I'd like to collect the mistakes in the Core Rulebook for the errata and the next printing. Any mistake, be it in the rules, spelling, printing or otherwise.

The ones I have found so far:

- In the Common lore description on page 79 - 80, the Skill Group "Underworld" is not described.

- Under the Skill Group "Tech", there is a spelling mistake on page 80 (first line): "sooth" instead of "soothe"

- There is no description for the Speak Language Skill Group "Ork".

- There is no space between "..." and "althoug" under Skill Use of Forbidden Lore on page 82.

- In the paragraph "Gaining Navigator Powers" on page 178 is a space after "time" in the 8th line.

- Spelling mistake headline "Gellar Field" instead of "Geller Field" in Table 8-3 (page 201). This line should also be bold.

- Page 205: No space between "..." and "but" in the Crew Reclamation Facility paragraph.

- Page 277: No space between "explorers" and "needs" in the Achievement Points paragraph (line 12). "Explorers" should also be written with a capital letter.

- Death World paragraph on page 308: No space between "nearly" and "impossible" in line eight.

- Page 341: No space between "and" and "that" in the The Koronus Passage: "The Maw" paragraph (line 18).

I thought about the same thing...and i even come up with some important rules for this thread:

there are 2 types of "Mistakes" in the book:

2. spelling mistakes

1. everething else (please someone come up with a proper name for this)

So, whenever you write something use the following system:(to make it easier for the others to prevent doble postings)

Type of "mistake" as a bold title (1. or 2.) (or spelling or game mechanics)

page, location in page, mistake

stuff i found so far

1. (non spelling mistakes)

-Page 49, the Meele Weapon training (primitive) for the astropath is listed in rank1 and rank2

2.(spelling mistakes)

-page 41, bottom, two different ways to write "Two-Weapon wielder" in the RT rank2 table

Non spelling mistake. (possibly spelling mistake)

Double listed skill for the Seneschal on pages 65 and 66. The Seneschal can buy Common Lore (Administratum) at both Rank 2 and at Rank 5. I believe that one of them should be removed or that one of them is intended to be a skill increase, but it isn't listed (none of them have prerequisites).

Spelling mistakes:

1) All instances of "Space Craft" should be replaced with "Spacecraft" since 'spacecraft' is an established compound word.

2) All instances of "Arch-militant" should be replaced with "Archmilitant" to follow the accepted use of the 'arch-' prefix.

Are you guys serious?

You can't possibly list all the errors in one thread: the book is full of spelling mistakes alone. The starship section uses the word "effect" instead of "affect" at least twice, the tables for male and female name generation tables refer to each other with the incorrect table numbers, the word "millennium" has been misspelled in the header on page 7... I could go on all day.

FFG, can I PLEASE proofread your documents before you sent them to the printer? Pretty please?

angryboy2k said:

The thing about playtesting and proofreading RPG books (which aren't exactly cheap to make and due to this general expense tend to have very tight deadlines to ensure that the books are released as swiftly as possible) is that there are plenty of errors that are caught and eliminated... but nobody ever sees those in the finished book. As I've been informed by a friend who worked as a Beta-tester for Electronic Arts (and what I learned while playtesting for Black Industries), when you're fixing problems in a product, you fix the big ones first (the ones that make everything else not work) and the little ones (the ones that'll cause minor irritation but are otherwise harmless) only if you have time.

It's presumptuous to assume that just because you've spotted errors that the product wasn't tested and/or proofread.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

He never said that he is assuming the book wasn't proofread. He just stated that he would like to proofread it himself (either). Anyway, even then I don't get how this would be presumptuous.

There are so many typos and spelling mistakes it makes me wonder. Especially because in such a 'product' the fixing of problems (ie. typos) is not such a big effort (as compared to certain 'problems' in computer games you mentioned). If I would ever sent a manuscript with so many typos for publishing, the editors would throw it in my face honestly.

Don't get me wrong, I am really thankful for these great games FFG (and before them BI) is (was) publishing, but the proofreading department seems a bit lax in my opinion...

there was already a thread that talked about the topic::

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=123&efcid=3&efidt=211459&efpag=1#213200

I regard this topic as a therapy for people who would like to do something constructive instead of flaming

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I really wasn't saying it like that and I certainly don't presume to be able to playtest the product. I happen to think that proper playtesting is MUCH more demanding than the (to me) easier task of proofreading for simple errors of spelling and punctuation. I have great respect for the authors and playtesters from the standpoint of producing and testing a quality product and in fact I wouldn't buy these books if I didn't feel they were doing such a good job.

You tell me that it's presumptuous to assume the work wasn't proofread, but in the same breath you flat out state that fixing errors in these books is a matter of triage, the implication being that spelling is extremely low on the priority list. I am of the opinion that spelling should be a priority, otherwise why bother trying to spell anything in the first place?

