High Guard Errata

[Travellingdave]

Okay, I have two (don't ask) copies of the version with the Mercenary TOC. So these would both be MK2s with the most problems?

One was bought for me at an LGS and another bought online. I live on the West Coast of the US. How is Mongoose going to replace these for me when the new printing (Mk3?) comes out?

This is my first time with a Mongoose recall. Please school me.

 

[G. K. Zhukov]

If errata is at manageable level, a pdf with corrections that I can print on sticker paper is enough for me.

Will we have something like that anytime soon?

Thanks.

 

[lastbesthope]

One was bought for me at an LGS and another bought online. I live on the West Coast of the US. How is Mongoose going to replace these for me when the new printing (Mk3?) comes out?

This is my first time with a Mongoose recall. Please school me.

In my experience in the past they just ask you to get in touch with them with your details and they send you a replacement at no charge.

I've never had to send a faulty book back, once I did have to send in photos of the binding problem.

Can't really say fairer than that can you?

LBH

 

[M. Lydius Of Phoga]

Recieved preorder of HG book hardcopy on Friday, Nov 21 in the US.

This book has the Mercenary Table of contents.

This book is satisfactory?

 

[EDG]

Can't really say fairer than that can you?

(de-lurk)

I'd really rather they didn't make these cockups in the first place.

To be honest, I'm a little baffled by some folks attitude to all this. Since when is it acceptable to put out a book with the wrong table of contents and a mass of layout errors? OK, so it's still usable, but if you want it fixed then you either have to download a huge bunch of errata, or write in the books or send them back. And how do you know that everything else is correct in it given the errors in it already?

Have our standards as customers dropped so far? Or has there been some massive paradigm shift while I wasn't looking? I mean, the TMB book was updated significantly recently with new art and layout to replace the really crappy stuff in the original product... so why wasn't this in the book to start with? People who bought the PDF can just download the update, but what about those who are now stuck with a different (inferior) first printing of the hardcopy version? And now people have to wait for Mongoose to get their act together to publish a HG with the right TOCs and without the errors?

I think the response of "cool, they're correcting the books, aren't they great" is all very well but it's really missing the point, which is that these issues shouldn't have been there in the first place. Is it not better to have a fully functional product than one that you have to return or replace? But if we accept and buy a product that we know is broken, I think that sends Mongoose the wrong signal - personally I don't want to have to return books or download updates, I want a book that is laid out properly and works as it should right from the start. I don't think that's asking too much, is it? Some errata I can handle, but something as glaring as an erroneous TOC is taking the biscuit.

If time is the issue then take more time to get it right in the first place - these books aren't necessities, they're luxuries and people can wait for them. And for the love of all that's holy have someone check the layout and editing before (or even after) it hits the printer - this isn't rocket science, this is something a publisher with Mongoose's experience should really be on top of to start with.

But this is the main reason why Mongoose isn't getting any more of my money til however many printings/revisions/editions it takes for them to get it right. If they do that sooner, then they'll get my money sooner - but in the meantime I'm certainly not going to waste my money on a shoddily-produced, error-filled first printing - I'll cheerfully live without the book if it doesn't meet my standards.

 

[captainjack23]

Well, on the other hand, T5 is on hold 'till it's perfect......and its ....still...not....out.

So maybe there is something to be said for "get it out there, and correct as needed".

 

[inire]

Can't really say fairer than that can you?

(de-lurk)

I'd really rather they didn't make these cockups in the first place.

To be honest, I'm a little baffled by some folks attitude to all this. Since when is it acceptable to put out a book with the wrong table of contents and a mass of layout errors? OK, so it's still usable, but if you want it fixed then you either have to download a huge bunch of errata, or write in the books or send them back. And how do you know that everything else is correct in it given the errors in it already?

Have our standards as customers dropped so far? Or has there been some massive paradigm shift while I wasn't looking? I mean, the TMB book was updated significantly recently with new art and layout to replace the really crappy stuff in the original product... so why wasn't this in the book to start with? People who bought the PDF can just download the update, but what about those who are now stuck with a different (inferior) first printing of the hardcopy version? And now people have to wait for Mongoose to get their act together to publish a HG with the right TOCs and without the errors?

