Krokodil

[Anders]

This is a drug that rots away at the tissues of the user. How much is that worth as an addiction?

You can read about it here. Warning: Graphic images - do not watch if you get nauseous easily.

Fixed link

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Asta Kask

This is a drug that rots away at the tissues of the user. How much is that worth as an addiction?

I don't actually believe those sorts of stories very much - this is a moderately common scare the kids away from drugs claim, and the dramatic damage is pretty much always from stuff left in from lousy purification. But I don't see that it changes the game mechanics even if true. Lots of stuff is bad for you in the long term, if it won't kill you in the next year or two, it doesn't change the point value.

[Kromm]

The Addiction is to desomorphine. Its effectiveness is 8-10 times that of morphine, where diamorphine (heroin) is 4-5 times that of morphine – and in a campaign, I'd simply treat all of this stuff as one Addiction and leave the matter of which drugs someone is taking abstract as long as drugs are available. If availability were to drop, then addicts would have to take what they can get or face withdrawal. "What they can get" may well be poison . . . they could attempt default Chemistry rolls if they had a "cookbook" and suitable ingredients, or they could buy from people who do that. Either way, any bad effects would be a campaign issue, not intrinsic to the drug, because clean opiods would work just fine and be preferred if available. It isn't as if users crave the bad effects of iodine and phosphorus, any more than characters with Bully crave being shot in the face if the only people they can bully happen to have guns.

This isn't specific to opiods. Very few "clean" drugs produced under controlled conditions will rot your flesh, dissolve your teeth, etc. Those effects result from impurities introduced in street production. You don't get extra points for Addiction just because you use crappy versions of the drug. You can certainly get extra points for Impulsiveness, On the Edge, low Wealth, etc., however, if your personal situation is tough or you're undiscriminating.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Kromm

This isn't specific to opiods. Very few "clean" drugs produced under controlled conditions will rot your flesh, dissolve your teeth, etc. Those effects result from impurities introduced in street production.

Basically the same lesson as don't buy your bathtub gin from guys who ferment in low nitrogen conditions, run the distillation to dry or otherwise don't watch out for methanol or other fusel alcohols.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Kromm

The Addiction is to desomorphine. Its effectiveness is 8-10 times that of morphine, where diamorphine (heroin) is 4-5 times that of morphine – and in a campaign, I'd simply treat all of this stuff as one Addiction and leave the matter of which drugs someone is taking abstract as long as drugs are available. If availability were to drop, then addicts would have to take what they can get or face withdrawal. "What they can get" may well be poison . . . they could attempt default Chemistry rolls if they had a "cookbook" and suitable ingredients, or they could buy from people who do that. Either way, any bad effects would be a campaign issue, not intrinsic to the drug, because clean opiods would work just fine and be preferred if available. It isn't as if users crave the bad effects of iodine and phosphorus, any more than characters with Bully crave being shot in the face if the only people they can bully happen to have guns.

This isn't specific to opiods. Very few "clean" drugs produced under controlled conditions will rot your flesh, dissolve your teeth, etc. Those effects result from impurities introduced in street production. You don't get extra points for Addiction just because you use crappy versions of the drug. You can certainly get extra points for Impulsiveness, On the Edge, low Wealth, etc., however, if your personal situation is tough or you're undiscriminating.

Interesting. I didn't think of it like that. And yeah, I agree that opiates should be one addiction with cost depending on your drug of choice from that group. And methadone (which is an opioid but not an opiate) as a mitigator.

[The Colonel]

I'm getting a page about information content of DNA ... but as Kromm says it's entirely possible that the tissue damage is due to an impurity rather than inherent to the action of the drug itself. Either that or the means of administration.

But it's a worthwhile question - how do we model addictions that have a significant harm beyond the addicition itself and inflict (as per example) toxic damage or some other detriment?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

But it's a worthwhile question - how do we model addictions that have a significant harm beyond the addicition itself and inflict (as per example) toxic damage or some other detriment?

If it's soon enough, Terminally Ill. Otherwise, just take disads to represent the effects of the drug.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

I'm getting a page about information content of DNA ... but as Kromm says it's entirely possible that the tissue damage is due to an impurity rather than inherent to the action of the drug itself. Either that or the means of administration.

I fixed the link now. The pictures are only visible if you scroll down a fair bit. It is absolutely a question of impurities, yes. The drug is manufactured in your kitchen from codeine, turpentine, hydrochloric acid, red phosphorous and probably some other nasty stuff. Then you inject that. Ouch.

Originally Posted by The Colonel

But it's a worthwhile question - how do we model addictions that have a significant harm beyond the addicition itself and inflict (as per example) toxic damage or some other detriment?

Yeah, that's the broader question. For Krokodil, I'd have you make a HT roll per month, and on a failure you lose 1 HP and 1 HT permanently. Something like that.

[Purple Haze]

Krokodil is terminally ill. Users have a life expectancy well under a year.

The problem is that krokodil is made from codeine, codeine is OTC in Russia, and Russian pharmaceutical companies have fought with the same vigour and effectiveness to keep it that way as US companies have to keep pseudoephedrine OTC in the US.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Anthony

If it's soon enough, Terminally Ill. Otherwise, just take disads to represent the effects of the drug.

Agreed.

—

Effects other than Addiction are the result of using poison instead of "clean" drugs. Characters who can only afford poison and can't cheat the system to avoid drug laws usually have very low Wealth and Status.* Those who don't care that it's poison have severe mental disadvantages – not everyone with Addiction has Chronic Depression or an On the Edge-style deathwish, but many people do acquire Addiction in the course of self-medicating for other problems. And those whose character concept calls for the poison to have already damaged them can take suitable physical disadvantages, up to and including Terminally Ill. Seeking to use "clean" drugs instead of poison is a decision for the player to make for the PC, so in principle, future disads that don't give back points can be avoided.†

* There's a strong argument to be made that a state that doesn't legalize "clean" drugs and control their quality and price imposes a set of social disadvantages on all addicts, but that's up to the individual gaming group. It's too politically charged to have rules assigned to it.

† Yes, real-world addicts don't get to do that. Then again, real-world warriors don't get top-down views of combat situations and real-life shooters don't get a nice stats breakdown that shows that Gun A is conclusively better than Gun B. A core conceit of RPGs is that PCs enjoy an unusual degree of control over their fate.