# D&D 3.5 Reprints in September?



## Morrus (Apr 26, 2012)

EN World member *Warunsun* spotted entries for the D&D 3.5 rulebooks (with errata) on *Barnes & Noble'*s website.

*UPDATE:* Barnes & Noble has *removed* these items from the website. Speculation is that this was some kind of third-party hoax, based on the fact that a recent board game reissue from WotC appeared on that site and disappeared after WotC confirmed that it was a fake. Additionally, a fourth item simply named "Provalone" disappeared; some folks thought that might be the Monster Manual, and other very optimistic people put forward the idea that It might be a secret code name for a rushed D&D Next release this year. Whatever the truth of it, the 3.5 PHB, DMG, "Dungeon!", and _Provalone_ have all disappeared, and the _Dungeon!_ entry has been confirmed as a hoax.

*UPDATE 2:* OK, so it turns out the _Dungeon!_ entry was NOT fake.  It has now appeared on WotC's own website.  Oh, I'm so confused. 

*Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook: Core Rulebook I, V. 3.5 with Errata*
ISBN-13: 9780786962464
Publisher: Wizards of the Coast
Publication date: 9/18/2012
Pages: 320
This item will be available on September 18, 2012.

*Dungeons & Dragons Dungeons Master's Guide: Core Rulebook II, V. 3.5 with Errata*
ISBN-13: 9780786962440
Publisher: Wizards of the Coast
Publication date: 9/18/2012
Pages: 320
This item will be available on September 18, 2012.
​


----------



## DimitriX (Apr 26, 2012)

I wonder if this is my Monte left.  He wanted piles of cash in order for WotC to re-release the old 3.5 stuff and they wouldn't pay out.


----------



## ruemere (Apr 26, 2012)

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


----------



## mudbunny (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 (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...
> 
> ...




Because there are many, many people out there that have expressed the desire to give WotC $$$ in exchange for 3.5 that has been updated with the errata.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 26, 2012)

DimitriX said:


> I wonder if this is my Monte left.  He wanted piles of cash in order for WotC to re-release the old 3.5 stuff and they wouldn't pay out.




He might disagree with the business decision to reprint material, but it is pretty clear that WotC holds the copyright on 3.5e, not the individual designers.  Monte would have to be pretty far out there to expect any money out of the reprint.


----------



## kitsune9 (Apr 26, 2012)

3.5? Really? Why not 2e after 1e and then follow it up with 3.0 and then 3.5. Probably going to pass on this lot.


----------



## JeffB (Apr 26, 2012)

Cheap prices too.


I suspect this  is part  of WOTCs goodwill support all the editions intention, like they did with the 1E books. They are not trying to make money off these books, they are trying to bring back lapsed/pissed off  customers...which will hopefully  make them money in the long haul.


----------



## am181d (Apr 26, 2012)

kitsune9 said:


> 3.5? Really? Why not 2e after 1e and then follow it up with 3.0 and then 3.5. Probably going to pass on this lot.




If this is legit, I don't think Wizards has any expectations about how well this is going to sell. There'll be some collectors who want a copy and some folks who are still playing 3.5, but it's not like they're suddenly going to start supporting 3.5 with new content.


----------



## malkav666 (Apr 26, 2012)

I really enjoyed 3.5. I will probably pick these up tbh. My 3.5 PHB has seen better days. May not get the DMG but the PHB reprint make its way to my 3.x shelf. I like the idea of reprints of the more popular rule books. It seems like these types of release are a great way to fill the sparse 4e new release landscape until 5e hits the shelves. And I have a sneaking suspicion that the 1e and 3.5 releases with be the best selling D&D products for WOTC in 2012. So it makes sense to me from a  business perspective as well.


Love,

malkav


----------



## Umbran (Apr 26, 2012)

kitsune9 said:


> 3.5? Really? Why not 2e after 1e and then follow it up with 3.0 and then 3.5.




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


----------



## Jack Daniel (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.




It's part of WotC's devious plan to reach out to the Trekkie/D&Der crossover market.  "Unlike Trek movies, it's the odd-numbered D&D editions that don't suck!"


----------



## DMKastmaria (Apr 26, 2012)

The Plot Thickens:

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


----------



## Grogg of the North (Apr 26, 2012)

As nice as it would be to have all the errata in the book for me, I kinda feel annoyed that they'd expect me to pay $20 for material I already own.  

