John Cooper's Revenge - MM3 errata

BOZ · Jan 29, 2005

now see, they really just need to *hire* john cooper. he obviously has the time on his hands to do this stuff, why not make it his job?

3d6 · Jan 29, 2005

The errata given for the death giant is incorrect. A death giant has an initiative modifier of +8 (+1 Dexterity, +7 Charisma; see guardian souls ability) not +1, as given in the errata. The book gives the correct number.

Richards · Jan 29, 2005

I think the problem is that John's errata list (from his review of MM3) originally contained some errors itself, which he later corrected as people pointed them out. (Of course, I haven't managed to gain access to the d20 Reviews page since the server upgrade, so I can't go double-check this.) It looks like WotC used his "original" errata list for their errata list, rather than his "updated" one.

Johnathan

Darrin Drader · Jan 29, 2005

alsih2o said:
You kow, the ceramic book publishing market is even smaller than the gamer market, and they put out dozens of error free books every year. Many with only 1 author.

And I'm sure the technical complexity of glaze is identical to gaming books. I look forward to the essay on this.

The rate of error amongst some publishers work should be a point of shame. Humans, sarcastic gasp or not, put out better work with fewer erroir in nearly every other field.

Prove it.

And sarcasm from WOTC employees like yourself really doesn't help. In fact, I would say it hurts.

As a FORMER-WotC employee (one of the few to leave by choice in the past five years), I'm free to spout whatever opinion I wish. I do not speak for the company anymore, so you'll have to forgive me if I refuse to censor my opinions.

Why do people keep confusing editors and developers? They are two totally different groups of people. Editos check language, grammar, etc., while the developers check the accuracy of the game stats. In general, WotC books contain fewer spelling and gramatical errors than books put out by any other company in this industry. The developers have the awesome responsibility of taking a metric buttload of raw work, deconstructing it, playtesting it, reworking it, and checking for errors. You think a lot of errors make it through to print? You should see the rough versions. These guys are the heroes of the R&D department, and they deserve praise, not derision.

John Cooper has it easy. By the time he gets it, almost everything has already been corrected and he just goes about finding the anomalies that slipped through. Keep in mind that a company like Hasbro, which is already on the ropes because of their enormous and unmanageable debt, simply won't allow the publishing department the headcount they need to get the perfection certain people are demanding. Given the number of products WotC releases every year and the number of people they have on staff, its a miracle they turn out as well as they do.

Of course WotC has another option. They can increase their headcount, catch more incidental mistakes, and then increase the price of the average book to about $50. I'm sure that would prove to be a popular decision.

edit: And why in the world would WotC want to hire John Cooper? Errata is inevitable regardless of who you have on the development team. The work and time he's putting into his reviews is about equal to one salaried employee. Why would they want to start paying him for it when he's already giving it to them for free?

Darkness · Jan 29, 2005

Starman said:
I don't see Wizards getting on the ball and fixing the error problem anytime soon, but I do see a solution for us. Everyone here on the boards can pitch in some money to "hire" John Cooper to edit every D&D/d20/OGL product for us and he can put up the errata here on the boards. The funds will have to cover buying all of these books and then paying John to do this. The enormity of the task means it will have to be his full time job, but I think he's up to the task.

I think checking books as a community project is a more feasible option.

Abstraction said:
There's errors like: this monster should have +7 to Jump, not +6. Then there's errors like: The Halfling Outrider doesn't need a BAB. I think Wizards has had a wakeup call about the grievous errors.

Not updating the summon undead spells to 3.5 even though they aren't compatible with the new skeletons and zombies falls in the latter category. They've even done that more than once.

JoeGKushner · Jan 29, 2005

Eremite said:
Um, yes, but that's because they need to publish errata. :\

I don't mean that sarcastically: the reality is that the development process at WotC leaves too much to be desired but that's been covered in a plethora of other threads.

The reality is that WoTC could be exactly like other companies and not release timely and efficient errata. Many companies do not publish errata.

ColonelHardisson · Jan 29, 2005

JoeGKushner said:
The reality is that WoTC could be exactly like other companies and not release timely and efficient errata. Many companies do not publish errata.

Exactly, and maddeningly, true. WotC takes a lot of guff for their errata, as if the fact that few other companies release errata at all means they have no errors in their books. Believe me, I've seen enough non-WotC product to know that just ain't so. Should WotC be held to a higher standard? I think so, simply due to them having the resources others don't, but not to the extent that many seem to hold them up to.

alsih2o · Jan 30, 2005

Whisperfoot said:
And I'm sure the technical complexity of glaze is identical to gaming books. I look forward to the essay on this.

Sure, you just get to where you understand glazes as well as I understand gaming and we will be set, until then I can only trust that you can see a correlation between a formula and a formula.

Are you honestly saying ALL publishers have an error rate approaching WoTC's?

Nightcloak · Jan 30, 2005

Whisperfoot said:
John Cooper has it easy. By the time he gets it, almost everything has already been corrected and he just goes about finding the anomalies that slipped through. Keep in mind that a company like Hasbro, which is already on the ropes because of their enormous and unmanageable debt, simply won't allow the publishing department the headcount they need to get the perfection certain people are demanding. Given the number of products WotC releases every year and the number of people they have on staff, its a miracle they turn out as well as they do.

I'm going to jump into the fire by first supporting Whisperfoot and then by pointing out how the fans are right also. I sure that'll make everyone happy

First, as a business manager with experience in budgets and working within established goals as defined by a parent company, board, etc. I can assure the following. WotC is working within whatever guidelines Hasbro has established. And as Whisperfoot has stated - Hasbro has their own issues to worry about for all of their divisions. Further, WotC is taking those directives and applying them to their departments as they best see to accomplish said goals. That doesn't leave a lot of room for the developers, or the other departments. They could very well be doing the best they can with the available budget, goals, resources made available by the layers of management above them.

Whisperfoot is right to stand up for the developers. They are mostly likely doing the best they can within the established environment and company objectives. Considering how lean Wotc has become, they are most likely excelling in that environment (most people in the RPG industry love the business, and those who work in an industry they genuinely like are motivated to excel above corporate standards). Product dissatisfaction needs to be taken to the leadership directly who is in a position to either change the conditions the developers work in or take the case above them to their bosses.

Second, as a manager in the field of production and distribution, I have experience with quality control. Quality control is the means of assuring low budget success in the modern JIT environment. As an example, GE was on the ropes many years ago. One of their problems was the unreliability if their products. The new CEO came in, issued some value directives (and fired any manager that didn't sign on!) and issued one major goal: There would be only 6 errors in one million parts. Everyone thought that was more than ambitious, but out right crazy. The thing is, he did it. GE quickly became successful, went out of debt, and made butt loads of money: He created some 4 billion dollars in wealth plus saved the pensions of tens of thousands of people, all by issuing standards to management and standards to quality control and then making them happen. And he did it without losing money.

The point of all of this. Developers may be working within an established environment, but the management at WotC can use their position as leaders to change that environment. If GE can hit 6 errors per million without losing money then the management at WotC can get the developers of their products the standards and resources needed to hit the goals of their job.