Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Lady Jestyr <s421539@*******.gu.edu.au>
Subject: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 12:09:52 +1000 (EST)
Sounds athletic, doesn't it?

Anyway, a thought crept into the dim recesses of my mind the other day...
drugs are a BIG part of the street scene even now, right? Drugs are a big
part of the streets in every major visualised cyberpunk setting, right?
(I'm thinking of things like Gibson's Mona Lisa Overdrive here...) So why
is it that our street-born shadowrunners refuse to touch the stuff? The
only character I've ever seen with any kind of drug use is my boyfriend's
decker character - a 60-a-day smoker.

Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
can find...)

Lady Jestyr

------------------------------------------------------
I don't have enemies, it's just that my best friends
are trying to kill me.
------------------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes s421539@*****.student.gu.edu.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503/
------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed are my own, unless you don't
agree with them, in which case they are my evil twin
sister's opinions.
Message no. 2
From: jhm@*****.com (J Hulley-Miller)
Subject: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 23:51:10 -0400
Greetings,

21 Apr 96 12:09, Lady Jestyr <s421539@*******.gu.edu.au> wrote:

>LJ> Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I
>LJ> know that we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player
>LJ> knowledge... street characters would still be hooked on every
>LJ> pretty-looking chemical they can find...)

Runners cant afford to loose their edge, which 'recreational' drugs would
definatly effect.

jhm

--
J Hulley-Miller <jhm@*****.com>
____ <fidonet#1:107/330>
\/\/ "Human nature is never so weak as in a bookstore" - Henry Ward Beecher
Message no. 3
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 96 13:49:18 +1030
>Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
>we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
>characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
>can find...)

The implication throughout the Shadowrun world is that drugs pale in
comparision for recreational effects to BTL. This is especially true in
the UCAS, though other countries have different rules (see "Streets of
Blood" for an example of drug usage in the UK, for example). In addition
to their superior effects, BTLs are cheaper... at about $500 for a chip
that can be used over and over again, versus a couple of hits of, say,
coke, crack, or heroin. Not to mention a group of people can chip in
together to purchase the chip.

OTH, I have currently in my group a mage who is hooked on heroin, and in
my first group, the personality of the decker changed from a weedy little
dweeb who was good in the Matrix to a full-on combat freak following an
unfortunate encounter with kamikaze... :)

Also, second-string merc companies and various corp guards are known to
use combat drugs to give them a bit of an edge, and steriods are no
longer even tested for in atheletics, because they are too commonplace.

(Off-topic... I seem to be getting two copies of everything, but I _know_
I haven't resubscribed...)


--
* *
/_\ "A friend is someone who likes the same TV programs you do" /_\
{~._.~} "Eternal nothingness is fine if you happen {~._.~}
( Y ) to be dressed for it." -- Woody Allen ( Y )
()~*~() Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au ()~*~()
(_)-(_) (_)-(_)
Message no. 4
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 96 13:49:53 +1030
>Runners cant afford to loose their edge, which 'recreational' drugs would
>definatly effect.

Not necessarily true. For starters, the bad effects of recreational drugs
are usually because of: a) impurities, and b) they did it cheap. Most
drugs are potentially available in non-hazardous forms now (for example,
heroin and morphine have few harmfull effects besides the addiction)). By
2050+ the designer drug community has more or less shaken down most of
the junk. Not to mention the uses of various combat drugs.


--
*************************************************************************
* .--_ # "My opinions may have changed, but not the fact *
* _-0(#)) # that I'm right." -- Old Fortune Saying *
* @__ )/ # *
* )=(===__==,= # Robert Watkins <---> robertdw@*******.com.au *
* {}== \--==--`= # *
* ,_) \ # "A friend is someone who watches the same *
* L_===__)=, # TV programs as you" *
*************************************************************************
Message no. 5
From: Kenneth Horner <kwhorner@*******.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 21:48:15 -0700 (PDT)
On Sun, 21 Apr 1996, Lady Jestyr wrote:

