 | | Re: New vs. old (was Re: More 1999 Figs... ?) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | (...) I agree -- and, they've opened the whole sexism can-o-worms by making only a tiny percentage of the people female. Back when the faces were generic, that was totally up to the person playing. (26 years ago, 25-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: New vs. old (was Re: More 1999 Figs... ?) —Richard W. Schamus
|
| | | | (...) The only fallacy in this line of reasoning is the quantity of female hair pieces that TLG made available in various town sets. I’ve always seemed to find that my biggest bang for my buck for specialized pieces was in the various themes that (...) (26 years ago, 27-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New vs. old (was Re: More 1999 Figs... ?) —Jesse Long
|
| | | | Richard W. Schamus wrote in message ... (...) a (...) that (...) If (...) hold (...) there (...) me (...) the (...) I think they're taking into account the non-haired people (hats, helmets, etc, which could have been any gender. Back then, they (...) (26 years ago, 27-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: New vs. old (was Re: More 1999 Figs... ?) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | (...) Right, yes. I had mostly space sets back then, and who could tell under those suits? :) (26 years ago, 27-Oct-98, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
