John Cooper does it again [Libris Mortis]

[pennywiz]

Why blame only the editor? For as many errors as wind up in the final work, every designer that works on such a project has to be held responsible. A mistake can't get past the editor unless it is made before it gets to the editor. Who were the designers who worked on this book and why don't they know the rules weel enough to avoid originating so many, many errors?

 

[Eremite]

It's a lack of time and money. Editing standards will only get better if prices increase, sales increase, or publishers accept lower (in most cases, though not WotC's, read 'even lower') margins.

I agree that this is one way of looking at the problem but the other way is to simply accept that the writers, developers and editors simply need to do their respective jobs properly the first time round.

After all, if we humble fans are picking up a plethora of errors on our first casual read-throughs, doesn't that show that the "professionals" are asleep at the proverbial wheel rather than doing their jobs? I'm still laughing over the inclusion of broadswords in the treasure of one of the mini-adventures. Um, didn't we get rid of those when 2E finished...?

Anyway, these are small-run products in a niche hobby and the reality is that the sales seem to be unaffected by concerns over quality so that means that nothing will change.

 

[Dragon-Slayer]

Did he miss: Page 99, Evolved Wraith, Ability score should be Int 14, instead of just "14", right after Con - ?

 

[Imruphel]

Why blame only the editor? For as many errors as wind up in the final work, every designer that works on such a project has to be held responsible. A mistake can't get past the editor unless it is made before it gets to the editor. Who were the designers who worked on this book and why don't they know the rules well enough to avoid originating so many, many errors?

I agree.

The issue is not so much the editing as what appears to be an essentially flawed design process. There has to be a commitment to quality all along the chain and I don't think there is.

 

[schnee]

Why blame only the editor? For as many errors as wind up in the final work, every designer that works on such a project has to be held responsible.

Um, no. I've been in publishing and design for ten years, and I can tell you that's not how it is or how it should be. Designers are responsible for visuals, layout and formatting, not content. Editors and writers are responsible for the words. It's as simple as that... if a designer is proofing you're wasting everyone's time.

I bet all these errors crept in because the editorial staff was relying on other people too much. Editing is tough work, and it definitely takes a professional to make a book of this complexity work.

 

[edbonny]

Um, no. I've been in publishing and design for ten years, and I can tell you that's not how it is or how it should be. Designers are responsible for visuals, layout and formatting, not content. Editors and writers are responsible for the words. It's as simple as that... if a designer is proofing you're wasting everyone's time.

I bet all these errors crept in because the editorial staff was relying on other people too much. Editing is tough work, and it definitely takes a professional to make a book of this complexity work.

Are you speaking of game design or graphic design? Game design is all writing and so the game designer is responsible for putting the words on the page initially. If you are speaking of graphic design, then you are right about not proofing.

- Ed

 

[Felon]

The truth of the matter, though, is that mistakes happen in technical books, whether they are game books, or math textbooks, or science manuals. It's not new, it's not out of the ordinary, and it's not unexpected by anyone. Whether you feel WotC is committing an egregious number of errors or not, the process of errors creeping into documents or past editors is not a new one.

Wow, a blithely shameless defense for shoddy editing...from a freelance editor no less. You speak as if Mystery Man and any other consumer who expects the editors to pour over the drafts tirelessly to prevent the copious amounts of errors contained in recent releases is just being silly. We're not just talking about a few typos here and there.

If you figure out a way to stop it, let the world know. I'm sure publishers everywhere will beat a path to your door.

Here's a way: try to only employ editors who have have some sort of standard of excellence, rather than this lax "oh well, this sort of thing happens and should be accepted" cop-out.

I'm trying to put my finger on what it is about your comments that are so unacceptable. The basic arguement that perfection is an unattainable goal is pretty valid. I guess it's not just your glib reaction to such sloppy work in a none-too-cheap published product, but also the snidely derisive tone you direct towards MM for even bringing up the subject, and the closing remark that suggests it's his burden to figure out a way for editors to do their job right. Reality check: it was those editors' job to make sure that the consumer got his money's worth.

Why blame only the editor? For as many errors as wind up in the final work, every designer that works on such a project has to be held responsible. A mistake can't get past the editor unless it is made before it gets to the editor.

But when it comes to proofing, the editor is where the buck stops. The writer's main job is to create the content. He can't tell the editor "sorry, I can't meet the deadline to give you a draft by Friday because I want to make sure it's error-free before anyone else gets to see it". The transition from draft to final copy is the editor's perogative and responsibility.

 

[Vigilance]

What I think people aren't understanding is that RPG books breed errors.

When the statblocks for a book are written, they are probably correct. Then let's say the monster gets playtested, and he's a little too tough for the desired CR. So a change in the monster's Strength and Dexterity are called for.

This requires a change in the monster's attack and full attack lines, Reflex save, AC, initiative and a bunch of skills.

Let's say 10 items need to be changed. If you get 9 of them, you have committed an error of the magnitude mentioned in the review (by and large- some of the errors are serious).

So what I'm hearing from some of the more indignant posters in this thread is, that 90% accuracy should lead to the writer of the monster and all the editors involved being fired.

I dont think 90% accuracy is "sloppy" nor am I being "glib" about quality control Felon.

Chuck

 

[Sammael]

I am sorry, but all it takes to fix most of the errors is giving a person well-versed in rules the final draft to read through once before it is sent to the printers. This may take a week of time, at most, and I am positive that 99% of the people here would do it for a free copy of the final published product (i.e. practically for free).

 

[rounser]

Let's say 10 items need to be changed. If you get 9 of them, you have committed an error of the magnitude mentioned in the review (by and large- some of the errors are serious).

So what I'm hearing from some of the more indignant posters in this thread is, that 90% accuracy should lead to the writer of the monster and all the editors involved being fired.

I dont think 90% accuracy is "sloppy" nor am I being "glib" about quality control Felon.

Garden-variety programmers face exactly the same problem (of one required alteration cascading to make other things out of date) and are held to higher standards than this. Admittedly they have compilers to check the code for syntax errors, and testers to look for the bugs, but then, authors have editors to do the same.