NEWS

Addiction tests

  • 7 Replies
  • 1695 Views

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« on: <06-25-17/0139:58> »
Is there an errata to the Addiction rules somewhere? I scanned the forums and found discussion on the subject but could locate any errata.
As I read the rules, your character could basically spend a week hyped up on kamikaze, then on the 7th day you stop cold without ever rolling an addiction test. Then after three weeks of clean living, and on the 4th week you could pop it everyday, repeat adnausium, with no risk.That just can't be RAI, even if it is RAW, what am I missing?
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Jack_Spade

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6516
« Reply #1 on: <06-25-17/0235:55> »
You have to make an addiction test for every instance of drug use
If you pop seven doses of K you have to make seven tests - and since you reset the clock every time you use you'll do so with the higher threshold

Your tactic only works with the last day of use still affords you enough time to reduce the threshold to zero (in which case you auto succeed on your test)
talk think matrix

To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield
Revenant Kynos Isaint Rex

UnLimiTeD

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 777
« Reply #2 on: <06-25-17/0530:45> »
What he said. So it works great on things like Hotsim or Soykaf, but the mention in the Fluff about Kamikaze possibly hooking you on a single dose is accurate. Unlikely, but possible.
Still waiting on a Vector-Thrust Liminal Body.

Kiirnodel

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1471
« Reply #3 on: <06-25-17/0629:27> »
I would say that this is probably the most frequently debated topic. There are several interpretations that arise from the strange wording of the rules, and no, there aren't any official clarifications or errata for the rules.

The Missions Organized Play has an alternate rule-set that makes an attempt to fix/clarify the rules, but it was also a bit of an over-correction to make drugs harder to just "deal with" because of the nature of organized play.

So the basic rule for Addiction Tests is based on:
Quote from: Core Rulebook pg 413
Every time you use an addictive substance during (11 - Addiction Rating) weeks in a row, you need to make an Addiction Test. The clock on this keeps ticking even if you skip a week, but every week you go without indulging reduces the Addiction Threshold by 1 (it returns to normal when you use again). If the threshold hits 0, you're off the hook until you use the substance again. This means that substances with high Addiction ratings (like kamikaze) could get you hooked in a single dose.

So, there are two major interpretations for how this rule works (because the phrasing is somewhat open). There is what Jack_Spade has already stated which focuses on the part "Every time you use an addictive substance," which means you make a test every time you take a drug.

However, I think this isn't quite right because it doesn't take into account the way they phrase the rest of the rule, which talks about the possibility of not needing to make any addiction test depending on the drug in question. For my explanation, I will use Novacoke (Addiction Rating 7, Threshold 2), and I will rewrite the rule with the duration appropriately altered (to remove the mid-sentence calculation).

Quote
Every time you use an addictive substance during 4 weeks in a row, you need to make an Addiction Test. The clock on this keeps ticking even if you skip a week, but every week you go without indulging reduces the Addiction Threshold by 1 (it returns to normal when you use again). If the threshold hits 0, you're off the hook until you use the substance again.

So, while some might focus on the "Every time," I focus on the "use an [substance] during X weeks in a row." The rules mention that not taking the drug for a whole week actually reduces that Threshold, which doesn't really make sense if you already had to make the test the first time you took that drug. So I use the "rolling timer" method, which works like this: When you take a drug for the first time, you start a timer (Novacoke's is 4 weeks, based on that 11 - Addiction Rating calculation). At the end of that timer you will make an Addiction Test to see if you've become addicted. The Threshold for this test can go down if you put off taking the drug, but resets to full again if you do take it again.

Now, depending on your GM and how much they want to make you make these attempts they could do a number of things a) the calendar being on doesn't mean that a new one doesn't start again each time you take it (I would limit this to at most one test a week). b) If a timer is counting down, it does mean a new one won't start again (until the previous one is over). c) The Threshold dropping to 0 could mean that the timer completely and taking the drug again after that just starts a new timer, it doesn't reset the threshold on a current one.

So option a) would mean if you take the drug roughly every week you would eventually be making the addiction test every week too. b) means you make a test every X weeks, for example Novacoke makes you need to make a test every 4 weeks if you're taking it consistently. and c) means that if you take a drug relatively infrequently, you might get away with not needing to make any tests at all.

Example: Novacoke,
Week 1: Takes drugs
Week 2: No drugs
Week 3: No drugs
Week 4: drugs
Week 5: drugs
Week 6: no drugs
Week 7: drugs
Week 8: no drugs

Option A) End of Week 4 needs to make a test at the full threshold, End of Week 7 Needs to make a test at full threshold, End of Week 8 test at -1
Option B) End of Week 4 needs to make test at full threshold, End of Week 8 test at -1
Option C) Week 3 threshold drops to 0, calendar stops. End of Week 7, test at full threshold

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #4 on: <06-25-17/0912:07> »
The wording is far to imprecise like you said Kiirnodel.

Every time you use an addictive substance during (11 - Addiction Rating) weeks in a row, you need to make an Addiction Test. The clock on this keeps ticking even if you skip a week, but every week you go without indulging reduces the Addiction Threshold by 1 (it returns to normal when you use again). If the threshold hits 0, you're off the hook until you use the substance again. This means that substances with high Addiction ratings (like kamikaze) could get you hooked in a single dose.

The issue is  "during (11- Addiction raiting) weeks in" this only make sense in a context where you are expecting to use on a weekly basis.

The example calls out Kamikaze, so I did the math with that Kamikaze Addiction rating 9 threshold 3.

