Post/Author/DateTime	Post
warrior-poet 11-08-04, 10:46 AM	Geez guys, do some EDITING for bleepsake!! The web preview states that the Green Star Adept gets a spellcaster level increase every even level, but then the chart shows a spellcaster level increase every third level... C'mon guys!!! Using a promo that is already flawed does not bode well for the completed work!!
Kratilim Valqui 11-08-04, 11:39 AM	It's true that they need to do their editing work better, but that's one error. If it has less errors than the CD I'll be satisfied..
Seeker95 11-08-04, 04:36 PM	It does not need errata. The FAQ already explains what to do when a table and descriptive text contradict. Further, have you ever considered that the web promo might be the culprit? I am confident that the vast majority of the armchair editors on these boards would fall flat on their respective (but all-too-often disrespectful) faces if asked to edit any of the WotC documents in their rough forms. Ask them to do it on top of a normal workload, and it'll be even worse. That said, WotC has already acknowledged that its editing standards have been less than acceptable in recent prooducts. However, thos eproducts are over a year in the making, while the staff changes at WotC are very recent. It will likely be second quarter of next year before we see the improvements take effect on new products.
warrior-poet 11-08-04, 04:44 PM	Gotta disagree with you there. Editing has been a long-standing problem and should have been addressed by now. Staffing problems are an insufficient explanation for ongoing lack of quality control. The fact that WoTC chose a flawed piece for one of its own promos is upsetting.
Seeker95 11-08-04, 04:49 PM	Staffing problems are an insufficient explanation for ongoing lack of quality control. The fact that WoTC chose a flawed piece for one of its own promos is upsetting.Staffing problems is a perfectly reasonable explanation. Unless you think there is a solution to the editing problems other than staffing. Not enough editors. The wrong editors. Either way it's staffing.
warrior-poet 11-08-04, 04:55 PM	Staffing is a concern in any organization, but a well run organization nows how to account for this and makes sure that it does not affect quality of product. WoTC has known for a LONG time that their editing was flawed, and they have not taken comprehensive measures to address this problem. But I don't want to get into a major snit about this. I will likely buy the book, I am just amused/dismayed that their own, self-selected, promo was flawed. This is not a good way to impress future buyers.
Zherog 11-08-04, 05:18 PM	Warrior-Poet, what you're missing from Seeker's original post is that the problem has been addressed by WotC. The problem is their production cycle is so far out into the future that you won't begin to see it until 2nd quarter of next year (Seeker's guess). Books that were past the "editing" stage when they hired the new editors are going to continue to reflect poorly on the staff. WotC did address the problem. Time will tell how well.
Wil_Hyral 11-08-04, 11:26 PM	Bottom line is that the text didn't follow the chart, and is thus erroneous. The fact that it's a promo is just tickling. No matter what anyone here (or in some insubstantial FAQ) says, the editing practices of WotC are easily substandard. And no matter what anyone says, the promo was done in this quarter; it doesn't take a whole six months for things to go to press for just using an FTP. Quite literally, the title of this thread is entirely accurate. Complete Arcane (meaning the contents therein) is already inconsistent with itself. There's nothing to discuss.
Seeker95 11-09-04, 02:45 PM	the promo was done in this quarter; it doesn't take a whole six months for things to go to press for just using an FTP. Complete Arcane (meaning the contents therein) is already inconsistent with itself. There's nothing to discuss.Slight flaw in your statements, based on contradictory assumptions. Either: The promo was done in this quarter Or: The promo is the contents of the Complete Arcane. If the promo was "made" this quarter, we cannot be sure it reflects the contents of Complete Arcane. If the promo reflects the contents of Complete Arcane, then it doesn't matter when it was done. Today's designers cannot alter the contents of the book. Either the gripe is one of ignorance of fact (commenting on something we cannot yet verify) or ignorange of curcumstance (we already know that editorial staff changes will not be reflected in current products). In either case, it is a gripe of ignorance.
pentagonal_penguin 11-10-04, 02:32 AM	Sure, errors are annoying, and WOTC should try and fix them. They've said they are, and on another thread, WotC_Mark said that this error was not in the book. But really, do the errors matter that much? There were a lot of error in complete divine, sure, but how many of them can't be interpreted correctly at first reading? Like the spell that appears on the aladin spell list. Is that really that hard to see what they meant?