>
> Sounds athletic, doesn't it?
>
> Anyway, a thought crept into the dim recesses of my mind the other day...
> drugs are a BIG part of the street scene even now, right? Drugs are a big
> part of the streets in every major visualised cyberpunk setting, right?
> (I'm thinking of things like Gibson's Mona Lisa Overdrive here...) So why
> is it that our street-born shadowrunners refuse to touch the stuff? The
> only character I've ever seen with any kind of drug use is my boyfriend's
> decker character - a 60-a-day smoker.
>
> Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
> we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
> characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
> can find...)
>
> Lady Jestyr
>
Could be that the runners that are addicts don't last long. Also, FASA
is pretty PC and the writers don't want to glorify drug users, that what
Hollywood is for after all. Also, chips appear to have replaced drugs as
the reality escape of choice. Plus some of the bioware that runners may
use may make drugs useless for them and it can be pretty ackward to have
to go get a hit in the middle of a run, another reason drug using runners
might not survive. That's about all I can think of, but I'm sure there
are even more reasons.

Nutcracker
Message no. 6
From: Larry <lomion@********.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 00:54:54 -0400
At 12:09 04/21/96 +1000, Lady Jestyr wrote:
>
>Sounds athletic, doesn't it?
>
>Anyway, a thought crept into the dim recesses of my mind the other day...
>drugs are a BIG part of the street scene even now, right? Drugs are a big
>part of the streets in every major visualised cyberpunk setting, right?
>(I'm thinking of things like Gibson's Mona Lisa Overdrive here...) So why
>is it that our street-born shadowrunners refuse to touch the stuff? The
>only character I've ever seen with any kind of drug use is my boyfriend's
>decker character - a 60-a-day smoker.
>
>Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
>we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
>characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
>can find...)
>
>Lady Jestyr

I disagree here, considereing most runners who live past their first run are
not typical street punks they'd not be on drugs. Your average successful
runner is more strong willed than Joe Q. Public and also very paranoid.
Paranoid that say drugs are a corp means of control. Look at how many say
BTL's are a corp thing. Smoking and drinking aside. I had a chain smoking
character as well as a character who woke pu every morining with a bottle of
bourbon. Drugs weaken you and stuff and most runners are smart enough to
realize it dulls the edge they need on the street.
Anyway that's just my 10 nuyen for ya.


Larry
Member HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org
lomion@**.cybernex.net
http://www2.cybernex.net/~lomion
-----------------------------------------------
"I see the eyes but not the tears
This is my affliction"
>From "Eyes that last I saw in tears", T.S. Eliot
-----------------------------------------------
Message no. 7
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 00:58:08 -0400 (EDT)
At 12:09 4/21/96 +1000, you wrote:
>
>Sounds athletic, doesn't it?
>
>Anyway, a thought crept into the dim recesses of my mind the other day...
>drugs are a BIG part of the street scene even now, right? Drugs are a big
>part of the streets in every major visualised cyberpunk setting, right?
>(I'm thinking of things like Gibson's Mona Lisa Overdrive here...) So why
>is it that our street-born shadowrunners refuse to touch the stuff? The
>only character I've ever seen with any kind of drug use is my boyfriend's
>decker character - a 60-a-day smoker.
>
>Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
>we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
>characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
>can find...)
>
>Lady Jestyr

A couple of years ago I found a magazine with expanded allergiy rules. It is
the March/April 1990 edition of Space Gamer. It includes a drug addict
allergy with severity equalling frequency of need. Failure to take the drug
results in the standard allergy penalty rules. I've found it works quite
well for my cyber reporter who was born without arms or legs. Ever seen a
drug cyber=limbed freelance reporter try to type up his latest story?
Lots'o'fun.
Sasquatch
(The technican formerly known as BLAIR)

------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Support Bacteria! |
| It's the only culture some people have. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 8
From: Tom Pendergrast <pendergr@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 22:03:13 -0700 (PDT)
> Runners cant afford to loose their edge, which 'recreational' drugs would
> definatly effect.

About the only drug that any runner would WANT to touch is something like
Kamikaze. It works really well, although it'll kill you eventually, but
hey, won't they all?

---Tom---
Message no. 9
From: fauxpas@******.net (Faux Pas)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 00:55:06 -0500
BTW, what're the stats/info on Zen? I've seen it mentioned a few times, but
don't know much about it (as opposed to BTLs, Kamikazi, and a few other
addictive items).

-Thomas Deeny
Cartoonist At Large

"You are getting very sleepy ..."
-Alex Trebek, _The X-Files_
Message no. 10
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 01:07:58 -0500
>Sounds athletic, doesn't it?

