BenS's page

I think this is a great idea, thanks. Efficient storage is one of the real problems with using pawns and it's only going to get worse as more sets come out. This looks like a terrific solution.

You know one of my favorite things about this Kickstarter (aside from all the frabjulous goodies that Bill and gang are throwing into the mix)? It's that this is a Kickstarter for a product that is almost here. I'm still hoping for a GenCon release of this monster.

Too often lately I've contributed money to KS projects that won't be released until 2013 sometime. With this one, I spend the money and the product gets here shortly thereafter.

I like that. A lot.

The Elder Scrolls Online announcement spawned this mild rant.

I have to say that I've fallen out of touch with the video game community nowadays, but I have to ask if I am the only one tired of MMOs?

I purchased SWTOR, because I loved KOTOR and KOTOR 2. I stopped SWTOR, because I found while playing that though that I didn't like having other people in the world.

The reason I find immersion to be difficult is because tons of players are just running about. The equivalent would be the dialogue and actions of strangers being inserted into a story I'm reading.

I treat my RPGs like books, they are both something I enjoy doing to relax veg out.

When I want to play games with friends I usually bring out the dice, but that's just me.

Thoughts?

100% agreement

I'll also add that I've never given MMOs more than a few minutes of my time before dropping that garbage like a rabid squirrel. Video games are a private experience for me and I cannot wrap my head around the appeal of dealing with real people in a medium that's supposed to be all about escapism.

While I don't argue against MMOs being developed, the Elder Scrolls MMO news made my heart sink. The main franchise might not suffer too much, but it will suffer some; we all know it. It seems everything I like is invaded by corporate interests determined to butcher gameplay in favor of marketing it to non-fans. This approach to game development has got to stop.

I'll stop here before the rant slips free and spills the coffee.

I like the Tome of Horrors "you see this" thing--but we would never get it done anywhere near the timeframe for delivery.

If this would be a Kick-starter perk and not necessarily something that is included with the book, it could always be sent a few weeks/months later. (If time is the only reason not to do it.)

If I could cast Wish or Miracle, I would like to see this product as a springboard for an AP set in an earlier (more "mythic") time period of Golarion. Come to think of it, this could also be a great way to satisfy the itch of those who want epic/mythic adventures. Put it far back enough that it wouldn't interfere w/ modern continuity and/or hesitation at having high-level material in today's Golarion.

Or just a "regular" AP (starting at level 1), but set in the mythic past in one of these great kingdoms of old...that would be epic in and of itself.

Agreed--that would be a nifty 'setting within a setting'.

I have mixed feelings about Nick being featured as a special guest. I appreciate his great work, but I am one of the Razor Coast pre-orders that has not gotten a refund. I thought that I had put it all behind me as a lesson learned. I guess I was wrong. I felt a little wrench in my gut when I saw his name on the list.

While I am not going to boycott the convention, stone anyone, or introduce myself to him as one of his victims, it does seem a little bit...what is the word I'm looking for...insensitive on the part of the planners to honor him. I don't know how widespread the incident really was, but it was certainly highly visible among the Paizo faithful.

I understand the theme. They're putting the band back together. I am all for him being there. But as a headlining special guest? There was probably a less controversial way to acknowledge Nic's excellent contribution to this fine product without seeming to overlook his behavior.

When I see lists of different bonus types, and which can stack with which (circumstance bonus, deflection bonus, dodge bonus, enhancement bonus, size bonus, etc.), I do feel a bit like that encourages a ton of different fiddly situational buffs to 'stack' as many bonuses as possible to a particular roll.

Rich Baker had a very nice idea on his blog the other week (can't recall the URL, I was pointed there by a Facebook post by someone else): no-one can have more than one arcane and one divine buff on them at once. You get mage armor OR shield. You get shield of faith OR prayer. That would also allow the buffs to be a bit better, or at least have longer durations, because you're still only getting one.

Since this has kind of wandered into "What I want from Pathfinder 2E" territory...

1. Kill magic item dependancy. Seriously...kill it dead. My suggestion: eliminate magic items that give flat bonuses, whether it be to saves, attack rolls, damage, or whatever. If those bonuses are needed, then build them into the class itself.
2. Simplify the system. Personally, I think huge swaths of existing rules / spells / feats could be excised. The d20 system is death by a thousand modifiers...either try to fix that, or abandon it entirely.
3. Kill some of the holy cows: alignment and Vancian prepared casting / memorization are two of the biggies.
4. The solution to balancing the classes might be to tone down the more powerful ones rather thank trying to make everything else more powerful.
5. Don't be restrained by feeling an obligation to backwards compatibility.

