Tell me you don't work in publishing without telling me you don't work in publishing
It's a small list of fairly insignificant misses, which pretty much every first edition of a book is going to have, and they already had the errata ready to go on launch -- which means the editing process did catch them, just too late for the printing deadline. I'm not seeing the problem
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Maybe I’m wrong, but I expect a company like WotC to be able to catch stuff like this in time for their deadline. This whole “print it now, fix it later” mentality of theirs just feels sloppy to me. For what they charge for these things… I dunno. Maybe it’s just me. 🤷♂️
Maybe I’m wrong, but I expect a company like WotC to be able to catch stuff like this in time for their deadline. This whole “print it now, fix it later” mentality of theirs just feels sloppy to me. For what they charge for these things… I dunno. Maybe it’s just me. 🤷♂️
Just means that instead of buying books on release, I will wait for the second printing so that I am not wasting money.
If I am going to be honest, this really does disturb me. Wizards of the Coasts seems to be rushing out their products without checking them thoroughly, and as a result, we are now getting frequent erratas to correct errors that should never have been made. Honestly, it is very frustrated to see such careless errors, but I guess that Wizards is really, really focused on 1DD and doesn't care as much about any bad products or mistakes in the meantime.
As a side note, I honestly did not know that DDB had a thread to update people on the erattas. So seeing that linked is interesting. Anyways, I am starting to wonder whether I, as someone who buys the physical versions of books, should never preorder. Not just because of the quality of the product, but also because what is the point in buying a book that will quickly be updated and have sizable changes made.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
I don't have the original to compare, but it really depends. I mean, if that's a normal amount of errata, the fact that they're catching it as they're launching rather than a month later...or after a Twitter firestorm...is a good thing.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I expect a company like WotC to be able to catch stuff like this in time for their deadline. This whole “print it now, fix it later” mentality of theirs just feels sloppy to me. For what they charge for these things… I dunno. Maybe it’s just me. 🤷♂️
I actually agree here. It's bad enough when they do it with games, but it's ridiculous that they're letting things slip through. It used to be that with books, occasionally you might spot an error and it was something that was a surprise. That every book has to be issued errata is not really an acceptable phenomenon, especially when we're paying a lot more for them than standard hardbacks.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I expect a company like WotC to be able to catch stuff like this in time for their deadline. This whole “print it now, fix it later” mentality of theirs just feels sloppy to me. For what they charge for these things… I dunno. Maybe it’s just me. 🤷♂️
I am the first one to decry the lack of care and quality in things as a clear sign of civilization's collapse (right after the existence of the Masked Singer), but typos and errors in first editions have existed as long as books have existed
I mean, there's a first edition of a Thoreau book that misspells his name on the title page. If the only issues in the new Dragonlance are the ones in the errata, that's pretty clean, relatively speaking
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I still have gamers say Will saves. Even those who only edition is 5E.
I also know of players still saying that, or Reflex save, Observation check, Flat Footed, Surprise Round and other references to previous editions, but that R&D would publish some is very surprising to me. That ref must had a Dexterity (Stealth) check of 25 since many sets of eyes failed to spot it! ☺
Typos I could understand, if it had been a weather/weather thing, or a bear/beer thing, I could accept that. But referring to the wrong school of magic… twice, or an outdated rule from an older edition of the game…. C’mon.
Typos I could understand, if it had been a weather/weather thing, or a bear/beer thing, I could accept that. But referring to the wrong school of magic… twice, or an outdated rule from an older edition of the game…. C’mon.
You realize you're describing two completely different types of editing there, right? Copy editing is not content editing, and a content editor might not even catch the things that showed up in the errata on a first pass. Evocation is an actual school of magic, after all, even if it wasn't the right one for that entry
You seem hell-bent on making this a bigger deal than it is. First editions have errors. That doesn't mean anyone was sloppy or lazy putting it together
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Typos I could understand, if it had been a weather/weather thing, or a bear/beer thing, I could accept that. But referring to the wrong school of magic… twice, or an outdated rule from an older edition of the game…. C’mon.
