Dumpshock Forums > The high cost of Addiction

HappyDaze

Jul 8 2009, 03:27 PM

Lots of people tend to take Mild Addictions for their characters. Some do it just for flavor and think it's just a fluff flaw that gets them easy points. However, Addictions can end up bing really expensive.

Consider that a Mild Addiction requires a hit at least every week - and hints at 'every few days' being more common. It's also a -2 penalty to resist the test to avoid needing a hit. Assuming that you're going to have a dice pool of less than 9 to resist for most characters, you can't avoid anything more than the threshold 1 stuff reliably (by buying successes). So, on average, you'll be needing around four hits per month assuming you make a few checks. However, if you're using the Tolerance rules from Augmentation, each hit at this level requires two doses. Now we're talking about 8 doses per month that are just added to your basic lifestyle costs - these are pretty much beyond whatever you hit on a run for stat boosts. Still, it's not too bad yet...

At Moderate Addiction, you're testing every day and at a -4 penalty. You're going to fail more often than not. Still, we'll assume you make some of them and only need 25 hits. However, you now need three doses to get a hit, so that's 75 doses per month for 'off-sceen' drug use. That's really damn expensive for some of the drugs.

At Severe Addiction, you pretty much just accept that you fail the tests. Two hits per day is going to amount to an average of 60 hits per month. Each hit is now four doses so you need 240 doses per month for your downtime use. Even Novacoke is going to cost you 2,400

extra per month, and something like Psyche is a whopping 48,000

monthly habit.

Also note that RP-wise, most addicts at the lower levels shouldn't try to avoid using - at least not in their down-time. Staying focussed for a run is one thing, but if you have taken Addiction (Alcohol, Mild) it's only right to play someone that gets drunk every weekend... unless there's business. Someone with Addiction (Moderate, Deepweed) is as likely to be high at any given time as they are to be clear-headed. If you're not going to roleplay them that way, then don't taske the Quality. And if you are going to play them that way, be aware of the costs.

Mr. Mage

Jul 8 2009, 03:32 PM

My mage actually has Addiction Mild, Alcohol/Synthahol. Other than while on runs, he's constantly buzzed, at least. And suffers from a hangover pretty much every morning. Did I metion he also tends to come downstairs in a ladies skirt? Usually because he's drunk... or lazy....I dunno....take your pick.

deek

Jul 8 2009, 03:41 PM

For this exact reason, I created my own set of houserules to handle addictions. Number one, you don't get any points for addictions, so that sets the tone for my players.

Basically, using a variation or two of existing tables, I made it so that each use of something you can get addicted to, requires a roll. If you fail it enough times, you get a mild addiction...its steps up through burnout. But I also created a way to remove them over time if you are able to resist temptation (also a roll).

I think the system is sound and my group has playtested it, but the end result is my players don't get points for addiction. They are there for role-playing and I put a little rule framework around them for ease.

Naysayer

Jul 8 2009, 04:07 PM

In a perfect world, all flaws are there for roleplaying.

Not dissing on your system, if it works for you, it works, and everyone's a winner.
Me, I don't have a problem with most "easy" flaws, be it a mild addiction, or the dreaded Sensitive System on a mage, or Incompetence: Hacking on a sammie. But at the tables I've gamed at, you'd also always get some roleplaying out of them, and I don't recall the points being used to do horrendous things to the system, so your mileage may of course vary.

noonesshowmonkey

Jul 8 2009, 04:12 PM

QUOTE (Mr. Mage @ Jul 8 2009, 10:32 AM)

My mage actually has Addiction Mild, Alcohol/Synthahol. Other than while on runs, he's constantly buzzed, at least. And suffers from a hangover pretty much every morning. Did I metion he also tends to come downstairs in a ladies skirt? Usually because he's drunk... or lazy....I dunno....take your pick.

Emphasis mine.

Weak sauce.

Whenever a player tries to pull this addiction flaw 'but not on runs' horse shit, I kick them in the teeth. You get the BP because the addiction isn't as convenient as 'all of the time, just not on runs' - its 'all of the fraggin time'. If it is purely an RP device then you don't need BP for it. End of story.

Mr. Mage

Jul 8 2009, 04:59 PM

QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Jul 8 2009, 05:12 PM)

Emphasis mine.

Weak sauce.

Whenever a player tries to pull this addiction flaw 'but not on runs' horse shit, I kick them in the teeth. You get the BP because the addiction isn't as convenient as 'all of the time, just not on runs' - its 'all of the fraggin time'. If it is purely an RP device then you don't need BP for it. End of story.

No...I mean "Not while actually performing the hour or two of the actual job". I'm not allowed to talk to the Johnsons anymore because they serve drinks in most clubs. We also have a ton of Non-Run roleplaying. Believe me, it makes sense if I use the "not on Runs" argument because his addiction is mild, as in the description says he needs to get a hit once, maybe twice a week. If I had gone with moderate or severe, then no, I would not be sober on a run, but I chose mild.

Not to sound like I'm picking a fight, but what would you say for a mage with Sensitive System and didn't take any Cyberware primarily because it would hinder his magic (even without the Sens Sys)? It's a convenient negative quality, just like Mild Addiction and saying "I'm not high when I'm on a run..."
If 95% of you're game is pure shadowrunning and your characters do it EVERYday, then sure, I could agree with your argument, but personally, I prefer less runs if it means more RPing on the side.

Of course, that's just me, you may feel different (which it sems you do). I just figured I'd make my argument.