You'd be surprised how fast some 'heads I know can run ;)

>Anyway, a thought crept into the dim recesses of my mind the other day...
>drugs are a BIG part of the street scene even now, right? Drugs are a big
>part of the streets in every major visualised cyberpunk setting, right?
>(I'm thinking of things like Gibson's Mona Lisa Overdrive here...) So why
>is it that our street-born shadowrunners refuse to touch the stuff? The
>only character I've ever seen with any kind of drug use is my boyfriend's
>decker character - a 60-a-day smoker.

Because SR is supposed to be pretty much drug-free (unlike CP2020). They've
got chips and feel taht should be the way to go (and why couldn't you slot a
chip that was simmed off of a person using a particular drug or another or
any combination thereof?).

None of this has stopped several of our characters in groups past from
using/abusing drugs of various sorts (one unlucky soul had to make a buy,
was asked to use a drug, did, and got hooked). We also don't use the
"slow/quick death by drugs" that SR rules tend to show. Depending on the
drug, the amount used, and the frequency it is used we apply varying degrees
of "allergies" if they don't get it.

So lets say a character likes to clear a bong or two every once in a while.
It's been a long hard week and a need for a smoke on his mind, call it a
nuisance "allergy". If said character was heavily into heroin then it'd be
a severe allergy, maybe even deadly. And none of this really gets into how
the character reacts while he's on the drug.

Its all roleplaying and sometimes characters have gotten karma for dealing
with their habits. Of course, it also takes a toll on the income.

>Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user?

A lot of people are disgusted by them. I'm not one of those people but I've
run into more than a few. Another thing is that there are no rules for it
(which deters all but us rule-making types). Finally, many people look on
SR as a heroic game and drug use doesn't make for heroic characters.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 11
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 01:24:51 -0500
>...it can be pretty ackward to have
>to go get a hit in the middle of a run

Popping a pill doesn't take too long, nor does lighting up. Only
problematic thing would be injections (which could be handled really easily
with proper tools). So that isn't really difficult at all.

Another point here though is that I seriously doubt anyone would be going
out of their way, during a job of any sort (let alone a Shadowrun), to get
their fix. If it was some form of speed, I could see it. Even the most
hardened addict can wait it out a bit, especially if it means more cash for
more drugs later. The last thing that would happen is...

"Hey guys, don't go in yet. I need to tie off."

Nobody would want that character on the team. No-one would trust him to do
what he had to do. This isn't to say that they don't exist and might not
find their way onto a team (e.g. "Killing Zoe" where every character is on
something, most heroin) but they won't be there for long. Dead or drugged,
they'll be out of work in no time. Without a doubt, though, this would be
VERY rare. Current tech can counteract most drugs, so SR-level tech could
handle it easily.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 12
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 01:42:57 -0500
>I disagree here, considereing most runners who live past their first run are
>not typical street punks they'd not be on drugs.

So only typical street punks are on drugs? Pardon me a minute, I feel a
giggle coming on...

Okay, I'm back. Next bit is that shadowrunners are street punks. If they
weren't, they'd be a part of society instead of warring against it.
Newsflash! Shadowrunners are criminals to over %99.9 of the public.

> Your average successful
>runner is more strong willed than Joe Q. Public and also very paranoid.
>Paranoid that say drugs are a corp means of control. Look at how many say
>BTL's are a corp thing.

BTL's are rarely made by corps, persay. More often made by corp-supported
black market groups (kinda like how shadowruns aren't done by corps, they're
done by people hired by corps). And the corps do have control. It isn't
paranoia if it it's true.

>Drugs weaken you and stuff and most runners are smart enough to
>realize it dulls the edge they need on the street.

On the contrary, many drugs could give runners the edge to get by.
Shadowrunners don't get their start by suddenly appearing in Seattle with a
boatload of guns, a sportscar, dozens of contacts, and magic ability from
hell. They have to work up to that point from some starting point. Which
means the streets for a hefty percentage of them. There'll always be the
graduate mage who turned down the million nuyen offer of a cushy and _legal_
life from Saeder-Krupp to work the shadows for paltry handouts (from corps
like Saeder-Krupp), but most will be products of some street scene or another.