Now if they offered some sort of trade in program where I could exchange my old books I'd be more interested....


----------



## ggroy (Apr 26, 2012)

DMKastmaria said:


> The Plot Thickens:
> 
> BARNES & NOBLE | "Provolone" by Wizards RPG Team, Wizards of the Coast | Hardcover





Heh.

WotC entering the Italian cheese business?


----------



## DMKastmaria (Apr 26, 2012)

ggroy said:


> Heh.
> 
> WotC entering the Italian cheese business?




Joe Bloch had an interesting take on this:

Greyhawk Grognard: Is "Provolone" D&D Next?

Seems too early, but its possible WotC is tentatively planning on rushing this thing out the door and the B&N entries are Placeholders, using code to disguise that fact.

Could a rushed release be what prompted Monte to resign?


----------



## freeAgent (Apr 26, 2012)

DMKastmaria said:


> Joe Bloch had an interesting take on this:
> 
> Greyhawk Grognard: Is "Provolone" D&D Next?
> 
> ...




"Provolone" certainly doesn't sound like a real name to me, so my bets would also be on this and possibly the "3.5" books being part of the D&D Next release.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Apr 26, 2012)

Anyone else find it strange that the PHB and DMG have the same pagecount? 

IIRC the PHB was a bit thicker than the DMG.


----------



## Grimstaff (Apr 26, 2012)

ExploderWizard said:


> Anyone else find it strange that the PHB and DMG have the same pagecount?
> 
> IIRC the PHB was a bit thicker than the DMG.




Its more economical (especially in limited print runs) to adhere to certain page counts. Content may very well stay the same, as things like art, font size, and margins can be tweaked to meet the page count restriction.


----------



## scruffygrognard (Apr 26, 2012)

*Dungeon boardgame re-release*

To add to the re-releases:
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Dungeon-Board-Game-Refresh-Wizards/dp/0786962984/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS?ie=UTF8&coliid=I1LGAVVS4CV5FT&colid=1T64FMGZ42CKI"]Dungeon![/ame]


----------



## scruffygrognard (Apr 26, 2012)

freeAgent said:


> "Provolone" certainly doesn't sound like a real name to me, so my bets would also be on this and possibly the "3.5" books being part of the D&D Next release.



Sounds cheesy to me...


----------



## MoonSong (Apr 26, 2012)

Ok, I'm officially excited, whether those books are 3.5 reprints or a veiled release of 5e I'm in!


----------



## darjr (Apr 26, 2012)

Dungeon! reprint? I have much nostalgia for that game.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Apr 26, 2012)

You can roughly estimate demand for reprints of an old product by aftermarket prices.  Seeing as the 3.5 PHB does very well on the aftermarket (read: sells for big bucks) - way better in comparison to any other edition - it makes sense to do a limited-edition reprint.

It makes far more sense than releasing 5e with only 4 months of open playtesting. Really not enough time to accomplish anything at all.

Not that WotC always makes sense, but I would bet on the former.


----------



## DMKastmaria (Apr 26, 2012)

Someone at Board Game Geek is reporting that the Dungeon reprint listed on Amazon is a hoax, per WotC:

New edition? [Edit: Fake] | Dungeon | BoardGameGeek

If so, then the B&N 3.5 listings could be a result of hacking, as well. That would explain the Provolone entry.


----------



## KesselZero (Apr 26, 2012)

The "Provolone" link is now non-working. Looks like whatever the mistake was, B&N corrected it.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Apr 26, 2012)

FitzTheRuke said:


> It makes far more sense than releasing 5e with only 4 months of open playtesting. Really not enough time to accomplish anything at all.




Are there many games besides D&D and Pathfinder that have conducted open playtests as long or longer? I can't think of any, off the top of my head. I agree that an open playtest should be longer than 4 months (assuming that's as long as it will be; I'm inclined to think it will be longer), but I don't think it will accomplish nothing for it to be four months.

By the way, are the products linked to gone for everyone else? They're not there when I click the links.