I think the response of "cool, they're correcting the books, aren't they great" is all very well but it's really missing the point, which is that these issues shouldn't have been there in the first place. Is it not better to have a fully functional product than one that you have to return or replace? But if we accept and buy a product that we know is broken, I think that sends Mongoose the wrong signal - personally I don't want to have to return books or download updates, I want a book that is laid out properly and works as it should right from the start. I don't think that's asking too much, is it? Some errata I can handle, but something as glaring as an erroneous TOC is taking the biscuit.

If time is the issue then take more time to get it right in the first place - these books aren't necessities, they're luxuries and people can wait for them. And for the love of all that's holy have someone check the layout and editing before (or even after) it hits the printer - this isn't rocket science, this is something a publisher with Mongoose's experience should really be on top of to start with.

But this is the main reason why Mongoose isn't getting any more of my money til however many printings/revisions/editions it takes for them to get it right. If they do that sooner, then they'll get my money sooner - but in the meantime I'm certainly not going to waste my money on a shoddily-produced, error-filled first printing - I'll cheerfully live without the book if it doesn't meet my standards.

Quoted (in it's wonderful entirety) For Truth.

I did the 'Apologist for my fave game' thing for TOO LONG with Heavy Gear. I'm now too old and poor to be content tossing a relatively large sum at, as EDG points out, a luxury done poorly.

 

[captainjack23]

<snipped (in it's wonderful entirety) For Brevity>

Quoted For Truth.

I did the 'Apologist for my fave game' thing for TOO LONG with Heavy Gear. I'm now too old and poor to be content tossing a relatively large sum at, as EDG points out, a luxury done poorly.

There are typos and there are typos. These seem not to destroy the content of the game, unlike some Trav editions, which were, frankly unplayable as they were issued. Not sure what's to be done, except to observe that some people can't stand any editing failures, and others, probably the majority based on sales and level of comment, don't care; or at least not enough to vote with their feet. The fact that mongoose is selling well, and generally successful may suggest that their strategy works -its a bit iffy, I admit, but at least they cover the corrections side quite nicely.

Again, maybe "getting it out there" vs "15 years in the studio for guns and Roses" works for gaming materials.

It's also possible that they are under some time pressure, or that they haven't finished (or found) a successful solution. For one thing, I do know that good technical editors (which is what you two are proposing) are both hard to find , and usually can command much better pay than a typical gaming company can invest in.

 

[EDG]

Quoted (in it's wonderful entirety) For Truth.

Thank you

I did the 'Apologist for my fave game' thing for TOO LONG with Heavy Gear. I'm now too old and poor to be content tossing a relatively large sum at, as EDG points out, a luxury done poorly.

Yeah, DP9 really screwed the pooch with Heavy Gear around the time Silcore came out. I think their excuse at the time was "yeah well, people don't care enough about editing to not buy the books, so we don't need to spend money on editing it". The culmination of that was Core Command, which was one of the worst put together, most badly edited RPGs I have ever seen (to the point of being largely unplayable because nothing actually worked and tracts of it were even unreadable), and that was one of the major reasons that (a) that line tanked, and (b) DP9 bought in freelancers to do a better job than they did, and they've only recently started to pull DP9 out of it.

It's all about standards, I think. If the publisher goes for the lowest common denominator then sure it may be cheaper, but they're going to suffer for it because eventually people will get fed up of spending money on flawed product and ultimately the publisher will get a reputation for producing those flawed products too. If they don't care enough to spend the effort to get the book as right as possible on the first release then why should I spend my money on it? Maybe it's true that a lot of people don't care about such things, but that's still no excuse to cater to the lowest standard. I would hope that Mongoose aren't doing that here, but so far they don't seem to be that concerned with getting it right first time.