Draco18s

Jul 8 2009, 05:24 PM

It was either the only SR3 game I played...no it was the SR3 game.

I had to do a lot of repair work on drones/vehicles and had to do it in a very short time. Took LONGHAUL, got the maximum duration off the two or three doses I had in three or four days. Gm made me roll for addition. Fortunately I made the test, but I think that's the only time my group has come across the addiction flaw. Maybe Jim had a character who smoked, but that's all I recall.

deek

Jul 8 2009, 06:55 PM

QUOTE (Mr. Mage @ Jul 8 2009, 12:59 PM)

Not to sound like I'm picking a fight, but what would you say for a mage with Sensitive System and didn't take any Cyberware primarily because it would hinder his magic (even without the Sens Sys)? It's a convenient negative quality, just like Mild Addiction and saying "I'm not high when I'm on a run..."
If 95% of you're game is pure shadowrunning and your characters do it EVERYday, then sure, I could agree with your argument, but personally, I prefer less runs if it means more RPing on the side.

As a GM, I try to gauge my players and the negative qualities they take. So, sensitive system with no intention of cyberware mods, I'd take a real close look. If the player was just doing it for bonus points, then I would likely make them change it. Its a preference from table to table. I don't think it would ruin a game, but if some players are just trying to get more points while others are really trying to build a background, then I try and balance that before entering the game.

Mäx

Jul 8 2009, 07:18 PM

QUOTE (deek @ Jul 8 2009, 09:55 PM)

As a GM, I try to gauge my players and the negative qualities they take. So, sensitive system with no intention of cyberware mods, I'd take a real close look. If the player was just doing it for bonus points, then I would likely make them change it. Its a preference from table to table. I don't think it would ruin a game, but if some players are just trying to get more points while others are really trying to build a background, then I try and balance that before entering the game.

I would think that a sensitive system flaw would be a good background reason to not have any cyber in you mage.

Dashifen

Jul 8 2009, 08:00 PM

I made addictions a little easier to handle by ignoring the penalty to the roll made to resist a craving. That makes it far more likely that you can resist the craving when it comes up and, thus, reduces the possibility of someone descending to a burn-out addiction within weeks. Not necessarily accurate for how badly certain drugs can grab a person, but it allows addictions to have an effect in game while not invalidating characters too quickly.

deek

Jul 8 2009, 08:08 PM

QUOTE (MÃ¤x @ Jul 8 2009, 03:18 PM)

I would think that a sensitive system flaw would be a good background reason to not have any cyber in you mage.

True, but I still think its based on the player. I normally play with friends, so it easier to know motivation. So, if I had a player that made a mage and he knew he was never going to get cyberware and he took the flaw, knowing it wouldn't come up...well, that is the situation I try to avoid. Its all but impossible to prove that between strangers.

I don't know about you, but I can determine pretty well, if a player (after gaming with them for years) is doing something for background reasons or just to get an advantage. It may be a thin or irrelevant line to most, but to closer groups, it does matter.

Just so I don't sound like an asshat, if I were to run a forum game or something with players I didn't know, I wouldn't start the game with any houserules, as its too presumptuous that different players would want the same gaming experience or fall into the same habits as another group.

Not that anyone outside of my campaign cares, but here is the houserule that I used to replace addictions:

[ Spoiler ]

Mr. Mage

Jul 8 2009, 08:19 PM

QUOTE (deek @ Jul 8 2009, 08:08 PM)

True, but I still think its based on the player. I normally play with friends, so it easier to know motivation. So, if I had a player that made a mage and he knew he was never going to get cyberware and he took the flaw, knowing it wouldn't come up...well, that is the situation I try to avoid. Its all but impossible to prove that between strangers.

I don't know about you, but I can determine pretty well, if a player (after gaming with them for years) is doing something for background reasons or just to get an advantage. It may be a thin or irrelevant line to most, but to closer groups, it does matter.

Just so I don't sound like an asshat, if I were to run a forum game or something with players I didn't know, I wouldn't start the game with any houserules, as its too presumptuous that different players would want the same gaming experience or fall into the same habits as another group.

Oh yea...Its kind of silly to take a flaw if it has absolutely no bearing on your character. For example, I have a friend who took Incompetent in the Sorcery skills but he is a cybered up street sammy, so he couldn't use the sorcery skills anyways...Personally, I think that's kind of cheap (and I'm not sure if its legal, but our GM doesn't mind).
Sensitive System goes well for me however since my mage is kind of a technophobe, he also has the Gremlins quality at level 3! And I roleplay the hell out of that! In fact, my storage area in my (character's) apartment is filled with broken down TVs and Radios, failed attempts at trying to entertain himself. Sensitive System, I thought, went hand in hand with that.

The thing that really irks me is when people start complaining about your little ways of making a certain negative quality not affect you, but that can be done to pretty much all of the qualities except for the really expensive ones. It all just depends on how you play the character, really. And hopefuly, most GMs will expect you to RP your negatives, in fact, my GM actually makes us pay off our negative qualities with Karma (like you could opt to do normally) if he feels we aren't roleplaying them enough. So far, I haven't been told I need to pay them off, so I'm gonna just keep doing what I've been doing.

Mr. Mage

Jul 8 2009, 08:21 PM

Also, I suppose the Sensitive System is a good reason to have no cyber in your mage and is really not convenient at all because it also limits how your character can progress. If I ever wanted Cyberware in the future, I'd have to carefully weaigh the pros and cons before doing so since it could be VERY harmful.

noonesshowmonkey

Jul 8 2009, 09:20 PM

We seem to be on the same page afterall, Mr. Mage.

