Did anyone notice that Drive Thru RPG & Battleshop both list as SR4a is being being noted as a different edition: Shadowrun, Twentieth Anniversary Edition

Why wouldn't they? It is what it says on the Spine of the Book afterall...

Well, without trying to embolden a whole 'nother flame war about the name, I seem to remember threads where heated battles occurred that SR4a was not a different edition.. bladah, bladah, bladah. In any case, I find it humorous that in the end, it is no longer referred to as SR4, but rather SR20.

Hmmmmm... Never heard SR20 before...

The horrible thing is, I can't decide whether to make a d20 joke or a version-number-creep joke.

~J

Yea, when I saw Shadowrun, Twentieth Anniversary Edition, SR20 or SR20a or SR20e all came to mind.... I know. The whole conversation is mischievous, but I guess that is the state of how ludicrous I feel its becoming.

Hmmm... I have always just used SR4A myself... the others never even occurred to me.

how bout SR420?

That's been the official title since it launched, actually. It's still considered to be 4th edition though, regardless of what anyone may claim. (I had to ask about this when I was redoing some of the Missions Boilerplate stuff, because I'd seen it written a couple different ways, so wanted to get the Official name).

Bull

The index pages for 20th anniversary edition refer to it simply as SR4 when giving page references.

I did that for compactness. With 5500+ lines of text in that index, one fewer character on many lines helped keep the index from being even more lines (and thus smaller type) without a loss of clarity.

The recently updated Street Magic refers to SR4A, actually.

Bye
Thanee

It makes more sense than you realise.

Wheile there is little difference between Shadowrun Fourth Edition and Shadowrun, Twentieth Anniversary Edition (and YES, I know I'm going to get flak by saying that, so save it; let me go on a roll here), it IS however made to make sure there is little to no complaints when a customer is looking to purchase one version, and gets another. We all know that most would start a flame-war over even less.

Also, think of the numbering scheme, as stated above. Those who don't or wouldn't know see "SR4" as the fourth iteration of Shadowrun; thus, "SR4a" is the next version/upgrade in the sequence. And it shows that one can have either version & still work (i.e, after the U.S.S. Enterprise was destroyed in Star Trek 4, the newest, most available ship in her classificiation was re-named Enterprise, but the 'a' was added to distict istelf from the original & establish the 'line' of Entrprise ships to come)

A lot of confusion comes when the abbreviation "SR20" is used. This says to me 'Shadowrun 20th edition', NOT Shadowrun Twentieth Anniversary Edition. adding a letter after it just adds more confusion.

SR4A is the general reference used for the Anniversary book in all other books and notation. As Adam pointed out, it wasn't used that way for space reasons in the master index, but you can also assume that for the most part, anyone using the index is using it out of the book, and thus knows to look in THAT book and not to pull out their old copy of the original SR4.

Bull

I find myself reading it as shadowrun d20, and wondering what the writer is actually trying to say...

Hey now! I never meant to infer that it gave you cancer.. Just poking fun at the fact that it is referred to as Shadowrun, Twentieth Anniversary Edition and not SR4. Nothing more, nothing less.

Although this might not be the best place to put it, it seems like the usual suspects here might be of assistance.

I'm looking for the leather-cover SR 3rd ed sourcebook. Yes, Third Edition. It's a gift.

Hoping for very good-> excellent condition, but as it was a popular seller, some Cheeto stains may be expected:)

Amazon isn't really helpful and as I'm in Oz, the 2nd hand booksellers here just shrug and shove the collected works of Anne Rice at me in response.


Regards,
Tir.
"Build the Robots"

good luck, that this is a limited edition that i find it unlikely that any owner will part with...

Troll & Toad has three in stock:

• $ 170.99 for # 523/1000 (near mint)
• $ 170.99 for # 578/1000 (near mint)
• $ 125.99 for # 705/1000 (fine)

Dear deity, what prices. And i thought some of the amazon resellers where nuts on more recent stuff.

Amazon sellers are almost always on crack. I don't know why anyone ever looks there.

