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)
It’s clear that WotC doesn’t care one whit about their print sales and are focusing more and more on digital where a “push it and patch it” mentality is fine.
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.
Yes, people make mistakes.
In the past, I understand that publishers had a system called "proof-reading" which would catch such glaring mistakes.
Yes, printed books had famously been completely error-free until WOTC set the big board back to "0 days without a typo"
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)
Changing the school of magic effected by an ability is not a typo.
Which is why I used the word 'error'
This is simply not a 'hilarious 20 minute video of Day One EA bugs' type of 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)
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.
Yes, people make mistakes.
In the past, I understand that publishers had a system called "proof-reading" which would catch such glaring mistakes.
Proofreaders make mistakes, too. These sorts of mistakes would typically be caught by line editors, not copy editors. Never has a perfect book been published. Humans are involved in making them. Humans all makes mistakes.
It’s clear that WotC doesn’t care one whit about their print sales and are focusing more and more on digital where a “push it and patch it” mentality is fine.
Is it? I've yet to see anyone who knows what they're talking about claim digital sales outpaces D&D print products. I mean, as part of this Dragonlance release they put out a physical board game to enhance the campaign, that's development and production money that could have gone into digital centered content if your speculation were grounded in reality.
A relatively short list of proofreading errors being introduced day one of a product release is not some harbinger of the future of D&D 5e or OneD&D. Nor is saying this is a micro to non issue an apologist stance. There's lots of ways to criticize and defend 5e late cycle and One D&D's float out, a short sheet of errata isn't one of them.
Proofreaders make mistakes, too. These sorts of mistakes would typically be caught by line editors, not copy editors. Never has a perfect book been published. Humans are involved in making them. Humans all makes mistakes.
Of course they do, sometimes. But we aren't saying "Oh no, there is one minor mistake, clearly the world is ending!" What we are saying is that too many of the recent books are riddled with a sizable amount of errors that any half decent group of proof-readers (because big companies releasing massive and widely distributed books usually have more than just one editor) should have caught.
Its not a gaming problem its a profit problem. They fell short of their projected profits and more then likely were told by board members to start making more money fast. So they dusted off a few not fully worked out ideas and published them as fast as possible just to gin up a few more sales.
The problem with this is that the content fell far short of what was expected and this effects the future sales. People are now skeptical and will wait for proof of something being worth it to buy.
1D&D better be a huge improvement over the last few publications.
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.
Yes, people make mistakes.
In the past, I understand that publishers had a system called "proof-reading" which would catch such glaring mistakes.
Yes, printed books had famously been completely error-free until WOTC set the big board back to "0 days without a typo"
Plus, there's always the classic dawizard error across much of an entire book! LOL!
The tower can absorb 200 points of dawizard before collapsing. Dawizard sustained is cumulative, and the fortress cannot be repaired (although a wish restores 10 points of dawizard sustained).
I do find it a bit funny that people are arguing that Dragonlance can have large amounts of errors because the first edition of the game (which was published nearly 50 years ago by a couple of random dudes) had errors too.
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.
any half decent group of proof-readers (because big companies releasing massive and widely distributed books usually have more than just one editor) should have caught.
Literally the entire history of publishing suggests otherwise
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)
Proofreaders make mistakes, too. These sorts of mistakes would typically be caught by line editors, not copy editors. Never has a perfect book been published. Humans are involved in making them. Humans all makes mistakes.
Of course they do, sometimes. But we aren't saying "Oh no, there is one minor mistake, clearly the world is ending!" What we are saying is that too many of the recent books are riddled with a sizable amount of errors that any half decent group of proof-readers (because big companies releasing massive and widely distributed books usually have more than just one editor) should have caught.
Please refer me to the perfect first edition of ANY book in any genre — games, fiction, nonfiction. “Sizable” is a very debatable term. This book is 10’s of thousands, possibly 100’s of thousands of words. They made a few errors. It’s far from sizable. The title of the post includes “troubling signs of the future” not literally the world is ending, but certainly dramatic. I mean, the PHB in 2014 had mistakes in it, too. I guess that was a bad sign, and yet here we all are, still playing.
Yes, they probably have multiple editors. These things still happen. I’ve worked in newspapers. Even the smallest papers had at least two editors read every story. Some would have two or more editors and a proofreader. Some larger stories would involve multiple editing passes from each of those people, and the reporter. Mistakes still happen. We hate it every single time. People get fired for it. Some papers track reporters correction rates, so you know you’re personally, tangibly screwed if you make too many. But even then they still happen.