Of course, I seriously doubt any of this will happen. If anything, as time has waned, Paizo has actually moved away from most of these items. And, to be blunt, I'm not sure they're as great at building a RPG system as many seem to give them credit for. The APG is really the only RPG line rules book that I've found impressive. The Core Rules is essentially just the Player's Handbook and some of the DMG shoved together with some house rules integrated. The GMG has lots of good advice, but nothing that hasn't been around for a few decades. As for Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat, I think a LOT of people have expressed disappointment with those two books.

Now don't get me wrong, I love Paizo, but more for their campaign setting, adventures, and bestiaries than for their rules.

From the Kotaku link;

"If you buy the disc, it must be locked to a single PSN account, after which you can play the game, save the whole thing to your HDD, or peg it as "downloaded" in your account history and be free to download it at a later date."

Okay. Wait.

Sorry, Sony. I'm not interested in this.
Of the big three game vendors, I'll buy whichever one lets me just go buy a damn game, take it home, put it in my machine, and play it.

For me, this isn't a "used vs. new price tag" issue. I buy used games, it's not a crime. They have companies that sell them all the time, and nobody seems to send the FBI to destroy their stock and sue them.
For me, the issue is internet security: My son's gotten his online games hacked, I've heard that Sony's had a lot of trouble with credit card info being hacked, and I don't really trust them to be secure. I think it's just too big for them to protect.
If I go buy an expensive new system, the last thing I want is to download a damn code off of the internet to protect THEIR cashflow, and risk downloading a virus that's going to make 1,000 Goatse's appear on my t.v. when I try to play Assassin's Creed IX or whatever.

Whoever can vend me a gaming console that does NOT require me to take it on the internet and risk my financial data and possibly my expensive gaming system will get my money. All the internet seems to have to offer are tens of thousands of 12 year olds screaming "F!!$YOUNOOB!!!F!+$YOUCAMPER!!!" AND tens of thousands of 15 year olds who want to hack my s&*$ for teh lulz and profit.

I'll finally get to apply that silly economics degree. Let's do away with a few assumptions here:

1. "If I buy a new game, the money goes to the developers." No, the majority of your money goes to the publishers first, then everyone else who had a part in packaging the game, and generally developers get what's left over. This is a valid argument for why games should go all digital (so that developers make more money), but a physical product serves more than just one purpose. Impulse buying and competitive pricing are just two reasons why a boxed game taken from a shelf is important to you, game stores and publishers.

2. "Current business models predict future business models." The current amalgam of boxed copies and digital copies lead to lower prices for digital buyers (due to the lack of packaging), but it would probably not be the same if the market went all digital. Firstly, you'd have a lot less competitors. It would put price control directly in the hands of distributors. No physical inventory means that there is no reason to drop prices to clear it out.

3. "Used game stores are obsolete." Used game stores serve a variety of purposes, the main being an "insurance company" for gamers. If the rumors prove to be true about Orbis, then the two most important words become: "Buyer beware." If the PS3 was $600 at launch and Orbis is shaping up to be much more powerful, you're looking in the $800 to $1000 range (not including the new TV you're purportedly going to need to buy to get the most out of the system and accessories). Games will likely be in the $70-$100 range. That is a significant investment. Sure, there will people who will drop that kind of money without batting an eyelash. However, without a safety net, there will be fewer people running out and making impulse buys (coincidentally, this pressures publishers to depend on "tried-and-true" IPs: Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed et al...fine for some, but not for all). Beyond not liking a game, a used game store also allows gamers to regain games lost in fires, accidents and thefts. Game and console warranties only last for about a year and only cover damage. If the situation is out a person's control, why should they have to buy a new game? Because "it's the right thing to do"? Finally, all situations for buying and trading are different. Some people buy new, trade and use the trade-ins to buy new games. Some don't. Some need money to buy gas and want to repurchase later. You can't argue ethics when you don't know all the reasons (economic sidenote: Why would consumers care if they're being ethical? There are many examples of video game publishers being unethical).

4. "Hoo boy, we're livin' in 2012. Internet for everybody!" Umm...no. Who is going to pay for it? Taxpayers? Warren Buffet? Sony won't. Providers are too busy tinkering with existing areas of service. So, if you live in podunk nowhere or an area where internet demand isn't strong (outside of major metropolitan zones and suburbs), you're still going to be relying on that offline console.

