Any GM I've played with so far has banned Empathy Software (and Empathy Toys).
Truth be told, I don't think I would play with a GM who doesn't.
This may also be the reason it doesn't generally show up in the charbuild thread. It's just completely ridiculous and using it seems to be generally frowned upon.
The rest of the sensor software is okay, imo.
I think your seriously misunderstanding the rules here, you don't but sensor software on your glasses, you run them on your commlink, just like all the other kind of software and you need one with system 6 to run those rating 6 softs(and that isn't really cheap piece of gear)cool, thought i must be missing something!
"With the computing power available in 2070, there’s a lotI can see where you'd think that, but the general consensus is that software can only be loaded into hardware with proper matrix nodes, which is usually considered to be commlinks with dedicated System ratings (though this isn't universal, S4A p233 states that every wireless device has a built-in Scan program at rating 1, so at least some programs can be loaded into electronic devices). I would, however, be inclined to agree with you that some programs (voice recognition on microphones, facial recognition on cameras) just makes sense to be put onto that device, but this detail might be up to each GM.
you can achieve when you hook up a dedicated sensor system to a
tailored soft ware package."
if it has to be run on a commlink, how does it interface with drones?Drones are slightly more built-up than other devices - for one, they all have their own node. That's how they can run Clearsoft (perception) and Targeting (attack) software, which are generally considered to be vital programs for every drone.
if it has to be run on a commlink, how does it interface with drones?Drones are slightly more built-up than other devices - for one, they all have their own node. That's how they can run Clearsoft (perception) and Targeting (attack) software, which are generally considered to be vital programs for every drone.
I think your seriously misunderstanding the rules here, you don't but sensor software on your glasses, you run them on your commlink, just like all the other kind of software and you need one with system 6 to run those rating 6 softs(and that isn't really cheap piece of gear)cool, thought i must be missing something!
the only text i could find was:
"With the computing power available in 2070, there’s a lot
you can achieve when you hook up a dedicated sensor system to a
tailored soft ware package."
this isnt exactly explicit, i read it as being a seperate module that you plug into a sensor, hence me modifying the glasses with a camera.
so, if it has to be run on a commlink, how does it interface with drones?
ta!
Peripherals use the same rules as standard nodes (see Devices and Software Ratings, p. 206, SR4), with some restrictions. They are only able to run a single persona and can only run programs they are designed to use. Matrix attributes of peripheral nodes range from 1 to 6 just like standard nodes, though most peripherals have low Response ratings. For simplicity, most peripheral nodes are given a single Device rating to represent all of their Matrix attributes (see Device Rating, p. 213, SR4), but gamemasters should feel free to adjust ratings as they feel appropriate.What does this mean? Let's use a Camera 6 for an example. This Camera is treated like a normal node with the following restrictions: can only run a single persona, can only run programs designed to be used on the camera, and system is not restricted by response. The last one isn't a bad thing, but it's still a drop off of the normal node rules, so I like to bundle it in there. Now this Camera has a device rating of 6. For simplicity, this means that the camera is treated as having 6 in all of it's matrix attributes (though the GM is given free reign explicitly to smash those attribute scores as he sees fit).
Since the operating systems of peripheral nodes are far more limited and focused, their System rating is not restricted by the Response rating, as is the case with standard nodes. In other words, the System rating of peripheral nodes may exceed Response rating without penalty.
Device RatingSo this seems to be exactly what Unwired stated. Device Rating = Matrix Attributes. In addition to this, let's look at the Device Rating table. A rating 6 camera (Device Rating 6) is cutting edge technology. Normal security devices are assumed Device Rating 4. I would propose that part of the disconnect most people feel is that 1) High DR gear is cheaper than it should be and 2) High DR gear is more available than it should be.
There are far too many electronics in the world of Shadowrun for a gamemaster to keep track of their individual Matrix attributes. Instead, each device is simply given a Device rating. Unless it has been customized or changed in some way, assume that each of the Matrix attributes listed above for a particular device equals its Device rating.
Well, a few quick points here:Witch is only applied to that specific type of modifiers listed in the table on the next page(and all similar ones GM may come up with), not to any other type of modifiers.
A.) All Charisma linked skills are subject to the special rule on page 130 SR4A, "Cumulative positive Social Modifiers may not exceed the character’s combined natural Attribute + Skill Ratings." This isn't the optional rule that applies to all skills, it's a core rule that applies only to charisma linked skills.
