NEWS

Shadowrun 5th Edition Errata Released

  • 117 Replies
  • 45800 Views

Dangersaurus

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 195
« Reply #30 on: <02-10-14/0017:21> »
If anyone at Catalyst is reading this - thanks for getting this out. It's about time!  ;D It's really appreciated though.

It's also nice to see that the errata now has an official home; the info there eases my some of my concerns about the errata process. Here's hoping future updates occur in a more timely manner.

Namikaze

  • *
  • Freelancer Ltd
  • Prime Runner
  • **
  • Posts: 4068
  • I'm a Ma'fan of Shadowrun!
« Reply #31 on: <02-10-14/0021:20> »
I'm also not buying the "typo" explanation.

The rulebook went through several revisions.  Some of these revisions used different terms, and some of the information was left in during the swap from one revision to another.  It happens.
Feel free to keep any karma you earned illicitly, it's on us.

Quote from: Stephen Covey
Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.

Medicineman

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2310
« Reply #32 on: <02-10-14/0216:15> »
A thank You from Germany to all the Freelancers who worked hard to get them cleared

HokaHey
Medicineman
http://english.bouletcorp.com/2013/08/02/the-long-journey/
---------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1V7fi5IqYw
---------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RYlAPjyNm8

Insaniac99

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 450
« Reply #33 on: <02-10-14/0307:20> »
I think that is a purposeful misreading of what I am saying.  They have quite clearly said that there are multiple other errors that they aren't going to list, but will release an updated PDF.  I am saying they should own up and say "Here are all the changes for those of you who only have the dead tree edition" so those with the paper book and not the electron version can still see all the mistakes.

Read the website.  Clearly the other errors that you're referring to are covered in this quote:
Quote
The document lists substantive changes to the book. We have also found some typos, grammatical issues, and other minor things that need changing, but they are not included in this document, as we wanted to focus on things likely to affect gameplay.

Or this one:
Quote
Note that there will likely be updates to this document as time goes by–we’ll try to announce when a new version comes out.

If you bought a PDF of the book, the PDF will be updated with the errata, per this quote:
Quote
The changes in this document and the aforementioned typos and such will be incorporated into the Shadowrun, Fifth Edition PDF in the near future. At that time, people who have bought the PDF will receive notification that they can download an updated version.

If you bought the rulebook physically then you will get the same errata document that the rest of us got.  I don't understand where you're coming from with this angsty "woe is the person who bought the physical book" attitude.

In order to help visualize my issue:

  • Things PDF owners get:
    • This Errata document
    • An assortment of Grammatical errors, typoes, and "other" fixes
  • Things Dead Tree owners get:
    • This Errata document
    • Bupkis

Given that grammar issues can be one of the strongest causes of rules debate and that we don't know what the "other" issues are that are beyond typoes and grammatical issues I do not think it is right that only Electron version purchasers get to know the fixes.  They need to compile a separate document where they list them.

So, for those who want to keep track; here are all of my complaints in an easy numbered fashion with reasons why:

  • The Lack of communication from those upon high.
    • The stuff we get from the freelancers is cool, as much as they are limited by the NDA and I don't blame them, but the NDA is a cause of poor customer service and needs to be changed.
    • I want to hear from the people in charge.  I want to know that they actually care about their customers, I don't see this.
  • The length of wait for the official errata document
    • 6 months is just too long of a wait for the first official errata.
  • The incompleteness of the official errata document
    • There are fixes missing that they have known about since July that aren't in there For example:
      • The cost of submersion is off I believe, it list: 10 X(times) (Submersion gradeX3) (P.257)

        The cost for Initiation is : 10 +(plus) (initiationX3) (P.325)

        The bolded parts are the differences and I think the mistake is the cost of submersion... Let us know, it is becoming a debate between my mage player and the technomancer player
        It's an error, yeah. If it's not in the errata already, it will be soon. Thanks!
    • I have heard multiple times they were taking their time to "get it right" and get as much as they can done with the first document. (For example Bull on this post).  This document is not "getting as much possible right" and I don't see how anyone can even claim that.
  • That there are fixes that only holders of the electron edition will be told about
    • There is no excuse for this.  There should be a master list of changes and if there isn't running the two versions through a Diff program and a couple hours of work cleaning it up could provide all the fixes in a list for those with the dead tree edition