Have some compassion, people. Perfection is not an option in any human endeavor. They made mistakes, like everyone does. Unlike everyone, they are admitting their mistakes and fixing them as fast as they can.
I do find it a bit funny that people are arguing that Dragonlance can have large amounts of errors because the first edition of the game (which was published nearly 50 years ago by a couple of random dudes) had errors too.
If I have way too much free time on my hands and nothing else to do, I'm going to go through every response on this post and find all the grammar mistakes. I think that would be fun.
I mean, you can, I occasionally to frequently catch myself, in this very thread even, but I don't really see that sort of analysis of community interaction being much of a comparison to a professionally developed product, a product from a brand whose consumers have expectations of quality and clear instruction that they're willing to pay money for. Such a "ha, I got everyone" exercise seems more idle trolling than a finding with any substantive bearing, Comparing errata offered by other publishers may be more worthwhile if you're looking for something to do.
If I have way too much free time on my hands and nothing else to do, I'm going to go through every response on this post and find all the grammar mistakes. I think that would be fun.
When you start paying everyone on the thread to provide quality content, there might be a valid criticism there. Otherwise, what you're really saying is that no one who is imperfect can criticise what they're paying for. That sounds nice...until you realise that means mediocrity will become norm...and debacles like the Hadozee become everyday.
I'm not convinced that day 1 errata is necessarily a bad thing as I explained earlier (although some of the repudiations of it are...eyebrow raising), but I think it's quite evident that WotC aren't checking their work with anywhere near the thoroughness that they should be. I mean, regardless of how the initial writer of the Hadozee lore came to think it was a good idea, a second pair of eyes should have spotted that slightly obvious problem. Their glide ability as well...tell me it wasn't playtested by someone with half an eye to exploit mechanics without telling me it wasn't playtested by someone with half an eye to exploit the mechanics.
WotC have been sloppy, and they do charge a significant premium for their books compared to other books.
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.
The reality of publishing is that proofreading is a statistical process: every round of proofreading will find errors, just (ideally) fewer and fewer as you do more passes, and if you wait for everything to be absolutely perfect you'll never actually get anything published. As such, the only way you don't wind up with errata is if you just abandon the product after publishing, which I assure you is not what you what you want WotC to do.
The listed errata are pretty minor (I mean, video game standards would be "by the way, insert this chapter which we hadn't finished when we sent it to the publisher"), the real tell would be the number of errors they didn't catch.
They fell short of their projected profits and more then likely were told by board members to start making more money fast. So they dusted off a few not fully worked out ideas and published them as fast as possible just to gin up a few more sales.
But also, the board members are beholden to their shareholders above all else.
They fell short of their projected profits and more then likely were told by board members to start making more money fast. So they dusted off a few not fully worked out ideas and published them as fast as possible just to gin up a few more sales.
But also, the board members are beholden to their shareholders above all else.
I mean theoretically. In practice a lot of boards are very self serving and will sacrifice long term growth and company health for short term, personal gains. See: the state of the average CEO anymore.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Errors in first editions of books existed maybe a couple minutes before video games were invented, people
The one has nothing to do with the other
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)
Boicot this product or you are part of the problem.
It’s clear that WotC doesn’t care one whit about their print sales and are focusing more and more on digital where a “push it and patch it” mentality is fine.
Yes, printed books had famously been completely error-free until WOTC set the big board back to "0 days without a typo"
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)
Changing the school of magic effected by an ability is not a typo. That changes gameplay. Now people with books will be told their books are wrong.
Which is why I used the word 'error'
This is simply not a 'hilarious 20 minute video of Day One EA bugs' type of 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)
Proofreaders make mistakes, too. These sorts of mistakes would typically be caught by line editors, not copy editors.
Never has a perfect book been published. Humans are involved in making them. Humans all makes mistakes.
Is it? I've yet to see anyone who knows what they're talking about claim digital sales outpaces D&D print products. I mean, as part of this Dragonlance release they put out a physical board game to enhance the campaign, that's development and production money that could have gone into digital centered content if your speculation were grounded in reality.
