Curious as to how many here have chosen to put this book aside until an errata file is soon put together, considering the huge amount of errors in the book there are?
I only buy books if they go to at least second printing, but I don't think UC has more errors than UM or any other book.
However there are a lot of things that need a FAQ entry (reload, firearms and thelike) and I wait till then to use those specific things.
I did not notice a huge ammount of errors compared to any other book, some things might be a target for some clarification more than anything else, but I did not encounbter any problems using the book so far.
I also rarely buy the books till 2nd print.
|
I wasn't all that impressed with either UM or the UC in all honesty. Much less the mistakes, omitions, errata (needed), etc. . . and more the choices of content presented. Just my opinion. In all honesty, I think both of them are named and presented misleadingly.
I'm glad some people do like them, but I personally wouldn't recomend either to others. That being said, both do offer, (again my opinion) a few really good things.
|
I find this thread to be humorous.
...to complain about "huge amounts of errors," while having errors in 100% of the sentences used in your complaint... priceless.
Fortunately, the OP was kind enough to identify him/herself as a native speaker in his profile, rendering the usual "I can haz not chessburgar, me not Amrecian/Eeenglesh" defense useless :D
I wasn't all that impressed with either UM or the UC in all honesty. Much less the mistakes, omitions, errata (needed), etc. . . and more the choices of content presented. Just my opinion. In all honesty, I think both of them are named and presented misleadingly.
I'm glad some people do like them, but I personally wouldn't recomend either to others. That being said, both do offer, (again my opinion) a few really good things.
Well mistakes and omitions never impress me, neither UM or UC was sticking close enough to the theme suggested by the titles, though UC more so it was a bit overdone on specific thematic elements rather than a broader treatment of combat. APG volume II and III would probably have been a better choice with some minor shifting in content between the two volumes.
Despite that both are very useful books for me wioth alot of usable content, the main thing taking them down a bit imo is that the APG raised high expectations for UM and UC. In 3.5 days a book with half the relevant fluff and crunch would be considered a good book.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm still trying to figure out when the fabled Golden Age of error-free first printings was.
Or maybe I just failed my "% in Liar" roll. ;-)
What a masochistic concept. OMFG there are two - maybe three - things in the entire book that I can't or shouldn't run as written... quick... discard the entire book.
Razz, look, use what you want from this book and from any other book. Use it as written unless you think it's broken. Don't worry about what other people on errata threads think is wrong; if you can't tell, it's not broken. Just use the couple hundred pages of text and if you happen to run into a problem at the table, resolve it then, like everything else.
This is definitely a "throw the baby out with the bath-water" thread.
|
|
If we're talking about "throwing babies out with the bathwater" and over-reacting in general, I believe that this thread needs to be remembered.
|
I only buy books if they go to at least second printing, but I don't think UC has more errors than UM or any other book.
However there are a lot of things that need a FAQ entry (reload, firearms and thelike) and I wait till then to use those specific things.
I usually buy the dirt cheap PDF that gets corrected automatically on future downloads. Wave of the future. ;)
What a masochistic concept. OMFG there are two - maybe three - things in the entire book that I can't or shouldn't run as written... quick... discard the entire book.
Razz, look, use what you want from this book and from any other book. Use it as written unless you think it's broken. Don't worry about what other people on errata threads think is wrong; if you can't tell, it's not broken. Just use the couple hundred pages of text and if you happen to run into a problem at the table, resolve it then, like everything else.
This is definitely a "throw the baby out with the bath-water" thread.
I take it you haven't seen the errata thread have you? UM wasn't too bad, and SKR has been FAQing it.
But UC is looking unusable. There're big errors or much needed FAQs on almost every other page it seems.
Don't believe me, check the errata thread and see if you can defend that one.
If we're talking about "throwing babies out with the bathwater" and over-reacting in general, I believe that this thread needs to be remembered.
This is why we need an ignore list here, as another thread brought up. I find it funny you manage to over exaggerate just a few sentences of mine into some hyped up frenzied fiasco. Good job being a troll! :D
I only buy books if they go to at least second printing, but I don't think UC has more errors than UM or any other book.
However there are a lot of things that need a FAQ entry (reload, firearms and thelike) and I wait till then to use those specific things.
