|
snip
Yea everything isn't 100% in the world, despite trying, and I believe you guys give 110% every book.
Like my work we don't get every package delivered by the date we say. Like yesterday we had two 747's go down and we threw our load plans out the door and were scrambling getting the "express" cans loaded. I haven't made it back in but am sure we didn't get 100% out.
Its not so much that I personally mind the grammar checks, the rules referencing something that has been cut though is a little annoying, its embarrassing to "promote" Pazio products so much and have friends point things out the first time they "partially" read something. (I'm sure its not as embarrassing as when you notice something that you swear you fixed...)
My main point for the post was the schedule...which is odd that it was included in the "edit"...but nonetheless true. Well and the rules referencing rules that have been cut...that is really aggravating as well.
Sean
|
To James and other Paizo staff my OP was not about putting the people down rather the number if items that were coming out. I love Paizo and what is done. Check my order history for proof. :)
I am concerned as books feel to me and some others as they are rushed out. When I referred to editing it wad more than just spelling. Missing bodies of text or text not making sense are more of a concern to me. I have not felt power creep or play test errors that others have ranted about at times.
I genuinely appreciate all the hard work that the good folk at Paizo put in. I worry that what model wotc appeared to use by pushing products each month and repeating text in different volumes. I will pay for quality over quantity every time.
|
Hmm, I was looking through Rise of the Runelords and some of the older stuff and I don't think the error rate has gone up so much as the number of people eyeballing it and complaining about it. Well that and the fact that there are 3-4 times the number of products out there and the word count is probably 10 times what it was back then. Probably the first product to really get scrutinized on a minute level was the original Campaign Setting and people found tons of goofy little editing errors in it and the product volume was far lower than it is now.
Without even digging too much, just look at all the the clarifications and errata for Rise of the Runelords.
As far as I can tell quality has been pretty consistent, problems get found a lot quicker because there are many more eyes looking the products over.
One other thing to consider, if a typical 320 page book has 100 errors in it people skim right over it or are briefly irritated and move on because once they are past it they will in most cases never revisit it. In a rules book you revisit a section of rules dozens or even hundreds of times. The chances an error will be noticed and identified in a rules section is much much higher than in a large section of story text or even a read-aloud block in an adventure.
|
|
My purchase history would also show I'm an avid supporter. Subscriptions are on suspension right now.
Grammar errors. Yea can live with them. When spells are referenced and then no where to be found, tables that have the required reference off....
The main concern I bring up is schedule of releases. The releases can't even stay on schedule now.
We the subscribers then end up with four of a particular line in July so Paizo can get back on their schedule. Or try to.
Chase cards are now a September release. They were early July.
New Capaign Guide got pushed back at least two months. Think it was closer to three or four though. (Now I know hugely complicated to do a tomb like that. Definitely want to get the info correct. )
If they get all of their lines to a monthly product what well the releases be like?
Hire more people? Maybe a solution. But don't think the type of product Paizo puts out well benefit that much from more. Economies of scale is coming into play.
Well really doesn't matter what I say. I've been looking at not subscribing to every pathfinder line ( probably well keep both Gamemasteries though). My decision is getting easier hearing this might happen.
Getting so much information / books people are going to start figuring out they have a month or more of backlog material to read, me it's probably a good six months due to the July release, and start thinking twice about keeping their subscriptions going.
Paizo success bringing about Paizo demise. Hope I'm wrong.
The thing about the schedule is that the effects are felt far, far after the problem. At the moment, we're on schedule and looking good--but a lot of those on-schedule products won't be hitting subscribers for many months.
The unfortunate nature of our business is that, in order to survive and thrive, you always need to push the envelope and ride that line between safety and utter disaster. Believe me when I say, however, that we're working hard on attaching some safety lines and helmets. :)
While I generally accept that occasional stat-block errors and the rare formatting issue are going to occur, I cringe when I see editors using phrases like "flaunt the law" and "the tenants of their religion" when they mean "flout the law" and "the tenets of their religion".
I expect these errors on the internet, where writing is more informal and for many it is a matter of English not being the primary language. I don't expect them in the printed products, and especially not in the Forewords or Introductions of the printed products.
Of course, that has nothing to do with the schedule, but I did want to point out a couple of word errors that should be nipped ... because both turns of phrase will likely repeat in RPG products.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Grammar errors. Yea can live with them.
Quoted for LOL.
|
|
Grammar errors. Yea can live with them.Quoted for LOL.