Any player that tries to saddle their character with a flaw that they expect to easily be able to sidestep during gameplay can pretty much be sure that I will 1) reject the character and/or 2) make their flaws come up regularly. Even Slight Addictions come up every few runs.

Also, Deek... Those addiction rules are tech, man. Nice work.

Critias

Jul 8 2009, 09:22 PM

QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Jul 8 2009, 12:12 PM)

Emphasis mine.

Weak sauce.

Whenever a player tries to pull this addiction flaw 'but not on runs' horse shit, I kick them in the teeth. You get the BP because the addiction isn't as convenient as 'all of the time, just not on runs' - its 'all of the fraggin time'. If it is purely an RP device then you don't need BP for it. End of story.

Maybe instead of just ranting about it, you could make them do stuff "not on runs" so that it does impact the character. Bad guys don't call up ahead of time and schedule ambushes. Hell, some Johnsons don't even schedule runs very far in advance. There's more to gameplay than shadowrunning, too; let it impact them during their "down time" with Contacts, training time, etc.

Let someone get into a firefight or two while they're all Blissed out of their mind, and suddenly that 5 bp flaw is more than worth it.

HappyDaze

Jul 8 2009, 10:38 PM

I only allow Sensitive System if the character has at least 0.1 Essence Cost of cyberware (before the doubling). Only then did the character discover that cyberware and his system are a poor match.

Oh yeah, Addictions. The houserule I'm doing with Tolerance is to adjust the multiplier by one place. Mild Addiction will still only require a single dose for a hit. Moderate is x2, Severe x3, and Burnout x4. This better fits with the description of Moderate Addiction in SR4A as the level where tolerance starts to appear.

Kerenshara

Jul 8 2009, 11:40 PM

QUOTE (deek @ Jul 8 2009, 01:55 PM)

As a GM, I try to gauge my players and the negative qualities they take. So, sensitive system with no intention of cyberware mods, I'd take a real close look. If the player was just doing it for bonus points, then I would likely make them change it. Its a preference from table to table. I don't think it would ruin a game, but if some players are just trying to get more points while others are really trying to build a background, then I try and balance that before entering the game.

This is an answer I can seriously get behind.

Personally, I tend to see a mild addiction to booze as binge drinking rather than alcoholism; you tend to party hard a night or two a week, but are still able to be straight the rest of the week... aside from the hangovers. Moderate, at that point you're consistently at least buzzing when you can hack it. THAT's when you need to worry about "Am I too drunk to 'run?" Another example would be day-job, 10 hours. Depending on the job, it's more there as flavor, and as a plot hook and occasional foil if the GM feels like screwing with you a bit (not dinging the GM, you took the flaw, expect to have it be a problem from time to time). But in a case like that, it's more like "can I get somebody to cover for me/call in sick/make other arangements" and so forth.

I can't remember the name of the quality, but it's the one where you had a bad run-in with BTL or Black IC and it causes you issues. If you're a decker, that's a real flaw (and IIRC gets you more points), but even for a normal user, there are times that will come in to play, and you should write it into your background, and expect the GM to bring it up at some point. But sensitive system on a mage with no 'ware is just... in need of some coaching from the GM. Notice how it doesn't allow nicotine as an addiction? I think that's serious bulldrek. How many GIs in 'Nam got smoked because they lit up in the jungle, needing their fix and the VC could smell it? Or the guard who has to sneak off to smoke when she thinks it's slow and nobody will notice them at the back emergency exit for a quick couple puffs? And if you have an actual addiction (I would require it to START at moderate to be realistic) to nicotine, that can start getting pretty expensive, too. I would consider a "hit" to be like half a pack of cigarettes, spread over the day. How many non-smokers have a friend who's a half-pack+ smoker? How apparently disruptive is that? Think it might be worth points to have to check for starting to "nic" in the middle of a run? I do.

Caffiene, on the other hand, is not an addiction... it's just the preferred alternative to "sleep". It's too easy to get that particular "fix" and it would technically be part of your lifestyle (Coke-a-cola^TM probably still exists in 2070... can anybody imagine what the 2070 version of Jolt^TM or Red Bull^TM would be like though? *shudder*).

noonesshowmonkey

Jul 9 2009, 01:00 AM

QUOTE (Critias @ Jul 8 2009, 05:22 PM)

Maybe instead of just ranting about it, you could make them do stuff "not on runs" so that it does impact the character. Bad guys don't call up ahead of time and schedule ambushes. Hell, some Johnsons don't even schedule runs very far in advance. There's more to gameplay than shadowrunning, too; let it impact them during their "down time" with Contacts, training time, etc.

Let someone get into a firefight or two while they're all Blissed out of their mind, and suddenly that 5 bp flaw is more than worth it.

I really like it when someone insinuates how my games run at table from off-hand comments on the boards. There has not been a single moment's context given to out of main run, in character activity that was challenged based in the thread thus it was simply not really... contextual...

In any case, the most common place for flaws to show up in my games is during meets with contacts or on down time in between runs since those two activities account for the majority of most shadowrunner's time (versus the time spent on a run).

Critias

Jul 9 2009, 01:11 AM

QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Jul 8 2009, 08:00 PM)

I really like it when someone insinuates how my games run at table from off-hand comments on the boards. There has not been a single moment's context given to out of main run, in character activity that was challenged based in the thread thus it was simply not really... contextual...

