I LOL'd. Apparently, nothing helps you getting the majority to vote as you would like?


By far.

SR4A

Voted for the 5x Attribute increase, it actually brings Attributes in line with skills (if you count all from 0 that is).

Voted Other for DCS. I'm not happy with the SR4 or SR4A way of doing it. Mostly my problem is mostly with overcasting and the ability to firstaid it away. So I house rule it DCS have +1 drain, ICS have -1 drain, all overcast force is counted at 1:1 instead of 2:1 for Drain, and you can't firstaid away physical drain damage.

IE: Magic 5 and Force/2 Drain spell, Force 5 = 2S drain and over that each force adds 1 to drain.

Given the number of people disagreeing with you even in this thread alone, I'd say it's more correct to call it a commonly not-accepted term.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

K.

In German Forums I read more SR4A than SR4.5 so Its SR4A for me ( SR4.20 would've been OK too (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) )
...and Hermit,we should Stop beeing of the same opinion ! I don't know if we cause a rip in this continuum if we keep it up this Way ?

HokaHey
Medicineman

Who says I care? Other than pointing out the Overcasting issue, I haven't spoken word 1 on these particular issues.


What, six? Out of all Dumpshock?

Besides which, who gets confused when I call it SR4.5?

this poll is useless. we already have a poll and it's results were pretty conclusive.

I'm not really happy with how overcasting works either, but how does that work out for you?

Does anyone in your group even use the option to overcast at that point? It seems like one or the other would be sufficient, I personally lean towards no first aid.

I will likely call it "the precious", once it has gotten a street date, and made it´s way to Germany. Until then, SR4A will do. (Gave null vote, am in favour of the specified updates.)

Do you call Shadows of Europe something besides SoE?

Until you start changing all generally accepted abbreviations, most people are going to see "4.5" as an attempt at a correlation between D&D3.5 and the Anniversary Issue. You've stated yourself that you see the rules changes as drastic, which is why you're linking the two. If the Devs are using 4A, and you've always used the commonly given abbreviations they've used before, what's the problem?

It's hayfever time, so I am taking drugs. Let's blame the drugs? Drugs are always a good scapegoat. It's the drugs!


You do.

I voted to keep the attributes as they were in SR4 and for a different for drain. I'd like to see that indirect combat spells would receive 1 or 2 less drain and use the resistance mechanism of SR4, that would make them more attractive and would not gimp direct spells.

Not SoE, but I use the traditional shadowslang and shadowterms wherever I can. I still call them Deckers and Otaku, and no one seems to have any confusion over what I mean. And I'm not the only one here using SR4.5, although I might have been the first.

I find most of the argumentation to be a waste of time and bandwidth, really. And these "polls" generally even more so, especially since the folks who post them usually either disagree with the results anyways, or find some way to skew the results so that it backs up their opinion anyways (Not saying that's the case here, just, in general. I have a thing about open Forum Polls, and I originally lobbied to not have them enabled on Dumpshock ages ago).

Anyways, that said... As a GM I voted for the x5 option. Compared to the other skill and skill group costs, it makes sense. And Attributes should be tough to raise. (As a player, it makes me wince a bit, but... Whatever (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) )

As for the other, I voted "Don't care". Because really, I don't. Even under 4th Ed, I don;t overcast much anyways unless it really makes sense for my character to try blowing his load. I also rarely min-max to the point where I'm virtually guaranteed to succeed on my drain tests (And as I loath the lowered drain costs on Stun spells, I don't use them usually. That's a bitch for another day though).

Plus, as a GM, I'm notorious for rolling amazingly well. But as a player, I'm just the opposite. A good example was in our Hunter game (Using nWoD rules). My ex-Boxer was trying to create a distraction, and when it failed, he decided to just knockout this nurse. I get to roll 2 attacks (Combination Punch Merit) with 10, and then 9 dice. Nurse is rolling 4. In nWoD you hit on 8+, so almost the same odds as SR. In the first round, the Nurse beat me on the first attack (3 Hits vs my 1), and on the second attack, I tied (2 vs 2).

So just because something is statistically easier does not mean it will go that way. And physical vs stun damage is a bit of a difference. And usually, my characters try and avoid excess pain and bleeding out of their nose and ears from drain damage (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

This one was for shits and giggles anyway, but it did separate out the Direct Damage Combat spells as being less desirable than originally thought. Attribute change seems to be alright (though I voted keeping it the SR4 way, I wouldn't mind it as much if skill groups came down in cost, so I think it's a partial fix, but I'll take "no fix" over a "half fix")

Also, I use SR4.5, though less. It was my preferred abbreviation when I first encountered the edition. So I use it and SR4A interchangeably.

Actually, there has been confusion before, in that some people aren't always sure whether you're referring to SR3 or SR4 when you speak of deckers and otaku. I've seen people specifically question you, only to be told by other posters that it's just you refusing to use the updated nomenclature.

On topic, I voted for the new attribute way and the old DCS. I like it better that way. And frankly, I'm comfy with mages being slown down even more on their power creep. (This coming from a player who has played in an entirely awakened group before for long periods of time)

I personally would call it 4.1, IMHO they didn't change enough to get the 4.5 title. I admit I have not read the whole pdf yet.