A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

[Ragitsu]

Can someone with these traits still enjoy a good smoke or drink? After all, they are poisons of sorts that can very likely lead to disease.

[Greywind]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

Ask Wolverine.

[Manic Typist]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

Sure, why not? You can still enjoy the burn of whiskey on your throat or the comforting habit of lighting a cigarette, etc. However, you wouldn't be able to become intoxicated/physically addicted, I'd say.

[Steve]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

In the current movie, Captain America can't get drunk. I think his metabolism just burns off the effects of alcohol. He may still enjoy the taste and may get a light buzz, but that's all it will do to him.

[Enforcer84]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

In the current movie' date=' Captain America can't get drunk. I think his metabolism just burns off the effects of alcohol. He may still enjoy the taste and may get a light buzz, but that's all it will do to him.[/quote']

 

Enjoy the taste. You guys are funny

[Ragitsu]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

Sure' date=' why not? You can still enjoy the burn of whiskey on your throat or the comforting habit of lighting a cigarette, etc. However, you wouldn't be able to become intoxicated/physically addicted, I'd say.[/quote']

 

Isn't part of what makes these vices enjoyable the subtly-dangerous effects which are a form of poisoning, though?

 

There is a psychological effect, sure, but you can't ignore the physiological.

[Manic Typist]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

Isn't part of what makes these vices enjoyable the subtly-dangerous effects which are a form of poisoning, though?

 

There is a psychological effect, sure, but you can't ignore the physiological.

 

Well, if you are physically immune to them, then you can. That's the point.

 

Of course there's a lot less incentive- you don't get the buzz that really is the whole point of alcohol, you don't get the nicotine rush from cigarettes, et al. So at that point the draws are very different and much more limited. Blending in or psychological factors are really all I can think of in this cae.

[Folded]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

I would say that Immunity is immunity. No side effects from any toxin/disease would be felt.

 

But here is a suggestion for a modifier to Life Support. Call it Partially Effective (-1/4 to -1/2). It could allow you to feel the side effects of a toxin or disease, but without any risk of suffering the major effects. This would allow the character to get drunk, possibly even to the point of passing out, but not be able to succumb to truly dangerous levels of alcohol poisoning. Or contract something like the Black Plague, feel unbelievably awful for a while, and then recover (as did Corwin in the Chronicles of Amber).

 

At the -1/4 level, the character would suffer no reduction to characteristics, including STUN, END or similar due to toxins or diseases, but would receive penalties to various rolls based on the side effects. NND/AVAD attacks which are prevented/reduced by the Life Support are still prevented/reduced.

 

At the -1/2 level, STUN and END damage could result, or some damage to characteristics, in addition to the side effects, but no BODY or other permanently damaging effects would result. NND/AVAD attacks are not usually affected by this modified level of Life Support, except for the BODY or other long-term damage associated with the attack.

 

Thoughts?

[Ragitsu]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

One situation I can see coming up is this:

 

you enjoy the drink just fine, and even get intoxicated (though you won't get cirrhosis, say). However, someone else could spike your drink with very strong alcohol and get you drunk enough to either spill secrets or even pass out.

 

Would it be fair to say, then, that bog standard Life Support is discriminatory/smart?

 

Well' date=' if you are physically immune to them, then you can. That's the point.[/quote']

 

Miscommunication: you can't ignore the physiological in regards to how these vices give pleasure (not talking about the immunity in this particular instance).

[Christopher]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

Can someone with these traits still enjoy a good smoke or drink? After all' date=' they [i']are[/i] poisons of sorts that can very likely lead to disease.

Actually thought the same way once: A character who really hates that part of his superpower ("And I can't even get drunk anymore, goddamit!")

 

In the current movie' date=' Captain America can't get drunk. I think his metabolism just burns off the effects of alcohol. He may still enjoy the taste and may get a light buzz, but that's all it will do to him.[/quote']

I think there was a in the first or second "Ghost in the shell" Movie, where Motoko noted: "We can get drunk but on a simple thought or body cleans it out again and we are sober again". Of course that was part of the SFX of "being cyborg with human brain".

 

The questions is how much pleasure you really derive from the adiction/intoxicating part. Frankly I never understood how people can actually aim for getting drunk. For me alcohol has a bitter flavor and i need to force some of it down before the taste get's acceptable. So I would propably be unable to derive any pleasure if my tastebuds can't be numbed enough to let it not taste awfull.

