Why is there no talk about the Castle Keepers Guide preview?

[mattcolville]

So, Crusaders, don't judge the content by the writing style, enjoy the load of content and support the book gives.

Presentation is part of Design.

 

[Treebore]

Let's not overstate the writing and editing quality of the CKG.

What point are you trying to make about "page XX?" I can't even discern how it's pertinent to this discussion. It's unfortunate when editing errors occur, but that's a whole different scenario than a general lack of good editing.



They cost the same as anyone else that uses POD on the cheap. And I would be reluctant to purchase hard copy from them, anyway, consider the extent of changes between 1st and 4th edition. I understand it was reader feedback tthat helped them fix some bad math in their original presentation of the SIEGE mechanics.

Could you try to be fair and compare apples to apples? The Trolls have 4 full time employees and a number of part time and per project employees that those who sell on the cheap at Lulu and Drivethru "on the cheap" do not.

So if your going to try and criticize the Trolls at least do it fairly with fair comparisons.

As for their writing, I buy tons of RPG's, yes, their style of writing is different, but their editing is on par with everyone elses. For example, I have seen many people claim that Troll Lord products are "riddled throughout" with spelling and other similar editing errors. You know the most I have ever found in ANY TLG book? 18. Only 18. That is the highest number in any one product. If that is "riddled throughout" than people with those kinds of opinions must not be fans of WOTC, especially 4E, since they are in excess of 100 pages of errata, etc...

So if you want to criticize TLG, please do it fairly and honestly. I can handle it. In fact, when you are right, I will agree with you. Asks the Trolls, when they screw up ask them which fan will be the most likely to call them to task over it and I bet they will say "Treebore".

Ask them which fan as the first to tell them they screwed up over the CKG PDF pricing. Me. Ask them who is usually the first to post about any problem on their boards, and they will most likely answer with "Treebore". So I may be a fan, but I will call them out on mistakes. Which I do. Just ask the Trolls.

But I do it fairly, I compare apples to apples, I actually count hard numbers of actual errors, I actually complain about errors they make that none of the other RPG companies make. I compare them to Paizo, WOTC, Green Ronin and Mongoose all the time, so I am very aware that their quality of work is completely on par.

I know that their customer relations is the next closest to Paizo in the whole RPG community. I know their response to fan input is completely on par with Paizo. I know that when you meet the Trolls in person they are just as cool a group of people to meet as those who work for Paizo. They are equally as responsive, equally as open to talk about their products, etc...

So hen looked at and compared fairly, TLG is one of the best over all RPG companies around. That is NOT blind fan boy crap, that is cold, hard, fair comparison type fact.

 

[catsclaw227]

They cost the same as anyone else that uses POD on the cheap. And I would be reluctant to purchase hard copy from them, anyway, consider the extent of changes between 1st and 4th edition. I understand it was reader feedback tthat helped them fix some bad math in their original presentation of the SIEGE mechanics.

Wait -- is C&C already in 4th edition?????

Or are you talking about the differences in D&D 1e thru 4e?

 

[GreyLord]

Yeah. Paizo is selling a quality product at a price point even people who don't normally buy PDFs might pay, and C&C is selling 5th grade English for premium prices.

I'm a little confused here...you put down C&C english and don't see the parallels with bad grammar in Paizo....

I think you are looking at things through tinted glasses...

I'd probably have as much red on Paizo products as Trolllord products.

This is why there is irony in the entire conversation about editing of RPG books. Everyone seems to ignore their own favorite brand whilst pointing out STYLISTIC errors (not GRAMMAR typically) in other RPG books.

I see it all the time where people try to put their own writing style into their editing. Let's be clear...I'm NOT impressed with ANY RPG company's (well there is one that is decent, but if I stated it, people in the know of what I do WOULD SAY I'm being biased) writing or editing. I'm not put off by any of them either...UNLESS it actually interferes with my understanding of their rules.

Paizo doesn't fall into that boat and Trolllords do not fall in that lot either. They both put out decently readable products.

