@futurebird I stress the concept that "smart" "competent" "professional" programmers spend significant time chasing errors, and code rarely works from the start ("have you heard of bugfixes and security updates?!").
and I bend a bit the reality adding "there's even a programming style that begins with purposely not-working code, to get to the functioning version gradually" (TDD). it's half truth but fun. so they can stop feeling stupid and can enjoy the intellectual challenge.

@futurebird when teaching a python bootcamp for people that never programmed (often from humanities background, with a special social anxiety around STEM) I introduce the "mystery solving hat", and 3 steps:
1) decide what should happen (sometimes this is not crystal clear to begin with)
2) modify the source and check the result
3) put on the mystery solving hat to discover why it didn't go the way you wanted, using errors as clues towards the solution.
"that's how professional programmers work"

@futurebird If I had time l'd create actual physical cards with a picture of the "errormon" and the characteristics, and let them pick their preferred errors to keep.
Better, yet, they could draw their idea of animal representation.

@futurebird during my course (kind of cs 101) I proposed a pokemon-error game: when they start using an ide with the standard helloword first program, their first task is to make edits to cause errors: for each one they must collect the message, translate and note down. also classify as warning, warning-but-actually-error, compile/link/runtime/logic error.
Someone responded well, with a longer updated list, but the goal was to defuse the negative reaction, it kind of worked.