Here's something interesting from a new Pack for the Call of Cthulhu Card Game [the yellow card in the middle]:

javascript:void(0);/*1232534493782*/

Card Name: ERICH ZANN [correct one]

But in Card's Ability: Eric Zann

And the Italic Text: Zahn

That's really amazing!

PS. In the COC Core Set players got a reprint of an old card as a different faction card [used to be an orange Miskatonic University character, now it is a blue Agency character]. So one faction has 21 cards, and the other 19. Nice!

i'm sorry but, Yawn, big time. I mean the thread about our typos in our own game wasn't really a big issue over here. Typos have been going on forever and after they are first pointed out they tend not to be a big deal. As Ktom said Myrcella Lannister being wrong doesn't stop me from playing Myrcella Lannister (yes Zann as written doesn't do anything, but that is easily correctable in an FAQ, and yes its annoying, but that is one of the purposes of an FAQ). Typos are everywhere in the world (my Continuing Legal Education books are full of them. However, i am expected to not have any when i turn in an assignment, you could argue that that is hypcritical and they should not punish me for it, but that would fall on deaf ears) and get compounded when you are dealing with two compaines that probably has no person in either office that speaks the other's native language naturally.

If it is a giant issue for you then volunteer (which means you don't get paid) to be FFG's quality control person. You might have to learn chinese, but it might help a catch a few (but not all) of the typos. Remember you get to look at the cards at your leaisure and in small chunks. No time limits, no format changes/different versions of a card to sort through, no customers screaming for the cards to be realesed, and all kinds of other issues.

I think this post belongs in the "Off Topic" forum, at least on the AGot board. It voices a specific complaint about another game, which is meant to voice a general grievance with the publisher. If you've had quality control problems with AGoT:LCG, then this would be the place to mention them. Otherwise, this is off topic.

Yes, It does bother me that quality/product control is getting worse in FFG. I pay, I demand. I do not know how things are organized at FFG, if it is (Chinese?) volunteers mostly or somebody else. I deal with the final product and I expect the best.

A card does not have much text, compared to your handbooks. Even a whole card expansion set is not much reading. And FFG is not a new company in the business. They should take a better care of their "babies" and customers.

Of course I use those cards with typos, becuse what can I do? But it is annoying, misinforming and negligent.

If I could move this subject, I would take it to Off-Topic.

Max Wax said:

In many ways, going to law school changes your life forever. One of those ways is that when I see a legal word, I immediately think of the requirements of that word. Negligence, for example, requires: Duty, Breach, Causation, Proximate Causation, and Harm.

Does FFG owe you a duty as a customer?

Have they breached that duty?

Were their actions the cause and proximate cause of your harm?

Have you been harmed?

I think the last one is most relevant. Where is the harm? Granted, no one likes seeing "Maeser Cressen," but its hardly a harmful event when I read that particular card...

If my topic should go to Off-Topic, I think some of those posts should go to lawyers forum.

jmccarthy said:

Just don't let yourself be blinded to the fact that "legal words" may also have different common usages. Put Max's use of the word "negligence" into its non-legal context and remember that it can simply mean "an instance of being lazily careless." One can be legitimately described as negligent without being negligent under the law. Just because this isn't legally actionable "negligence" doesn't mean that FFG's customers should not have a higher expectation of quality or agreement with source material.

~ It's kinda the same discussion as the difference between "legal" and "ethical." (The can's open and there are worms all over the place now....)

I get Max's point. I also get that people are sick of complaints.

The real issue for me is that I don't want to feel like FFG is simply "keeping the LCG games alive" and putting minimal effort into them. I want these games to grow and get the attention they need to do so. While minor errors like typos aren't that big of an issue, they add to these feelings. I get that CoC and AGoT don't bring in the cash for FFG, but anything worth doing....

Thanks guys. I am not a native English speaker so it is hard for me to elaborate linguistic matters.

That COC card seems a little bit symbolic for me. The issue of names typos was addressed before on this forum, but the problem is not getting it's solution. Erich Zann is card from a coming, brand-new COC packs cycle and we get so many typos on one card?! I do not want to complain anymore, but would be happy it FFG got this kind of complaints and try to improve their products control and quality in general. With all the changes we got served last year from FFG (the changes were not bad actually, the way they were delivered was very hurtful most of the time), it would be really nice to feel and see that FFG cares not only about finances, but their customers satisfaction too.

I was joking about moving this subject to Off-Topic, but it is moved now. It surprises me that criticism of FFG is something off-topic, put in between discussions about Obama or new Heros season.

