at all that we'll see an OD&D reprint?

Yeah, that would be cool.

Unlike 1e AD&D, there's not much love for the original D&D art and layout, either. They could do a single-volume hardcover that includes the content of the LBBs and the Supplements (i.e. no rule changes) with new art and layout.

The tricky thing would be getting the art right, frankly. If it were me, I'd aim for the look of high-quality/professional late 70s fantasy art (Frazetta-ish, rather than Elmore-ish or Reynolds-ish or DragonballZ-ish). Color cover, black-and-white interior art.

That said, I'd also like a reprint of the "Original Collectors Edition" boxed set that included all the supplements in the digest format, with original layout and art. (Even cooler if it included Chainmail, too.) Call it the "Ultimate Collectors Edition" boxed set. I'd buy that in a heartbeat; my original D&D books aren't getting any younger.

 

[JediSoth]

A reprint of the Rules Cyclopedia would probably do pretty well.

Although...I already have two copies in good condition, so it'd be a hard sell for me.

 

[vonschlick]

Will the errata be any different than what they fixed in the 'Black leather' Special collector's editions?

 

[DM Howard]

Awesome, I'm glad that Wotc is doing this. Out of all the editions I enjoyed just reading the 3.5 books the most. Mostly the option books but I still enjoyed the core too. Too bad I already spent a bunch on Castles and Crusades. Might have to put this as a christmas present. It's like coming close to moria and not going inside if I was a dwarf.

 

[airwalkrr]

I think they look elegant and simpler than the original 3.5 covers. I disliked the 3.5 covers. They were gaudy and overly decadent. I felt they were a step back from the 3.0 covers. These are subtler and less pretentious. I like that and I want them for Christmas.

 

[Tsuga C]

I must admit that I'm less than inspired. My original AD&D (1E) books are far more inspirational than these bland offerings.

Honestly, WotC, is this the best you can do?

 

[Lord Rasputin]

I must admit that I'm less than inspired. My original AD&D (1E) books are far more inspirational than these bland offerings.

The 3e and 4e core covers have been all meh. At least it tried with 4e's cover, but the trade dress for 4e negates any artwork (3e had good trade dress). 2e, while always some kind of red-headed stepchild of editions (mentioned earlier in thread, it was quickly abandoned once 3e came out; I did a survey of the Dmoz directory in 2001 and found that almost all D&D sites listed in it that weren't abandoned were 1e or 3e), had nice artwork. There have been some non-core covers with nice artwork; the 3e Draconomicon is almost worth the price for the cover, in particular.

Why didn't the 1e reprints have the full original covers, anyways?