WotC to Reprint 3.5e (with errata)

[Myshlaevsky]

I originally posted this as a sidenote in the 5e/D&D Next thread, but it could probably stand its own discussion here.

Barnes & Noble preorders seem to show that Wizards of the Coast intends to reprint at least the three core 3.5e books, errata included, at some point later this year - probably around September.

News sourced from here (http://greyhawkgrognard.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/more-wotc-reprints-35-this-time-wtf.html). The blog has links to the appropriate Barnes & Noble pages.

What are people's reactions to this? It seems like quite an unusual move from WotC.

e: just gonna post the Barnes (http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/dungeons-dragons-players-handbook-wizards-rpg-team/1110379209?ean=9780786962464) & Noble (http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/dungeons-dragons-dungeons-masters-guide-wizards-rpg-team/1110379196?ean=9780786962440) links by themselves.

e2: links no longer working, appear to have been removed

[AslanCross]

That's...a very interesting move. @_@ I'm confused, but sort of happy. I still wish they just took the Tome of Battle errata seriously, though. :P

[JadePhoenix]

They did reprint OD&D, so that's to be expected, I guess.

[navar100]

Not buying them. They fired me as a customer. Paizo hired me. When 5E comes out I'll do a preliminary shop to see if WOTC apologizes.

[Empedocles]

What do you mean by errata? Like web enhancements/fixes included? Or actual fixes? Or does no one know? :smallamused:

[JadePhoenix]

What do you mean by errata? Like web enhancements/fixes included? Or actual fixes? Or does no one know? :smallamused:

I think he means errata when he says errata. I could be wrong, though. One can never be sure.

[Yorrin]

....why? Those of us faithful to 3.5 already have the books. And copies of the core books are common enough for newbies.

[Tvtyrant]

....why? Those of us faithful to 3.5 already have the books. And copies of the core books are common enough for newbies.

How are the new players getting the later books under this? Plus, new errata to chew!

[JadePhoenix]

....why? Those of us faithful to 3.5 already have the books. And copies of the core books are common enough for newbies.

Good luck finding a 3.5 PHB nowadays. It's very rare.
The price of 3.5 sourcebooks is very high as well. A friend of mine sold his ToB for 100 bucks.

[Jeraa]

How are the new players getting the later books under this? Plus, new errata to chew!

It doesn't say "new" errata, just that the errata is included. That very well could be the errata files from 2006*, the last time 3.5 errata was put out for the core books.

Latest PHB and MM errata is 2006. DMG is 2004.

[Fitz10019]

I came to D&D 3.5 a bit late. The DM of the regular campaign I joined had a nice black-leather-bound version of the PHB. It looked great, but it was pre-errata. He tried to insist that my druid's animal companion was a magical beast, and I could not use Speak with Animals to communicate with it. I showed him in my drab PHB that they were still animals.

[Knaight]

I'm glad they're doing this. It will provide book access for those just getting into D&D now, and it will provide new books for those that need to replace particularly beat up ones. It gets better if they also reprint a few fan favorites (ToB, XPH), and even better if they print good books that weren't received all too well (MOI).

[Particle_Man]

I still wish they just took the Tome of Battle errata seriously, though. :P

I will have a look at the cores and see what errata they mean. And if they issue an errata'd ToB I am buying it.

[Scowling Dragon]

WHY! I already bought pathfinder!

[Malachei]

Barnes & Noble preorders seem to show that Wizards of the Coast intends to reprint at least the three core 3.5e books, errata included, at some point later this year - probably around September.

What are people's reactions to this? It seems like quite an unusual move from WotC.


The only aim of reprinting an old edition would be to draw new players to 3.5, as the existing player base would already have their books.

Perhaps the people at WOTC feel Pathfinder is not doing enough to undermine the success of 4E and D&D Next, so they wanted some more in-house competition? :smallconfused:

[Lord_Gareth]

The only aim of reprinting an old edition would be to draw new players to 3.5, as the existing player base would already have their books.

Perhaps the people at WOTC feel Pathfinder is not doing enough to undermine the success of 4E and D&D Next, so they wanted some more in-house competition? :smallconfused:

Or they reprinted for nostalgia. Y'know, like with the oD&D books they just reprinted.

[Soranar]

same reason george lucas changes a few things and rereleases his movies

money

That's all there is to it. A new generation of players accepted 4th edition but many players refused to follow and, as was mentioned before, 3.5 books are hard to find (physical copies anyway...)

[Kurald Galain]

Okay, that was unexpected.

Looks like WOTC really wants Pathfinder's market share back. I think they're a little bit late with that, but still. I don't think competing with yourself is good business practice, but I suppose it beats competing with someone else.


It gets better if they also reprint a few fan favorites (ToB, XPH)
I don't think that's likely. The overwhelming majority of sales for any RPG has always been the Player's Handbook (or its equivalent in other RPGs).

[Knaight]

I don't think that's likely. The overwhelming majority of sales for any RPG has always been the Player's Handbook (or its equivalent in other RPGs).

I'd consider it unlikely. However, given that it is significantly cheaper to put these out a second time than the first (given that they already have everything but the printed copies made), it's not an impossibility.

[ericgrau]

It says "with Errata". Errata is "go play 5e". J/k, please don't take me seriously. I'm looking forward to this and hope it isn't a mistake. Given the high price of 3.5e material there's a demand so it's a good idea to get more books out there.