Well, when you froth about how you're going to kick someone in the teeth for pulling horseshit like "not on runs" flaws, it really, really, implies that "yes on runs" is what really matters in your games. If you spend so much of your games "not on runs," why do you react so vociferously when someone wants qualities to matter "not on runs?"

I'm sorry if I misunderstood your statement, but given that you feel a "not on runs" flaw shouldn't count (so much so that you don't say you'll sit down with a player and talk it over, or don't say that you'll modify the value of such a flaw, but that you have to call it horseshit and joke about kicking them)...well...the logical assumption to make is that your games focus very heavily on runs.

Mr. Mage

Jul 9 2009, 01:28 PM

QUOTE (HappyDaze @ Jul 8 2009, 06:38 PM)

I only allow Sensitive System if the character has at least 0.1 Essence Cost of cyberware (before the doubling). Only then did the character discover that cyberware and his system are a poor match.

I can see where that is going, but my reasoning for having Sensitive System is actually coupled with also having Gremlins 3. If they try to put cyberware on me, it will end very badly, not only because I tend to have bad luck with technology (Gremlins) and such a problem may actually be internal (Sensitive System) *wink wink*

However truth be told, I actually want tot take the quality where you feel really sick in AR and VR, but couldn't remember what it was called and confused it with Sensitive System. They're right next to one another too, I think. But I had already finished my character by the time I found my mistake, so I simply reworked his personality a bit. hehe

QUOTE (Kerenshara @ Jul 8 2009, 07:40 PM)

Caffiene, on the other hand, is not an addiction... it's just the preferred alternative to "sleep". It's too easy to get that particular "fix" and it would technically be part of your lifestyle (Coke-a-cola^TM probably still exists in 2070... can anybody imagine what the 2070 version of Jolt^TM or Red Bull^TM would be like though? *shudder*).

Oh...I disagree.... Caffeine is a drug, and you can be addicted to it. While it is true that 1-2 cups of coffee in the morning can actually be beneficial (increased brain activity, reflexes, etc.), many people today drink more caffeine than is in those two cups. Some of these energy drinks actually have warnings that you shouldn't drink more than two a day or you could have a heart attack! (Most like that have been banned in the US, though some of the Energy "Shots" like that do still exist here. NOS energy Shots, I believe have that warning)
I know some people who actually begin to feel really sick if they don't get a hefty dosage of caffeine each day, so I'd say they're probably addicted.

I wuold guess that Caffeine isn't as addictive as other drugs though, but it is still addictive on RL. As for in Shadowrun, it may not quite be addictive enough to warrant a negative quality...but maybe you could take it at a reduced cost, i.e. Moderate addiction for only 5 points? I dunno.

toturi

Jul 9 2009, 01:42 PM

When my players show me their characters with Addiction or any Negative Quality that is especially debilitating or is itself not useful in certain circumstances, I ask them if they are sure about it. In the case of Addictions, I ask if they would rather change the substance to Betel instead.

Mr. Mage

Jul 9 2009, 01:47 PM

QUOTE (toturi @ Jul 9 2009, 09:42 AM)

When my players show me their characters with Addiction or any Negative Quality that is especially debilitating or is itself not useful in certain circumstances, I ask them if they are sure about it. In the case of Addictions, I ask if they would rather change the substance to Betel instead.

One of our group's members has mild addiction to BTL Elf Porn, but I'd rather not roleplay that, thank you. And personally, we just tend to give it to him because we don't want him to roleplay it, we just conveniently use it when he's...."occupied"....

All in all, I think I'd rather have addiction to a normal substance than to BTLs... even if it isn't BTL porn.

toturi

Jul 9 2009, 01:50 PM

QUOTE (Mr. Mage @ Jul 9 2009, 09:47 PM)

One of our group's members has mild addiction to BTL Elf Porn, but I'd rather not roleplay that, thank you. And personally, we just tend to give it to him because we don't want him to roleplay it, we just conveniently use it when he's...."occupied"....

All in all, I think I'd rather have addiction to a normal substance than to BTLs... even if it isn't BTL porn.

Betel (p74 Arse).

noonesshowmonkey

Jul 9 2009, 01:52 PM

QUOTE (Critias @ Jul 8 2009, 08:11 PM)

Well, when you froth about how you're going to kick someone in the teeth for pulling horseshit like "not on runs" flaws, it really, really, implies that "yes on runs" is what really matters in your games. If you spend so much of your games "not on runs," why do you react so vociferously when someone wants qualities to matter "not on runs?"

I'm sorry if I misunderstood your statement, but given that you feel a "not on runs" flaw shouldn't count (so much so that you don't say you'll sit down with a player and talk it over, or don't say that you'll modify the value of such a flaw, but that you have to call it horseshit and joke about kicking them)...well...the logical assumption to make is that your games focus very heavily on runs.

First and foremost there is a great distinction between metaphor, hyperbole, sarcasm and what the words themselves mean without any such interpretation. I forget that people read things literally (for whatever reason. Blame society!)

Anyhow, the game breaks down into fluff and mechanics. I refuse to allow a player to take a flaw that has mechanical resolution (BP rewards) which never really comes up when the juice is on, when the mechanical parts of the game are running. If you want a flaw that only impacts the fluff portions of the game - portions of the game without any serious conflict resolution, without your character's neck being on the line or the like, then you don't get BP for it. Fluff =/= Mechanics - never has for any game. The distinction between Fiction and Rules is a clear distinction that needs to be made. I make that distinction with my players.