Now, if only one or those two issues were present, I wouldn't be making as much of a fuss as I am.  If this errata document came out 5 months ago, I would say it is a great start and thank them for getting it to us as quickly as possible.  If the errata was much more complete and/or had the inclusion of the master changes list then I would probably be okay with it taking 6 months.  If there wasn't the poor customer service and the people upon high were approachable and talked to us, I would be a lot more forgiving of the rest of the stuff.

As it is, I don't feel like I'm being treated like the valued customer that I should be treated as; I feel like am being treated as a quick cash grab and it makes me want to support the company less and less.  Other game companies that don't make these mistakes I buy every single product they put out regardless of if I plan to ever use it just because I want to support them for being a good company that makes good games.  The more this kind of stuff happens the more I read reviews and critically ask myself "will I use this product within the next week (or even sooner)" and the less and less money I give to the company who treats their customers with such little regard.  I guarantee you I'm not the only one who has purchasing habits like this, I'm just probably one of the more vocal.

So if Catalyst doesn't care about money from me and people like me, by all means they are welcome to continue treating their customers like crap but I'm not happy with it and will stop setting aside money specifically for Catalyst products and will continue to give less and less of my gaming budget towards them until I stop all together.
Check out my all purpose Shadowrun Die roller and Probability generator: http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=13241.0

samoth

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 147
« Reply #34 on: <02-10-14/0626:44> »
It's very telling that they didn't bother changing ONE WORD to make the Binding skill have a use:

Quote
The test
is an Opposed Summoning + Magic [Force] v. spirit’s
Force x 2, and it inflicts Drain equal to twice the hits
(not net hits) on the spirit’s defense test, minimum 2.
Additional net hits beyond the first add to the number
of services the spirit owes.

shadowrom

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 32
« Reply #35 on: <02-10-14/0800:55> »
I must say I am underwhelmed by the errata. If it was released as such on the first month and got updated regularly it would be great. By February 2014, not so much. It is a beginning though. I hope it is a first step to catch up.

Osiris

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 1
« Reply #36 on: <02-10-14/0903:32> »

  • Things PDF owners get:
    • This Errata document
    • An assortment of Grammatical errors, typoes, and "other" fixes
  • Things Dead Tree owners get:
    • This Errata document
    • Bupkis


I own the PDF and it wasnt updated yet. So right atm everyone is in the same boat.

Namikaze

  • *
  • Freelancer Ltd
  • Prime Runner
  • **
  • Posts: 4068
  • I'm a Ma'fan of Shadowrun!
« Reply #37 on: <02-10-14/0925:24> »
  • Things PDF owners get:
    • This Errata document
    • An assortment of Grammatical errors, typoes, and "other" fixes
  • Things Dead Tree owners get:
    • This Errata document
    • Bupkis

Given that grammar issues can be one of the strongest causes of rules debate and that we don't know what the "other" issues are that are beyond typoes and grammatical issues I do not think it is right that only Electron version purchasers get to know the fixes.  They need to compile a separate document where they list them.

You're so full of it.  What makes you think that people who own the physical copy won't get a PDF of all the changes too?  And as Osiris said, we're all in the same boat right now.  You're worrying about the wrong things here, mate.  You just need to take a step back and look at the situation realistically.  There's not a thing that indicates that the owners of physical copies of the book won't get a PDF update like the rest of us.

  • The Lack of communication from those upon high.
    • The stuff we get from the freelancers is cool, as much as they are limited by the NDA and I don't blame them, but the NDA is a cause of poor customer service and needs to be changed.
    • I want to hear from the people in charge.  I want to know that they actually care about their customers, I don't see this.

This isn't some sort of forum for the CGL folks to talk to the fans.  This is a forum for the fans to talk amongst themselves.  I don't know where you get the idea that this forum is something other than what it is.  If you're wanting to talk to CGL, use Twitter, Facebook, or email.

