How to build: Immunity to Addiction?

[Surrealone]

If I recall correctly, Life Support: Immunity to Heroin would cost 1 CP and Life Support: Immunity to Alcohol would also cost 1 CP.  This is nice and simple if you want someone to be completely immune to the effects of a particular substance, but the trouble is that I'm after an approach that allows someone to get high or drunk but not addicted. (i.e. I want the character to suffer no withdrawal symptoms and no bodily weakness or want of substances that are normally addictive.  It's a willpower-based thing for the character -- but I don't have an interest in tying to an EGO roll.)

 

To me, this seems like some form of Life Support: Immunity, but I'm on the fence about how many points it should cost since it should be broad-spectrum (i.e. he's immune to any/all addictions).  On the downside, this approach means that someone could use drug darts against this character to tranq him with an opiod ... or a stim patch to hop him up ... i.e. he lacks full immunity to drug effects ... but won't ever go through withdrawal or require such substances.  For what it's worth, addictive substances are not super common in this game, but they are in play.  Some have positive effects (like stim patches) while others have negative effects (tranq darts) ... in addition to their addictive aspects.

 

Thoughts on how much such an immunity should reasonably cost in a heroic game?

[steriaca]

Immunity to All Poisons (5 points) (what exactly is a drug if not a poison) with the limitation Limited Power (Only To Prevent Addiction: -1/2) (Real cost: 3 points). Beneficial effects still happen. Negative effects still happen. He can even overdose and die. But in the morning, assuming he is still alive, he won't be craving more.

[Tasha]

+3 to Ego roll vs becoming addicted to substances. 

[steriaca]

+3 to Ego roll vs becoming addicted to substances.

While it is acceptable, I don't think that was what he was looking for.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yeah I'd just treat it as a poison and use life support.

[Tasha]

While it is acceptable, I don't think that was what he was looking for.

 

but not addicted. (i.e. I want the character to suffer no withdrawal symptoms and no bodily weakness or want of substances that are normally addictive.  It's a willpower-based thing for the character -- but I don't have an interest in tying to an EGO roll.)

The system doesn't really have a mechanic in place for items to become addictive. IF it did it would probably be a Transformation attack. Which gives the character the appropriate Complication that causes physical symptoms when the substance isn't being used. So to prevent that Transformation attack would be Power Defense vs Addiction. 

[steriaca]

 

 

The system doesn't really have a mechanic in place for items to become addictive. IF it did it would probably be a Transformation attack. Which gives the character the appropriate Complication that causes physical symptoms when the substance isn't being used. So to prevent that Transformation attack would be Power Defense vs Addiction.

Assuming it is not an Attack Verses Alternative Defense NND Transformation attack, with the defense being immunity to drugs.

[Lucius]

I'd price it at about 2 pts, personally.

 

Maybe even 1 if I expect it to almost never come up.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I can stop posting palindromedary taglines if I really want to.

[Doc Democracy]

I am with Lucius,  It is almost a Perk - something that you get for being something different,

 

I am presuming that this character is indeed something different to reflect that he does not have the biological mechanisms that provide the opportunity for addiction.

 

Like Tasha said - there is no mechanism to reflect addiction but neither is there one to reflect poison (possibly the reason folk reach for that mechanic to address it).  I like the thinking there - that for a character to be addicted you add a complication to their lives (and thus the transform attack).  Like Steriaca says though, a GM might decide to apply a more exotic build for which the player's defence has no locus (though I would think that writing [immunity to addiction - 10pts POW Def] on the characters sheet would apply to the NND described for a reasonable GM).

 

It takes good communication between player and GM to address this sort of thing.  I think the GM should decide how much it will be worth (and take the examples of life support etc into account here) and, knowing the level of game impact, decide it's worth...

 

Doc

[Doc Democracy]

Immunity to All Poisons (5 points) (what exactly is a drug if not a poison) 

 

A discussion on whether addictive drugs are or are not poisons might get too moral or too biochemical - I forego the opportunity to raise one or more cans of worms...

 

:-)

 

Doc

[IndianaJoe3]

What genre is this in? Some genres feature more addictive substances than others.

[Cantriped]

Pathfinder treats Addiction as being basically similar to a Disease which happens to be triggered by useage of particular drugs, which it in turn clasifies as a kind of poison. Given how rarely Addiction is likely to come up, and how "minor" its effects are (on the superheroic scale); I would likely treat Immunity to Addiction as a 2 to 3-point Life Support. Life Support (Immunity to Poison) would also make you immune to Addiction.

