Plaag wrote:This is not silly
As I don't intend to keep doubles, is anyone interested in anything from that lot that has 2 or more copies?

oh and now I'm done, have to let the ol heart settle....

ShaneG.

Well, I would be interested in the Dungeoneers. A couple of things scare me about that auction though. 1) Did you see how signifigant the staple rust was on some of those zines? Isn't it a strong possiblity that the rust is just as signifigant if not worse in the Dungeoneers? Secondly, what's is the deal with the "reprint" on the Dungeoneers #1 & #2. I am assuming that means it was a second print right?

Dungeoneers 1 thru 6

Adrian Newman thought all of the Dungeoneers were the same, but from the auction you can clearly see #1 is not like on the site. (I shall have to dig out his emails to me and correct the page as to what printings he had.)

ShaneG.

Plaag wrote:Dungeoneers 1 thru 6

Adrian Newman thought all of the Dungeoneers were the same, but from the auction you can clearly see #1 is not like on the site. (I shall have to dig out his emails to me and correct the page as to what printings he had.)

ShaneG.

I actually took a hard look at that before I placed my bid. That Dungeoneer #1 is definitely different which is one of the things that caused some concern from me. I am by no means anywhere close to being an expert on JG stuff, but it is something that definitely stuck out to me. I have seen a few pictures of #1's before and they are all brownish like the one you have listed on the site, whereas that one in the auction is clearly yellow.

Plaag wrote:

bclarkie wrote:
I actually took a hard look at that before I placed my bid. That Dungeoneer #1 is definitely different which is one of the things that caused some concern from me. I am by no means an expert on JG stuff, but it is something that definitely stuckj out to me. I have seen a few pictures of the #1 and they are all brownish like the one you have on the site whereas that one in the auction is clearly yellow.

But check out #2..also yellow, only 1 printing, from September 1976. I think the auction's #1 is a 1st print from June 1976. Only assuming of course at this point that Paul used the same card stock in the begining for the covers.

ShaneG.

Well, it will be interesting to see how this shakes out.  David must have been pretty convinced about it as well as he threw in a pretty heavy duty bid too.

Plaag wrote:This is not silly

Only a bit silly. Max $40 each for the reprints and originals makes $320.
A reseller could probably justify going the extra mile, if they were missing all of those.

Yup, if Bob's recollections are correct, there would be no more than around 50 of the white "I" installments, as he only used those for the subscribers they got at Gen Con 1976. On the other hand, there would originally be at least a thousand brown "I" installments, as by June 1977 alone there were 1,217 guildmembers, each of which would have gotten a copy of "I" (around 50 white, and 1,183 brown) as each membership included the "Initial Package" (including "I") and the next 5 installments... plus, of course, it was also sold separately, so the numbers were surely greater than the number of guildmembers.

Installment "I" was still being sold as of August/September 1977 (JG Journal "N," circulation 1,549, though not all subscribers were necessarily guildmembers). By the next issue (circ. 1,671) "I" had been discontinued as a separately-available item, the material therein being available as part of the City State of the Invincible Overlord Play Aid (#12).

I would believe, therefore, that the number of brown "I" booklets originally printed during that first year was certainly no less than 1,500, possibly as many as 2,000, as you have to include separate sales and sales to retailers in addition to sales to guildmembers. That would mean that for every white "I" there were at least 30 to 40 brown "I" installments initially, and presuming that the ratio obtains even after all these years, we should see one white sold on eBay for every 30 to 40 brown... the white installments being worth up to 30 to 40 times that of the brown based on rarity alone.

Not that I like this overmuch, as this means a True 1st "I" is probably beyond my means right now... my bid on that auction, which held for days up to the very last moment when the snipes came in, didn't even wave as the snipes flew past it... I was watching it as it rolled past, and were I even able to answer those bids, I couldn't have, as I literally sat there with my jaw on the ground at the $$$...

Plaag wrote:

faro wrote:If Shane's happy to stick with his timeline ( History of Judges Guild ) which would suggest that white "I"s should be relatively common, that's up to him.
I've pointed out, before (referring back to Mike/IOs postmarked copies) why that doesn't tally, and why the white copies are rarer.

Concerning that white 'I':
"Bob said they sold about 40 to 50 subs at that first Gen Con, and continued to sell subs like gangbusters through mail order thereafter."

"Of course, Bob didn't want to send out the white copies, so he sent it out only to those who had subscribed at GenCon and were thus already waiting on their subscription."

"Bob then destroyed the remainder of the White cover "I"s when the Brown cover "I" was printed."

ShaneG.

I don't know whether History of Judges Guild has been modified since the email I sent you last year, but I'll re-copy that anyhow, if that's OK.
*
As that "history" currently reads, white "I"s are stated to have been sent with the first regular installment whereas we know that orange "I"s were sent with that (full-scale) subscription.
And the only white "I" known in original context (with mailer) did not get sent with journal #0.

me wrote:

Shane wrote:White I info came from the early pages of the JG Question thread and Mike/IO. The brown I's would have started to be sent out when they came back from the printer some time in Oct-Dec of 76. The tac cards were done one month before the I booklet, so reams of them would have been printed off. (and since some uncut sheets were sold at the GenCon auction this year, they may not have cut the cards up until orders/subscriptions were placed.)

Judges Guild Questions
"It's not a Xerox copy, it's definitely printed, and it came in a sealed JG mailer [NON-POSTMARKED; see correction- but also
contained an original GenCon IX = Aug '76].... Because in the envelope there was only the Guideline Booklet I (White), and the
CSotIO maps (the four maps are made with a different heavy-stock paper than the two other sets we have from envelopes P.O. marked
October 76), and the envelope did not contain Journal # I. The two with the October 76 post mark has all three of the items normaly
included in these mailers. The orangey-brown Initial Guideline Booklet I, The Maps, and the Journal # I, that states October 76 on
the cover."