Here is a question. Yes we notice the single instances of typos (easy to pick out when looking at three cards in isolation), but has anyone compilied stats to see how many cards there are with typos verse how many cards there are without typos? I mean there have been thousands upons thousands of cards in both the CCG and LCG. if like 15 of them have typos, is it really an issue or just an instance of humans being the imperfect creatures that we are?

Typos are not an issue of the biggest importance, but yes, it does matter to have a proper text on them. Especially that both LCG games are literature based and I like that aspect a LOT! Even if it is a matter of my personal opinion, I am sure there is more people who think alike. If it was my job to type card's text I would try to do it best I can, avoiding mistakes and to do my work well.

Lars said:

That would be a great idea, though of course, to get an accurate picture of whether it's something that should concern us as consumers of their product, then we would also have to compile similar lists for other card games and other companies in order to get ratios that we can compare to get some sort of average cards per typo figure. Who wants to start crunching numbers?

Lars said:

I think FFG has done an ok job keeping typos to a minimum overall. My question would be, are they becoming more frequent? If not, perfect. If so, why and what can be done to help?

It seems to me like we've seen more typos recently, but that may be due to all of the changes we've seen. That, and FFG is in my dog house, causing me to be more critical in noticing these things. I'm completely willing to suggest that might be the reason. In fact, I'd bet on it

I think that the quality of FFG games in general is great, and I can overlook a few typos.

Max Wax said:

Criticism of FFG is not "off-topic." Discussions of general FFG quality as evidenced by some of the new CoC cards is off-topic for the AGoT boards. Your original post is essentially about how frustrated you are with errors in the CoC Core Set. On the CoC boards, that's general discussion. On the AGoT boards, that's off-topic.

Lars said: Here is a question. Yes we notice the single instances of typos (easy to pick out when looking at three cards in isolation), bust has anyone compiled stats to see how many cards there are with typos verse how many cards there are without typos? (...) is it really an issue or just an instance of humans being the imperfect creatures that we are?

If you are trying to say that a few typos are forgivable, especially when you consider how many cards are fine, I agree. There is no need to throw a fit over them and we can afford to give FFG the benefit of the doubt that it was an honest mistake. But if you are trying to say that a few typos are understandable and even acceptable, especially when you consider how many cards are fine, that is crap. Even if there is no real harm being done, that's not what we are paying for when we buy the licensed game. "Zero defect" is a reasonable expectation when it comes to the spelling of the names on the cards, so there is nothing unreasonable about calling FFG's attention to, or expressing your dissatisfaction with, the defects that will show up sooner or later. There's no need to over-react, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't react at all.

"Humans being imperfect creatures" means that errors will happen, but it is not an excuse or a reason that they should happen. It's not a free pass for FFG, or anyone, to miss things in editing or quality control. How many words is it acceptable for GRRM to misspell and his editors not to catch in Dance? How many prescription labels can acceptably contain typos at your pharmacy? How many "pilot errors" are acceptable on commercial airlines each year?

uhm, not sure i was trying to say anything, i really was just curious if it is indemic of FFG (as has been the charge levied against them) to have typos or if they are singular (on a per set basis) instances that we notice becuase we stare at individual cards basically one at a time (should FFG have someone who does this before the cards are released working for them is a different question, sort of addressed below).

Deathjester brings up a good point of "are the typos growing in magnitude, with LCG?" Max seemed to answer yes and that it is because of FFG not caring as much about LCGs. My answer woudl be a bit different in that if they are growing in magnitude it is not becuase of care levels, but some other reason. My hypthosis, words (especially a lot of made up names and places) are read differently by different people and the more people involved on the project, with very different language and cultural backgrounds the more times and chances their are for different readings and spellings. I'm not sure who their publisher was before the LCG, but i'm fairly certain they use a chinese publisher now and a lot of things might get lost in translation (excuse, i know, but a reason if not a solution). Also, with the intial card that spawned this thread I read it as Erich Zahn in the title, even though after it got brought up in other threads i realized it was Erich Zann (plus Erich, which i belive is correct in German, should be Eric to me, so....).

I think my standpoint is that typos happen (they happen in novels even though publishers have exstensive staffs to prevent them) and for varied reasons (human error, mechicinal error, etc.) and i don't think it shows a low level of caring, but that the staff is geared to the front end of the process and not the back end and so mistakes are not caught near the back of the process. Should this change? Well i think that becomes an issue of economics that i can't answer. However, i would say that if it keeps quality of the design process and keeps costs from going up, i can live with typos.