Working your way up from "that guy on the street" to shadowrunner means a
lot of work, and certain things can make that work easier. Things like
friends, cyberware, magic, cash, and sometimes drugs. Every little bit of
edge helps. Would you pop a pill if you knew you were going to get into a
rough fight? Answer that question while you're laid up for a couple months
while they sew you back together from the time you didn't and the other guy did.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 13
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 01:48:32 -0500
>...In addition
>to their superior effects, BTLs are cheaper... at about $500 for a chip
>that can be used over and over again, versus a couple of hits of, say,
>coke, crack, or heroin. Not to mention a group of people can chip in
>together to purchase the chip.

I seem to remember reading in something (could be a rulebook, a novel, or
maybe a figment of my fevered imagination) that many BTL's were set up as
"single runs". So the user could only use it once and then the chip'd be
useless. I really wouldn't see them any other way (have to keep demand up).

>(Off-topic... I seem to be getting two copies of everything, but I _know_
>I haven't resubscribed...)

Happened to me too, was really strange. I sent mail to Marc and J.D. and
they got it cleared up for me. (Thanks again to both!)

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 14
From: Larry <lomion@********.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 03:56:32 -0400
At 01:42 04/21/96 -0500, TopCat wrote:
>>I disagree here, considereing most runners who live past their first run are
>>not typical street punks they'd not be on drugs.
>
>So only typical street punks are on drugs? Pardon me a minute, I feel a
>giggle coming on...
The way the game portrays a Runner they above steet punk level if they're
successful. They've got more goin for them

>Okay, I'm back. Next bit is that shadowrunners are street punks. If they
>weren't, they'd be a part of society instead of warring against it.
>Newsflash! Shadowrunners are criminals to over %99.9 of the public.

Criminal doesn't equal street punk.

>> Your average successful
>>runner is more strong willed than Joe Q. Public and also very paranoid.
>>Paranoid that say drugs are a corp means of control. Look at how many say
>>BTL's are a corp thing.
>
>BTL's are rarely made by corps, persay. More often made by corp-supported
>black market groups (kinda like how shadowruns aren't done by corps, they're
>done by people hired by corps). And the corps do have control. It isn't
>paranoia if it it's true.
True, but runners are still paranoid. And most Runners have the attitude of
looking down on BTL'ers and their ilk. I get that from sourcebooks

>
>On the contrary, many drugs could give runners the edge to get by.
>Shadowrunners don't get their start by suddenly appearing in Seattle with a
>boatload of guns, a sportscar, dozens of contacts, and magic ability from
>hell. They have to work up to that point from some starting point. Which
>means the streets for a hefty percentage of them. There'll always be the
>graduate mage who turned down the million nuyen offer of a cushy and _legal_
>life from Saeder-Krupp to work the shadows for paltry handouts (from corps
>like Saeder-Krupp), but most will be products of some street scene or another.
>
>Working your way up from "that guy on the street" to shadowrunner means a
>lot of work, and certain things can make that work easier. Things like
>friends, cyberware, magic, cash, and sometimes drugs. Every little bit of
>edge helps. Would you pop a pill if you knew you were going to get into a
>rough fight? Answer that question while you're laid up for a couple months
>while they sew you back together from the time you didn't and the other guy
did.

Most drugs like that are short-lived before the cons affect the pros. Look
at Kamikaze it'll screw up the users system very rapidly after the first
hit. Also
workin your way up means bein smart enough to not get a monkey on your back
that can be used to leverage you. I'd stay away from anything that has
limited use and could end up really fragging me up. Besides the amount of
money needed for side-effect free drugs is more than your average runner can
afford. The edge from drugs is a short-lived on at best, and the inevitable
crash is very hard from the drugs.

Larry
Member HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org
lomion@**.cybernex.net
http://www2.cybernex.net/~lomion
-----------------------------------------------
"I see the eyes but not the tears
This is my affliction"
>From "Eyes that last I saw in tears", T.S. Eliot
-----------------------------------------------
Message no. 15
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 11:52:26 +0100
Lady Jestyr said on 21 Apr 96...

> Anyway, a thought crept into the dim recesses of my mind the other day...
> drugs are a BIG part of the street scene even now, right? Drugs are a big
> part of the streets in every major visualised cyberpunk setting, right?
> (I'm thinking of things like Gibson's Mona Lisa Overdrive here...)

