Eratta ... errata? corrections. whatever. ... SO MANY!

[BVB]

Sheesh. So much WofC errata, clarification, FAQs ... Why can't they get it right the first time?! Customers shouldn't be treated as though they deserve only second consideration. Nor should an allegedly complete product off the shelf have so many fixes required after the purchase.

For that matter, why don't we ever see a disclaimer in books warning, "This product is probably full of errors and vaguely defined sections that will require the buyer to go online for corrections or further explanation. This process may continue for months, if not years."

Don't you ever get tired of buying mediocrity?

 

[alsih2o]

i have looked at errata maybe twice.

we are working with a rules system, and that can be hard. hoyles has been known to maje mistakes and some fo what they are dealign with is as old as the hills.

i appreciate having a company willing to tackle a system so complex, yet so simple. and one that puts out errata.

i se where it irritates some people i gues, but it just isn't that big a deal for me. the magic is there or it isn't- rules are just the frame.

 

[Grazzt]

Dude- people are human. They make mistakes. And the bigger the product is, the more mistakes that are gonna invariably slip by. It happens. It will always happen. No product out there is mistake-free...regardless of what anyone says.

 

[BSF]

Fixes required? Hardly. The rules provide a nice baseline so that we all have a pretty good idea where everybody starts playing the game from, before any house rules. WotC continually tries to fine tune that baseline, but I would hardly classify that as a necessary fix.

I appreciate the work that they do to try to clarify things. And it is certainly a leap forward from the rules ambiguities from previous versions of D&D. For that matter, I would argue that the rules for a plethora of other games have been ambiguous.

Hmm, maybe I should just give up on this whole role-playing thing.

.
.
.

Nah! Worst case scenario, I'll just wing the rules that I disagree with or find ambiguous.

EDIT: Fixed typo and added smiley

 

[DaveStebbins]

Errors happen. Every novel, every textbook, every RPG book contains errors. Should the entire publishing industry be shut down because of this? When I start producing completely error-free work, I'll start expecting such from others as my due.

I applaud WotC for providing clarifications and errata, many other companies don't.

-Dave
"Life is not the way it’s supposed to be. It’s the way it is. The way you cope with it is what makes the difference." --Virginia Satir, social worker

 

[BVB]

Fixes required? Hardly. ... WotC continually tries to fine tune that baseline, but I would hardly classify that as a necessary fix.

(blink) Huh?
From the most recent "bulletpoints" at http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20modern/bp/20031125a here's just one small example:

Q: Why do all the vehicles in Urban Arcana have such weird sizes?
A: The sizes given in the vehicle descriptions are largely incorrect. Here's a rundown of the proper sizes...

This sort of thing goes on all the time. WHY?!
What are they paying their editors to do?

 

[guedo79]

To edit. I'm sure there are 100 mistakes for ever one they find afterwords. Plus we've seen Wotc's D&D section shrink and shrink in the past few years.

Most of the errors you wouldn't even notice if they had not pointed them out.

It could be worse, they could just not support them at all and leave the errors in the books and not mention them.

 

[BVB]

... It could be worse, they could just not support them at all and leave the errors in the books and not mention them.

"It could be worse --" arguments aren't very useful. Like saying a sharp stick in your eye could be worse only because it wasn't set on fire first. Or having an elephant sit on your car could be worse only because you didn't fill your gas tank earlier that day. ... Let's just be happy that the failures visited upon us are sorta small and manageable, eh? What happened to "Could Be Better" standards of excellence?

(shrug) I guess gamers just have low expectations and don't mind buying mistakes.

 

[Tsyr]

Or, you know, we accept it as something that isn't going away.

I've got books from before turn of the *last* century in my collection (Not RPG books, granted ), and I still find errors in them... Plus books that have gone through 10+ editions that still have errors in them. The publishing industry is one where errors are pretty much par for the course, the only thing you can try to do is minimize errors... And when you have the situation with RPG books (Where you might have a dozen writers or more in some products, plus another half dozen people doing layout after the fact, and another group of people editing it...) Too many cooks and all that is I suspect a large part of it; I generaly find single-author products to be a little higher quality, though that might just be my imagination.

 

[guedo79]

Tsyr makes a good point. Look at college books. I've found they can have as many if not more errors then rpg books. They just correct them in new additions or you have to hunt down the errata on the web site.

Its like the weather. You can talk and talk about it but you can do a thing to change it. Basically you just ignore it or get out a sharpie and alter your book. I don't feel taken advantage of. I bought a rpg book that has brought me much joy. So there is a 3 where there should be a 9. If its a problem I fix it in game if not then I don't worry about it.

Sure it could be better. D&D would be better if it was all open source and everyone could tweak and change the phb until we had the ultimate D&D game. D&D would be better if they would give us play tested stats for all the characters from the Planescape Novels. D&D would be better... I could do this all day.

The bottom line is the game works, the books look great, and I'm having fun. I can survive if Wotc/D&D is not perfect.