----------



## DMKastmaria (Apr 26, 2012)

FitzTheRuke said:


> You can roughly estimate demand for reprints of an old product by aftermarket prices.  Seeing as the 3.5 PHB does very well on the aftermarket (read: sells for big bucks) - way better in comparison to any other edition - it makes sense to do a limited-edition reprint.




The 3.5 PH averaged roughly $35 last week on ebay. Maybe 15 listings? I sold a set of all three core a couple of weeks ago, for $75, which is on the low end of average. 

I've been keeping an eye on the 3.5 aftermarket for about a year now. It's  rocking!


----------



## Remathilis (Apr 26, 2012)

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


----------



## Lord Rasputin (Apr 26, 2012)

ExploderWizard said:


> Anyone else find it strange that the PHB and DMG have the same pagecount?
> 
> IIRC the PHB was a bit thicker than the DMG.



All three were 324 pages.


----------



## ggroy (Apr 26, 2012)

KesselZero said:


> The "Provolone" link is now non-working. Looks like whatever the mistake was, B&N corrected it.




The two original links in the OP to B&N for the "3.5E" books don't work anymore either.

Doing a search for WotC titles on B&N, these three titles don't show up at all anymore.


----------



## 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?_


----------



## Remathilis (Apr 27, 2012)

OpsKT said:


> 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?_




Aaron Allston went on record to admit there are errors in the manuscript between the RC and BECMI box sets. Additionally, the weapon mastery rules were never playtested. A few tweaks to both would make it heavenly. To be honest, I'd take A reprint as-is.


----------



## thegrognard (Apr 27, 2012)

OpsKT said:


> 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?_




Don't think there was anything 'official' but and unofficial one exists and pretty much should be: http://www.acaeum.com/library/cyclopedia_errata.pdf


----------



## Knightfall (Apr 27, 2012)

Warunsun said:


> 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.



This made me think of the following idea...

D&D reprints done in digest-sized format.


----------



## Knightfall (Apr 27, 2012)

Ooh. I just had another idea...

The PHBs for 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, and 3rd Edition all redone in a digest-sized format and sold together as a gift pack.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Apr 27, 2012)

ColonelHardisson said:


> Are there many games besides D&D and Pathfinder that have conducted open playtests as long or longer? I can't think of any, off the top of my head. I agree that an open playtest should be longer than 4 months (assuming that's as long as it will be; I'm inclined to think it will be longer), but I don't think it will accomplish nothing for it to be four months.
> 
> By the way, are the products linked to gone for everyone else? They're not there when I click the links.




Oh I didn't mean playtesting would accomplish nothing in 4 months. I'm sure they will be able to gather mucho data with 4 months of open playtesting.  I mean that four months is not enough time to playtest, process the data collected, finish the rules, write the rules, write the fluff, edit and proof the books, send them to the printer, and have them arrive for an on-sale date in september.

Good luck with that.  It's not happening.


----------



## prosfilaes (Apr 27, 2012)

FitzTheRuke said:


> You can roughly estimate demand for reprints of an old product by aftermarket prices.




Dr. Kromm, from Steve Jackson Games, said that in their experiences, that didn't work so well.


----------



## Iceciro (Apr 27, 2012)

Aftermarket prices only show what a small segment of the population is willing to pay, not what the average gamer will pay, and thats the core problem. The fact that there are some persons who would pay 150 per book has little bearing on how many people would be interested in a 35 dollar reprint set; its a willingness to pay that price, not a question of supply and demand there.


----------



## DMKastmaria (Apr 27, 2012)

Iceciro said:


> Aftermarket prices only show what a small segment of the population is willing to pay, not what the average gamer will pay, and thats the core problem. The fact that there are some persons who would pay 150 per book has little bearing on how many people would be interested in a 35 dollar reprint set; its a willingness to pay that price, not a question of supply and demand there.




The 3.5 aftermarket is its own beast, in this regard and isn't being driven by "collectors." There's no question of rarity. There are many auctions, every week for the core 3.5 material (as well as splats, etc.) Those auctions consistently rock toast and have been doing so, for a long time. 