You realize you're describing two completely different types of editing there, right? Copy editing is not content editing, and a content editor might not even catch the things that showed up in the errata on a first pass. Evocation is an actual school of magic, after all, even if it wasn't the right one for that entry
You seem hell-bent on making this a bigger deal than it is. First editions have errors. That doesn't mean anyone was sloppy or lazy putting it together
You seem hell bent on defending the people responsible. Almost like it's personal. Did you do the editing?
To be fair, the stuff in the erratum is really minor issues, that could be expected in the first release: Two wrong schools of magic, will save instead of wisdom (I am pretty sure I wouldn't notice it if I read the book), and bunch of wrong npc stats (oh noes Tem Temble has only +4 to sleight of hand instead of +6 , the horror). I mean quality of Wotc stuff went downhill in the last several books, but making a big deal out of this erratum is really overblown.
It also is worth noting that dozens of folks are working on these books - you would think with all those extra eyes, that would decrease the chance of errors, but, in my experience, large collaborations increase the amount of typos and mistakes like using outdated terminology. All those different people writing their own contributions means you have a dozen or so writing styles and ingrained habits, and proofreading can easily miss things that sound technically right if they are silly mistakes like Will/Wisdom.
There also is a psychological element of “I don’t need to proofread this, surely one of the other dozen people will.” It is a lot like the bystander effect in that regard - with the key difference being that the corporate bystander effect has been demonstrated as a statistical reality and the actual bystander effect has been consistently shown to be hogwash based on bad data.
It’s really poor form, they are charging a premium for a pound store product. What’s worse is they know it and don’t care. Previous releases have sold massively, and the explosion of new and returning players has left them feeling invincible. The only way it will change is if people stop being apologists and start voting with their wallets. Boycott their product, sales will plummet, stock market value will tank and they will immediately up their product quality
Damn, tough crowd around here. I can only assume that no one on the boards (save 1 or 2) has ever made a mistake at work. Or more likely, you’re just in fields where your mistakes aren’t broadcast to the world. There are thousands of words in that book and, what, 10 of them were wrong? That’s really pretty good.
As for why they caught them so quickly, I’d bet that after the hadozee debacle, they had consultants going over this with a microscope, and they noticed a few things that had gotten past the line editors.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What does it say to you that there is already an official errata for the new Dragonlance book within mere minutes of its release: (https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/rules-game-mechanics/8760-official-wizards-of-the-coast-errata?comment=32)? I gotta say it worries me that they found flaws in their product before it was even published but after it was too late to fix them properly in the first printing. Yet more signs of rushed, underbaked products coming from WotC.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Errata are always welcome to correct things hence why most D&D books have some. So better sooner than later i guess?
What baffles me though, is glaring mistakes such as reference to Will save when it's gone for so many years!
I still have gamers say Will saves. Even those who only edition is 5E.
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
Tell me you don't work in publishing without telling me you don't work in publishing
It's a small list of fairly insignificant misses, which pretty much every first edition of a book is going to have, and they already had the errata ready to go on launch -- which means the editing process did catch them, just too late for the printing deadline. I'm not seeing the problem
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Maybe I’m wrong, but I expect a company like WotC to be able to catch stuff like this in time for their deadline. This whole “print it now, fix it later” mentality of theirs just feels sloppy to me. For what they charge for these things… I dunno. Maybe it’s just me. 🤷♂️
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Considering how bad Spelljammer was, I would have expected much tighter editing for this one.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Just means that instead of buying books on release, I will wait for the second printing so that I am not wasting money.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
If I am going to be honest, this really does disturb me. Wizards of the Coasts seems to be rushing out their products without checking them thoroughly, and as a result, we are now getting frequent erratas to correct errors that should never have been made. Honestly, it is very frustrated to see such careless errors, but I guess that Wizards is really, really focused on 1DD and doesn't care as much about any bad products or mistakes in the meantime.
