Mine fell apart. Worst binding on any D&D book ever, worse that UA. I'll probably buy these. I'm assuming they are the original 2.0 books, and not the 2.5 or the Players Options and Skills or whatever the hell the book was called. If anyone knows for sure though, please let me know. It doesn't appear to be the binder debacle for the MM either. Check it out...
The Winner of the Razor Coast PDF For Swords & Wizardry Is...
-
The votes are in. I'm glad the final decision wasn't in my hands, as it
wasn't an easy vote by far.
(the winners need to contact me at tenkarsDOTtavernATgm...
34 minutes ago
3 comments:
Have you seen they are reprinting hardcover versions of the old module series? All for of the S series in one book for 40 bucks, not bad.
The so-called "2.5" is just a term used to justify the 3.5 revision by fans of that edition. The black-covered 2nd edition books were identical text-wise, except for fixing mistakes and adding the Planescape names for the various planes instead of the older ones. That's it. It's the same game, 100% compatible in every way. Since these are "classic" reprints trying for a retro-feel, however, I am going to guess they are the original printing as far as the layout and look goes. That would make the most sense.
@Anon. I was calling it 2.5 as early as 1999. It has been called that on the old d&d Usenet groups as long as that as well.
Post a Comment