Post/Author/DateTime	Post
jonthegm 08-11-05, 02:07 PM	Now I'm gonna rant, so beware. When I first bought the ECS I quickly decided for myself that this is definitely the best D&D book ever. Then I got Sharn, which was a really good book, but it didn't have an index, so I spend most of my time paging through it. Then I got the Races of Eberron book, and while I liked some of the fluff, my PCs really only use it for Warforged information, for which it is invaluable. The shifter chapter was good, though. Again, my PCs are demihuman-phobic so they never really call on it. Five nations was kinda neat. Now, I don't know about you, but I don't typically read these books with an eye for inconsistencies. I read them for ideas. The setting is secondary to my story as a GM. If I want the queen of Aundair to be King Kaius LXV in disguise, FROM THE FUTURE, I'll make it so. If my PCs ask me where such and such a place is, I say it's there, and there it stays, no matter what a book says to contradict it. What we need is people to be a little more forgiving. It's hard enough to write your own work, much less sit and churn out stuff out in a world that you had no part in creating. Even with an Eberron bible, this stuff is going to happen. Hilarious mistakes will happen, and our Beloved Eberron will change and morph into something that we'll eventually acknowledge as old and broken, like FR or Greyhawk or Mystara. Eberron is the new hotness right now, but let's all be honest with each other; WotC has NEVER been any good at consistency. Hell, since Bigby shook his Wand of Wonder at Zagy, we really haven't been able to rely on the competence of the corporate writers. Let's acknowledge that this is JUST A GAME. The important thing is to have fun. If you can't have fun when one book says East and you really know it means West, or that it says Six airships can fit around a tower but your precise calculations that actually correct for wind shear say they cannot. WHO CARES? Play the game, have fun, and if you don't like the consistency, WRITE YOUR OWN. I've read the Explorer's handbook about partway through, primarily the location ideas and the wayfinder guild thingy. It's had a positive affect on my campaign, and my PCs are happy. I'm happy, and you can be too, if you just stop *****ing. Over and out
Serpentine 08-11-05, 04:59 PM	Hear hear.
MrFilthyIke 08-11-05, 05:03 PM	*nominates jonthegm for Eberron fan President*
memorax 08-11-05, 05:17 PM	I agree. In the end it all really boils down to one thing. Wotc owns the rights to Eberron so they can do pretty much anything to it good or bad. Myself I am just happy more Eberron books are coming out.
Altaris13 08-11-05, 05:29 PM	:whatsthis
makeshiftwings 08-11-05, 05:32 PM	I totally disagree. What your argument boils down to is the familiar "Let's never ever complain about products we buy from companies, because we might hurt someone's feelings." If you're really concerned about politeness, then fine, be polite in your complaints. But asking consumers to shut up and pay for things they don't like just because you're worried about hurting an employee's feelings is stupid. No company is giving you things out of the goodness of their heart, they are doing it because you're paying to keep them in business. Was the ECS good? Yes. Does that mean that we now owe WotC our support in future products, no matter how many problems there are? No. We owerd WotC the money we payed for the ECS, nothing more, nothing less.
jonthegm 08-11-05, 05:58 PM	I totally disagree. What your argument boils down to is the familiar "Let's never ever complain about products we buy from companies, because we might hurt someone's feelings." If you're really concerned about politeness, then fine, be polite in your complaints. But asking consumers to shut up and pay for things they don't like just because you're worried about hurting an employee's feelings is stupid. No company is giving you things out of the goodness of their heart, they are doing it because you're paying to keep them in business. Was the ECS good? Yes. Does that mean that we now owe WotC our support in future products, no matter how many problems there are? No. We owerd WotC the money we payed for the ECS, nothing more, nothing less. I disagree. I owe Wizards nothing. They owe ME nothing. I do not have to buy their book; I am not obligated to make a purchase. However, if a book has enough good ideas at a quick glance, then I buy it. I do not concern myself with the fact that a city was stated as being located at 22N33W when it is said in a later book to be at 22.5N34W. I just choose which one fits my campaign better. The more you complain, the less fun you're obviously having. Sure, it's distracting sometimes to have conflicting or OOC information in a book, but come ON folks... That "Inconsistency" thread has garnered 30 replies, and only half actually have real submissions. Of THOSE, only half again are actually confusing. The rest are nitpicks or misunderstandings or personal hates. The last name thing? Not important. The mournland never being explained? Important. How many Airships can dance on the head of a pin... I mean dock at lyrandar tower? Not important. Encouraging your players to jump off of cliffs and take spectacular risks? Important What Level an NPC is from book to book? not important Gnomes ****ing rock? Important. King Boranel is actually Mecha-Raistlin-who-fused-with-Suel-IN-SPACE-FROM-THE-FUTURE? Actually, I'm gonna give this one a depends.
Atlictoatl 08-11-05, 06:09 PM	Something worth noting is that other products produced by other companies do not have the same amount or degree of errors that WotC products do. While it is true that every company and every product will likely have a few errors, what bothers me is that: 1) WotC is the giant of the industry, commanding a substantially dominant market share, and 2) WotC's products are strewn with an unprecedented quantity of typos, grammatical errors, map errors, graphical errors, and textual/contextual errors. As a gamer of over twenty-five years and someone who makes my living in the industry, my level of frustration with WotC is that they seem to bear an inherent disrespect for not only the roleplaying industry and consumer, but for their very own product. It is not that difficult to produce a canonical "Product Bible" and to adhere to it, though it requires the desire to do so. Perhaps Eberron authors are still whetting their teeth on the material, but the increasingly poor quality of editing in Eberron products -- along with the continually poor quality of editing of other WotC products -- implies that the company cannot be bothered to ensure that their product lines are as good as they can be, which is a flag to anyone in any industry that something is wrong. When a company doesn't learn from its mistakes and right its errors, we got problems.
jonthegm 08-11-05, 06:18 PM	Something worth noting is that other products produced by other companies do not have the same amount or degree of errors that WotC products do. While it is true that every company and every product will likely have a few errors, what bothers me is that: 1) WotC is the giant of the industry, commanding a substantially dominant market share, and 2) WotC's products are strewn with an unprecedented quantity of typos, grammatical errors, map errors, graphical errors, and textual/contextual errors. As a gamer of over twenty-five years and someone who makes my living in the industry, my level of frustration with WotC is that they seem to bear an inherent disrespect for not only the roleplaying industry and consumer, but for their very own product. It is not that difficult to produce a canonical "Product Bible" and to adhere to it, though it requires the desire to do so. Perhaps Eberron authors are still whetting their teeth on the material, but the increasingly poor quality of editing in Eberron products -- along with the continually poor quality of editing of other WotC products -- implies that the company cannot be bothered to ensure that their product lines are as good as they can be, which is a flag to anyone in any industry that something is wrong. When a company doesn't learn from its mistakes and right its errors, we got problems. Well, I only have limited experience with nonWotC, but let me go over things... Palladium: Massive power creep, great fluff, terrible game. HERO system: No story to really keep track of. Well, I guess Dr. Destroyer blew up Detroit. Whoop. Not very prolific, and almost all content is funneled through one or two writers. GURPS: It's HERO light, but MUCH less consistent. Cthulhu: No consistency needed. Unknown Armies: Written by 3 guys, very consistent in tone, world, and rules. Also failed to catch on. White Wolf: Sorta-consistent. Massive power-creep. Haven't looked at the new stuff, though. All of these examples have one thing different from the WotC offerings: Amount. WotC puts out more stuff ALL the time. They're forced by the market which continually DEMANDS that they have a new FR, new CoreAccessory, new Miniatures, new M:tG, new Eberron CONSTANTLY. If they go to a more staid release program, everyone will go up in arms and shout and hue and moan and cry. We can't have our cake and eat it too.
Fiddlypoppin 08-11-05, 06:45 PM	I buy D&D books because I like this system better than any other that I've played. I buy the books because I like the ideas that are contained therein. I buy the books because they excite my imagination and give it a place to go, the way that no other setting has. I agree with the assessment that WotC has a lot of content that they're publishing at any given time, and that keeping on top of it can be a problem. I also don't care if there are minor typos in my books. None of the core rules, mechanics, story points, etc. are wrong, that I have ever noticed. The only things that slip through the cracks are details--minor details. How strong an NPC is this? How many artificers are in Sharn? Why don't we have a political map of Khorvaire? etc. etc. ad nauseum If that's important to you, then go ahead and ask the appropriate questions about it. I'm sure you'll get a prompt and friendly response. I've never had a problem with WotC not responding to me or giving me a hard time. For me, though, those things really aren't that important. Like has been said, if I want an NPC to be a given level, or if I want X number of airhsips to dock at a given location, or anything of the sort, then I roll with it, based off of what's in the book and extrapolating what I need to. If there are inconsistencies, then I deal with them myself. And as far as inconsitency goes, WotC is light years ahead of another company I regularly have to deal with in my hobbies--Games-Workshop. They don't even bother with consistency. When logical gaps are presented to them, they either explain why that's not illogical, but makes perfect sense; or they just say, "It doesn't exist. Shut up and buy our product." Compared with that, if nothing else, WotC is a fantastic company. Keep up the good work, guys.
Griff_Goodbeard 08-11-05, 06:49 PM	What I don't understand jonthegm, is that if a thread noting the inconsistency of the Eberron releases bothers you, why click on it. Note in my game I try to adhere to official material but usually end up inserting "this" or "that" if it suites my campaign, much like you do I suspect. If every little setting detail isn't important for you, then more power to you. It appears that there are people on this board who like their setting and the books printed about them to be internally consistent. What makes you right and them wrong? As far as I'm concerned if they spent their hard earned money for a product, and that product was unsatisfactory, then they have the right to voice their opinions. Lighten Up. :rolleyes:
jonthegm 08-11-05, 07:00 PM	What I don't understand jonthegm, is that if a thread noting the inconsistency of the Eberron releases bothers you, why click on it. Note in my game I try to adhere to official material but usually end up inserting "this" or "that" if it suites my campaign, much like you do I suspect. If every little setting detail isn't important for you, then more power to you. It appears that there are people on this board who like their setting and the books printed about them to be internally consistent. What makes you right and them wrong? As far as I'm concerned if they spent their hard earned money for a product, and that product was unsatisfactory, then they have the right to voice their opinions. Lighten Up. :rolleyes: Heh, call it a masochistic streak. I want people to have fun, and I don't understand how they can get so worked up over stuff. I STRIVE to understand them. To understand them, I must observe them in their natural habitat. Just wait until I publish MY setting, though. Every NPC is going to be both Low-Level AND epic. AT THE SAME TIME! Also, everything will make 100% sense! Especially the Magic! And the fairies. The Trolls won't though, because no one likes them.
Edymnion 08-11-05, 07:10 PM	I totally disagree. What your argument boils down to is the familiar "Let's never ever complain about products we buy from companies, because we might hurt someone's feelings." If you're really concerned about politeness, then fine, be polite in your complaints. But asking consumers to shut up and pay for things they don't like just because you're worried about hurting an employee's feelings is stupid. No company is giving you things out of the goodness of their heart, they are doing it because you're paying to keep them in business.Agreed. If I pay my money for a book, and I don't like whats in it, I have every bit as much right to voice my discontent as you have to say "Oh, its wonderful in every possible way!". No double standards. Either we can all voice our opinions on the books in any manner we wish, or no one may voice their opinions on the books in any way. No double standards. Take your pick.