I think the concept of avoiding competition with themselves has turned out to be flawed. With the release of the red box and 1e I think they're realizing it too. Diverse products are actually better to reach more people. Antagonizing any portion of customers is not a good idea. I think working with customers to get them what they want turns out better than working against them and trying to force them to go a certain way. In the second case they won't actually go that way unless they already were anyway, or some that would have get turned away by the antagonism. So it's all for nothing. Rather people that want 3e will want the re-release, and people that want 5e will still go for it or get both.

[Malachei]

It may also be an indicator that D&D Next arrives later than we might expect.

[Oscredwin]

If 3.5 is compatible with D&D Next then these serve the function of being splat books for the new edition in addition to bringing back an old favorite. In fact having all four editions in print at the same time (is 2ed coming out again?) would be a great way to pave the way for the newest edition which works with all of them.

[some guy]

That's nice of them. I've enough players without the PHB and my own PHB shows a bit of it's useage.

[Malachei]

If 3.5 is compatible with D&D Next then these serve the function of being splat books for the new edition in addition to bringing back an old favorite. In fact having all four editions in print at the same time (is 2ed coming out again?) would be a great way to pave the way for the newest edition which works with all of them.

Interesting idea. But wouldn't they then reprint other accessories and not the core rulebooks?

Because the D&D Next / 5E core rulebooks would have huge thematic/mechanical overlap with D&D 3.5 core (different rules, but rules on the same subjects).

[Gwendol]

It may also be an indicator that D&D Next arrives later than we might expect.

Not necessarily, they can release this version to attract interest for the Next edition.

Smart move: I hope they take the effort to clean up the mounted combat rules and make the rules for fighting with two or more weapons a bit more coherent.

[Fatebreaker]

Looking at the Wizards of the Coast upcoming release catalog (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Catalog.aspx), I do not see the 3.5 books anywhere, though I do see products scheduled to be released after Barnes & Noble claims the 3.5 core books will be in stock. Is there any official word from Wizards on this?

[Malachei]

Looking at the Wizards of the Coast upcoming release catalog (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Catalog.aspx), I do not see the 3.5 books anywhere, though I do see products scheduled to be released after Barnes & Noble claims the 3.5 core books will be in stock. Is there any official word from Wizards on this?

Perhaps just a typo?

Unlikely that a publisher has acquired the rights to reproduce them?

[Spuddles]

same reason george lucas changes a few things and rereleases his movies

money

That's all there is to it. A new generation of players accepted 4th edition but many players refused to follow and, as was mentioned before, 3.5 books are hard to find (physical copies anyway...)

All published D&D materials were done for money.

zomg.

How upsetting

:smallyuk:

[Scowling Dragon]

All published D&D materials were done for money.

zomg.

How upsetting

:smallyuk:

Or passion.

And in order to continue passion they need money.

[Fatebreaker]

Perhaps just a typo?

Unlikely that A publisher has acquired the rights to reproduce them?

Could be? Some companies are really weird about not announcing upcoming releases, but Wizards has been pretty good about announcing stuff months and months in advance.

Farming it out to a third-party might be the answer. The third-party pays for the printing and takes on the risk, while Wizards gets the money for the printing rights and a cut of the profits. Not saying that's what's happening, but it would explain why it's is on B&N's list but not on the Wizards catalog.

[DigoDragon]

I'm curious to find out if the errata is going to be molded into the book chapters directly or just some extra appendix in the back.
Heh, I'll call it version 3.55

[Roguenewb]

This is one of those strange times that someone has a good idea and I just don't understand why its being done.

[Malachei]

This is one of those strange times that someone has a good idea and I just don't understand why its being done.

Yes. Though I'm perfectly fine with the 3.5 core books and errata pdf. I don't need a new printing.

I'd much more appreciate an errata'd print for other books, especially Tome of Battle. Oh, on second thought, while a printing would be nice, just having an official errata for all books, including Tome of Battle, in pdf would be good enough.

[Oscredwin]

A printing gets something more valuable than errata, more players. If the game isn't growing, it's dying.

[Fatebreaker]

A printing gets something more valuable than errata, more players. If the game isn't growing, it's dying.

Very much agreed -- a stable gaming population is just a really slow decline.

That said, I'm curious as to what Wizards thinks this will do. Old 3.x players (and the Pathfinder crowd) likely already have their books. 4e players don't need 3.5 reprints. And hooking new players into 3.5 before the release of 5e will likely hurt 5e, unless the idea is that every singe edition sourcebook is somehow compatible with 5e rules. Somehow, I doubt that will be the case.

Edit: Clarified 3.x players already having their books as "old 3.x players" due to confusion. I am aware that new 3.x players are unable to purchase books. They are among the new players who now have less incentive to buy 5e.

[TheTick]

And it's not even old enough to count for nostalgia, really.

[some guy]

That said, I'm curious as to what Wizards thinks this will do. 3.x players (and the Pathfinder crowd) likely already have their books. 4e players don't need 3.5 reprints. And hooking new players into 3.5 before the release of 5e will likely hurt 5e, unless the idea is that every singe edition sourcebook is somehow compatible with 5e rules. Somehow, I doubt that will be the case.

Yes, but you forget new players joining old 3.5 groups. There's plenty of that. In my 3.5 gaming groups there are 5 out of 20+ people who own the PHB. And I'm always introducing people to 3.5, those people can't buy the PHB at the moment but might buy it when it comes out.

[Lord_Gareth]

Very much agreed -- a stable gaming population is just a really slow decline.

