While discussing Voronin's removal in backdoor @Barrogh brought up an interesting/frustrating point about the existing shock crit FAQ. Long story short, do shock crits still have the death effect and cancel Dogged/NWI etc? My own interpretation is since it says you bypass the roll, but automatically failed, so that's the same as failing a roll, so the other effects of shock would still apply, and the extra effects aren't listed in the FAQ because it would make the FAQ almost as long as the entry...
normal shock bypass dogged/nwi and cause death/unconscious (depending on the number of wound), so I see no reason crit shock wouldn't do the same
Well, technically it doesn't say that. To be fair, I was always assuming that crits basically cause target to auto-fail saves (even though this is not RAW), but then SymbioMates ruling happened. Specifically, it was said that crits don't count as save rolls and therefore mates don't get to neutralize ammo effects you are supposed to apply on crits - because they allow to cancel rolls, but they don't happen, so there's nothing to cancel. Debates were heated, but apparently this interaction was confirmed. So, this stuff about Shock and Viral (same wording there) is frankly weird and I admit it was probably not the intention to make criticals be less potent than failed saves, but the logic is the same. Now, like I said, since intention could be different, I could be a mistake to apply same logic that was used for Mates, here. But wording is too similar, so somebody eventually noticed that. Another point is that ammo that does nothing to wounds/structure but apply some status effect (EM, for example) specifically says you apply those special effects on crit. It is not the case here. It is, however, possible that it's just an oversight. Such mistake is hard to make while writing an ammo that does nothing but causes some lasting effect, but here you can just forget that there are secondary effects, or just assume people will apply them naturally. On a side note, I frankly think that applying special clause for crits for every ammo type specifically isn't very elegant solution, but that has more to do with my usual pet peeve about ammo type system in general and how I would prefer it to be presented instead.
BTW, every F-time this Q came up, i link the page but no one ever settles the theme as solved... Pages and pages ranting on... >_<
Kicking Shock in the face is a battle worth fighting. Seriously though, this is because people mostly use Wiki and expect everything to be found on a dedicated page, assuming if it isn't there, it doesn't exist. We really need "community's notes" section on some pages.
This is a very useful table which I didn't know existed! That said, it does't list the FAQ'ed interaction between Shock and V:Dogged/NWI for 2W models, so its current validity is going to be called into question by pedantic players.
exactly, and the Ammo entries says there is nothing special happening for crits, only a bunch of effect that happens on a failed roll. and then the rule for Crits say you apply an automatic wound and nothing else unless specifically called out by the ammo rule. so saying the question is resolved by pointing to a chart which have a red disclaimer that it doesn't supersedes the rule (being "just a summary") and you must "always check the full rules" doesn't really solve anything. Except to confirm that the intent was indeed that a critical hit should apply all Ammo effects that triggers on failed ARM roll.
Do you have this sense of dread in the face of eventual N4 release because you fully expect to grab that new PDF and go "They haven't fixed this / haven't cleaned up that, REEEEEE!" in its fullest? I do.
If N3 is anything to go by it's going to take about 2 to 3 years before we start discovering the really bad flaws, since each release has been significant improvement over the previous release. Hell, we might even finally see a formalized language in the next edition.
There's a reason for that... that's a post-hoc ruling made by someone who has no idea what was going on.
I don't think Wiki is connected to that hypothetical event though. FAQs and Wiki are managed separately, I think, and that particular Q/A, being a part of released FAQ, should've been added just like any other one.
