I know you've mentioned that you're aware of errors, and said you will be fixing them for the next print run (and PDF/PRD). What I would like to know is what scope of editing do you see actually doing? I'm asking this because I certainly come across many sections that are rather non-optimally worded, but I don't know if it's worth my effort/time to call these to attention or suggest alternatives. Is the editorial stance "we want every passage to be as clear and readable as possible", or are you only looking to clear up "type-o" class errors, like a 5 instead of a 6?
bump?
May I ask what "clear" is? There are rules best left vague, rules that can be clarified with a few words, and rules that present complexities not easily understood. The latter category represents a vast area for misunderstanding to compile with personal preference. :)
(So says a guy who has edited a few things.)
|
May I ask what "clear" is? There are rules best left vague, rules that can be clarified with a few words, and rules that present complexities not easily understood. The latter category represents a vast area for misunderstanding to compile with personal preference. :)
(So says a guy who has edited a few things.)
We're talking the errata and other small things that don't make sense anymore.
Like the fact perform mentions bards needing ranks to do bardic music, ect ect.
Director of Games
|
The next printing is already gone to the printer. In addition to the changes found in the update document, there are a host of other changes that are grammatical in nature, cleaning up poor sentences or incorrect references. If these impacted the game rules, they are in the update, otherwise, they will be found in the second printing.
I am not 100% sure how things will go from here. We are still working up a policy for handling user feedback on the book.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thanks for the info,
I had started compiling a list of stuff (minor rules corner-cases and things left out, as well as purely grammatical issues - i.e. sub-optimal communication of the intent, not "my design preferences vs. yours") but I felt it wasn't really appropriate to expend my effort in that way without any idea if it would be productively used. ...And realistically, editing a commercial book should be a paid position.
IMHO, if you decide to pursue more extensive editing, a good idea might be highlighting differently worded passages in a different text color on the SRD, so people with the first printing(s) will easily be able to see the differences in context. One color could be for grammatical changes not impacting rules, and another could be for actual clarifications/ errata to the rules.
Also,
will there be a time for more "Q&A" over the "why" of design choices in the Final?
that over-laps to some extent with 'grammatical' or presentation issues, of course...
|
Quandry, you are really asking a lot of the questions I've been biting my tongue over.
With Gen Con and Paizo moving their offices I don't see how the staff could possibly have had time to address alot of the questions, especially about wording/clarification.
Another week and I plan asking many, many questions. Not so much for me but I know some of my players can really misread almost anything.
|
The next printing is already gone to the printer. In addition to the changes found in the update document, there are a host of other changes that are grammatical in nature, cleaning up poor sentences or incorrect references. If these impacted the game rules, they are in the update, otherwise, they will be found in the second printing.
I am not 100% sure how things will go from here. We are still working up a policy for handling user feedback on the book.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Jason,
I am assuming that the PDF will also be updated to incorporate the errata and will be available shortly. Is this a correct assumption?
|
|
Maybe they can do a video, like a behind-the-scenes documentary on what their design choices were, what the choices were and the decisions ultimately made, preferably addressing the hot-button issues on the boards. ( I think you guys did a great job myself, but maybe it would help those staunch cleric-with-plate-armor guys)
I'm actually most interested in apparently NON - "hot button issues",
like what happened to Vital Strike dropping the lowest iterative attack(s),
or why Suicidal Rage HPs weren't changed (though their wording is still slightly ambiguous)?
Thanks for the info,
I had started compiling a list of stuff [...]
Post them here.
Jason said that thread "is a good thread folks. I am going to be combing through here for clarifications on a relatively regular basis."