That said, I'm curious as to what Wizards thinks this will do. 3.x players (and the Pathfinder crowd) likely already have their books. 4e players don't need 3.5 reprints. And hooking new players into 3.5 before the release of 5e will likely hurt 5e, unless the idea is that every singe edition sourcebook is somehow compatible with 5e rules. Somehow, I doubt that will be the case.

Well, actually, in my local area a whole lot of 3.X players don't have their own books - we borrowed everyone else's, and now a lot of us want 'em, but can't afford the used copies. This reprint is a godsend for me, personally, and for a lot of other people in my local area.

[Fatebreaker]

Very much agreed -- a stable gaming population is just a really slow decline.

That said, I'm curious as to what Wizards thinks this will do. 3.x players (and the Pathfinder crowd) likely already have their books. 4e players don't need 3.5 reprints. And hooking new players into 3.5 before the release of 5e will likely hurt 5e, unless the idea is that every singe edition sourcebook is somehow compatible with 5e rules. Somehow, I doubt that will be the case.


Yes, but you forget new players joining old 3.5 groups. There's plenty of that. In my 3.5 gaming groups there are 5 out of 20+ people who own the PHB. And I'm always introducing people to 3.5, those people can't buy the PHB at the moment but might buy it when it comes out.

No, I get that. That's where the "hooking new players into 3.5 before the release of 5e will likely hurt 5e" comes in, because that just encourages them to not pick up 5e.

Edit:

Well, actually, in my local area a whole lot of 3.X players don't have their own books - we borrowed everyone else's, and now a lot of us want 'em, but can't afford the used copies. This reprint is a godsend for me, personally, and for a lot of other people in my local area.

Perhaps I should have said "old 3.x players (and the Pathfinder crowd) likely already have their books." That would have been more clear.

[danzibr]

All published D&D materials were done for money.

zomg.

How upsetting

:smallyuk:

Or passion.

And in order to continue passion they need money.
My wife and I were talking about this the other day. I like to agree with Scowling Dragon on this.

[Gurgeh]

Plenty of the "new" 3.5 players are unlikely to transition to 5e when it comes out, even if the new edition is as amazing as WotC are making it out to be. If they can sell some books to these people, it will hardly hurt their sales of the new edition.

[some guy]

No, I get that. That's where the "hooking new players into 3.5 before the release of 5e will likely hurt 5e" comes in, because that just encourages them to not pick up 5e.


Yeah, but it's a lower threshold for people to join existing old edition groups than to pick up the newest edition on their own and form a new group.

[killem2]

Be funny if it is just the same book with black and white pages added to the end. :smallbiggrin:

[Venger]

Be funny if it is just the same book with black and white pages added to the end. :smallbiggrin:

I have no doubt whatsoever that that will be exactly what they do.

However, if they release a new Tome of Magic and fix truenamers, that would be pretty great.

[Answerer]

They're rereleasing three of the four poorest-designed 3.5 books and I should be excited? Unless they're doing a full overhaul (which they're obviously not, they have 5e coming), I don't care; the SRD is more convenient for my purposes anyway.

Errata for Tome of Battle certainly would be nice, but I highly doubt many people on their staff even remember how it worked, much less what needs fixing in it. If they did, I'd be terrified that they'd do too much; the book is almost perfect and only needs slight adjusting here and there (saner Stance progressions, clarifications on Iron Heart Surge, White Raven Tactics, and Divine Impetus, either excising the Legacy Weapons entirely or adding the bits to those that, IIRC, are missing, but probably just about nothing else)

[Fatebreaker]

Yeah, but it's a lower threshold for people to join existing old edition groups than to pick up the newest edition on their own and form a new group.

In some ways, yes. In other ways, it's harder because resources for the old edition are hard to come by, whereas you can walk into any decently-stocked hobby store and purchase the latest core books for D&D.

That, and from a business viewpoint, encouraging players to stay with an old edition that rather than your brand new shiny edition is baffling.

Compare: I have 42 4e books and 14 adventures (plus 14 3.x Forgotten Realms sourcebooks which I use for fluff purposes). I am financially invested in 4e in a way that makes me unlikely to commit to 5e. I have 21 3.x books (not counting those FR books already mentioned), but as I grew to realize I didn't like 3.x, I moved on to 4e, which I did like. When 4e goes out of print, I'm likely to stay with it. If they keep doing limited run reprints of 4e periodically (and especially before a new edition), the odds of me picking up that new edition continue to go down, because I can simply have fun with what I already have. Giving those folks who haven't bought anything an opportunity to become financially invested in an out-of-date edition only gives them incentive to not buy the up-to-date edition.

Unless they're going to commit to a full re-run of the 3.5 print line? And somehow make that part of 5e?

We'll see.

[Rejusu]

It's such a shame we can't swear here because I think a comment about blessed excrement perfectly expresses my reaction to this.

To add the above discussion:
There are a lot of 3.5 players who don't have books. In my current group I think I'm the only person (or maybe the only other person) who actually owns any 3.5 books. Most of us are running off PDF's, and I only have the three core books plus about five supplements (XPH, CPsi, MoI, MIC, SC). There are many more books I'd love to own and would definitely buy (now that I can afford to) were they actually still available.

On whether or not this will hurt the sales of 5th...
Firstly, does it even matter? If sales of 3.5 cut into sales of 5th then Wizards is still selling books and still making money. Sure they have to recoup what they've invested into 5th but I imagine they'll probably make more money of re-issues of 3.5 content (having recouped their development costs already).