So it's "Every time you use an addictive substance during (2) Weeks in a row, you need to make an addiction test. The clock on this keeps ticking even if you skip a week, but every week you go without indulging reduces the Addiction Threshold by 1 (it returns to normal when you use again). If the threshold hits 0, you're off the hook until you use the substance again. This means that substances with high Addiction ratings (like kamikaze) could get you hooked in a single dose.

So how do you get past it saying? "Every time you use an addictive substance during two weeks in a row, you need to make an addiction test." That logic implicitly states two weeks in a row. That make no sense, with the rest of the paragraph, but that is what it says.

So for me, it mean looking for another example, If you look at K-10 it's Rating 11 threshold 3.

That translates to "Every time you use an addictive substance during 0 weeks in a row, you need to make an addiction test." That says to me at 0 weeks in a row, means you test anytime you take it, and thus their original example is proven, however that logical also implies, that 2 weeks in a row is intended as two weeks in row.

So my question is for the every time you use an addictive substance group, where am I miss-interpreting?
Is your logic just ignore "(11-rating) weeks in a row" b/c it makes no sense? Something else?


« Last Edit: <06-25-17/0944:17> by Marcus »
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Kiirnodel

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1471
« Reply #5 on: <06-25-17/1344:42> »
You make some good points, and I've seen those discussion points before. I think my interpretation explains this, but I may not have worded it in a good way, so I'll start over and work it out in a slightly different way. Basically, I'm going to show my work how I got to my method for tracking addiction. It starts with that first sentence (and only that sentence) and then uses the rest of the information and builds on the concept:

So, we start with the phrase
  • "Every time you use an addictive substance during (11 — Addiction Rating) weeks in a row, you need to make an Addiction Test."
For this, I'll assume the "Addiction Duration" which is the 11-Rating, falls in the range 0 to ~11 (minimum 0 because negative time just flat out doesn't work). With a duration of 0 meaning that you make an Addiction Test every time like Marcus said with K-10. But for any other drug we need to know what "use an addictive substance during (X) weeks in a row" means. Like I said before, I'm starting from scratch and building on the later sentences once I have this current meaning, so bear with me.

So if we assume that weekly usage is enough (because the timing doesn't get more precise than tracking it by weeks), then by that phrasing you need to use the drug consistently for the listed duration. So for Kamikaze, you would have to use it for 2 weeks in a row, Jazz would be 3, Novacoke would be 4, etc. By just that sentence, taking the drug only one time would only result in an Addiction Test for durations of 0 or 1, because otherwise you haven't taken it for enough "weeks in a row" (again a frequency of at least once a week would be the assumption). And the rules don't get any more precise than that in terms of more frequent usage (like multiple times daily, for example) so I think it would be fair for a GM to apply some sort of penalty for someone who is a constant and extremely frequent drug user.

The next sentence:
  • The clock on this keeps ticking even if you skip a week, but every week you go without indulging reduces the Addiction Threshold by 1 (it returns to normal when you use again).
This adds in the concept that you don't have to use the drug every week during the duration to trigger an Addiction Test. Before, skipping one week meant you were free and clear (because you didn't meet the requirements). Now we have a rule for what happens if you skip a week (the Threshold goes down). This means that you still want to keep track of that duration, even if you stop taking the drug, because just stopping no longer breaks the requirement of "during X weeks in a row."

  • If the threshold hits 0, you're off the hook until you use the substance again.
This could be interpreted in one of two ways. Either it means that when the threshold drops to 0 you can stop keeping track of the threshold, or it is just a clarification that if the threshold is 0, you don't have to make a test. I prefer the former, meaning if you stop taking a drug long enough to let the threshold drop to 0 (before the duration expires), you don't have to worry anymore until you take the drug again (and start the whole process over again).

  • This means that substances with high Addiction ratings (like kamikaze) could get you hooked in a single dose.
So if you take Kamikaze, the duration is 2 weeks. So it starts with: you need to take kamikaze for two weeks in a row. Again, if you use it much more frequently, like daily, I would consider the GM appying some sort of penalty. If you take a week off, which would normally break the concept of "two weeks in a row" you aren't off the hook, it just reduces the Addiction Threshold by 1. So, presumably, taking that first dose counts as using the drug for "1 week" although I would agree to listen to arguments that it just starts the countdown and doesn't count as part of the week. For now I'll assume it counts. So if we take it once, that's one week in a row, and if we don't take it ever again, we hit 2 weeks in a row (about another week later). That's the duration for Kamikaze, so we have to make an Addiction Test. Now, we didn't indulge in Kamikaze for one full week before we need to make this Addiction Test, so the Threshold drops by 1, down to 2. This means that the Kamikaze drug is potentially addicting at even one dose, because the combination of Addiction Rating (duration) and Threshold means that it is impossible for the drug's Threshold to drop to 0 (which would have let you off the hook).
« Last Edit: <06-25-17/1349:53> by Kiirnodel »

Sterling

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 425
  • Dragged in by the credstick
« Reply #6 on: <06-25-17/1558:55> »
Back in 2013 (!) this was discussed, and one of the members then created a flowchart that I've used ever since.

It's in this thread:

http://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=11865.msg223795#msg223795

I'm not sure how to link to a specific post, but its on page 1
"His name is Sterling. He’s an ex-pat Brit making a living as a fixer and a hacker in Metropole. He’s a rare blend of upstanding and fun...(so) listen to his experience."
>>Data Trails, p.82

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #7 on: <06-25-17/1918:51> »
Thank you Kiirnodel, I agree with you, sorry to re-hash this. I feel I should re-title this Drug here to stay in 5th!

Nice flow chart Sterling, gonna see if I can add it to my DM screen lol.
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking