Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: reasonable mechanical results of a glitch / critical glitch
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
noonesshowmonkey
The SR4A rules for Glitching are left rather open ended. I like that.

This does beg the question, though, as to what effects would fall under the umbrella of a Glitch vs. a Critical Glitch.

The Glitch example given involves a runner's bag tearing open and dumping its contents. This is a negative effect which, depending on the contents, could be pretty down right problematic. There is no roll provided, as the original test provided the roll (and the glitch). The results would be one complex action (or more) required to pick up the contents.

For comparison, the Critical Glitch involves the player being tangled in concertina wire atop the fence (which in the Glitch merely slit the bag open) and leaves them exposed and stuck until a Skill Check (Agility + Athletics? Reaction + Something?) can free them. This may also cause them to spend several complex actions to resolve but leaves the player with far less options.

Similarities: Both penalize the player with at least required complex action in their next phase(s) to resolve the complications of the glitch. The Glitch is not directly life threatening. The Critical Glitch, in this case, is potentially life threatening.

The derived guidelines that I find here are:

Glitches always require at least a complex action to resolve.

Glitches give the player a choice between endangering themselves and staying safe (often at a cost).

Critical Glitches directly endanger the glitching character by either exposing them to largely increased danger (that often requires damage resistance checks).

------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you all think?
Yerameyahu
Sounds fine. Remember that glitch severity is supposed to be variable, though.
QUOTE
The nature of the glitch can be tempered against the number of hits achieved: 6 hits and a glitch would be a minor setback, while 1 hit and a glitch would be a severe annoyance.
Characters may spend Edge to negate a glitch (p. 74).

Perhaps you should add a basic rule for net hits vs. glitch that determined the number of actions required. For additional granularity, just use Simple Actions (1 SA, 2 SA, etc.). Don't forget that PCs have the option of using Edge to negate, so don't make that option worthless.
Fatum
Frankly, when I determine glitch effects, I recall all those IC horror stories in the 3E books. And yeah, glitches are just dangerous or unpleasant situations, critglitches are equipment failures, unlikely risky developments and such.

Say, if a runner was trying to sneak into a compound underwater, and glitched on his Infiltration test as a security drone draws near, I'd say he dropped his gun or maybe got stuck in the seaweed. A critglitch? He moved erratically, and his equipment has just emitted just the sound that draws all the man-eating sharks in a kilometer radius. Or his scuba equipment is failing, and he has a minute before he has no more air. Or samesuch.
Yerameyahu
I agree. A glitch should slow you down (or make it much safer to slow down), whereas a critical glitch is a serious problem, per your examples. Let's not say that critical glitch, per OP, is necessarily *life-threatening*. It's more accurate to say 'success-threatening'; if you're in a dangerous situation, then failure could be death. smile.gif
codemonkey_uk
The rules also describe what to do on a crit-glitch with explosive ammo:

Explosive rounds will misfire whenever a
critical glitch is rolled. When this occurs, the
character firing the weapon is automatically
struck by one “attack,” with a Damage Code
equal to the normal damage done by the weapon.
The character may make a damage resistance test
as normal. Any attack the affected character is
making at the time misses.

Which also has the potential to kill a character. The severity of crit-gitches can go all the way to deadly, but keep in mind - PCs always can use edge to avoid a glitch, so managing edge is a key mechanic for players ...



Fatum
All in all, it burns down to using what's suitable to make the game more dramatic, dynamic, and in the end, interesting.
If the players start whining how "a bad dice roll should not mean such severe consequences" - yeah, tone it down.
The players are cutting through your campaign like a knife through butter, and are not having fun because of how easy it is? Tainted Leviathan time on critglitch.
noonesshowmonkey
The guidelines provided give no suggestions on how to handle Glitches in a larger context than a single player.

If a player is currently interacting with a larger area than just himself - performing to a large group, driving really fast on the interstate, fleeing from the star on foot on busy streets etc. there is nothing really noted about the ripples of such a glitch.

Can a Glitch reasonably reach out and effect other characters and NPCs? Can they be a gift that gives to others, too? And what of a critical glitch? Does that endanger the success (and mayhaps the lives) of those around them?

For example, a player opens fire into a crowded public space and glitches, missing their primary target. Can they hit someone / something important? What about something that radically changes the scene and endangers both the player and their target (thereby emulating success in the case of shooting to kill)? What amount of global interaction would be suitable for a Glitch vs a Critical Glitch?
Yerameyahu
Certainly bystanders (read=unimportant) can be hurt. A glitch simply *must* be negative to the user; they can't accidentally win a fight, or help their friends, etc.
Fatum
QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Aug 18 2010, 09:10 PM) *
Can a Glitch reasonably reach out and effect other characters and NPCs? Can they be a gift that gives to others, too? And what of a critical glitch? Does that endanger the success (and mayhaps the lives) of those around them?
What amount of global interaction would be suitable for a Glitch vs a Critical Glitch?


