I'm not trying to argue here that the errata is unwarranted, but just that it is a lot to keep up with and can make running a game very tedious.
For general opinions and questions please post here!
How is that NOT a rules question?
To the OP: It may be a lot to keep up with, but no *more* than we have without the errata. Each errata ruling *replaces* (or clarifies) an existing rule. With very few exceptions, the errata does not add rules. It could even be argued that the errata helps us to have fewer rules, because a lot of the errata deletes without replacing!
Tiamat: The errata is a collection of rules changes. The OP has a question about the errata.
How is that NOT a rules question!
Actually I see no question in his post. But as you like...
I'm sure the mods will move it eventually anyway... ;)1. You do not need to use the errata - no WotC paid ninjas are going to kick down your gaming-hut doors and kick you to pieces if you don't use the most up to date wording of a rule.
2. Those of us that like a game to be balanced now have an option besides doing all of the work by ourselves.
This is just my personal guess, mind you. Human error is to be expected, I guess.
There does seem to be fewer erratas in the newer books though...
I think it's because Wizards is pushing books out as fast as they can (of course) that things get missed. Maybe if more time was spent going over new material, little things would get caught and corrected before the final printing.
This is just my personal guess, mind you. Human error is to be expected, I guess.
There does seem to be fewer erratas in the newer books though...
lol, and then wizards will feel the wrath of all the whiners and complainers because they're not publishing books fast enough...
I don't mind the erratas, although, I would prefer that if they errata something they restructure future printing of the books to match said erratas. Or go further into what they did with the PHB2 and include erratas in future publications.
There are only so many developers and there is thousands of us, who will pick apart the rules one by one trying to break the game. We are their testers and evaluators, and I really wouldn't want it any other way.
Actually I see no question in his post.
I consider the thread title to be as much a part of the post as the content that follows. :P
(So as not to seem entirely contrarian, I must note that I agree with your comments above this post!)
I consider the thread title to be as much a part of the post as the content that follows. :P
Right. Touche good sir... touche... haha... I tend to ignore thread titles when I'm reading the first post... weird... I know... :D
1. You do not need to use the errata - no WotC paid ninjas are going to kick down your gaming-hut doors and kick you to pieces if you don't use the most up to date wording of a rule.
The problem is that those of us that play RPGA are stuck using the errata, which is getting larger and larger and thus harder to keep track of what the new rules for things are.
I thought errata was for corrections, like spelling errors and "oops, that was 1d8 not 2d8" but Wizards is using errata like game patches that online games do with completly changing how some things work and that is just going to cause problems.
I don't mind the erratas, although, I would prefer that if they errata something they restructure future printing of the books to match said erratas.
Well, they've already done that to some extent: the deluxe editions of the 3 original core rulebooks contain all the errata for them.
I thought errata was for corrections, like spelling errors and "oops, that was 1d8 not 2d8" but Wizards is using errata like game patches that online games do
hmm, I just thought of something else, I think they don't mind doing just that, because they want people to join Insiders and get the Character Builder... which automatically has the errated information updated...
The problem is that those of us that play RPGA are stuck using the errata...
Right. So just like I said - you do not need to. (note the word: "need" - you chose to play in the RPGA, and therefore you also chose to keep track of errata).
As for the other point being made - that errata is for stuff like typos and what have you (like something supposed to be 1d8 instead of 2d8) - I consider every piece of errata that changes the basic function of a rule or power to be saying "oops, we meant for that to be clear that it did [insert the way it works because of errata]."
Those in RPGA can use the Character Builder as their official source of rules, making the tracking of errata unnecessary.
The Character Builder isn't going to tell me anything about how the Night Hag's sleep attack needs a saving throw, or the current round of DC adjustments for Skill Challenges, or whether or not a Conjuration occupies a square if the power description doesn't mention it.
The Character Builder isn't going to tell me anything about how the Night Hag's sleep attack needs a saving throw, or the current round of DC adjustments for Skill Challenges, or whether or not a Conjuration occupies a square if the power description doesn't mention it.
No, but the Rules Compendium will tell you most of the rest of what you need. Beyond that, if it's not in the FAQ (which is really more about clarification or interpretations, not errata, you'd need the books plus errata.
With some few exceptions, once you've mastered the basics of 4e, the Character Builder and Rules Compendium give you 90%-95% (+)of what you need, which I think is pretty darn good and certainly mitigates the need to stay on top of all the rules updates (which is more than errata).
