I have to admitt i have not scrutinized the books for the DH and RT as close as i have the Deathwatch books, however i find ist striking and appaling how many editing and proofreading errors are included in those, the core rules suffered from copy paste errors, unclear wording, conflicting wording and plain errors. The DW Game Master Kit provided a screen with incorrect tables, the screen being one of the selling points of the book, especially for those GMs who needed it as a gaiming Aid. Rites of Battle managed to become an even greater jungle of plain errors and unclear or misplaced mechanics. I would like to discuss with those who already have the books, or at least have given them a thorough look, whether this kind of product quality is acceptable for you as customers. As already stated the points being not the basic ideas, background or art direction, but the clear cut editing and proofreading issues. Please share your opinions, based on a wide enough community response i would like to compose an open letter to FFG on that issue.

It's a Fantasy Flight thing. Both the Dark Heresy and Rouge Trader have the same problems with proofreading and editing. However the system is still good enough to make a decent game playable which is what matters to me. With a few tweaks you have a great system, and it's in the 40k universe....my favorite part.

The core system for 40k RPG was not designed by FFG, even if taken by it into the third iteration by now, which is more or less in the same state it was before. Same applies for background, as at least 50% of it does not come from FFG but was already provided before. But neither the mechanics , nor the background is the issue here, rather obvious copy&paste mentality and comparably poor editing and proof reading.

That's what happens when you have a business run things. Im quite sure that if it were purely in the hands of people who played regularly they would make sure it was more properly done. However, board members and people who report to those board members are the people who determine quality. They need to make a profit, the best way to do that is get a product out quickly (meaning they don't have to pay the workers more for being there longer to proofread or whatnot) and in the cases they can use similar product as a "mold" (your copy & paste, meaning they don't require people sitting around making up stuff when they can just use things they already have).

I wish this weren't the case but industry sucks sometimes.

That is exactly the issue, neglecting product quality in favour of the quick buck, is not something which keeps a company in business, we are not living in an information vacuum. Great idea, nice background, workable mechanics, but lacking final product is not exactly something customers flock to. People on this forum can pose as a representation of FFG customersfor this particular product in the wide world, a vocal minority so to say. Buying it nontheless and as soon as possible no matter the quality is exactly the kind of attitude leading to such product releases. It is not a "dont buy it" call, as we are all fans here, but there are drastic issues with the products quality, and those need to be consolidated and clearly communicated to those responsible, if those are not taken seriously, then the time for "dont buy it" calls may very well arrive

The editing in Rites is about what I'd expect from FGG. I'd like it to be better, but I know that's unlikely to happen.

However, the crunchy bitz themselves seem poorly thought out. The Advanced Specialties tend to provide skill and talent selections that are too expensive to be reasonable. The various marks of power armour all seem a bit out of balance (the Mk6 with its inherent +10 Agility, and extra +5 on the Auto-Senses, and an extra history roll all for the cost of 'only' 9 AP on the Body seems a bit too much to me). The new power armour histories are wildly imbalanced - some are 100% positive and others are significantly penalizing for almost no gain. Deeds range from amazing 'must have' deals to craptastic choices intended to hobble the fool that selects them. Yeah, bad bitz are worse than a few editing mistakes.

You get what you pay for, if FFG was WotC, all the books we currently have in the line would cost double or triple of what they currently do, and on the 2nd year anniversary of their release, we'd have a Deathwatch 1.5 book with very few changes (half of them good, half of them bad, cause if they were all good, you wouldn't have to buy Deathwatch 1.75 next year) to buy again and you'll find the editing/proofreading to be no better. You can find editing/proofreading/spelling mistakes in most novels, and that's the ONLY thing they have to worry about.

To Happy - Editing Quality is something that's quantifiable, book content is subjective. For every person who says "x is brokz0red and y is complete idiocy to take" there is a person who says otherwise.

BrotherHostower said:

Going by WotC and D&D 3.0-3.5 reference, the pricing of the books was comparable (with suggested retail price of 60 $ for Players and DM Guide approx. 600 pages , while Deathwatch Core is being sold for 60$ being approx 400 pages i length), while the editing was several notches above the Deathwatch products. FFG is no longer a small semi known company it was during initial Twilight Imperium and Battlemist times, playing in the upper league means providing high quality products.

Should just give all the books to me. I'll find the mistakes!

When I read rulebooks my mind is permanently set on "Find the mistakes" mode. I'm overly critical, but I'm essentially programmed to find mistakes even when I don't want to.

BYE

BrotherHostower said:

The Deathwatch books are probably the most exspensive role playing books I have ever purchessed, so I did expect a bit more in this department also. Not only the mistakes, but simply the layout of where things are is also a pain. I was pleased that FFG did grab DH when Black Libraries dumped it, and I do enjoy some of the new game mechanics in RT and DW, but they could use a little more time in the Editing/Proofreading/Playtesting department.

H.B.M.C. said:

I'm like this myself. I can't not see them.

It comes down to my point I made in another thread about releasing the "final product" to a virgin reader for editing review so that people like us can find the errors with a "sight unseen" read through before the book gets finalized.

That's what i would consider true play-testing, but **** me if it never seems that publishers do that sort of thing anymore.

Deathseed said:

Your "virgin reader" might catch things that don't make sense, but they would be unlikely to catch things that are poorly designed (like the list of Black Shield Advances).