Several years later, with PF out and 5e on the horizon, the 3.5 PH still averages $35 all by itself. I think there was 12 - 15 auctions last week, that were solely for the PH.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Apr 27, 2012)

Iceciro said:


> Aftermarket prices only show what a small segment of the population is willing to pay, not what the average gamer will pay, and thats the core problem. The fact that there are some persons who would pay 150 per book has little bearing on how many people would be interested in a 35 dollar reprint set; its a willingness to pay that price, not a question of supply and demand there.






prosfilaes said:


> Dr. Kromm, from Steve Jackson Games, said that in their experiences, that didn't work so well.




This is what I meant by "roughly".   Speaking as a game retailer, I can attest there is plenty of demand for the 3.5 Players Handbook.  _Some_ people may be willing to pay top dollar for it, but _many_ people would be willing to pay standard retail for it.

Whereas 2nd Ed and even 3.0 books are pretty easy to come by at cheap prices.

Aftermarket _is_ primarily controlled by supply and demand, but is sometimes skewed (especially on e-bay) by localized demand (ie one crazy  person wanting it _really_ bad) overshadowing right-this-second's supply.

This isn't the case with 3.5 PHBs.  There's consistent demand beating current supply (even with there being LOTS of them in existence.)


----------



## nillic (Apr 27, 2012)

I see several posts here saying people would pick these up, my question is why? Pathfinder supports an updated version of these rules that many seem to think work a lot better (I mean Hide AND Move Silently? WHO HIDES LOUDLY!?). 

This would be like people buying 3.0 books while 3.5 is out and supported.


----------



## Warunsun (Apr 28, 2012)

nillic said:


> I see several posts here saying people would pick these up, my question is why? Pathfinder supports an updated version of these rules that many seem to think work a lot better (I mean Hide AND Move Silently? WHO HIDES LOUDLY!?).
> 
> This would be like people buying 3.0 books while 3.5 is out and supported.



Pathfinder _is different_. If your Dungeon Master want to stick to the core of v3.5 then having the v3.5 _Player's Handbook_ is a lot more useful to that player. I am not knocking Pathfinder but after several years of expansions and hardcovers it is _significantly different_ from v3.5.


----------



## Falstaff (Apr 28, 2012)

Warunsun said:


> Pathfinder _is different_. If your Dungeon Master want to stick to the core of v3.5 then having the v3.5 _Player's Handbook_ is a lot more useful to that player. I am not knocking Pathfinder but after several years of expansions and hardcovers it is _significantly different_ from v3.5.




And it says _Dungeons & Dragons_ on the cover.


----------



## Drowbane (Apr 28, 2012)

nillic said:


> I see several posts here saying people would pick these up, my question is why? Pathfinder supports an updated version of these rules that many seem to think work a lot better (I mean Hide AND Move Silently? WHO HIDES LOUDLY!?).
> 
> This would be like people buying 3.0 books while 3.5 is out and supported.




PF is Paizo's house rules for 3.5. And some of those House Rules are rather undesirable to some of us. I like Paizo a lot, but I prefered them when they were running Dragon and Dungeon mag.


----------



## nillic (Apr 28, 2012)

I guess I just feel like Paizo's rules were just house rules we were all using anyway. I feel like PF is a better rules set which focuses not on how many prestige classes you can stack, but on making your core character class important. 

But hey, this isn't the forum for that. And to each their own, as long as we're all having fun around the table.


----------



## Zireael (Apr 28, 2012)

Back to the topic - what is/was a Dungeon boardgame? It seems "Dungeon!" is not a fake, after all...


----------



## nillic (Apr 28, 2012)

I don't know, but WoTC has really been hitting some home runs with their board games so I'm interested!


----------



## Cergorach (Apr 28, 2012)

A reprint of the 3.5E PHB would be a good move, updated with errata would be brilliant because it would add value to folks that already have a 3.5E PHB.

I've spoken to a lot of folks that still play 3.5E, or even started playing since the release of 4E. The biggest issue they have is that they don't have access to a ready supply of reasonably priced 3.5E PHBs. And that doesn't surprise me, you only need one DMG/MM per game group, but one PHB per player is desirable. It's a pain for new 3.5E D&D players.

PF is great, it really is, but as mentioned before it isn't D&D. It is my D&D in all but name, but it doesn't have the D&D brand and that is important to a lot of folks. Also while PF might be popular, it doesn't mean everyone knows about it, about half the folks I talk to here buying my excess D&D books haven't heard of PF (although they'll look into it as a possible new version for their game group after I show them the core rulebook). Still most game leaders (although not necessarily full time DMs) have a huge investment in 3.5E D&D books and are still looking to complete their collection and want to give it value by playing it.