Pax 08-11-05, 07:12 PM	Something worth noting is that other products produced by other companies do not have the same amount or degree of errors that WotC products do. I would have to say that this is patently untrue. WOTC doesn'tmake more errors than other companies per product, or even per X thousand words. You perceive them as making more errors for two reasons: WOTC simply puts OUT more products, and more thousands of words, than anyone else. After all, 5% of 500,000,000 is going to be larger than even 20% of 1,000,000. WOTC products are often subject to a higher level of scrutiny by people who go looking for mistakes, than most other companies' stuff. Case inpoint - I have in front of me a book titled "Sorcery and Steam", published under the "Legends and Lairs" imprint, by Fantasy Flight Games. I paid $24.95US ffor it (plus my state's 5% sales tax), and it's just over 170 pages. And frankly, it sucks. Oh, I love what they were TRYING to do. My problem is, some of hte sections are obviously unfinished (let alone the victims of poor editing). The pages are thin-ish, unlaminated, and black-and-white throughout the entire book. The whole thing comes across as inexcusably unpolished, and to make it work, I'd have to pour a few hundred hours of MY own time into just finishing the rules, let alone putting a setting and beginning story-arc together. I have never seen a WOTC product that bad. Not once. And, indeed, I have bought nearly every 3.X D&D book WOTC has published (excepting modules/adventures); there's nearly fifteen hundred dollars' worth of books next to me. Even the first-printing Sword and Fist splatbook (a dog-eared copy of which I still have, though I've had to apply duct-tape to the binding to keep it from falling apart - the price of long, hard use, I'm afraid) ... anyway, even that, with it's glaring omissions (no BAB listed for hte Halfling Outrider ... remember that one?), is IMO a superior product to "Sorcery and steam" in almost every way. WOTC does nothing more, nor less, than make it's "share" of errors. It is only the fact that they are, relative to "the industry", as large as you yourself admit they are, that WOTC-originated errors are so magnified, out of all proportion, into becoming the insurmountable obstacles many wish to perceive them as. Mountains out of molehills, indeed. As a gamer of over twenty-five years And just for hte record, I've got you on that, too. I started playing D&D when I was ... oh, around 8 years old, give or take a year. That would mean I started around 1979 ... about 26 years ago. Again, "give or take". That's right at the dawn of AD&D,mind you (the three core books for which were first released between '77 and '79). Not that such details have any real bearing on wether or not WOTC is as callously uncaring as you seem to wish us to believe.
Darrek 08-11-05, 07:24 PM	Take your pick. The OP's point is that we do not have to "take your pick". The point is to RELAX! You don't have to pick an extreme and go with it. It's possible to enjoy an entire book, use it to have fun, and just ignore the stuff that's inconsistent. If an inconsistency between two sources can utterly ruin your enjoyment to the degree it does some of the more extreme examples on this board, then the game is obviously no longer fun for them. Case in point. Aberrant mark of feather fall on an airship. Yeah, I saw it. Yeah, I knew it was contrary to the culture established by Hellcow and the boards. And since I tend to appreciate the armosphere generated by the boards, this data even conflicts *gasp* with the game I have been running. So I ignored it and moved on to the rest of the book. And all without denouncing the editors, threatening to eviscerate the proofreaders, or postulating the breed of monkeys used to write the material. Well spoken jonthegm.
Illvillainy 08-11-05, 07:38 PM	Your post is two characters too long jon >=(
greatfrito 08-11-05, 07:54 PM	... it just has to be in smaller portions. Honestly, there have been a lot of typos and general formatting issues as of late, but there has also been a vastly exaggerated field of complaints. I don't know... perhaps I have lesser expectations of Wizards, and less of an expectation of having everything work perfect for me, but when something crops up in a book that says "I'm wrong! Use me!" or "I'm inconsistentent! Hold me as Canon!" I tend to just look the other way and ignore it. I -do- feel that Wizards should respect their customers a bit more, but I'd rather see higher quality -books- make a return than have a better spell checker (heh, with these boards we have a -free- spell-check/consistency check courtesy of other players). My issue with Races of Eberron was that the pages were so skinny they scared me. My issue with Five Nations is that it seems paper-back length in a hard-bound case for no justifiable reason. Really, part of the issue is that so many players of Eberron who are consistently on this board are overly loyal, setting-elitist, and very loud with their opinions (and very opinionated). I may fit into one or two of those catagories m'self, even if I'm usually on the wrong side of things from the normal "fan" perspective. If you don't believe me, look around for "How do I incorporate Eberron into Planescape" or "Where would you put Elf Subraces" threads, and watch as board personas normally respond with a "You don't" or a "That's innapropriate for Eberron, and should never be allowed near it".
ekomega 08-11-05, 08:00 PM	Agreed. If I pay my money for a book, and I don't like whats in it, I have every bit as much right to voice my discontent as you have to say "Oh, its wonderful in every possible way!". No double standards. Either we can all voice our opinions on the books in any manner we wish, or no one may voice their opinions on the books in any way. No double standards. Take your pick. I don't agree with this, although I will admit the inconsistencies do irritate me greatly. The bottom line is, though, if you don't like the book, don't pay money for it. No one's making you buy it. Clearly if you purchase a book you are asserting that there is enough good stuff in it, versus the bad, that it is worth spending your money on. Otherwise, you are a fool (or very rich) to spend your money on things that you do not value, or do not like. I wish more people would decide with their wallets, rather than with complaining on the internet. I bet WotC couldn't care less about web ranting, but if they saw a significant decrease in sales they'd turn their heads. Now, I think these two things can be combined. IF they happen to pay attention to the forums AND people stop purchasing books, then MAYBE they will understand why the people aren't purchasing based on the reasons they give on the forum. Maybe. Regardless, the real answer is to not buy books. It's too bad that WotC will stop making Eberron if people stop buying it. I like Eberron a great deal. But if I am not intending to purchase any of the books because I find them to be garbage or too riddled with errors, it doesn't really matter how many WotC prints, does it? If you never buy them, and never use them, then it doesn't matter if they exist or if WotC keeps making them. I, personally, find it valuable to vent and whine with the rest, in a place where there is a slight chance those in charge might be paying attention. But do I expect it to actually produce results in future products? I'd rather play the lottery than take that wager.
greatfrito 08-11-05, 08:01 PM	If I pay my money for a book, and I don't like whats in it, I have every bit as much right to voice my discontent as you have to say "Oh, its wonderful in every possible way!". No double standards. ...... Take your pick. Honestly, my problem with the complaining is that it's so common 'round about these parts, and it seems to pop up everywhere. Perhaps if it were limited in scope, as much of the "Oh yes, this is incredible!" stuff is, it would be more tolerable.
jonthegm 08-11-05, 08:43 PM	Your post is two characters too long jon >=( Ah, but those two characters reveal the true depth and beauty of my satire.
KP91 08-11-05, 09:01 PM	I'm having fun with Eberron and that still doesn't make me any less mad about all the errors. The thing is, the complaints are in hopoes wizards can make better products. If I made a statue of a cat and it ended up looking like a fly, I want to know how to make it better. I also would return a defective product and tell the company whats wrong. It's called constructive criticism. We only complain in hopes of a better product so we can have more fun. Maybe I want a real way to escape airplanes since my character is going to be thinking aberrant marks are corrupted in mind and soul. And your no better, your just complaining about people complaining.
Ryltar Swordsong 08-11-05, 09:06 PM	... it just has to be in smaller portions. Honestly, there have been a lot of typos and general formatting issues as of late, but there has also been a vastly exaggerated field of complaints. I don't know... perhaps I have lesser expectations of Wizards, and less of an expectation of having everything work perfect for me, but when something crops up in a book that says "I'm wrong! Use me!" or "I'm inconsistentent! Hold me as Canon!" I tend to just look the other way and ignore it. I -do- feel that Wizards should respect their customers a bit more, but I'd rather see higher quality -books- make a return than have a better spell checker (heh, with these boards we have a -free- spell-check/consistency check courtesy of other players). My issue with Races of Eberron was that the pages were so skinny they scared me. My issue with Five Nations is that it seems paper-back length in a hard-bound case for no justifiable reason. Really, part of the issue is that so many players of Eberron who are consistently on this board are overly loyal, setting-elitist, and very loud with their opinions (and very opinionated). I may fit into one or two of those catagories m'self, even if I'm usually on the wrong side of things from the normal "fan" perspective. If you don't believe me, look around for "How do I incorporate Eberron into Planescape" or "Where would you put Elf Subraces" threads, and watch as board personas normally respond with a "You don't" or a "That's innapropriate for Eberron, and should never be allowed near it". Excellent post.
Euangelion 08-11-05, 09:14 PM	Yes, and I'm sure this isn't the only example of it. In fact, if someone wants to start a thread (if they haven't already) cataloguing the inconsistencies between the sourcebooks, I'd consider it a favor. At some point we're going to need to sort this out on the design end, and the more complete the list, the better. And so I did. I must be the only one to get slammed both for being too soft (by makeshiftwings) and too hard (by jnothegm) on the Eberron books. :D
Raster 08-11-05, 09:25 PM	The major problem that I see with the complaint threads in when people who haven't looked at the books read them, see all the uproar, and get the idea "OMG, WotC has ruined Eberron!" Pretty soon you've got a mob of people ready to knock in the doors of the Wizards offices and burn the editors at stake, and most of the people haven't even checked to see how major the problem is. If the OPs of such threads worked to keep it at informed constructive criticism instead of riling people up, I don't think it would be such a problem.
Sieylianna 08-11-05, 09:55 PM	Let's acknowledge that this is JUST A GAME. The important thing is to have fun. If you can't have fun when one book says East and you really know it means West, or that it says Six airships can fit around a tower but your precise calculations that actually correct for wind shear say they cannot. WHO CARES? Play the game, have fun, and if you don't like the consistency, WRITE YOUR OWN. It's a game for us. It's a job for them. A nice job, but a job none the less. I don't know where (or if) you work, but if I told my boss that quality didn't matter, because our customers were having Fun he'd tell me to clean out my desk. I don't even mind the little things like dropping a couple of words when merging in an illustration, but how do you mess up the rail coaches on a full page piece of artwork? However, the biggest problem isn't the absence of proofreading, but the lack of playtesting. Some of the feats and spells which are released are ridiculous. It's obvious than no thought went into the "Able Learner" feat for example. It's not fun for me when the DM and I have to review every feat, prestige class, etc. that I'm interested in to determine whether it's balanced. Ed
Atlictoatl 08-12-05, 12:29 AM	I wish more people would decide with their wallets, rather than with complaining on the internet. I bet WotC couldn't care less about web ranting, but if they saw a significant decrease in sales they'd turn their heads. Now, I think these two things can be combined. IF they happen to pay attention to the forums AND people stop purchasing books, then MAYBE they will understand why the people aren't purchasing based on the reasons they give on the forum. Maybe. Regardless, the real answer is to not buy books. It's too bad that WotC will stop making Eberron if people stop buying it. I like Eberron a great deal. But if I am not intending to purchase any of the books because I find them to be garbage or too riddled with errors, it doesn't really matter how many WotC prints, does it? If you never buy them, and never use them, then it doesn't matter if they exist or if WotC keeps making them. Before Eberron came out, I had personally sworn off buying any more D&D books, because the quality of the content of the books had become so low, and they were so poorly edited. When Eberron came out, the product was of such high quality that I actually went out and bought five books that I would never have purchased otherwise, books I had previously wanted nothing to do with, because I was going to start running an Eberron campaign and thought I wanted MM II, MM III, Fiend Folio, BoVD, and Complete Arcane to do a better job of it. Because, yes, they had some good ideas in them, even though they were ideas executed in a way I had previously thought not worth my money. What I've seen as more Eberron products come out is that they are of progressively less quality than the ECSB, with regards to editing and internal consistency. This is a red flag, and is already precipitatating in me a renewed reluctance to buy new product. The thing with WotC is that they have a built-in audience. If they would only maintain a high quality on their books, they have customers who will automatically buy every Eberron product they produce. They still have that, but I suspect the quantity of "no matter what" fans is dropping. Case in point, the novels. I purchased City of Towers without even thinking about it. The book was almost unreadable because of its poor copy-editing. I'm not buying any more Eberron novels; I'll wait for them to show up in the library, or borrow a friend's. As a retailer, I'm no longer recommending new Eberron supplements as a higher standard for D&D supplements. I might recommend a specific title to someone interested in the setting, but the newer books do not get my unabashed recommendation. $30 is a lot to spend on poor-quality product, and there are frankly better systems to spend one's money on, though such systems do not have the degree of exposure that D&D has. Regardless of what one thinks of the content, in any other publishing endeavor, the quantity and degree of error present in a D&D book is substandard and wholly unacceptable. Why this is not so for WotC is thoroughly disturbing. I would have to say that this is patently untrue. WOTC doesn'tmake more errors than other companies per product, or even per X thousand words. You perceive them as making more errors for two reasons: WOTC simply puts OUT more products, and more thousands of words, than anyone else. After all, 5% of 500,000,000 is going to be larger than even 20% of 1,000,000. WOTC products are often subject to a higher level of scrutiny by people who go looking for mistakes, than most other companies' stuff. Case inpoint - I have in front of me a book titled "Sorcery and Steam", published under the "Legends and Lairs" imprint, by Fantasy Flight Games. No, I perceive them as making more errors per product than other publishers in the industry because they do. This is easily documented. I'm a games purchaser for a large hobby store. I can pull almost any other product off of my wall that will thoroughly trump any WotC product for editing quality. Bringing Legends and Lairs products into the comparison is hardly noteworthy, as d20 products are notoriously as bad or worse than WotC, and Legends and Lairs is well-known as one of the not so good ones. If you want a classic example, look at the City of Towers novel by WotC, and tell me the last time you saw an editing travesty of that magnitude from a major book publisher. Granted, it's a novel, not an rpg book, but one would think that would mean it was more thoroughly edited... It's a game for us. It's a job for them. A nice job, but a job none the less. I don't know where (or if) you work, but if I told my boss that quality didn't matter, because our customers were having Fun he'd tell me to clean out my desk. I don't even mind the little things like dropping a couple of words when merging in an illustration, but how do you mess up the rail coaches on a full page piece of artwork? However, the biggest problem isn't the absence of proofreading, but the lack of playtesting. Some of the feats and spells which are released are ridiculous. It's obvious than no thought went into the "Able Learner" feat for example. It's not fun for me when the DM and I have to review every feat, prestige class, etc. that I'm interested in to determine whether it's balanced. EXACTLY! This is core stuff, people. It's a waste of everyone's time when we have to comb over it for accuracy. It's entirely these people's jobs to get it right, and they don't. I've come to the point where I'll forgive a handful of errors, but I also shook my head at the lightning rail coach illustration page, in addition to a number of other things in the Explorer's Handbook. I mean, how exactly does one make that mistake? It isn't a simple copy/paste error that substituted an extra sleeper cart for the standard passenger cart, because each sleeper cart is different and neither of them matches the text describing the sleeper cart. How exactly does one do that? How does an editor let that slip by? It's incredibly sloppy. Does the sloppiness of the lightning rail depiction impact my play so much that I cease to have fun? No, but it and the other errors in the Explorer's Handbook lowers my trust for the rest of the content in the book by a significant degree. If they can't get the little stuff right, what makes me confident they are getting any of it right? How can it be official canon if it contradicts either the canon of the ECSB or the spirit of the ECSB? Having to slog through all of the prolific quantity of material being produced for Eberron, weighing and comparing it with what I glean from the ECSB and Keith's writings, does impact my enjoyment of the game. Because, fundamentally, what turned me on to Eberron was how it employed a number of relatively innovative ideas in D&D. NPC classes, widespread low-level magic, relatively low levels of power in the world allowing the realities of social power to have more relevance, the impact of mercantile houses on medieval governance, etc. These innovatations will not stand up well to the "white bread-itization" of Eberron that we are seeing with Eberron product that is beginning to look more like standard D&D than Eberron. Oh well. The 5th edition of Pendragon is coming out. I have yet to delve into the new editions of Ars Magica, Tekumel, and Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. There's always Burning Wheel, and Harn, and a number of other small-party publications that blow D&D out of the water for innovation and playability. I harbored such high hopes for Eberron, and after RoE, 5Nations, and the ExHB, I'm beginning to waver in my devotion. The trick, sadly, is going to be getting my Eberron players to try something new.
