carl3369 wrote:Also how about a 1978 soft back 3ed Monster Manual by GW and GW d&d hexsheets from 1978 - 30 remaining and covered scribbled on a bit!
harami2000 wrote:carl3369 wrote:Also how about a 1978 soft back 3ed Monster Manual by GW and GW d&d hexsheets from 1978 - 30 remaining and covered scribbled on a bit!If a few of the sheets are scribbled on, remove them carefully. If it's the cover which is, pity...The GW MM really needs to be in good condition, too. They fall apart very easily.The third print is the most common, by far.
deimos3428 wrote:harami2000 wrote:If a few of the sheets are scribbled on, remove them carefully. If it's the cover which is, pity...The GW MM really needs to be in good condition, too. They fall apart very easily.The third print is the most common, by far.Just gave me an idea, as the first thing I said after reading this was "sure, but none of them are common!". I humbly suggest we replace the 1-5 rarity scale with something to which we can all relate, the monster "Frequency" scale: very rare, rare, uncommon, common. Ummm...I didn't say all my ideas were gems.
harami2000 wrote:If a few of the sheets are scribbled on, remove them carefully. If it's the cover which is, pity...The GW MM really needs to be in good condition, too. They fall apart very easily.The third print is the most common, by far.
bclarkie wrote:Or, if you want to go that route, you could always use the No. Appearing scale as well.
deimos3428 wrote:bclarkie wrote:Or, if you want to go that route, you could always use the No. Appearing scale as well. What's a good figure for a PoVQ? Let's see. Vampires. 8O (Is anyone else a little freaked out that No. Appearing on them is 1-4?)Dwarven Glory: 40-400? Ok, this system may have a flaw or two.