[massey]

Not worth any points at all.  It's not likely to be something ever covered by the game.  There are no rules in the game for addiction.  It's like being immune to divorce.  You just tell the GM "I'm not interested in playing something dealing with this aspect of my character's life".

[Cantriped]

Not worth any points at all.  It's not likely to be something ever covered by the game.  There are no rules in the game for addiction.  It's like being immune to divorce.  You just tell the GM "I'm not interested in playing something dealing with this aspect of my character's life".

 

I can't recall there being any strict game rules for diseases either, except for the section of the HERO Bestiary which described Rabies...

Yet Life Support (Immunity to Disease) is still a thing.

By the same standard that a GM can choose to include Rabies, or a Zombie Plague in their campaign... a GM running a Dark Champions campaign might very well choose to write a "Drug" who's Side Effect is Transform (Person into Person Addicted to "Drug") (With the addiction itself treated as either a Dependence or Psychological Limitation. Said Transform would likely be NND (Defense Is Life Support (Addiction or All Poisons)).

 

However, it is also fair to say that if the GM isn't going to EVER use any diseases or poisons, or addicting substances in his campaign: then none of these forms of Life Support should cost a character any points.

[Surrealone]

What genre is this in? Some genres feature more addictive substances than others.

Sci-Fi/Space Opera.  There are beneficial drugs, recreational drugs, certain other substances (specifically blood that I know of, so far), and weaponized agents that all have addictive qualities in this game.  

 

 

Not worth any points at all.  It's not likely to be something ever covered by the game.

 

It is likely to come up in this game and, thus, the ability to ignore what is perhaps the most significant downside to the (in)voluntary consumption of certain substances in this game is definitely worth some CP, IMHO.

 

 

+3 to Ego roll vs becoming addicted to substances. 

I considered this sort of approach prior to posting and then threw it out, as it's not a willpower thing, at all -- it's something inherent to the character's being that I'm trying to model, as there's a supernatural bloodline/heritage involved ... as well as genetic tampering.

 

 

I am with Lucius,  It is almost a Perk - something that you get for being something different,

 

I am presuming that this character is indeed something different to reflect that he does not have the biological mechanisms that provide the opportunity for addiction.

Correct: the character is something different.  Specifically, the blood of certain supernatural creatures has specific (often beneficial ... until the crash at which point it's detrimental until the crash is over) effects on most humanoids in this game ... and the ingestion of that blood fosters addiction.  It was recently learned that this character has one such supernatural creature within his own bloodline/heritage -- so at the very minimum if there's to be immunity to addiction, it would be to his own heritage's blood ... and possibly more addictive substances pending discussion with the GM. 

 

What, specifically, that supernatural bloodline/heritage entails is still something being explored, by the way.  It's a bit more complicated than that since the character is also a genetically modified humanoid ... so it's not just the heritage, but potential enhancements to it that could be at play.  (Clearly, discussion with the GM is needed and planned; I was just trying to get a baseline for how others felt on the topic of costs for immunity to ONLY the addictive aspect of certain substances.)

 

 

Immunity to All Poisons (5 points) (what exactly is a drug if not a poison) with the limitation Limited Power (Only To Prevent Addiction: -1/2) (Real cost: 3 points). Beneficial effects still happen. Negative effects still happen. He can even overdose and die. But in the morning, assuming he is still alive, he won't be craving more.

This seems about right.  3 CP is kind of spendy for a heroic game, but the ability to consume addictive things without concern regarding addiction is potentially a big deal, as well, since such substances WILL (and have) come up in this game.

 

 

 

What I seem to be hearing as a consensus is that if it's going to come up in the game, it's definitely worth more than 1 CP in a heroic game ... probably somewhere in the vicinity of 2-3 CP in a heroic game, with a leaning toward 3 CP if such substances are relatively common.  Is that a fair restatement/assessment?

[Tom Cowan]

Note: If it is only Immunity to some things then it will be less costly

[eepjr24]

I agree with that consensus. Although I would be more tempted to deal with it as a Perk rather than life support, unless it also does provide some bufer against the EFFECTS, not just the possibility of addiction. I would also then add the perk into the common defenses for AVAD against substances that addict, transforms, CE, etc.

 

- E

[Grailknight]

Not worth any points at all.  It's not likely to be something ever covered by the game.  There are no rules in the game for addiction.  It's like being immune to divorce.  You just tell the GM "I'm not interested in playing something dealing with this aspect of my character's life".