Edymnion 08-12-05, 01:01 AM	Honestly, my problem with the complaining is that it's so common 'round about these parts, and it seems to pop up everywhere. Perhaps if it were limited in scope, as much of the "Oh yes, this is incredible!" stuff is, it would be more tolerable.How so? ECS: Gets rave reviews by almost everyone on these boards. City of Towers: Gets rave reviews by pretty much everyone on these boards. Five Nations: Got good reviews by the majority of the people on these boards. Races of Eberron is the ONLY Eberron book that has been more or less consistantly slammed on, and for good reason. There are plenty of posts on the boards saying how much they like books, its just that when somebody wants to make a rant about how much people complain, they don't tend to actually pay attention to the places where people rave about how wonderful things are.The OP's point is that we do not have to "take your pick". The point is to RELAX!No, the OP's point was to copy the format of another thread where somebody was venting, in a rather mocking style, IMO. His whole point seems to be "if you don't like it, relax and stop talking about it, let those that do like it have all the say!". As evidenced by:just stop *****ing. No, there needs to be an equal voice for both sides. Races of Eberron is the single worst book to ever have the word "Ebberron" printed in it, IMO, and if there are those that haven't made up their minds on if they want it or not, I think they deserve to know that there are those that don't like it, and why. This isn't a board full of yes-men WotC-suckups. If something is bad, you can bet your bippy people around here will let you know.people who go looking for mistakesOh come now. I have never gone LOOKING for a mistake in a D&D book in my life. I sit down with a book that I buy expecting to like it. Then I read it. And when things jump off the page as being patantly WRONG, I notice it. No, I'm not going to just skim over it and ignore it. That kind of attitude just makes the mistakes WORSE, because WotC sees that nobody gives a damn that they don't edit their books properly, so they just don't put as much effort into doing it next time. As for WotC not caring about people ranting on the boards? Sure they do, how do you think 3.5 came about? Or how the things that got "fixed" were exactly the topics that got the most threads about them on the boards, and not what was truely broken (like Hypnosis or Astral Projection)? The squeeky wheel gets the grease.
MysticTheurge 08-12-05, 01:27 AM	I kind of see where both sides of this argument are coming from. Yes, everyone should lighten up a bit and just enjoy the games. And yes people should be able to point out the problems they have with products in the hopes that they improve in the future. But honestly, the latter doesn't happen, people start to fly off the handle about a simple mistake (or a bunch of stuff they don't like) and then all of a sudden it's "RoE is the worst book ever in the history of time ::snide comment...snide comment...snide comment::" It's all well and good to say "WotC should have more editors" or "This is their job!" But in fact, I'm fairly sure many of the people who write these books don't make their living doing so. Sure they make some money, but it's mostly freelance and they have to do something else to pay (the majority of) the bills. I wouldn't mind the complaint posts if they were less in a "WotC kills everything!!!1!!1!" style and more of a "Man, they goofed, eberron has twelve moons." The fact of the matter is, it's a mistake, and there's not a single person out there who can't figure out how to fix it on their own. The repeated rants about how there should be more editors just gets old, fast. Nearly as fast as reading books that have a bunch of errors.
ekomega 08-12-05, 01:50 AM	As for WotC not caring about people ranting on the boards? Sure they do, how do you think 3.5 came about? Or how the things that got "fixed" were exactly the topics that got the most threads about them on the boards, and not what was truely broken (like Hypnosis or Astral Projection)? The squeeky wheel gets the grease. Well, I'm certainly going to keep complaining and not buying (as I have been). I sincerely hope that you are correct, but only time will tell.
anarco_rata 08-12-05, 01:51 AM	I think everybody is taking things too far. If you don't like a product, you don't need to buy it, if you buy ione, and turns out to be deficient, you got all the rigth to complain, but do it civilized. Also, if you see something you don't like in a book, just don't use it, this is no videogame, where you ahve to accept the system and the things as programmed, you can use the stuff you find or not. Remember it's just a game, it doesn't have to be perfect, don't spend hours fixing the mistakes on a book, exepnd them developing an adventure and forget those mistakes, don't use them, they don't exist. There are tons of others rpg's, if you don't like the direction dnd is going or dislike WoTC then stop buying and play another one. Have you all become so cynical and crittical that you cannot read a book and enjoy it, and instead of that pint out every little mistake and ruin it for you and probably others? I enjoyed reading RoE (yes, i enjoy reading sourcebooks), it was a lot more roleplaying oriented that i have expected, when i put it to use in my game, i found out the mistakes and corrected them as i played, and i never developed that berserk rage you all seem to have.
Edymnion 08-12-05, 03:14 AM	Also, if you see something you don't like in a book, just don't use it, this is no videogame, where you ahve to accept the system and the things as programmed, you can use the stuff you find or not. Remember it's just a game, it doesn't have to be perfect, don't spend hours fixing the mistakes on a book, exepnd them developing an adventure and forget those mistakes, don't use them, they don't exist.Except that what you have to remember is that there is always the chance that something else that comes out that you DO want to use will be built off of something you don't like. It would be like saying the next Faerun book permanently kills off Elminster, and then every FR book after that uses that as the center of their premise. It means you either have to not use those books, or essentially rewrite large chunks of them to keep your game straight. Long as its isolated though, its not a big deal. But when you see trends emerging, with no signs of stopping in the near future, you can see the writing on the wall. You either make your displeasure known, or you are passively agreeing with what they are doing. Its sad, especially with only what, 4 actually Eberron line books out now, and one eberron themed generic book, and we're already seeing power creep? WotC and the developers DO read the boards, if they post or not. If all they see is people going "Yeah, this rocks!", they're just going to think thats what everybody wants, and will ramp it up some more. If they see a lot of people going "What the crap is this???", they know they're losing their target audience, and will adjust material back in the other direction.
Tealgorthian 08-12-05, 03:21 AM	I desided a long time ago that after Races of Eberron, I would never buy a single Eberron product again. Why? These boards, and their elitism, and consistant ranting, and down putting of ANYTHING that was not "pure Eberron". Any thread that even MENTIONS subraces turns into a load of the "regulars" flaming/baiting everyone, telling them that it has no place in Eberron, and they should just keep it out. I mentioned Spelltheives and Warlocks once, and I got jumped for "adding obviously broken material". This seems to happen ANYTIME someone wants to make a change to the setting. Take a look at the High Level Characters thread, where a load of people are jumping the crap of a couple guys. The obvious attacks on the Forgotten Realms setting, a setting that has been around for a very long time, with a LOAD of good material, authors, and contributors, and it gets DUMPED ON here. Even if you dont like it, you should RESPECT the amount of work people have put into it. It is a rich and dynamic setting! You are obviously allowed to not like it, but some of the comments I've seen on this board go well beyond that. I come around every now and again to see if this place has changed. It hasnt. It's still the same people running around with their "hammer" making comments like "subraces dont belong in Eberron" in a thread were someone was asking were to put them. That's not adding to the topic at hand. That's someone shoving their opinion down someone elses throat, and seems alot like trolling to me. You arent helping them, your just cluttering the thread. But I am sure this will get ignored, like it always does when I have something like this to say.
greatfrito 08-12-05, 04:54 AM	Excellent post. That may be the biggest complement I've gotten on these boards. Thank you.
greatfrito 08-12-05, 05:11 AM	Edit: Bah, that was just mean-spirited and rambling. It's too late, and I've worked way too long. *waves hands* This never happened! *waves hands* Suffice to say, in summary: Tealgorthian? Word man. Word.
bassjon 08-12-05, 05:17 AM	Having read many of the threads of complaint and praise for Eberron products I am stil a little confused as to the purpose of either. Are they: 1 Aimed at potential buyers to give them an informed opinion before they make their purchase. 2. Aimed at WotC and its writers to try and prevent future errors. 3. A chance to let of some steam. It seems to me, and correct me if I'm wrong, that the answer in the main is 2 (with a hefty chunk of 3 thrown in). Now there seems to be some conjecture as to how much wieght WotC gives to the comments on these boards and therefore the effectiveness of making a protest in this way. May I ask the people who point out errors and the such whther or not they make their thouights heard in any other way. Do they write to WotC or indeed Hasbro? In my experience as someone who has handled customer complaints the best way to make an impact is to write direct to the man in charge. If you want things to change then write directly to the people who can implement such a change. That is all - thank you. PS: Is there a specific place for threads on product reviews and critcisim? If not maybe there should be one?
Splendide 08-12-05, 05:26 AM	I don't see anything wrong with complaints. Every game line has dud sourcebooks, and most lines have some gems. The best we can do is report both. But, I am disappointed every time I read a piece by someone that doesn't even seem to have read the ECS thoroughly. How hard is it to do? Are Wizards having trouble finding freelancers with a genuine interest in Eberron?
Pax 08-12-05, 07:53 AM	Regardless of what one thinks of the content, in any other publishing endeavor, the quantity and degree of error present in a D&D book is substandard and wholly unacceptable. Why this is not so for WotC is thoroughly disturbing. And in any other industry, the qualityof materials and printing demanded by the customer (harcover, with full-color illustrations throughout, usually over 100 pages inlength, with relatively small typeface for full 8.5"x11" pages) would result in prices double or triple what we pay now. At least. You think thirty dollars is a lot to pay? My god man, if WOTC was able to charge as much, by pagecount and/or wordcount, as onehas to pay for textbooks or "coffee table" books, you'd be looking at a pricetage of a HUNDRED dollars. People insist onpaying for pretty pictures and hardcover supplements; they also insist on paying for hardcovers instead of softbound. Lastly, they also insist on not payin more than thirty or fourty dollars for a single supplement, DESPITE the level of quality they demand in terms of covers and pictures. So where, exactly, is the money that woudl pay for all the copyeditors and such that would be present in "any any other publishing endeavor" coming FROM ...? It's certainly not being generated by selling the books ...! No, I perceive them as making more errors per product than other publishers in the industry because they do. This is easily documented. Great. Document it! I'm a games purchaser for a large hobby store. I can pull almost any other product off of my wall that will thoroughly trump any WotC product for editing quality. Sadly, I sincerely doubt that. Maybe a few extra typo's sneak in, but those are hardly a major quality issue. As for Legends and Lairs stuff - the point is, I compared that to the worst products I had gotten from WOTC, from both 3.0 and 3.5 ... and it was still far, faaaar worse. You, OTOH, are IMO clearly implying that WOTC is the worst gaming publisher out there. If you want a classic example, look at the City of Towers novel by WotC, The novels are irrelevant to me - I only care about the quality of gaming products, not novels. and tell me the last time you saw an editing travesty of that magnitude from a major book publisher. WOTC is not a major book publisher.