Deathseed said:

Actually, my playtest team has 2 people completely new to RP in it, namely my best mate's girlfriend (she's into gaming though, so she quickly caught on) and my 12 year old step-son (who's actually pretty good at spotting flaws that we'd probably just interpret our own way rather than get confused by). Of course, I don't work on Deathwatch though

Well I don't mean "virgin to role play" so much as "virgin to the book in question". The problem with designers and play testers in many production is that they keep getting edits with focus on certain changes, but get so involved in the "work in progress" that they frequently seem not to go back and do a "read from the start" review, and thus things get missed.

What I suggest is putting it in the hands of experienced gamers like some of you for a fresh "sight unseen" read through for a good month or more before calling a project done.

In other words, what we paid money to do as customers, only BEFORE the game is called finished and actually put in the hands of paying customers.

MILLANDSON said:

Heh, I don't think you're a powergamer though and my gut feeling is that one of the problem with DW is that Ross and the others aren't either. Which is basically a good thing. But having powergamers among the play-testers base is a good thing too. Really, my thinking is that consulting a group like boruta's early on would have helped steer clear of some troubles, especially with scaling at high ranks.

Typos and minor editing errors isn't something I personally mind, I just think that some of the more confusing editing errors will slightly stain the image of the 40K line, unnecessarily so. But I guess FFG is on a tight schedule.

Alex

tkis said:

What tables on the screen? Have not bothered to review it closely yet.

BrotherHostower said:

dude, that's just plain ridiculous. FFG charges a premium for their books including charging more than WOTC on average; i happen to think they're worth it though but that doesn't mean that your exaggeration has any merit. 2-3x the cost? what wotc book are you picking up for $100-150 (double to triple the cost of rites of war)?? i'm no fan of WOTC and what they've done for the past 2 years (d&d 4e blows chunks and dropping star wars was pure stupidity) but lets stay in the realm of reality.

as for the editing... unfortunately, rites does continue the fine FFG tradition of not proofreading very well. i've spent a grand total of 15 minutes with the book in my hands and found two mistakes from a casual quick read of certain sections (the one i can recall ATM is that the mk6 helmet armor ability says to use the improved biomonitor bonuses instead of what i suspect is supposed to be the autosenses).

ak-73 said:

However, you should meet one of my other playtesters, who used to work as a producer/QA for a computer gaming company, and so is an expert in finding cracks and breaks in games. He also likes, in other systems, to play the character that is a psychic who take lots of flaws (like being 8 years old) in order to be amazingly powerful, so he really does try to break the game over his knee when playtesting.

I try to cover all bases in my team

As I mentioned though, I don't work on Deathwatch, so none of what is published for that line is anything to do with me. I don't get to see it any sooner than you guys (even later, since Rites of Battle was out in the US before the UK, so I only got it on Wednesday). Therefore, whether my team has powergamers or the like in it wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference to Deathwatch

I have no idea as to the make-up of the playtest groups for Deathwatch either, so it might be that you are off the mark and there are lots of powergamers there. You might go and ask on Bolter and Chainsword, since some of the guys over there got asked to be DW playtesters. They'd know whether any of them are powergamers.

i love wh40k, its my 3rd favourite RPG universe in my 14 year history of being GM and rarely player. (1st place goes to old 3rd edition of WOD) But no matter how i love wh40 setting i must honestly admit that DW core book is rubbish, same goes for RoB. Good thing that for me its mere set of guidelines, and number of things we reworked, changed or thrown away becomes greater witch almost every game we play, its not bad tbh every one have right to play game as they like.

If it comes to bugs, stupidity, unfinished and ill made rules DW is king. Only thing DW would truly need to shine is few more gaming groups and one month more for "beta tests". FFG should look at DW forums and count how many errors, things that needed clarification were pointed in few weeks after release.

boruta666 said:

I find 40K RP much better than say D&D or Palladium rules-wise. But I always liked Harnmaster rules.

Alex

ak-73 said:

brother ak-73, D&D isnt RPG, its Turn Squad Based Combat as my players put it, perfect system for computer games tbh. (only system that allowed u to do Chariot Knockdown feat, how u could not love it). Played it for short time, very short tbh. And ofc im not fan of shining heroic ubermagical fantasy.

My adventure with Palladium wasnt great, but few books from that setting i still use as inspiration ("The compendium of weapons, armours and castles" is my favourite, except from throwing African knives BS)

About Ha^rnmaster, i hear great opinion about it (oldest of editions, and few source books), but sadly im fanatically devout to GURPS 3rd edition revisited.

boruta666 said:

Well, I like high fantasy, although I am currently playing a Dwarf Barbarian from a rare northern nomad tribe which has been displaced. He is anything but shining heroic, I'm afraid. It is a role-playing game, I just don't like the system. AD&D was okayish in Baldur's gate.

boruta666 said:

Harnmaster needs some tweaking too but I consider the basics of the system very elegant. I'm more a d100 gamer, so 3d6 isn't so much my cup of tea. The only 3d6 game I own is Aliens RPG. Ah, the old Phoenix Command combat rules.

Alex

Well, at least they spelt the titles of the books correctly

"The Roll of Glorious Divininity" Indeed WW.

Warmachones was my favorite.

still completely off topic.

brother Ak-73, its RPG even D&D can be made into horrific, nightmarish, dark, traumatic experience and i know that, by shining ubermagical heroic fantasy i was thinkin of pre made universes like Forgotten Realms. Yet base mechanical system is so "dumb" it will kill every possible enjoyment very fast. (1st level wizzard killed by 5 wasps or 2 big rats or one small dog... while lvl 16 fighter can clear minefields by just walking through it)