Also, if you want to read between the lines, perhaps you could try reading the 'reject the character' to imply that I am discussing character generation with my players before we even come to the table. There are a lot of subtexts in what I write that don't involve kicking people in the teeth (but what fun that is!). Then again, that wouldn't do much to help you be argumentative or critical. (crappy) Implications and assumptions generally carry far more weight of meaning begotten from the labors of the interpreter than the writer.

Mr. Mage

Jul 9 2009, 01:53 PM

QUOTE (toturi @ Jul 9 2009, 09:50 AM)

Betel (p74 Arse).

Sorry, no book on me.... is it not BTLs? My bad, I thought that was the nickname for them....but I guess I'm wrong?

toturi

Jul 9 2009, 02:02 PM

QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Jul 9 2009, 09:52 PM)

Anyhow, the game breaks down into fluff and mechanics. I refuse to allow a player to take a flaw that has mechanical resolution (BP rewards) which never really comes up when the juice is on, when the mechanical parts of the game are running. If you want a flaw that only impacts the fluff portions of the game - portions of the game without any serious conflict resolution, without your character's neck being on the line or the like, then you don't get BP for it. Fluff =/= Mechanics - never has for any game. The distinction between Fiction and Rules is a clear distinction that needs to be made. I make that distinction with my players.

While I agree that fluff =/= game mechanics, I beg to differ on the subject of Negative Qualities not coming up. There is always a drawback, while you might not think the BP value might not be in proportion to the game effects, but they are there as stated.

Critias

Jul 9 2009, 02:29 PM

QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Jul 9 2009, 09:52 AM)

First and foremost there is a great distinction between metaphor, hyperbole, sarcasm and what the words themselves mean without any such interpretation. I forget that people read things literally (for whatever reason. Blame society!)

Anyhow, the game breaks down into fluff and mechanics. I refuse to allow a player to take a flaw that has mechanical resolution (BP rewards) which never really comes up when the juice is on, when the mechanical parts of the game are running. If you want a flaw that only impacts the fluff portions of the game - portions of the game without any serious conflict resolution, without your character's neck being on the line or the like, then you don't get BP for it. Fluff =/= Mechanics - never has for any game. The distinction between Fiction and Rules is a clear distinction that needs to be made. I make that distinction with my players.

Also, if you want to read between the lines, perhaps you could try reading the 'reject the character' to imply that I am discussing character generation with my players before we even come to the table. There are a lot of subtexts in what I write that don't involve kicking people in the teeth (but what fun that is!). Then again, that wouldn't do much to help you be argumentative or critical. (crappy) Implications and assumptions generally carry far more weight of meaning begotten from the labors of the interpreter than the writer.

So first I'm at fault for misunderstanding you because I read literally. Later in your same overly defensive post, I'm at fault for misunderstanding you because I read between the lines too much. Which is it, and at what point can it maybe partially become your fault for being misunderstood? Or, even better, at what stage in the blame game can we just call it a day and stop being snippy little bitches?

And I understand the difference between background (I hate the term "fluff") and mechanics. I first entered this thread merely to point out that "mechanics" doesn't only mean "on runs." If something is sufficiently hampering between runs -- whether it be handling contacts, purchasing gear, training, cyber-doc appointments, or the GM throwing the team into hot water outside of a regularly contracted job -- then whether or not something is happening "on a run" or not is a moot point, because it is still happening with game "mechanics." I then offered a couple fairly plausible scenarios to point out how this could happen.

It's not the sort of things that have to happen every game session, but they are things that certainly could come up often enough for someone with a Mild Addiction to still suffer for their poor decision making and impulse control. For Qualities that are only worth 5 BP, I don't think they have to come up every session.

Stingray

Jul 9 2009, 02:31 PM

QUOTE (Mr. Mage @ Jul 9 2009, 04:53 PM)

Sorry, no book on me.... is it not BTLs? My bad, I thought that was the nickname for them....but I guess I'm wrong?

BTL= Better Than Life Dreamchip
Betel (CorpCandy,JaW)= Legal Chewing Gum
Never worse Addiction than Mild,
Instantly Addictive
Characters who add dice to Toxin Resistance Tests(throught
Adept Abilities, Implants,Metatype,Magic etc) are immune to this effect if
they succeed at Toxin Resistance Test.
(so dwarf who have Ogre Stomach-quality, and Toxin Extractor-bioware is pretty safe..)

Question is: What is Betel's Power Resistance Number?

Mr. Mage

Jul 9 2009, 02:36 PM

alrighty...it just seemed like you were talking about BTLs...y'know Betel could easily be seen as BeTeL...
not as familiar with Augmentation since I usually play non-cybered Mage characters, so core book and street magic are what I tend to look at.

noonesshowmonkey

Jul 9 2009, 02:38 PM

QUOTE (toturi @ Jul 9 2009, 09:02 AM)

While I agree that fluff =/= game mechanics, I beg to differ on the subject of Negative Qualities not coming up. There is always a drawback, while you might not think the BP value might not be in proportion to the game effects, but they are there as stated.

There is a significant difference in description between the Light and Severe addictions and this distinction is carried over in rules in the game. I wouldn't care to make the addiction come up every single run should it only be a minor addiction. Generally speaking the 5 point flaws only come up every few game days (if that) when I run a game. Depending on how you run the actual runs, this can mean that they come up every run should most runs take 3 days or so. I think that it is important to point out there are many, many 5 BP perks that come up every session (Adept?!