I don't have the money to pay for an editor. ;-). But yea that's why I can live with them.
@James Sutter
I am probBly confused but your on schedule for all the items being released at Gencon / the month of July? These products were always planned to be released in this time slot?
Or do you mean on your end your on schedule? That it's in the info headed to printer/ product coming back from printer stage the stuff released this month that things took a turn for the worst.
Because the Chase cards are definitely not being released as planned.
If it's the printer stage that a lot of items are falling of schedule that's a completely other topic I guess. Not much you can do about that. Or wait hire a person with a B.A.A. In Globbal Logistic And Supply Chain Management. I will be available! ;-)
Sean
CEO
|
Because the Chase cards are definitely not being released as planned.
The Chase Cards lateness has nothing to do with the editorial team. They were on schedule with those. The lateness has to do with our card printer, which has decided to take longer and longer and longer to print the cards, without even telling us it is going to be longer. If we could find a competitive quote with someone else, we would switch in a heartbeat. But alas. So we are sending cards to the printer earlier and earlier to head off their lateness. But it takes time to get to that earlier and earlier stage.
-Lisa
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Without even digging too much, just look at all the the clarifications and errata for Rise of the Runelords.
And the difference is that Paizo is now in the business of RPG rules, much more so than when they released a smattering of AUXILLIARY crunch (Feats, etc) to go along with their APs, they are now making PRIMARY rules material. OF COURSE, the 1% rule or whatever will always apply, and nobody doubts that... But expecting to apply the same editorial process to a crunch product is just not a competent production decision. A rules product NEEDS to be edited by rules-competent people, along with implementing standardization of wording for equivalent mechanical functions (amongst other crunch-specific needs). I haven´t gotten the impression that´s how Paizo has done most of their PRPG crunch books to date... Hopefully that will change, along with integrating different quality control processes, foremost being ´hand the final draft to different types of players, and see how they interpret all the rules´ (to see if RAI is conveyed by RAW, and by conveyed I mean ´conveyed to the typical player´). There are so many Errata that simply would not have been missed had a robust and appropriate editing process been in place.
Paizo still expects players to alternately hew exactly to very specific RAW in opposition to common English usage, while ignoring specific RAW in other cases. Again, 1st printings will never escape the 1% error thing, but strong editing processes CAN address the other stuff... And you´d expect that by the 3rd or 4th printing of a product (esp. one that has heavy fan feedback, like core Rules products) that 99% of errors would have been Errata´d, but that unfortunately isn´t the case. Working back thru Errata of current products is a big task hanging over Paizo, so having a good editing process for current and future Crunch projects justs prevents creating more Errata work, while leaving more time to fix old products that need the help.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The internet is Paizo's greatest ally and its greatest adversary...
|
|
Because the Chase cards are definitely not being released as planned.The Chase Cards lateness has nothing to do with the editorial team. They were on schedule with those. The lateness has to do with our card printer, which has decided to take longer and longer and longer to print the cards, without even telling us it is going to be longer. If we could find a competitive quote with someone else, we would switch in a heartbeat. But alas. So we are sending cards to the printer earlier and earlier to head off their lateness. But it takes time to get to that earlier and earlier stage.
-Lisa
Lisa,
I don't think the topic was just about the editorial team.
Chase cards are late (due to printer ok).
Adventure Path #48 is late. If it had been on schedule it would of been in the early July shipment. Since you guys have said the late July shipment is really the August shipment.
I didn't take any screen shots but could swear a campaign setting has been pushed back as well. Two for early July as well as two late July shipment doesn't seem like it would of been a normal release schedule for you all.
The point of the thread was Paizo was reviewing their release schedule. When I saw that you had mentioned on releasing the other lines as a monthly product. Awesome! Love the product you guys put out.
Yet whether it's the editorial staff or the printers your not able to stay on schedule as is. Releasing more products well only compound that. (Plus alienate some of your loyal "fans" due to higher subscription requirements. )
Is it important that products are late? It's a matter of opinion I suppose. For regular Paizo forum visitors they'll get the warning a product is running late. Your increasing coustomer base might not get the info. I have seen people peek in here on the forum inquiring about products they had planned a game session around, just to be disappointed.
Once again is it important the products come out on time? I do prefer a product be delayed to get it right the first time, but for it to happen routinely is another thing. (Example: had an employee who was always five minutes late on the nose. Always. It was always this thing happened or her kids were hard to round up, etc. My reply was leave five minutes earlier for work. For it to be so consistent, it's an easy fix. She started arriving on time amazing enough.)
