For the Love of Editing!
Heh, intriguing how similar threads on this matter pop up every now and then ....
Just to begin, I have a piece on being an editor written for FDP's
Dragon's Breath feature that's somewhat related to the discussion here.
Give it a look, if you'd like.
Before I address some points below, I would like to suggest that the editing of d20 products now is much improved in comparison to when 3e/d20 launched a few years ago. Sure, editing can always get better, but we've come a long way since the beginning -- and due in no small part to the community persistently raising the issue of product quality. Editing well actually takes a lot of time to learn, especially if you have not been formally trained as an editor. The skills and tasks required of an editor involve a lot more than catching typos and grammar problems, and RPG editors need other particular skills as well, such as rules knowledge. So, I think d20 editors have generally grown in sophistication along with the d20 industry; of course, we can always ask for improvement.
I do, though, have an anecdote that proves the opposite. On the plane back from Gen Con 2003, I spent some time reading a new release from a relatively major d20 publisher. Within two paragraphs I could no longer resist getting out my pencil to circle and underline things -- in short, to edit. After six excruciating pages, I merely shook my head, put the book away, and waited to land in Toronto (I've not picked up the book since, because its opening pages were that bad). Not only was the editing
extremely lax in every single paragraph, but the layout/presentation made each page rather confusing to read and follow: an unprofessional job all around, really.
Yet this publisher constantly receives accolades here, while other publishers that strive for higher quality in such areas barely get noticed. Apparently, then, high quality editing and good to above-average presentation do not always guarantee better sales. As much as people desire good editing, they actually don't consistently reinforce that desire through their purchases. It's a strange world, indeed, eh ....
Originally posted by Wombat
With word processing programs so easy to attain, complete with spell-checkers and even syntax-checkers, there is no reason to have poorly edited manuscripts. The occasional error is not the problem; consistent errors are.
There is no excuse for bad spelling at this point.
As AFGNCAAP notes, you cannot always rely on the spelling and grammar checkers of word processing programs such as MS Word. In fact, some recent college writing handbooks include cautions about relying on such programs, indicating through examples some instances in which these programs prove inaccurate. I can't tell you how many times MS Word gets supposed sentence fragments wrong. Every now and then it does catch something that I missed (or needed reminding about), but I actively distrust it for the most part.
Originally posted by ichabod
Finally, I think people make more of the editing problems in RPGs than there really is. If you look at other technical publications like legal and mathematical texts, you see a similar incidence of editing problems.
Overall, I think you're right, ichabod. Every field of publishing has its share of editing issues, and RPGs no more than any other field -- it's not like RPGs alone have this serious, rampant, apocaplyptic problem with poor editing.
One element of RPG editing that might set it apart from other fields, however, is that it tends to use "nonprofessional" or "untrained" editors: i.e., someone gets an RPG publishing company going and brings in his or her good friend who did English in university to be the editor. An English (or journalism) degree certainly establishes a good start for the basic skills of an editor, but it does not prepare one for
how to edit. By professional and trained, I mean those people who do editing as their career and have gone through some kind of educational path to get certified/accredited as an editor, also often belonging to professional organizations (for instance, the Editors' Association of Canada).
Yet there are ways to educate oneself about being an editor, including a lot of really helpful books and some web sites out there. The more one knows about publishing in general, the better one will be as an editor. Still, practice is essential, and one can only hope to learn from each project and do better the next time around. That, at least, is the attitude I take.
Sue Cook also has an editor's message board where folks can go with editing questions to other editors. It's a great place to be if you edit, proofread, or are considering trying your hand at either.
Check it out.
Originally posted by mythusmage
Low standards. Publishers see a need to get product out on the shelves, so they accept material that is weak in execution, poorly edited, and incompetently laid out. The goal being to keep publishing in the hopes that quantity will make up for the lack of quality.
Quite simply, this is
not true as a general rule. Some publishers may do this, but the majority actually do care about establishing high standards for themselves. Those publishers who take "low standards" as a basic operating philosophy only hurt themselves and the gaming industry in the long run, even if they experience success today. The record of years will come around to the truth eventually. In this vein, however, the problem I noted above remains: if people truly are so concerned about poor editing, why do they continue to support companies that demonstrate it consistently and ignore some others that demonstrate good editing?
Still, Alan, your list of wishes and pet peeves describes what works for your sensibilities. A lot of layout people and developers might simply disagree with you on some points, but that does not detract from their professionalism, attentiveness, and standards.
Originally posted by arcady
One of the reasons I think there's such a disagreement between gamers and industry over what the price should be is the shoddy, 3rd grade, completely unprofessional editing and research that goes into most RPG work.
[...]
From what I read and hear in the community, gamers in general are just about fed up over this issue.
Can you provide further corroborating evidence, arcady? Who are these gamers, where are they, and what precisely are they saying?
I will suggest that "shoddy, 3rd grade, completely unprofessional editing and research" actually applies to the minority as opposed to the majority of publishers, adding a "see above" to my quotation of ichabod. It may be prevalent enough to warrant dissatisfaction, but it's not the rule for all RPGs.
As I mentioned above, however, most RPG editors likely are not "professionals." Sure, using professionals would be ideal, but their rates lie beyond the ability of most RPG publishers to handle. Editors never get paid as much as writers or developers in any field of publishing, even the professionals. A fact of publishing life overall is that editing often comes in low on the totem pole of a publisher's budget concerns (and constraints). We shouldn't lose sight of RPGs as a hobby, though -- professionalizing it too much, which seems to be the current trend, could lead to the loss of its down-to-earth, made-in-the-basement charm.
Originally posted by Liolel
Even the best editor lets one or two mistakes slip so I can live with a few rule editing problems. But if the whole book is unclear due to the editing then its a real problem.
Everyone should keep these words of Liolel's in mind when they begin a rant about poor editing. Let's repeat them, eh: "Even the best editor lets one or two mistakes slip [...]." It's a fact of life. What can you do when errors get by even after three editing passes, four people looking at the first proofs, and then another two people examining the final proofs? Stuff happens. The error-free RPG product is a dream ... though, definitely, the error-prone RPG product is a nightmare.
In the end, we should be glad that we have so many creative and dedicated people putting out products for the hobby we love. Many of those people take high standards in editing and presentation very seriously, which will show in their products. Whether consumers actually reward them for such high standards more and more seems uncertain as other less attentive publishers garner more of the spotlight. For the love of paradoxes!
Take care,
Mike