warrior-poet 11-10-04, 09:56 AM	on another thread, WotC_Mark said that this error was not in the book. Is that really that hard to see what they meant? Thanks penguin. If they have corrected it for the book, then I am somewhat relieved, still they could have fixed it for their web promo too (should have been even easier). However in this case it is hard to see which would have been the correct interrpretation--spell caster level increase every even or every third level is a big difference, and not easy to discern from this prestige class.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-10-04, 10:19 AM	But really, do the errors matter that much? There were a lot of error in complete divine, sure, but how many of them can't be interpreted correctly at first reading? Like the spell that appears on the aladin spell list. Is that really that hard to see what they meant? Every once in a while, there are really bad errors. Like the Shining Piece of Crap of Heironeous. I'm talking about the whole class being mistake.
Zherog 11-10-04, 11:33 AM	Thanks penguin. If they have corrected it for the book, then I am somewhat relieved, still they could have fixed it for their web promo too (should have been even easier). However in this case it is hard to see which would have been the correct interrpretation--spell caster level increase every even or every third level is a big difference, and not easy to discern from this prestige class. Check out the Web Preview again - Mark updated it there to be correct.
Nyvinyd 11-10-04, 12:26 PM	The feeling I get from the sympathizers on this thread is basically, "It's okay that they're screwing up because they've told us already that they know they are." This is just not right. It seems to me that WotC just wants to keep making money, despite the quality of their product. Whether or not you have an "excuse," putting out a substandard product is still putting out a substandard product. If your excuse for doing so is the fact that you know you're doing so, that's even worse. "Yeah, we knew we put out the Pinto with the gas tank outside the frame. We're really sorry about that, but we restaffed our design team right before it went out, and the new staff just couldn't handle it I guess. Keep buying the car though, we'll make them better in the future! Sorry it blew up on ya!"
Seeker95 11-10-04, 12:38 PM	putting out a substandard product is still putting out a substandard product."Substandard" implies that there is a standard below which WotC is operating. Where are you getting your standards criteria from? I've played RPGs for the past 26 years, and have yet to find a set of game rules without typos, loopholes, and flat out errors. White Wolf, a fairly "mechanics-light" set of story-teller games manages to have just as many errors in each of its books as WotC. Its d20 books (Scarred Lands, et al) are also just as riddled with errors. The rule books have almost no spelling errors. The errors folks like to gripe about are generally cross-reference errors. Cross referencing game mechanics is the most difficult form of editing. It is made even more difficult as each mechanic is created at the same time as the mechanics it is referencing. An editor may catch a mechaincs reference error, make the edit, only to learn at the time of publication that the referenced mechanic was changed by another editor to comply with a different rule. It is the nature of game mechanics editing. So again I ask, what standard are you using? And where have you seen such a standard both set and met?
Incenjucar 11-10-04, 12:57 PM	WotC obviously has news paper, magazine, and college book editors. :P
Ogre4Hire 11-10-04, 01:16 PM	Every once in a while, there are really bad errors. Like the Shining Piece of Crap of Heironeous. I'm talking about the whole class being mistake. Yeah. The original version in Dragon Magazine was pretty cool, but the CD version was nerfed down to the power level of a 3.0 ranger. PS, if you think that WoTC has poor editting, you should try reading AEG.
Count Arioch the 28th 11-10-04, 08:33 PM	What did the Dragon magazine version look like? You don't need to spell out the entire class, but maybe a general overview of why it was different?