Paizo success can become their down fall. Remember the first impression is the lasting impression. You coustomer base is growing! That is great! It means a solid foundation can be established for future growth. Yet if those people keep expecting a product to only find out it's been delayed again..... And again..... Well more than likely they will still keep buying Paizo's product but what if they decide not to.
They might decide not to purchase not only because of the delays but of editorial issues and FAQ. (Recently the FAQ's have been being updated. My understanding the website has been updated to be able to handle it in Paizo's way.)
That strong foundation to build on might not be as strong as hoped. People keep getting the very nice looking product, some say beautiful product, but upon closer inspection find the rules omission or spelling / grammar mistakes. A person can live with these errors for sure. In fact I use to be reading the forum and laugh at some of the things pointed out by people. While it was great they let you all know about them the "end of the world" attitude they had due to the mistake was laughable to me. Maybe they just got tired of it after awhile. Either that or felt Paizo wasn't listening to the errors being pointed out. Which is odd considering Paizo's excellent customer service. At any rate I don't laugh at these people as much.
Well incredibly long forum post but it's the way I feel about the companies products.
Why do I feel so strongly about this? Not 100% sure. I have been purchasing $100 every month, yes mostly to take advantage of the $10 credit on shipping for going over that $100 mark so wouldn't have a problem with the Companion on Modules becoming monthly budget wise. I have been lately having a hard time finding things that I "need" to help my orders to break that magical $100 mark.
Paizo does need to always push the envelope but also shouldn't outpace their capabilities. It's a fine line to walk I agree. With the FAQ's just now being updated, the glaring editorial mistakes (perhaps there is not a lot in terms of percentage of total word count, but due to perception quite a lot. After all if a person perceives something it doesn't really matter if it's true when it comes to businesses. Example the DC-10, a plane accident occurred and an expert said it was a mechanical issue. The press hammered this for weeks then it was determined a ground crew didn't do a key step in securing the door. Wasn't the design at all but a single person. It ruined the planes image from there on and relegated it to being a cargo plane only. Hurt McDonald Douglas and ultimately helped lead to Boeing taking them over. Word of mouth is powerful), and the constant slipping of the schedule I am not sure the foundation is as strong as it could be.
Sean
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, since the product pipeline is 6-9 months long, Paizo may have done things already to improve their process. They've already acknowledged that the Inner Sea World Guide (or more to the point, trying to do 4 hardcovers a year) affected their schedule more than expected. Soon things should be back to normal.
|
|
That seems a pretty bad misrepresentation of the DC-10 situation. It was a pretty flawed aircraft. In particular, the cargo door problem required FAA intervention more than one before it got properly addressed.
Yea it might of been a simplified recollection of it.
You did make me find this crazy highjacking of a FedEx plane in the early 90's.
Although FAA intervention....is really laughable sometimes.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Funny Thing about editing: There is no perfect, error free book, regardless of how thoroughly it is screened.
Editing can be improved, of course, but a reader looking for errors (or even one not looking for them but with the mindset to notice them) will find errors.
What he doesn't find are the hundrets of errors corrected after editing, and he won't even notice the dozens of additional errors the new, improved (and more expensive) editing corrected.
He just sees the errors and starts thinking (or posting) "Here we go again, so many errors, I thought you wanted to improve editing!"
I have yet to find a paizo produkt I won't use because of editing problems. I daresay I've far worse produkts from different companies (WEG Star Wars anyone?) I could use perectly, sometimes shaking my head because of funny or not so funny errors, sometimes having to think how a particularly faulty table should look like, but I never had a reason to give up on a produkt because of the bad editing.
Also Paizo got behind schedule in November of 2010, and are now caught up at the end of July.
|
|
What I will say is that the FDA has guidelines for how much rat poop can show up in your food. Same with hair, dangerous chemicals, etc. Those numbers are not zero, because they *can't* be zero. Rat poop happens. What they've done is set the bar as high as seems feasible (and, hopefully, safe).
Editing is a lot like that.
Best. Analogy. Ever.
This will be my response to all complaints about editing.
"Rat poop happens! Deal with it!"
|
|
Also Paizo got behind schedule in November of 2010, and are now caught up at the end of July.