<snip book quotes> adding its rating as a dice pool bonus to the character’s Social skill tests. <more snipping>They are a "dice pool bonusses", not Social Modifiers as listed in the table labled "Social Modifiers".
Dice Pools
When a player makes a test, she rolls a number of dice equal to her dice pool. The dice pool is the sum of the relevant skill plus its linked attribute, plus or minus any modifiers that may apply.
* Unless otherwise noted, these dice pool modifiers apply to the acting
character’s dice pool.
† These modifiers apply to the target character’s dice pool.
‡ These modifiers can apply to either character’s dice pool.
Social ModifiersThe section goes on to list such an example as this: "For example, trying to influence someone in a club where the music is overbearingly loud, while being covered in blood, or when wearing a rival team’s sports jersey in the wrong sports bar may all impact a character’s Charisma-linked tests."
Many sorts of modifiers may apply to social skill tests, depending on the situation and characters in question.
Anyhow, as I said, a non-issue in most games.The point is that it's banned because people misinterpret/don't know about/disregard the rule about social modifiers and their limits. If you really look at it, the only people that are going to be able to make use of a full rating 6 empathy software are people that are already well skilled in those areas. Anyone not well skilled, it's just going to be helping to mitigate penalties, or limiting the other bonuses you can get.
| Skill Used | Acting Character Rolls | Target Character Rolls |
| Con | Con+Charisma | Con+Judge Intentions |
| Etiquette | Etiquette+Charisma | Perception+Judge Intentions |
| Intimidation | Intimidation+Charisma* | Intimidation+Composure |
| Leadership | Leadership+Charisma | Leadership+Composure |
| Negotiation | Negotiation+Charisma | Negotiation+Judge Intentions |
A social modifier is somethign that gives a penalty or bonus based upon a socially (un)acceptable factor in a certain situation, not something that universally applies to all tests.Quote please. I placed the exact text from the book above. Nowhere does it state this about Social Modifiers. In fact, it includes a factor that has nothing to do with the social acceptability of the character in the example (loud noise). You're adding restrictions to the description in the book that are never stated to be there, and your restriction does not account for the example given.
All social modifiers are dice pool modifiers on social skill tests, but that doesn't mean all modifiers to social skill tests have to be social modifiers."The gamemaster should evaluate each situation and apply modifiers," not that this sentence says apply modifiers, not apply Social Modifiers. Whatever the gamemaster decides is a factor counts as this entire explanation is under the heading Social Modifiers; the entire point of the section is to explain what Social Modifiers are.
The software doesn't do that, it just gives you a bonus all the time, and not because of the situational benefits, but just because that's what it does. The social modifiers are specifically meant to flow from the likes/dislikes of the other, or environmental details, nothing else.It does do that. It gives you a bonus only in real time interactions. In addition, it must have a video feed of the target. It is extremely situational. Not that this at all matters for whether it's a Social Modifier or not, see above.
It's quite clear from all the examples given in the book that it intends for the "Social Modifiers" to be modifiers based upon the situation you find yourself in, not universal aids that apply regardless of who you have against you. For example the "loud noise": That is most likely going to be a situation that you find yourself in that is not of your own design. Perhaps it -is- of your own design, but even then, it cannot be expected to just flat out provide a bonus or penalty every time. Some people will be distracted by the noise, others will not be. It's situational.It's quite clear from the book that this is what a Social Modifier is:
Social ModifiersNote the underlined point. It does not matter why the modifier applies. It's a modifier applying to a social skill test.
Many sorts of modifiers may apply to social skill tests, depending on the situation and characters in question.
You're using the wrong social in Social ModifierI used the book as a reference. If you disagree, please provide a quote with rules text that supports your stance.
A program isn't a social circumstance, it's just a tool, a piece of gear.So a gun with Custom Look isn't a social modifier either? Sometimes the software doesn't work. What if you're talking to a voice box instead of a person? What if you're talking to a "person" that doesn't show emotion (mimic drone for instance)? What if there is a Jammer in the room? What if your camera can't actually focus on the character (camera neutralizer or low-ligh/dark conditions)?