devinmdp 11-10-04, 10:20 PM	Sorry. I don't buy the whole production cycle routine. Even the newest publications have numerous errors in them. Libris Mortis is a good example. Right off the bat the first spell they have is broken because it fails to list a duration. There are numerous spelling errors. Etc. I've said it before and I will say it again. All WOTC has to do is not spend a dollar more. Just assign six volunteer players like us to pore through the drafts of new releases. Make them sign NDAs. Don't use these volunteers to replace the current editors. You don't want to rely on amateurs and non-employees entirely. But until someone tells me how having an extra half dozen to a dozen set of experienced eyes also looking at a draft would in any way harm WOTC or the product, I am convinced this is the way to go. World In Flames is a massive World War 2 tabletop wargame. The rules are complicated and voluminous and used to be riddled with loopholes and errors and inconsistencies you could drive a Mac Truck through. After years of complaining and cajoling, we finally got the game designer to let a select group of die hard players who sign NDAs to pore over proposed rules and new editions and hash through them for corrections. The WIF game is still not perfect, but it is in much better shape. I simply think that the editors WOTC hires are not dedicated D&Ders. They are likely professional editors. The problem is that they cannot discern a lot of "game-based" errors that experienced D&Ders could ferret out. I guarantee, for example, if I had been on the edit team I would have noted the lack of a duration of Avascular Mass IMMEDIATELY. I would also spot 3.0-isms in 3.5 works because to me they stand out like a sore thumb. A lot of experienced gamers are better at noting mistakes deeply imbedded in NPC stat blocks than would a non-D&D fanatic editor. Devin
Iku Rex 11-11-04, 07:02 AM	The feeling I get from the sympathizers on this thread is basically, "It's okay that they're screwing up because they've told us already that they know they are." Don't forget... "It's okay that they're screwing up because they do it based on carefully laid out rules." "It's okay that they're screwing up because it's possible to use their products despite of it." "It's okay that they're screwing up because other companies have been known to screw up too."
warrior-poet 11-11-04, 09:34 AM	Devinmdp has a point. From the feel of it, I doubt that the WotC editing crew are gamers. So many of the errors wouldn't stand out to someone with an MA in English, but are like a blaring lighthouse to anyone with D+D experience.
smileybob1 11-11-04, 10:08 AM	"Substandard" implies that there is a standard below which WotC is operating. Where are you getting your standards criteria from? I've played RPGs for the past 26 years, and have yet to find a set of game rules without typos, loopholes, and flat out errors. White Wolf, a fairly "mechanics-light" set of story-teller games manages to have just as many errors in each of its books as WotC. Its d20 books (Scarred Lands, et al) are also just as riddled with errors. The rule books have almost no spelling errors. The errors folks like to gripe about are generally cross-reference errors. Cross referencing game mechanics is the most difficult form of editing. It is made even more difficult as each mechanic is created at the same time as the mechanics it is referencing. An editor may catch a mechaincs reference error, make the edit, only to learn at the time of publication that the referenced mechanic was changed by another editor to comply with a different rule. It is the nature of game mechanics editing. So again I ask, what standard are you using? And where have you seen such a standard both set and met? i find your enthusiasm to bend over backwards and argue semantics, disconcerting to say the least. WOtC can give excuses all day. unfortunately most companies would never accept such **** poor quality control. if i turned in an assignment to my boss or professor, no matter how difficult the assignment may be, if the quality is lackluster no excuse in the world is going to make up for that. why should wizards get off this way when the rest of the world has to answer to another standard. and as for standards...there are standards page numbering, referencing, spelling, etc. why should these concepts be so difficult. within a week or so of reading the majority of the playing community can find them all, wizards has almost unlimited time to prepare a product (i know they have a schedule, but even 2 weeks of editing could find these errors). i would think that you might be able to find "standards" in much of the modern printed world. it is not rocket science (those people have no standards). and it is really disappointing that you would point to another rpg only to say "hey look they put out poorly edited books, everyone else should be allowed to do the same." what a great argument, because our competitors dont care, then we dont have to care...or we didnt care in the past so we dont have to care now, they will still by our books cause they are junkies. dont you find that to be distasteful, that they dont even care about putting out quality products because people like you will just stand in line and still shell out $30. its worse than catholic dogma. its like what WOtC says is law because it was inspired by god and you just accept it without thinking. and no, not all errors are easily worked out upon reading. if that was the case there would be no need for errata, rulings and updates. hope some of this finds a receptive ear, as this thread seems to be filled with fanboys who worship at the alter of WIZARDS
Count Arioch the 28th 11-11-04, 11:21 AM	You see, I'm cynical about the books. I don't expect to see any book from WotC that earns higher than a D if graded by a college english professor. (Which is higher than most game companies, I have noted. I've seen worse in other game books by other companies.) I don't expect them to ever get better. Maybe one day I'll be pleasantly surprised, but I doubt it. I now judge things by the Complete comparison. If it's better than any of the books in the Complete series, I consider it passable. Anything worse than the Complete series I won't buy. (For the record, I didn't buy warrior or divine for the exact reason that they were so obviously slapped together. I don't expect Arcane to be any different.)
