Can we get a better errata / update format?

[EJDean]

Posted this on the subreddit and it was well received, so reposting here for increased visibility.

Yesterday's 1.1 update to the Playtest rules has some welcome changes, and some changes that take some time to understand. This is thanks to the errata format of "replace the would 'should' with 'may' on line 25". This is meaningless without going to the page in question, doing the mental substitution, and figuring out the change in meaning.

The errata and update documents should be much clearer in outlining the intent of the changes being made. As it stands, they're opaque as to what the changes are intended to actually do. Sure you tell me what sentence to change, but I've no idea why until I do it, and if I get the wrong idea from my substitution, the meaning is lost in translation.

I propose the following format for important errata: wrote:

Errata Title

Location of text

Text describing the intent behind the change

Original Text: ...

Updated Text: ...

For example: wrote:

Using Quick Alchemy to Craft Uncommon Items

Page 46

The Alchemist should be able to use Quick Alchemy to craft any item in their formula book, not just common alchemical items.

Original Text: You create a single common alchemical item that is of your level or lower without having to spend the normal monetary cost in alchemical reagents or needing to attempt a Crafting check.

Updated Text: You create a single alchemical item in your formula book that is of your level or lower without having to spend the normal monetary cost in alchemical reagents or needing to attempt a Crafting check.

This way the change is immediately apparent and the reason for the change is clear. It would make readying the update document a lot more pleasant. As it's a PDF, pagecount isn't an issue, though I understand there's additional layout required.

Another request I saw was for timestamps for each erratum, so we can see what is a new change and what isn't.

[The BP]

I like this idea a lot. I would add that the updated text should bold new wording to draw the eye and possibly leave old wording in with strikethrough to show that it is being deleted.

[Zautos']

They should also have a version of the update document with only the new changes instead of all the change, that I think they have now. So its easy to see whats new.

[Koihime Nakamura]

That's a bad idea as they don't update the pdf. Do you want to have four or five errata printouts and have to constantly refer between them?

[Shade325]

Koihime Nakamura wrote:

That's a bad idea as they don't update the pdf. Do you want to have four or five errata printouts and have to constantly refer between them?

No I would not... but it would be nice to have the new errata in each version highlighted somehow so that I can see what's new at a glance and update my documents accordingly without having to work through each item line by line.

[Vorsk, Follower or Erastil]

Personally would love the new Errata to be done in a different font color.

[Strachan Fireblade]

Yes! Please change the errata format. While I can live with it, I have players who don’t want to put the effort into the errata that is currently needed.

[KingOfAnything]

Vorsk, Follower or Erastil wrote:

Personally would love the new Errata to be done in a different font color.

Is the bold not distinct enough?

[Shade325]

KingOfAnything wrote:

Vorsk, Follower or Erastil wrote:

Personally would love the new Errata to be done in a different font color.

Is the bold not distinct enough?

Wow... apparently not! See it now but not when looking at it the first time and not when it printed on my printer. So for me... something a little more obvious would be appreciated.

Thanks for pointing the bold out. Maybe if the whole section was bold and not just the page#?