Competing with yourself is fine as long as you're selling.

Secondly considering how bad a time they've had trying to get 3.5 players to transition to fourth they may consider this a safer bet than just hoping they'll pick up 5th. Plus sales of 3.5 might help sales of 5th. It's easier to convince an existing customer to try your new product than it is to convince another companies customers. It'd be easier to get D&D players to give the new D&D a shot than it will Pathfinder players. Even though ostensibly there's not a massive difference I'm sure there's a number of people who've only played Pathfinder and not played D&D.

I just hope that this is true and that they'll be selling more than the Core Books. I'd love a full set of completes. Plus who knows, if it goes well for Wizards then there's the faintest hope of new 3.5 content. Perhaps just putting the web material into print or even expansions for some of the systems that didn't get much love (like a Complete Incarnum or Complete Battle).

Then again this might just be nothing more than a rumour/mistake, or they might just try and change things and mess it up in the process. Here's hoping eh?

[Lord_Gareth]

Perhaps I should have said "old 3.x players (and the Pathfinder crowd) likely already have their books." That would have been more clear.

Fool! Little did you know that most of us have been playing since 3.0! YOU FELL RIGHT INTO MY TRAP!

*Create Food and Water trap goes off*

....Crap. Wrong trap.

[deuxhero]

I'd rather they reprint the rare books, but whatever

[Fluffy_1.0]

Hate to be the voice of paranoia here, but anyone else think they're just offering reprints so they can strengthen a case against pirates? It's a lot easier to sue for lost profits if you actually have profits to lose if the product is downloaded.

[Answerer]

I doubt it. Such legal action is expensive, time-consuming, and terrible for PR. Plus, these things have a tendency to be difficult to pin someone with. They probably would love to prevent piracy, but their options for doing so just are not worth it, I would suspect.

[Fatebreaker]

Fool! Little did you know that most of us have been playing since 3.0! YOU FELL RIGHT INTO MY TRAP!

*Create Food and Water trap goes off*

....Crap. Wrong trap.

Sweet! Free swag!

...what? Food and water can be swag! EVERYTHING IS SWAG!

*ahem*

Swag aside (...for NOW), 3.x includes 3.0. That's why I say 3.x. It's both 3.0 and 3.5.

Ah-ha! The tables have turned, and now your trap is mine!

[Cieyrin]

Yes. Though I'm perfectly fine with the 3.5 core books and errata pdf. I don't need a new printing.

I'd much more appreciate an errata'd print for other books, especially Tome of Battle. Oh, on second thought, while a printing would be nice, just having an official errata for all books, including Tome of Battle, in pdf would be good enough.

It should be pointed out that the errata page for 3.5 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a) is still available and they're all in PDF format already. I don't see new errata coming out by any means, though.

[Malachei]

It should be pointed out that the errata page for 3.5 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a) is still available and they're all in PDF format already. I don't see new errata coming out by any means, though.

Of course! But it is not complete, and they have stopped issuing them, so I think we could use some more errata ;)

[Cieyrin]

Of course! But it is not complete, and they have stopped issuing them, so I think we could use some more errata ;)

That's the thing, though, I don't see WotC issuing new errata on a product line that they retired when 4E came out.

[Psyren]

10gp says they print the exact same books, and include the existing errata as an "appendix" in the back.

Including the ToB errata. Verbatim.

[The Glyphstone]

10gp says they print the exact same books, and include the existing errata as an "appendix" in the back.

Including the ToB errata. Verbatim.

This. I'd buy a copy of the 'new' ToB just for this.

[Scowling Dragon]

My wife and I were talking about this the other day. I like to agree with Scowling Dragon on this.

Which is a big problem for some companies like ea. The order has switched. They want money that they work towards to with a passion.


About the reprints:

Why this is a good idea: More people that love 3e to sate their love. Great.

Why Printing these books is a bad idea:

After the release of 5e this will confuse new players. When I first joined I just grabbed the first book I saw titled "DND" from barnes and noble. As a new guy I would get very pissed off If I bough the game only to find out the supported thing was an entirely different book.

Im serious, this can happen.

[Palanan]

Looking at the link on B&N, the reprint is listed at 320 pages. That's the same page count as my copy of the PHB, including the sample character sheet and the hokey ad for some novels on the very last page.

I picked up my copy in about September of 2003, which is presumably before any errata came out. If the page count for the reprint is accurate, this suggests the corrections will be incorporated throughout the text, rather than being printed as a separate section after the original text.

I called the Barnes & Noble customer line to ask about this, and despite some language issues they seemed to think that was the way of it, although the CSR didn't know too much. They couldn't tell me about what else might be reprinted, which I'd expected, and they suggested I contact the publisher.

So I called Wizards, and they stonewalled me. Breezy and friendly, but refused to say anything, official or otherwise. Probably they're getting a hundred calls a day about this.

[Ravens_cry]

Am I the only one who feels that WotC is really scrambling for ideas?
Fourth Edition wasn't the success they hoped for, so they tried the Basic Set, with a real nostalgia kick. But that apparently did not work as well as hoped either. The plan for fifth edition "Yeah, you can play your 1st edition and your 3.5 and your 4th edtion character in the same game!" sounded like a big fat mess to be honest.
So now they are going back to what they abandoned.
Unfortunately, Pathfinder and other variants have probably scooped up most of the '3.5 but with changes/errata' crowd. They scored some geek points with the 1st edition rerelease, but will it be enough?
I just get this general vibe from them of "What the heck do we do?!"

