D&D 2E 2e Reprints, anyone else notice?

[JeffB]

They are doing the black cover revised versions from the mid 90s?

Initially I was not planning on buying the reprints of either AD&D version because originals are so easily found in good enough shape.... for my purposes anyway.

But I had decided in recent months I would support WOTC in the reprints and now the PDFs because I want to see them.continue down this old school lovefest I REALLY wanna be able to buy the LBBs again, in particular.

Anyhoo,.I have no desire to own the revised 2e books again, for all the warts of the originals, I find them easier to use for actual gaming ( I am no longer a collector, or have that mentality).

Anyone else disappointed by this?

 

[TwoSix]

There's a whole thread of people disappointed by it on RPG.net.

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?672273-2nd-Edition-Premium-Reprints

 

[D'karr]

There's a whole thread of people disappointed by it on RPG.net

When is there NOT a whole thread of people disappointed by something on the internet?

 

[JeffB]

Lol.

I am not a typical Internet D&D whiner/fanboy. No loss of sleep, boycotting or wishing ill will upon the designers and their families through the next two generations. Nor looking to multiquote and refute at 10000 words per post.

Just was under the impression they were doing the original prints and disappointed that is not the case.

 

[am181d]

I'm assuming that they're reprinting the later versions, because those are the ones that contain all the errata. Just like the 3.5 PHB.

 

[NotZenon]

well that sucks.

 

[Orius]

Interesting choice.

There may be a few reasons for doing this:

1. The black cover 2nd edition books had errata corrections, so they may have been picked for more accuracy.
2. The look of the black border reprints was also used in the Player's Option books, the only difference is that Spells & Magic uses a serif typeface unlike the sans-serif typeface everything else had. If they decide to reprint any PO books at a later date, there will be an internal consistancy across the line (one of the reasons the reprint was done in 2e in the first place).
3. Second edition originally used the AD&D logo that was introduced sometime during 1e's run, with the words 2^nd Edition below. The later books had a (blander IMO) logo that just said Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. They may have picked it to use a logo that was unique to 2e, just as 3e and 4e had their own logos. In this case though, I missed the dragon ampersand.
4. The reprints were full color inside, as opposed to the black and blue original printings, so maybe WotC feels they look better.

It makes little difference to me. I started buying right before the time the reprint hit, so I ended up with the original PHB but reprint DMG, so I'm used to seeing both styles (along with original ToM and the whole PO set). Internally, I like the reprint's look a bit better (except for the use of Helvetica or one of its bastard offspring as the main typeface), and a lot of people think the monocrome art in the originals is pretty butt-ugly. As for the full-color art, both the originals and reprints use full color art, just different pieces. It's no big deal to me.

 

[Jester David]

And if they were reprinting the originals, we'd have threads full of fans of the black border books calling for those to be reprinted and complaining about the choice of the originals. Either way they lose, but at least this way the books look nicer and they don't have to worry as much about errata.

 

[MortalPlague]

This PHB was the one I cut my teeth on. I really liked some of the art in there.

 

[Nikosandros]

I understand using the most recent version, since it includes errata, but I find the "black" version considerably uglier.