Pax 08-12-05, 08:02 AM	I desided a long time ago that after Races of Eberron, I would never buy a single Eberron product again. Why? These boards, and their elitism, and consistant ranting, and down putting of ANYTHING that was not "pure Eberron". Bah. Don't let the opinons and asshat-ness of others, on an internet board, turn you away from something. If youlike it - buy it, and to the nine hells with what anyone else thinks. If you don't ;like it, don't buy it, and ditto for what others think of THAT. ^_^ I mentioned Spelltheives and Warlocks once, and I got jumped for "adding obviously broken material". Which is strange to hear ... because to me, Spellthieves just fit Eberron like a freakin' glove ...! And Warlocks also fit, in a way. As a GM, I might tweak Warlocks somewhat ... add in a need for a dragonshard of some sort as a Focus component for their powers, and counterbalance that with an Aberrant Dragonmark (and progress that to better versions, much like "true" dragonmarks do ...). I can see the point of objecting to SOME extraneous-source stuff in Eberron - most of the races in the XPH, for example; Oriental-flavored classes like the Ninja or Wu Jen; Half-Dragons run against some specifically-established bits of the setting (and thus, eventhe Dragon Disciple is questionable, at best); the BoED and BoVD might undercut some of themoral ambiguity inherent in Eberron's "greyer alignment" setup. But to object to ALL stuff not specifically written for Eberron? FF, that'd even include the PHB, if you took it to it's logical conclusion. So, yeah ... I can see how that irks you. But don't let it turn you off of the BOOKS, too.
Tom McCarthy 08-12-05, 09:40 AM	I'm one of the people who posts about nitpicky and minor details I find contradictory in Eberron products. And jonthegm's criticism would be well founded if I really thought that each of the things I'm posting about actually were diminishing people's enjoyment of Eberron. I know most players and GMs don't care about misusing titles and honorifics. I know most of them don't care whether airships are 200 feet long or 100 feet long. But unfortunately, I fall into old patterns. See, I proofread Hero System manuscripts before they are published and post to the line editor the things I think should be changed or corrected. And so I have a habit of pointing out even minor things which won't really affect play or enjoyment, but which would be nice to get right in the first place. And for what it's worth, the typical Hero System manuscript I see has been written and then had one or two editing passes by the line editor before I see it. And they have about the same number of math errors or the like as, say, The Five Nations. But because the majority of Hero System products are set in the present or near future and on Earth, there's generally fewer errors in geography, history, or etiquette. After all, we all know what Mister, Miss, Misses, Judge, Captain, Officer, President and Prime Minister mean today. As for docking at an airship docking tower, I just know my players are going to try to leap from one to another, and I do want to know how close together they are (but in the absence of any information from WOTC, the answer will be, "Close enough that you could make it, far enough apart that you might not").
MrFilthyIke 08-12-05, 10:22 AM	ATTENTION WOTC!!! GIVE KEITH BAKER MORE WRITING AUTHORITY!!! I love it Altaris13. :D
jonthegm 08-12-05, 10:59 AM	I guess the main reason I dislike the nitpicky nitpickings is that it sounds like you guys are all just a bunch of Comic Book Guys (Worst. Book. Ever.) with a stack of papers, complaining about how Alien Apocolypse could never be considered canon because in Scene 3 at the 5 second mark, you can clearly see a can of orange slice. Slice cannot exist in the future because Crush is superior!
makeshiftwings 08-12-05, 11:55 AM	Another thing you need to realize is that these are internet message boards. People who think "I think no one should ever have an opinion on anything, and no one should ever complain about anything, and everyone should shut up" don't post much of anything except posts complaining about people complaining. These boards are for discussion of WotC products; I come here because I want questions answered and ideas thrown around and I EXPECT people to dissect the books. Keith ASKED us to start the inconsistency thread; that isn't whining. He will hopefully compile the errors and bring them before WotC and say "Hey guys, look, people have been noticing since you fired the entire editing staff." This can only be a good thing. It will result in a higher quality product. Everybody wants a higher quality product, but that doesn't happen unless us "whiners" point out the mistakes. The quality of the books is going downhill. Here's what happens if you never complain: they get worse and worse until eventually you just stop buying them. But when you stop buying them, they don't just magically get better. WotC won't automatically assume people aren't buying their book because of sloppy editing. They'll see that the FR books outsold the Eberron books 4 to 1, and assume that Eberron's not as popular, thus, we get less Eberron books, and of lower quality. However, by complaining, WotC can actually see WHY you've decided not to buy the books; they will realize it's not that people don't like Eberron, but that they are fed up with their sloppy editing. And then, in theory, they will hire the editing staff back and designate playtesters for Eberron material. If they ignore us and don't, then eventually we all stop buying the books anyway, but at least we tried.
Manyfist 08-12-05, 12:22 PM	I just wish that WOTC wouldn't rush the Gun on printing out so many Eberron Books, so quickly. I think it should take almost as long as it takes another Complete X to come out. With that time, they could spend some time actually making the books a bit better. Edit what REALLY needs to be edited, they will have some time to come up with Ideas and such. Keith Baker needs to be the Top Eberron guy, he knows what the general wants, and he's a bit of a perfectionist. If they stop producing so many Eberron books, the Quality of the book would actually be worth to look at. Theirs TONS of inconsiconsies in your own real life, no one really complains about that, well some do. Thinks in Eberron should never be explained, like what caused The Mourning, or What happen on that day. Nothing should EVER. EVER. Be set in stone for Eberron. Thou I do agree that Subraces do not belong in Eberron, or that Eberron should be included in Planescape. Since you start pooring out the subraces, Eberron will be no better than FR, which has every subrace of elf their is + more. Planescape Could be connected to Eberron only through a Means of hazardess paths. That would stop the Gods from wondering in and Enslaveing all of Eberron, it would also stop Illithids and Giths from other settings coming in and enslaving eberron. :D
Illvillainy 08-12-05, 12:25 PM	He's not upset about the inconsistency thread, more that the fact the half the so-called inconsistencies, well, aren't.
greatfrito 08-12-05, 12:33 PM	Another thing you need to realize is that these are internet message boards. People who think "I think no one should ever have an opinion on anything, and no one should ever complain about anything, and everyone should shut up" don't post much of anything except posts complaining about people complaining. See, I don't think anyone has ever said that they want to have no opinions on the boards. This little straw-man popped up for some reason, but don't try to base an argument on it - no one thinks that the boards should be devoid of opinions. We'd just like to see something more akin to opinions, and less akin to yelling. Keith ASKED us to start the inconsistency thread; that isn't whining. He will hopefully compile the errors and bring them before WotC and say "Hey guys, look, people have been noticing since you fired the entire editing staff." This can only be a good thing. It will result in a higher quality product. Everybody wants a higher quality product, but that doesn't happen unless us "whiners" point out the mistakes. I don't know if people who complain about the Inconsistency Thread have read through it - I did last night. Frankly, I find little to complain about in that thread. The way errors are presented in it is very useful, and very interesting. Now, I do have a problem with non-errors being listed in there erroneously because there's no discussion of matters. The quality of the books is going downhill. God is it ever: Races of Eberron was made from tissue-paper. Five Nations is like a hundred pages long (it feels that way). Let's complain about those things to Wizards. I'll feel better with 50/50 hit-and-miss with the material if the books are up to what they used to be on physical quality. Hell, it's back to the Wizards' standard at that point!
Psymnotica 08-12-05, 01:01 PM	Here's an idea: Why don't we just start writing the developers & editors of books we find problems with? I'm sure you could just send your complaint to them c/o customer service and that way, the people in charge will be more likely to get the message. So send your complaints to one/some/all of the following: Andy Collins (Developer: Races of Eberron) James Wyatt (Developer: Races of Eberron, 5 Nations; Editor: 5 Nations) Michelle Lyons (Editor: Races of Eberron, Explorers Handbook) Scott Fitzgerald Gray (Editor: Races of Eberron, Explorers Handbook) Janice Sellers (Editor: Races of Eberron) Kim Mohan (Managing Editor: Races of Eberron, 5 Nations, Explorers Handbook) Jesse Decker (Author: Races of Eberron) Mathew Sernett (Author: Races of Eberron) Gwendolyn F.M (Author: Races of Eberron) Keith Baker (Author: Races of Eberron) Bill Slavicsek (Author/Developer/Editor: 5 Nations; Director of RPG R&D) David Noonan (Author: 5 Nations, Explorers Handbook) Christopher Perkins (Author: 5 Nations) Frank Brunner (Author: Explorers Handbook) Rich Burlew (Author: Explorers Handbook) That should cover the three most *****ed about books on these lists. So have at them, because unlike a great many of us, they may not check every message on these boards every day, so not all of them may get the message. Oh, and to those who think that the lightning rail carts on page 37 of the Explorers Handbook are a complete travesty of editing, I suggest you look again. I'm pretty sure that those beds on car 7 are meant to be benches (perhaps they didn't have a bench image for the program they were using). And as for car 8, I'm sure two of those sleeper rooms are actually the water closets. Anything else I'm missing? Ciao
Euangelion 08-12-05, 01:23 PM	Now, I do have a problem with non-errors being listed in there erroneously because there's no discussion of matters. There absolutely needs to be "discussion of matters" concerning inconsistencies, the discussion just needs to take place off that particular thread, either through PM or using a thread dedicated to discussing that particular issue. If a the original poster of an inconsistency later changes their mind about that issue, then they should edit their post accordingly. Is that a little pie-in-the-sky to assume that it'll happen? Sure, but I'd rather give people the chance to be mature and keep the "discussion runs" from clogging up a thread that's supposed to be just a list. Everyone needs to bear in mind that the vast majority of us really don't know what goes on in the WoTC offices and homes as they work to put these resources together. For example, maybe some at WoTC think that the Church of the Silver Flame is alive and kicking in Aundair while others at WoTC think it's moribund. Or maybe they just left out discussion of religion in Aundair from 5N on purpose. I have no idea, but what I do know is that it's possible that there is confusion on the issue. If someone doesn't say something about it, then perhaps they never get around to discussing it, which runs the risk that future products might continue a continuity error. I believe they want to put out a quaility product, especially since their names are on it. We're just helping them to do so. Keep discussing these issues, just please don't use the Inconsistency Collection thread to do it.
ekomega 08-12-05, 04:33 PM	I desided a long time ago that after Races of Eberron, I would never buy a single Eberron product again. Why? These boards, and their elitism, and consistant ranting, and down putting of ANYTHING that was not "pure Eberron"... Isn't the solution to your problem ignoring the forum? I don't see how not buying Eberron products has anything to do with your complaint. And yet you came to the forum to explain why you don't come to the forum...
Sithis 08-12-05, 06:13 PM	I guess the main reason I dislike the nitpicky nitpickings is that it sounds like you guys are all just a bunch of Comic Book Guys (Worst. Book. Ever.) with a stack of papers, complaining about how Alien Apocolypse could never be considered canon because in Scene 3 at the 5 second mark, you can clearly see a can of orange slice. Slice cannot exist in the future because Crush is superior! Why on earth do you care? It's a pretty cardinal rule of message boards (or social situations in general) that people will talk about what they want to talk about and if you're not interested, then don't listen. This being a message board, you are entirely capable of simply ignoring the posts talking about things you aren't interested in. No one owes silence to you or really cares whether you think their quite active topic doesn't need to exist. If you think all of these people sound like Comic Book Guys that's fine, but their personalities and topics of conversation are not your concern nor does anyone want you to tell them they should act in a different way.