Astral Chameleon, High Pain Tolerance etc.) and only a few Negative ones that do (or even just might) such as Code Block or Astral Beacon... Even then, why get your 5 BP through those two flaws when you can just get 5 BP through, say, a Minor Addiction and have it essentially not matter?

This kind of gamesmanship is something that I come across all of the time with players. The reason for such aggressive wording like 'kick them in the teeth' is that I find that if you don't set hard and fast rules and play aggressively as a GM, players will abuse the shit out of SR and its many, many, many glaring loopholes (of which Minor Addiction is but one).

The tricky part about flaws (and perks, too) is justifying their cost and benefits adequately so that the character is not abusing via gamesmanship the character creation rules.

noonesshowmonkey

Jul 9 2009, 02:40 PM

QUOTE (Critias @ Jul 9 2009, 09:29 AM)

So first I'm at fault for misunderstanding you because I read literally. Later in your same overly defensive post, I'm at fault for misunderstanding you because I read between the lines too much. Which is it, and at what point can it maybe partially become your fault for being misunderstood? Or, even better, at what stage in the blame game can we just call it a day and stop being snippy little bitches?

And I understand the difference between background (I hate the term "fluff") and mechanics. I first entered this thread merely to point out that "mechanics" doesn't only mean "on runs." If something is sufficiently hampering between runs -- whether it be handling contacts, purchasing gear, training, cyber-doc appointments, or the GM throwing the team into hot water outside of a regularly contracted job -- then whether or not something is happening "on a run" or not is a moot point, because it is still happening with game "mechanics." I then offered a couple fairly plausible scenarios to point out how this could happen.

It's not the sort of things that have to happen every game session, but they are things that certainly could come up often enough for someone with a Mild Addiction to still suffer for their poor decision making and impulse control. For Qualities that are only worth 5 BP, I don't think they have to come up every session.

Part 1) I don't care to go line by line and have my cake and eat it too so... Right about now sounds lovely, thanks!

Part 2) We are in agreement about this though I guess I was less explicit.

Part 3) See my last response to Toturi.

Have a good one.

DuctShuiTengu

Jul 9 2009, 02:56 PM

QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Jul 9 2009, 04:38 PM)

Even then, why get your 5 BP through those two flaws when you can just get 5 BP through, say, a Minor Addiction and have it essentially not matter?

"Your character just took a dose of Aisa to celebrate their successfully completed run when the Red Samurai team sent to recover the McGuffin you just stole catches up to you."

"You're enjoying a nice trip from Crimson Orchid to keep from stressing out over where you're going to get more money when your Fixer calls, they have a job for you, but you need to be there in 20 minutes; you're still looking at being out of it for most of the next 3 hours. Do you take the job and hope it's something you can do while high, or deal with the loss of income and rep from turning it down because you were too stoned to work?"

Just because the character has enough control over their addiction to make sure they're sober when they've been given sufficient warning that they'll need to be - and they won't need to stay clean for too long before they can go back to their vice of choice - doesn't mean that it'll never come up, or even never come up when it matters.

Mr. Mage

Jul 9 2009, 03:05 PM

QUOTE (DuctShuiTengu @ Jul 9 2009, 10:56 AM)

"Your character just took a dose of Aisa to celebrate their successfully completed run when the Red Samurai team sent to recover the McGuffin you just stole catches up to you."

"You're enjoying a nice trip from Crimson Orchid and to keep from stressing out over where you're going to get more money when your Fixer calls, they have a job for you, but you need to be there in 20 minutes; you're still looking at being out of it for most of the next 3 hours. Do you take the job and hope it's something you can do while high, or deal with the loss of income and rep from turning it down because you were too stoned to work?"

Just because the character has enough control over their addiction to make sure they're sober when they've been given sufficient warning that they'll need to be - and they won't need to stay clean for too long before they can go back to their vice of choice - doesn't mean that it'll never come up, or even never come up when it matters.

That makes sense...when I said "sober on runs" I probably should have mentioned on planned runs. It may have helped since someone quoting me seems to have had a hand in starting this little "debate" about teeth-kicking ans such...

Mäx

Jul 9 2009, 03:48 PM

QUOTE (DuctShuiTengu @ Jul 9 2009, 05:56 PM)

"Your character just took a dose of Aisa to celebrate their successfully completed run when the Red Samurai team sent to recover the McGuffin you just stole catches up to you."

"You're enjoying a nice trip from Crimson Orchid to keep from stressing out over where you're going to get more money when your Fixer calls, they have a job for you, but you need to be there in 20 minutes; you're still looking at being out of it for most of the next 3 hours. Do you take the job and hope it's something you can do while high, or deal with the loss of income and rep from turning it down because you were too stoned to work?"

Just because the character has enough control over their addiction to make sure they're sober when they've been given sufficient warning that they'll need to be - and they won't need to stay clean for too long before they can go back to their vice of choice - doesn't mean that it'll never come up, or even never come up when it matters.

I was going to post something similar, put you said i so much more eloquently then i ever could have.

noonesshowmonkey

Jul 9 2009, 04:17 PM

QUOTE (DuctShuiTengu @ Jul 9 2009, 10:56 AM)

"Your character just took a dose of Aisa to celebrate their successfully completed run when the Red Samurai team sent to recover the McGuffin you just stole catches up to you."

"You're enjoying a nice trip from Crimson Orchid to keep from stressing out over where you're going to get more money when your Fixer calls, they have a job for you, but you need to be there in 20 minutes; you're still looking at being out of it for most of the next 3 hours. Do you take the job and hope it's something you can do while high, or deal with the loss of income and rep from turning it down because you were too stoned to work?"