What I would like to see would be a role playing game based off Magic the Gathering multi-verse. There is a lot of lore in those worlds, they've even had novels written based on it.
Not good ones, or at least the one I read, but novels nonetheless.
It doesn't even have to be d20, in fact it would be better off not to be, but the idea interests me nonetheless.

[Yora]

....why? Those of us faithful to 3.5 already have the books. And copies of the core books are common enough for newbies.
I have four books left. The other one is Manual of the Planes.

[Cieyrin]

After the release of 5e this will confuse new players. When I first joined I just grabbed the first book I saw titled "DND" from barnes and noble. As a new guy I would get very pissed off If I bough the game only to find out the supported thing was an entirely different book.

Im serious, this can happen.

So...instead of checking the edition it is, you just buy it and get pissed you got the wrong one? Is it that hard to hold onto your receipt so you can return it and get the edition you actually meant to pick up? Looking at the older books, the edition is pretty prominently on the cover, so I don't see how this is gonna be a major issue except for people who can't be bothered to read things before they buy them, which is ironic since we're talking about books.

[OracleofWuffing]

This. I'd buy a copy of the 'new' ToB just for this.
You know what? Me, too. And also the "Errata Included" 1d43 Scorpion Tail Whip Sandstorm book.:smallbiggrin:

Looks like B&N removed or changed the links from the original post, though. Part of me wonders why they'd go physical copy when they could tie it in directly with DDI and go all digital, you know, cutting out publishing and shipping charges.

[Scowling Dragon]

So...instead of checking the edition it is,

I didn't even know that editions existed. I just grabbed the book. I didn't know the whats when hows and whys I just knew that I was interested in DD.

This didn't happen to me, but it easily could have if there where copies of the wrong thing.

Some guy said the correct thing: DD needs a core rulebook to simplify things for newcomers (A Core+ GM guide combo works best)

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by OracleofWuffing
Looks like B&N removed or changed the links from the original post, though.

Interesting. That's happened within the hour, since I was just looking at those pages a little while ago.

[eggs]

So...instead of checking the edition it is, you just buy it and get pissed you got the wrong one? Is it that hard to hold onto your receipt so you can return it and get the edition you actually meant to pick up? Looking at the older books, the edition is pretty prominently on the cover, so I don't see how this is gonna be a major issue except for people who can't be bothered to read things before they buy them, which is ironic since we're talking about books.
Buy the fifth edition of a biology or chemistry textbook, and it's basically compatible with the seventh or eighth edition. Buy 50-year old game of Life or Risk, and it's basically the same as one you'd buy in the stores now. In most situations, the specific edition of a book or board game doesn't matter; there's no reason a new player should assume it does.

D&D is aberrant in that a new edition isn't just a book with the chapters moved around, or some of the examples changed - it's a whole different game.

[Scowling Dragon]

Buy the fifth edition of a biology or chemistry textbook, and it's basically compatible with the seventh or eighth edition. Buy 50-year old game of Life or Risk, and it's basically the same as one you'd buy in the stores now. In most situations, the specific edition of a book or board game doesn't matter; there's no reason a new player should assume it does.

D&D is aberrant in that a new edition isn't just a book with the chapters moved around, or some of the examples changed - it's a whole different game.

This. Exactly this.

[Andorax]

Buy the fifth edition of a biology or chemistry textbook, and it's basically compatible with the seventh or eighth edition. Buy 50-year old game of Life or Risk, and it's basically the same as one you'd buy in the stores now. In most situations, the specific edition of a book or board game doesn't matter; there's no reason a new player should assume it does.

D&D is aberrant in that a new edition isn't just a book with the chapters moved around, or some of the examples changed - it's a whole different game.

I'm guessing eggs hasn't bought eithe Risk OR Life recently. I have, and was more than little disappointed to find out that they have made substantial changes to both.

That aside, I would agree that there is risk to having multiple supported editions out there at the same time, but I think that it's mitigated by several factors...not the least of which are:

1) In the computer day and age, people are familiar with constantly changing (and frequently incompatable) versions.

2) Many places that would be selling it ALREADY have multiple editions on the shelf at once. Not just gaming stores, there's B&Ns, Hastings, etc. that still haven't cleared their shelves of their OLD 3.5 materials.

[Palanan]

So, I'm discovering that I don't know as much about ISBNs as I really should. The ISBNs for the reprints were listed on the B&N site, and before the listings were removed they were recopied all over the web.

I gather that ISBNs are purchased by publishers and assigned internally. Apart from querying the publisher (which in this case is WotC) is there anywhere else the ISBNs would be listed? That could give some independent confirmation, and maybe a little more info.

[AslanCross]

I still don't see how they plan on getting back market share from Pathfinder, since they're just releasing the same old rules without the fixes that Pathfinder offers.

And yes, I do get the vibe that they're scrambling really hard for ideas to keep D&D working, and unfortunately, I don't think the "New stuff every 3 months!!!!" product model they're using for Magic: The Gathering (Which, I hate to admit, WORKS for Magic) is going to work with D&D.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by eggs
Buy the fifth edition of a biology or chemistry textbook, and it's basically compatible with the seventh or eighth edition.

Maybe in history or literature, but not in biology. My college textbooks are hopelessly outdated, frozen relics of an earlier state of knowledge. Molecular biology in particular has made so many advances (Craig Venter; organ printing) that the books can barely keep up.

I agree with your broader point, just not with the particulars of the example.


