[Dinendae]

Well, I was talking about the reprint process and how it seems like everyone is upset that the errata that is currently known did not make it into said reprint. ...   I will point out that I do not remember seeing any original print copies of Street Grimoire at Gen Con in any of the shops but I wasn't looking that hard so even a normal reprint makes sense since this book was, if I remember right, the first supplement to come out only a few months after the hardback copy of SR5 had came out.  ...

Just a comment on the parts I took out of the post:


I don't think it would nearly have been this big of an issue, if they had just reprinted the original book, as it was. I used to work in a game store, I get it: Stock of an item runs low, and you know (or even think) that you'll be needing more so you order more. But that's not quite what they did here. Word had been passed down that errata was going to be incorporated into the new print. For whatever reason it didn't make it for the this printing, OK, fine. However they didn't just reprint the original book, they went ahead and changed the cover art.


Originally I had been planning on getting the reprint of this book, so that I could have the updated rules in book form (and hey, help support Shadowrun as well). I would have been pissed to buy it and find out that the only change had been different art on the cover. They should have just reprinted the book as it was, entirely, to refill needed stock, and not changed the cover until things inside had been changed as well. If the printer is playing games with the company, as has been earlier put forth as a possible reason, then Catalyst should say so. If they gave the updated file to the printer, and the printer dropped the ball, then Catalyst should say so.

[Sir_Prometheus]

They clearly intended to have errata in the reprint.  To mess that up is a fairly epic fail. 

I doubt it was the printer, just because printers who mess up like that go out of business.  Also, the .pdf is messed up too. On the other hand, Catalyst has messed up like this a lot. 

Get it together guys. 

[tytalan]

I found out that the core book been out of print for about 4 months now that not a good sign in any way

[Patrick Goodman]

There is, apparently, new errata in the SG reprint that was gathered before I got the errata gig; the 2014 corrections were left out, though I'm not sure why or what happened there. I'm working on getting hold of those changes and getting them posted.

As for the core rulebook being "out of print": Much more common, industry-wide, than you apparently believe, since you appear to be confusing "out of stock" (there's no more, or almost so, in the warehouse) with "out of print" (it's probably OOS, and they are no longer ordering reprints). OOS isn't a big deal; it happens a lot because the distribution channel buys it by the pallet-load. The SR5 core book has never been OOP; the SR4A core book is, however.

Doom-saying helps no one, Tytalan. Please do us all a favor and knock it off.

[wraith]

Urgh. That makes me even more leery, Patrick.  If none of the errata got in, I could totally see it being an error on the printers' end involving just using an old set of proofs.

Some changes means that whatever was sent didn't include the corrections.   

[tytalan]

According to 3 different store owners in this area one them runs his own game company they are not being told by the dist's that the book is out of stock but that it is out of print.  and Diamond Dist.  says it reorder from CGL's is by weekly so and Out of Stock would only last at the most 3 weeks and its been 4 months.  So either it is out of print or CGL is not selling it to the big 2 Gamming  dist's .  I know the different between Out of Stock and Out of Print dealing with Dist's is a part  of my job

[tytalan]

Urgh. That makes me even more leery, Patrick.  If none of the errata got in, I could totally see it being an error on the printers' end involving just using an old set of proofs.

Some changes means that whatever was sent didn't include the corrections.   

Does not work that way the printers always send a proof for review before doing the complete run and it is up to CGL to approve or not if the printer does not print the approved proof but in stead use say an older one then CGL could make them swallow it and reprint they did not do that which strongly indicate that it was their mistake.

[Beta]

According to 3 different store owners in this area one them runs his own game company they are not being told by the dist's that the book is out of stock but that it is out of print.  and Diamond Dist.  says it reorder from CGL's is by weekly so and Out of Stock would only last at the most 3 weeks and its been 4 months.  So either it is out of print or CGL is not selling it to the big 2 Gamming  dist's .  I know the different between Out of Stock and Out of Print dealing with Dist's is a part  of my job

And yet, I bought one of the new soft-cover copies last month, at a game store. 

I wonder if the soft-cover printing got a different 'part number' (whatever you call it in the book/game business), so that it was clear whether one is ordering the hard cover or soft cover.  I am willing to believe that the hard-cover is out of print, but the new printing with soft-cover very clearly exists.

[The Tekwych]

Diamond does not distribute anything from CGL. Distribution of CGL product is through Alaince first and foremost. Diamond can, and does, buy from Alaince and then add a further markup to retailers that use them.

A HUGE downside to the FLGS is that, to carry the basic games and systems, you will need to deal with at least 4 different distributors, plus WoTC and Games Worksop at a minimum. Siz sets of monthly orders and six invoices and six payments and six packing slips to cover and keep strait. It is a very demanding job with little financial payback

[wraith]

Urgh. That makes me even more leery, Patrick.  If none of the errata got in, I could totally see it being an error on the printers' end involving just using an old set of proofs.

Some changes means that whatever was sent didn't include the corrections.   

Does not work that way the printers always send a proof for review before doing the complete run and it is up to CGL to approve or not if the printer does not print the approved proof but in stead use say an older one then CGL could make them swallow it and reprint they did not do that which strongly indicate that it was their mistake.

Given what we know of CGL's editorial process, I could entirely see them getting a printing proof and it getting signed off on without anyone thinking to check if all the errata were in it.  God knows we've gotten deprecated playtests in printed sourcebooks before.

[tytalan]

Urgh. That makes me even more leery, Patrick.  If none of the errata got in, I could totally see it being an error on the printers' end involving just using an old set of proofs.

Some changes means that whatever was sent didn't include the corrections.   

Does not work that way the printers always send a proof for review before doing the complete run and it is up to CGL to approve or not if the printer does not print the approved proof but in stead use say an older one then CGL could make them swallow it and reprint they did not do that which strongly indicate that it was their mistake.

Given what we know of CGL's editorial process, I could entirely see them getting a printing proof and it getting signed off on without anyone thinking to check if all the errata were in it.  God knows we've gotten deprecated playtests in printed sourcebooks before.

The problem with that is the PDF on drive thru games is also not fixed now blame that on the printers

[wraith]

As soon as I get some more info, I'll be sure to pass it along.

However, I think it's worth pointing out this *this* doesn't happen very often...at least as far as I can remember. There was the reprint issue with the core rule book, but that was a conscious business decision based on getting tit reprinted as quickly as possible. When the third printing came out, the edits and changes were there.

I know that there have been issues related to proofing, editing, etc., but they're not the same (IMHO).

Again, as soon as I have more info, I'll pass it along.

Hey AJ, two weeks down the line, any news to share?

[AJCarrington]

Sorry guys, nothing yet.

[TonyK]

BTW, noticed that there appears to be an update, dated today, to the PDF Street Grimoire on DriveThru.  Anyone knows what's changed on this iteration?

[AJCarrington]

The updated PDF should be hitting this week, so good chance it should included the errata.