Just because the character has enough control over their addiction to make sure they're sober when they've been given sufficient warning that they'll need to be - and they won't need to stay clean for too long before they can go back to their vice of choice - doesn't mean that it'll never come up, or even never come up when it matters.

And these kinds of moments are exactly what my players have to deal with nearly every session. Any flaw comes up. End of story. No free BP at my table.

Kerenshara

Jul 9 2009, 04:25 PM

QUOTE (Mr. Mage @ Jul 9 2009, 08:28 AM)

Oh...I disagree.... Caffeine is a drug, and you can be addicted to it. While it is true that 1-2 cups of coffee in the morning can actually be beneficial (increased brain activity, reflexes, etc.), many people today drink more caffeine than is in those two cups. Some of these energy drinks actually have warnings that you shouldn't drink more than two a day or you could have a heart attack! (Most like that have been banned in the US, though some of the Energy "Shots" like that do still exist here. NOS energy Shots, I believe have that warning)
I know some people who actually begin to feel really sick if they don't get a hefty dosage of caffeine each day, so I'd say they're probably addicted.

I wuold guess that Caffeine isn't as addictive as other drugs though, but it is still addictive on RL. As for in Shadowrun, it may not quite be addictive enough to warrant a negative quality...but maybe you could take it at a reduced cost, i.e. Moderate addiction for only 5 points? I dunno.

That was the point I was trying to make: from a game perspective, it's neither costly enough nor disrtuptive enough to warrant a negative quality and points... now, if you want to portray somebody who's addicted, feel free. As for the actual addictive properties, I had to go cold turkey at one point (down from an average of 6-10 "doses" daily) and I can tell you, it's a genuine nightmare. But staying dosed up is just too easy - heck, they even have caffinated GUM these days, and that's PERFECT if you need a hit on a 'run.

Mr. Mage

Jul 9 2009, 04:38 PM

Ah..my bad...I must have just missed the game mechanics reference in your post. I agree with you about it not being addictive game wise, I just thought you meant not addictive in general.

Kerenshara

Jul 9 2009, 04:42 PM

QUOTE (DuctShuiTengu @ Jul 9 2009, 09:56 AM)

"Your character just took a dose of Aisa to celebrate their successfully completed run when the Red Samurai team sent to recover the McGuffin you just stole catches up to you."

"You're enjoying a nice trip from Crimson Orchid to keep from stressing out over where you're going to get more money when your Fixer calls, they have a job for you, but you need to be there in 20 minutes; you're still looking at being out of it for most of the next 3 hours. Do you take the job and hope it's something you can do while high, or deal with the loss of income and rep from turning it down because you were too stoned to work?"

Just because the character has enough control over their addiction to make sure they're sober when they've been given sufficient warning that they'll need to be - and they won't need to stay clean for too long before they can go back to their vice of choice - doesn't mean that it'll never come up, or even never come up when it matters.

Yep. Exactly. Now, here's the question: Antidote(Asia) or Antidote(Crimson Orchid) patches? When you really need to get un-high in a hurry? You'd lose the "dose" toward your fix and need to "re-dose" later, but I can't see why that wouldn't work. I seem to remember seeing someplace a mention of an Antidote(Alcohol) patch for un-buzzing in a hurry but maybe that was a novel and not RAW. *shrug* The description of the Antidote Patches is vague enough I can see allowing it, but there would be some amount of time before they became effective in that sense.

Critias

Jul 9 2009, 04:45 PM

QUOTE (Kerenshara @ Jul 9 2009, 12:42 PM)

Yep. Exactly. Now, here's the question: Antidote(Asia) or Antidote(Crimson Orchid) patches? When you really need to get un-high in a hurry? You'd lose the "dose" toward your fix and need to "re-dose" later, but I can't see why that wouldn't work. I seem to remember seeing someplace a mention of an Antidote(Alcohol) patch for un-buzzing in a hurry but maybe that was a novel and not RAW. *shrug* The description of the Antidote Patches is vague enough I can see allowing it, but there would be some amount of time before they became effective in that sense.

I'd let them exist in-game, but I'd make someone with the Addiction quality make an appropriate roll to see if they could use them to kill their buzz. It makes perfect sense to want to do so, but IRL there's precious little about being an addict that makes sense.

Kerenshara

Jul 9 2009, 05:04 PM

QUOTE (Critias @ Jul 9 2009, 11:45 AM)

I'd let them exist in-game, but I'd make someone with the Addiction quality make an appropriate roll to see if they could use them to kill their buzz. It makes perfect sense to want to do so, but IRL there's precious little about being an addict that makes sense.

By "could" you mean "bring themselves to nix the high" I presume? If that's the case, I can see it. But if the group is "close" with each other, the other group members might start carrying them to slap on at need... I am reminded of B.A. Baracus's fear of flying in A-Team, and all the ways they contrived to get him unconcious and on a plane/chopper.

If you mean "I don't know if it would work on an addict" (and I don't think you did) then I would have to disagree - the chemicals/bots work on the compound and chemistry in the body to neutralize the effects regardless of who uses it.

Critias

Jul 9 2009, 08:42 PM

I meant it more as "I don't think the addict should be able to bring themselves to want to end their high early without an appropriate die roll to do choose to do so," not as "I don't think it would work once properly applied."