You could use the electronic versions or the printed SRD versions, but a lot of folks still prefer a nice full color hardcover physical book.

WotC has an issue with the D&D brand, it's loosing value due to 4E loosing a lot of fans/sales to PF. WotC might be forced to do everything in their power to keep as many D&D fans as possible while they scramble at a 5E edition that might return D&D to it's former glory...


----------



## IronWolf (Apr 28, 2012)

ColonelHardisson said:


> Are there many games besides D&D and Pathfinder that have conducted open playtests as long or longer? I can't think of any, off the top of my head. I agree that an open playtest should be longer than 4 months (assuming that's as long as it will be; I'm inclined to think it will be longer), but I don't think it will accomplish nothing for it to be four months.




I think the thing is if it is 5e being released in September, then an open play test that starts in late May is really more of an open preview, not test. There simply isn't enough time to take the feedback from an open playtest, tweak the rules, test the tweaked rules and then make them fit for publishing and turn the book over to the printer in time for a September release.

A four month open play test with a release sometime in 2013 would work fine.


----------



## rkwoodard (Apr 28, 2012)

*agreed and*



Warunsun said:


> Pathfinder _is different_. If your Dungeon Master want to stick to the core of v3.5 then having the v3.5 _Player's Handbook_ is a lot more useful to that player. I am not knocking Pathfinder but after several years of expansions and hardcovers it is _significantly different_ from v3.5.





I agree with this, Pathfinder and even the later 3.5 is too different, not bad just different.


I have started re-reading 3.5 and realized it was a darn good game.  I have 2 of the complete books, and they are good add ons.

But I also have Book of 9 Swords, Magic of the Incarnum, and Tome of Magic.  Each has systems that vary wildy from the base: Skills, Feats, Prep Magic, and Spontaneous Magic system. They are all good, as is Pathfinder, but they are not core 3.5. 

I almost wish (knowing it would not be a good business decision), that WOTC would have marketed each of those as separate RPG games.

So, while I like the looks of Pathfinder and would play, I much prefer 3.5 with few expansions.

RK


----------



## IronWolf (Apr 28, 2012)

Cergorach said:


> A reprint of the 3.5E PHB would be a good move, updated with errata would be brilliant because it would add value to folks that already have a 3.5E PHB.




I think a reprint of the 3.5e PHB would have been a brilliant move when Pathfinder was released. Now it seems a little late. 

It seems to be more of a threat to D&D Next than anything. D&D Next is supposed to be the edition that brings everyone together, a re-release of 3.5 doesn't instill confidence that D&D Next is ready to do that.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Apr 28, 2012)

IronWolf said:


> I think the thing is if it is 5e being released in September, then an open play test that starts in late May is really more of an open preview, not test. There simply isn't enough time to take the feedback from an open playtest, tweak the rules, test the tweaked rules and then make them fit for publishing and turn the book over to the printer in time for a September release.
> 
> A four month open play test with a release sometime in 2013 would work fine.




Yeah, I get that now, it just wasn't clear that was the sticking point when I posted. I've been going under the assumption that Next would appear in 2013, probably at GenCon, given that WotC seems to have refocused on that con.


----------



## Cergorach (Apr 28, 2012)

IronWolf said:


> I think a reprint of the 3.5e PHB would have been a brilliant move when Pathfinder was released. Now it seems a little late.
> 
> It seems to be more of a threat to D&D Next than anything. D&D Next is supposed to be the edition that brings everyone together, a re-release of 3.5 doesn't instill confidence that D&D Next is ready to do that.




Yeah, it's supposed to bring everyone together, but after the 4E 'debacle' how many folks are willing to give WotC the benefit of the doubt and try this D&D Next? The folks that weren't disappointed by 4E and the folks that buy everything D&D, that isn't enough. WotC is trying to reach out to older fans, fans it has lost. They did that with the 1E reprint, they do that with the sporadic miniature releases, and possibly with the 3.5E reprint. WotC is generating goodwill. Also keep in mind that this particular reprint doesn't have to cost a lot of money, all the work has been done, changing a book with errata isn't that big of a deal with modern software. It's only the printing and the shipping, add to that that they might not be looking for a profit (but for goodwill) and it's suddenly it isn't impossible anymore.