  • The length of wait for the official errata document
    • 6 months is just too long of a wait for the first official errata.

You're right about this.  But bear in mind that CGL isn't the size of Wizards of the Coast, they don't have a crapton of playtesters, and they are also spreading themselves a little thin by working on four (maybe as many as six) projects at once.  Is this an excuse?  Not really.  It's just that you have to take things with a grain of salt sometimes and not act with a sense of entitlement.  The consumer is always right, yes - but the consumer should also live in a realistic, understanding world.


And here is where things get a little weird, in my opinion:



  • The incompleteness of the official errata document
    • There are fixes missing that they have known about since July that aren't in there For example:
    • I have heard multiple times they were taking their time to "get it right" and get as much as they can done with the first document. (For example Bull on this post).  This document is not "getting as much possible right" and I don't see how anyone can even claim that.

Yes, but these are issues that you did not bring up.  Your issue right off the bat was that somehow the owners of the physical copies of the book were "being screwed by Catalyst."
"if you didn't buy the pdf, screw you, we won't even tell you all of our mistakes."

  • That there are fixes that only holders of the electron edition will be told about
    • There is no excuse for this.  There should be a master list of changes and if there isn't running the two versions through a Diff program and a couple hours of work cleaning it up could provide all the fixes in a list for those with the dead tree edition

Again - not really sure where you're getting this idea.  Here's a breakdown:
  • Everyone has a PDF with several changes in it
  • Everyone will have access to the future PDFs that have changes in them
  • Digital owners will have their original rulebook PDF updated with the changes
  • Physical owners will not have their physical book refunded and replaced with a new version

I guess the only part on there that you might have a problem with is the fourth point, which is that Catalyst isn't going to take back your book and re-issue a new one to you.  Otherwise, you've got no argument on this issue.
Now, if only one or those two issues were present, I wouldn't be making as much of a fuss as I am.  If this errata document came out 5 months ago, I would say it is a great start and thank them for getting it to us as quickly as possible.  If the errata was much more complete and/or had the inclusion of the master changes list then I would probably be okay with it taking 6 months.  If there wasn't the poor customer service and the people upon high were approachable and talked to us, I would be a lot more forgiving of the rest of the stuff.

As it is, I don't feel like I'm being treated like the valued customer that I should be treated as; I feel like am being treated as a quick cash grab and it makes me want to support the company less and less.  Other game companies that don't make these mistakes I buy every single product they put out regardless of if I plan to ever use it just because I want to support them for being a good company that makes good games.  The more this kind of stuff happens the more I read reviews and critically ask myself "will I use this product within the next week (or even sooner)" and the less and less money I give to the company who treats their customers with such little regard.  I guarantee you I'm not the only one who has purchasing habits like this, I'm just probably one of the more vocal.

So if Catalyst doesn't care about money from me and people like me, by all means they are welcome to continue treating their customers like crap but I'm not happy with it and will stop setting aside money specifically for Catalyst products and will continue to give less and less of my gaming budget towards them until I stop all together.

I think you're misunderstanding and making assumptions.  There's no reason to assume that Catalyst isn't doing their best to flood our lives with Shadowrun products.  There's no reason to go from "I have a PDF errata document" to "I am a quick cash grab," and "I'm being treated like crap."  I think there's about thirty steps in there that just don't happen in a logical fashion.  Catalyst hasn't treated you like crap in the slightest.  You're just wanting to be the center of attention in your world.  The rest of us also waiting six months for the errata.  The rest of us will get the same updates as you.  There's nothing special about your issue.  Not that you can't voice your complaints, but your initial issue was that you felt the physical book holders were being screwed.  And I think it's pretty obvious that you're wrong.
Feel free to keep any karma you earned illicitly, it's on us.

Quote from: Stephen Covey
Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.

orcmeat

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 43
« Reply #38 on: <02-10-14/1004:02> »
I do not feel like I am a quick cash grab and I buy just as much from catalyst as anyone. Catalyst is a weird sized company than the others you are referencing Im sure. They are not small enough to not use NDA's and not large enough to be able to produce all the things that need to be produced all the time. They are juggling a lot of projects within a time frame that is getting more and more skewed. I think everyone needs to calm down.
Just because it has stats, Doesn't mean you can kill it

Insaniac99

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 450
« Reply #39 on: <02-10-14/1531:49> »
Namikaze. before I start, let's agree to remain civil towards each other.  I have cooled off a bit and while I am upset and don't like how I feel I am being treated, I will attempt to stay as rational in my reasoning as possible.  So let's not speak in a hostile fashion towards one another just because we have differing views; deal?

  • Things PDF owners get:
    • This Errata document
    • An assortment of Grammatical errors, typoes, and "other" fixes
  • Things Dead Tree owners get:
    • This Errata document
    • Bupkis

Given that grammar issues can be one of the strongest causes of rules debate and that we don't know what the "other" issues are that are beyond typoes and grammatical issues I do not think it is right that only Electron version purchasers get to know the fixes.  They need to compile a separate document where they list them.

You're so full of it.  What makes you think that people who own the physical copy won't get a PDF of all the changes too?  And as Osiris said, we're all in the same boat right now.  You're worrying about the wrong things here, mate.  You just need to take a step back and look at the situation realistically.  There's not a thing that indicates that the owners of physical copies of the book won't get a PDF update like the rest of us.

I think there is, I won't repost it here but they say "we found errors that the PDF will be updated with" while specifically not mentioning anything about producing another document to catalog those fixes.  You and others take it as written that they will make such a document -- I don't.  I read it as they won't be releasing a master list of changes

I will admit that I am a relatively new customer for Catalyst, I only started to care about their company when I learned they were going to release the 5th edition soon (You can thank Sharowun Returns and Shadowrun Online, which I kickstarted with a lot of money for getting me excited again to roleplay it).  I'm used to better support from a product company overall.  My frustration with catalyst is not this single event but something that has been building the longer I am with them -- which I explained a little bit but will do so in more depth later.


  • The Lack of communication from those upon high.
    • The stuff we get from the freelancers is cool, as much as they are limited by the NDA and I don't blame them, but the NDA is a cause of poor customer service and needs to be changed.
    • I want to hear from the people in charge.  I want to know that they actually care about their customers, I don't see this.

This isn't some sort of forum for the CGL folks to talk to the fans.  This is a forum for the fans to talk amongst themselves.  I don't know where you get the idea that this forum is something other than what it is.  If you're wanting to talk to CGL, use Twitter, Facebook, or email.

I don't buy that or find it acceptable.  I am used to dealing with small companies, those are the ones I tend to support the most.  Most of them manage to have a sizable presence on the forum; not the non-existent presence here.  If you have official forums that are accessible from your main page, you should have someone in your employ reading and posting on them.  Green Ronin, the Harebrained Studios, Lone Wolf Development, and a bunch of operations that have only a handful of people working them manage to have at least one person who posted regularly on the forums, as well as the other common social media sites.

Looking at the Shadowrun facebook page, they don't reply back very often either.   I count two replies in  the first 20 or so post I looked through, they aren't replying to any of questions people post on their wall, and didn't even take the time to reply to a simple computer wallpaper sizing request (made by multiple people) with a "because of X, we can't do that".  That is not a company engaging with their customers in my book.

  • The length of wait for the official errata document
    • 6 months is just too long of a wait for the first official errata.

You're right about this.  But bear in mind that CGL isn't the size of Wizards of the Coast, they don't have a crapton of playtesters, and they are also spreading themselves a little thin by working on four (maybe as many as six) projects at once.  Is this an excuse?  Not really.  It's just that you have to take things with a grain of salt sometimes and not act with a sense of entitlement.  The consumer is always right, yes - but the consumer should also live in a realistic, understanding world.