But then maybe that's down to some of the fans too. If they convince themselves that they need a book as soon as it comes out then of course they'll pre-order it and buy it as soon as it comes out, without regard for quality. And of course they'll come up with rationalisations and self-justifications to excuse the poor quality of it once they have it, because they think their urgent "need" for the book trumps everything else. And so they'll buy it in their droves, and the publisher will just think everyone must be satisfied despite the errors, and won't bother to do better next time, and so things remain the same.

Thing is though, you can bet your bottom dollar that without that "need", they'd undoubtedly cast a more rational eye over it and be a lot more critical of the errors and wouldn't leap so quickly to buy it. I've seen this sort of thing happen time and again with RPGs, and especially with Traveller (heck, T5 practically has itself a cult built around it now) so it's not really abnormal, but I don't think it's a good thing. I just think some people could do with being a bit more discerning about what they buy - I think that would send a stronger message to the publishers to improve their products.

(and to be clear, this isn't the "fanboyism" that some of MGT's haters go on about. This is just the natural tendency to buy stuff that one is looking forward to or excited about - everyone does it, but sometimes I think one does have to step back and be a bit a more critical about what one is buying).


Editing is not optional. Good layout (by which I mean, at the very least, layout that works and that doesn't have tables going over borders, screwed up fonts, or whatever) is not optional either. These are not things to scrimp on or rush, and I don't know why some publishers think that they are. Just like writers and artists, the editing and layout is an essential part of the chain.

 

[atpollard]

I can see some merit in the "PDFs First" and "Books Later" arguments to work out many of the unexpected bugs and reduce the cost of "revisions".

This is an engineering solution to a technical problem ... but I admit to knowing nothing about the economics and marketing of Game Companies. I assume that "Books First" is somehow better for Mongoose.

 

[rust]

It's all about standards, I think. If the publisher goes for the lowest common denominator then sure it may be cheaper, but they're going to suffer for it because eventually people will get fed up of spending money on flawed product and ultimately the publisher will get a reputation for producing those flawed products too.

Indeed.

One of the most common remarks I did hear when the German version of
Mongoose Traveller was announced was something like "I will not buy it if
it is as badly made as the other Mongoose stuff." - a reaction to the prin-
ting problems Mongoose had suffered shortly before, I think.

And the German publisher decided to wait until the first series of errata
of the core rules and the improved deck plans were ready and could be
included into the translation, to make sure that the German Traveller ver-
sion would not suffer from a reputation for production problems.

 

[EDG]

I can see some merit in the "PDSs First" and "Books Later" arguments to work out many of the unexpected bugs and reduce the cost of "revisions".

Yeah, but that's what some software publishers do - they release a buggy product first and then patch the heck out of it later, and then maybe a few years down the line it's all working properly. Meanwhile users have to download updates, or deal with the bugs til they're fixed.

I really don't want book publishers to do that. If they spend enough time, and put enough care and effort into it right from the start then they won't have to do reprints and corrections and new editions.

 

[lastbesthope]

OK, so it's still usable, but if you want it fixed then you either have to download a huge bunch of errata, or write in the books or send them back.

As I pointed out above,m I've never had to send a faulty book back once, I have always been sent a replacement at no cost to me.

Now yes it would be better if they didn't make the mistakes, but given that they have in this instance, you can't really fault the up till now standard 'replacement' method they have used.

LBH

 

[lastbesthope]

Speaking of, Matt when will the replacements be available?

LBH

 

[Allensh]

The problems with the replacements this time is verifying that the person receiving the replacement actually purchased the book in the first place which will require sending the book back. Unless Mongoose pays the postage on this, I won't be able to do it. Thus I will likely have to keep the faulty version and purchase the (hopefully) corrected version later.

I am with EDG and others on this; the level of errors in High Guard, while not crippling to the book's use, are unacceptable in a professional publication. I have taken some heat for defending Mongoose on other forums and this is the first product that I have to say I am slightly dissapointed with. This was one of two books that were announced that I really was looking forward to, and it is disheartening that it is so buggy. But..I am using it and more or less enjoying it, aside from some oddities.

