Cover Art for 2e Reprints?

3 posts / 0 new
Last post
While it hasn't been directly announced by WotC on the site, it's been all over the rest of the net, including pre-orders on Amazon. My question is this: how do you think that the 2e covers will be altered? The job WotC did on the 3.5 premiums was, in my opinion, even better than the original covers. The 1e premium covers are okay, but I can seem WotC doing something similar with the 2e covers, hopefully with the original 1989 Easley artwork (seriously, the 2e DMG had the best cover of all D&D core rulebooks, period.)

Just roll some dice.



Explore the new D&D podcast that is a celebration of all eras of the game! Discussing the loves, challenges, topics, ideas, and news of this great hobby in both a contemporary and historical view.

It has to be the original art if they want all the old grognards to buy in. While I prefer the easy to read text of the revised "black" edition, the artwork of the originals is by far some of my favorite ever done for D&D. I remember when the black editions came out and my D&D group hating the covers. Put the original and the black edition side by side and tell me which looks more awesome.

There's no doubt about it, they have to use the 1989 Easley covers. 
The job WotC did on the 3.5 premiums was, in my opinion, even better than the original covers.

Ohhh, I was wondering how the 3.5 Corebooks showed up on the shelf of Chapters. I thought it was old stock, didn't realise there was a 3.5 reprint as well.

Cover wise, the original 1989 covers were definitely better. The backwards hand on the barbarian for the PHB was just frustrating. That said, I won't be disappointed if they use the 1995 covers, as I won't be buying them anyway. The core books are the worst part of 2nd Edition, I'd rather replace them with Castles & Crusades or something similar.

Encyclopedia Magica reprints though.... that I would totally love. 
Sign In to post comments