I don't buy from WotC, so I don't frequent their forums; the companies I support a lot tend to be much smaller.  I frequently support kickstarters, indie game developers, and small game lines that I'm willing to bet have no more manpower than CGL and probably much less.  I don't view the world in black and white, and I'd be willing to cut CGL some slack; as I mentioned.  if the errata was more complete I would understand waiting 6 months but when it doesn't even have things that they knew about six months ago and there are still a ton of unanswered questions that arise from the errata; they should have just started a public list that they edited along the way with all the error their fans found.


And here is where things get a little weird, in my opinion:



  • The incompleteness of the official errata document
    • There are fixes missing that they have known about since July that aren't in there For example:
    • I have heard multiple times they were taking their time to "get it right" and get as much as they can done with the first document. (For example Bull on this post).  This document is not "getting as much possible right" and I don't see how anyone can even claim that.

Yes, but these are issues that you did not bring up.  Your issue right off the bat was that somehow the owners of the physical copies of the book were "being screwed by Catalyst."

I had multiple issues in my first post -- this was one of them; I said "a six month wait for this is inexcusable" (emphasis added).  I will concede it wasn't 100% clear but in context with everything else (like the others complaining about fixes that are still missing) it is there and understandable by most.  I even stated it before I talked about how I feel that certain customers are getting screwed.





"if you didn't buy the pdf, screw you, we won't even tell you all of our mistakes."

  • That there are fixes that only holders of the electron edition will be told about
    • There is no excuse for this.  There should be a master list of changes and if there isn't running the two versions through a Diff program and a couple hours of work cleaning it up could provide all the fixes in a list for those with the dead tree edition

Again - not really sure where you're getting this idea.  Here's a breakdown:
  • Everyone has a PDF with several changes in it
  • Everyone will have access to the future PDFs that have changes in them
  • Digital owners will have their original rulebook PDF updated with the changes
  • Physical owners will not have their physical book refunded and replaced with a new version

I guess the only part on there that you might have a problem with is the fourth point, which is that Catalyst isn't going to take back your book and re-issue a new one to you.  Otherwise, you've got no argument on this issue.

Please try to understand this, because I have said multiple times, I am NOT expecting a new copy of the print book.*  I am expecting an electronic document listing the "typos, gramatical, and other kinds of errors" that will be fixed for the PDF.  So for an example, let's say that they want to include the Technomancer Submersion price as a typo;  Don't you think it would be pretty darn important for the print owners to be told it is a typo and not something that is just a stealth edit?  There are a bunch of other sources of confusion that might be solved by the inclusion of the typos, grammatical, and other errors.  All of that should be in a free errata document for those that own the dead tree edition and the wording and intent leads me to believe no such document will be forthcoming.  Again, you might faith that they will, I sure don't.

* (hell, I will admit that I have bought new books from companies who were much more customer orientated not because I needed it, but just because I wanted the changes in the physical copy without having to cross-reference the errata and I liked the company enough to throw more money at them.)


Now, if only one or those two issues were present, I wouldn't be making as much of a fuss as I am.  If this errata document came out 5 months ago, I would say it is a great start and thank them for getting it to us as quickly as possible.  If the errata was much more complete and/or had the inclusion of the master changes list then I would probably be okay with it taking 6 months.  If there wasn't the poor customer service and the people upon high were approachable and talked to us, I would be a lot more forgiving of the rest of the stuff.

As it is, I don't feel like I'm being treated like the valued customer that I should be treated as; I feel like am being treated as a quick cash grab and it makes me want to support the company less and less.  Other game companies that don't make these mistakes I buy every single product they put out regardless of if I plan to ever use it just because I want to support them for being a good company that makes good games.  The more this kind of stuff happens the more I read reviews and critically ask myself "will I use this product within the next week (or even sooner)" and the less and less money I give to the company who treats their customers with such little regard.  I guarantee you I'm not the only one who has purchasing habits like this, I'm just probably one of the more vocal.

So if Catalyst doesn't care about money from me and people like me, by all means they are welcome to continue treating their customers like crap but I'm not happy with it and will stop setting aside money specifically for Catalyst products and will continue to give less and less of my gaming budget towards them until I stop all together.