Mike notes those he has which were sent out pmk'd October 76 had a /orange-brown/ "I" booklet.
The white "I" was presumably sent out before that date with those "different heavy-stock paper" CSotIO maps (hand-folded?), but
/without/ Journal "I".
There's nothing in Mike's evidence to say that White "I"s were sent out with the first regular mailing in Oct '76 c/w
History of Judges Guild .

The Tac Cards were done just before the "I" journal (hence the note about last minute cutting). Would be September or into October.
That could still have been after, or at the same time, as the "I" booklet; no need for the sequence numbers to translate directly
into chronological order.

What d'you think?

faro wrote:I don't know whether History of Judges Guild has been modified since the email I sent you last year, but I'll re-copy that anyhow, if that's OK.
*
As that "history" currently reads, white "I"s are stated to have been sent with the first regular installment whereas we know that orange "I"s were sent with that (full-scale) subscription.
And the only white "I" known in original context (with mailer) did not get sent with journal #0.

Last the page was modified was Dec 3rd, got your email on the 5th. I think I may have equated mailer as the subscription and not put the contents of white I and maps as being seperate. If that is the case, was this mailer considered a subscription/installment on its own? As in it's installment I, and the subscription is what inclues Journal #0 plus other contents? (Course it would not be the only Installment that got changed..K without Ref sheet, L with extra Ref sheet both initially)
And to answer the other question from that email..Later journals show that the Tac cards were printed in a larger quantity, but as for if the first prints were the 40-50 batches and 2nd prints the rest I guess james maybe can find out. Course not difinative, but the 1st and 2nd may have some of the same cards, with new title card.

me wrote:

Shane wrote:White I info came from the early pages of the JG Question thread and Mike/IO. The brown I's would have started to be sent out when they came back from the printer some time in Oct-Dec of 76. The tac cards were done one month before the I booklet, so reams of them would have been printed off. (and since some uncut sheets were sold at the GenCon auction this year, they may not have cut the cards up until orders/subscriptions were placed.)

Judges Guild Questions
"It's not a Xerox copy, it's definitely printed, and it came in a sealed JG mailer [NON-POSTMARKED; see correction- but also
contained an original GenCon IX = Aug '76].... Because in the envelope there was only the Guideline Booklet I (White), and the
CSotIO maps (the four maps are made with a different heavy-stock paper than the two other sets we have from envelopes P.O. marked
October 76), and the envelope did not contain Journal # I. The two with the October 76 post mark has all three of the items normaly
included in these mailers. The orangey-brown Initial Guideline Booklet I, The Maps, and the Journal # I, that states October 76 on
the cover."

Mike notes those he has which were sent out pmk'd October 76 had a /orange-brown/ "I" booklet.
The white "I" was presumably sent out before that date with those "different heavy-stock paper" CSotIO maps (hand-folded?), but
/without/ Journal "I".
There's nothing in Mike's evidence to say that White "I"s were sent out with the first regular mailing in Oct '76 c/w
History of Judges Guild .

The Tac Cards were done just before the "I" journal (hence the note about last minute cutting). Would be September or into October.
That could still have been after, or at the same time, as the "I" booklet; no need for the sequence numbers to translate directly
into chronological order.

What d'you think?

[/quote]

Actually 4 section City State maps were first, given GenCon 76 and what helps start the company (Journal I seems to never have been given an item number..but #0 has been floating around the internet for a while now) and does came later in the secquence of things. Does anyone know when the 76 GenCon was, given August, but specific dates?
James it seems we need clearer answers on this history..
Since Oct now (course when who knows) has the orangey-brown Initial Guideline Booklet I, Journal I, (no postmark) has white I, "While writing Booklet "I", Bob and Bill come up with the Dungeon Tac Cards and publish those first (product #2)." by this it would go Item #1, #2, #3 white, #3 orangey-brown, #0 Journal I (when were more #1s reprinted?, and did the #9 actually come before #3 just get held off because of the sizing mix up?)

ShaneG.

faro wrote:

Plaag wrote:was this mailer considered a subscription/installment on its own?

Don't think so, in the case of Mike/IOs one, esp. with a GenCon IX included (aside: and I'm still not sure why the second edition, reprinted/released/purchased one year later according to the auction description, is listed as a "first printing" at GenCon IX Dungeon , btw ).

I wish Mike <IO> would come back over here..dwarvenforge taking up a lot of his time?
Well I know the title page is different then the green copy' title page, though the same as the red (were I got those title page scans from I'd have to check, but it doesn't seem to appear on the other 2 old sites...) Anyhow "From what I can gather this is similar to the later self-published version (1st Print)*. This is not a copy of the self-published version as there is no evidence of the hole punches. Probably a pre-pub or unbound copy he used for tourney play**. It does have some notes and marks from being played at GenCon X but is in great complete condition."
*self published version refering to here is the red cover.
**Did he use this at GenCon IX though is why I placed it as 1st, since it was Mr Blakes..now he'd have had the original..not sure how many copies of that original he would have made. Yeah it says 2nd edition but then did he ever keep the first.

This would easily be cleared up if Mike provided answers since his was definately 1976 given whats in the mailer, and mine definately 1977 given the history on it.  I do however see that I should have also included my copy's history since its the scans being used.

Can I say I hate seeing 'Need Scan' as the lazy, uneducated, don't care, , short answer? Yeah thats not me..NM..see post above.

ShaneG.