----------



## IronWolf (Apr 28, 2012)

Cergorach said:


> Yeah, it's supposed to bring everyone together, but after the 4E 'debacle' how many folks are willing to give WotC the benefit of the doubt and try this D&D Next?




I was one that looked at 4e and then decided it wasn't for me. D&D Next seemed attractive to me (and it still might), but I am beginning to wonder. Monte I felt would bring enough of the "old" feel to attract me and the talk had been bringing the players back together.

Now with a possible release of 3.5 books again, that just makes me wonder if D&D Next is going to follow more in 4e's steps and leave us with 3.5 to play. Pure speculation of course - but these recent news events aren't leaving me warm and fuzzy about D&D Next and I was optimistic up until this point.



			
				Cergorach said:
			
		

> WotC is generating goodwill. Also keep in mind that this particular reprint doesn't have to cost a lot of money, all the work has been done, changing a book with errata isn't that big of a deal with modern software. It's only the printing and the shipping, add to that that they might not be looking for a profit (but for goodwill) and it's suddenly it isn't impossible anymore.




Perhaps. I am skeptical it will be enough as it seems we will still have islands of players and a further fractured community. And regardless, it still costs money to reprint books. And to me it looks like this will just reinforce the fractured community and possibly cut into D&D Next sales. Again, pure speculation and opinion on my part.


----------



## Nellisir (Apr 28, 2012)

rkwoodard said:


> But I also have Book of 9 Swords, Magic of the Incarnum, and Tome of Magic.  Each has systems that vary wildy from the base: Skills, Feats, Prep Magic, and Spontaneous Magic system. They are all good, as is Pathfinder, but they are not core 3.5.
> 
> I almost wish (knowing it would not be a good business decision), that WOTC would have marketed each of those as separate RPG games.




A really interesting idea.  I like it.  It would be cool to see each as a mini-setting/rpg book, with different, but compatible, races, classes, & etc.


----------



## 3catcircus (Apr 29, 2012)

JeffB said:


> Cheap prices too.
> 
> 
> I suspect this  is part  of WOTCs goodwill support all the editions intention, like they did with the 1E books. They are not trying to make money off these books, they are trying to bring back lapsed/pissed off  customers...which will hopefully  make them money in the long haul.




If they REALLY want to engender goodwill, they'd immediately throw up their back catalog of pdfs on DrivethruRPG/RPGNow and/or Paizo and also offer them as POD.  And they wouldn't charge (nearly) the same price for the 3.x and 4e pdfs as for actual print products (like they did when they did offer pdfs).

Frankly - from the moment they went nuclear and pulled all their products and sued people for file-sharing printer proofs, they lost me as a customer since I looked at 4e, found it lacking, but wanted to keep purchasing stuff from earlier editions.  I'm willing to give 5e a try, but WotC will have to offer their back catalog to see me return as a regular customer.  If they want to draw customers and make boatloads of cash, they'd do well to consider adopting Paizo's model of offering print with a complimentary free pdf, and offering just a pdf at a lower price.


----------



## Aluvial (Apr 29, 2012)

Dungeon!  

Awesome.  I have this game in my closet and have made a point of playing once a year with my brothers on beach trips.  Dragon magazine expanded the original rules with additional characters and we made TONS of expansion monster, traps, and treasure cards.  We even had a few different spells.  

Lot of fun and daring.  A good race to the finish.

Aluvial


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Apr 29, 2012)

I think it is a sart move to rerelease older edition books. They have a very ambitious goal. If they are afraid to release a 3.5 PHB, they could as well give up. there are people playing D&D 3.5 who don´t want to have something to do with pathfinder. And fecing those people to either switch or buy an old PHB fo 100 dollars is no smart move.
And when you think even more about it, it should really reassure 4e fans, that their edition will not be left behind. Actually, with rereleased 3.5 books, maybe even fully errated 4e books will appear at the end of the edition. This should make everyone happy.


----------



## talok55 (Apr 30, 2012)

I was kind of excited about these reprints.  I was considering buying them.  As it turns out it was a mistake, because the listing was quickly removed.