I think you're misunderstanding and making assumptions.  There's no reason to assume that Catalyst isn't doing their best to flood our lives with Shadowrun products.  There's no reason to go from "I have a PDF errata document" to "I am a quick cash grab," and "I'm being treated like crap."  I think there's about thirty steps in there that just don't happen in a logical fashion.  Catalyst hasn't treated you like crap in the slightest.  You're just wanting to be the center of attention in your world.  The rest of us also waiting six months for the errata.  The rest of us will get the same updates as you.  There's nothing special about your issue.  Not that you can't voice your complaints, but your initial issue was that you felt the physical book holders were being screwed.  And I think it's pretty obvious that you're wrong.

I do not expect to be the center of attention. However, I do expect the publishers of niche hobbies (of which Roleplaying is definitely one) to be in touch with and approachable by their fans.  I do not see this.  The silence we get except when some product suddenly releases is not paying attention to their fans.  I also have an expectation not to be lied to by the company, which I feel I have been about the errata*. 

That has added to the already existing annoyance about how the company operates in silence and secrecy.
  If CGL said "You know what, 3 of our guys are laid up in the hospital, dealing with family problems, or are in the middle of having an existential crisis and things are going to take longer than we thought" I'd be content.
  If they said they were dealing with licensing issues, or they were in the middle of debating whether or not Star Trek 2 is the best film ever and got sidetracked I'd tell them I understood.
  If they said they were spread thin and couldn't afford new people or that there was a giant fight over Team Edward and Team Jacob fans so things will be coming out slowly I'd be a little disturbed, but I would still get it and be a lot more cool with it.
  This secrecy; the no word until a product drops on the market and the in general acting like a corporate monolith that hands out information a single grain at a time does not make me happy, does not make me feel like a valued customer, and does not make me want to support the company.

Maybe you are much more into larger products than I am where the silence and unapproachable aspect is de rigueur.  I'm not. I don't like it.  I will speak up at times like this when I feel the fans are not being treated properly until either the company makes some changes or I decide to stop supporting them all together.  CGL should consider them lucky enough that I at least care enough to voice my problems with them in a field where they can read and respond instead of my just telling all the gaming groups I'm in and anyone else at conventions or game stores who ask not to bother supporting them because of their terrible customer service and various other problems.

* Specifically when they said the delay was to make sure they got as much right as possible; what we have been given should not have taken 6 months to "get right" this is something 1 person could have spent a couple weeks on; and I feel even that long that is being generous.  I still wouldn't be upset if they took a month for this document, but getting this after six months of being told they want to be sure they get as much of it right?
Check out my all purpose Shadowrun Die roller and Probability generator: http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=13241.0

JM_Hardy

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Omae
  • *****
  • Posts: 404
« Reply #40 on: <02-10-14/1544:37> »
I did not include typos in the errata document because I didn't feel it was all that useful; the typos don't change how the game plays, and the changes that people really need to know tend to get lost in the noise.

If anyone wants a list of the full changes, drop me a line at info@shadowrun4.com. I'll set up a distribution list to send out that document for those who want that level of detail.

Jason H.
Jason M. Hardy
Shadowrun Line Developer

"The thing is, I’m serious about what I do, and the people with whom I associate are serious about what they do. We’re all serious people. Look, I can even make a serious face. See?" --Quinn Bailey

Insaniac99

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 450
« Reply #41 on: <02-10-14/1554:34> »
I did not include typos in the errata document because I didn't feel it was all that useful; the typos don't change how the game plays, and the changes that people really need to know tend to get lost in the noise.

If anyone wants a list of the full changes, drop me a line at info@shadowrun4.com. I'll set up a distribution list to send out that document for those who want that level of detail.

Jason H.

That's wonderful; Thank you. Please try to post on here more often.
Check out my all purpose Shadowrun Die roller and Probability generator: http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=13241.0

Namikaze

  • *
  • Freelancer Ltd
  • Prime Runner
  • **
  • Posts: 4068
  • I'm a Ma'fan of Shadowrun!
« Reply #42 on: <02-10-14/1557:32> »
Namikaze. before I start, let's agree to remain civil towards each other.  I have cooled off a bit and while I am upset and don't like how I feel I am being treated, I will attempt to stay as rational in my reasoning as possible.  So let's not speak in a hostile fashion towards one another just because we have differing views; deal?