 

While I agree with the consensus on this being worth only 3 points or so, Hero definitely has rules for Addiction.  It's part of Dependence on CC page 125.

[Christopher]

First question is:
How is addiction even build? Without knowing how the attack is build, we can not tell you how to defend against it. Or rather the attack must have the defense build into itself.

 

The only construct this side of a Campaign rule I know would be "Side Effect (Transform into being with addiction complication)". And a side effect can explicitly not be defended against - if you can, you jsut proved there is no side effect worth a limitation value.

So it would be a naked buyoff of the Side Effect limitation on the Drug Equipment. May want to allow Naked Group Buyoffs for this, or it becomes expensive fast.

 

If it is a campaign rule, limited LS would propably be a good idea. However some questions have to be asked:

Does it affect physical addiction, psychological addiction or both?

How interesting would the drugs be without the danger of addiction? i.e. are thier drugs whose main danger is Addiction (rather then post use withdrawl)?

How common is drug use (I asume somewhat, since the question was raised)?

[Surrealone]

First question is:

How is addiction even build? Without knowing how the attack is build, we can not tell you how to defend against it. Or rather the attack must have the defense build into itself.

Addiction is not an attack, it's a complication (specifically, a form of the 'Dependence' complication).  The (in)voluntary consumption of certain substances can lead to dependence/addiction.  If someone needed to build it as an attack, it would most likely be some form of NND Transform with a limitation to only cause a dependence on the substance whose effects had said NND Transform linked to them.  That said, my GM hasn't built it out and the entire group trusts the GM to do the right thing when it comes to things like addictions.  After all, we all know addiction when we see it.  In this context, a Perk may make sense, here, but that's up to the GM.

 

If it is a campaign rule, limited LS would propably be a good idea. However some questions have to be asked:

Does it affect physical addiction, psychological addiction or both?

How interesting would the drugs be without the danger of addiction? i.e. are thier drugs whose main danger is Addiction (rather then post use withdrawl)?

How common is drug use (I asume somewhat, since the question was raised)?

For 3 pts in a ~2225pt Heroic game, I would expect immunity to addiction to deal with both physical and psychological aspects.  The drugs are interesting enough that they're consumed by characters in this game with or without the risk of addiction (a number of them being medicinal or weaponized is a key driver -- meaning consumption is both voluntary and involuntary), but the ones with the risk of addiction are consumed more sparingly for obvious reasons in this game.  There are euphoric and incapacitating agents with addicitive qualities that have been weaponized ... and they're used to good effect in the game, as well ... by all sides.  As you can tell, drug use is by no means rare in this game.  I wouldn't call it frequent, but it's reasonably common.  It is, after all, a sci-fi/space opera game ... and futuristic pharma tech is a natural offshoot of bio research, chemical research, genetic manipulation, and the like.

[bigdamnhero]

Addiction is not an attack, it's a complication (specifically, a form of the 'Dependence' complication).

Yes, but the question is how does someone who starts out not addicted become addicted, ie how does someone without that Complication develop it? That's an attack, whether it's statted out as one or not. I know we always prefer to Reason From Effect, but it's difficult to define Defense Against ____ without understanding how _____ affects the character in the first place?

 

I agree that in most games it's unlikely to come up enough to be worth more than a point or two. But in this case, it sounds like the GM is deliberately setting it as a way to stop characters from over-using performance enhancers without consequences? That sounds like some kind of Cumulative Transform: either Power Def or a limited EGO Boost would work. (Assuming it works against EGO, not BODY.) Resistance might be appropriate too.

 

If you want an absolute defense, then yeah Life Support is probably a better approach. But I'm wondering if "Only prevents addiction" is actually a Limitation or an Advantage in this case? If normal Immunity means drugs have no effect on you, modifying that so you get the benefits without the downside is arguably more of an Advantage. Depends on how you and the GM see this coming up in game. Not to accuse anyone of munchkinism, but I've gamed with a few people who would argue vehemently for the Limitation, but then take it as a license to use performance enhancers on a regular basis while ignoring the side effects...

[Christopher]

Addiction is not an attack, it's a complication (specifically, a form of the 'Dependence' complication).

Neither are the Environmental effects of extreme Cold, Heat, Thirst, Hunger or Sleep Deprivation an attack. But at least we know they are defind as campaign rules and wich defenses should apply.

And the first 2 can be turned into an attack using CE. Or just used as special effects in attacks.

[Hugh Neilson]

Immunity to All Poisons (5 points) (what exactly is a drug if not a poison) with the limitation Limited Power (Only To Prevent Addiction: -1/2) (Real cost: 3 points). Beneficial effects still happen. Negative effects still happen. He can even overdose and die. But in the morning, assuming he is still alive, he won't be craving more.

