I'm going to break this one up into a smaller poll. I've reworded things so the options are clearer and easier to read, and are much more specific.

Might want to rephrase the "Leave it alone" option to something along the lines of "Leave it as pre-anniversary SR4". As written, it has a similar problem of some of my phrasing, being able to be taken as Leave as SR4A or SR4.

I voted "other" for the first option - the change really mucks up karmagen, and slows down advancement. I wouldn't mind a change, but I think they might be better off lowering skill costs than upping Attribute costs.

I voted "leave it alone" for direct combat spells. Direct combat spells have always been the workhorse spell of shadowrun, the cheap, efficient, re-usable spells that a mage could cast and usually soak the Drain. The proposed change turns them from low-Drain to ultra-high Drain and punishes, rather than rewards, the player for making extra successes. If you're going to turn one of the core mechanics of the game on its head, you should do it with a new edition, not suddenly change the rules of the universe for the current edition.

Good idea. Done.

Yeah, what would be wrong with:

Which version of the drain from direct combat spells do you prefer?

1) SR4A (Increase by net successes)
2) SR4 (No increased drain based on successes)
3) Other

IMO It's a more neutral poll this way.

I voted for leave it alone for both.

I think Shadowrun has far more important problems than those two frankly.

And none of them is really fixable without a major re-write. We don't need a new edition at this point. We need the one we have to grow in popularity.

The new book is the perfect vehicle to do this. From everything I've heard it is a work of art and fabulous in every way except for the unexpected rules changes.

Because not everyone has read the Sr4.5 rules yet, so it's more fair to put up the actual rules.

This poll starts on the wrong foot by using the perjorative term for the rules instead of the official. Nor did it use the best possible alternate name, SR4WWLOMTRAPMPT

Do you know Push Polling?

I would have like to seen an answer on drain that said "No more divide by 2".

That would be other.

I chose other and other.

I actually am okay with the x5 attribute cost, but without a skill cost decrease it feels incomplete.

And I want a change to the drain of spells this one just doesn't do it for me. I actually like the idea of current drain mods-3 with no 1/2 force crap as proposed by czech.

Perjorative? Where?

And what does SR4WWLOMTRAPMPT mean, anyway?

http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?s=&a...st&p=782328

...4.5?!?!?!?!?!?

What, has WotC bought the property?

...geeez you go away for a few months to learn 3D CG and when you come back you find they rearranged the furniture on ya and rented your room out.

4.5 is an inaccurate term. And the more I think about it, the phrasing of my poll had a few issues, but this one is, overall, at least as bad.

The term SR4.5 - your pet name for the anniversary edition and errata. What with the connotations of D&D3.5 incident it makes this sound a whole lot more dramatic than it actually is.

I voted to keep the 5x Attributes (as in the errata). I voted "Other" for the Direct Combat spell drain. I'm okay with making the drain slightly worse on these but I don't like the way it was done for a few reasons.

EDIT: It is interesting that this poll is getting different results to the last one. The changes to Attributes remain more popular than other options combined, but now we have more people against the Direct Combat spells than for them. That could be because there has been more time for discussion and people to become aware of the issues. It could also be because people have had enough of this discussion and only the people who object to this are still bothering to read and vote. Similarly people who are fine with things may perceive the poll has just an attempt to get a second answer because the first wasn't popular and / or biased because of the 4.5 term, and therefore are not interested in reading it or don't wish to lend it validity with more numbers.

Ditto on the poll title. Of course, this is Cain and he seems to enjoy defying the official nomenclature whenever he can.

I voted for x5 on the Attribute costs. I just that don't have a problem with it, and that's gotta be good enough.
On the drain issue, I also have no beef with the rule per se, but I voted "other", simply because the new ruling adds additional counting and math to the game and for that reason alone would to me have been better included as an optional rule.
So, when y'all go and unzip your pants again to compare "results", please take into account that "other" is always a dodgy term.

I was already using Attribute*5 (or Attribute²) but house-ruled so that metahumans could raise their attributes as easily as humans.
As for the spells, I'd prefer a change that doesn't add yet another exception to the rule. I don't want to end up with as many tweaks, exception and special cases as in SR3.

Nothing like polls that are easy to read and gently point the voter towards the preferred results, eh?

Interesting idea to lump people who do not care into Other by making the 'don't give a damn' admitting something derogatory in today's culture.


Certainly. It has more than yours because you at least attempted to make a more or less neutral poll. Cain, on the other hand, seems intent to haver this poll produce the numbers he'd like to see.

SR4A on both counts, again, on my vote.

Character advancement is secondary in importance to me, so I'm not too fussed either way on xp costs for attribute improvements.

The spell change looks alright to me, although I don't like that mages can choose afterwards whether to apply hits or not. Might as well go the whole hog, and let them roll drain resistance before deciding how many hits they want to apply, and thus choose whether and how much drain they take at all.

I'm going to voice the same concern as others regarding the use of "SR4.5" rather than "SR4A". The 4.5 terminology seems to be used most heavily by those who dislike the changes, and thus has a negative association at this time.

That said, the poll options don't really feel slanted toward either side to me otherwise. I approve. I will say that, while I think all of the poll options are necessary for a successful sampling, I lump the "no opinion" crowd in with pro SR4A votes (versus the combined total of the other options) when I look at the outcome of these polls. I guess I assume that if they don't care if the changes are made or not (likely because they already use, or plan to use, other rule options on their own) then they don't count as opposition.

Well, initially, I was calling SR4.5, but, well...that was because I could not think of anything else to call it. Admittedly, I have since adopted SR4A when talking about it over all, but, honestly, sometimes I thin SR4.(something) sounds more Shadowrun....maybe we should start calling something like SR4.7?(there are 6 errata, quiaff?)

Because i didn't fall for Cains bait I voted for the new SR4A Rules in both cases
@Cardul if you want to call it SR4. something ,name it 4.20 (like in 20th Aniversary)

HeyaHeyaHeya
Medicineman

I have a Cain-to-Reality dictionary add-on for Firefox, so I didn't notice. =i)

Shadowrun 4.5 isn't "my pet name" for it by a long shot; it's a commonly accepted term both here on Dumpshock and in use on other sites as well. It's also easier and more accurate when used to explain the depth of the changes to others. At any event, "dramatic" is not the same thing as "perjorative".

As far as the poll being biased, you're free to stat your own poll. Interestingly enough, the results are coming out more in favor of SR4.5, so apparently my "biased poll" is producing accurate results. Without the phrasing errors in the last poll, however, the results are much more balanced.

Luring the voter into a trap is still luring the voter into a trap even it is not the trap that was expected.

SR4A is accepted, as far as I can see, over the rather polemic SR4.5.

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.



K.

In German Forums I read more SR4A than SR4.5 so Its SR4A for me ( SR4.20 would've been OK too )
...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 )

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

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.