Do you agree with WotC selling errata?

[delericho]

I voted no, and I feel that Wizards absolutely and emphatically should not be charging for errata. Where there are mistakes in the books (which are inevitable), Wizards can and therefore should be offering corrections as free downloads. That they don't in every case is unfortunate, but it's definately forgivable - there are only so many hours in the day, after all.

There is a difference between a book incorporating errata and them 'selling errata'. I would be extremely angry if the new books didn't include errata, since that would mean Wizards were knowingly and intentionally selling sub-standard product. But the Spell Compendium isn't primarily about errata, it's about collecting the spells in one place. The errata are just a side benefit.

IMO, of course.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I would prefer that WotC sell their errata, then they would have a reason to double check it.

Really?

I would assume that, could I sell the book and then sell the errata for the book, making a few mistakes would be a way to make additional money. Not too many, of course (because we want to sell the original book), but enough to justify the errata.

Conversely, if you end up doing the errata essentially for free you have an incentive to keep the need for errata in check.

At least, in non-Bizarro Land.


RC


EDIT: Of course, any errata that ends up in the SRD or on the WotC website isn't errata that you are being asked to pay for. What they are selling in this instance is the packaging.

 

[SteveC]

I'm going to echo the sentiments of some of the other posters here: I don't agree with the notion of paying for errata, but I also reject the premise of the poll: I don't consider the Spell Compendium or the upcoming Rules/Magic Items Compendiums to be errata. What they're doing is putting all of the content in one place, so that you don't have to lug around a lot of books if all you want is one spell/item or rules tidbit.

Now on the issue of errata itself, I'd say that WotC has not been keeping up on that end very well. Errata is incomplete and released very late. Am I entitled to this? No, but it does keep me from buying a lot of their books at the moment. The Complete Divine was a terribly edited book, and it kept me from buying both the races and environment setting books. Honestly, I went from buying all of the hardbacks to looking very closely at them before purchase. And as I like to say on some other issues, I'm not the only one.

--Steve

 

[philreed]

"Do you still wear women's underwear at work? (o Yes o No)"

Can I answer with: "Which day of the week?"

 

[bairdec]

Apparently, WotC has this nerve with selling us errata. ... I believe if you make a mistake on a product, I send it back and you fix it or send me a new one at no extra costs. In this case, WotC has the obligation to present errata for their material ASAP. When was the last time we saw errata for any of the books recently? It wasn't recent, that's for sure. They're still behind on some 3.0 books.

The examples presented are not the same as charging for an errata sheet, as the poll question implied. A revised or new edition, or a compilation of previous books' material does not constitute charging for errata. The last only time I've seen a book publisher actually recall a book was when GW first came out with the third edition WH40K rules. The cover on the books was coming off, and so GW sent owners a new copy of the rulebook that didn't have the manufacturing flaw. I can think of a number of game companies that have produced errata sheets like WotC does, and none have considered recalling a book for editing errors or misprints. Including (but not limited to) Steve Jackson Games, Game Designers Workshop, FASA, TSR, and Games Workshop.

In short, get over it. A publisher of any series of print doesn't owe the customer errata, but most provide errata sheets as a goodwill measure.

 

[Ilium]

Lemon Curry

 

[blargney the second]

I'm abstaining from voting in your poll: it is a misleading question not cogent to the topic of your post.

 

[Storm Raven]

Really?

I would assume that, could I sell the book and then sell the errata for the book, making a few mistakes would be a way to make additional money. Not too many, of course (because we want to sell the original book), but enough to justify the errata.

Assuming, of course, that WotC is an evil corporation run by scheming villans. Assuming they are normal humans who are working for a business that needs to make money, they will do the best job they can on the initial product, and if it needs errata, the cost they charge should be enough to defray the resources necessary to put the errata documents together.

Conversely, if you end up doing the errata essentially for free you have an incentive to keep the need for errata in check.

If you do errata for free, then there is no reason to invest any serious time or effort into it. Which means they don't. "For free" errata and rulings has gotten us the riddled-with-errors FAQ, the often contradictory answers from Customer Support, and so on. They have no reason to bother putting any resources into errata, and the result is that WotC seems to have put all of those issues on the back-burner.

 

[Turjan]

Apparently, WotC has this nerve with selling us errata.

You get errata for free on this page. What you are talking about are not errata but rules changes. It's D&D 3.75, if you so want.

Edit: Of course, I didn't vote. The poll doesn't present a sensible option.

 

[Umbran]

It seems to me that your decision to actually purchase the errata is more of an obsessive/compulsive need to have the rules exactly as they are supposed to be played according to some game developers rather than a practical need to enjoy the game.

Amaril, welcome to the boards!

I'd like to take this opportunity to point you towards The Rules, our guideliens on posting etiquette. We ask you to refrain from ascribing motives to others - try to avoid telling people what they think, or why.

If you've got a question about The Rules, and how they might apply, please feel free to e-mail one of the moderators - our e-mail addresses are available in a post stickied to the top of the Meta forum.