I don't necessarily expect to see 100% of errors corrected, but the sheer quantity of misspellings in these books is astounding. I read a novel last week by Alastair Reynolds and there were TWO spelling errors in the entire book: one a typo and the other a mistake that slipped by the copy-editor ("payed" instead of "paid"). You can probably find two spelling errors within the first two pages of Rogue Trader and it ruins what is otherwise a beautiful book. Some of these misspellings (like "millenium") should have been caught by an automated spellchecker while others (effect vs.affect) should have been spotted by a competent proofreader. It is obvious that a reasonable majority of these errors are not simple typos; they are systematic errors written by people who just don't know how to spell. They need to have their work checked by someone who CAN spell.

I am sure I'm not the only person who would both be delighted to proofread these manuscripts for free while also having the competence to actually catch the majority of misspellings. With modern document editing software there's no reason for such corrections to take a vast amount of time either.

Steve

Cost vs. Benefit, on one hand they had most of the fan base screaming "AMG! Has 2 b out at GenCon I wantz nau." Then after there is QQ and whining about spelling errors and so on, if you let something as trivial as this affect your appriciation of something then I doubt you would have enjoyed it in the first place. It is really trivial, is it game breaking? But don't worry I'm sure a corrected 2nd printing will be out soon enough.

UncleArkie said:

Cost vs. Benefit? The benefit is that the book looks more professional rather than looking like your "has 2 b out at GenCon I wantz nau". The cost is negligible since there was a guy in that other thread who offered to do this for free and he proofreads legal contracts for a living (he was informed that FFG already pays a proofreader - who clearly isn't doing the job adequately).

Your comment on the triviality of spelling speaks volumes. I don't know why you bothered going to school if that's your opinion. You could have been a subsistence farmer somewhere instead, doing a non-trivial job that requires next to no education.

A second printing isn't much help when I have a beautiful collector's edition here that is riddled with errors.

Too bad there doesn't seem to be an edit button as I'd like to add to my previous post by saying that I really don't understand why there are so many people today who think that slip-shod spelling is acceptable. Sloppy math skills aren't acceptable: if you got the incorrect change at the supermarket and complained only to have the checkout clerk look at you like you'd landed from Mars and say "Meh, it's almost right, isn't it?" you'd be rightfully upset.

Well I did lash out a bit as well, I work as a graphic designer and artist and the amount of times that I have had clients complain about issues like spelling errors and typos in texts that they provided me with (I only correct the eye sores), but I understand the "other side" of works and volumes like this. Small publishers and trust me in publishing companies like FFG and even GW, White Wolf and Wizards are tiny little fish in a very big pond, simply do not have the armies of proofreaders that say random house can produce on a flagship publication. And just FYI there is and edit button, but thats ok, I'll just respond with a "l2 Interwebs" and move on

angryboy2k said:

I am so totally in agreement with you on this spelling issue. I think that people are letting spelling slip because they are now inundated with text messages and chatting, and are used to it now; it has become normal to them.

I have also said this many times: I am a professional proofreader. I proofread legal documents. I called FFG back in February and offered to proofread the Rogue Trader book FOR FREE. They informed me that they had a proofreader. I informed them that if he was the same person that proofread the Dark Heresy line, then they did not in fact have a proofreader, they instead had a person with a job I would love to have: GET PAID TO DO NOTHING.

The bottom line it, regardless of if you feel that this has all been covered in another thread and should go elsewhere (and who are you anyway?) the errata is OUTRAGEOUS. I love the RT book, but I know for a fact IT WAS NOT PROOFREAD.

Levyten said:

Really? And what are you now, the Forum Fuhrer? I believe people can post whatever they want in a Forum, and it is an errata forum, and the errata comes from LACK OF PROOFREADING. I plopped down my thrones and bought the book just like you and everyone else did, and with that purchase comes a right to FLAME.

I have to say that I agree about the lack of proofreading. If the readers can pinpoint them when they read a book than so should the proofreader. But I guess that if it's just one person then he or she might just skim through the texts rather than reading them in full, which of course means that a lot of spelling and grammatical mistakes will slip through.

That being said, I can understand why they are there. Remember that according to the preliminary release plan by FFG, Rogue Trader was supposed to have been released a lot earlier than it actually was. The fans were screaming for it, so I guess it bottled down to a simple trade-off. Either they release a rushed product to satisfy the impatient fans, or they refuse to release it for just a little bit longer and will have to suffer an equal amount of whining from the fans.

But that's usually what happens when things get released behind schedule. You'll always have to suffer through some whining, be it about lack of decent proofreading or the fact that the book was released too late.

I think most of the people at FFG are aware about this and will just take all the whining in strides, like they should. However it would be prudent of them to check over threads like these for future print runs and published erratas. Because despite the copious amount of whining, it is an easily accessible source of discovered errors in the current print.

