To update or not to update? That is the question.

[delericho]

Now, that said, I would greatly prefer a "two-step" errata process. First, about two months after release, an errata doc that cleans up any editing issues in Book X. Then a maybe annual update that 'fixes' any major discovered issues system wide.

I could go for this. Although my preference would be that each individual book gets errata'd twice, rather than, potentially, annually. If they find any issues after that, they should have live with them. If a new option causes an old option to become broken, it is the new option that should be errata'd, or removed, IMO.

 

[Abraxas]

I agree with The Jester - and I would add the ability to toggle on or off the various updates to class abilities/powers/feats in the CB.

The difficulty with updates and my current games is that often people have different understandings of how various rules work. This occurs because player A has the updated version and player B doesn't and we have to stop and figure out who is right. (And this isn't as simple as logging into the compendium - we don't always have access.)

 

[Zaran]

I actually love getting errata because I think the game isn't perfect. Do I always agree with what they change? Of course not but I rather they keep going over everything and eventually get to the stuff that I would like to see fixed.

I would actually like to see this errata make it into print though. I've had whole campaigns stop because of errata. They make it seem like reprinting old books with errata is not cost effective but since rumor has it alot of the core books are going out of print, I don't see why they can't make a second printing with the errata. I'd buy the books over again. Especially since mine are getting worn.

I definately wouldn't buy a new PHB to replace my old one without the errata. I see no point.

 

[aurance]

Errata is good. You could always choose not to use it.

A more complicated question is how should that errata be presented, as Zaran alluded to. There are different answers to this, but each seems to have its own particular set of draw-backs.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I have not problem with the existance of errata and for Living campaigns and stuff like encoutners erratta is a necssity but in general I ignore erratta or would if not for the character bulider.

The fact tha powers change mid campaign does not bother me or my players.

 

[DracoSuave]

I'm okay with it as it is now.

It's not like the 3rd edition days when something could be broken out of the box (I'm looking at you Sword and Fist!) or a game element was eratta'd every time they printed a book (What do Polymorph and Wild Shape do this month?) or where an entire revision edition was printed just to errata everything from the ground up.

I4th edition 'patching' isn't as bad as people make it out to be.

 

[Sunseeker]

Updates are not always warranted, but they are always necessary. Broken powers make it into play either on accident or by the nature of power creep. Updates are useful to help keep all of this under control, though I think a lot of it could be prevented by simply releasing material less often. Rushed content additions are often the ones most flawed.

Playing systems that are dead are great if they're balanced, but a broken system that doesn't update is just bad.

 

[mudlock]

I've never been a DDI subscriber, but I do use all the updated rules. One day in an effort to save myself some time in the future, I sat down with my PHB and a pack of those little adhesive pointers (like you'd use to point out "sign here" on a document) and tried to mark out each place where there was an update.

I ran out somewhere between Warlock and Wizard.

Which sounds like it would be huge argument toward me saying that there's too many updates, but you know what I realized? 95% of them are trivial. Adding the word "weapon" before "attack", or the word "attack" between "encounter" and "power"; adding the "healing" keyword to a power that heals; clarifying that you can't cleave into the guy you just hit; making a power that cancels stun be "no action" instead of a can't-be-taken-while-stunned immediate action. Yes, there's *something* that's been changed on just about every other page, but if you look only at major changes, there really isn't that much there.

Look at fighters in the PHB: people flipped out about Rain of Blows and, more recently, Come and Get It (and it's epic upgrade, Warrior's Urging.) Those were major changes, no doubt about it, but then the detractors held them up as *examples* of the changes... but that just isn't the case. RoB and CaGI aren't examples of the changes, they basically are the only changes (of consequence) for Fighters in the PHB. And even the detractors admit they were GOOD changes! Usually they'll say "Yeah, those ones are good, but there are just *too many changes*." Madness!

95% of the errata are tiny or obvious; they'll help avoid the occasional argument over what the rules should mean or should have meant. The other 5% (let's call them "critical updates"; haha!) are solid changes; generally making powers that were way too good not to take a little less good (RoB and CaGI), or powers that were too bad to ever use a little more viable (no one argues about those changes; like when a huge number of cleric utilities became minor actions).

Would I have done some things differently? Yeah. I would have resolved the "free action attacks" problem differently, and handled all the little things that had to have a "non-minion" inserted before "enemy" differently. But what WotC has done works just fine.

Is the game fun and playable with no updates? Sure is, and if you don't want to bother with them, rock on. But it's even better with them, and usually the only argument you'll have with anyone goes "That killer thing you've got, the one that seems too good to be true? Yeah... it's no longer true."

 

[mudlock]

This occurs because player A has the updated version and player B doesn't and we have to stop and figure out who is right.

Example?

What kind of campaign have you got where characters regularly have identical powers or items or whatever, LFR? And how bad is it if Bob has an extra [W] written down; give both Bob and Larry the extra [W] and sort it out before next week.

 

[Raith5]

I like the idea of annual updates.

In hindsight I liked what happened with the Cleric update. They created an update, listed to the feedback (to their credit) and in end had a balanced and usable update.