In any case, FWIW, the players can pretty much rely upon the Character Builder, though DMs may need a bit more than what both that and the Compendium deliver.
The rules updates are a great thing - it makes the game be far more playable and balanced that any previous edition.
I thought errata was for corrections, like spelling errors and "oops, that was 1d8 not 2d8" but Wizards is using errata like game patches that online games do with completly changing how some things work and that is just going to cause problems.
They've been doing that for the games for many years, and so long as the product can't be released in both a timely fashion and a perfectly tested and balanced state, it will continue to happen.
They've been doing that for the games for many years, and so long as the product can't be released in both a timely fashion and a perfectly tested and balanced state, it will continue to happen.
This is the only game I have played that completly re-writes rules in errata. Other games I have played will release an "optional/alternate" rule in a future book in the event that they think of a better way to handle something, they dont release an errata to re-write the rules.
This is not normal for the industry and is not something that should just be accepted. Needing to re-write rules and place them in errata isnt them saying "we thought of a better way to do this" it means "OMG! We didnt test this and completly screwed up by putting the wrong rules in the book, this is what the book should have said!"
If they want to change the rules for the game they should either release a new edition of the game or publish the rules as an optional or alternate way of doing things.
As customers we should not accept this type of behavior from the company. How would you feel if your car manufacturer published the user manual for your car and then posted online errata for it giving the correct instructions for how parts of the car work rather than the information showing in the book?
Fixing wording errors on things that arent clear, fixing misprints isnt too bad(as we can just write the correct information into the book itself) or adding missing lines of text are all fine. Changing rules to something completely different in the sytle of online MMORPGs is just stupid. Knee-jerk balance changes that were poorly thought out and just out of whack, balance changes should be done a little at a time, not done by re-writing how a class functions or making a major change to a power that just needed a minor tweak.
If there is a major balance problem with a released product, that is just too bad. It means the testers failed or the development team didnt listen well enough to tester feedback. Only minor balance issues should get through testing and those shouldnt be a problem that will break a game. This isnt an MMORPG, it is ok if something is more powerful than something else as long as it isnt a large difference and any large difference should be found and corrected in testing.
This is the problem all of the late 3.5 books have, the company is set on getting a new book out every month and thus doesnt take the required time to test and edit everything and thus they fail to release a quality product. I had hopes for 4E as the PH1 was done pretty well, but now Wizards has placed the game into cash cow mode and quality is out the window.
I for one will not be buying more 4E products until I see the quality level improve to the point where they are worth what is being charged for them.
I for one will not be buying more 4E products until I see the quality level improve to the point where they are worth what is being charged for them.
I dare ya to follow through.
I double dare ya.
I triple dog dare ya.
But we both know that the above rant is baseless. You play D&D. The existence of errata doesn't change that. You'll buy the next supplement as quickly and eagerly as the first. And you'll come on these Boards and complain about something else, all the while enjoying the game as much as you always have.
I dare ya to follow through.
I double dare ya.
I triple dog dare ya.
But we both know that the above rant is baseless. You play D&D. The existence of errata doesn't change that. You'll buy the next supplement as quickly and eagerly as the first. And you'll come on these Boards and complain about something else, all the while enjoying the game as much as you always have.
seconded, I also dare as well.
The books are written in English and, unfortunately, it is a language that is hardly precise. The rules are very open to interpretation. It does not matter how long the game is tested, something is going to be missed. The possible number combinations for character options are beyond true comprehension. It is impossible to test them all.
As for the erata and updates? They are optional. Use them if you want or don't. No one from Wizards is going to make you use them in your home games.
This is the only game I have played that completly re-writes rules in errata. Other games I have played will release an "optional/alternate" rule in a future book in the event that they think of a better way to handle something, they dont release an errata to re-write the rules.
so when other companies find these errors they make you pay for (A new edtion, or a new book with options) it, but WotC hands it out for free...not seeing the problem yet
This is not normal for the industry and is not something that should just be accepted. Needing to re-write rules and place them in errata isnt them saying "we thought of a better way to do this" it means "OMG! We didnt test this and completly screwed up by putting the wrong rules in the book, this is what the book should have said!"
hastrics aside, they test things with limited player base, then it is relaced. Most of the errata is what you want anyway, howmany things are rewritten...1 or two powers, and 2 class features...If they want to change the rules for the game they should either release a new edition of the game or publish the rules as an optional or alternate way of doing things.
people complain about the $$$ grab now, imagin if I had to buy a book to fix an error...
