Ouch man, very ouch.
Disappointment about the numerous Errata...
- Thread starter Elianka
- Start date
Might as well name some names, Shonner.
mechascorpio
SOC-12
That's like blaming those who lined up in advance of The Phantom Menace for what ended up on-screen. And that metaphor is, I suspect, appropriate.
Not at all. It's not the buyers of the game, who have been waiting for it, who are at fault. Can't blame customers for this game's problems.
Actually... 3.x was officially Greyhawk - the encoded elements (deities, spell names) are in fact those of Greyhawk. (As was the case for AD&D 1E, as well. Grayhawk Adventures didn't add any classes, nor modify them. It did add options for 0-Level characters, and detail out the world a bit; the AD&D1E Greyhawk box provided the core maps.)
That the books don't have fluff text about the world doesn't mean they are settingless - the majority of the OTU's tropes are encoded in rules.
But, yes, agreed, no explicit setting does not equal toolkit.
T5, however, is built with a toolkit mentality. That is, the various components are intended to be useful with or without the totality, and the core mechanics don't need all the various bits to be functional.
I was in the Beta group. Life was busy for me then, so actual participation was low, however I read the threads with interest and I can assure you there was VOLUMINOUS feedback, suggestions, corrections, ideas, and concerns submitted. This was taking place from the minute I signed up to right up until DonM had to put a break in the collected information because MARC decided it was time to go to print.
Can't address Q1.
Q2. As it was a Kickstarter project, not backed by some corporation, I'll suggest that yes, less money was spent than probably a big publishing house would have, at the same time, yes, we fanboys can indeed overlook the errors and use what's there. I have to admit that I am mechanics lite kind of GM and the little things don't bother me. As someone pointed out, a 2-3% error rate isn't all that bad.
Q3. So, what exactly are the "current professional standards" for formatting, editing, and indexing an RPG? I'll suggest there aren't ANY. Having hear downthread from the professional librarian who agreed an index is nice, but not necessary, I think that perhaps some other game companies may be spoiling you a bit. Certainly none of the games I own have an index. That being said, there are utilities that can be had to index a text automatically. Having had first hand experience with this in a technical field, they such. I spent many, many hours fixing the output of the automatic indexer.
Q4. Why taking action after publication? You'd prefer they did not?
My personal take: I did not invest in the book - I got the CD as a beta person and I also contributed to the kickstarter because I could, not because I needed to. It is my HOPE that some later edition will be updated from the files to reflect any errata that the helpful fans on this forum will assist in identifying and correcting.
Meanwhile, I will be happy to search the PDF and print only what I really need on paper.
Ideally, in this electronic age, anyone that Marc can positively identify as a purchaser should be allowed to get any updated edition as a free download, but that's just my opinion.
Life's too short to worry about whether or not something was published in a 100% perfect state. If it's not your cup of tea, I am sure e-bay has plenty of potential buyers. In the meanwhile, join the community and help make our favorite SFRPG better.
The reason for there being no index, is at least part of the blame samich I will eat, as honestly folks I never thought of bringing it up.
Why not, I am sure you are wondering, well, because I don't think I have ever used an index for any gaming book. Hell, I rarely use them in non-fiction books, so for me it wasn't an issue till everyone started bagging T5 for not having one. I guess it is like the dice tables, turns out that several people dig them when I thought they were neat but not worth putting in. Turns out I was wrong (true, it does happen sometimes, but not often), sort of like I never thought of an index for a gaming book.
So, if it makes you feel better to blame someone, you can blame me. I can take it, I put my grown up skin on today.
Now, as to your complaints regarding Personal Combat, those I got nothing for, but since I run abstract (extremely rules light) most of the time, I suspect I shall continue to be a raving fan boy and love that too.
And people, really, the Book is coming, have some patience. I got my name it and just got my stuff, so when you are feeling put out, remember that.
Now all that said, be aware this is just me, I don't speak for Marc or FFE here in anyway, just as a Beta participant. Which by the way may have been part of why it has some errata (other than huge projects are never perfect), we were constantly changing things to try and make it all work together.
Sorry it isn't your cup of tea and that some of you still don't have your stuff yet, but I hope in the future you will give it second chance (and that you all get your stuffs soon).
Magnus,
I, too, was a Beta. Many of us concentrated on one or two areas of the rules. For example, I looked at Trade and Commerce and Starship Construction. So, I think there was a bit of tunnel vision on our part sometimes. Frankly, I never really looked at the combat rules because I am a "look for a non-combat solution" kinda guy.
Also, when the same people are looking over something, there are bound to be some things missed.
Some sections didn't see the light of day until a few months before the final release.
I am not trying to make excuses, but I agree that with a project this big this is bound to happen.
Yamsi
The reason for there being no index, is at least part of the blame samich I will eat, as honestly folks I never thought of bringing it up.