I have to say -1/2 for removing all but a single incidental adverse effect, and leaving all other adverse implications *, seems like a really lowballed limitation. I would suggest that removing only the addictive qualities of all drugs/poisons removes most or virtually all of the benefits of the ability, and merits a -1 1/2 to -2 limitation, which gets us to 2 points. How common is addiction relative to the other adverse effects of poisons? How severe is it, again in comparison to other detrimental effects?

 

* I do not believe the power removes desirable/beneficial effects. That would be a complication. Power Defense does not “protect” you from Aid or Healing, and Life Support to heat does not mean a fire does not warm you. Immunity to poisons does not mean the character cannot undergo a medical procedure under anesthetic, or that he cannot be vaccinated against polio or the flu.

 

I'd price it at about 2 pts, personally.

 

Maybe even 1 if I expect it to almost never come up.

 

I am with Lucius, It is almost a Perk - something that you get for being something different,

 

It takes good communication between player and GM to address this sort of thing. I think the GM should decide how much it will be worth (and take the examples of life support etc into account here) and, knowing the level of game impact, decide it's worth...

 

Given how rarely Addiction is likely to come up, and how "minor" its effects are (on the superheroic scale); I would likely treat Immunity to Addiction as a 2 to 3-point Life Support. Life Support (Immunity to Poison) would also make you immune to Addiction.

 

Not worth any points at all. It's not likely to be something ever covered by the game. There are no rules in the game for addiction. It's like being immune to divorce. You just tell the GM "I'm not interested in playing something dealing with this aspect of my character's life".

I agree with all of the above – the question is how often it will likely come up, and how valuable it is when it does come up. 1 or 2 points seems reasonable to me. Whether it’s a perk, or Life Support, or whatever, is not really important. The character pays the points and is immune to addiction.

 

As Doc says, the real key is communication so GM and player are on the same page as to what the ability does and how often it will be relevant. That determination sets the value somewhere between 0 (not an issue in game anyway) and 3 (will come up at least as often as other Life Supports characters might reasonably purchase in this genre and setting).

[eepjr24]

If you want an absolute defense, then yeah Life Support is probably a better approach. But I'm wondering if "Only prevents addiction" is actually a Limitation or an Advantage in this case? If normal Immunity means drugs have no effect on you, modifying that so you get the benefits without the downside is arguably more of an Advantage. Depends on how you and the GM see this coming up in game. Not to accuse anyone of munchkinism, but I've gamed with a few people who would argue vehemently for the Limitation, but then take it as a license to use performance enhancers on a regular basis while ignoring the side effects...

I don't think it ignores all the side effects, only the one of possible addiction? Maybe I am reading it differently, though. I am running a Fantasy Hero campaign where addiction to certain potions is possible (although it has not come up and likely will not). Ignoring addiction would get you out of that, but not the other side effects of long term usage. For instance, speed potions eventually effect both INT and EGO in a negative fashion if over used. And longer term than that they affect the body in the form of calcium depletion, which lowers CON, Body and PD / ED.

 

I am presuming that the side effects of vampiric blood or nano-drugs could be even more severe...

 

- E 

[pinecone]

If I recall correctly, Life Support: Immunity to Heroin would cost 1 CP and Life Support: Immunity to Alcohol would also cost 1 CP.  This is nice and simple if you want someone to be completely immune to the effects of a particular substance, but the trouble is that I'm after an approach that allows someone to get high or drunk but not addicted. (i.e. I want the character to suffer no withdrawal symptoms and no bodily weakness or want of substances that are normally addictive.  It's a willpower-based thing for the character -- but I don't have an interest in tying to an EGO roll.)

 

To me, this seems like some form of Life Support: Immunity, but I'm on the fence about how many points it should cost since it should be broad-spectrum (i.e. he's immune to any/all addictions).  On the downside, this approach means that someone could use drug darts against this character to tranq him with an opiod ... or a stim patch to hop him up ... i.e. he lacks full immunity to drug effects ... but won't ever go through withdrawal or require such substances.  For what it's worth, addictive substances are not super common in this game, but they are in play.  Some have positive effects (like stim patches) while others have negative effects (tranq darts) ... in addition to their addictive aspects.

 

Thoughts on how much such an immunity should reasonably cost in a heroic game?

I'm thinking one point...just how Useful will this be? Maybe 2 if he/she is a narcotics agent ...?