As a side note, I honestly did not know that DDB had a thread to update people on the erattas. So seeing that linked is interesting. Anyways, I am starting to wonder whether I, as someone who buys the physical versions of books, should never preorder. Not just because of the quality of the product, but also because what is the point in buying a book that will quickly be updated and have sizable changes made.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.I don't have the original to compare, but it really depends. I mean, if that's a normal amount of errata, the fact that they're catching it as they're launching rather than a month later...or after a Twitter firestorm...is a good thing.
That said:
I actually agree here. It's bad enough when they do it with games, but it's ridiculous that they're letting things slip through. It used to be that with books, occasionally you might spot an error and it was something that was a surprise. That every book has to be issued errata is not really an acceptable phenomenon, especially when we're paying a lot more for them than standard hardbacks.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I am the first one to decry the lack of care and quality in things as a clear sign of civilization's collapse (right after the existence of the Masked Singer), but typos and errors in first editions have existed as long as books have existed
I mean, there's a first edition of a Thoreau book that misspells his name on the title page. If the only issues in the new Dragonlance are the ones in the errata, that's pretty clean, relatively speaking
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I also know of players still saying that, or Reflex save, Observation check, Flat Footed, Surprise Round and other references to previous editions, but that R&D would publish some is very surprising to me. That ref must had a Dexterity (Stealth) check of 25 since many sets of eyes failed to spot it! ☺
Typos I could understand, if it had been a weather/weather thing, or a bear/beer thing, I could accept that. But referring to the wrong school of magic… twice, or an outdated rule from an older edition of the game…. C’mon.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
You realize you're describing two completely different types of editing there, right? Copy editing is not content editing, and a content editor might not even catch the things that showed up in the errata on a first pass. Evocation is an actual school of magic, after all, even if it wasn't the right one for that entry
You seem hell-bent on making this a bigger deal than it is. First editions have errors. That doesn't mean anyone was sloppy or lazy putting it together
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
To be fair, the stuff in the erratum is really minor issues, that could be expected in the first release: Two wrong schools of magic, will save instead of wisdom (I am pretty sure I wouldn't notice it if I read the book), and bunch of wrong npc stats (oh noes Tem Temble has only +4 to sleight of hand instead of +6 , the horror). I mean quality of Wotc stuff went downhill in the last several books, but making a big deal out of this erratum is really overblown.
It also is worth noting that dozens of folks are working on these books - you would think with all those extra eyes, that would decrease the chance of errors, but, in my experience, large collaborations increase the amount of typos and mistakes like using outdated terminology. All those different people writing their own contributions means you have a dozen or so writing styles and ingrained habits, and proofreading can easily miss things that sound technically right if they are silly mistakes like Will/Wisdom.
There also is a psychological element of “I don’t need to proofread this, surely one of the other dozen people will.” It is a lot like the bystander effect in that regard - with the key difference being that the corporate bystander effect has been demonstrated as a statistical reality and the actual bystander effect has been consistently shown to be hogwash based on bad data.
This looks like a clear example of taking 3rd edition stuff and just changing a few words - and then forgetting to change the important rule words.
Very sloppy!
Either that or a designer from 3.X/PF worked on it.
It’s really poor form, they are charging a premium for a pound store product. What’s worse is they know it and don’t care. Previous releases have sold massively, and the explosion of new and returning players has left them feeling invincible. The only way it will change is if people stop being apologists and start voting with their wallets. Boycott their product, sales will plummet, stock market value will tank and they will immediately up their product quality
Looks like a cut and paste construction project.
If it was good enough for 3.5 then its fine for 5E mentality.
Looks like they need a continuity proof reader or three. Someone who actually knows and plays the game not just a random collage grad.
Damn, tough crowd around here. I can only assume that no one on the boards (save 1 or 2) has ever made a mistake at work. Or more likely, you’re just in fields where your mistakes aren’t broadcast to the world.
There are thousands of words in that book and, what, 10 of them were wrong? That’s really pretty good.
As for why they caught them so quickly, I’d bet that after the hadozee debacle, they had consultants going over this with a microscope, and they noticed a few things that had gotten past the line editors.