Dungeons and Dragons, FIRST EDITION, 1ST PRINT, ORIGINAL!!!

[Admin Pete]

Dungeons and Dragons, FIRST EDITION, 1ST PRINT, ORIGINAL!!!

This item has about 1 day to go with no bids and $699.00 as the starting bid. If anyone can bid, please do you might get a bargain if you bid in the last 10 seconds and nobody has bid yet. If I had any money at all I would bid about a $1000.00 with a few seconds to go (assuming no bids yet) and see if I lucked out, if I were able afford that. My wife would never agree to my spending even the $699.00 on a game, even a first print.

I hope it gets bid way up, I would hate to see it locked away for that low of a price. On the other hand it would be great to see someone get a bargain that would take it to the game table and use it.

[Deleted]

I hope it doesn't sell. I am bitterly opposed to "collector's prices." It's a game, not a sacred artifact.

[captaincrumbcake]

I'm in agreement with you on that, Mike.
This whole "collecting" thing has not benefited "the game" IMO.
ymmv

[Von]

A youthful character in Stephen Fry's novel The Liar is appalled when his tutor, the legendary Professor Trefusis, assaults him with a well-flung first edition of something tremendously classy and rare: I forget what. The response is golden.

A book is a piece of technology. If people wish to amass them and pay high prices for this one or that, well and good. But they can’t pretend that it is any higher or more intelligent than collecting snuff-boxes or bubble-gum cards. I may read a book, I may use it as an ashtray, a paperweight, a doorstop or even as a missile to throw at silly young men who make fatuous remarks.

I am very much a Trefusis. I refuse to pay triple figures to someone for second-hand goods. Did they create the work? Did their labour produce it and warrant remuneration? I think not. All they have done is own it for a period of time without rendering it unusable. This is hardly worth the best part of a month's rent.

[Admin Pete]

Apr 17, 2016 12:07:30 GMT -5 Von said:

A youthful character in Stephen Fry's novel The Liar is appalled when his tutor, the legendary Professor Trefusis, assaults him with a well-flung first edition of something tremendously classy and rare: I forget what. The response is golden.

A book is a piece of technology. If people wish to amass them and pay high prices for this one or that, well and good. But they can’t pretend that it is any higher or more intelligent than collecting snuff-boxes or bubble-gum cards. I may read a book, I may use it as an ashtray, a paperweight, a doorstop or even as a missile to throw at silly young men who make fatuous remarks.

I am very much a Trefusis. I refuse to pay triple figures to someone for second-hand goods. Did they create the work? Did their labour produce it and warrant remuneration? I think not. All they have done is own it for a period of time without rendering it unusable. This is hardly worth the best part of a month's rent.

Well said!

[aldarron]

Couldn't agree more. The sad part is, all this money is being thrown at pieces of paper which will, at most, last only a few hundred years until inevitably turning to dust. Meanwhile the world is full of starving kids.

[robkuntz]

What people do with their money for what they value is their business. I find nothing wrong with collectors or collecting. It is part of human nature since the beginning of time when someone duped us and created currency that they then linked to commodities to start gathering all resources to the few and which they could then "value" as scarce, thus to gather more of said currency/commodities. I used to pay some hefty prices for comics; and I doubt if any one of us here were to acquire Superman #1 by accident (lucky find, inheritance, etc) or such that we'd be leaving it to the dust bins of history. Feel lucky that people collect, for your old stamps and rocks and what-not just went up in value due to that.

[robkuntz]

Apr 11, 2016 19:10:24 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

I hope it doesn't sell. I am bitterly opposed to "collector's prices." It's a game, not a sacred artifact.

Why, but... ??  Did you not sell your own collection, Michael, or parts thereof, through the Collector's Trove (or was it elsewhere) for some pretty hefty change, no??

[robkuntz]

Apr 19, 2016 9:10:53 GMT -5 aldarron said:

Couldn't agree more. The sad part is, all this money is being thrown at pieces of paper which will, at most, last only a few hundred years until inevitably turning to dust. Meanwhile the world is full of starving kids.

Right.  Starving kids are due to collectors.  Starving kids are due to what Dorothy Day said:  "Our problems stem from our acceptance of this filthy, rotten system."

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2016 9:50:57 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

Apr 11, 2016 19:10:24 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

I hope it doesn't sell. I am bitterly opposed to "collector's prices." It's a game, not a sacred artifact.

Why, but... ??  Did you not sell your own collection, Michael, or parts thereof, through the Collector's Trove (or was it elsewhere) for some pretty hefty change, no??

I did indeed, because I needed the money.

That doesn't mean I have to like the whole "collectors' mindset."  I'm bothered by the idea of all those games that will never be played again.  It's like putting Stradivarius violins in a display case instead of playing them.

[robkuntz]

Blame the Church who created the whole art collector's mindset through making Sacred Art lineal (from God) and thus started the worship of objects they in fact preached against. It is what has lead to the investment in extrinsic objects that "empower us". So having a 1st ed D&D empowers the one who has it, just like those who wear gucci loafers...