As customers we should not accept this type of behavior from the company. How would you feel if your car manufacturer published the user manual for your car and then posted online errata for it giving the correct instructions for how parts of the car work rather than the information showing in the book?
I would be happy, becuse I then have working information...as a posed to wrong info...
Fixing wording errors on things that arent clear, fixing misprints isnt too bad(as we can just write the correct information into the book itself) or adding missing lines of text are all fine. Changing rules to something completely different in the sytle of online MMORPGs is just stupid.
well I don't know MMORPGs, since I HATE online gameing I have no idea how this is or is not like them...
Knee-jerk balance changes that were poorly thought out and just out of whack, balance changes should be done a little at a time, not done by re-writing how a class functions or making a major change to a power that just needed a minor tweak.
can you provide an example???
If there is a major balance problem with a released product, that is just too bad.
wait...so you feel that it is better to have the ability to do Infinit damage...or to be unhurtable by equal level monsters... and if others don't like it 'toobad'???
I don't get the arguement hereThis isnt an MMORPG, it is ok if something is more powerful than something else as long as it isnt a large difference and any large difference should be found and corrected in testing.
but what if they are not found...then it unbalances a balanced system...
I had hopes for 4E as the PH1 was done pretty well, but now Wizards has placed the game into cash cow mode and quality is out the window.
wait...by giving away fixes for free, instead of chargeing for them (by having optional rules, or new edtions) you think it is in cash cow mode???
I am really confused now, isn't striving to fix a living system for free better then chargeing for it I for one will not be buying more 4E products until I see the quality level improve to the point where they are worth what is being charged for them.
ok bye bye then...becuse they ARE makeing them worth it, becuse they update things as they become problmatic, but you don't like it...
I dare ya to follow through.
I double dare ya.
I triple dog dare ya.
But we both know that the above rant is baseless. You play D&D. The existence of errata doesn't change that. You'll buy the next supplement as quickly and eagerly as the first. And you'll come on these Boards and complain about something else, all the while enjoying the game as much as you always have.
I own 4 4e books, PH1, PH2, AV and AP. I did so to help support my LGS and to make game play slightly easier by having another book around. Only one person in any game group has to have the book to be able to use its contents for everyone. If each game group stops buying more than one book total, WoTC takes a major loss on profits. My group has already partly done this as when we played Star Wars we only had 1-2 copies of any book where as back when we played D&D 3.5 each player own almost every book (until the book rush they started at the end when quality started droping and we held off buying).
so when other companies find these errors they make you pay for (A new edtion, or a new book with options) it, but WotC hands it out for free...not seeing the problem yet
I think you missed the point, other companies dont make the huge glaring errors that WoTC does as they dont try to spit a book out every month. They take the time to work on said book to get it right the first time and only need errata for minor fixes.
When the developers think of a different way to have something work 6+ months after the game comes out it is a little late to change the rules at that point. Other companies will include the optional rules in future supplements, not as a correction book that you have to pay for as you seem to be impling. For example in Shadowrun 2E they came out with a compendium at a later time that gave some different options for character creation and some combat rules. This was not done as an errata because there was nothing wrong with the first rules, these were options for people that didnt think the original worked well. Earthdawn had working movement and initiative rules, but when they came out with the Companion they gave an alternate system to use rather than trying to errata the first system.
If you build a system, you test the system, you make other systems to work with this system you should not make major changes to the system.
As for an example of a knee jerk response, look what they did to battle rage vigor fighters. They completly changed for the class feature works and redid two related feats. The core problem with the class feature was the stacking issues with the feats, if they had just toned down the THP gained and left the core mechanic alone it would have been a simple fix. Instead they reworked it causing a much larger amount of errata.
They took something that needed a tweak and hit it with a sledgehammer.
Rain of Blows was also a knee jerk over nerf of something that just needed to be tweaked. We are now left with Wardens having a level 1 encounter power that is much stronger compaired to what most fighters would get out of rain of blows. Non-optimal wardens get two attacks with 1w + str, while fighters get two attacks with 1w. Optimal wardens get two attacks with 1w +str +wis, while fighters get three attacks at 1w..