Deal - you are correct on this.  We have no reason to get hostile toward each other.  Especially over something that is relatively trivial.  I apologize for being an asshat.

You and others take it as written that they will make such a document -- I don't.  I read it as they won't be releasing a master list of changes

This is just a difference of opinion and reading, I suppose.  In my experience, all companies release errata that covers all the typos and mistakes that can affect gameplay.  I don't expect or care about someone putting an "a" where there should be an "e", unless it changes the gameplay.

I'm used to better support from a product company overall.  My frustration with catalyst is not this single event but something that has been building the longer I am with them -- which I explained a little bit but will do so in more depth later.

I understand.  In my case, I've been playing Shadowrun since 2nd edition.  I watched as Shadowrun essentially died on the vine between 3rd and 4th editions.  The licensing issues of swapping from FASA to FanPro to Topps to Catalyst has perhaps imbued me with a greater leniency in dealings with Shadowrun publishers.

I don't buy that or find it acceptable.  I am used to dealing with small companies, those are the ones I tend to support the most.  Most of them manage to have a sizable presence on the forum; not the non-existent presence here.  If you have official forums that are accessible from your main page, you should have someone in your employ reading and posting on them.  Green Ronin, the Harebrained Studios, Lone Wolf Development, and a bunch of operations that have only a handful of people working them manage to have at least one person who posted regularly on the forums, as well as the other common social media sites.

I can understand that, and I think you're right.  CGL should have a greater presence in front of their community and fans.  Unfortunately, that has zero bearing on the topic, which is about the errata.

I don't buy from WotC, so I don't frequent their forums; the companies I support a lot tend to be much smaller.  I frequently support kickstarters, indie game developers, and small game lines that I'm willing to bet have no more manpower than CGL and probably much less.  I don't view the world in black and white, and I'd be willing to cut CGL some slack; as I mentioned.  if the errata was more complete I would understand waiting 6 months but when it doesn't even have things that they knew about six months ago and there are still a ton of unanswered questions that arise from the errata; they should have just started a public list that they edited along the way with all the error their fans found.

Do I wish the errata was more encompassing?  Certainly.  Do I think this is the only errata we'll get?  No.  I'm not happy that it took them 6 months to come up with a four page document with a lot of whitespace.  I'd rather have the errata written in Notepad and be more encompassing.  I mean, our thread from the fans on this board is dozens of pages long.  Surely they could find more content to errata just based on that information.

Perhaps this issue goes back to the lack of a solid Catalyst presence on the boards.  But that's a different issue.

I had multiple issues in my first post -- this was one of them; I said "a six month wait for this is inexcusable" (emphasis added).  I will concede it wasn't 100% clear but in context with everything else (like the others complaining about fixes that are still missing) it is there and understandable by most.  I even stated it before I talked about how I feel that certain customers are getting screwed.

I tend to use definitive words a lot.  They make it seem like I see things in black and white, when in reality it's better to take my posts as a whole rather than the parts.  So perhaps I should execute a little more judgement in this issue with regards to you as well.  When I see someone say, "I got screwed," it tends to come off as black and white.  I know from your other posts that you are more gray than that, as I am as well.  So I apologize.

As far as your concern about CGLs issues, again - different topic.

Please try to understand this, because I have said multiple times, I am NOT expecting a new copy of the print book.*  I am expecting an electronic document listing the "typos, gramatical, and other kinds of errors" that will be fixed for the PDF.

I do have faith that it'll happen.  I've never seen it NOT happen in any RPG.  And it does make sense that if they're going to put these changes into the PDF at some point, there has to be a master document that has a list of these changes.  But that simply re-affirms my faith that they will publish the list of changes at some point.