Yea, Paizo might be caught up again. They said that last year at Gencon as well. So far right after Gencon they seem to fall behind every year going into the new year.
They do have more staff now so maybe they can stay on schedule this year. Let's hope so. Releasing more products a year might make them full behind again. That's all I'm saying.
As well as hurt the quality. They said they had a hard time with doing so many hard covers along with the other lines. Resulting in the page count being reduced for the hard covers.
Releasing more products well bring the total page count to the same if not more as when they had issues. This is what the reasoning for reducing the page count of the books were by their admission.
To get that page count back to the equivalent doesn't seem good to me. Then to release more products seems like they are countering why they said they reduced the page count in the first place of the hard covers.
After all they are a company that needs to make a profit so releasing more products is a good thing but they can also take it to far and alienate there customers.
I could be wrong, but I believe Paizo is doing well because to a lot of gamers coming from 3.5 or other RPG games Paizo isn't the big corporation. It's a company that said they wouldn't swamp the market.
Here is to hoping they can handle it and not expand to fast.
Sean
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mistakes are inevitable. Some books will have more than others. Life goes on. My issue is with errata. It's been suggested before by at least one Paizo staffer than errata isn't a priority because the production schedule must be kept up.
I will accept Lisa's statement that slowing the production schedule won't prevent errors -- though I'm not entirely convinced it wouldn't reduce them -- especially given that some of the types of errors we see in finished products are only apparent once they come back from the printer.
I am dismayed by the notion that web-published errata must be approached on the basis of "if and when we have time, but don't hold your breath."
I own over 100 Paizo products. Probably most if not all have errors, though many of those errors will be insignificant typos. Still, do errata documents exist for products other than these four (six, if you count multiple printings of the Core Rulebook?) If so I cannot find them:
* Errata for Core Rulebook First Printing
* Errata for Core Rulebook Second Printing
* Errata for Core Rulebook Third Printing
* Errata for Bestiary First Printing
* Errata for GameMastery Guide First Printing
* Errata for Advanced Player's Guide First Printing
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Apart from the beleaguered Planet Stories line, we have been on schedule with everything for a couple of months now. Late products are still working through the pipeline, but after the August products ship (in late July), our releases should be on track after that, unless something beyond our control happens, like delays at the printer on in Customs.
Yes, it's true that the same thing happened last year, and then we quickly got back off schedule, but this time, we've made several changes to ensure that we stay on schedule. These changes include the addition of a new developer and a new designer since last year, and—even more importantly—a lot of new processes to ensure that things keep moving, including schedules that now allow for more hiccups along the way. We've also got new policies about assigning writers that will help minimize delays at the authoring level (where, historically, we've been hosed the most).
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Still, do errata documents exist for products other than these four (six, if you count multiple printings of the Core Rulebook?) If so I cannot find them:
* Errata for Core Rulebook First Printing
* Errata for Core Rulebook Second Printing
* Errata for Core Rulebook Third Printing
* Errata for Bestiary First Printing
* Errata for GameMastery Guide First Printing
* Errata for Advanced Player's Guide First Printing
We also have errata for the first printing of the Adventurer's Armory.
Apart from the beleaguered Planet Stories line, we have been on schedule with everything for a couple of months now.
...
We've also got new policies about assigning writers that will help minimize delays at the authoring level (where, historically, we've been hosed the most).
Man, you should really get on those Planet Stories authors then!
[I kid! I know Planet Stories are all already written and acquiring licenses is another headache entirely.]
Still, do errata documents exist for products other than these four (six, if you count multiple printings of the Core Rulebook?)
Basing errata on only reprints is a shame as I pointed out earlier in the post. I look at some of the forum activity of the employees and if they would spend even a fraction of that time on creating living errata for all product pdf files it could go a long way in answering many of these same questions. While a FAQ for a few books is nice it is also limited to basically the same few core books that already get errata. A once a month pass at product issues brought up on the forums (see below) and wrangled toward the proper person(s) for pdf inclusion would go a long way in speeding updates to files.
If it was up to me I would also make a new set of product forums for each product, with posts of each page of a product with no new posts allowed. This would make a more uniform location to gather errors as opposed to just being out in the wild as they are now.
Lol, life happens so perfection is not achievable. However, Ultimate Magic feels like Adventurers' Armory part two. This was a disappointment after how much more well crafted the APG and Inner Sea felt.