I also do not smoke. I took a breath from a nikotin inhaler once (this was really only nikotin). My tungue and taste bud literally cramped.

Studies see the physiological effect of cigarettes differently:

Some say you get the nikotin out of your body in only 2-5 days, that only the psychical addiction is relevant.

Other said that the "cigarette after" for women produces the same hormons as the sex before. But chocolat does the same, so it might be that this effect is psychological in nature.

As a non-smoker I also notice that smokers tend to cling to each other. When one smokes, the others go too. It's equally a ritual, a pause from work and a social gathering. So im mostly on the "the pleasure effects are 95% psichological".

[Manic Typist]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

Miscommunication: you can't ignore the physiological in regards to how these vices give pleasure (not talking about the immunity in this particular instance).

 

Absolutely true. I just said that because you quoted me; my original post was dealing with exactly what you point to- that with this sort of thing, you have removed the physiological incentives that are dangerous.

[SSgt Baloo]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

RE: The discussion above regarding how much of cigarette addiction is "in your head"...

 

I quit smoking a few years back, and when I was input to the V.A. outpatient mental health clinic, I had to sit in on a substance abuse therapy group so they could determine that my depression and anxiety problems weren't the result of an addictive lifestyle. Several of my classmates were recovering from cocaine and/or heroin addiction. More than a few admitted that quitting cigarettes was harder than quitting their drug of choice. Just because something's "all in your head" doesn't mean it isn't as serious as something that has a wholly outside cause.[/soapbox]

 

There're a few ways to handle this, and Hero is flexible enough to do it whatever way the player wants:

 

1. LS negates both positive and negative aspects of the protected substance. He drinks, and if he doesn't like the flavor, he may quit with little or no difficulty.
   
2. LS Negates all negative effects, but "entertaining" aspects of the substance are fully experienced.
   
3. LS protects the player from long-lasting harm, but he will feel all non-fatal effects of the substance.
   
4. Some other thing that wasn't the previous three.
   

What disadvantage you use to reflect the difference between fully-effective and the low-rent versions depends on how often the GM expects the character to come in contact with the substances in question, and the player, too of course. Of course, if the GM doesn't want to expose anyone to disease or poisons, he can just tell the player not to buy the power, but if he really wants it why not? Unless you were counting on all your heroes being K.O.-ed by the villain's sleep-gas or plague-spray, I see no problem letting a super-hero have that particular superpower.

 

If you argue that someone with "Immunity to poisons" can't appreciate the taste of brown liquor or a fine tobacco, I'd say you're wrong. Maybe he just enjoys everyone else's reaction to his stinky cigar? Or maybe, to him it doesn't stink? When diluted with water, many hard drinks "bloom", giving off more aromatic chemicals and flavors, as well as reducing some of the less-pleasant effects, or at least delaying them.

[Ragitsu]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

There're a few ways to handle this, and Hero is flexible enough to do it whatever way the player wants:

 

 

1. LS negates both positive and negative aspects of the protected substance. He drinks, and if he doesn't like the flavor, he may quit with little or no difficulty.
   
2. LS Negates all negative effects, but "entertaining" aspects of the substance are fully experienced.
   
3. LS protects the player from long-lasting harm, but he will feel all non-fatal effects of the substance.
   
4. Some other thing that wasn't the previous three.
   

 

What do you think is the default assumption of the rules...or is there NOT one?

[bigbywolfe]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

I don't think there is one, but I would personally go with 1 or 2 depending on the campaign. I'd probably lead towards 2, and let "receives no benefit from drugs" be a 5 point (or 0 point) Physical Complication.

[Martin2]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

Ask Wolverine.

 

Is Wolverine a bad example?

 

I would say his SFX is regeneration so all the bad things that happen to him he then just regenerates the damage done by the poisons etc. So he drinks to excess and he gets the effects of being drunk and possibly the hangover next day but no further damage. He smokes and has the buzz of smoking but will never get lung cancer.

 

It looks like he has the sugested limitations (1/4 1/2?) of feeling the effects but none of the life threatining effects.

 

So it would come down to the SFX of the power to determine if the character has any of the side effects.

 

The problem is putting the limits on it to when the character has an effect he would like to happen like drink to excess and then pass out happy or the same effect of being drugged to pass out. The character wants one but no the other.

 

Difficult one to GM.

[SSgt Baloo]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

Is Wolverine a bad example?