Originally Posted by Andorax
Not just gaming stores, there's B&Ns, Hastings, etc. that still haven't cleared their shelves of their OLD 3.5 materials.

Wherever you live, I should visit. My local B&N hasn't had 3.5 books in years.

:smallfrown:

[PlzBreakMyCmpAn]

Hate to be the voice of paranoia here, but anyone else think they're just offering reprints so they can strengthen a case against pirates? It's a lot easier to sue for lost profits if you actually have profits to lose if the product is downloaded.Although this is true, getting previous pirates isn't realistic. However I daresay this might significantly throttle down the new offenders. At least for the few books being reprinted. Maybe WotC is putting their money where their mouth is when they complain about pirates. Then again, they might never republish everything in 3.5 so the point would be moot.

TBH I didn't expect 3.5 to be rerele

[Zaq]

Huh. If this works out, it'll be pretty cool.

I'm not naive enough to genuinely get my hopes up that they'd print more than the core 3, but it'd be really, really cool if they did.

[Particle_Man]

By the way is this going to be "Fancy Covers" like the July 1st edition reprints?

[Dsurion]

What I would like to see would be a role playing game based off Magic the Gathering multi-verse. There is a lot of lore in those worlds, they've even had novels written based on it.
Not good ones, or at least the one I read, but novels nonetheless.
It doesn't even have to be d20, in fact it would be better off not to be, but the idea interests me nonetheless.Or even just release setting books for their existing M:tG settings... I would lap those right up. It'd be a great tie-in product for the new edition, if if would be for D&D Next, getting both Magic players and D&D players to buy in.

[Scowling Dragon]

1) In the computer day and age, people are familiar with constantly changing (and frequently incompatable) versions.

Except thats computers. All I knew was "Dungeons and Dragons". I had no idea that there even WHERE editions.

[Crow]

I really enjoy 3.5, but man, it really seems like WotC is grasping at straws here. Don't most of the people still playing 3.5 right now, already have the books?

Or are there really that many SRD-only players out there?

[Lord_Gareth]

I really enjoy 3.5, but man, it really seems like WotC is grasping at straws here. Don't most of the people still playing 3.5 right now, already have the books?

Or are there really that many SRD-only players out there?

Poverty, lack of opportunity, damaged books and theft all create markets for players to have either never owned the books (me) or need replacements (the rest of my friends).

[Particle_Man]

I really enjoy 3.5, but man, it really seems like WotC is grasping at straws here. Don't most of the people still playing 3.5 right now, already have the books?

Or are there really that many SRD-only players out there?

I dunno, I am in a 3.5 campaign that gets new players and they want to get 3.5 books for it. Anecdote is not data, but I don't think my case is unique.

[Malachei]

I'm still not convinced we're not seeing a typo here. A reprint with errata, but with the exact page count?



Or are there really that many SRD-only players out there?

I know people who never take their PHB to gaming sessions, because they have the SRD with them, and are happy to instead take other books with them (accessories for their spells, feats, etc.).

[Divayth Fyr]

I'm still not convinced we're not seeing a typo here. A reprint with errata, but with the exact page count?
Why would it change? Most likely the errata won't be included as a separate part, but will replace the parts which needed correction.

[pffh]

I really enjoy 3.5, but man, it really seems like WotC is grasping at straws here. Don't most of the people still playing 3.5 right now, already have the books?

Or are there really that many SRD-only players out there?

I know I wouldn't mind an extra PHB (the two we have could be in a better shape), a fixed ToB (woop woop stance progression) an extra MiC and SC (always open and in use by someone at the table) and possibly some other choice books depending on what they would put out.

[Malachei]

It seems B&N has removed the products from the linked page.

But I found this instead: WOTC reprinting AD&D core rulebooks. (http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2012/01/wizards-is-reprinting-the-add-core-books/)

[Rejusu]

It seems B&N has removed the products from the linked page.

But I found this instead: WOTC reprinting AD&D core rulebooks. (http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2012/01/wizards-is-reprinting-the-add-core-books/)

Uh, that's kind of old news already. In fact I think they're already available for sale and have been for a while.

[Malachei]

Uh, that's kind of old news already. In fact I think they're already available for sale and have been for a while.

Really? In fact, do you know where to get one of them already?

Their website (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/02410000) says release date July 2012.

[Curmudgeon]

I'm still not convinced we're not seeing a typo here. A reprint with errata, but with the exact page count?
That's common practice for WotC. They've kept the page numbers the same in 4e by altering margins and font size as they made changes. The 4e original Player's Handbook and Player's Handbook Deluxe Edition have the same sections on the same pages, despite dozens of pages of errata being worked into the latter book's content.

[Quietus]

I really enjoy 3.5, but man, it really seems like WotC is grasping at straws here. Don't most of the people still playing 3.5 right now, already have the books?

Or are there really that many SRD-only players out there?

I've had my 3.5 PHB since... since it came out? That's what, a decade+ now? I really can't remember, but you can tell that it's been well-loved, even with as much care as I take with it. If finances allow, I'd totally buy a new PHB when it came out, and probably a DMG as well since I never bought a 3.5 version. Yeah, I could get pirated PDF's, but A) Let's face it, WotC deserves to get paid for me using their product, and B) I simply prefer having a book in hand. Add to this the fact that literally half of my gaming group doesn't have a copy of the PHB, and I try to discourage the use of electronics at the table to keep distractions down, and WotC can probably expect quite reasonably to make $120-$200 off my table alone, at $40/book.