For example the "loud noise": That is most likely going to be a situation that you find yourself in that is not of your own design. Perhaps it -is- of your own design, but even then, it cannot be expected to just flat out provide a bonus or penalty every time. Some people will be distracted by the noise, others will not be. It's situational.How is not being distracted by the noise any different from the situations I mentioned where the empathy software doesn't work? How is it any different than pulling out a gun (which may not intimidate some folks), wielding magic (which may not scare other mages), or causing pain (which may be negated by magic, augs, or drugs)?
That's because the social in that description isn't the social there to indicate that it's a modifier to social skills, but to indicate it's a modifier from social cicumstances.Please, before you respond again, find a rules source to support this. The closest thing I've found is this part of the quote I posted, "depending on the situation and characters in question." I can see how you could try to take "depending on the situation," to mean things must be situational to apply, but that isn't the end of the sentence. The other part "and characters in question," includes the character with the Empathy Software right? Is the empathy software not part of that character?
If it's a Social Test, the modifiers are Social Modifiers.No they are not, Social Modifiers are a very specific subgroup of dicepool modifiers that can affect a Social test.
Improved Ability always boost the characters skill, no matter the situation or the people involved(well obviously the character with this power much be involved)Look at dice pool. Improved Ability improves the skill, it is not a modifier.
Kinesics, Improve Charisma,Background counts can reduce levels of power, improve spells can be dispelled.
Charisma boosting DrugsHow are these different from intoxication which always works when you drink enough? Sometimes you have it, other times you don't.
Tailored PheremonesWork over the commlink? With target's that are chemically sealed? When soaked in anti-sent spray?
Enhanced Phermone ReceptorsPretty much the same list in reverse works I believe.
Vocal Range EnhancerText based negotiations? Target can't hear and is lip reading? Target has a translator relaying information to him?
Empathy SoftwareNon-real time interaction? machine interaction? camera neutralizers? total darkness? Jammers?
No they are not, Social Modifiers are a very specific subgroup of dicepool modifiers that can affect a Social test.Where do you get this? What page and book? I have yet to find any definition of Social Modifier other than the one I've repeatedly quoted from the book. The listed table is quite blatantly stated to be some examples of modifiers that are Social Modifiers, but never is any stipulation put that the modifier must be situational, circumstantial, or anything else. In fact, the only stipulation placed is that the modifiers "apply to social skill tests."
Yes it is, more specifically its a skill modifierQuoteImproved Ability always boost the characters skill, no matter the situation or the people involved(well obviously the character with this power much be involved)Look at dice pool. Improved Ability improves the skill, it is not a modifier.
Well obivously those don't work if you don't have them. YOu or somthing else completely removing the power doesn't make it situational.QuoteKinesics, Improve Charisma,Background counts can reduce levels of power, improve spells can be dispelled.
Additionally, assensing Johnson's (or those with magical support) can always request powers be dropped before a deal or walk. Everything can be situational.
You don't need anything else, that quote talks about a sub type of a modifier(as they all are dicepool modifiers) and gives rules for it. It very very clearly doesn't say anything about being the only type of modifier that can ably to social tests.QuoteNo they are not, Social Modifiers are a very specific subgroup of dicepool modifiers that can affect a Social test.Where do you get this? What page and book? I have yet to find any definition of Social Modifier other than the one I've repeatedly quoted from the book.
All the other types of modifiers(skill modifiers, Attribute modifiers and general dice pool modifiers) can ably to social test just like they ably to all otherkind of tests.For building a dice pool, you take skill, linked attribute, and modifier. The skill and attribute are modified before ever figuring the dice pool for an action. Look at the text more carefully:
Social ModifiersIf it's modifying the skill or attribute, then it isn't modifying the social skill test, it's modifying part of the character that is used in the social skill test. You have to hit Step A before ever getting to step B.
Many sorts of modifiers may apply to social skill tests, depending on the situation and characters in question.
Social ModifiersOh my, Social Modifiers can be of "Many sorts." They are not a single sub-type of modifier. "Many sorts of modifiers may apply to social skill test;" this is the definition of Social Modifiers. It does not matter if it's normally a general modifier to the skill test, a visibility modifier to the skill test, a range modifier to the skill test, all that matters is that once it gets applied to the social skill test it falls under the consideration of Social Modifiers.
Many sorts of modifiers may apply to social skill tests, depending on the situation and characters in question.
Well obivously those don't work if you don't have them. YOu or somthing else completely removing the power doesn't make it situational.You realize that you are essentially saying that removing a condition doesn't make it situational. The inverse of that is that applying a condition doesn't make it situational. At that point, where does a condition become situational. A character running into a bar naked isn't a situation modifier because his clothing was removed? A character wearing a bloodied shirt isn't a situation modifier because it was applied? Where does the split occur?
In closing, I seem to find that your "social circumstances" theory is merely speculation on how you want it to be ruled. Run it that way if you want, but it doesn't change what the rulebook says, which is what I've been covering.
You're working off a logical fallacy of the kind of "If B's are A's, then all A's are B's."Show me an A then. A single A.
Even if a Social Modifier is a "modifier to social tests" that doesn't mean every modifier to social tests a social modifier. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.If a square is defined as a regular quadrilateral (four sided polygon with equal sides and angles), what are all regular quadrilaterals? Are they not all squares by definition? If something falls under the exact definition of a term, it is that term. So that means that, yes, if a Social Modifier is defined as a "modifier to social tests", every single "modifier to social tests" is a Social Modifier.
Social ModifiersSocial Modifiers are clearly listed as the sorts that may apply to social skill tests. If it cannot apply to a social skill test, then it's not a Social Modifier. Of course, it it cannot apply to a social skill test, it's never going to be a modifier to a social skill test because it cannot apply to the social skill test.
Many sorts of modifiers may apply to social skill tests, depending on the situation and characters in question.
My "rule supporting this" is the exact same thing you've been quoting.Then explain it. Underline what part of it meets your claims and discuss.
But it is never -defined- as such. The fact that Social Modifiers encompass many sorts of modifiers does not mean that every modifier that applies to a skill test has to be a social modifier. That's a simple fact. Once you realise that, you also realise that "Well, it modifies a social skill test." does not mean it is a social modifier, as we've just established there's nothing in the text saying "Any modifier applying to a social skill is a Social Modifier." If there was, well, fair point, but there's not.Thanks for butting this so eloquently, saved me the trouble of trying to explain the same think and ending up with a lot less eloquent explanation.
Many sorts of modifiers may apply =! all modifiers that apply are this
Your analog with a square is cute, but at the same time inapplicable. You're likening something where you're making assumptions ("Social Modifier" meaning "anything that modifies a social test") to something based just on facts. I can just as easily construct such an analogue for myself, you know.
There's basically a statement that says "Water makes various objects wet." and because we've now found that orange juice also makes things wet, you're concluding that it has got to be water. It contains elements shared by the water, sure, but it is not water, it is orange juice, even if it sometimes sorts the same effect.
There's basically a statement that says "Water makes various objects wet." and because we've now found that orange juice also makes things wet, you're concluding that it has got to be water. It contains elements shared by the water, sure, but it is not water, it is orange juice, even if it sometimes sorts the same effect.Which falls on it's face as a comparison, since orange juice is not defined as water.
But it is never -defined- as such.Please provide the definition of a social modifier according to the rules that supports your stance on this. I have yet to see you provide any sort of rules to back up you claim.
The fact that Social Modifiers encompass many sorts of modifiers does not mean that every modifier that applies to a skill test has to be a social modifier.I think you're missing something here. Social modifiers encompass many sorts of modifiers. These modifiers have one thing in common, "apply to social skill tests". I've already stated that not all skill modifiers are Social Modifiers. Only skill modifiers that "apply to social skill tests." It doesn't matter if it's prejudice, drugs, appearance, show of force, rudeness, visibility, disorientation, ect. (Many different sorts here), what matters is that one key part, what it's applying to.
as we've just established there's nothing in the text saying "Any modifier applying to a social skill is a Social Modifier." If there was, well, fair point, but there's not.Again, please refer me to this definition of Social Modifier that you're referring to. The only thing we are given is the section on social modifiers which starts out describing, that's right, social modifiers. Now, you could decide to claim that the section on social modifiers is not, in fact, describing social modifiers. What is it describing then? Yellow daisies?
Many sorts of modifiers may apply =! all modifiers that apply are thisAgain, explain how you get around this.
Neither is Social Modifiers defined as everything that modifies Social Skill pools.QuoteThere's basically a statement that says "Water makes various objects wet." and because we've now found that orange juice also makes things wet, you're concluding that it has got to be water. It contains elements shared by the water, sure, but it is not water, it is orange juice, even if it sometimes sorts the same effect.Which falls on it's face as a comparison, since orange juice is not defined as water.