----------



## cougent (May 1, 2012)

Jack Daniel said:


> It's part of WotC's devious plan to reach out to the Trekkie/D&Der crossover market.  "Unlike Trek movies, it's the odd-numbered D&D editions that don't suck!"




It just might work then, cause I fit right into that category.  My biggest complaint with 4E was always the $1,000's I had (and still was) invested in 3.X.  I simply could not afford to start over... again.

<Looks over at the massive collection of AD&D stuff on the shelf>


----------



## frankthedm (May 1, 2012)

kitsune9 said:


> 3.5? Really? Why not 2e



Money. 3.5 PHB is still doing *very* good on the secondary market. 2E PHB can be had for much less and is pretty easy to find in used bookstores due to T$R's market flooding. 1E needed the Collectability and Charity angles to get respectable sales numbers. 3.5 will sell itself.


----------



## Trance-Zg (May 1, 2012)

I would buy it if they were compilation books.

That is

1st book:
PHB with all 3,5 (official, rebalanced) classes with alternate class features included in it and ALL 3,5(official, rebalanced feats). no spells.

2nd book: DMG, with DMG 2 included and stronghold build book.

3rd book: spell compendium with all 3,5 spells included(no spells in PHB).

4th book: complete compendium of official 3,5 prestige classes(promg DMG, PHB2, complete series, etc...).

that is all...


----------



## talok55 (May 1, 2012)

I would be so tempted to buy those books you just mentioned, and I'm not even currently playing any 3.5.


----------



## Warunsun (May 1, 2012)

rkwoodard said:


> I agree with this, Pathfinder and even the later 3.5 is too different, not bad just different.



Indeed. I agree wholehearted that the core of v3.5 was amazing and playable. Everyone enjoys a few expansion books. But my later issues with v3.5 are that it had far too many expansion books and just like in the later half of Second Edition things started to get screwy.

My group eventually switched to Fourth Edition (it had been out for over a year when we did switch) largely to get free of the many crazy ideas presented in some of the later expansion books for v3.5. It was actually quite refreshing to play 4E in that the material was much more scarce and more controlled. Overall which edition was better? I am not sure. I did really enjoy the early Third Edition era but I also like the simplicity of fourth edition combat rules compared to what was available by the end of v3.5.

I hope that fifth edition will have less books than v3.5 and keep the basic combat rules very simple. It is a big desire of mine to see the 7 main races and 12 or so main classes supported fully from the start with less "cool bonus rules of the month" crap. Expansion books later on could add new classes and races and hopefully don't completely rewrite the content of the Player's Handbook like was done in both v3.5 and 4E.


----------



## SkidAce (May 11, 2012)

They provided the errata for free download.


----------



## El Mahdi (May 12, 2012)

Ummm...yeah... <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->@fizagul44 <!-- END TEMPLATE: dbtech_usertag_mention -->...what SkidAce said.

They're available here.


Edit: Damnit! [MENTION=7706]SkidAce[/MENTION] and I fell for a Spambot!  Crap!


<!-- google_ad_section_start(weight=ignore) -->fizagul44<!-- google_ad_section_end --><SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_5907393", true); </SCRIPT> 
_has no status. _


*Registered User*

Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4 




Novice (Lvl 1) 

Spambot Reported.


----------



## SkidAce (May 12, 2012)

I feel so sullied.


----------



## frankthedm (May 22, 2012)

SkidAce said:


> They provided the errata for free download.



Except the last update was $26.95 + tax.


----------



## _NewbieDM_ (Jun 25, 2012)

*The books are coming*

See here...

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (3.5 Edition Reprints)


----------



## Warunsun (Jun 25, 2012)

_NewbieDM_ said:


> See here...
> Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (3.5 Edition Reprints)



Indeed! It was real! Wait until they announce _*Provolone: The Advanced Chef RPG*_ where you can role-playing out sessions of _Iron Chef_ or _BBQ Pitmasters_!


----------



## Nellisir (Jun 26, 2012)

Well.  Fancy that.  Like I said, a straight-up run at Pathfinder.  I'm really interested in their plan for D&DN now.


----------



## nillic (Jun 26, 2012)

WotC: "1st ed, 3.5?? 4th? 5th? PLEASE JUST BUY SOMETHING FROM US!"


----------