Why not, I am sure you are wondering, well, because I don't think I have ever used an index for any gaming book. Hell, I rarely use them in non-fiction books, so for me it wasn't an issue till everyone started bagging T5 for not having one. I guess it is like the dice tables, turns out that several people dig them when I thought they were neat but not worth putting in. Turns out I was wrong (true, it does happen sometimes, but not often
So, if it makes you feel better to blame someone, you can blame me. I can take it, I put my grown up skin on today.
Now, as to your complaints regarding Personal Combat, those I got nothing for, but since I run abstract (extremely rules light) most of the time, I suspect I shall continue to be a raving fan boy and love that too.
And people, really, the Book is coming, have some patience. I got my name it and just got my stuff, so when you are feeling put out, remember that.
Now all that said, be aware this is just me, I don't speak for Marc or FFE here in anyway, just as a Beta participant. Which by the way may have been part of why it has some errata (other than huge projects are never perfect), we were constantly changing things to try and make it all work together.
Sorry it isn't your cup of tea and that some of you still don't have your stuff yet, but I hope in the future you will give it second chance (and that you all get your stuffs soon).
If you want do something about it, how about starting with making an electronic downloadable index available on this site then?
Personally, I like the reference tables for probabilities in the front of the book - and generally the intro sections of the game are exactly how I envisioned them. I just don't see how a pretty core system like personal combat can be overlooked like that through play testing, or the issues over clear explanations and tables.
Various things.
See, there you go, me I never would have put them in (the probability tables that is). Glad there are things you do like.
I think the reason may be some us like yamsi and I aren't big on combat, so we just never looked at or used it. To us combat is not a pretty core section, but a section we use when we have really screwed the pooch and things are officially "ugly" with like guns and fighting things happening. (Violence being the last resort of the intelligent human and all. Plus, His Imperial Majesty really doesn't like seeing His Peerage in the Crime pages. 
)
Just to be clear (this an edit and), I said I would bear some blame for there not being an index, not that I wanted to do something about it.
I have no intention of creating a document that I have both no need for or time to create being a smidge busy with other T5 projects (not mention the rest of my currently slightly more dramatic than I like it life). Now, if you want to pay me to then maybe I could squeeze in some time, but I seem to recall a couple of people here are willing to do so (and not for pay either) which is probably what you want.
in reverse order...
See, there you go, me I never would have put them in (the probability tables that is). Glad there are things you do like.
I think the reason may be some us like yamsi and I aren't big on combat, so we just never looked at or used it. To us combat is not a pretty core section, but a section we use when we have really screwed the pooch and things are officially "ugly" with like guns and fighting things happening. (Violence being the last resort of the intelligent human and all. Plus, His Imperial Majesty really doesn't like seeing His Peerage in the Crime pages. )Just to be clear (this an edit and), I said I would bear some blame for there not being an index, not that I wanted to do something about it.
I have no intention of creating a document that I have both no need for or time to create being a smidge busy with other T5 projects (not mention the rest of my currently slightly more dramatic than I like it life). Now, if you want to pay me to then maybe I could squeeze in some time, but I seem to recall a couple of people here are willing to do so (and not for pay either) which is probably what you want.
L
lordmalachdrim
Guest
Only answer I have is this is a mythos book for Cthulhu pretending to be a game.
That thought crossed my mind more than once. At first I thought it was amusing.
Now it just reminds me of how religions fracture.
Orthodox Travellerian: "Clearly the lord intended THIS by the rules on page blah-de-blah."
Adherent of the Order of the Crimson Traveller: "No No No, clearly he intended THAT."
And now I'm stuck with Monty Python, "He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy."
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
Malachdrim, cutter, you guys say that like we haven't had orthodoxy issues since CT...
And, just remember....
No one expects the SPANISH INQUISITION!
And, just remember....
No one expects the SPANISH INQUISITION!
Indeed, but like D&D et al, this was mostly warfare between followers of specific editions. Now we have folk who can't even agreed what the rules are in the same edition.
Captain Benjamin L. Willard: They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.
Colonel Walter E. Kurtz: Are my methods unsound?
Captain Benjamin L. Willard: I don't see any method at all, sir.
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
You ain't been watchin' the CT thread then. There is orthodoxy warfare within CT alone! We have people who can't agree about almost anything in there.
I think orthodoxy warfare is canon; and remember, never get off the boat. Even for fresh mangoes.
Really? Sounds grim.
But at you've given me idea for GunMaker 2.0, an addition for GM04, p.252
Category: Artillery (includes Guns, Can
on, AutoCanon, GatlingCode: Omg
Descriptor: Orthodoxy
TL: =0
Range: infinite
Mass: x0.0
qreBs: +5
H2: Psi
D2: +1D
H3: Sound
D3: +1D
Hits (v1): + 2D
Cr: x6.7
There might be some errata in there, but we'll clear that up after the KickStarter.