Allen

 

[lastbesthope]

The problems with the replacements this time is verifying that the person receiving the replacement actually purchased the book in the first place which will require sending the boom back. Unless Mongoose pays the postage on this, I won't be able to do it. Thus I will likely have to keep the faulty version and purchase the (hopefully) corrected version later.

I don't know how often I can say it. As I said they never have asked me to return a book before. Nor anyone I know of.

Once for the Sons of Cimmeria program, they requested you cut and send back a corner of one page to prove you had the book, but that was for something other than replacements.

LBH

 

[Allensh]

The problems with the replacements this time is verifying that the person receiving the replacement actually purchased the book in the first place which will require sending the boom back. Unless Mongoose pays the postage on this, I won't be able to do it. Thus I will likely have to keep the faulty version and purchase the (hopefully) corrected version later.

I don't know how often I can say it. As I said they never have asked me to return a book before. Nor anyone I know of.

Once for the Sons of Cimmeria program, they requested you cut and send back a corner of one page to prove you had the book, but that was for something other than replacements.

LBH

well, I hope you are right. I don't want the company to take too big of a hit in these dire economic times, but yes...that would be the right thing to do in this instance.

Allen

 

[EDG]

As I pointed out above,m I've never had to send a faulty book back once, I have always been sent a replacement at no cost to me.

Do you not need to send them proof of purchase of the original faulty product at least? If not, that's awfully trusting of them.

And yes, good for them for doing that... but it's still costing them money. If they'd done the book right in the first place then they wouldn't lose the potential sale of the replacement they're sending out to you (and the postage).

Fact is, they shouldn't have to ship replacements out to people. It's in their own interests not to have to do that, in fact. So one would think that they'd make more effort to not screw up in the first place.

 

[rust]

On the other hand, I have worked for a small publishing company for
a couple of years, and despite our very best efforts we also suffered a
streak of very bad luck with several sub-standard productions: Printers
who sent us perfect advance copies for approval, but then printed ter-
rible books because they confused the material, bindings that came off
because a truck had been parked in sub-zero conditions for days, and
so on and on.

Sometimes you can beat Murphy's Law, and sometimes ...

 

[captainjack23]

On the other hand, I have worked for a small publishing company for
a couple of years, and despite our very best efforts we also suffered a
streak of very bad luck with several sub-standard productions: Printers
who sent us perfect advance copies for approval, but then printed ter-
rible books because they confused the material, bindings that came off
because a truck had been parked in sub-zero conditions for days, and
so on and on.

Sometimes you can beat Murphy's Law, and sometimes ...

Exactly. Stuff happens. Small companies with small runs are much more vulnerable to a glitch nailing a great proportion of any given run; and yet, their screwups are far more visible than those of an individual, and yet, there is much more intertia in implementing a solution than for an individual, who can just decide "this is going to be perfect before it comes out". It really is a "no can win" situation sometimes.

Small press is rife with this problem - if you don't have anything to do with hobby publication, small academic presses or indy comic books (ie not DC/Marvel) you don't know how often this happens. So...are all indies/small press unprofessional ? Some, sure. What about MGP ? Well what is the record for traveller ?

T&G looks to be in good shape, and Merc and 760 are, editing wise, fine. The main book had some glitches, but on the level of an errata sheet. The cover problems seem to have been solved, too. I think on the whole, immediately defining the company as unprofessional is quite unreasonable....especially if they are, as far as I can tell, the only larger gaming company with such a responsive customer complaint policy.

Honestly, I doubt that MG ever has had the "Editing is a waste of time attitude" one does run into sometimes in the gaming market. And I'm sure that they don't have an attitude that wasting money is cool.

Fact is, plenty of game companies can turn out graphically and editorially beautiful pieces of derivative trash. If there has to be a problem , I'd rather it be sloppy typesetting than idiotic and incomprehensible content; or an unresponsive and uninterested customer service.