MysticTheurge 08-12-05, 07:26 PM	Why on earth do you care? It's a pretty cardinal rule of message boards (or social situations in general) that people will talk about what they want to talk about and if you're not interested, then don't listen. This being a message board, you are entirely capable of simply ignoring the posts talking about things you aren't interested in. No one owes silence to you or really cares whether you think their quite active topic doesn't need to exist. If you think all of these people sound like Comic Book Guys that's fine, but their personalities and topics of conversation are not your concern nor does anyone want you to tell them they should act in a different way. It's really not that simple, because it's not as though the people who want to complain about Eberron Books confine their opinions to threads titled "Complaints about Eberron Books." Sure not every thread has complaints of this nature, but take for example an innocent question that someone might ask about material in Races of Eberron. Instead of getting real, constructive response they get a lot of "This is why I don't consider RoE part of my game" and "RoE is the worst book ever" kind of answers. The internet, and boards like these in particular, seems to make some people feel like they have free reign to be jerks. Personally, I don't expect (or want) people to stop pointing out the errors when they come up, or even stop complaining about them, but I'd rather it was approached with less of a snide attitude and more in a way that might actually lead to constructively solving the problem. Honestly, I think writing letters to the authors and designers (who are, in all likelihood, going to do more Eberron work in the future) might be more productive. God knows if I was an author of any of the books in question I doubt I'd read many of these threads for long.
ekomega 08-13-05, 03:07 AM	You think thirty dollars is a lot to pay? My god man, if WOTC was able to charge as much, by pagecount and/or wordcount, as onehas to pay for textbooks or "coffee table" books, you'd be looking at a pricetage of a HUNDRED dollars. Textbook prices are artificially inflated. Especially for graduate level textbooks. The publishing companies still like to maintain high profit margins, even if only 4000 students nationwide are going to be buying one book in a year. Also, revising editions every two years is another key to "success" for textbook publishing companies. I'm not saying WotC charges too much, or too little. I don't know. But comparing them to textbook companies is not fair. Even comparing to regular book companies isn't fair. Look at Penguin, who publishes many books that are in the public domain. These public domain books are retail price $7.00, which means the bookstore bought them for $3.00. And it cost Penguin about 20 cents or less to print and distribute that book. Big publishing companies make major money. I don't think a hobby book company can be compared to anything like that. I doubt WotC has the profit margins of Penguin or Wiley, and so it's not valid.
LuciferNietzsche 08-13-05, 05:15 AM	1) Go through a book BEFORE you buy it. No, don't read the whole thing and catalogue every single mistake there is, but go over it and see if there's anything blatantly wrong or otherwise unacceptable to you. Be responsible for your choices as a consumer. 2) Mistakes don't matter as much if simple logic can sort them out. If something is an obvious typo and you can easily determine what was supposed to be there, then don't worry about it. 3) If you find more mistakes, or bigger mistakes, than you can comfortably deal with, assume there are probably far more little mistakes and DON'T buy the thing. If you really need the info, buy it anyway if you like. Let the company know what mistakes you do find, and use the book as you see fit. Do NOT complain and whine to everyone you can possibly find about how crappy it is. If others decide they still need the book after seeing it's flaws, they'll have their own problems to deal with and certainly won't want to hear anything from you. You bought it, you deal with it. Ask for help if you need it, tell the company it screwed up, but do not go on a crusade to tell the world. The world DOES NOT CARE if we who role-play have flawed material to work with. 4) If you find one day that your book has outlived its usefulness, or that you can no longer deal with its flaws, then get rid of it. You have a number of options in this regard. You can give or sell it to a friend or fellow player who might need it or be able to find his or her own use for it. You can sell it to any retailer who deals in such used materials. And finally my personal favorite, you could give it a fond farewell in a magnificent bonfire, as you and your group sit around remembering the fun times playing the game and wish the departed book a good journey to the great beyond. Now, onto other things... There are more than two sides to all arguments. It is the job of the writers and editors to put out a quality product. It is our responsibility as consumers to determine whether or not that product is worth buying BEFORE we buy it. It is our right as consumers to tell the company that it has made errors. It is the perogative of the company to ignore our complaints if they wish. It is NOT our right to complain to everyone we can about a product. Corporations are not in business to put out quality products, to make us happy, or even to stay in business... They're in business for money, and nothing else. Moreover, they're in business for money NOW. They have little to no interest in long-term profit or company success, being practically unable to see beyond each fiscal year and their bonuses. That doesn't mean they get to fleece us as, if they did, we would end their business prematurely by boycotting them, even by their standards. As I said before, we have a right to complain to the company when they mess up. When it's big, they usually fix it. If it's not big, don't even think of expecting them to care in the slightest. It's the nature of our society, and it's not likely to change soon. Now, all of that being said, there ARE exceptions, but usually all even that means is that their greed is such that they want more money overall, rather than having it right now. Like I said, skim the book to see if you really want it. Buy it if you do, don't buy it if not. Tell the company what mistakes you find, but don't pester the rest of us because even the ones who say they care really don't. On a final note, one wishes to eat one's cake and have it too. Anyone who has cake is of course going to eat it, that's the point of having any kind of food in the first place. The real trick is to eat your cake and yet still have it.
Pax 08-13-05, 05:24 AM	Textbook prices are artificially inflated. Especially for graduate level textbooks. The publishing companies still like to maintain high profit margins, even if only 4000 students nationwide are going to be buying one book in a year. Also, revising editions every two years is another key to "success" for textbook publishing companies. Actually, I was coparing the game bookprices not JUSt to textbooks. But even that part - I stand by the comparison. BEcause, you see, I'm not talking Graduate level textbooks ... I'm talking community college stuff. ALGEBRA textbooks, even! The last one I had to buy, myself? One hundred and twenty dollars. Not many more pages than the PHB or DMG, lower-quality paper for the pages, and while it was printed incolor, the color was for DIAGRAMs, not artwork - I gurantee you they weren't paying artist prices for a few triangles and circles and whatnot. Big publishing companies make major money. I don't think a hobby book company can be compared to anything like that. I doubt WotC has the profit margins of Penguin or Wiley, and so it's not valid. That, actually, is my oint: RPG books simply don't generate the kind of cash flow neccessary to have the samelevel of editing and proofreeding quality control that the big publishing houses have. Therefor, saying "WOTC's quality isn't up to publishing industry standards" is an inappropriate comparison to make. I only mentioned tetbook and "coffee table book" prices because, to get that level of quality ... you'd have to PAY for it. :)
Azual 08-13-05, 09:48 AM	i have a solution. Its every Librarians nightmare. DONT BUY ANYMORE BOOKS. if they suck, dont buy em.
a_psh 08-13-05, 05:31 PM	i have a solution. Its every Librarians nightmare. DONT BUY ANYMORE BOOKS. if they suck, dont buy em. But if we don't buy anymore books, a lack of exposure to language will cause us to soon forget how to spell, punctuate, and coherently express our thoughts in an effective manner, turning all of our discourse into a bunch of poor almost-non-sequiturs and random, simplistic rants! It would be the death of civilization. Oh, noes! We don't want that! Remember: Librarians are your friends. They love you. They want to help you. They don't care if you don't buy books. They only care that you read them. That's why they maintain giant collections of books that they give out to people so people can read them without having to buy them all. People aren't asking for their money back. People are asking for subsequent work in the series to be better. They love the setting and really, really want information about Cyre, airships, dragons, warforged, whatever. They're worried that some shoddy fact-editing will cause a continued decline in quality, until Eberron turns into two or three good books and a dozen bad ones, all of which contradict each other. While many are overzealous in expressing their discontent, their concerns are legitimate. Thus, the "vote with your wallet" crap simply doesn't work in this case (nor does it make sense in most other instances in which people suggest it). You don't buy Eberron, they don't print it. NOT the point. The point is that you really do like Eberron and want more, but what's coming out doesn't meet the high standards set by stuff like the ECS and S:CoT, so you go on message boards and complain. The problem that people are posting about here is that the complaining seems to have gotten a bit out of hand.
MysticTheurge 08-13-05, 06:15 PM	While many are overzealous in expressing their discontent, their concerns are legitimate. Thank you. This pretty much sums up my opinions on the matter.
Arden Blackleaf 08-13-05, 06:38 PM	But if we don't buy anymore books, a lack of exposure to language will cause us to soon forget how to spell, punctuate, and coherently express our thoughts in an effective manner, turning all of our discourse into a bunch of poor almost-non-sequiturs and random, simplistic rants! It would be the death of civilization. Oh, noes! We don't want that! Remember: Librarians are your friends. They love you. They want to help you. They don't care if you don't buy books. They only care that you read them. That's why they maintain giant collections of books that they give out to people so people can read them without having to buy them all. People aren't asking for their money back. People are asking for subsequent work in the series to be better. They love the setting and really, really want information about Cyre, airships, dragons, warforged, whatever. They're worried that some shoddy fact-editing will cause a continued decline in quality, until Eberron turns into two or three good books and a dozen bad ones, all of which contradict each other. While many are overzealous in expressing their discontent, their concerns are legitimate. Thus, the "vote with your wallet" crap simply doesn't work in this case (nor does it make sense in most other instances in which people suggest it). You don't buy Eberron, they don't print it. NOT the point. The point is that you really do like Eberron and want more, but what's coming out doesn't meet the high standards set by stuff like the ECS and S:CoT, so you go on message boards and complain. The problem that people are posting about here is that the complaining seems to have gotten a bit out of hand. "Reads post" "Jots down a_psh's name for respect list and bounces off" Good post! and one that I agree with completely.
Edymnion 08-13-05, 06:50 PM	but take for example an innocent question that someone might ask about material in Races of Eberron. Instead of getting real, constructive response they get a lot of "This is why I don't consider RoE part of my game" and "RoE is the worst book ever" kind of answers.Yeah, and you know there are several threads which talk about introducing new races to Eberron that get along just fine without anything like this happening. Of course, the threads were what you're talking about happening are also the ones that are framed like "Oh, I want to play a wizard, but nothing in Eberron gets a +2 to their Int, where I can I stick subrace X so that I can have my stat boost?" Or the threads that garner the "Its just RoE, you can ignore it" are the threads along the lines of "This part doesn't make any sense, how am I supposed to get X from this book and Y from the other book to mesh?" When the easiest answer is "You don't". Of course Eberron garners a lot of diehard fans. Have you even SEEN the Faerun boards? There are just as many, if not more there that do the exact same thing. And frankly, as an Eberron player, I don't want to see this setting turn into another hodgepodge of everything everybody ever thought of above level 15 in one setting that Faerun has turned into over the years. Faerun has become too bloated to really do anything with anymore without ignoring/rewriting the majority of the setting's history. As for the "nobody ever said you couldn't express your opinion", the entire tone of this thread has been "stop complaining and saying you don't like things!" or "You're all a bunch of elitists for not accepting everything shoved under your noses with open arms!". Yeah, the general tone of this thread is "You're free to express your opinion, unless it conflicts with mine, then you should just shut up." Double standard. If someone is saying that others should keep their negative opinions to themselves, then they must also call for people to keep their positive opinions to themselves as well. No double standards, its either both, or neither. Anything else is just being a hypocrit.
fugueplane 08-14-05, 01:19 AM	There are many kinds of negative opinions. Just like with anything else in life, having a negative opinion about something does not necessarily mean you should air your opinion or that it’s even a good idea or a justified idea to do so. This is a game we play. Treating game books with a same kind of seriousness that life and death decisions get treated is taking it too far. I think this is what the thread was saying at the start. It is a logical fallacy to go to extremes and ignore the middle. Saying if anyone can speak then they should be able to say whatver they want, or otherwise nobody should speak because it’s supposedly a double standard is idiotic and is always very stupid. There is plenty of room for everyone to say usefully when they don’t like some Eberron book and for other to say when they do like a Eberron book, without anyone having to resort to extremes like praising every book ever printed without even reading it, or to always downbeat a book that didn’t conform to some intense attitude about how all Eberron books should be (like how the book covers are presented for example).
a_psh 08-14-05, 02:53 AM	Thank you. This pretty much sums up my opinions on the matter. "Reads post" "Jots down a_psh's name for respect list and bounces off" Good post! and one that I agree with completely. My ego has been thoroughly stroked. =)
nyysjan 08-14-05, 04:21 AM	As for the "nobody ever said you couldn't express your opinion", the entire tone of this thread has been "stop complaining and saying you don't like things!" or "You're all a bunch of elitists for not accepting everything shoved under your noses with open arms!". Yeah, the general tone of this thread is "You're free to express your opinion, unless it conflicts with mine, then you should just shut up." Double standard. If someone is saying that others should keep their negative opinions to themselves, then they must also call for people to keep their positive opinions to themselves as well. No double standards, its either both, or neither. Anything else is just being a hypocrit. Edy, you da man :w00t:
LuciferNietzsche 08-14-05, 04:55 AM	I just spent a very long time writing a very angry post, and then I deleted it. I didn't feel like dealing with the inevitable flood of posts to disagree with it. Suffice it to say, one can always express one's opinions, but that should never go unchecked. People should be able to speak their minds for good or ill, but no one should ever be allowed to shout in the middle of a store that republicans, democrats, whites, blacks, homosexuals or any other group is superior or inferior to another. That's merely an example. You can say whatever you like, whenever you like, but don't endlessly go on negatively or positively in such an extreme way about anything. You have better things to do, like having children or not. I say they're both important because some people do a greater service to the species by not further polluting our already tainted stock. As I said in a previous post, tell the company they goofed, and then let it go. Do not crusade to tell the world, because the world just doesn't care.
Edymnion 08-15-05, 02:10 PM	As I said in a previous post, tell the company they goofed, and then let it go. Do not crusade to tell the world, because the world just doesn't care.There is an old saying in retail business that applies here just like everywhere else. A happy customer will tell one other person about your store. An unhappy customer will tell ten.
Calibim 08-15-05, 03:04 PM	There is an old saying in retail business that applies here just like everywhere else. A happy customer will tell one other person about your store. An unhappy customer will tell ten. Yeah but those "unhappy customers" should be boiled in oil, dipped in tar, rolled in feathers and drop-kicked off the nearest freakin cliff.... Can't tell that I work in 'customer service' can you? :rolleyes: Alright, carry on.... P.S. "It's a, I say it's a JOKE son. Don't cha get it? You're built too short, the good ones go over yer head. Ya got a hole in yer glove, boy; I keep pitching 'em and you keep missing 'em. Ya gotta keep yer eye on the ball, son. Eye. Ball. Eyeball. I almost had a joke there. Joke, son, get it?" ~ Fog-Horn Leghorn "Looney Tunes"
Sithis 08-15-05, 05:15 PM	Suffice it to say, one can always express one's opinions, but that should never go unchecked. This is a message board about D&D. How is that in any way compared to shouting hate speech in a store? Those things are checked because they're hate speech, intimidation, or good ol' fashioned disturbing the peace. Putting checks on opinions and how you express them is an exception, not the norm. People should be able to speak their minds for good or ill, but no one should ever be allowed to shout in the middle of a store that republicans, democrats, whites, blacks, homosexuals or any other group is superior or inferior to another. Hell, as long as the store owner (or any owner of private property) does not mind, you're perfectly allowed to badmouth any group you wish. If you bring it to a public forum (depending on your local laws) you can generally even continue on the political line without interference. Someone might shout back at you, but you still don't need to stop talking. You can say whatever you like, whenever you like, but don't endlessly go on negatively or positively in such an extreme way about anything. You have better things to do, like having children or not. I've got an idea. How about you worry about what you should do, and I'll worry about I should do, and as long as neither of us forces the other to do anything, everything will be fine? As I said in a previous post, tell the company they goofed, and then let it go. Do not crusade to tell the world, because the world just doesn't care. Wonderful. So it may be wasted effort. It's good of you to point that out. Now you can move along and we'll decide whether we still want to crusade. Doesn't the active nature of the error threads suggest that at least some number of the individuals in this world do care?
Atlictoatl 08-18-05, 02:47 PM	And in any other industry, the qualityof materials and printing demanded by the customer (harcover, with full-color illustrations throughout, usually over 100 pages inlength, with relatively small typeface for full 8.5"x11" pages) would result in prices double or triple what we pay now. At least. You think thirty dollars is a lot to pay? My god man, if WOTC was able to charge as much, by pagecount and/or wordcount, as onehas to pay for textbooks or "coffee table" books, you'd be looking at a pricetage of a HUNDRED dollars. People insist onpaying for pretty pictures and hardcover supplements; they also insist on paying for hardcovers instead of softbound. Lastly, they also insist on not payin more than thirty or fourty dollars for a single supplement, DESPITE the level of quality they demand in terms of covers and pictures. You infer that WotC cannot afford to pay for competent copyediting and writing while also paying for the physical product quality that gamers, under your assertion, demand. If that is, indeed, the reason why we are getting such poorly edited product, then I am even more disturbed about the future of Eberron, D&D, and WotC, because that makes absolutely no business sense. If one has a product that is inexpensive to produce, one need not make it a high-quality product (in terms of content or anything else). Profit will be made from the product through mark-up alone. If, however, one has a product that is relatively expensive to produce, then it is in one's interest to make it the best possible product, because profit margins will of necessity be much lower, and one's volume of profit will be derived predominantly through volume of sales. Better product = better word of mouth and sustained consumer interest = better volume of sales. D&D has a finite number of customers. WotC, as a business, must attempt to sell as many of each product as they can to that finite number of customers. In producing product of inferior quality, they are hurting present and future sales of their product. It makes no business sense to continue to produce product of questionable quality -- which is why I am concerned. I'm in roleplaying and D&D for the long haul; heck, I make my living in part off of it in addition to being a fan. When WotC makes poor business decisions, it affects me on multiple levels, and the decreasing quality of Eberron product specifically and D&D product in general, is very simply a poor business decision. It's not an accident or a mistake -- we have all watched the quality of these books deteriorate over the last few years. It can be nothing but intentional, at least so far as choices about paper quality, book length, writer assignment, and the number and quality of copy-editors on a book goes. Great. Document it! Perhaps I will, for myself and WotC, with whom I am in communication. For the purposes of this conversation, I think it would be wasted effort. Sadly, I sincerely doubt that. Maybe a few extra typo's sneak in, but those are hardly a major quality issue. As for Legends and Lairs stuff - the point is, I compared that to the worst products I had gotten from WOTC, from both 3.0 and 3.5 ... and it was still far, faaaar worse. You, OTOH, are IMO clearly implying that WOTC is the worst gaming publisher out there. Perhaps I spoke without clarity, then. What I intended to state is that WotC commands, by far, the largest market share of roleplaying profits in the industry. While I acknowledge this to be an extreme viewpoint, I maintain that they thus have a responsibility to the industry to produce the best possible products within their ability, and within reason. They are obviously constrained by price-points and overhead costs, but nobody is complaining about the physical quality of their materials, aside from paper weight, book length, and some shoddy binding. WotC can afford to pay writers and editors to do the best job possible, and they should be doing so. These are the first sourcebooks ever for D&D's new campaign setting. Shouldn't they be the best possible, instead of merely adequate? Wouldn't that be a standard worth setting, and which would ensure the longevity of this new product line which they have already invested hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of dollars into? The novels are irrelevant to me - I only care about the quality of gaming products, not novels. Well, I care about the novels -- primarily because they are as good if not better as anything else at conveying the setting, for both DMs and players. Forgotten Realms is the success that it is primarily because of the line of novels, and D&D gained a much larger player-base because of those novels. It says a lot to me about WotC that the first novel ever written for their new campaign setting -- written by the hottest authorial property they currently have -- had copy-editing that would have been an embarrassment in a high school yearbook. That says a lot. And I shudder to think what that must have been like for Keith. His first novel ever, for the intellectual property that put him on the map in a way he probably never dreamed of, and the thing was just horridly edited. That can't have endeared him to WotC, so not only did they alienate some hardcore fans, they probably alienated Keith a bit too, although he seems a forgiving guy. Shoddy work all around, on the part of WotC. WOTC is not a major book publisher. And they'll never get anywhere close to the success of one if they continue to produce such poor material.
jonthegm 08-18-05, 03:10 PM	And they'll never get anywhere close to the success of one if they continue to produce such poor material. The main problem is that WotC is already successful at a number of things other than book publishing, and so will never spend as much money QCing their books. Besides, you assume that negative talk about copyediting actually hurts sales. This is a "fact" which has not been demonstrated to my satisfaction.
Sharn Inquisitor 08-18-05, 04:52 PM	Personally, I think WoTC could stand to slow down the pace of getting things to the press a bit, to have better editing occur and I'd be fine with that. Take an extra month to make sure the glossary is included, take an extra month to have some extra eyes read the fields and locate errors. I like what WoTC is producing, just think the quality could improve and that they could slow down a bit.
Folderpirate 08-21-05, 11:24 PM	They misused a semicolon! Blasphemy! :rant:
Bryce 08-22-05, 02:05 AM	People do make mistakes, and well, the world loves to point it out. If everyone just took the time and energy used to complain, and did something about it instead, the planet would be a better place. But I don't see what the problem with City of Towers(the novel not the book) is? If any of the Eberron books is unreadable it would have to be Crimson Talisman, CoT was wonderful, it was what an Eberron game should be, and I really had no problems reading it, I guess to me enjoyment comes before wanting to complain. Yes there are several things that bother me about editing errors in Eberron books, like all the d'non-dragonmark names, but I just look to see if they have the feat and change it in my head, or reaplace it with ir' if they dont, it's not that hard to do. And yes, I do really hope someone whines about any grammatical or spelling errors I've made, I'm sure there are some, and I know it will brighten that persons day
Atlictoatl 08-26-05, 11:54 AM	My apologies that my infrequent board habits and my participation in this discussion are having the effect of flogging a dead horse. The conversation still interests me, which is why I am posting again. The main problem is that WotC is already successful at a number of things other than book publishing, and so will never spend as much money QCing their books. I think that you are probably right. It's interesting, though, that their other main product, Magic the Gathering, has much higher QC. It's also on a fairly aggressive release schedule, though they've built product testing into that schedule. Besides, you assume that negative talk about copyediting actually hurts sales. This is a "fact" which has not been demonstrated to my satisfaction. I'm the hobbies/rpg guy at a relatively large hobbies store, and I'd say about 20% of my clientele seems to care about the issue, but they care quite a bit. That subset pays attention to things like authors, etc. when making book choices. I can't speak to sales at places like Amazon, which obviously have a much greater volume, which volume is most likely somewhat blind purchasing. People do make mistakes, and well, the world loves to point it out. [...] And yes, I do really hope someone whines about any grammatical or spelling errors I've made, I'm sure there are some, and I know it will brighten that persons day People making mistakes isn't what we are talking about. We are talking about a product-producing corporation consistently making the same mistakes with every product release. If every refrigerator Kensington made didn't really work properly, they'd have a problem. If every car GM made had a problem with the fuel filter, they'd have a problem. Every book WotC makes doesn't really work as written -- it needs to be appended with errata, and the readers have to figure out what they really meant for particular passages or stat blocks. Most consumers don't put up with that; many of the consumers in our hobby do, while some few of us don't. As to any grammatical or spelling errors somebody on the boards makes, it's thoroughly irrelevant. Nobody is posting on the boards as their occupation, for which quality they should be held accountable.