In SR, that role has been taken over by BTLs for the most part.

> So why is it that our street-born shadowrunners refuse to touch the
> stuff? The only character I've ever seen with any kind of drug use is
> my boyfriend's decker character - a 60-a-day smoker.
>
> Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
> we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
> characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
> can find...)

Our local shaman also smokes quite heavily, but that's all. I have at
various times decided to create drug-addicted characters, but I usually
forget about the idea half-way through creating them (no, really). If I
ever do get the chance to *play* SR, I think I'll give it a shot.

Drugs might be bad for you, but so is trying to dodge bullets, IMHO...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
RL?
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 16
From: Paul@********.demon.co.uk (Paul Jonathan Adam)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 11:18:30 GMT
In message <9604210642.AA24948@**.cencom.net> TopCat writes:
> On the contrary, many drugs could give runners the edge to get by.

"Special Forces popcorn, gentlemen, dexamphetamine. It makes you
mean. It makes you want to go out and kill Charles with a knife, with your
hands, with your teeth. It makes you want to go out and have *fun* with
Charles.
"It will also get you over a hill after your troops have deserted you and
Charlie is on your ass. When your body tells you to stop, but your brain
reminds you that Charles is on your ass, this will help you run faster,
see clearer and hear better."
(From "Sympathy for the Devil" by Kent Anderson.)

However, while drugs might help in the short term, longer-term could
be a problem. Cocaine induces paranoia, just as a for-instance: imagine
adding that to a runner's usual disposition. Amphetamines screw with
your perception, and while they might help for a while, 'stacking' them
has nasty results: and you can't stop using them until you can safely
crash for quite a few hours.

Several of our PCs have had drug habits: Lynch used to have a dexamphetamine
problem, Lilith was a cocaine addict for several years, Easy was a major-
league alcoholic. Any predictable dependency can be turned into a weakness,
and that's the biggest argument against shadowrunners being long-term
addicts.

--
"When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude
towards him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem.
For better or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him." R. A. Lafferty

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 17
From: "Darrin M. Conant" <dconant@****.spectra.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 23:32:33 -0400
The other thing is that most people doing drugs do it to enhance/escape from
life. The player is already doing that with the game, why should they have a
character with the same daily drudgery that they have?
--
insert Darrin's signature here
(Impressive, eh?)
Message no. 18
From: Justin Thomas <Justin.C.Thomas-1@**.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 12:40:11 -0500
At 12:09 PM 4/21/96 +1000, you wrote:
>
>Sounds athletic, doesn't it?
>
>Anyway, a thought crept into the dim recesses of my mind the other day...
>drugs are a BIG part of the street scene even now, right? Drugs are a big
>part of the streets in every major visualised cyberpunk setting, right?
>(I'm thinking of things like Gibson's Mona Lisa Overdrive here...) So why
>is it that our street-born shadowrunners refuse to touch the stuff? The
>only character I've ever seen with any kind of drug use is my boyfriend's
>decker character - a 60-a-day smoker.
>
>Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
>we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
>characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
>can find...)
>
>Lady Jestyr
>

Because these guys (Shadowrunners) are suppost to be the best of the best
street scum... You don't see the drug pushers and the people on the top of
the drug cartels using drugs, they know what it can do to you, they are just
out for money. Anyway, in order to be a shadowrunner you need experience
and if you are on drugs you will not have gotten to the position these
people are, you would have OD'ed long ago... IMHO

******************************
Justin Thomas
"Farr"
Email:
thom0767@****.tc.umn.edu
or if that doesn't work
Justin.C.Thomas-1@**.umn.edu
Message no. 19
From: Tom Pendergrast <pendergr@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 11:07:08 -0700 (PDT)
> Would you pop a pill if you knew you were going to get into a
> rough fight? Answer that question while you're laid up for a couple months
while they sew you back together from the time you didn't and the other guy did.

((That's assuming, of course, that it helps out more than the drugs'
value in 'ware. For not much 'yen you can get stuff like boosted refs...
sure they aren't wires, but if you're that desperate for an edge, you
probably don't have them...