smileybob1 11-11-04, 11:43 AM	You see, I'm cynical about the books. I don't expect to see any book from WotC that earns higher than a D if graded by a college english professor. (Which is higher than most game companies, I have noted. I've seen worse in other game books by other companies.) I don't expect them to ever get better. Maybe one day I'll be pleasantly surprised, but I doubt it. I now judge things by the Complete comparison. If it's better than any of the books in the Complete series, I consider it passable. Anything worse than the Complete series I won't buy. (For the record, I didn't buy warrior or divine for the exact reason that they were so obviously slapped together. I don't expect Arcane to be any different.) i dont know if that is cynical. you have just not choosen to by into their line of garbage...nothing wrong with that. in fact that is what i am talking about. you have good judgement skills, which is appearantly (at least according to this thread) to much to ask of any consumer. accepting that something is inferior or done improperly is fine. its the settling process that i have a problem with. people just accept things because wizards says so. i wish the rest of the world worked like this, on second thought maybe not ignorance is not bliss...dont just buy something because they tell you to. buy it because you want it or need it. because you are impressed with their work and you are proud of their product.
player1 11-11-04, 12:13 PM	Geez guys, do some EDITING for bleepsake!! The web preview states that the Green Star Adept gets a spellcaster level increase every even level, but then the chart shows a spellcaster level increase every third level... C'mon guys!!! Using a promo that is already flawed does not bode well for the completed work!! Reminds me of Soulknife BAB error in XPH preview. (and it was an error in book too, later fixed in errata)
player1 11-11-04, 12:15 PM	By the way, how does that barb4/sorc1 in example gain prerequisites to enter that PrC. I can't see a way for him to gain 8 ranks of Knowledge.
Iku Rex 11-11-04, 01:39 PM	By the way, how does that barb4/sorc1 in example gain prerequisites to enter that PrC. I can't see a way for him to gain 8 ranks of Knowledge.Prerequisites are doable by starting as barbarian, and not taking the sorcerer level last before going GSA. What I can't see is a way for him to get all the skills listed. 1st level barb 5x4 + 3 levels barb 5x3= 35 skill points from barbarian levels. The three skill points from sorcerer should go towards knowledge(arcana). Need 2+2+2+2+5 cross-class skills, 13x2= 26, leaving only 9 skill points to spare for 8 ranks of jump, 2 ranks of intimidate and 6 ranks of survival. And then he has to somehow get 3 more ranks of jump cross-class while gaining 6 ranks of concentration and three more knowledge ranks, for a total of 15 skill points out of 9 available. Am I missing something? :confused:
Zherog 11-11-04, 02:20 PM	Well, let's see what we can do... I'm pretty sure stat blocks include ability modifiers. If that's correct, here's how many ranks he has in each skill: Concentration: 6 ranks + 3 con mod Decipher Script: 2 ranks + 0 int mod Intimidate: 2 ranks + 1 cha mod Jump: 11 ranks + 4 str mod Knowledge: Arcana: 8 ranks + 0 int mod Knowledge: Architecture and Engineering: 3 ranks + 0 int mod Knowledge: Geography: 3 ranks + 0 int mod Knowledge: History: 3 ranks + 0 int mod Survival: 6 ranks + -1 wis mod So those are the number of ranks in each skill we're shooting for. First level - Barbarian 1. Five skill points per level * 4 for first character level = 20 points Decipher Script: spend 4 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Knowledge Arcana: spend 4 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Knowledge Architecture & Engineering: spend 4 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Knowledge Geography: spend 4 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Knowledge History: spend 4 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Second level - Barbarian 2. Five skill points Intimidate: spend 2 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Jump: spend 2 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Survival: spend 1 point for 1 rank; total 1 Third level - Barbarian 3. Five skill points Jump: spend 2 points for 2 ranks; total 4 Knowledge: Arcana: Spend 2 points for 1 rank; total 3 Survival: Spend 1 point for 1 rank; total 2 Fourth level - Barbarian 4. Five skill points Jump: Spend 3 points for 3 ranks; total 7 Survival: Spend 2 points for 2 ranks; total 4 Fifth level - Sorcerer 1. 3 skill points Knowledge: Arcana: Spend 3 points for 3 ranks; total 6 *** So it seems player 1 is correct - Theogrin Raablek cannot qualify for the class as a barb 4/sorc 1. Other things (such as his other knowledge skills having a total of 3) can be explained by using the 9 skill ranks he'd get from his 3 levels in Green Star Adept. But that's really moot, since there's no way he can qualify for the class to begin with. If someone sees any other way to reasonably distribute his skills so it would be more advantageous, I'd love to see it.