Thank you for giving me an honest and respectful reply to a mere question I was curious about.
Unlike SOME posters on this thread...
Gorbacz can learn something from folks like you. :D
I am not putting UC down, It is my first new Paizo book I ever purchased and i was a little shocked at the egregious lack of final editing, minor correction are one thing but putting in a whole archetype that has feats that does not exist is another. I Was a little shocked but it has not soured my love of paizo to much. now the next step is to see when and if they release a faq/errata if it takes them to long I may say something but as of now my patience is still pretty good.
apparently this is business as usual? for rp book publishers to have errata needed and faq updates
|
|
If I were to put down UC due to "overwhelming amount of errors", I would also have to put UM, APG, Core Rulebook, both Bestiaries and most of my WotC books. So, not an option ;-)
Also, new week = new "Razz Rage" thread. Boooring.
yet again i find myself agreeing with Gorbacz...
I'll just have to post some more semicoln Stat Block errors so I can get the old Gorbacz back.
You should ask TOZ on advice on what happens when people agree with me (or vice versa).
Him and me used to snipe and flame each other, and now we want to go out and get some drinks someday.
And your semicolon posts still drive me crazy! :P
If we're talking about "throwing babies out with the bathwater" and over-reacting in general, I believe that this thread needs to be remembered.This is why we need an ignore list here, as another thread brought up. I find it funny you manage to over exaggerate just a few sentences of mine into some hyped up frenzied fiasco. Good job being a troll! :D
Wouldn't trolling also include posting the same thing over and over again and/or starting the same topic in as many threads as one can?
We get it. You don't like the book or are sad about the number of errors that make the book totally unplayable (for you). Maybe relax a bit and find something else to dwell on.
|
I only buy books if they go to at least second printing, but I don't think UC has more errors than UM or any other book.
However there are a lot of things that need a FAQ entry (reload, firearms and thelike) and I wait till then to use those specific things.
Thank you for giving me an honest and respectful reply to a mere question I was curious about.
Unlike SOME posters on this thread...
Gorbacz can learn something from folks like you. :D
Razz,
You are one of the largest contributors to trolling in general on these forums. Your complaints are epic and far reaching. The thread people referred to is a great example of your trolling attitude. So glad one can count on you to complain about YET another book.Ultimate combat is a book, it has some errors in it, so what. There is not a game out there in the computer industry that does not have a patch schedule. There is not an operating system out there that does not have some sort of patching schedule. Books have errors in them, whenever one deals with any human interaction in creating something there is going to be some type of errors, it is part of being both human and infallible.
To call it almost unusable is a misnomer... I can certainly still use it and I do.
Oh Razz why do you bother with the smiley face? Use them when you honestly mean it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You tricked me into posting! I Was serious you are not.
Curious as to how many here have chosen to put this book aside until an errata file is soon put together, considering the huge amount of errors in the book there are?
Not putting it down, definitely picking it up. Mistakes are unfortunate, but they really don't bother me that much. This book has a lot of hot options. My only problem is not using the new stuff too soon, or I will have to let my players use it as well.
I just love options, even if I can't afford to let them all in at once. I have been a big fan of the ninja since Shogun, and I can even make guns work.
I will put a book down if it is full of boring stuff, but this book does not have that problem.
|
|
My goal is to have so much Paizo stuff that even when I sleep it's on a bed of sweet sweet words, and then even when I'm tired and have to put the books down all is well.
Note: Must buy Paizo bedsheets if they ever make them.
On a serious note, there are some things in there I want clarified (Boar Style and Master of Many Styles Elemental Fist requirements I'm looking at you), but other than that I think it's a great book and delivers exactly what I wanted. Even though I didn't know what I wanted. Except the book, I wanted that.
But UC is looking unusable.
Huh... I checked the errata thread and have gone through the book a few times. Not seeing how it's even remotely unusable.
Are you sure you're reading the right book?
|
|
EnixDragin,
We are not berating him for his comments, heck we are not even berating him. But he does make backward insults to people here on the forums and you expect us to show him respect? why? He flames the threads on a regular basis just to get a rise out of people on the forums.