Absolutely. I mean, suppose you critglitch a Demolitions check, and all that Rating 12 explosive in your backpack explodes.
Now suppose you're in a crowd.

Also, I feel that the PCs' actions affecting the world around them is one of the major benefits of PnP games vs computer games, from street lights being shattered by ricochets to whole walls and buildings collapsing, traffic lines changing directions, space stations going into the atmosphere, and so on. While the runners should ideally stay hidden and not leave any traces, I strongly believe the players should be seeing their impact on the world.

Even if it means critglitching with a monowhip and shredding the dancers in a nightclub.
Yerameyahu
Computer games are *all about* letting the PC murder townsfolk and destroy houses. smile.gif I dunno what you're talking about.
Fatum
What was the last cRPG that let you satisfyingly ruin any house you wanted? Actually, what was the last game about it at all besides Red Faction: Guerrilla?
noonesshowmonkey
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 18 2010, 12:46 PM) *
What was the last cRPG that let you satisfyingly ruin any house you wanted? Actually, what was the last game about it at all besides Red Faction: Guerrilla?


Go go Silent Storm!
Yerameyahu
Oh, you only meant RPGs. :/ Hehehe.
noonesshowmonkey
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Aug 18 2010, 12:14 PM) *
Certainly bystanders (read=unimportant) can be hurt. A glitch simply *must* be negative to the user; they can't accidentally win a fight, or help their friends, etc.


And what of instances where any glitch, critical or otherwise, can cause a whole crap load of things to go wrong? You are fighting in an engine bay or on the Hindenberg. You are balancing on the edge of a rooftop / cliff face / rickety bridge or whatever. Something goes wrong and everybody loses. Same with situations where large amounts of explosives are involved. Or high speed / high altitude. Etc.
Yerameyahu
Again, yes. There's nothing wrong with that. Glitches aren't a personal punishment, they're an action failure. Life isn't fair, and NPCs don't matter anyway.
Fatum
QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Aug 18 2010, 09:49 PM) *

Oh, thanks for reminding me about that one. Grenades were awesome. BLAM half the building is gone.

QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Aug 18 2010, 09:52 PM) *
Again, yes. There's nothing wrong with that. Glitches aren't a personal punishment, they're an action failure. Life isn't fair, and NPCs don't matter anyway.

Well, some NPCs are important, but I agree that the game is supposed to be emulating real life more or less. You fail at driving - you glide through a crowded bus stop, killing dozens of people who have nothing to do with that at all. Etc.
noonesshowmonkey
Where I am going with this is that I am of the opinion that a Glitch or Critical Glitch has the potential to cause a domino of events that can harm the Glitcher and those around them in certain circumstances.

The incident that motivates this is a chase sequence in a game I am running wherein some gangers are chasing a player down the I-5 at high speed during heavy traffic and one opens up with an Ingram Smartgun. He glitches and sprays the wrong car(s). I gave it some thought and decided that there was the distinct possibility that cars ahead of the ganger and even ahead of the player could go wildly out of control as a result (driver death, tire blow outs, panic). This could result in a huge pile up.

I asked for an Edge (1) test and submitted the same test to the NPC. The player passed and the NPC, rolling his 1 Group Edge value Glitched. So, a car flips and the ganger has to make a crash test to avoid it. He passes.

As a result of the story that the dice told, the story in the game went from a chase to holy hell breaking loose on the I-5 with bullets and chunks of cars flying everywhere.

Lastly, I was prepared to give the player a 2 to 4 dice pool bonus on his crash check if he failed the Edge test since he was likely near the start of the crash and not downstream where things got really messy.

Was this out of line? I don't feel that it was. I think that the result was a tense, interesting action scene with a nice tweak that wouldn't otherwise have been there.

What does RAW / DS think of this?
Doc Chase
I think it's two, maybe three kinds of awesome. That's the kind of consequences I'd see in a glitch/CG.
Mooncrow
Seems pretty great to me.
Traul
I would not have had the gangers roll the Edge test. One should not benefit from one's own glitches.
Fatum
RAW thinks nothing of it, I believe.
I, however, while I can't represent all of DS, think that this is the GMing how it should be done.
Congratulations, keep up the good work.
Fatum
QUOTE (Traul @ Aug 18 2010, 10:08 PM) *
Maybe you should not have had the gangers roll the Edge test. One should not benefit from one's own glitches.


Well, they could have escaped unscattered if they had been lucky. Makes sense to me.
LurkerOutThere
Personally i tend to run by a loose rule of thumb and needs of story sort of thing. GGlitches tend to be inconvenient. Critical glitches are usually harmful but not fatal, unless they involve the demolitions skill in which case they are always fatal and hopefully highly entertaining.