Fighters are left with a sub par power except for combining with specific concepts or certain items that need errata such as reckless and bloodclaw weapons.
If you are going to re-balance something after it has already been introduced into the system it needs to be done slowly and one step at a time, not done as a re-work.
This is the system that just about every MMORPG company takes, people whine and moan that some class is overpowered and then instead of just doing a minor adjustment to bring it down they do multiple significant adjustments and thus rather than bringing the class down to where other classes are they drop it below the other classes. Down the road they then make another change to bring the class up and once again instead of making a minor change they make multiple large ones and put the class back into a spot where it is stronger than other classes again.. this forms a cycle of classes getting bumped up and down instead of just doing small tweaks to fix problems.
If something in the game is determined to be a problem, they need to look at what the goal of subject is, what is going on to make that goal not be reached and then adjust the problems that are causing the goal to not be reached.. WoTC is instead adjusting the goal of the subject(thus base mechanics in the case of fighters)
The problem with BRV fighters was the base THP were too high, this could have easily fixed by making an errata to cut it down to half con mod and changing the two feats to both be feat bonuses. Chances are the Stoneblood feat would still be too powerful and then it could be adjusted.
This would be a fairly simple short errata that does not change the fundamental aspects of the class feature.
and I am sorry if I expect more from a company than you do. It is just really sad that so many people are willing to accept low quality product.. such as one of the Star Wars Saga books that pretty much had errors on every page. It was the equiv of the monster manual and almost every entry had errors (I am not joking either, more had errors than were correct)
Second. Oh, come on. You fighter partisans are as bad as the wizard partisans were in 3e. The point is that some things were unbalanced and needed nerfing: in particular, the fact that fighters being the best striker in the game and the best defender.
There are hundreds of moving parts in this game system. It's incredibly, incredibly complex. Which means that there are going to be problems -- serious, serious ones -- with balance. It's just the way this sot of thing works: the more moving parts, the more points of failure they are. Which means that things like this are going to happen.
and I am sorry if I expect more from a company than you do. It is just really sad that so many people are willing to accept low quality product.. such as one of the Star Wars Saga books that pretty much had errors on every page. It was the equiv of the monster manual and almost every entry had errors (I am not joking either, more had errors than were correct)
I think you have too high of standards. to call the 4e products low quality is unjust, sure things could be tested longer and we could have books delayed indefinitely but then we wouldnt have any books. and im sure then you would start complaining about that too.
other companies dont make the huge glaring errors that WoTC does as they dont try to spit a book out every month.
Riiiiight.
- Palladium has seven Summer releases in just three months and another 8 set for the Fall.
- White Wolf has five releases for the three month period July to September.
- Goodman Games has seven releases for July and August.
- Mongoose Publishing released nine books last month alone, with another 15 products due out in August and eight more for September.
- Chaosium has eight titles due in the next four months.
1) Mistakes will be made, any game can have them and plenty have had "errata's" or updates.
2) D&D has alot more to it then most other games, more complex things leave room for more mistakes
3) Future releases can interact with past ones, turning something that was balanced into something that is broken.
4) Most of the errata's is based on feedback, we "voted" for it.
Each time an update is released, the game get's better. I'd rather put forth a little effort to play a better game, then put forth none to play a worse one.
This is an important concept - WotC has committed to keeping 4e a well-balanced system, which means they will update the rules if they find they've published something that throws the game our of whack - and have already done so a number of items.
Yes, this can be difficult to track when you rely upon the published books and pencil and paper, but WotC is using this a part of their incentive to get you to use their digital tools which have the updates built into them - plus Dragon magazine material and some otherwise-unpublished material, too.
I think it's because Wizards is pushing books out as fast as they can (of course) that things get missed. Maybe if more time was spent going over new material, little things would get caught and corrected before the final printing.
Agreed.
I think it's because Wizards is pushing books out as fast as they can (of course) that things get missed. Maybe if more time was spent going over new material, little things would get caught and corrected before the final printing.
I'd rather have a a book a month with a few errors then have a book every 3 months with a fewer errors.
This is the only game I have played that completly re-writes rules in errata. Other games I have played will release an "optional/alternate" rule in a future book in the event that they think of a better way to handle something, they dont release an errata to re-write the rules.
I like this. I like how WotC actually listens to the community and fixes problems with the game. I applaud them for their efforts.