Neither is Social Modifiers defined as everything that modifies Social Skill pools.Not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying they are modifiers that apply to a social skill test. Your skill enhancing and attribute enhancing modifiers aren't to the test, they're to your skill and attribute. They aren't social modfiers. Only DP modifiers to the specific test count as Social Modifiers. Everything else is, at the time, part of your character.
And nothing in the book except the stuff in the Social Modifiers table is defined as a Social Modifier.Quite untrue. Even if you throw on blinders and refuse to accept the only three possible definitions the book grants us, the following is clearly a social modifier from the example: Overbearingly Loud Music. It's not on the table, but exists.
Now, let's look at other modifiers. They tend to be much more exact in wording. Ranged Attack Modifiers are "The various modifiers are listed on the Ranged Combat Modifier Table, above, Visibility Table, p. 152, and the Weapon Range Table, p. 151." Melee Attack Modifiers are "The modifiers noted on the Melee Modifier Table (below) apply to both attackers and defenders,Because to list all possible social modifiers a GM could come up with that table would have to be 20+ pages long, so they just give examples.
unless specifically noted." Sensor Modifiers are "so modifiers from the Signature Table apply to the detecting vehicle’s dice pool."
There is a trend here. If the modifier is limited to what is on a table or several tables, it explicitly says so. Where is this for Social Modifiers?
And now a challenge to ye old naysayers of the Social Modifier definition:I allready did that on the last page.
Provide at least one modifier (other than Specialization) that is not comparable, in some way, to the modifiers on the table.
I've listed the three possible definitions of Social Modifier:
A.) Any modifier that applies to a social skill test.
Based on:Many sorts of modifiers may apply to social skill tests, depending on the situation and characters in question.
B.) Any modifier that impacts a charisma-linked test.
Based on: may all impact a character’s Charisma-linked tests after the example.
C.) Any modifier the GM decides to impose on a social skill test.
Based on: The gamemaster should evaluate each situation and apply modifiers as he feels appropriate
With respect to the character, the NPC is:
Friendly +2
Neutral +0
Suspicious –1
Prejudiced –2
Hostile –3
Enemy –4
Character’s desired result is:
Advantageous to NPC +1
Of no value to NPC +0
Annoying to NPC –1
Harmful to NPC –3
Disastrous to NPC –4
Control Thoughts/Emotions spell cast on subject -1/net hit
Character has (known) street reputation +Street Cred (p. 265)
Subject has (known) street reputation –Street Cred (p. 265)
Subject has “ace in the hole” +2†
Subject has romantic attraction to character +2
Character is intoxicated –1‡
depending on the situation and characters in question.So if it doesn't depend on the situation AND characters in question, it's not a social modifier. The software? It doesn't depend on the characters. Works on every ganger, wage slave, corp security leader, whatever. I also don't agree that meeting IRL with a cam equipped are a "situation", but even if you persist and disagree on that, as long as it says "and" you need both anyway, and the software obviously doesn't depend on who it targets so the "characters in question" bits is -definitely- not part of the software.
The gamemaster should evaluate each situation and apply modifiers as he feels appropriate.
Also your still clinging to the logical fallacy of "Beer is alcoholic beverage, as cider is also alcoholic beverage it must be beer"Is "alcoholic beverage" the definition of beer? No. It's a possible characteristic of beer (not all beer has alcohol). Same with Cider. The flaw is in your example in this case. Congratulations.
I allready did that on the last page.I fail to see anything that would work, care elaborate. Everything I see is easily similar to another modifier on the table.
Stop insisting the book provides definitions that aren't there, too. It's extremely arrogant and quite annoying. We only have example modifiers to go by, and none of them are anything like the gear you insist fits into it.Stop insisting the book isn't providing definitions that are there. It's extremely arrogant and quite annoying. We have example modifiers to supplement the definition, and they are all similar to the gear and powers that you can gain bonuses from.