LordofIllusions 11-11-04, 02:21 PM	Here is a good solution: Do not buy their products, if WoTC's editing is so horrid that you feel you must log onto the WoTC boards and beat the regular posters in the head with your whining on a daily basis. ~~~
devinmdp 11-11-04, 02:28 PM	Here is a good solution: Do not buy their products, if WoTC's editing is so horrid that you feel you must log onto the WoTC boards and beat the regular posters in the head with your whining on a daily basis. ~~~ Here's a thought. If the whining bothers the "regular posters" then the "regular posters" should simply not read these threads. Pretty elementary huh? The fact is that as dedicated players of the game we wish to purchase WOTC products, and don't have a huge choice to go elsewhere for OFFICIAL material, do we? Telling people to stop buying the products accomplishes nothing. It accomplishes nothing for WOTC, who loses sales, and it does nothing to help correct the errors. It merely satisfies your vain desire to....I don't know...I guess interject into a conversation where you really have nothing useful to contribute? Devin
Iku Rex 11-11-04, 02:36 PM	If someone sees any other way to reasonably distribute his skills so it would be more advantageous, I'd love to see it.Like I (sort of) said, you can't take sorcerer on character level 5. Make it character level 4 instead, and you can max out knowledge(arcana) cross-class with the last level of barbarian.
LordofIllusions 11-11-04, 02:42 PM	Here's a thought. If the whining bothers the "regular posters" then the "regular posters" should simply not read these threads. Pretty elementary huh? You have not taken your own advice. Since WoTC's editing is so horrid, why waste time even paying them for the horrible editing ? Simply go to another d20 publisher that does not make these mistakes you claim WoTC is guilty of. The fact is that as dedicated players of the game we wish to purchase WOTC products, and don't have a huge choice to go elsewhere for OFFICIAL material, do we? If you wish to purchase WoTC products then you must deal with the WoTC standard. Telling people to stop buying the products accomplishes nothing. Except stops you from complaining, and having to deal with what whiney gamers claim is a substandard product. and it does nothing to help correct the errors. Personally I do not see all of the life-threatening errors you/and other whiney gamers claim exist within said books. They look fine to me, no book is going to be perfect; nor do I need it to be. It merely satisfies your vain desire to....I don't know...I guess interject into a conversation where you really have nothing useful to contribute? This entire thread does nothing useful, except serve as yet another whine-fest. People have been whining about WoTC's products for the longest, yet the products remain the same. Obviously they are not going to conform to the way you think they should be(D&D gamers, at least some on the boards, are whiney and they are going to whine regardless.), so either accept it, or stop buying WoTC's stuff. Now if you want to argue, and see who can make the smartest remark go right ahead, but know this, It accomplishes nothing and unless you either accept the books as being quality products, or, stop buying WoTC's books all together; you are doing nothing but giving yourself, and everyone else on the boards, a headache. ~~~
smileybob1 11-11-04, 03:13 PM	Now if you want to argue, and see who can make the smartest remark go right ahead, but know this, It accomplishes nothing and unless you either accept the books as being quality products, or, stop buying WoTC's books all together; you are doing nothing but giving yourself, and everyone else on the boards, a headache. ~~~ wow can you smell the hypocrisy...or is that irony, i think it would only be ironic if you didnt know you were being a hypocrite well there is nothing that gets people to stop whining like more whining. actually the only thing more effective than that is coming into a conversation and telling people to shut up, and inferring that they have no right to have an opinion that contradicts your own. god bless america, you’re either with us or against us. god forbid anyone ever discuss anything anymore or think about the way things could be or i dont know question anything...just shut up and get in line, dont ask questions, do what your told and dont ever ever think for yourself. ok was that over the top enough do i get the smart@ss comment award
Zherog 11-11-04, 03:14 PM	Like I (sort of) said, you can't take sorcerer on character level 5. Make it character level 4 instead, and you can max out knowledge(arcana) cross-class with the last level of barbarian. Alrighty - let's see... First level - Barbarian 1. Five skill points per level * 4 for first character level = 20 points Decipher Script: spend 4 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Knowledge Arcana: spend 4 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Knowledge Architecture & Engineering: spend 4 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Knowledge Geography: spend 4 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Knowledge History: spend 4 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Second level - Barbarian 2. Five skill points Intimidate: spend 2 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Jump: spend 2 points for 2 ranks; total 2 Survival: spend 1 point for 1 rank; total 1 Third level - Barbarian 3. Five skill points Jump: spend 2 points for 2 ranks; total 4 Knowledge: Arcana: Spend 2 points for 1 rank; total 3 Survival: Spend 1 point for 1 rank; total 2 Fourth level - Sorcerer 1. Three skill points Knowledge: Arcana: Spend 3 points for 3 ranks; total 6 Ffith Level - Barbarian 4. Five Skill points Knowledge: Arcana: 4 points for 2 ranks; total 8 Jump: 1 point for 1 rank; total 5 *** So Iku is correct - at this point we can qualify for the class. The problem now, though, is making up the "difference" in the various ranks, because there's so many cross class skills here (as Iku also pointed out). We get 9 skill points from our 3 levels in Green Star Adept. With those 9 ranks, we need to purchase: Concentration: 6 ranks (this is a class skill) Jump: 6 ranks (cross class) Knowledge: A&E: 1 rank (class skill) Knowledge: Geography: 1 rank (class skill) Knowledge: History: 1 rank (class skill) Survival: 4 ranks (cross class) So we still need to account for 19 points spent, when we only have 9 available. *** Does anybody really find the sample characters in these products useful? It seems to me that they have a ton of errors, and I for one could care less - I don't even pay attention to them.
lugnut71 11-11-04, 05:11 PM	I agree I just skim over them. I wouldn't even know if they had errors because of this.
devinmdp 11-11-04, 05:25 PM	You have not taken your own advice. Since WoTC's editing is so horrid, why waste time even paying them for the horrible editing ? Simply go to another d20 publisher that does not make these mistakes you claim WoTC is guilty of. I already explained it to you. Many of us want OFFICIAL D&D products. Get it yet? Or should I restate it twelve more times? If you wish to purchase WoTC products then you must deal with the WoTC standard. Who says? I can instead work to change that standard. Isn't sentient existence amazing? Try it some time. Except stops you from complaining, and having to deal with what whiney gamers claim is a substandard product. Hadn't realized someone forced your fingers onto the keyboard and forced you to click your mouse on this thread. Please post the name and address of this cad and I will direct the police to arrest the villain! Personally I do not see all of the life-threatening errors you/and other whiney gamers claim exist within said books. They look fine to me, no book is going to be perfect; nor do I need it to be. Obviously your standards for organization are substandard and lax. Good for you. Just because you could theoretically stand to eat maggots in your hamburgers doesn't mean I should have to. This entire thread does nothing useful, except serve as yet another whine-fest. I know for a fact that WOTC has read threads like these (because they have replied to them). I also mentioned my own prior experience with another game where after years of what you call "whining" the game designed DID RELENT, did allow player reviewers, and did improve the quality of his product. So stick that in your pipe and take a puff of it! People have been whining about WoTC's products for the longest, yet the products remain the same. Obviously they are not going to conform to the way you think they should be(D&D gamers, at least some on the boards, are whiney and they are going to whine regardless.), so either accept it, or stop buying WoTC's stuff. Don't presume to tell me what to do. I will continue to rail against poor editing until the cows come home. There is not a darned thing you can do about it. Really....not a darned thing! There is nothing you can possibly type that will stop me. So now who is wasting his time? Now if you want to argue, and see who can make the smartest remark go right ahead, but know this, It accomplishes nothing and unless you either accept the books as being quality products, or, stop buying WoTC's books all together; you are doing nothing but giving yourself, and everyone else on the boards, a headache. No... YOU may be giving me a headache, but I assure you I am not harming my own keppie at all. And as far as "everyone else on the boards", seems you are the only one complaining. I guess you are everyone.....nice ego there! Buh bye. Don't come back. Devin
smileybob1 11-11-04, 05:34 PM	*** Does anybody really find the sample characters in these products useful? It seems to me that they have a ton of errors, and I for one could care less - I don't even pay attention to them. i dont know what is up with these things. i always have a hard time working them backwards, i am convinced that they are showing people how to cheat (no just kidding) i do love it when the totally break the wealth system though. i was reading on the characters of the Drizzt series, and they actually added a caption saying that if someone kills Cattie-brie then she should be worth 20% more exp than any normal 7th level fighter because of all the crap she has. thats funny no one has to follow the rules, what rules
devinmdp 11-11-04, 05:37 PM	I find the sample NPCs useful yes. And to be quite honest, none of my players is going ot veen know if Elminister's Ride skill is +21 when it shoudl be +20. The problem comes when as a DM you are trying to learn the game by reverse engineering the NPCs to see how they got to that state. It ends up not working out, and then you spend hours flipping through rulebooks trying to find the reason.
