mbassoc2003 wrote:A black foldered version, or a folderless with the correcxt halftone printing and paper, or the digest versions are the only validated legitimate printings of PoVQ. I'd be in the market for a black foldered PoVQ at the right price, or a good clean digest, but I wouldn't touch a 3rd print even if it were going for $10.

good provenance not so easy with others agreed

Man, if this is true, it sucks for me. I just bought like 3 of these.

serleran wrote:Man, if this is true, it sucks for me. I just bought like 3 of these.

$10 each was not bad jk??

I can see that people who want to read PoVQ will always see a cheap copy and a cheap copy as they have no other way of reading it. Just as a photocopy of ST1 probably has value to some people. But by authenticating these and giving them validity, it's also allowing the sale of fakes to propegate on eBay. We'd all be shouting and complaining if someone sold a colour copy of ST1 on eBay, but it could just as easily be the legitimate local Gamestore preview copy or the authorised brother-in-law copy, and have no proof. So who are we to say that any photocopy is real or fake? Why not allow all photocopied product to be considered legitimate? Either photocopying a module creates a fake or it doesn't. Even if you then brand name it 'authorised Zocchi fake' (which I do not believe the UK sorced fakes are BTW, and I doubt the bulk of the US ones are either. But I can see that the LZ sticker will allow that arguement to stand in this case.

Bottom line. Either photocopying a module creates a fake or it doesn't.

So that's why it's not on your want list.

Yes and no. My wife has the bigger, huger, list, and I lost it when my PC fried... so I tried to quickly add as much as I could recall. The list should be about twice as long. I suck.

bombadil wrote:Odd we haven't applied the same scrutiny to the Dwaven Glory.  About time, maybe?

Probably because we haven't seen a stack of fakes on eBay, and also because it wasn't the one that resellers were photocopying and senning at conventions. Luckily all the fackes of PoVQ have the same cover, and we're all very familiar with it.

JohnGaunt wrote:General question: Can a fake be assigned a legitimate collector's value due to age or limited supply?

I wouldn't think so. The problem is everyone accepts these fakes as being legitimate, the same way they accept the Gamelords fakes ans being legitimate, and this legitimizes their trade on eBay and assignes them value within the community. I'd be willing to bet some muppet will shell out a couple of hundred bucks for this photocopy, and then at some time in the future be willing to sell it on to someone else and purport it to be real knowing full well it's a photocopy.

mbassoc2003 wrote:Why not allow all photocopied product to be considered legitimate? Either photocopying a module creates a fake or it doesn't.

The big trouble is that for some items, a photocopy (or something similar) was the method used to reproduce the item.

If Lou Zocchi had the license to reproduce these and sell them then they are a legitimate product.  If there was no time limit stated in their agreement, then he could still whip up a new batch and sell them now and they would be legit.   So far, I haven't heard anything from the author that would contradict or cast a shadow on Lou Zocchi having the right to do this.

It would be nice if each batch had a statement saying when it was printed up, etc but that is more for collectors/archivists trying to keep track of such things.  This is probably what leads to the most concern because someone who buys a copy probably goes in thinking it was printed in the 1970s when in reality it could be the 1980s or 1990s.  Info such as this may or may not effect the final price.

No, what I mean is, there are not many 1st print DGs that show up, and they certainly weren't hawked around mailing lists and games conventions with a cartoon cover like the PoVQ was in the UK. The usual assumptions about authenticity of any bound and stapled volume DG or PoVQ is as reliable as it is for say a Necromecan or Booty & The Beast.

Now if we had resellers selling DGs with doodle sketch covers at convention stands and they were available en mass from mail order companied through the 80's and 90's, then I'd suggest there could well be just as high a risk that they were fakes. But that is not the case.

The 3rd print is very distinctive, and thus far, there has been no evidence that they are anything other than badly photocopied 1st prints. There is no evidence that WW had enything to do with them, ot that they produced the cover as far as I can see. I'd suggest if there is any evidence that these are legitimate, it would have come out by now.

mbassoc2003 wrote:No, what I mean is, there are not many 1st print DGs that show up, and they certainly weren't hawked around mailing lists and games conventions with a cartoon cover like the PoVQ was in the UK.

Without even considering that there is no way to possibly account for what may have happened over the 30+ years to each of these products by their owners, no one even has the slightest clue as to what the actual print run of either of these products are, so you can't even make a somewhat educated guess as to how many of each should be showing up at this point.  Who knows maybe just more people threw away their DGs as opposed to their PotVQs.

Also, just because Wee Warriors may have chosen to do a print run like the current 3rd/4th print PotVQ as it stands now, it does not necessarily mean that they would have automatically chosen to do the same for DG.  It's entirely possible(if not probable) that PotVQ was more popular, resulting in higher sales and which resulted in the need for Wee Warriors to take quick action to meet demand versus DG.  That's trying to use the absence of evidence as evidence.  That's not how it works.

In other words, without knowing original print runs of both and having at the the very minimum a decent idea as to what the sales figures were at the time, you are taking a really big stretch assuming this particular print run as its known is just some unauthorized fakes.