I do not expect to be the center of attention. However, I do expect the publishers of niche hobbies (of which Roleplaying is definitely one) to be in touch with and approachable by their fans.  I do not see this.  The silence we get except when some product suddenly releases is not paying attention to their fans.  I also have an expectation not to be lied to by the company, which I feel I have been about the errata*.
 

I wish I worked for CGL so that I could give you definitive answers.  But I don't - I'm just a fan like the rest of us.

Maybe you are much more into larger products than I am where the silence and unapproachable aspect is de rigueur.  I'm not. I don't like it.  I will speak up at times like this when I feel the fans are not being treated properly until either the company makes some changes or I decide to stop supporting them all together.  CGL should consider them lucky enough that I at least care enough to voice my problems with them in a field where they can read and respond instead of my just telling all the gaming groups I'm in and anyone else at conventions or game stores who ask not to bother supporting them because of their terrible customer service and various other problems.

You and I are of the same mind.  But this isn't what I would call the place for it.  This topic is unrelated to the bigger issues, and this forum is woefully undermanned by CGL persons.

* Specifically when they said the delay was to make sure they got as much right as possible; what we have been given should not have taken 6 months to "get right" this is something 1 person could have spent a couple weeks on; and I feel even that long that is being generous.  I still wouldn't be upset if they took a month for this document, but getting this after six months of being told they want to be sure they get as much of it right?

I think taking 6 months to write a 4-page PDF is too long.  I can do that in less than an hour.  But there may have been other factors, such as playtesting the changes.  I don't want to make excuses, but this process is definitely more than just writing a PDF.

I did not include typos in the errata document because I didn't feel it was all that useful; the typos don't change how the game plays, and the changes that people really need to know tend to get lost in the noise.

If anyone wants a list of the full changes, drop me a line at info@shadowrun4.com. I'll set up a distribution list to send out that document for those who want that level of detail.

Jason H.

That's awesome Jason - thanks for taking the time to be here.  Please, post here more often - we love to get feedback from the developers and we love to feel included in the process of this badass game system.
Feel free to keep any karma you earned illicitly, it's on us.

Quote from: Stephen Covey
Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.

JM_Hardy

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Omae
  • *****
  • Posts: 404
« Reply #43 on: <02-10-14/1610:18> »
Unfortunately, demands on my time are long, so forum time is not always possible. I will do what I can.

In this discussion, please remember that compiling errata is not a matter of simply writing down the points that ended up in the document. If all I had to do was write the document that was distributed, yes, it would have taken a very short amount of time. What actually happen was review of comments from initial users, compilation of initial errata, review and discussion, more detailed review of the book, more detailed discussion, some playtesting to see which of multiple solutions were the best, gathering points from many different outlets, writing them in two different forms (proofing comment style for layout, more user-friendly style for posting), sending them to layout, then preparing laid-out text for distribution.

That all happens while the Beginner Box Set, Stolen Souls, Splintered State, Gun H(e)aven 3, Run & Gun, Coyotes, Runners Toolkit: Alphaware, Shadowrun: Crossfire, Missions, Street Grimoire (upcoming magic core rulebook), and more are being worked on.

I mention that for one reason: Be careful assuming that anything in the RPG world is easy …

Jason H.
Jason M. Hardy
Shadowrun Line Developer

"The thing is, I’m serious about what I do, and the people with whom I associate are serious about what they do. We’re all serious people. Look, I can even make a serious face. See?" --Quinn Bailey

Kanly

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 307
« Reply #44 on: <02-10-14/1624:55> »
If CGL said "You know what, 3 of our guys are laid up in the hospital, dealing with family problems, or are in the middle of having an existential crisis and things are going to take longer than we thought" I'd be content.

I guess you're exaggerating a bit here - and thus meant nothing serious by this line -, but I feel it might be good to point out that CGL has absolutely no obligation to reveal any personal and/or medical information about their employees or other associates.

Reading what Jason wrote... if they're really working on all of that at the same time it's no wonder everything's coming slowly. Let's hope it all works out for the best in the end. Which of course means Rigger 5 comes out first and it rules that we get free gas and donuts for life.