Funny thing is first go perfection might not be possible but on the other hand if you are willing to it can happen going forward.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Basing errata on only reprints is a shame as I pointed out earlier in the post. I look at some of the forum activity of the employees and if they would spend even a fraction of that time on creating living errata for all product pdf files it could go a long way in answering many of these same questions. While a FAQ for a few books is nice it is also limited to basically the same few core books that already get errata. A once a month pass at product issues brought up on the forums (see below) and wrangled toward the proper person(s) for pdf inclusion would go a long way in speeding updates to files.
The compiled PDFs will continue to update books that are reprinted; books that aren't being reprinted, or are between reprints, will be updated with FAQs. We've recently been able to dedicate more time to answering FAQs, and once the crew has sifted through the current backlog of questions, we'll expand the FAQ system to cover more products.
The compiled PDFs will continue to update books that are reprinted; books that aren't being reprinted, or are between reprints, will be updated with FAQs. We've recently been able to dedicate more time to answering FAQs, and once the crew has sifted through the current backlog of questions, we'll expand the FAQ system to cover more products.
I guess something is better than nothing. That route to me just seems archaic in the digital age where updating an existing InDesign document which in turn updates all pdf files (and reprints as needed) isn't even being considered as a viable, and in my opinion superior, option. Like most choices, time will be the decider on how well the chosen option works.
We also have errata for the first printing of the Adventurer's Armory.
I believe you, but I don't see errata linked from the page you indicated.
I know the FAQs are linked from the individual product pages, but there's a lot of searching to find out which ones exist (determine product line, scroll to product, pull up product description, is there a FAQ tab? Yes/No; repeat) -- is there a central page somewhere listing all FAQ and errata links?
That route to me just seems archaic in the digital age where updating an existing InDesign document which in turn updates all pdf files (and reprints as needed) isn't even being considered as a viable, and in my opinion superior, option. Like most choices, time will be the decider on how well the chosen option works.
I'm guessing you've not done extensive work with In Design. Especially not in an environment where multiple people have access and could be working with a file. A publishing house like Paizo has to have processes in place where after a change like that happens it goes back to the editors and proofreaders to verify the change was correctly made, etc. All of that is manpower spent chasing minor typos instead of working on new books.
The web based FAQ system is faster and requires less work than "just edit the InDesign file" which can #$@#$ everything up far too easily.
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Releasing more products well bring the total page count to the same if not more as when they had issues. This is what the reasoning for reducing the page count of the books were by their admission.To get that page count back to the equivalent doesn't seem good to me. Then to release more products seems like they are countering why they said they reduced the page count in the first place of the hard covers.
This is not really accurate. Our hardcover books do not have a formally "set" number of pages.
Rather, we give the books the number of pages we believe they need to do justice to their topic.
The Core Rulebook, for example, is 576 pages because that's how many we needed to include all the rules between two covers.
The Bestiary is 320 pages because we figured that was a good number to get a lot of core critters into the first one without making too many terrible sacrifices. Since then, we've stuck to 320 pages for these types of books.
The GMG is 320 pages because we figured that was the right number of pages for that book.
Ultimate Combat and Ultimate Magic are 256 pages because that seemed like the right number of pages for the content, and while the reduction in page count has the add-on value of making them marginally easier to produce, that wasn't really the goal.
Incidentally, all of our $39.99 hardcovers are priced as if they were 256 pagers. In the case where you get 320 pages for $40, it's mostly us thinking that $39.99 is a more attractive price point than $44.99. So it doesn't even have much to do with a book's price.
If we ever feel that a topic would be better treated with 180 pages, we'll make the book 180 pages (and charge a lower price).
That route to me just seems archaic in the digital age where updating an existing InDesign document which in turn updates all pdf files (and reprints as needed) isn't even being considered as a viable, and in my opinion superior, option. Like most choices, time will be the decider on how well the chosen option works.I'm guessing you've not done extensive work with In Design. Especially not in an environment where multiple people have access and could be working with a file. A publishing house like Paizo has to have processes in place where after a change like that happens it goes back to the editors and proofreaders to verify the change was correctly made, etc. All of that is manpower spent chasing minor typos instead of working on new books.
The web based FAQ system is faster and requires less work than "just edit the InDesign file" which can #$@#$ everything up far too easily.