So if it doesn't depend on the situation AND characters in question, it's not a social modifier. The software? It doesn't depend on the characters. Works on every ganger, wage slave, corp security leader, whatever. I also don't agree that meeting IRL with a cam equipped are a "situation", but even if you persist and disagree on that, as long as it says "and" you need both anyway, and the software obviously doesn't depend on who it targets so the "characters in question" bits is -definitely- not part of the software.You're in a real-life meet. You've got your camera strapped on. Mr. Johnson has a camera neutralizer, boom situation negates your bonus. Mr. Johnson has had physical mask cast on him to just appear as a blur, boom situation negates your bonus. Now, are you trying to say that gear is not part of a character at this point? Magic Abilities? I don't get where you're going with this. It certainly does matter what "character" you target, because any given character may have a way to circumvent it. Tactics, knowledges, resources, personality, psychology, these are all parts of any given character that can fit into the puzzle and be pushing him to find a way, know a way, or just simply always use a way of communicating that kills the bonus.
For the software the GM doesn't need to "evaluate the situation" because the software works under very precise wordings, so it's always a clear Yes/No case, and he doesn't need to "apply modifiers as he feels appropriate" since the modifiers are set in stone.Oh, so it's like being Intoxicated. It's a clear Yes/No case, and he doesn't need to "apply modifiers as he feels appropriate" since the modifier is set in stone. Just like he doesn't need to "apply modifiers as he feels appropriate" when you're intimidating with a weapon because it's a clear Yes/No case and the modifier is set in stone.
Even ignoring the logical fallacies and the fact that the example modifiers and the software are nothing alike, these two (or 4 if you split it up into parts) elements of the "definition" of social modifiers don't mesh up with the software. ALL elements of a definition need to be accounted for if something is to adhere to it. If a Social Modifier is something that is x, y, w, r, q and z, then the software, having just been shown not to possess -all- of these elements, is not a Social Modifier. Just like the water lacks some of the elements that make orange juice, the software lacks some (not all, but a sufficient amount) of the elements needed to qualify as a social modifier.Just so I'm clearly understanding this. The book's definition isn't good enough...err...I mean doesn't exist to you, so you're claiming that a definition based on what you've made up (Must not be a Yes/No answerable question with set modifier effectively) is the valid interpretation of what a Social Modifier is. We're supposed to have gotten this from the book with no text at any way hinting toward that definition at all? That's less absurd than using what the book says?
A) Many sorts of modifiers may apply =! "all modifiers that do apply are social modifiers"You are absolutely right. I've stated that. A specific rule can always overrule a broad rule. However, the sort that doesn't apply must be defined to not apply. Got an example of one? I can't find any other definition for modifiers to social tests anywhere. Definitely none that say they don't count as social modifiers.
C) Yeah, I can actually sort of agree with this. It's all situational modifiers that a GM can throw on a player based upon very specific circumstances, so -NOT- modifiers that a player can strive to -always- apply to the test so long as he adheres to a few general rules. If you can say "So long as x and y are true, modifier z applies to the skill." then it's not a social modifier. If it's "If x situation occurs, GM may decide to give a modifier based upon the social setting and the temperament and character of the NPC in question." Then yes, it is a social modifier. You'll no doubt note that all examples given are in this second category, while the equipment is in the first, as you don't even need a GM decision for it. (real-life meeting and cam recorder in place? Bonus achieved.)Again, it's functionally equivalent to A.) in all respects. Any single modifier on the table is a modifier the character can strive to always apply to a test.
Check the table again. Pretty much all of the bonuses or penalties are preconceived notions or mutual interests or leverage, or because of elements that appease the NPC or displease them. The gear actually makes you do a better job by giving you pointers. Surely even you can't ignore this blatant difference? It's getting silly here.
Good job not seeing the forest for the trees.QuoteAlso your still clinging to the logical fallacy of "Beer is alcoholic beverage, as cider is also alcoholic beverage it must be beer"Is "alcoholic beverage" the definition of beer? No. It's a possible characteristic of beer (not all beer has alcohol). Same with Cider. The flaw is in your example in this case. Congratulations.
So...arguing to prove your superior status.
Typical human mentality. Ignore what's important for the sake of being thought important.
Please take a break, guys. Come back in a few days. I'm sure some cooldown time will aid clarity.
So...arguing to prove your superior status.
Typical human mentality. Ignore what's important for the sake of being thought important.
Please take a break, guys. Come back in a few days. I'm sure some cooldown time will aid clarity.
Seconded.
Or, better yet, how about we just all let it die out? At this point we've reached the point we've clearly reached a state where neither side is willing to listen to what the other has to say.