Lars said:

Well, I think I'd find this idea more comforting if the people in charge of the front-end process and the back-end process were the same people. I don't get the feeling that the Lead Designer is also responsible for final proofread.

Lars said:

I guess where I'm coming from is that I read this and get the general attitude from the post, intended or not, that "I can live with typos and I don't really care if FFG makes them. " That unwritten part is what just doesn't sit right with me. Maybe it's because I grew up in a "spelling counts" kind of world and work in healthcare where even the one-in-a-million, unintended, understandable, human error can have some pretty serious consequences

Granted, there is something in Max's post that could be read as "The Beast walks among us, and his sign is FFG." That's not it either.

For me, it's "I can live with typos, but I shouldn't have to." It's the "I shouldn't have to" part that seems to be missing from a lot of this.

I guess for me, i can't fault someone for typos becuase i am more guilty then anyone (except for maybe stag lord) when it comes to typos, i'm a horrible speller, I have tons of trouble with double letter words and than vs then and all these other things that spell check doesn't catch. I proof read everything i do, and stuff that i have to turn into court i try to have 2 or 3 other proof as well. I've still had a document or two come back with a red circle on it (its not a big deal for most court issues, bigger depending on judges....I could never do appelate practice though becuase of it). Bottom line, i'd feel like a hypocite calling someone out for making typos (poking fun at stag not included). so the I shouldn't have to part isn't really there for me, even if i would like to live without typos.

Lars said:

I think that's the thing I'm looking at. There are places in your own profession where missing these "little details" would be considered a deficiency instead of a nearly insignificant inconvenience. To me, publishing is a place where typos are a deficiency instead of an inconvenience (certainly not insignificant), and FFG is a publishing company (of games instead of books). There are times, places and situations where people are held to a higher standard than you yourself could meet (and knowing you could not meet them, you stay out of that place; others have voluntarily entered and should be held to the standard).

There's nothing wrong with holding FFG to a higher standard on typos than you yourself could meet. I mean, I can't fix a car for crap, so is it hypocritical for me to point out to my mechanic when something he was supposed to have fixed still doesn't work right? Would you still feel it wasn't your place as a consumer to point out FFG's missed typos if the cards read like a Stag Lord post? (That's not a slam on Stag, it's an example of where something is no big deal in one format, but not in another.) For me, it's not "calling someone out;" it's pointing out an error so that the process can be tightened for next time.

Lars said:

Could you fault a doctor for killing you on the exam table because the knife slipped and you're not so good with knives, either?

I'm with ktom. They are a publisher. Publishers should aim a bit higher than random dude on a message board when setting the bar for quality.

madkasel said:

ignoring the hyperbole of the anology, when you go into any surgeary there is always a risk of damage becuase surgeay is a ver ybrutaql process. So in that regard FFG being a publisher runs the risk of having a typo. Would i fault the Doctor for making an honest mistake, no, especially becuase there is no way i could do what they are doing. Would i fault a doctor for being negligant and not giving a crap, yes.....same for a publisher.

Lars said:

Out of curiosity, how do you tell the difference? (I'm not being facetious here; it's a real issue in many environments.)

And are you suggesting that if it's an honest mistake, especially since there is no way you could do that they do, you'd feel hypocritical calling the mistake to the doctor's attention and requesting that they do something to avoid the same mistake as much as possible for the next guy? I'm just not getting where it's hypocritical to make someone aware of a mistake. I'm not talking about making a federal case out of a reasonable error (which may be the misunderstanding here since the thread did kind of start in that tone), but more of a friendly "heads-up" thing.

a mistake is something that can happen no matter how careful someone is being. Negligence is a lack of care (or of effort). It can be generally defined as conduct that is culpable because it falls short of what a reasonable (simularly situated) person would do to protect another individual from foreseeable risks of harm.

you said it yourself, reasonale errors hapen. If FFG is being reasonable in its process to not have typos they get a pass from me for a typo or two. If FFG is not being reasonable, well then i'd be complaining.

Lars said:

If, for instance, a man is born hasty and awkward, is always having accidents and hurting himself or his neighbors, no doubt his congenital defects will be allowed for in the courts of Heaven, but his slips are no less troublesome to his neighbors than if they sprang from guilty neglect.

Granted, in these discussions, we should probably be utilizing the common English usage form of negligence and its derivatives rather than the legal form.