And how, this being an experimental side project probably means it has fewer resources to work with than core D&D products? Considering that, they did a great job with LoG.
You're free to put things in context, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a base level of competency from a company I'm patronizing. You don't see record companies misspelling song names or letting a junky drum track slide just because an artist is "an experimental side product" or "has fewer resources to work with."
That's because attention to detail is a direct result of the pride you have in your product. It's clear that WotC doesn't take nearly enough pride in products like LoG (or the whole Gamma World line, for that matter). Because if they did, they'd correct all the glaring errors. If I was Rich Baker or Bruce Cordell, I'd be embarrassed at the way the final product turned out. But they're not, and it's because WotC knows they can shove whatever crap they want out the door and it'll still sell.
I think, as a community, we've been giving them too much of a pass.
[I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a base level of competency from a company I'm patronizing.
I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill on this one. The products for Gamma World rock, even with errors. I think we're getting a helluva lot more than a "base level" of competency. I think Gamma World has distilled all the best mechanics of 4e into a quick-start, setting-specific, easy-to-grasp game.
As for your choise of word -- patronizing:
Betokening the condescension of a patron; condescendingly or superciliously favorable: as, a patronizing smile.
Your posts seem to carry just enough bitterness that perhaps you should step away from it. Write to customer service about your complaints. Let them know how you feel. But consider keeping the complaints off the Boards for a while. Some of us are coming to the Gamma World section because we actually like the game.
Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion:
Three Basic Rules (p 11)
Power Types and Usage (p 54)
Skills (p178-179)
Feats (p 192)
Rest and Recovery (p 263)
All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)
A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.
And how, this being an experimental side project probably means it has fewer resources to work with than core D&D products? Considering that, they did a great job with LoG.
Just out of curiosity, would you say WotC has more, or less resources at their disposal than, say, Bold Pueblo? A one-woman operation that publishes free supplements on this very board? I'm asking because, frankly, it's rare to find these kinds of editing errors in Oraibi's work, even on first publication.
I'm not saying that I expect perfection from WotC. All I'm saying is that, given number of writers and developers they have on-staff, WotC could learn a lot from the community-driven writer-editor model... especially in terms of "experimental side projects."
Your posts seem to carry just enough bitterness that perhaps you should step away from it. Write to customer service about your complaints. Let them know how you feel. But consider keeping the complaints off the Boards for a while. Some of us are coming to the Gamma World section because we actually like the game.
Seriously? We're going to censor the boards now? I'm not sure how much you've looked around these boards, but I've done more than my fair share of supporting the game. I give credit where credit is due. So, yeah, I think I have the right to levy a legitimate criticism (and I think almost all of us can agree it's legitimate) without being called patronizing. You're free to disagree with me, but keep the personal attacks to yourself.
And by the way, some people come to these boards to find out if Gamma World is a good product. They deserve to hear about both the good and bad parts.
Would I not buy the next Gamma World product due to editing errors? no.
I'll grant you that sloppy copy editing denotes some basic problematic issues present in many publishing industry companies, but I don't think it's a deal-breaker for a hobby company. A very large hobby, yes, but not The New Yorker, say.
I know posters have quite a few grievances with WoTC, but I was wondering why copy editing oversights seem to be so divisive? Do you folks feel the underlying game material is sub-standard as well? or, are you merely bothered by the lack of editorial attention to Gamma World proofs/galleys and the like?
Perhaps my less-than-ardent adherence to game mechanics is to blame for my ambivalent feelings regarding proofing these books, but I haven't noticed a gross negligence in the copy editing of other WoTC products.
I have noted that the DDI boards often bring up the problem that articles aren't released when promised. Sometimes a deadline being met comes at the cost of the most thorough vetting for a company with limited resources. I don't know if WoTC is such a company, but I do know I keep seeing the same names appearing on articles, books and forum posts. These are all content creators, suggesting to me that the talent pool is probably strained each month. If the creative end is strained, the editing end is going to be likewise strained.
Publishing in general has taken a huge (I mean epic) beating since the economic recession coupled with the rise of e-literature. (To say nothing of the other forms of entertainment that always beat the written word.) The end result is a industry trying to stay relevant and liquid while attempting to provide solid, creative content. It's not an easy balance to strike.
Should they be able to check their copy with accuracy? yes.
Do they have the resources necessary to do this and meet monthly deadlines? Debatable.
I can say with some certainty that boycotting products is only going to have an adverse effect on the company and gaming in general. I doubt they are moving product like they did in the 90s, and I sincerely doubt any gaming company will ever move paper product at those levels again.
I think you have to cut them a little slack for being in a niche market, within a niche industry whose broader industry base is being battered about like a red-haired step child on nickel night at stepdad's local bar.
Your posts seem to carry just enough bitterness that perhaps you should step away from it. Write to customer service about your complaints. Let them know how you feel. But consider keeping the complaints off the Boards for a while. Some of us are coming to the Gamma World section because we actually like the game.
Seriously? We're going to censor the boards now? I'm not sure how much you've looked around these boards, but I've done more than my fair share of supporting the game. I give credit where credit is due. So, yeah, I think I have the right to levy a legitimate criticism (and I think almost all of us can agree it's legitimate) without being called patronizing. You're free to disagree with me, but keep the personal attacks to yourself.
And by the way, some people come to these boards to find out if Gamma World is a good product. They deserve to hear about both the good and bad parts.
I'm not sure you can make that comparison with any sort of equality. A one-woman hobby effort (while great work) is not under the demands of deadlines, managers, executives and project re-tasking. In other words, Oraibi doesn't have to worry about marketing telling design that product A is tracking better than product C and therefore they are moving some of C's staff over to project A.
Publishing isn't a 21st century industry. it isn't even a 20th century industry. Publishing is still cleaving to a 19th century model. Things aren't done the way you'd often expect in publishing and I suspect less so when the parent corporation is a toy company used to a different kind of business.
Oddly, I submit that it is easier for one person to police their own work than it is for a strained team of editors to police the work of many on a constantly shifting basis of priority. This is, of course, all speculation as I have never worked for an RPG company.
I'm not censoring you. I'm not asking any authority to censor you. I'm asking you to step away from the fan board if your general feeling is negative. Your comments have indicated a general displeasure with Gamma World. Your comments are emphasizing the negative, and you appear to be blind to the positive. So if you are that dissatisfied with the product, why are you here?
Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion:
Three Basic Rules (p 11)
Power Types and Usage (p 54)
Skills (p178-179)
Feats (p 192)
Rest and Recovery (p 263)
All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)
A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.
I'm not censoring you. I'm not asking any authority to censor you. I'm asking you to step away from the fan board if your general feeling is negative. Your comments have indicated a general displeasure with Gamma World. Your comments are emphasizing the negative, and you appear to be blind to the positive. So if you are that dissatisfied with the product, why are you here?
I'm not censoring you. I'm not asking any authority to censor you. I'm asking you to step away from the fan board if your general feeling is negative. Your comments have indicated a general displeasure with Gamma World. Your comments are emphasizing the negative, and you appear to be blind to the positive. So if you are that dissatisfied with the product, why are you here?
Ummm, He's here because he liked the product originally, he put tons of work into making something for the gaming community. And this is a Gamma World board, not a Gamma World Fan Board, there is a difference. He has just as much right to complain as you do to enjoy the game. Maybe he likes the product a lot and he feels like the errors show just how little WotC cares and that upsets him. Sense he hasn't said anything truly offensive I see no reason why he shouldn't be allowed to voice an opinion.
tr
-n
z
, p
t