[Rejusu]

Really? In fact, do you know where to get one of them already?

Their website (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/02410000) says release date July 2012.

I only said I thought they were available, I didn't actually know for sure when they were out. But I know that it's old news that they were doing so.

[Callista]

It makes me very happy. I'll finally be able to get a PHB to replace my old, tattered copy; and the newbies in our group can buy their own.

Yes, there are 3.5 newbies. Lots of them, in fact. Three out of our eight players are playing their first 3.5 characters. 3.5 and Pathfinder are the most popular games in my school's gaming club; as far as I know there's only one 4th ed game going right now, out of maybe a dozen.

Great business decision on their part. I hope it stays in print. People are going to keep playing it (as well as AD&D) for a very long time to come, and the used books won't last forever.

[Cieyrin]

Buy the fifth edition of a biology or chemistry textbook, and it's basically compatible with the seventh or eighth edition. Buy 50-year old game of Life or Risk, and it's basically the same as one you'd buy in the stores now. In most situations, the specific edition of a book or board game doesn't matter; there's no reason a new player should assume it does.

D&D is aberrant in that a new edition isn't just a book with the chapters moved around, or some of the examples changed - it's a whole different game.

Oh c'mon, consider the RPG industry, there are major changes between editions not just in WotC but other game companies. Consider White Wolf or Catalyst, OWoD and NWoD are vastly different beasts, as are the 4 different versions of Shadowrun. And again, what's so hard about holding onto your receipt to get what you actually wanted? It's part and parcel to the industry and taking a few moments to check that you're grabbing 5th Ed compared to 4th or 3.5 shouldn't be that hard. If a 3.5 rerelease does occur, it would behoove the WotC marketing staff to make sure the edition is prominently on the cover so they keep such confusion minimal.

[Callista]

And because it's a whole different game, there are many people who like 3.5 and don't like 4th. Which is why they should keep printing 3.5; otherwise they'll lose even more customers than they already have.

To continue the board game analogy, because they are so different, it would be like ending production of Sorry! because you had come out with Monopoly. If it had been a true update, then that would be a different issue, but it's not--it's a total overhaul. You're not guaranteed to like 4th edition just because you liked 3.5.

The way I see it, they're tapping into a pretty big pool of potential customers here--all of the people who like 3.5, don't like 4th, and would otherwise be lost to Pathfinder and similar systems as 3.5 used books became harder to find and groups gradually switched to Pathfinder instead.

[Spuddles]

I really enjoy 3.5, but man, it really seems like WotC is grasping at straws here. Don't most of the people still playing 3.5 right now, already have the books?

Or are there really that many SRD-only players out there?

My group has almost every non setting 3.5 book in hard cover, but we only have one set of the core rulebooks. Definitely going to purchase this when it comes out. Well maybe. If it's over 60 bucks I may not.

[Water_Bear]

Don't most of the people still playing 3.5 right now, already have the books?

I came into the game after they stopped printing books; I've had to rely solely on PDFs and have always been envious of my friends with hard-cover Player's Handbooks and DMGs. And now I can actually get my hands on a fully-errata'd brand new copy?

DO WANT.

[Rejusu]

Yeah I think some people are seriously underestimating how many 3.5 players got into it late. Consider that 3.5 is still very popular even well after the release of fourth. And those 3.5 groups are bringing new players into the game. I know I recently started a 3.5 game and one of our players is new to both 3.5 and D&D in general.

[Spuddles]

Since 3.5 was discontinued, I've seriously gamed (at least a year +) with10 people, 7 of which had never played 3.5 and 4 who had never played an RPG. I have run casual games for maybe another 8 people, half whose first dnd and rpg experience was 3.5.

And this has all been since the discontinuation of 3rd edition.

[OracleofWuffing]

And again, what's so hard about holding onto your receipt to get what you actually wanted?
There's not a day that I've worked customer service where I end up really, really, really wanting to ask a customer this very question.:smallfrown: The answer would most certainly be, "What are you talking about I should hold on to my receipt that's barbaric can't you look up my purchase on your computer I demand to speak to your supervisor!"

Another hilariously silly thought came to mind, is that they might've just downloaded one of the infamous pirate PDFs that already applied errata, and sent that file off to the printer. After all, what are the pirates going to do, sue them for copyright infringement?:smalltongue:

[Cieyrin]

There's not a day that I've worked customer service where I end up really, really, really wanting to ask a customer this very question.:smallfrown: The answer would most certainly be, "What are you talking about I should hold on to my receipt that's barbaric can't you look up my purchase on your computer I demand to speak to your supervisor!"

I am sometimes too optimistic of people being rational. It makes me wonder why I bother having faith in humanity as a species...

[Scowling Dragon]

I am sometimes too optimistic of people being rational. It makes me wonder why I bother having faith in humanity as a species...

................Seriously, this really pissed me off. You don't know me, so don't judge me.

Sometimes the recite gets too crumpled. Sometimes I forget about it. Sometimes I accidentally throw it away.

Honestly, im looking very angrily at your text right now. :smallmad:

[Scowling Dragon]

I am sometimes too optimistic of people being rational. It makes me wonder why I bother having faith in humanity as a species...

................Seriously, this really pissed me off. You don't know me, so don't judge me.

Sometimes the recite gets too crumpled. Sometimes I forget about it. Sometimes I accidentally throw it away.

Honestly, im looking very angrily at your text right now. :smallmad:

[Talakeal]

That's common practice for WotC. They've kept the page numbers the same in 4e by altering margins and font size as they made changes. The 4e original Player's Handbook and Player's Handbook Deluxe Edition have the same sections on the same pages, despite dozens of pages of errata being worked into the latter book's content.


I have several different versions of the 3.0 and 3.5 PHB that already incorporate various versions of errata into the text. They all have the same page count / numbers. This is very important because if you don't do this the table of contents and page referances become useless. If you look at some of the TSR books where they don't work so hard to keep page numbers constant this is a huge issue and the indexes are just worthless wastes of space.


Or even just release setting books for their existing M:tG settings... I would lap those right up. It'd be a great tie-in product for the new edition, if if would be for D&D Next, getting both Magic players and D&D players to buy in.

I remember when it was first announced that WoTC was buying out TSR everyone was afraid that this was going to happen and there was such strong feed back against it that WoTC came out and said (I think in Duelist magazine) that they had no plans to ever do anything like this. Of course, that was fifteen years ago...


There's not a day that I've worked customer service where I end up really, really, really wanting to ask a customer this very question.:smallfrown: The answer would most certainly be, "What are you talking about I should hold on to my receipt that's barbaric can't you look up my purchase on your computer I demand to speak to your supervisor!"

Another hilariously silly thought came to mind, is that they might've just downloaded one of the infamous pirate PDFs that already applied errata, and sent that file off to the printer. After all, what are the pirates going to do, sue them for copyright infringement?:smalltongue:

This goes both ways by the way.

One time I had a guy threaten to call the police on because I didn't hold onto my receipt at a cafeteria. I purchased a meal, ate it, and then threw the receipt away with the trash. The manager then came up, told me he didn't see me pay for my food, and demand that I pay for it twice before he called the cops. Even when the cashier vouched for me the manager was still ranting and raving and threatening to call the cops on me when I walked out.

[Cieyrin]

................Seriously, this really pissed me off. You don't know me, so don't judge me.

Sometimes the recite gets too crumpled. Sometimes I forget about it. Sometimes I accidentally throw it away.

Honestly, im looking very angrily at your text right now. :smallmad:

That wasn't aimed at you by any means and I apologize if you took it that way. It was aimed at the hypothetical (and sadly common) customer that treats customer service people like crap whose first instinct is to scream at them rather than talk to them like normal people to get what they want fixed. It works better for both parties if we don't vent at the people hired to deal with such situations so that we get the stuff we want fixed/replaced.

Again, I apologize if you took offense, my comment was in relation to Oracle's hypothetical customers and not at any specific person, particularly at the hypothetical customer comment.

[Venger]

There's not a day that I've worked customer service where I end up really, really, really wanting to ask a customer this very question.:smallfrown: The answer would most certainly be, "What are you talking about I should hold on to my receipt that's barbaric can't you look up my purchase on your computer I demand to speak to your supervisor!"

Another hilariously silly thought came to mind, is that they might've just downloaded one of the infamous pirate PDFs that already applied errata, and sent that file off to the printer. After all, what are the pirates going to do, sue them for copyright infringement?:smalltongue:

that's probably exactly what they did.

[Akal Saris]

But...but...

When will they re-print 2E???

:smalltongue:

[JadePhoenix]

But...but...

When will they re-print 2E???

:smalltongue:

Soon, I bet.
Maybe next to Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition's release?

[Scowling Dragon]

Again, I apologize if you took offense, my comment was in relation to Oracle's hypothetical customers and not at any specific person, particularly at the hypothetical customer comment.

Its alright. Thats my dad doing that stuff there. Im kinda polar opposite. I wouldn't blame customer service for my own fault. Id give a "Please?" then a "Well crap" and then leave.

I mean, I bought the book, I lost my "Get money back" ticket. Why are they to blame?

I never had something like I mentioned before happen, But getting into DnD would be SO much easier with a core rulebook (Usually combining the GM book and Players handbook. Gets rid of the redundant stuff in there).

When a guy that just HEARS of D&D is interested, and walks up to find 50+ books and your not sure what to even begin with its highly frustrating. Never happened to me but COULD happen.

[Palanan]

I can't agree enough with Scowling Dragon, as to how completely overwhelming the game can be to someone with absolutely no prior experience. That's how I felt in September of 2003, when I'd just joined a group of friends, the DM opened the PHB to pp.90-91 and told me to pick two feats. (I picked Stealthy and Toughness; they looked good.)

Even looking at the shelves in the bookstore today, the variety of 4E books available is completely bewildering. Pathfinder is only slightly less so. Two solid meters of hardcover supplements on the shelves? The 3.5 core rulebooks will be completely lost and overshadowed, unless they're surrounded by a crowd of other 3.5 reprints.

Someone walking up to that for the very first time would be justifiably lost. Throw in 5E and it'll be hopeless. So I'm assuming WotC is planning to make most of their 3.5 reprint sales from online purchases, rather than first-time buyers in the store. Otherwise very few people would ever find the books.

[Togo]

I know several people who will buy this. They still play 3.5, and a PHB or DMG have recently been trading for more 2nd hand than the origial purchase price.

Throw in the fact that they already have printed editions with the errata in (I have one) and its money for old rope.

They reprinted 1e a while ago in a series of pocket size editions. It wasn't a huge print run, and they sold out pretty quickly.

I can't see why they wouldn't reprint 2e at some point.

I see no problems with this. I want WoTC to make lots of money, and thus find it profitable to produce more exciting things for me to buy. That they do so by printing stuff that I might buy myself is just gravy.