devinmdp 11-11-04, 05:45 PM	Not all of the errors in Libris Mortis, for example, are gamer-related. Some are indeed just bad editing. For example: It continually amazes me at the lack of ability to alphabetize things in WOTC products. In Libris Mortis, Necrotic Focus weapon ability comes after Sacred Burst. In same, Necrotic Tumor comes before Necrotic Termination in the spell descriptions. So what? You might ask... In the middle of a game, when I need to look up that spell description, I don't want to have to go looking for it and putting my game session into a screeching halt. Worse, if I were not sure what book it was in, I might look alphabetically in LM for it, not find it, and then waste time looking through other books. There's just no excuse for not being able to alphabetize a list of things. Devin
ORC_Tuhteth 11-11-04, 05:50 PM	Okay, this discussion is getting a little personal. Make your statements about the topic, not other patrons. (This includes accusing each other of hypocrisy or making sarcastic comments about each other's intelligence.) Consider this a warning to everyone on this thread -- any further transgressions will be subject to swift disciplinary action.
Iku Rex 11-11-04, 06:06 PM	Does anybody really find the sample characters in these products useful? It seems to me that they have a ton of errors, and I for one could care less - I don't even pay attention to them.In theory I find them useful. In theory they provide interesting NPCs and give examples of how class abilities are applied. In practice I tend to skim over them. It's blatantly obvious that they're used as filler (like we need to have every bloody class and racial ability repeated from the PH and the previous page...) And since such characters are notoriously unreliable, they're not much use as examples. If, that is, the designers can even be bothered to include stats for when the character is actually using his abilities. (My latest pet peeve: The weretouched master from the Eberron book. It's unclear how the 5th level alternate form ability is supposed to work. Since the example character has that ability, you'd think we'd get a [for once] helpful example. But no. The writer responsible apparently agrees with me that the ability is difficult to understand and "solves" the problem by simply leaving it out of the write-up. :tantrum: The warshaper from Complete Warrior suffers from the same problem.)
pentagonal_penguin 11-13-04, 07:02 AM	Yes, errors are annoying. Yes, the amount of errors in Complete Divine was even worse. Yes, WotC needs better editing. Guess what! They've said that they are working to imnprove it! If they tries to defend the errors, then sure, you may have a point. However, they said that "Yes, we stuffed up, we're fixing it". This is good. It means that they listen to our comments. Even though Complete Divine had a lot of errors, it is one of my favorite books. As I said earlier, there may be one or two errors in THE WHOLE BOOK that cannot be resolved just by a second read and a good dose of common sense. Even these errors (such as the Green Star Adept spellcasting one) can be resolved by having a good look at the class. If WotC hadn't fixed the GSA one, then what I'd do would be: Compare Versions (One ends up with 2 more caster levels - not all that much difference) Class looks underpowered - give it the benefit of the doubt. Is this really that hard? On the sample characters topic, I tend to skim them too, although I can see using them as an on-the-spot NPC.
Palin the Wizard 11-13-04, 10:06 AM	Ugh.... realized a huge error. Oh well. Disregard.