Uller999 08-26-05, 04:22 PM	Right, well I'd like to say this and add my two cents. I've been purchasing D&D products and playing some form of D&D since I was 12, so that's about 9 years or so (god, I've done something for near a decade...that's a strange new feeling) anyway I've noticed a couple of things about people who play D&D over the years (myself included) and I think it is of praticular relevance to this thread. 1. D&D players tend to be more intellectually inclined (if more insulated) than the average person. This isn't to say players are genious, just to say that D&D is a hobby that necissitate's (or at least used to before 3.0) a certain amount of ingenuity, intelligence, and imagination to be fun. 2. D&D players are generally loyal to their hobby and that hobbie's producer. Despite WOTC being a big company everyone is on their board hanging out talking about their stuff. It was the same with TSR. I personally respected and liked TSR but personally don't like WOTC for personal reasons. What this loyalty in brand often does is puts people in semi-obligation to purchase products that bear a remote interest to their hobby, not for WOTC support necessarily but to support the hobby as a whole. 3. D&D players (especially on the boards) are nit picky as it is. To be completley honest, with the exception of English professors and students, I have never seen so many people be so **** about something so small as minor misspelling and grammatical mistakes. It's a message board not a nobel prize winning paper. This feeds into the fact that I'm willing to say that the "multitude" of errors in WOTC is probably overly scruitinized. Most DMs I've met don't have time to with the utmost pedanticism gurantee that their NPCs have all the right Xs, Ys, and Zs to qualify for this or that prestige class option. I know I adjucate and add stuff arbatraily all the time. the PCs won't know for sure and it makes more fun when unexpected things come out and bight you. 4. Okay I'm tangenting, right so D&D players are grammer **** compared to the average person I'd say but ultimatley since the vast majority of us live in some form of capitalism I'd say that if you don't like a book than don't buy it. If you are suspicious of the spelling mistakes go buy the book at your local border's and look at it before buying it. If you are prone to illegal things like myself download the book give it a look through and than buy it (I've done it with a number of books) if the book is of sufficient quality to spend money, I'll buy it regardless. There are some books that once I did look through, I was glad as hell that I didn't drop the 35$ to get it (Heroes of Battle for one) and some who's material just won't t be that useful to me anytime soon. So people seriously unless you are required to buy the bloody thing for an exam in class or its mandated law. Don't buy it if you think the product sucks. It is in WOTC's interest to do a better job amedning mistakes if profit sales take a nose dive since they are obviosuly aware of the ecnomic sucess in this marketshare otherwise they wouldn't be spending money. (ps. my grammar is fine, I wrote this in about twenty minutes and didn't run through it, any corrections concerning grammar or spelling I will consider a sign of **** retentive ignorance and ignore. Cheers)
Rake 08-27-05, 09:55 AM	Look, I'm a rent-a-cop. I've got night shifts and lots of spare time. When I got my hands on the ECS I took it straight to work and more or less read it cover-to-cover over an 8-hour period. In the ECS alone there are plenty of minor-to-moderate errors. Simply checking the erratta will tell you that. So! If ~I~ caught so many errors, it stands to reason that a decent editor with a good eye and eight hours ought to have caught them too. How hard is that? Before you've given the go-ahead to print, sit an editor down, ~and read the book~. Since publishing the ECS, however, WotC has just gotten sloppier. I think most of us agree,here. Most reasonable gamers really ~don't~ care how many airships can fit up Merrix's bum, but it'd be nice if NPC levels were consistant, feats and spells were balanced properly (anyone check out "Adept Learning" or whatever-that-was? Ech!), and the illustrations matched the crunch. And it's not so much the quantity of the errors as the magnitude. Wizards has a severe editing problem. No if's and's or but's about it. A good deal of this stuff REALLY ought have been caught before print. Way before print. When a casual gamer, such as myself, reading the material the first time through, catches a significant number of errors... you've got an editing problem. One of the guys I DM for has recently resolved to aquire WotC exclusively through illegal filesharing p2p programs like LimeWire and KaZaA. (NOT that I'm promoting ~that~ idea... but let's not ignore the fact that there are folks DOING it because of the quality of WotC's material.) It's not just the Eberron material, either. Look up Create Undead in the Libris Mortis. The Libris Mortis is a 3.5 sourcebook, okay? So... this spell references such creatures as "Large Skeleton" and "Medium Zombie". What does this mean, exactly? You can summon a skeletal version of ANY creature, as long as it matches the size given? Hmm... that can't be right. Aha! Lookie here. Here's the same spell - Create Undead - in the 3.0 book Magic of Faerun. So, we page to the "skeleton" and "zombie" entries in the 3.0 Monster Manual, and what do we find? Humanoid skeletons and zombies, listed by size. Skeletons and zombies NO LONGER LISTED IN THE CURRENT MONSTER MANUAL! The Libris Mortis includes a spell which ~tells you to summon creatures that can't be found in any Monster Manual.~ They just copied and pasted the spell without looking to make sure it was still current. The editors and playtesters are so busy they can't spare a ~casual glance~? One MINUTE of consideration? Don't get me wrong, Wizards saved D&D. They raised it from the dead. 3.0/3.5 is beautiful. A masterpiece. And the little stuff - it doesn't bother me. But when I see a major error that could've been corrected almost effortlessly before it ever saw print, and I ~so often do~, I feel like the publisher doesn't care very much about me.
Ricohard_Draconis 08-27-05, 11:53 AM	To return to the original poster i would just point out there is a solution to one of his problems. Keith baker's own website includes a downloadable version of the Index for Sharn: City of Towers here http://www.bossythecow.com/sharnindex.htm
Roxlimn 08-27-05, 01:08 PM	I would be the first to say that Races of Eberron isn't as bad as all that. In fact, It's fairly decent. However, it is less exciting and enjoyable of a product than Races of Faerun is, and that's saying quite a lot. I'm going to be voicing some similar concern about the product of Eberron books and the writing in general, but to preface that, allow me to say the following: 1. To be fair, editing in WotC products is probably no worse than average for many books. If you can't see editing mistakes in a book, then all that says is that you're probably not reading it hard enough or with enough interest. Medical textbooks on Surgery, Medicine, Pediatrics, Anesthesia, etc. etc, all have editing problems, and some of these can result in a junior doing a potentially lethal action without supervision. They have "errata," of course, and all these can be located in very reputable editors and publishing houses. A layman would probably not be able to spot these mistakes, but then that's just more reason why laymen probably shouldn't self-treat using medical textbooks. Pocketbooks can have editing problems. Texbooks can have major editing problems. It's not that big a deal. 2. Lack of an index is becoming endemic in many WotC books for some as-yet-unknown reason. The phenomenon actually started with the Living Greyhawk Gazeteer, which was the first 3e book I know of that got sold without an index. I don't believe that it's a mistake. WotC apparently doesn't think that indexing books is worth the money or effort. ________________________________________ _________________________ Having said that, I take exception to things like stat blocks being completely off the mark and concepts being flung out the window. One of the reasons I bought Eberron was because Keith Baker actually used NPC levels in his NPCs. If this concept doesn't get through to the thick-headed or ignorant authors submitting material to WotC, then that's one less reason why I'll be choosing Eberron over other RPG material. There's more to it. I want content. FRCS has more content in it than ECSB and Five Nations combined. Some of it may not have been as well thought-out, but the content is there. There are naming conventions in the damned core book. Nation based books like the Silver Marches and Unapproachable East have tons of material that inspire ideas and help shape a vision of what Thay or Aglarond or Silverymoon might be like. Even if I use none of the actual material, the vision is the important product. What the heck kind of vision is in Races of Eberron for Shifters? NONE! Not a single one, I tell you. It's all just more crunch supported by text that's pretending to be fluff, but is really no more than toilet paper. What's exciting about Shifter culture? What kinds of regional or inter-village differences exist between Shifters as seen through games of hrazhak? It says that Shifters love to "run races," yet no truly evocative rendering of such an event follows! Are races impromptu events that can simply arise between the glances of Shifters passing each other? Do they gain satifaction in the running or in the winning? How are they different from other races in that regard? Shifter children supposedly enjoy a game of "hunter and prey." How about more material on that? Shifter culture in its entirety has "perfected" two art forms?!?!? I know villages of unique tribes numbering no more than 20 or so that have more arts than that. How about covering "everyday" art and culture? The entry on War is one of the most insulting. Here we have tribes of shifters waging internecine war with each other in the Eldeen Reaches and none of it is worth any special mention?!?!? Pray, if we're talking about Shifters in War, then what the heck else are we supposed to be reading about? Nothing? The totality of the War entry is supposed to read like so much nothing? So the Shifters were involved in the Lycanthrope Purge. So what? We already knew about that. Heaven forbid that the book actually introduces something new and not obvious about that or about anything else. In all honesty, I had a stronger vision of the Shifter race before I read those flavorless and boring bland entries. Aside from the crunch, they could strike off every fluff statement in that book about Shifters and we would all be none the worse. A bit better, really, in that we would not have wasted minutes of our lives reading the obvious. It's the content that's the problem, not the editing. This has been happening more and more with WotC product. I bought FRCS and Unapprochable East. I even bought Silver Marches. Shining South and Underdark, for some amazing reason, despite the fantastic locales and ideas, utterly failed my expectations. I did not purchase those. I'm not even minding the quantity of content. City of Splendors: Waterdeep has guild entries for practically every organization in the City you can want to be a part of, including really mundane guilds like traders guilds and noble houses. It's got a ton of content in really small print. Sharn: City of Towers is better because it presents it's material in a format that makes the depth and life of the idea more palpable, and tons more fluff that's immediately usable in-game. The fact that the Wands family is having trouble may or may not come up in a game. It'll depend on whether I want the PCs to involve that family. The fact that food stalls are great near the Morgrave University is a fluff piece that I can throw in in virtually every game involving Sharn, because it's interesting and everyone would probably know about it! Heck, I can probably even throw it in in a game mostly set in Stormreach. When Races of Faerun outperforms Races of Eberron in the eyes of a fan of Eberron, then you know that there's a content problem in there, somewhere. They need to hire writers who actually know as much about the ideas and concepts of Eberron as the fans. I don't much care that Adal's stats in T5N is different from his stats in ECS. What I do mind is that his levels, and many more entries in 5N, does not reflect the idea that NPCs in Eberron usually have NPC levels, even very notable NPCs. He could be 18th level, for all I care, but I would rather that a fair bit of those are NPC levels. I don't believe that this or the many threads so far are "too much." Wil Wheaton getting bashed on the Dungeon boards because he actually writes well, that's a bit much. This is right on the money. We are buying Eberron not because the hardcovers are colored different, nor simply because it's a new setting. Eberron purchasers are buying Eberron because they are purchasing a very specific product. A specific "taste," if you will. If subsequent products don't "taste" the same, then people will stop buying it. I will stop buying it. I would very much prefer to continue purchasing and supporting Eberron.
Atlictoatl 08-31-05, 05:27 PM	Thanks, Roxlimn. As always, a delicious post. Something I'm getting more frequently disturbed by is that, as content quality continues to diminish, so does my awareness of it. I compare Races of Eberron to other Races books and actually tell my customers it is what a Races book should be, not even realizing I've succumbed to the dumbing down effect. Thanks for the reminder.
Sir Elton 08-31-05, 07:16 PM	Everyone, Eberron is basically yours to do with as you please. Keith Baker may have had his right to copy taken away from him, but Wizards is graciously sharing Eberron with us and the whole world for the relatively Low Price of $39.95 (+ state sales tax). This basically means that Eberron, and any expansion product you purchase for Eberron, is *yours* to make unique and special. As many of you already know, my Eberron is unique from Keith's; and it's Unique from Wizards' Eberron. Already I put a snake cult where some people think is illogical. Doesn't matter; it's where I put it in my Eberron. In my Eberron I have wizards capable of turning ordinary humanoids into Systemic Osmoforms (okay, they grow gills on their backs and are called "squid." An idea from Blue Planet). In my Eberron, the Changegate may get buried by rivers of lava; people from Earth are transported to it, and I have a City Council made up of Twelve People (not necessarily elected Senators). Further more, I have a dreamsight shifter who goes around wooing the ladies of Sharn, an elven Wizard/Artificer who can't seem to grow out of her adolescence, and someone from the House of Cannith on the City Council. In my Eberron, House Cannith and House Orien improved the submarine design; making a sleek submarine that looks like it could be from the 21st century; but it is entirely powered by magic (I think. I'm kind of waffling if I want the submarine to have a Catipillar Drive based on Bound Water Elemental magic or not). All the inconsistencies doesn't matter to me. Really. They are part of the business of publishing. These errors are the hallmark of what happens when a mortal tries to make something. I take what I want and use what I want; creating a world from the barebones and changing it to suit my fancy. When you buy the book, it really is "yours" in a very real sense. You are only asked to respect Wizards of the Coast's right to publish and copy Eberron and any spin-off product. Wizards doesn't have a Campaign Police force out there to enforce our visions of the world. It's impossible to do so, since that will violate the number one component needed to Roleplay: an Imagination. So, this thread shouldn't be about complaining about Eberron after all. It should be: "This is my Eberron, despite the errors in the book that I've bought." The Errors can be pointed out, yes. But also tell us what you did with Eberron to make it uniquely yours. And this is coming from an Adventure Writer's perspective! :)
Edymnion 08-31-05, 08:36 PM	I'm going to be voicing some similar concern about the product of Eberron books and the writing in generalCareful there man, people don't like it when ya talk truth like that. They'll call you an elitist and a trouble maker and say you don't appreciate all the hard work WotC is *giving* us, as if we aren't paying through the nose for it.
Logophylia 09-01-05, 02:41 PM	OK, I'm weak - I was trying to stay out of this thread. I have my opinions and don't want to throw them into anyone's face. Nor do I want to throw down a glove of challenge, but ..... All the inconsistencies doesn't matter to me. Really. I'm glad that they don't bother you. But you have to accept that they DO bother some folks, and let those folks have thier voice. They are part of the business of publishing. These errors are the hallmark of what happens when a mortal tries to make something. I take what I want and use what I want; creating a world from the barebones and changing it to suit my fancy. When you buy the book, it really is "yours" in a very real sense. Bravo ! Absolutely correct - BUT I am paying for a product, and I believe in feedback to let the folks at WOTC know what I like and don't like about the product I purchased - without this input, they have no idea what I would prefer to see in future products. NOTE: I say "I" because that's explicitly it - just me, my own opinions. Wizards doesn't have a Campaign Police force out there to enforce our visions of the world. It's impossible to do so, since that will violate the number one component needed to Roleplay: an Imagination. Well ... I don't really agree with this. I think that it's possible to have an internally constistent set of publication material without resorting to a "Campaign Police Force". It simply requires an author to read and be familiar with the material that has been previously published, and to be consistent with it, OR to preface any inconsitencies with a heading that points out that the material they are writing is an ALTERNATE take on the material that has been previously published. It's not a case of quelling imagination or even creativity, it's a case of providing a consitent framework that players and DMs alike can referrence without fear of two opposed ideas, rules, etc being forced to "duke it out". WOTC provides the bedrock that we can all refer back to when differences of opinion arise in the form of thier published materials. There is a reason that I use the D20 system when I game - I don't like the idea of the ages old problem that arises when creative minds try to tell an interactive and sometimes even competitive story together. The problem, in it's most basic form, boils down the old games of imagination that we all played as kids, where one player swings his wooden sword at another - "You missed me!" "Nunh-unh, I'm standing right next to you" This is easily solved by referring back tot he RAW for D20, but what about this issue ? "Ha ! I told you I hit you !" "But I have a force field" "No way - there are no force fields in Eberron" "Are too - it say's so in 5 Nations" "But it says they don't exist in the Explorer's Handbook ..." So even Fluff inconsistancies rob WOTC's books of one of thier primary uses. That of preventing two inconsistent visions of a setting to be arbitrated without emotional involvement. Now one might point out that a DM has the ultimate authority in these issues, and leave it at that. I prefer not to be so heavy handed, and even try to fully reason out all house rulings before presenting them to my players to make sure that our visions match. I think that a solid framework is necessary to actually allow two or more people to bring thier two imaginations into harmony. So, this thread shouldn't be about complaining about Eberron after all. It should be: "This is my Eberron, despite the errors in the book that I've bought." The Errors can be pointed out, yes. But also tell us what you did with Eberron to make it uniquely yours. And this is coming from an Adventure Writer's perspective! :) Again, I respectfully disagree - that would be a valuable topic for another, completely different thread. I admit though, the only reason I answered your thread, even to disagree, was because it was well written and thus thought-provoking.
Sir Elton 09-01-05, 05:44 PM	I love our Republic! Thank you for disagreeing with me and showing how you do. :)
Roxlimn 09-03-05, 07:02 AM	Sir Elton: Despite what you may think, I'm actually glad that WotC is sharing Eberron with us for our gaming purposes at home. That's not really what constitutes my problem with the way things seem to be shaping up. It's actually a lot less smarmy and a lot more prosaic than that. Whatever else it may be Eberron books are products. WotC isn't making these products to share their ideas with us or to help us out, or because they're fans of the setting. All these may or may not be true, but the bottomline is that WotC is selling these products to make money. That is the main reason why we have these things to buy - we fork over our money for intellectual product, they use it to make a living. Everyone is happy. This beautiful set up is disrupted when WotC loses sight of exactly what product it is that we're buying. Suddenly, WotC starts putting out stuff that looks like what we want, and may even be what they think we want, but it isn't, and people like me and others stop buying the product because it is no longer the product we want. WotC profits go down, and they lose interest in making more product because it's not making them a living anymore. Everyone scratches their heads and thinks about what went wrong. Feedback on these boards, especially negative feedback, allows WotC to sense that it is not making the kind of product that will sell. Constructive feedback and suggestions allows them to make the product that we want to purchase. They make the right product, we fork over our money, and everyone's happy again. I like it that Eberron's NPCs are supposed to have many NPC levels, abnd generally they're of a level I think is appropriate to their power. As I said, it's one of the things I bought Eberron for. I don't believe that all Eberron kings and lords should be high level. Indeed, I rather think that anyone over level 12 or so wouldn't waste so much of their time mundanely managing a nation if they don't want to. They can always hire a loyal seneschal or appoint a prime minister. A Wizard Lord with 9th level spells will not be spending his time using his Diplomacy skill to manage day to day things when his spells will allow him to do so much more. He should probably be more like the Witch King of Angmar or the Hags of Droaam. Those individuals need to have this much power to do what they need to do, and they use their powers in the best possible way to attain their goals. In my opinion, Eberron supports a grittier reality in which having a great deal of power is difficult to hide and people will not accept "adventurers" as being "good heroes" just because they called "adventurers." Wizards and Sorcerers in Eberron are rare examples of power and are rightly given a wide berth. This is one of the things I'm buying Eberron for. I can always stat up whatever Eberronian or Faerunian villain or personality I want using my own representations. You can even people Faerun with NPCs who are more like the levels you want. None of 18th level Wizard porter or garbage sweeper nonsense. However, this is not product. This is my own vision and my own stats and effort. I buy Eberron product because it presents me with a vision of the D&D world wherein PC levels are special and rare. When the stat blocks and plots and concepts stop providing this vision, then Eberron no longer provides my with at least one product which I originally bought the ECSB for. I will then stop buying subsequent products and the line risks premature death, if enough fans feel the same way. I do not want this to happen. I want more quality product released for Eberron consistent with the vision Keith has set out for it, because Keith's concept world is the product I like and want to continue to purchase. If WotC strays from Keith's concept, then I had better like their vision better than his, or I will not like the product.
Sir Elton 09-03-05, 11:43 AM	Someone else is disagreeing with me. YAY! :w00t: Sir Elton: Despite what you may think, I'm actually glad that WotC is sharing Eberron with us for our gaming purposes at home. That's not really what constitutes my problem with the way things seem to be shaping up. It's actually a lot less smarmy and a lot more prosaic than that. Whatever else it may be Eberron books are products. WotC isn't making these products to share their ideas with us or to help us out, or because they're fans of the setting. All this may or may not be true, but the bottomline is that WotC is selling these products to make money. That is the main reason why we have these things to buy - we fork over our money for intellectual product, they use it to make a living. Everyone is happy. This beautiful set up is disrupted when WotC loses sight of exactly what product it is that we're buying. Suddenly, WotC starts putting out stuff that looks like what we want, and may even be what they think we want, but it isn't, and people like me and others stop buying the product because it is no longer the product we want. WotC profits go down, and they lose interest in making more product because it's not making them a living anymore. Everyone scratches their heads and thinks about what went wrong. Feedback on these boards, especially negative feedback, allows WotC to sense that it is not making the kind of product that will sell. Constructive feedback and suggestions allows them to make the product that we want to purchase. They make the right product, we fork over our money, and everyone's happy again. Roxlimn, I’d like to say that I’m actually glad that people point out editorial errors. What I’m not pleased out is the feeling of whininess I see on these boards when they do point them out every time a new Eberron product comes out. Telling Wizards of the Coast what errors exist is extremely important. It allows them to see what errors exist and how they can be fixed. I.E. errata. Maybe everyone posts their ideas on the other Eberron boards, but I’d love to see how people are working the products into their campaigns; despite the errors. Wizards selling product to make money is obvious; of course; but they are incorporating fan input better than TSR, inc. did. I buy Eberron product because it presents me with a vision of the D&D world wherein PC levels are special and rare. When the stat blocks and plots and concepts stop providing this vision, then Eberron no longer provides my with at least one product which I originally bought the ECSB for. I will then stop buying subsequent products and the line risks premature death, if enough fans feel the same way. I do not want this to happen. I want more quality product released for Eberron consistent with the vision Keith has set out for it, because Keith's concept world is the product I like and want to continue to purchase. If WotC strays from Keith's concept, then I had better like their vision better than his, or I will not like the product. You have to remember that Kieth’s sandbox is shared by the other children. Eberron is a Shared World; and it can be compared to a shared world like Thieves’ World. With a Shared World, one person comes up with a basic concept, and then everyone pitches in with their ideas. When a Shared World is launched, many people get in on the act and start writing stories, and/or product and very often you do get stories and product that deviates from the original concept. This is part of what makes a Living Shared World. The upside of a Shared World is this collaboration from many people. In the case of Eberron, it’s adventure writers, novel writers, Keith Baker, and the Eberron™ brand staff. The result is a living, breathing world you can sink your teeth into; or immerse your players into. The downside of a Shared World is that a story can actually be incredibly different from the original concept. Take the Realms, for instance. A lot of the early novels were cool; but then you get a R.C.E. like the Time of Troubles, then everything is messed up. What is worse, that the Realms have deviated from the original concept incredibly over the years that you have a big mess. There is so much going on and so much that you can add it’s not even crazy. That’s the downside of having a Shared World. However, there is something you can do about it. What I am going to do about it is that I am submitting an Eberron adventure to Dungeon that shouldn’t deviate too much. It’s going to be an underwater adventure featuring soggies (sahuagin) and aquatic humans. To carry the adventure out requires that the problems of adventuring underwater needs to be solved. Crush depth, explosive decompression, sonar weirdness (as an aside, it would take an entire RPG book to incorporate SONAR into the D&D game), what it is like living underwater and what magic is needed to live there, light and darkness in water, and so forth (I know enough about oceanography to pull this off!). You vote with your dollars and state your displeasure, and that is pretty effective. I’m going to submit adventures and get them published, which is also effective. That’s two ways of making sure that the Shared World has an internal consistency. Eventually, I'll submit a novel proposal, but that might not happen for a while yet. :schemes:
UnkemptSage 09-03-05, 04:41 PM	As I've said in many a forum before, it all comes down to the difference between "complaining" and "whining".
Ramses III 09-03-05, 10:48 PM	I don't feel that posting inconsistencies amounts to whining. It's an honest criticism of the product; it's a statement that we the consumers would like to see a more consistent gameworld from book to book, and we'll be more enthusiastic about spending our money on the product if we get what we're asking for. In that context, using this message board to post criticism becomes a useful tool both for us, the consumers, and WotC as the vendor. They receive instant feedback on a product and can see what we liked and what we want done better in future products.
cerberuspuppy 09-04-05, 07:21 PM	I think everybody is taking things too far. If you don't like a product, you don't need to buy it, if you buy ione, and turns out to be deficient, you got all the rigth to complain, but do it civilized. Also, if you see something you don't like in a book, just don't use it, this is no videogame, where you have to accept the system and the things as programmed, you can use the stuff you find or not. Remember it's just a game, it doesn't have to be perfect, don't spend hours fixing the mistakes on a book, exepnd them developing an adventure and forget those mistakes, don't use them, they don't exist. There are tons of others rpg's, if you don't like the direction dnd is going or dislike WoTC then stop buying and play another one. Have you all become so cynical and crittical that you cannot read a book and enjoy it, and instead of that pint out every little mistake and ruin it for you and probably others? I enjoyed reading RoE (yes, i enjoy reading sourcebooks), it was a lot more roleplaying oriented that i have expected, when i put it to use in my game, i found out the mistakes and corrected them as i played, and i never developed that berserk rage you all seem to have. Agreed, and emphasis added. One of the great things about a tabletop RPG is that you can change things around if you want. As the DM, you can fill in the gaps as you please, and even change things around quite a lot. IIRC, there are how many different "official" sets of stats for the Lord of Blades? Two or three? With different levels and even alignments? You can choose which one you want, and adjust it from there. Then, there's the question of who he really is in the first place. He might even be a human who has turned himself into a Warforged. This is just the sort of thing that keeps the players on their toes and at the same time gives you leeway to run the game as you see fit. That's just an example, but my point is, if you can change the alignment, history and agenda of major NPC's, what else can you change? On the other hand, I do realize that major errors can be a major pain. I am not familiar enough with the Eberron books to speak to this, but I have noticed minor errors in other WoTC books. What really concerns me much more is playtesting and game balance. I am not very familiar with the books beyond the core three, but from what I have seen there is stuff that sounds pretty ridiculous, like some of the feats from Libris Mortis, and the Frenzied Berserker. While I do expect a certain power level in a D&D game, I find rampant munchkinism pretty irrtating. But they have a market to please, a market more broad than just me. Knowing this, any DM has to make a decision on where to draw that line. Yes, if you allow everything from all WotC books, you will have a (at least somewhat) munchkinized game, and if you don't want that, you will have to be judicious and disallow things selectively. You could just "ban" all non-core books, but you'd miss out on some really cool stuff, and that would be a shame.