I have done extensive work with InDesign which is the only reason I bring such an option up. I have not done extensive work with InCopy since I do all of my work solo. I am not sure to what extent, if any, Paizo uses it. All the steps required for an unpublished book have been done already for the systems in question here so they are not required as much. As for proofreading and the other steps it is all based on the info gathering method and the person put in charge of making the changes. Anyone with limited knowledge of InDesign should be able to make typo changes with the associated skills to keep the page format in place with the use of tracking and kerning, etc. In some cases I could point out it seems some who have had their hands on the files at one point before release do not.
Obviously, the right thing to do would be to offer partial refunds and/or physical replacement copies for the worst offenders in editing, similar to the non-mint products offered in the store. This would also provide additional incentives for every person working on a text and increase editing quality as a whole.
But such overly customer-focused quality initiatives hurt the business, reduce revenues, so its quite understandable that Paizo doesn't use such strategies.
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
By that metric, maybe the right thing to do is to fire editors who make mistakes, which then keeps the rest of the staff so frightened than they never make mistakes ever again.
FEAR will keep the star systems in line. Fear of this battle station!
|
Obviously, the right thing to do would be to offer partial refunds and/or physical replacement copies for the worst offenders in editing, similar to the non-mint products offered in the store. This would also provide additional incentives for every person working on a text and increase editing quality as a whole.
But such overly customer-focused quality initiatives hurt the business, reduce revenues, so its quite understandable that Paizo doesn't use such strategies.
If we apply this thinking to WotC products, given the amount of "updates" some books get, a customer should be actually PAID for having the book in the first place. ;-)
Paizo's quality control is excellent. Their response to the problems which do slip through equally so.
The only 'really bad' error in my mind was whatever string of events resulted in the failure to include the errata in the second printing of The Adventurer's Armoury. Even something like that should be expected from time to time.
As a boardgame collector for some years, it's my experience that a few flimsy pages of rules nearly always contains contradictions and/or ambiguous rules. The fact the 'error rate' is so low given the hundreds of pages of rules Paizo produce every year is remarkable, imo.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
By that metric, maybe the right thing to do is to fire editors who make mistakes, which then keeps the rest of the staff so frightened than they never make mistakes ever again.
FEAR will keep the star systems in line. Fear of this battle station!
The more you tighten your grip, Erik, the more editorial mistakes will slip through your fingers.
By that metric, maybe the right thing to do is to fire editors who make mistakes, which then keeps the rest of the staff so frightened than they never make mistakes ever again.
FEAR will keep the star systems in line. Fear of this battle station!
Haha. You just wanna play Darth Vader...or so.
But seriously, you don't have to twist it into a bizarre distortion and then make fun of the idea.
Adding a financial incentive or disincentive to increase the editing quality of the final product does work, as I am sure you know. But I guess you dislike potential side effects of such a solution...
By that metric, maybe the right thing to do is to fire editors who make mistakes, which then keeps the rest of the staff so frightened than they never make mistakes ever again.
FEAR will keep the star systems in line. Fear of this battle station!
The first thing is part of the good of business sometimes. (Insert name) might be an awesome person but it is a business after all and sometimes that hatchet has to even kill the ones we love.
Fear is usually a side effect for those in a field of similar ability to the first who just haven't been fired yet for the same reason. Those who are within their depth to do the job at hand should never feel that way in such an environment unless management fails at explaining the reason for why a person was let go.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
I believe you, but I don't see errata linked from the page you indicated.
We also have errata for the first printing of the Adventurer's Armory.
It's in bold, near the bottom of the product description:
Errata for the first printing of the Adventurer's Armory is available as a free download (860 KB zip/PDF).
(Note that the link in this messageboard post will break if we do another printing... if so, visit the Adventurer's Armory product page for the updated link.)
I know the FAQs are linked from the individual product pages, but there's a lot of searching to find out which ones exist (determine product line, scroll to product, pull up product description, is there a FAQ tab? Yes/No; repeat) -- is there a central page somewhere listing all FAQ and errata links?
The errata docs for the Pathfinder RPG line are listed on the Pathfinder RPG Resource Page.
The FAQs are listed in the box in the upper right corner at http://paizo.com/paizo/faq. (You can even see at a glance when they were last updated.)
If we apply this thinking to WotC products, given the amount of "updates" some books get, a customer should be actually PAID for having the book in the first place. ;-)
I'm not sure this is the right place to start edition warring, my polish friend. :)
|
Senior Software Developer
|
Adding a financial incentive or disincentive to increase the editing quality of the final product does work, as I am sure you know. But I guess you dislike potential side effects of such a solution...
