Anti-bad luck

[Morithias]

In the Shadowrun game one of my players and I have been debating about the application of 'anti-bad luck'. Said "bad luck" is a negative ability that if you roll a 1 on a 1d6 after using 'edge' (sort of like action points) the edge will have an opposite effect (e.g asking for extra dice will lower the amount of dice you get).

The argument goes like this.

"If I use edge when I have bad luck, and say "I want to LOSE 6 dice" and then roll a 1, does it give me 6 extra dice?"

The main point to this argument is that the ability flat out says "opposite effect" not "lose dice effect".

One example we've come up with in real life, is one time Family Guy's creator slept in and missed his cab, and therefore his flight. Seems like bad luck, until you realize said flight was the plane that hit the WTC in 9/11. So ironically his bad luck was actually good luck (for him).

So what do you people think? Legit argument, or just an attempt to munchkin their way out of a flaw?

[Douglas]

So what do you people think? Legit argument, or just an attempt to munchkin their way out of a flaw?
That depends: is the chance of the flaw triggering more than 50%?

Assuming the probabilities work out something like I expect (I'd have to look up some rules and do a bit of math to be sure), spending edge when you have this flaw has a high (more than 50%) chance of being beneficial and a low (less than 50%) chance of backfiring. Simply rule that he must declare his use of "anti bad luck" before he rolls. If he wants to swap those probabilities, he can go right ahead - he's actually hurting his own chances by doing so. It's only a problematic munchkin interpretation if he attempts to declare it after making the roll and seeing that it botched.

Now, if my vague memory of it is off and the flaw triggers more than 50% of the time, then he's just being a munchkin. In this case I'd say you should still allow it, but reduce the number of build points the flaw gives.

[Morithias]

That depends: is the chance of the flaw triggering more than 50%?

Assuming the probabilities work out something like I expect (I'd have to look up some rules and do a bit of math to be sure), spending edge when you have this flaw has a high (more than 50%) chance of being beneficial and a low (less than 50%) chance of backfiring. Simply rule that he must declare his use of "anti bad luck" before he rolls. If he wants to swap those probabilities, he can go right ahead - he's actually hurting his own chances by doing so. It's only a problematic munchkin interpretation if he attempts to declare it after making the roll and seeing that it botched.

Now, if my vague memory of it is off and the flaw triggers more than 50% of the time, then he's just being a munchkin. In this case I'd say you should still allow it, but reduce the number of build points the flaw gives.

The flaw only triggers when you roll a 1 on a six sided die after declaring the use and intent of the edge roll.

E.g

Player: I use edge to attempt to gain 6 more dice.
Dm: Roll 1d6 to check bad luck
Player: *rolls* 1
Dm: Instead of gaining 6 extra dice, you lose 6 dice, that hurts.

You need to roll a 1 on the trigger check, therefore the flaw will only activate 1 out of 6 times.

[jiriku]

The only situation where I could see "anti-bad luck" being a munchkin issue would be if the player tries to use it to gain something he could never have gained from Edge in the first place. Otherwise, as Douglas said, it's an amusing thing to do but it's actually a mechanical hindrance.

[hiryuu]

In the Shadowrun game one of my players and I have been debating about the application of 'anti-bad luck'. Said "bad luck" is a negative ability that if you roll a 1 on a 1d6 after using 'edge' (sort of like action points) the edge will have an opposite effect (e.g asking for extra dice will lower the amount of dice you get).

The argument goes like this.

"If I use edge when I have bad luck, and say "I want to LOSE 6 dice" and then roll a 1, does it give me 6 extra dice?"

The main point to this argument is that the ability flat out says "opposite effect" not "lose dice effect".

One example we've come up with in real life, is one time Family Guy's creator slept in and missed his cab, and therefore his flight. Seems like bad luck, until you realize said flight was the plane that hit the WTC in 9/11. So ironically his bad luck was actually good luck (for him).

So what do you people think? Legit argument, or just an attempt to munchkin their way out of a flaw?

You can't use Edge to take dice away from a roll, it does not work like that, so no, it can't be done. Re-read the rules on using Edge.

[Lev]

But what if they use anti-anti-bad luck? You may have to user anti-anti-anti-bad luck.

[1337 b4k4]

Knowing nothing about the rules at hand, the spirit of the given rule seems to be that the opposite of the intended effect occurs. So even if the player is declaring that they want to lose dice, the intention is to gain dice, so in the spirit of the given rule, I would argue that the player should lose twice as many dice on a 1.

Incidentally, is there a reason why a player would want to risk a 5 in 6 chance of losing dice for a mere 1 in 6 of gaining them?

[Alleine]

Just use the bad luck to subtract more dice than you're rolling. Then you get an integer underflow and the number of dice you get to roll is set to the highest it can go! Roll all the dice at the table :smallcool:

[Morithias]

You can't use Edge to take dice away from a roll, it does not work like that, so no, it can't be done. Re-read the rules on using Edge.

We're still learning the game, so I guess I'll have to double check that.

Thanks for all the answers people lol

[Poil]

We actually had this discussion in my group some time ago, everyone agreed that the flaw would ALWAYS result in bad things and at the very least the opposite of what you wanted. The DM also decided to expand it so he could roll for things like getting stuck in traffic, missing the train, etc due to how little it affected our game compared to other flaws. It is called bad luck after all. :smallsmile:

[Khatoblepas]

Just use the bad luck to subtract more dice than you're rolling. Then you get an integer underflow and the number of dice you get to roll is set to the highest it can go! Roll all the dice at the table :smallcool:

Haha, this is the best ever. I literally laughed out loud. It's so crazy it just might work.

(Unless the DM brings out NEGATIVE dice with -1 to -6 on their sides! Signed ints, no! Pretty appropriate for Shadowrun)

[cfalcon]

It shouldn't work, but my first thought on hearing it would be great to pick some hugely negative number of dice to subtract, enough that would simply result in a failure, and then 1/6 times it's some crazy bonus.

But no, it shouldn't work, and of course if the rules allow it to, you should fix that.

[Morithias]

It shouldn't work, but my first thought on hearing it would be great to pick some hugely negative number of dice to subtract, enough that would simply result in a failure, and then 1/6 times it's some crazy bonus.

But no, it shouldn't work, and of course if the rules allow it to, you should fix that.

Well we have decided after long debate to allow it, with 'common sense and spirit of the law' in effect. Namely that it is to be used in the name of fun and not crazy stuff like that.

The fact you're trading in a 5/6 chance of success for a 1/6 chance of success also made it work that way. We're thinking of making it that if you use it, get the one and then roll another called number you keep your edge or something (kinda like how 'unlucky' sims in the sims 3 can't die of non-natural causes).

But thanks for all the answers people, great help. :D

[Alleine]

Haha, this is the best ever. I literally laughed out loud. It's so crazy it just might work.

(Unless the DM brings out NEGATIVE dice with -1 to -6 on their sides! Signed ints, no! Pretty appropriate for Shadowrun)

Heh, glad you liked it.

oooh, that could get nasty. I mean, rolling ones means you botched whatever you were doing, but negative ones? That's like critical fumble right there. I wonder if there are any negative numbered dice?