What we could try to do is cut down on the whining and actually do what the OP asked for: meaning, hunting down errors in the current rulebook.

Also, I really don't see the reason for bitching about what "could have" been done in the case of proofreading. What happened, happened. Deal with it and move on...

Hey GIF, to be honest, you being a proofreader of legal documents probably puts you in the super heavy weight class of proofreaders. Now I know that I have been telling ppl to take a chill pill and just enjoy the game, but saying no to your offer is something that makes me shake my head at FFG, but that said, did you provide them with something that proves to them that you are what you say you are and not just some fan who wants an early sneak peak at a product. Getting a mail from someones gmail account would most likely solicite a response like that from me as well, mail them from work maybe, with your boss' approval of course. Then at least they will take you seriously. Funny how having a [email protected] email addy changes things, hehe, reminds me of working for the mega corps.

Grand Inquisitor Fulminarex said:

Way to be aggressive there! Really, was there any need to talk like that to someone informing you of another thread on the same topic that is older? He was entirely right to do so, as duplicate threads result in info being spread across several threads, rather than in one, useful, all-encompassing thread.

Also:

1) You can't post "whatever you want" in a forum, only what the rules allow, and

2) Flaming is against the forum rules, so no, buying the book does not give you that right.

So, in future, it might pay to be a little more polite and respectful to the rest of the community, if you don't mind.

UncleArkie said:

You only have my word for it, but I'm really not interested in getting to view the manuscripts early. What I am interested in is getting books in which the quality of spelling matches the high production and presentation standards that already exist. If that means sacrificing time to proofread the manuscripts I would be willing to do just that, but it doesn't mean I'd find the task fun; I spent many years correcting the university papers and journal submissions of second-language speakers and it was not something I really enjoyed doing.

Unfortunately, my qualifications aren't from the literary field (I have a master's in aerospace engineering and I speak fluent Mandarin Chinese). I don't know think I can prove my skills other than by say, pointing out that the word "prise" is most emphatically NOT a British variant of the word "prize" (it means the same as "pry" in the sense of "to pry off a lid"). I'm just a guy with better-than-average spelling, an interest in languages and a pretty thorough knowledge of the differences between British and American English that comes from having lived on both sides of the Atlantic for many years.

In any event, there are people like Grand Inquisitor Fulminarex who are eminently more qualified than I am and his bid to improve the final product has already failed. I don't really see much point in posting typos and misspellings in a thread like this since the right way to fix spelling is on an electronic or paper manuscript. It would probably be more useful to start a new thread on rules inconsistencies and separate them out from the spelling issue.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Maybe if enough people ***** the folks at FFG will actually take someone like GIF up on his offer, at which point they'll be able to release a product that they can be proud of in every way. I also don't agree with your earlier point about release dates because outsourcing the spelling correction (for free) means that you are not removing your own people from other deadline-related tasks.

Steve

EDIT: Found the Edit button

Its a sneaky lil sucker.

While debating the quality of our product in the forums is perfectly acceptable, I'd ask that everyone refrain from personal attacks between one another. If that continues, the thread will be locked.

UncleArkie said:

It also disappears after a while, otherwise I'd have been able to correct the superfluous word in my earlier post.

Still, I'm sure it shouldn't interfere with anyone's enjoyment of what I've written

angryboy2k said:

Ah, that reminds me of an old episode of The Simpsons, when Bill Clinton tells Lisa: "Whenever you find something you think is wrong, just nag and nag until your dreams come true."

While Marge proceeds to say: "Well that's a pretty lousy advice."

And Bill shrugs saying: "Hey, im a pretty lousy president!"

So, like Marge said, it is a pretty lousy advice. Bitching and flaming rarely achieve anything (other than a foul mood of all the involved parties and a general sense of the "bitchee" not wanting to do anything to please the "bitcher"). Constructive criticism on the other hand...

Well, I was under the impression I was speaking to a big-wig, but perhaps not. I would have gladly submitted references to the quality of my proofreading, but the only response I received was a "we have a proofreading department". And so I dropped the subject and moved on with my life, warm with the knowledge that Rogue Trader would come out free of the most glaring errors, since they had "a proofreading department."

I could never imagine why FFg didnt just have 4 people proof it? A basic spellchecking program would have caught many of them, given, but with all the special words, you need 4 people poring over it who know the system or at least know the setting.

HOWEVER, I like the Rogue Trader book, and the occaisional error I just chalk up to the translation from High Gothic to low English.

Sam, Rogue Trader is an awesome product. I am pleased with it. My frustrations stem from the lack of proofreading, which is clearly from a lack of proofreading on FFG's part. I have tons of FFG product, games, you name it, and I know that FFG proofreads, as I see it in the quality of the other products. So, why is the DH and RT line so plagued with errors?