Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Messer 12-28-05, 11:32 AM	Dis-appointment was a travesty. I don't mean to criticise, lord knows I have trouble spelling. But... and there is always a big butt... We must have spent well over 40 minutes in that adventure picking through simple grammar errors such as: 1. Misused words. 2. Dropped subjects. 3. Incomplete sentences. 4. Spelling Errors that change the meaning of the sentence (because someone ran it throught a spell checker and didn't proof read it) 5. Descriptions that give away too much information 6. Count Non Count issues, "Did he say hound, or hounds?" 7. overly ambiguous language. the anceastor was the "Hound of the (whatever)" and the (whatever) was haunted by "the Hounds of the (whatever)" So, anyways... It was a good attempt, but, well, I feel embarrassed for having run this adventure because, basically my coworkers spent so long picking at things, and tearing the errrors to pieces.... At onepoint someone said, "This was obviously written by someone who /doesn't/ speak english as thier first language." and, well. That just kinda sealed the coffin. Anyways, I know there have been complaints in the past, and I'm quite certain that the staff here are the RPGA is kinda gett'n screwed in the money department. I think someone was rushed and being pushed around... and I think that... we all need to be afraid that, whoever is really organizing this is a seriouly rushed, and probably beyond the point of breaking, and I would like to apologize for admonishing them, but further, I would like to ask them to seriously tell thier boss that things need to change.... .... Anyways... thanks for publishing what you did... let us know if there is any upcomming change to the system... how things work, or... well... the general structure of the whole thing. I had a creepy kind of fun tonight, but... I'll just leave it at 'creepy' cuz, as much as I had fun running the game, I was embarrasssed at presenting something that was, well, difficult to read.... In the future I will spend more time prepping so I can correct any mistakes that may be present. again, thanks and stuff...
Herrbard 12-28-05, 12:46 PM	Well, after careful consideration (since you didn't mention the name of the adventure you ran) you must be talking about EMH 6 "Blind Man's Hunt". I ran this two weeks ago, and yes, there are a LOT of typos/spell check errors/just plain grammatical errors in it. That being said, it took me about 35 minutes to read through and correct with a black ink pen, so that when I ran it they did not cause a problem. If your players are complaining about it, that leads me to think one of two things. Either: A: stop letting your players read the mod! or B: Learn to correct "on the fly". :) That may seem a little facetious, but it is what convention judges do all the time. We often have anywhere from 4 days to three weeks (maximum) to prep a new mod, depending on when headquarters releases it. It's just something you learn to do after a while, to keep the fun going. Don't give up! Keep on running things, and put a little extra prep time in. It always pays off in a better adventure. :cool:
smerwin29 12-28-05, 01:06 PM	As an editor and teacher of all sorts of writing, it does drive me crazy when I see an abundance of errors in any form of writing. The RPGA is a volunteer organization, and the people reviewing the mods are not professional editors in the traditional sense of the word. Errors are distracting and need to be caught in the process from first draft to final copy. However, it is also the job of the judge (or DM if you will) to insulate the players from these problems in the module. When the players leave the table at the end of a module, they should have no idea if there were problems with typos. They should have no idea whether the judge thinks the mod is great or not. The judge should be making the best possible experience for the players as a facilitator of the module, or in worst-case scenarios, in spite of the module. I've judged too many tables of too many mods in the RPGA to even count: some great mods, some terrible mods, and many in between. As a judge, if the players did not have a good time that is my fault, not the writers. I have the power to tweak the flow of play, paraphrase boxed text instead of reading it, and tailoring the game to meet the needs of the players. I run the game, not the writer or the editors. If the players are unhappy, it is only because I didn't have the skill or the patience to make the game what they needed it to be. Anyone who has seen the game from all three sides--player, judge, and writer--can tell you that a good judge can make a terrible module fun, and a bad judge can ruin a great module. Complaints about module quality should certainly be listened to by the powers that be--no doubt. Problems with the actual game play, barring the most radical circumstances, are all on the judge. Respectfully submitted, Shawn
Messer 12-28-05, 10:58 PM	The issue was not with me correcting things, I'm quite good at it, certainly the players knew I was correcting a lot by the way I was reading. They pick up when I shift from smooth to shatner. The issue was the hand outs, the letters were attrocious. I guess you are right, I should prep more, but I do need to say... I am concerend... thanks for your replies
Herrbard 12-28-05, 11:08 PM	You are definitely right, the letters (player handouts) were nearly impossible to read. Small type, many errors, bad grammar, et al. I confess: I re-typed the things so the players could read them, and yes, I felt like it was a terrible use of time that could have been better spent on something else. All that being said, I still loved this module, and my players enjoyed the daylights out of it. The anger when they discovered the "villain" was priceless.
indel2001 12-28-05, 11:13 PM	First, as the designer of said module, I'd like to thank you for posting your comments. They are always appreciated. Second, it disappoints me that you and your co-workers were frustrated by the module. Third, why the heck aren't your comments posted on the EMH-6 TYPOS thread? ;) But seriously, I can appreciate your frustration, and I apologize for any errors that may have been mine. It may amuse you to know that English is INDEED my first and primary language and that I do a lot of writing and editing in my professional career. So why the errors? The module appears to have been revised by RPGA at least twice since it left my computer and I'm not sure of their development process. I submitted a final draft sometime at the beginning of May and offered to revise/edit anything outstanding. The offer was never accepted. I know RPGA play-tested the module between May and July, and made some excellent adjustments. The version played at ORIGINS in July was released to judges a few days before the actual convention so I presume RPGA revised the module at a late date. If they were pressed for time, editing issues may not have been a primary concern. Comments from other posters indicate they have changed a few things for the HOME play version, so further typos may have crept in. That said, I also agree with Shawn's comments. I had a great time DMing Gambit at Darkhold at ORIGINS but probably only because I had prepped the module and identified the trouble spots. I know that module had even more limited development time than my module and typos, missing info, and other errors still existed in the convention version. But the module gave me the framework and resources to bridge those gaps. I'm not forgiving sloppy writing and editing though. All of the module writers I know strive to create a polished product but it appears their best efforts can be confounded by a peculiar development process. I'm sorry this upredictability exists and wish I had a way to change your bad experience into a positive one.