Maths errors in RPGs

[JoeGKushner]

And the slow posting time for errata is another area where WoTC falls WAY behind. WAY behind.

 

[jdrakeh]

Do other RPGs have this problem?

Yes. . . well, math errors, anyhow (not necessarily in stat blocks). Often times, math gets screwy in examples (e.g., examples do not mathematically reflect the written rules), I've noticed. The 5th Edition of HERO System (not FRED), for example, contained numerous minor math errors. That said, I think that math errors are often overlooked by consumers if not explicitly pointed out by publishers.

 

[jdrakeh]

And why isn't there some amazing tool that can help with this?

There is such a tool! It is called a "proofreader"

That said, game publishers don't pay enough to command the level of excellence from these "proofreaders" that they are capable of providing. Proofreading is a time consuming endeavor and a flat rate of $50, for example, won't get you more than $50 worth of work from a proofreader (and that isn't much).

In other sectors of publishing, proofreaders get paid enough to make a living, so their work is comparatively better than it is in the RPG sector (where they may get paid enough to keep their phone on, if they're lucky). That said, I understand that companies like Steve Jackson Games and WotC don't have the kind of money to throw at proofreaders that companies like Random House do.

 

[dcas]

Another thing is that mechanics (rules and stat-blocks) are not the only area in which one can find mathematical errors in RPGs. For example, there are at least two math errors in Gary Gygax's Yggsburgh hardback -- for one, the triangular lot on which the Green Dragon Inn (#57) is located is too small for the inn's main building. There is another error in the description of the Chapel & Priory (#23) -- the southern border of the lot is much too long given the lot's other dimensions.

It can be difficult for a proofreader or editor to pick up an errors like these unless (a) he knows a bit of geometry and (b) thinks it important enough to check.

 

[T. Foster]

Yes, lots of games have had mathematical errors in them in the past. Traveller had them, especially in the miniatures rules Striker and in MegaTraveller. Villains and Vigilantes had a formula for carrying capacity that was different than the words in the description. And other games which escape me at the moment all have errors in math in them. I think it happens due to folks not knowing math as well as they think they do. That and seeing the same numbers over and over you just start to think they are right.

There was a book of starship stats for MegaTraveller called Fighting Ships of the Shattered Imperium that were all so error-ridden and just plain broken by the game's starship design rules that wiseacre fans renamed the book Shattered Ships of the Fighting Imperium

 

[jdrakeh]

And the slow posting time for errata is another area where WoTC falls WAY behind. WAY behind.

To be fair, WotC isn't alone here -- and some companies simply dont provide errata. Green Ronin, for example, has no official compilation of errata for The Black Company book (I compiled an unofficial errata PDF for the product, but that's not the same thing), while Torchlight Games released errata for Dangerquest and then later yanked it from circulation (apparently because it called attention to the fact that Dangerquest was an error-riddled product that should have been held back for more editing prior to release). WotC, despite being slow with errata, has a much better handle on it than some publishers.

 

[Arashi Ravenblade]

Eh. Errors happen, sometimes they notice them, sometimes they dont. If it's like 1 or 2 points who cares. I could understand if there is like a +25 bonus where only a +2 should be. That is unexcusable.
But I'll give you an example of what I think is happening behind the scenes. I think someone goes through all the trouble to stat something up. Lets say it takes him 2 hours to get it right. But then notices he messed up and it's gonna take another 2 hours to reverse engineer what he did to try and fix it. The designer most likely looks at it and thinks "Oh well" and goes about his merry way. I know Ive done this with NPC's and in a d20 sourcebook im working on have noticed a messed up stat block but it's gonna take me time to fix it and I have other things to work on. So do I, or the other person working on the game, take time way to fix it which could be spent on something else or leave it alone. What if they are dealing with a time frame and there is no time to fix the stat block?

I think we need to get off our high horses and forgive a few errors here and there.

 

[Cam Banks]

There is such a tool! It is called a "proofreader"

Well, we do have proofreaders, but they take care of what proofreaders usually take care of, which is the body text. Stat blocks require people who know the rules well enough to spot the mistakes, so what typically happens is that we have at least two or three sets of eyes go over them. For Price of Courage, for instance, which has hundreds of NPC stat blocks, I went over them myself after they were done and had 2 other rules-savvy people read over the whole NPC appendix making corrections. I'm sure that even with that, some sneaked through.

What I really want is a diagnostic tool or creative spreadsheet that crunches the numbers for me so that when I adjust one or two things (like adding a level in or some magic item or another) it fixes them across the board.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[WhatGravitas]

Seriously.

Most of the errors arent enough to throw an encounter out of whack. That's why pretty much when I see a review with John Cooper's name attached to it I ignore it, no offense against the guy, but I know what to expect in his reviews and I avoid them accordingly.

That's the reason, why I read *every* John Cooper review - to see if there are glaring errors, that *have* consequences. Most are indeed errors, that are simply caused by the different versions of a monster in the various manuscript/edit/proofread-stages. And usually it doesn't affect me... but then, some errors are potentially out of whack - then I'm very happy about a John Cooper-review.

 

[jdrakeh]

Well, we do have proofreaders, but they take care of what proofreaders usually take care of, which is the body text.

I think that's a rather narrow view of what objective proofreaders are capable of and, perhaps, sheds a bit of light on why many more errors sneak into RPG books than say, college course books. Objective, third-party, proofreaders are hired to examine whole texts in other sectors of publishing -- not just descriptive text.