All that and no guarantee you'll get better games. Yeah, "better-looking"...but not necessarily better. Apologies for the long-winded post.

I, unfortunately, have to agree and say that I do not read the fiction. I read just about everything else in a given volume but just can't bring myself to read only one chapter of a novella at a time. For me it's not that the fiction wouldn't add to the over product or that I don't like short format fiction, simply that I don't like reading only one of portion of it said story and then have to wait a month for the next short installment. I think even the most patient person would be driven mad by immersing themselves in a good story and then having to basically watch the characters and events transpire under a strobe light that pulsed once every three weeks. I just find it frustrating.

Personally, I wait until the AP is completed and read the fiction then. It does mean you have to wait, but at least you're not left hanging for a month at a time - you're just six months behind the latest story.

Honestly, aside from the Incarnum, I'd love to see a re-write of Tome of Magic with updated Shadowmage and the Pact mages.

Skeeter, I can understand where FGG and its personnel are coming from. You folks have access (or at least Bill does) to the sales data, we don't. So going with what sells the best makes sense.

As much as I would like to see it, I doubt that I will see anything like Tsar released for Pathfinder ever again--the financial risk is too much (although a great proposition for a megaadventure from a well known author and Kickstarter funding it might not be out of the question). But there's a niche in PFRP that you folks have done a great job of filling--the arc campaign that spans several levels.

I like Paizo's modules a lot, but at times they seem like cotton candy--impressive appearance and maps and good writing, but the 32 page length means when you are done you don't always feel that you accomplished something epic. The APs are great as well, but they require a long term commitment from lvl 1 to 12+. That sweet spot adventure where one can take an existing party of levels 5-8 and do something epic/heroic (GDQ Series and Red Hand of Doom being prime examples) is a niche that some of FGG's products fill very well.

I hope FGG keeps putting products out that fill that niche and mining the back catalog for gems. For all the requests I've seem for conversions of Abysthor and other old NG modules, I know they are in there.

I think FGG has struck a nice balance between the two: products like Slumbering Tsar, Hex Crawl Classics, Splintered Faiths, and The Northlands Saga provide new gaming experiences, while having one or two conversion projects ongoing ensures that fantastic older products continue to sell under the Pathfinder rules.

I certainly don't want EVERYTHING NG wrote to be converted. Off the top of my head I'd say City of Brass, Tomb of Abysthor, Crucible of Freya and Bard's Gate for sure, with Trouble at Durbenford and Lost City of Barakus as possible maybes.

I'm not sure if the Judges Guild stuff is viable, but I'd shell out cash for sure for a conversion of City State of the Invincible Overlord too, come to think of it.

DJF

I think the RAW works well enough for most typical games of good versus evil.

However, the rules get a little ridiculous in a game that features evil fighting evil as a prominent plot point. Just as an example, imps can't hurt each other without rolling a critical hit.

Their attacks do at most 4 points of damage (less than their DR) and they are immune to poison.

In an evil vs. evil game the house rule that like DRs cancel is probably a good one.

So, if two monsters with DR 5/good fight, then simply ignore both DRs.

If a devil with DR 10/good fights a demon with DR 5/good then the superior devil has his DR lowered to 5 and the demon has no DR against that particular opponent.

If nothing else, this house rule will speed up fights.

Gary McBride
Fire Mountain Games

Number One reason Paizo should try to gets rights to D&D name brand...

so they can publish the Age of Worms Hardcover !!!

More than D&D, I would like Paizo to be in control of Greyhawk setting. That would be awesome !

The upcoming Bestiary Box will have a bunch more bases, and now that we've molded them at different sizes, we're looking into selling packs of them for people who want to pick up more.

Any plans to develop another "Rival Guide" volume? I found this to be a great supplement and I would love to have another installment

Also, note that this release will mark the first monthly volume of the Player Companion

My wallet screams!!!

Edit: And so do your Editors...

No, it was just DA:Os time scale that bugged me. I can accept quest based event advancement but DA:O had me constantly looking at the little map going "did they move at all?" The sense of urgency that was imparted in the beginning of the game wasn't really followed through very well. Even Mass Effect 1 didn't have the same kind of "now now now" urgency in the beginning. It felt far more systematic, okay let's get the evidence that Saren is evil and leading the Geth. Up until Virmire and Ilos when things get a bit more urgent, but by then the player was likely ready to plow on ahead with the main story.