As for the third ed LE... That was impossible to get. They did 1000 copies and sold them out at Gen Con. $126 to $170 is actually reasonable. I've seen them go for over $300 before. I regret it, but I sold mine back in 2002 for $300, actually.

Bull

SR4:20 would certainly explain the slow production schedule

Thank you for the information - and $170 is a reasonable price for a collector's edition mint (But Fine? That's some serious use right there.)

Problem is, I don't know if they ship to Australia. And my American friends would "accidently" ship something like, oh, a phone book rather than the SR3 CEd:) - they have good taste.

Well, I'll surprise the lovely with somethig special, don't you worry about that:)

Thank you Dumpshock Gestalt,
Tir

You never know...

Bye
Thanee

not surprised

You *can* refer to it as SR4.5 without starting an edition war....

no, no you can't...

Sure you can. It's not SR5E, after all. That would be an edition war.

Soooo not getting into this argument again.

To be fair, Cain's right. SR4A vs SR4.5 is a Nomenclature War, not an Edition War, since it's not a new edition, and it's quibbling over the terminology.

Bull

the kind of discussions that web forums excel at.

*ahem* the kind of discussions at which web forums excel

"This is the kind of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put!"

-Almost certainly not Churchill

~J

Queue Grammar Nazi..

Tell the guy with CAPS LOCK to get ready. He's on in 5 minutes.

Reminds me of a novel I have that is rather hard to find. Dragoncharm (and its associated series and sequel trilogy).
Anyway, I was poking around trying to locate a "reasonably priced" copy for someone else (I was happy to pay $20 plus shipping for a used copy when I read it) and Amazon.co.uk had copies....for 1000 British pounds each. I was like, "holy smokes, I know the book is rare, but not THAT rare." I messaged the seller with something along those lines, and while I never received a response, the books weren't available a few weeks later (either someone had stupidly paid 70+ times what I did, or the seller took them down).

Dragoncharm? I'd accept $5 (and P&H) to get that thing off of my bookshelf. And I'm a sucker for dragons.

-better check I've still got it before I shoot my mouth off further, but they were for sale here in oz in the 3/$10 bin ~ 5 years ago.

Still, it's not as bad as Eragon, etc.

Tir

Its actually a pretty good book.
And if you did pick up the trilogy but didn't pick up its sister trilogy starting with Stone & Sky, I do advise it. Despite a "million year" gap between the two series there is a character that is common to both.

I also recently picked up Dragon Keeper by Robin Hobb, which I found quite enjoyable. The only thing is is that the book doesn't end, it just runs out of pages. By which I mean, the story continues as part of a trilogy, but nothing got wrapped up, it just found a convenient place to stop and did so.

That would be "Cue Grammar Nazi" actually.

Maybe he wanted the Grammar Nazi's to form a line?

Plural not possessive, no apostrophe, jesus christ on a popsicle stick man!

Jesus Christ
popsicle-stick

i cant believe their are so many errors hear

At leasr /i know how to tyoe even if I can;t speel

I see what you did there.

I cnduo't bvleiee taht I culod aulaclty uesdtannrd waht I was rdnaieg. Unisg the icndeblire pweor of the hmuan mnid, aocdcrnig to rseecrah at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mttaer in waht oderr the lterets in a wrod are, the olny irpoamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rhgit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whoutit a pboerlm. Tihs is bucseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey ltteer by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Aaznmig, huh? Yaeh and I awlyas tghhuot slelinpg was ipmorantt!




-k

Fntsainaicg.

~J

Its actually untrue. Try some larger words and rearrange their interiors at random. There is a point at which the word is illegible.

Try:
clnsitoetnsy
and
minsosrcuopne

Technically, it's not JUST the words, it's the context - use even those long jumbled words in a sentence and the mind can often figure it out.



-k

The sentence, when I wrote it 6 years ago, was:

"I tihnk, so. It mhgit elxiapn why I can clnsitoetnsy minsosrcuopne lnog wdors."

I'll admit, "Mispronounce" gave me a moment of trouble, but "Consistently" pretty much jumped out at me as soon as I looked at the sentence.




-k