TSR NuTSR Sells Rebound 1E Core Rulebooks For $650 Each

Despite being embroiled in ongoing legal disputes with WotC regarding use of the TSR trademark (amongst other things), NuTSR has posted images of leather-bound compilations of AD&D 1E books they say are rebindings of old material, complete with the disputed logo. They're selling these books for $650 each.

The Deities & Demigods book (middle top in the image) has a typo on the front cover.

TSR - The Full & Glorious History of NuTSR

Because the Saga of TSR3 has been ongoing for a while, with many landmarks, I thought I'd do a quick timeline for those who haven't had the time (or, frankly, inclination) to keep up with the whole palaver. As multiple entities refer to themselves as TSR, I will use the nomenclature (1), (2)...

www.enworld.org

About these books, NuTSR says "Look what just came in. Sorry, we didn't have these in for TSR CON. (in the beginning, WotC said similar to what people below are saying. We said they are rebound of old material. Long story short, WotC said ok no problem, we have it in writing)"

As rebindings, these would be existing books simply being resold. However, the covers with the disputed logo are new.

In early March WotC launched a lawsuit -- (PDF attachment of filing) -- naming TSR, TSR CEO Justin LaNasa personally, and the Dungeon Hobby Shop museum. WotC seeks a judgement that TSR hand over all domains, take down all websites, pay treble damages and costs, hand over all stock and proceeds related to the trademarks, and more.

 

[Umbran]

But we're not talking about how to write for today - we're talking about Gary Gygax and his old-academicish style of writing. I can totally see him leaving the apostrophe off not by accident but because he was writing the way he wrote. After all, it was only 1e AD&D that called it a Players handbook instead of a Player's Handbook.

Or... just spitballng here... it was just a name, and the grammatical correctness of its construction didn't really pass through anyone's head when the put it on the first books. Gygax wasn't a great technical writer, so I wouldn't ascribe much intent to it.

And, even if Gygax had a quirky writing style, I don't think here's a solid argument that it was specifically a style from before WWI.

 

[ko6ux]

The good news is that if you were going to rip the cover off a copy of 1E Unearthed Arcana, you are unlikely to be able to find one that actually has the binding intact to begin with.

 

[Faolyn]

While the misspellings are inexcusable, the missing apostrophes in the titles are accurate. The titles of the 1st Edition Handbooks were "Players Handbook" and "Dungeon Masters Guide" and not "Player's Handbook" and "Dungeon Master's Guide". Even the official 2012 WotC premium reprints of the 1st Edition books honored TSR's original apostropheless titles.

Hand to go back and check, but yeah; you're right. I guess I'll have to let that bit pass.

 

[Racegamer]

Bonus points for the logo being infuriatingly uncentered.

Well, there is only so much you can do when working in Word 3.0!

 

[Fifth Element]

After all, it was only 1e AD&D that called it a Players handbook instead of a Player's Handbook.

BECMI books also used this style. Players Manual rather than Player's Manual or Players' Manual.

 

[Racegamer]

Heh...TSR Con originally advertised that tickets for the "event" would be sold via NFTs. To the best of my knowledge, they never followed up on that.

Speaking of, they're claiming 800 attendees for TSR Con and that "60% of them" didn't even know Gary Con was a thing. For those unaware, TSR Con was held at the Dungeon Hobby Shop Museum, which is literally just a house. The "game room" was the dining room.

By "800 attendees", maybe they meant 800 total brain cells were in attendance...
...Even then, I would think that would be stretching it!

 

[Fifth Element]

Then how come it is written as if the author is speaking to an individual, instead of a group?

Because at any one particular time there will be one player reading? Even if, over the course of a session, several of them will read it at different times?

Yeah, but you know, when looking for how to write stuff today, I generally like example references that are less than a century old. Or maybe it should be called "Ye Olde Booke-of-Hande for Plaerf" and none of us could be happy about the construction.

The Players Handbook was released at almost exactly the same time as the Scouts handbook you posted. You've already seen an example. Also the BECMI books - the Players Manual, for example, from the Basic Set.

 

[glass]

Almost no one includes it because it is generally not considered to be correct - it's what you call a false possessive. You would write a fan of the Beatles' music, but not a fan of the Beatles.

No, it is not false. It has largely fallen into disuse, which makes leaving it out correct too. But as I noted in the post you quoted, it persists in phrases such as "a friend of mine". Unless you really go around saying "a friend of me"?


_
glass.

 

[Faolyn]

It's confusing... the DMG+MM1+MM2 collection is well over 500 pages, but the D&DG book is 1/4th the size of that. The grouping makes no sense.

Assuming it's a "rebinding" and they didn't just print out a PDF (which I wouldn't put past them), is it even possible to take three books and cram them together into one binding?

If you take the pages out of the book completely, removing the spine and stitching/glue altogether, then it's possible to combine and rebind them.

But good point about the page count. The D&DG does strike me as being thinner than the DMG/MM collection, but not hugely so.

And the D&DG is 1st Edition, which includes the redacted Lovecraft and Moorcock content (the latter of which is still alive and has a copyright claim), which is really hard to find and ain't cheap. And if I had an original 1st Edition D&DG, why would I do THIS to it and devalue it?

It's possible that they simply used their copy so often that it was falling apart. Although in that case, the inside pages would also be so badly worn that it wouldn't be worth selling--which is why I really want to see the insides of the books they have for sale. At $650, those rebound books (useless for collectors, useful for gaming) better be in good condition.

It's also possible that they took a sketchpad (notice the similar textures) like this and embossed the cover, and refuse to let anyone actually look at the store copy:

 

[Fifth Element]

No, it is not false. It has largely fallen into disuse, which makes leaving it out correct too. But as I noted in the post you quoted, it persists in phrases such as "a friend of mine". Unless you really go around saying "a friend of me"?

Friend of mine is an idiom, and idioms often break the "rules."

Friend of me is grammatically "correct", even if it's rarely used due to the idiomatic form being much more common. It's more clear when it's not first-person. While a friend of Bob's is probably more common, hearing a friend of Bob is more frequent than a friend of me.

I hope that hyphen illustrates that when it comes to grammar and orthography, I know of what I speak.