The only situation I know of where this has been tried is Donald Knuth's reward checks. Note that The Art of Computer Programming has been a work in progress since 1962 and isn't finished yet, so there are some drawbacks to producing timely work with that approach.
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Adding a financial incentive or disincentive to increase the editing quality of the final product does work, as I am sure you know. But I guess you dislike potential side effects of such a solution...
We offer plenty of financial incentives for employees who exceed our relatively high expectations. I strongly dislike the idea of giving partial refunds for products with typos in them for about a million reasons, not least of which being that my editors and accountants have better things to do than calculate fractions of pennies to return to people because someone didn't catch a double period.
Like finding errors, for example.
I'd prefer that they focus on that.
|
|
If we apply this thinking to WotC products, given the amount of "updates" some books get, a customer should be actually PAID for having the book in the first place. ;-)I'm not sure this is the right place to start edition warring, my polish friend. :)
That's a nice try there, but I was referring to this page.
Where do I cash in my check for Monster Manual 3?
The only situation I know of where this has been tried is Donald Knuth's reward checks. Note that The Art of Computer Programming has been a work in progress since 1962 and isn't finished yet, so there are some drawbacks to producing timely work with that approach.
Do I understand this right? You think that rewarding outstanding work and punishing subpar results does not work? Really?
The only situation I know of where this has been tried is Donald Knuth's reward checks. Note that The Art of Computer Programming has been a work in progress since 1962 and isn't finished yet, so there are some drawbacks to producing timely work with that approach.Do I understand this right? You think that rewarding outstanding work and punishing subpar results does not work? Really?
I don't believe that was what he said at all.
|
Senior Software Developer
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do I understand this right? You think that rewarding outstanding work and punishing subpar results does not work? Really?
The day that Paizo starts talking about "punishing" employees is the day I find a new job. Rewarding good results, that's different. I find the notion of an employer having the power to "punish" a grown human being, like they were a child or a criminal, outright offensive.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anyone with limited knowledge of InDesign should be able to make typo changes with the associated skills to keep the page format in place with the use of tracking and kerning, etc.
Any time we make any changes to files that may be sent to the printer, more than one person is going to do it. Specifically, a developer/designer would need to request the change; then, any number of people might be able to enter it, either in InCopy or InDesign but, either way, a layout person would need to check it in InDesign to ensure that it didn't cause text flow problems, and an editor (who wasn't the person who made the change in the first place) would have to make sure that it was entered correctly. So a minimum of three people would have to put their hands on any file, for any change. And that does turn into exactly the scenario that deinol identified, where a bunch of tiny changes add up to hamper our efforts making our *new* books as error-free as possible.
And that's just the start of it.... if you then wanted that PDF to go out to customers, another person would have to spend several hours making the new PDF (and checking it), and then we'd have to send an email to thousands of people letting them know that it has changed, and then everybody who has the PDF in their downloads can come pound our site for the next few days to download gigabytes of data to each get a sentence fixed.
(Also, I'm pretty sure that folks would want a public changelog, so we'd have to spend time implementing and maintaining that too.)
It's far more efficient—for you *and* for us—if we just post that new sentence on the FAQ, and when we go to reprint, we can make a bunch of changes all at once, and give you a handy compiled errata doc to bring your edition up to the current one.
I strongly dislike the idea of giving partial refunds for products with typos in them for about a million reasons, not least of which being that my editors and accountants have better things to do than calculate fractions of pennies to return to people because someone didn't catch a double period.
Like finding errors, for example.
I'd prefer that they focus on that.
As already mentioned in my first post, I completely understand this position from a business point of view.
But as a consumer of Paizo products, I don't agree with your assessment of 'pennies'. At least for me, there's a limit for editorial oversights. Below that limit, a double period at the wrong place is worth nothing. Ten are worth nothing. But as soon as there are enough small mistakes that I notice them while browsing an rpg book, it hurts its value way more than the fraction of letters the errors comprise.
That's a nice try there, but I was referring to this page.
This is essentially what my posts are pointing out as lacking from Paizo. Everyone knows things slip by but it is how well a company responds to that which matters. Replying in forums while nice to a few who read the posts is just that, nice. Faq on a product page is nice but unless the info is highly visible, has a solid layout, and fixes the issues of a release it is just that, nice. Right now it should be called Q&A which would hit more of the mark as to what it really is. These in my opinion do not solve the underlying issue of fixing errors in released products in the most appropriate manner.