If you talk about formats...at least webformats...RPG.net has the worst FORMAT of most websites that I've been too. People commenting of format styles from that site should work on improving THAT site first. It's almost impossible to find things specific on that site, I end up using google to find anything, if I even visit.

Color me unimpressed with comments found on any threads there...and any crossflow to here from that thread. They need to repair their own stuff first...at least they've improved it a little bit from a few years ago, but it still needs a LOT of work.

Edit PS: More on the topic, I don't think I'd buy the PDF...but then as a general rule I don't buy PDF's that are over 0.00 in costs anyways. I don't like reading on a computer. I prefer to browse hardcopy. If I WERE going to do things via a computer, I probably still wouldn't buy Trolllord's PDFs, not in my price range. For Pathfinder, I wouldn't use their PDF, I'd just use there rules that are already online. Easy to go to what you need, and THAT is actually REALLY WELL FORMATTED IN MY OPINION for a website.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

What point are you trying to make about "page XX?" I can't even discern how it's pertinent to this discussion. It's unfortunate when editing errors occur, but that's a whole different scenario than a general lack of good editing.

A chronic problem with editing from the #2 RPG company for more than a decade isn't "unfortunate editing errors," it's a complete indifference to quality control. But no one is tearing their shirt and screaming that they'll never buy a White Wolf game. Likewise, their style, particularly in the oWoD was definitely an acquired taste, and was more florid and purple than any other publisher I've come across. (It was originally meant to evoke Anne Rice, I think, and mutated from there.)

They cost the same as anyone else that uses POD on the cheap.

This is a new way of using "print on demand" that I don't understand, I think, or an abbreviation I don't recognize.

 

[pawsplay]

Wait -- is C&C already in 4th edition?????

Yup.

 

[pawsplay]

I have a good impression of the Troll Lords guys; they seem like really nice folks. I admire their creativity, too; producing a game line is no small feat. However, in all honesty, the editing and writing are completely sub-par. In comparison to other publishers, they do not even clear the front door. Treebore, there are probably 18 errors just in Stephen's acknowledgements; I will excuse that section from the analysis on the basis that an introduction is a less formal section.

 

[pawsplay]

Here are my thoughts while reading the first three paragraphs of the, uh, pre-Introduction of the CKG preview. This is basically the first part of the text proper.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Well to me, who had heard of nothing about this label of bad grammar/english, the CKG is as good as any other RPG book I have read. Certainly not perfect but a pleasant read... although small. Whether it is mathematically sound, unlike 4E was at the start (monster solos and skill challenges etc) I don't know as I haven't played it.

EDIT: LOL Paws you an engerlish teacher? None of those bothered me and/or I didn't notice them. Spelling mistakes annoy me (although as some who spells using the Queen's English, you get used to poor spelling from US products ) as do 'continuity' type errors. But I guess my grammar is so poor I am not affected (effected?) by sub-par prose.

 

[Votan]

Yeah. Paizo is selling a quality product at a price point even people who don't normally buy PDFs might pay, and C&C is selling 5th grade English for premium prices.

I think we can agree that we have different opinions of the TrollLord games products. I rather like C&C as an interesting take on the game. I agree that the writing has issues but I would also argue that Paizo has some of the best production quality out there.

Many companies would suffer by comparison to them (Paizo).

The real thing I liked about C&C was the attempt to minimize rule bloat and still have a fun/usable system. Do they completely succeed? No, they do not. Have they convinced me to buy their products? Yes. Has their slow production schedule cost them players? Yes, my Seattle gaming group might have gone C&C when we left 3.5 D&D except that they were having trouble keeping the Player's Handbook in print and the CKG appeared to delayed. We ended up using Rolemaster, instead.

On the other hand, my perfect bound copy is still in transit so maybe I will be eating my words when it arrives. I am hoping that it is full of good ideas, for which I will forgive the editing and prose. If the good ideas are lacking then the production quality will start really mattering.