A relatively short list of proofreading errors being introduced day one of a product release is not some harbinger of the future of D&D 5e or OneD&D. Nor is saying this is a micro to non issue an apologist stance. There's lots of ways to criticize and defend 5e late cycle and One D&D's float out, a short sheet of errata isn't one of them.
EDIT: found some typos a few hours after post ;)
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Of course they do, sometimes. But we aren't saying "Oh no, there is one minor mistake, clearly the world is ending!" What we are saying is that too many of the recent books are riddled with a sizable amount of errors that any half decent group of proof-readers (because big companies releasing massive and widely distributed books usually have more than just one editor) should have caught.
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.WOTC has a problem.
Its not a gaming problem its a profit problem.
They fell short of their projected profits and more then likely were told by board members to start making more money fast. So they dusted off a few not fully worked out ideas and published them as fast as possible just to gin up a few more sales.
The problem with this is that the content fell far short of what was expected and this effects the future sales. People are now skeptical and will wait for proof of something being worth it to buy.
1D&D better be a huge improvement over the last few publications.
Plus, there's always the classic dawizard error across much of an entire book! LOL!
I do find it a bit funny that people are arguing that Dragonlance can have large amounts of errors because the first edition of the game (which was published nearly 50 years ago by a couple of random dudes) had errors too.
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.Literally the entire history of publishing suggests otherwise
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)
Please refer me to the perfect first edition of ANY book in any genre — games, fiction, nonfiction.
“Sizable” is a very debatable term. This book is 10’s of thousands, possibly 100’s of thousands of words. They made a few errors. It’s far from sizable.
The title of the post includes “troubling signs of the future” not literally the world is ending, but certainly dramatic. I mean, the PHB in 2014 had mistakes in it, too. I guess that was a bad sign, and yet here we all are, still playing.
Yes, they probably have multiple editors. These things still happen. I’ve worked in newspapers. Even the smallest papers had at least two editors read every story. Some would have two or more editors and a proofreader. Some larger stories would involve multiple editing passes from each of those people, and the reporter. Mistakes still happen. We hate it every single time. People get fired for it. Some papers track reporters correction rates, so you know you’re personally, tangibly screwed if you make too many. But even then they still happen.
Have some compassion, people. Perfection is not an option in any human endeavor. They made mistakes, like everyone does. Unlike everyone, they are admitting their mistakes and fixing them as fast as they can.
Where are the people arguing that?
I mean, you can, I occasionally to frequently catch myself, in this very thread even, but I don't really see that sort of analysis of community interaction being much of a comparison to a professionally developed product, a product from a brand whose consumers have expectations of quality and clear instruction that they're willing to pay money for. Such a "ha, I got everyone" exercise seems more idle trolling than a finding with any substantive bearing, Comparing errata offered by other publishers may be more worthwhile if you're looking for something to do.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
When you start paying everyone on the thread to provide quality content, there might be a valid criticism there. Otherwise, what you're really saying is that no one who is imperfect can criticise what they're paying for. That sounds nice...until you realise that means mediocrity will become norm...and debacles like the Hadozee become everyday.
I'm not convinced that day 1 errata is necessarily a bad thing as I explained earlier (although some of the repudiations of it are...eyebrow raising), but I think it's quite evident that WotC aren't checking their work with anywhere near the thoroughness that they should be. I mean, regardless of how the initial writer of the Hadozee lore came to think it was a good idea, a second pair of eyes should have spotted that slightly obvious problem. Their glide ability as well...tell me it wasn't playtested by someone with half an eye to exploit mechanics without telling me it wasn't playtested by someone with half an eye to exploit the mechanics.
WotC have been sloppy, and they do charge a significant premium for their books compared to other books.
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.
The reality of publishing is that proofreading is a statistical process: every round of proofreading will find errors, just (ideally) fewer and fewer as you do more passes, and if you wait for everything to be absolutely perfect you'll never actually get anything published. As such, the only way you don't wind up with errata is if you just abandon the product after publishing, which I assure you is not what you what you want WotC to do.
The listed errata are pretty minor (I mean, video game standards would be "by the way, insert this chapter which we hadn't finished when we sent it to the publisher"), the real tell would be the number of errors they didn't catch.
But also, the board members are beholden to their shareholders above all else.
I mean theoretically. In practice a lot of boards are very self serving and will sacrifice long term growth and company health for short term, personal gains. See: the state of the average CEO anymore.