Minor NPC's who glitch on damage resistance tests tend to die in fairly spectacular and sometimes unintended(though more for humor) sort of ways.
noonesshowmonkey
QUOTE (Traul @ Aug 18 2010, 01:08 PM) *
I would not have had the gangers roll the Edge test. One should not benefit from one's own glitches.


This is the kind of question that I asked myself at the time. I had to determine if the Glitch caused a dangerous situation or just endangered the ganger. I ruled that, at least in this case, it was a dangerous situation that could effect anyone on the I-5 that had the misfortune of being anywhere near these two hooligans.

Also, note that it was not an expenditure of Edge, but just an Edge (1) test. Edge attribute rolled against a threshold of 1. Unlucky characters are more likely to have the car in front of them start spinning out than to have someone else's day get shit on.

Where this gets grey to me is that the Glitch - failing miserably to even hit the player character (his intended target) - had the potential to cause damage to the PC anyways. Again, this is a repeat of the 'dangerous situation' vs 'danger to himself' debate.
Yerameyahu
Generally, a glitch shouldn't help. However, there's nothing wrong with *some* accidental 'help', in the example you described. Certainly it's not what anyone wanted, so it's not ruining anything. Life's not fair. biggrin.gif
Fatum
Where does it say in the rules the glitch must not have any kind of beneficial effect in the end?
Back to the backpack of explosives example - if you critglitch right in front of the man you were paid to kill, yeah, you're likely to end him, too.
Ascalaphus
A CritGlitch is a catastrophic failure of an action. But that doesn't necessarily mean fatal, only if the action was important. CritGlitching a climbing check on a scyskraper is far worse than doing it on a 2m fence. Just focus on the action and how it can catastrophically fail; any secondary+ indirect results can be good, bad, or both, depending on circumstances and reactions.
X-Kalibur
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 18 2010, 02:14 PM) *
Where does it say in the rules the glitch must not have any kind of beneficial effect in the end?
Back to the backpack of explosives example - if you critglitch right in front of the man you were paid to kill, yeah, you're likely to end him, too.


Unless the glitch caused the explosives to not go off at all or caused the blast to shape away from him, leaving him free from harm and fragging you right good.
Fatum
QUOTE (X-Kalibur @ Aug 19 2010, 02:19 AM) *
Unless the glitch caused the explosives to not go off at all or caused the blast to shape away from him, leaving him free from harm and fragging you right good.


At my table, that kind of dickishness would be wooed at.
X-Kalibur
QUOTE (Fatum @ Aug 18 2010, 03:21 PM) *
At my table, that kind of dickishness would be wooed at.


Hah! Well, the second part was intended to be a bit over the top, but the explosives failing to detonate would be fine for a critical glitch I'd say. Sometimes death is preferable to failure. spin.gif
Ascalaphus
Setting a dud explosive, and not finding out until it's too late, is really a nice way of nailing the player smile.gif Far nicer than just blowing up the character, in fact.
X-Kalibur
QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Aug 18 2010, 03:34 PM) *
Setting a dud explosive, and not finding out until it's too late, is really a nice way of nailing the player smile.gif Far nicer than just blowing up the character, in fact.


Matter of opinion that's really based on the player. Some players don't want to have to deal with the backlash of being captured/hunted after their backpack full of bombs fails to detonate. Sometimes it's easier for them to just blow up with it, call it a pyrrhic victory, and write up a new character.
Ascalaphus
QUOTE (X-Kalibur @ Aug 19 2010, 12:37 AM) *
Matter of opinion that's really based on the player. Some players don't want to have to deal with the backlash of being captured/hunted after their backpack full of bombs fails to detonate. Sometimes it's easier for them to just blow up with it, call it a pyrrhic victory, and write up a new character.


True, I suppose. I run with a crowd that tends to be protective of their characters.
X-Kalibur
I also feel that the situation in question with the glitch causing a "dangerous situation" makes for a far more interesting game and I highly approve of it, provided it is done in a correct manner and not overly used. Other points for fun in that situation : the car that got shot instead is full of <insert yak/triad/vory/mafia> and they start shooting back, turning the road into a literal warzone.

As for the bombs not going off.... that's what edge is for. I tend to forget about it most games, I like to save it for emergencies which means I end up almost never using it and wasting it.
Yerameyahu
It is not *stated* in the rules that a glitch must not have any positive results for the character. It's simply obvious that it should be generally negative thing. smile.gif Duh.

I don't think people are saying that you have to magically ensure that no good comes of a glitch, either. It's just a *major failure* (critical glitch) or generally negative, unwanted result (glitch); a setback. Failure and setback shouldn't help you, but that doesn't mean that you can't make lemonade. smile.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012