But yes you are right "we" are the ones that should be ashamed because we are stooping to HIS level. Which in and of itself is bad enough but we do not insult him in the guise of a smiley face thinking that would make things better after a thinly veiled insult.
As far as the Ultimate Combat book, there are mistakes yes, does it make it SO bad that it is virtually unusable? not in the least.
Huge amount of errors?
Are you serious?
There are only 2 or 3 things that are either unplayable or just break the game, sure there are quite a few clarifications needed but those aren't errors.
I've been lurking on these boards for several months and only recently made an account. If there's one thing I've noticed, it is how people here belligerently antagonize Razz on these boards for no reason other than you disagree with what he says. He makes many fine points, if a little rough on the edges, but all I have seen is a constant state of disrespect for his opinions and he has not once done that to any one here that I've seen. I've never seen him antagonize anyone here when he disagrees with them. Actually, I'm pretty sure he makes a point to not jump in on someone when he does disagree with them and remains rather silent from what I've noticed.
I've been reading the UC Errata thread and there're numerous errors in that book that does make me wonder if I should bother purchasing it as a hard copy.
Razz, I agree with you. The designers shouldn't have rushed the book out, which is what I believe they did. So much FAQ and errata is needed, and I don't mean typos. Rules mechanics like entirely missing feats or 2 rogue talents from separate products doing the same thing. It's getting as bad as WotC's 3rd edition editing. I, for one, will wait on errata before allowing this at my table.
As for some of you here, I'm appalled at your behavior. Personally, I'm surprised he hasn't gone off on one of you here for the way you treat him. If it were me, I'd berate you until I probably got banned.
Context matters.
Let me first say on-topic that I understand and agree that UC isn't flaw-free. My contention however is that the vast, vast majority of the modular content in it is absolutely useable exactly as written. The nature of RPG rules is such that when you buy a book with 250 pages of rules, if one or two or even ten or twenty individual rules are are imperfect, you're still looking at a huge amount of value. Jumping to a random page (92) I see that there are... oh... eight individual feats on that page. Using that as a vague guess, we're looking at in the general order of 2,000 rules in this book. Roughly. If even 1% are completely, utterly useless as published, you've got a book with 1,980 usable rules in it.
Out of curiosity, does that sound like the basis to abandon ship on the book?
No, of course it doesn't.
So that's my response to the root of the issue; the vast, vast majority of the book is just fine to use. Did I say vast twice? Maybe I should use vast three times, just to get the order of magnitude right.
So now... back to context mattering.
You're absolutely right that personal attacks aren't cool. That said, what you're witnessing are a number of forum regulars, who know their stuff who spend a lot of time here helping people and discussing how to make this stuff work, teasing the living heck out of Razz. Not cool, right? Well, yeah, not really cool. But... what you're probably missing is that this isn't the first time. Or the third. Basically - right or wrong - Razz is probably the most visible/audible nay-sayer, complainer, doom-sayer, critic, and generally intolerant poster on the boards. It's... Razz. So. Paizo seems to tolerate his instigation with great grace. In fairness, they seem to tolerate gently - and funny - teasing in return.
I'd far rather Paizo errs on the side of less moderation than more. I'd rather Razz gets to complain than not. And I'd rather everyone else gets to point out how over-the-top his complaining is in a witty - if derisive - fashion than not.
Make no mistake. This thread is a troll. It has no positive function. It doesn't say anything Razz hasn't already said elsewhere, several times. It doesn't offer constructive input, it's just him venting about a problem he's exaggerated out of proportion.
So hey, understand nobody is going to treat you like they do Razz, unless you work really, really hard at earning it. Civility is the rule, not the exception. This whole thread is overblown. I'm assuming from your post that you've got the PDF. Take another look and actually keep track of what you seriously believe isn't usable as written. Come up with raw numbers proportion-wise and let's see if there's any grounds for coming to the publisher's forum and soliciting boycott numbers.
For the record... I bought the PDF, then I read it, then I bought the hardcover, and I don't even vaguely regret either purchase. Weird, huh? I mean... if the book is so screwed up, you'd think nobody would do that. In fact, you'd expect people would be clamoring for refunds and shipping them back in protest. But that's not happening. And no, if Razz starts such a thread, that doesn't count.