 

I would say his SFX is regeneration so all the bad things that happen to him he then just regenerates the damage done by the poisons etc. So he drinks to excess and he gets the effects of being drunk and possibly the hangover next day but no further damage. He smokes and has the buzz of smoking but will never get lung cancer.

 

It looks like he has the sugested limitations (1/4 1/2?) of feeling the effects but none of the life threatining effects.

 

So it would come down to the SFX of the power to determine if the character has any of the side effects.

 

The problem is putting the limits on it to when the character has an effect he would like to happen like drink to excess and then pass out happy or the same effect of being drugged to pass out. The character wants one but no the other.

 

Difficult one to GM.

 

There could be a subconsciously-controlled (or consciously-controlled) mechanism that intervenes when actual damage is about to occur. Perhaps an ego roll is required to shake off all non-toxic effects, otherwise the person's body simply repairs the damage when it occurs, whether the SFX is a natural resistance or mind-linked nanobots that patrol the body and remove toxins (or toxic metabolites). Maybe the chemical's damage isn't a primary effect but the toxic side effects are a result of metabolizing the substance? Alcohol combined with acetaminophen is a fairly good example, as this combination overwhelms the liver's ability to remove toxins from the blood. Perhaps the character's liver recognizes harmful toxins and removes them, but not necessarily their precursors?

[Greywind]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

I'd have to go through my collection, but it was pointed out that due to his regen Wolverine CAN'T get drunk. His body deals with the alcohol too quickly.

[cutsleeve]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

Related to the current topic but a bit of a sidestep. What about beneficial poisons. Certain toxins if used in regulated amounts have a beneficial effect, some of which cannot be adequately reproduced by other medicines.

 

A form of Arsenic (ARSENIC TRIOXIDE) is used as a treatment for leukemia which is used when other medical treatments don't have an effect.

 

Digitalis commonly referred to as Foxglove is another example. Even a tiny tiny bite of this plant will cause death, a particularly agonizing death. However Digitalis is one of the oldest therapeutic medicines and is still in use today to treat complications of congestive heart failure and its particular effect has not been reproduced synthetically. Digoxin tablets come in ranges from 0.125 mg to 0.5 mg.

 

If someone had immunity to poisons and it was ruled as an absolute effect then the person wouldn't be able to use some lifesaving medicines. The dividing line between beneficial and dangerous for some medicines is only a matter of amounts For some of those medicines that amounts needed can be very very small and the line between poison and medicine can likewise be very very small.

 

Personally I would let the player define the power, maybe allowing them to take a 5 point complication (mentioned in a post above) if they can't gain the beneficial effects from a poison.

[Folded]

Re: A thematic question regarding Life Support (Disease) and (Poisons)

 

There is a good article on Toxicity on wikipedia. It is, in fact, a very complicated subject. Some toxins act directly on the body, interfering with normal function. Others cause problems only when the body breaks them down, resulting in different substances that then go on to interfere. Some bacteria and viruses work in a similar way. They do not have an effect in and of themselves, but their waste products or the results of the body's immune systems breaking them down do have toxic effects.

 

As cutsleeve pointed out above, some toxins have beneficial side effects if prepared and dosed properly. Sometimes, a little bit of a dangerous effect (blood vessel dilation, for example) helps counter another problem.

 

Furthermore, there is the concept of levels of resistance, which could be applied to people in general, not just those with Immunities. I used to be able to drink a pint of strong beer and a double shot quickly without any significant effect. I've known other people who would have passed out from that. Even knew a guy who could drink ipecac and just sit there, smiling. Some people are so allergic to certain minor toxins (bee venom, nettles, poison oak/ivy) that what causes other people to have an uncomfortable reaction puts them in the hospital. How realistic (i.e. detailed) do you want to get? We gloss over a lot of this kind of thing for the sake of the game, but this is where the question leads.

 

Ultimately, this is a question that is up to the GM. For some characters (a sentient robot, for instance) the answer is obvious - they have no biological system for the alcohol to effect, so they can't get drunk. I had a character with an altered body who required alcohol as part of his diet, he couldn't get drunk because his metabolism was fundamentally different. The Newcomers in Alien Nation didn't get anything from alcohol, but spoiled milk was the equivalent of fine wine or scotch.

 

Judge it on a case by case basis, apply common sense and strive for an enjoyable interpretation. But remember that the pleasurable side effects are still the effects of a toxin. Hence the term 'intoxication'.