It's why I worry about ME3. Considering the game opens with the Reapers picking off Earth (echo of openning loss in DA:O) the player is getting immediately thrust into a situation of "oh no, raise an army quick before more people die." I really hope they pull it off better then DA:O "oops, they sacked a single city and then halted" while I screwed around on side quests (back tracked, farmed random road encounters, etc). They need a good excuse that explains why the Reapers take so long, or at least remind the player that the Reapers and slow and methodical entities as a whole and be devoting time to building Reapers out of the populations they harvest.

It's because the emergency flavor is fun, but urgency in the game play itself isn't. I would HATE the kind of time frame you are suggesting. I want to be able to take my time and enjoy the game, not have to hurry all the time if I want to be able to win.

All of them but RotRL are still in print.

If you mean, "yeah, but eventually they'll sell out and then they'll make a hardback," that falls under Vic's disincentives to buy them as-is. There's a lot of people that wouldn't buy, say, Curse of the Crimson Throne, if they had the expectation that it would be available as a hardback compilation, updated to PFRPG, in a year or two. Thus, people stop buying the back issues; thus, they never actually go out of print.

Who wants to see a Vudra product?

In Legacy of Fire, there is a happy little background called Latent Psion. This means Vudra has a substantial psionics community.

So, who wants to see a Vudra product?

I very much want more Vudra. And Jalmeray. I've been wanting more on those places and their people for a very long time now.

More on the Vudrani people.

More on Irori.

More monk traditions.

More on the thousands of gods Vudra has.

More on rakshasas.

More on asuras.

More on nagas.

Bring us some Indian/Hindu-flavored celestials.

Bring on the apsaras.

Bring on the multi-aspect deities.

Bring on the psionics.

Bring on fully fleshed out, fantasic caste systems and societies, along with all the values dissonance they can explore.

Also, Carolina Eade as lead artist.

James, Vic, et.al., I just wanted to say not all fans/subscribers get their Girdles of Giant Strength in a bunch over things like this. The quality APs you make and ship are excellent whether they are early or late, doubled-up, or off by a month. With new products in the works, I bet this will be another amazing year for PAIZO, and I'll bet most customers can appreciate the crunch you're feeling right now. Good work on everything, no worries, and good luck on all the new products and innovations!

Pax

I think that might be a bit much for a single city at this point. I loved Ptolus too, but the city kind of was the setting. With such vast stretches of Golarion not yet even having a 64-page supplement, it would be a gamble to give one single city the full on hardcover treatment. I'd rather get a hardcover for Garund, Vudra, or the various unexplored bits of the planet first.

My ideal world of D&D would center Paizo owning D&D and publishing for either 3.5 or Pathfinder in Greyhawk again, with 3rd party publishers again publishing lots of compatible stuff.

But if I didn't like Paizo's work, and pre-4e D&D stuff, I wouldn't be here on this page, would I? :)

More Empyreal Lords, and more detail on them (which are archons, angels and azata, for instance).

Team Evil has nine Arch-devils, four daemon Horsemen, four evil Elemental Lords, a passle of Great Old Ones and twenty or so Demon Lords, all with domains and favored weapons. Almost any combination of domains you want are going to be there somewhere, and there's a few exotic weapons of note available on that list, like the spiked chain.

Team Good has six Empyreals. That's kinda weak.

Team Neutral, Team Law and Team Chaos? Yeah. They've never really mattered since D&D became AD&D. Afterthoughts, mostly. Even Paladins, the lawful-est of the lawfuls care not a whit for allies acting chaotic, only those that act evil.

(The Elemental Lords, or some sort of 'Animal Lords,' might have been an interesting route to go with Neutral 'demigods,' for that matter. It's kind of what Moorcock did, suspending Kakatal and Grome and Meerclar and Roofdrak between the great Law/Chaos war, and beholden to neither side.)

A book devoted to the Empyreal Lords would be useful for PCs and GMs, as it would provide twenty-ish new 'minor gods' for use by cleric, paladins, inquisitors and good-aligned religious non-divine spellcasters of any class.

The setting pretty strongly discourages playing evil folk, like drow or necromancers or orcs, so it would only make sense to incentivize playing good folk by giving them even half the domain/favored weapon/cool deity choices that the evil NPCs are getting...

A Big Book of Law focusing on Axiomites, Formians and Inevitables, and a Big Book of Chaos, focusing on Proteans and, uh, more Proteans!, could be neat.

I'd want more Kytons, Rakshasa and Oni (perhaps including Familiar options!) before devoting a book to them.

A Big Book of Genies, covering Djinn, Efreeti, Marids and Shaitan (and Janni, I suppose) could also be nifty.

A Bigger than Big Book of Titans can also wait until there are more of them... :)

Now that the "Big Three Evil Alignment" groups are done, I could see the remaining evil outsiders being grouped by their native terrain. Thus, the books could be as follows:

Book of the Damned W: Divs and Demodands of Abbadon
Book of the Damned X: Oni and Rakshasas of the Material Plane
Book of the Damned Y: Asuras and Devilkin of Hell
Book of the Damned Z: Kytons, Night Hags, and other fiends of the Shadow Plane

Personally, I would want to see more Books of the Damned in the order above (I'm currently most interested in the Divs and Demodands), but oni and rakshasas may be better for a fourth book, as they do fit more with the Asian-theme and they are natives of the Material Plane, making them the fiends in your own backyard.

Edited for using the wrong name in several places.

1,000 pages?

I say crank it up to 1200 by adding Wizard's Amulet, Crucible of Freya and Tomb of Abysthor to the thing. :)

We're contemplating something different for those :) Stay tuned....

1,000 pages?

I say crank it up to 1200 by adding Wizard's Amulet, Crucible of Freya and Tomb of Abysthor to the thing. :)

or sell this as a separate volume - I got back into D&D via Wizard's Amulet -> Crucible of Freya. This campaign is as nostalgic as The Keep on the Borderlands.

By the way folks, Wizard's Amulet is a free PDF that you can still get!

That rogues are weak. (I don't think they're overpowered, but they're not weak, nor useless. Any rogue I've seen played in an actual game has been continually helpful to the party and the player felt good about the character they played.)

That the only thing that matters is damage (at least, what are touted as "good builds" are ones that have high melee damage output (or a good spell list). If that's what you're going for, great. But at least the campaigns I play in, combat is only half of what you run into in a campaign, and in combat, tactics and teamwork are as essential, if not more so, than how many dice you roll per hit).

That wizards always win (mostly because arguments in their favor ignore the tremendous resource management wizards and other spellcasters have to constantly track, and always assume wizards know every spell and have the right one prepared for every circumstance, which is highly improbable. I don't think wizards are low powered of course, but I find "the wizard wins" arguments seldom well-reasoned with real-life gameplay taken into consideration).

That's a real loss...I truly loved Zogonia and Mt. Zogon.

The issue of depictions of women (and sometimes men) is complicated because there is a big blurry line between what is against someone's personal aesthetic, and what most people with consciences can agree is exploitative and potentially hurtful.

I have seen images in fantasy books and comic books where my initial, gut reaction is, "AUGH, that is AWFUL and DEGRADING." Usually it is because a woman is posed unrealistically so as to show off her breasts or crotch in a way she could not possibly be doing (comic books are notorious for this) and/or because she is being depicted as weak. A lot of early fantasy game art was criticized not because it depicted sexy women, but because it consistently depicted sexy women tied up with their erogenous zones on display--with no "heroic women" images to counteract this image of the sexed up victim. Women were objectified, NOT because they were showing some curves, but because they were being depicted consistently as objects of desire and domination and absolutely nothing else.

Now, the first picture that Darwinism linked to, of Seoni? My initial, gut reaction to THAT was, "Wow, that is gorgeous." I saw a beautiful woman with a serene look on her face, in a reasonable, realistic, humanistic pose. And yes, she has nice boobies too. (So do I, actually, even if I lack Seoni's figure, and I've got no problem showing them off on occasion.)

So for me, I know there is a line somewhere between where I say, "Oooh, pretty," and "WTF were they thinking?" or even, "If I ever meet the artist that drew this, I'm kicking him in the balls." But the "Ooh pretty" part, for me personally, goes well into the area where we can see some decolletage and skin on the women and rippling pecs on the men. Some folks just don't enjoy that kind of artwork, but "doesn't enjoy" doesn't necessarily mean "bad for everybody."

Where the line between "pretty" and "offensive" is drawn, I think is in context and respect for the subject matter.

There is some artwork I've seen in Paizo's books where I've gone, "Really? I think that's indecent." But it's very, very infrequent (I think they learned their lesson that one time). WotC's D&D books more frequently had something I found objectionable (I remember in Cityscape (I think) a very busty woman being strangled by a goblin, and the way the scene was laid out, her cleavage was the focal center of the artwork. THAT was in poor taste for multiple reasons).

For the most part, most of the artwork in Paizo's books I'm fine with. I do think the "witch" looks more like a hooker at a Renaissance festival than an actual practitioner of arcane hexes, but I don't actually find her offensive. She's at least standing tall and confident, and it's a nice drawing that clearly took a lot of work to produce.

Most importantly, I am certain all of Paizo's iconic women, by the way they are described and depicted, are capable of whupping ass and taking names and are NOT victims. I am certain they are indeed examples of heroes, and this is SO very important. And I absolutely am glad that we have Ameiko and Sheelah and other depictions of women who aren't scantily clad and hope that also keeps up--it shows a diversity of women all being kick ass. If all the iconic women were dressed like exotic dancers and all the iconic men were clad head to toe in fur, I'd be screaming out "double standard!" for all to hear.

Come to think of it, for the men, we've only got Seltyiel showing a lot of skin, and I DO think Paizo needs to change that. Who's with me for petitioning Paizo for Shirtless Valeros?

(Women can be horny sex-driven consumers too. And as I swing both ways, I'd be hypocrite if I didn't say I found some of Paizo's depictions of women very appealing.)

TL;DR: There is a difference between celebrating human(oid) beauty and depicting people as objects. Showing off boobies does not necessarily mean someone is an object. It CAN, but it doesn't have to. Context and respectfulness are something to bear in mind. Sometimes Paizo could do better, but they usually do a great job keeping this balance, in my personal opinion.

I enjoy Monte's third edition books, especially the Arcana Evolved series and the Books of Eldritch Might but I still won't try fourth edition no matter who they hire.

So, off to the messageboards I go, trying to see if the battle system rules are worthwhile and if the books are worth buying. What I found was very much an edition-wars style conflict online, with players of previous editions bashing the current edition, Warhammer and Warmachine players smearing the Confrontation fans, and generally no one saying anything at all that could be even be mistaken as positive or constructive.

These kinds of things always remind me of a developer conference conversation I listened to. I posted this before,but the lead designer of Lord of the Rings Online at the time figures their forums accounted for about 15% of their legitimate feedback loop, and only about 4-5% of their entire customer base. (I believe even WoW's total board population falls around the 7% mark of total player population).

Anecdotally, in my previous group of 7, I'm the only one who posts, I know of one other who reads, and the rest just play the game (and are no less 'hardcore' because of it).

In other words ... we messageboard folks are, in general, the unsilent minority.

I think it's easy for all of us to forget that while we're all rioting and raging, there's a ton of other people just hanging out and quietly enjoying themselves with the game as is.

There are errors, and then there are errors. No reasonable person would say there should be 0 errors in a book.

A) Spelling errors : Yeah, really no excuse for these, not with modern technology. A spell check can be performed as part of editing. These should never make it in.

B) Sentence structure errors : These should mostly get caught by the same spell checking engine, but they could get missed. Still, there shouldn't be a ton of them in a book, if there is, then someone didn't do a spell check prior to publishing.

C) Rule Violations : These are insidious, a good example would be the new feats that allow you to make AoO with ranged weapons, yet it takes a free action to draw an arrow. This means the feat can't work with the rules as written. These types of errors are the hardest to catch, yet they are also the types of things that HAVE to be caught.

D) Missing Required Rules : These are neither insidious, nor should they get missed very often. These are things like leaving out bits of a stat block, like spell components, or stats in a bestiary entry.

E) Phantom References : These are editing mistakes made when removing something from the book, but all the references to it were not removed elsewhere in the book (cantrips in UM).

F) Poorly Explained Abilities : This is a game design issue, not an editing mistake, but it shouldn't make it to the printer if you want people to buy your products. Things like the Synthesist Summoner come to mind, where there are a dozen ramifications that are ignored and you end up with situations where by the rules you can't heal your eidelon because he's temp HPs, or there's a rule that conflicts with the base class rule (summoner uses his equipment normally, but eidelon's can't use armor, 3 = 2, does not compute).

G) Break the Game : These should NEVER happen in an RPG book. And I'm not talking about 'Take 3 levels of X, 2 Levels of Y, take this feat, and then buy this magic item, and poof, you win the game!' things. I mean things that all in and of themselves are broken (Antagonize feat!).

Now, UM had too many of each of these categories, especially the C to G categories. And it left a bad taste in a lot of customers mouths. That's not to say the book wasn't good, but, again, a company is always going to be judged as much by the issues in it's products as the rest of the content.

The question is, how much 'error' is acceptable, and how much isn't. That's different by customer. UM pushed my breaking point on that to be honest. UC has made up for that so far (other than Antagonize).