dathon wrote:Seems quite a few people are talking around the edges of this question... and I've wondered how many folks are also collecting 3.0/3.5 Ed. D&D.
shadzar wrote:i refuse to acknowledge WotC or Hasbro products as being Dungeon and Dragons, even if they now own the name.
shadzar wrote:i mean even their OGL only includes the d20 system, so people cant legally make stuff under AD&D for the people that love it.
and the whole ignorance or incompetence of the statement in one of the core rules for 3.0+, "rolling a d20 will result in an average roll of 10 or 11." ummm, no! rolling a d20 will results in an average roll of 1 through 20 as they all have the same 5% change to be rolled such as shown in the orange spined DMG explains.they dont understand linear probability and just lying to people about how things works. not very trustworthy to me.
and WotC like to "make the game easier for all to play", so they get more money, and are not afraid to sacrifice playability to do it.
Keith wrote:As far as the licensing aspects are concerned, I have not read the OGL, but I gather that products for 3E and 3.5E must not be easily adaptable to 1E AD&D or OD&D.
wthomas wrote:Hi KeithGood d20/3/3.5e:Mongoose do some nice books at very reasonable prices.Fast Forward have brought out some interesting monster collections, although I felt that the artwork in the encyclopedia of Demons and Devils was a bit ropey in places.AEG - After all they did World's Largest Dungeon which has to be seen to be believed.I can't remember who did it but Iron Kingdoms Stuff is well worth a view, especially the Monsternomicon which is IMHO a work of geniusWill
GraysonAC wrote:Could not agree less on Fast Forward - they are the worst publisher I've ever seen.
Xaxaxe wrote:GraysonAC wrote:Could not agree less on Fast Forward - they are the worst publisher I've ever seen.Fast Forward, generally speaking, was awful — and I say "was" because I believe the company is essentially past-tense. The most recent web-page update was in December, and Jim Ward, from what I've heard, now works with Aaron over at NobleKnight.com.To be fair, I'll say two things in FFG's defense: 1. the idea to use spiral-binding on a couple of their releases was a good one (very nice for the DM to be be able to read a book without having to balance it, too); 2. I don't think FFG ever got a fair shake from some reviewers. ENWorld, in particular, just body-slammed every single thing FFG ever put out. It become sort of a joke: "who can write the funniest FFG review?"Still, they should have tried actually editing their releases ...
beermotor wrote:Well, one wonders if it is truly "collecting" in the strictest sense of the word. How collectible are books that are completely mass-produced? Not very.
Doug Williams wrote:beermotor wrote:Well, one wonders if it is truly "collecting" in the strictest sense of the word. How collectible are books that are completely mass-produced? Not very.Items don't have to be rare to be collected. If you have a bunch of 3rd edition books and materials, then you have assembled a collection, even though the books themselves aren't rare. As for me, I collect it all, meaning everything from the original woodgrain box edition to present day v3.5 stuff.
dathon wrote:Doug Williams wrote:
Doug Williams wrote:
Reindeergamez wrote:Well, I'm collecting a bit at a time, when I get ahold of something I just don't want to let go. I really enjoy the 2nd ed and some of the later 1st ed AD&D stuff to read through, the world building done in that time was incredible. Ravenloft, Planescape, FR, Dragonlance, etc. I've mostly played 3rd edition just because it was "handy" but am thinking about either trying an "old school" 1st ed AD&D or one of the throwback modules with 3rd ed rules.I'd like to get some of the early stuff eventually, but it will definantly be a gradual step.