If they've got to make Willpower tests (and suffer penalties on them) to resist the urge to get high, it seems like a cheap and easy out to let them fail or ignore those rolls, shoot up, and then just willy-nilly slap a patch on without a roll, to undo their drug of choice. If a die roll is an appropriate way to see if they want to shoot up in the first place, it seems an equally appropriate way to see if they can bring themselves to wreck their buzz after the fact.

Kerenshara

Jul 9 2009, 09:41 PM

QUOTE (Critias @ Jul 9 2009, 03:42 PM)

I meant it more as "I don't think the addict should be able to bring themselves to want to end their high early without an appropriate die roll to do choose to do so," not as "I don't think it would work once properly applied."

If they've got to make Willpower tests (and suffer penalties on them) to resist the urge to get high, it seems like a cheap and easy out to let them fail or ignore those rolls, shoot up, and then just willy-nilly slap a patch on without a roll, to undo their drug of choice. If a die roll is an appropriate way to see if they want to shoot up in the first place, it seems an equally appropriate way to see if they can bring themselves to wreck their buzz after the fact.

That's what I thought you meant, and like I said, I agree. But that doesn't keep Faceman or Murdock from slapping B.A. with a patch when they need him straight and sober (in 5 or 10 minutes).

HappyDaze

Jul 9 2009, 10:30 PM

QUOTE

Question is: What is Betel's Power Resistance Number?

Per Arsenal, all voluntarily taken drugs are Power 6 unless noted otherwise.

Keep in mind that there is at least one drawback to Betel. Using it will impose a -1 penalty to other addiction tests made while using it per the speedballing rules, so it really can act as a gateway drug.

Kerenshara

Jul 9 2009, 10:54 PM

Here's a question: what's the power of "Slab" if used offensively?

*Wide EVIL grin*

HappyDaze

Jul 10 2009, 01:02 AM

Still 6, it's just that you get to resist. Most voluntary use opts out of the resistance roll, the exception being those with passive resistances to drugs/toxins from magic, cyberware, or another source.

toturi

Jul 10 2009, 01:56 AM

QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Jul 9 2009, 10:38 PM)

This kind of gamesmanship is something that I come across all of the time with players. The reason for such aggressive wording like 'kick them in the teeth' is that I find that if you don't set hard and fast rules and play aggressively as a GM, players will abuse the shit out of SR and its many, many, many glaring loopholes (of which Minor Addiction is but one).

The tricky part about flaws (and perks, too) is justifying their cost and benefits adequately so that the character is not abusing via gamesmanship the character creation rules.

As long as the GM applies all of the relevant RAW fairly and evenly to all the characters, I do not see why the such gamemanship is abuse. If the GM chooses to ignore such rules, then it is his decision. Such skill and effort at character building should be rewarded, not kicked in the teeth. I would want to see more such good character builders, not less. Read the rules and apply them, make informed and intelligent character choices. It is, at the end of the day, the player's choice.

In fact I like the present costs, it encourages clever character building and forces the player to take responsibility for their choices. Not everything is viable in-game, and I am not going to coddle "role"-players by house ruling so that their characters can work. Either build a character that works and can stand on its own or suffer the consequences.

Stingray

Jul 10 2009, 05:18 AM

QUOTE (HappyDaze @ Jul 10 2009, 01:30 AM)

Per Arsenal, all voluntarily taken drugs are Power 6 unless noted otherwise.

Keep in mind that there is at least one drawback to Betel. Using it will impose a -1 penalty to other addiction tests made while using it per the speedballing rules, so it really can act as a gateway drug.

Yeah, i know, what makes it even worse, it creates Physical AND Mental Addiction ("highly addictive").. so 2 Tests..
I rather take Addiction (Mild) G3 (Vitamin Addiction)

Word of the advice: If you have Addiction Quality of any kind, DO NOT take Scorched-Quality (-2 die to resist addiction)

Naysayer

Jul 10 2009, 06:01 AM

QUOTE (Kerenshara @ Jul 9 2009, 06:42 PM)

Yep. Exactly. Now, here's the question: Antidote(Asia) or Antidote(Crimson Orchid) patches? When you really need to get un-high in a hurry? You'd lose the "dose" toward your fix and need to "re-dose" later, but I can't see why that wouldn't work. I seem to remember seeing someplace a mention of an Antidote(Alcohol) patch for un-buzzing in a hurry but maybe that was a novel and not RAW. *shrug* The description of the Antidote Patches is vague enough I can see allowing it, but there would be some amount of time before they became effective in that sense.

I'd say have them exist, have them be accessible enough, but make that shit addictive, too.

"That shit you just hit, to get down, to get those neurons to think straight again? They's effin' awesome, I know. Problem is, what they do to you, all those tiny chemical reactions in your tiny, tiny neurons? It's like a motherfuckin' rollercoaster-ride for your brain. Better pack a couple more if you wanna last the day!"

toturi

Jul 10 2009, 06:03 AM

QUOTE (Stingray @ Jul 10 2009, 01:18 PM)

Yeah, i know, what makes it even worse, it creates Physical AND Mental Addiction ("highly addictive").. so 2 Tests..
I rather take Addiction (Mild) G3 (Vitamin Addiction)

Word of the advice: If you have Addiction Quality of any kind, DO NOT take Scorched-Quality (-2 die to resist addiction)

Where does it say that "highly addictive" means both Physical and Mental Addictions?

Stingray

Jul 10 2009, 06:11 AM

QUOTE (toturi @ Jul 10 2009, 09:03 AM)

Where does it say that "highly addictive" means both Physical and Mental Addictions?

I knew it would need this: IMO