Errata

[EricNoah]

Oh, history, my favorite subject!



December 22, 2000: The first scoop on S&F from a fan who had purchased it appears. So likely this was the first time it was available in stores, etc.

January 16, 2001: The first official errata news for S&F appears. Includes the infamous chat log from the WotC chat in which S&F co-designer Jason Carl says of the Halfling Outrider, "The Halfling Outrider is the only prestige class in the book without a unique attack bonus. It's designed that way purposefully to reflect the fact that the class role is primarily that of a scout, not a combatant. I took a chance on that one." Of the mercurial greatsword's 2d8 damage and x4 crit, he says, "Some weapon has to be at the top of the heap, after all. " (The damage on the mercurial greatsword was later errata'd to be 2d6).

January 20, 2001: S&F web enhancement posted.

January 29, 2001: I created the Errata Center for the website, gathering any "official"errata that hadn't been "officially released" via the WotC website.

February 4, 2001: More chat logs from Jason Carl with more clarifications or corrections. Unclear if this is from the same chat as before but from a different scooper or a new chat.

February 19, 2001: Keith Strohm tells us about the new "rules council" at WotC that will "evaluate new feats, skills, and other evolutions of core mechanics for playability and quality."

March 16, 2001: T'Ed Stark says of the Halfling Outrider: "The Halfling Outrider (in Sword and Fist) should have a Base Attack Bonus. In fact, in early copies of the manuscript, it did. I don't understand how it got dropped, but we missed it in galleys."

March 30, 2001: T'Ed Stark says of S&F: "I hope that the Sword and Fist errata goes as quickly, and that we can plow through the MM in early April and get it ready to go up no later than May." WotC did indeed accomplish that goal, though the other major plan (releasing DMG errata within the week) did not come to pass.

May 25, 2001: S&F errata list posted at WotC.

All in all, the turnaround on the errata list was pretty quick. The disturbing part was the inconsistent message coming from WotC about the product (that there weren't errors to certain things when in fact there were). That's what made this particularly unusual, as WotC has typically done an OK job of telling us when they've screwed up. And I don't think Jason Carl was laid off (at least at that point, he might have been later on) -- he worked on the FR sourcebook Lords of Darkness with Sean Reynolds.

 

[EricNoah]

I was under the impression that someone from WotC admitted that they goofed and didn't put in the latest version when it went to printers.

The exact quote from the web enhancement re: the bladesinger is:

"It seems there is an imposter lurking on pages 49 and
50. It’s a bladesinger alright, but there are a few pieces
missing. Here’s the complete version"

I don't know either version well enough to tell you whether the new one is fundamentally different from the original or not, however.

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Oh, history, my favorite subject!
All in all, the turnaround on the errata list was pretty quick. The disturbing part was the inconsistent message coming from WotC about the product (that there weren't errors to certain things when in fact there were). That's what made this particularly unusual, as WotC has typically done an OK job of telling us when they've screwed up. And I don't think Jason Carl was laid off (at least at that point, he might have been later on) -- he worked on the FR sourcebook Lords of Darkness with Sean Reynolds.

Jeez! Thanks for the "blow by blow" thoroughly researched clarification/timeline there, Eric! I didn't expect (or mean) for you to go to all that trouble to answer my question.

The disturbing part was indeed as you said, the completely inconsistent and/or contradictory messages coming from WoTC and Jason Carl re: S&F errata.

I remember reading on these boards that Carl was laid off around the same time as Steve Miller and the other guys (within a month or so of each other), during last year's round of layoffs (er, I mean "corporate downsizing"). So i figured Carl's contribution to Lords of Darkness was already done by that time and it just took awhile for the book to be released, or his part was "freelanced." On that note, anybody know what Jason Carl is up to these days?

 

[Tsyr]

The exact quote from the web enhancement re: the bladesinger is:

"It seems there is an imposter lurking on pages 49 and
50. It’s a bladesinger alright, but there are a few pieces
missing. Here’s the complete version"

I don't know either version well enough to tell you whether the new one is fundamentally different from the original or not, however.

It's... different. No fundamental CHANGE per say, just additions. The one in the book is extreamly bland, and IMO underpowered... The one in the web enhancement isn't as bland, and in some peoples opinion a touch overpowered.

I think I remember post on the boards being where I got my memory from, but...

 

[Wolf72]

gadgets! bah!

Bad idea to hold up patches as an example. A lot of us remember days when games ran out of the box quite well 95% of the time. Heck, a lot of games still do. Improved from, say, Diablo II which didn't run on a TON of systems out of the box... or Pools of Radience... Or heck, any MMORPG who are patched weekly (at least) for years and never made bug free.

On the other hand, most of us who remember days of flawless games are remembering back in the days when games consisted of a PC speak (MAYBE a soundblaster 16 if you were cutting edge), a simple SVGA graphics card, maybe 8 megs of ram, came on three floppy discs, and ran on basicly one processor... an intell... under one OS, DOS. Or even older.

Thus, most of us are senile old fools longing for the nostolgic days of yore, so...

There are some cases where it has been truely unforgiveable, though, even you would have to admit. Need I bring up the halfling outrider?

cutting edge? ... lessee ... oh that would be my commodore 64 which still runs!

yes and I never had a problem with any of the pools of radiance games (gold box) ...

 

[Tsyr]

I wish I had a 64... all I got is a lousey 128.

 

[Wolfspider]

The bladesinger described in Tome and Blood is OBVIOUSLY missing some important parts. I've never seen a Prestige Class that only included ONE special class feature. Yeah, the bladesinger also gets a few bonus feats as well, but that's hardly compensation for taking the class. It's simply not complete.

Now I don't know if the version they released in the web enhancement is the one they intended in the first place, but at least it's a complete (and pretty neat) class.

 

[sfgiants]

Yeah, I know that some of the ways that errata has been dealt with has been stupid. The info comes out too late and there are many glaring mistakes, but keep in mind that most editors aren't perfect and while we should hold them up to a high standard we don't need to give constant grief on a few mistakes. Fix it yourself (and yes I know you spend a ton of money, but mistakes happen, they don't intentionally mess up something...).

 

[the Jester]

Well, I'm glad there's all that errata- I'd hate to see some of the stuff used without it ("Here's my mercurial-greatsword wielding ninja of the crescent moon...")

What I really want a la errata is details on the nightwing nightshade's "transformation" bite affect. I know it's from Mystara, but that's about all I know...

 

[coyote6]

Re: the Bladesinger

ISTR reading that the printed Bladesinger was an earlier draft; the one released in the web enhancement was the final version that should've been in the book. Somebody screwed up, and pasted the wrong version into the final manuscript (or provided the wrong file, or whatever; depends on how WotC does layout & such), and then nobody noticed.

It's happened with other companies, too. Rather embarassing, no doubt.