---Tom---
Message no. 20
From: Lady Jestyr <s421539@*******.gu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 15:07:11 +1000 (EST)
> >LJ> Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I
> >LJ> know that we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player
> >LJ> knowledge... street characters would still be hooked on every
> >LJ> pretty-looking chemical they can find...)
>
> Runners cant afford to loose their edge, which 'recreational' drugs would
> definatly effect.

So as far as you're concerned, it's a matter of professionalism? Cool.
That would explain why my character doesn't do drugs, but went on a pub
crawl last night with a polar bear. (OK, so the party mage was messing
around with a shapechange spell...)

Lady Jestyr

------------------------------------------------------
I don't have enemies, it's just that my best friends
are trying to kill me.
------------------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes s421539@*****.student.gu.edu.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503/
------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed are my own, unless you don't
agree with them, in which case they are my evil twin
sister's opinions.
Message no. 21
From: "Andre' Selmer" <031ANDRE@******.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 09:11:49 GMT + 2:00
@
@ > Runners cant afford to loose their edge, which 'recreational' drugs would
@ > definatly effect.
@
@ About the only drug that any runner would WANT to touch is something like
@ Kamikaze. It works really well, although it'll kill you eventually, but
@ hey, won't they all?

The 'recreational drugs' might give you relief in the real world,
but no Shadowrunner isn't paranoid enough to believe that someone,
somewhere wants his blood.

I remember a game where in which some runner tried to take us
out. We were in a orbital flight so he pumped a tranqualizer through
the air conditioner. Knocked everyone else in the plane out, I was
quick enought to shove a stim patch on before I passed out. Hell that
one enjoyable flight, my character seeing double flighting the
wouldbe assisin while floating.

Imagine having a firefight while pumped up on hallucnagins (sp).
For more info on drugs etc See Running Gear (edited by our own
Gurth), the last I looked it was on cerebus.










Andre'

-- We exist because you want us to, because you are
|__|__ afraid to fact the facts. We are what you fear
/\ /\ \ in the deep recesses of your soul, yourselves.
|\ /\ /| | It is there in the shadows of your soul and those
|/ \/ \| | of the street that we exist. Through the use of
\/__\/ might, magic, cunning, blood, sweat and tears we
protect you from your fears, from youselves, from
others and keep your utopia, not ours, intact.
Message no. 22
From: Tom Pendergrast <pendergr@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 01:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
> Imagine having a firefight while pumped up on hallucnagins (sp).

((Think about it. Think how much drek is going on in a firefight. Think
how confusing it is. bullets are flying eveywhere, people are screaming,
blood, loud gunshots, all sorts of stuff... now multiply it by ten. When
you kick in one of those drugs, it'll really mess with your
perceptions... do you really want to think you're able to do stuff you're
not? "Hey, I can take that guy do-<BLAM>.... things are crazy enough as
it is, without complicating the whole thing...

---Tom---
Message no. 23
From: "Andre' Selmer" <031ANDRE@******.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:31:22 GMT + 2:00
@ Anyway, a thought crept into the dim recesses of my mind the other day...
@ drugs are a BIG part of the street scene even now, right? Drugs are a big
@ part of the streets in every major visualised cyberpunk setting, right?
@ (I'm thinking of things like Gibson's Mona Lisa Overdrive here...) So why
@ is it that our street-born shadowrunners refuse to touch the stuff? The
@ only character I've ever seen with any kind of drug use is my boyfriend's
@ decker character - a 60-a-day smoker.
@
@ Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
@ we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
@ characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
@ can find...)
@
@ Lady Jestyr

I can think of many answers to this, but here is a smattering

a) whether we like it or not, when we generate the characters
(Role-players that is), we base part of them on ourselves, on our own
experiences and some parts of our personality. Hence if being
addicted to drugs has not been in your experience, chances are that
you would have no idea how to play a character with a drug addiction.

b) Depending on the country in which you grew up (and hence
defined your attitudes), your perception of drugs etc differs. Most
of us have grown up in a seriously heavy any drug society, and
(subconsciously) we assign this belief to the characters. (I won't go
into a 3 page detail of this point)

c) We know that the chances of the characters actually
surviving a long time on drugs is minimal?

d) You loose control of the character to some or the other
degree (and no self respecting player would allow a GM to control
their characters actions, especially when incapaciatated) ;)

Thats all for now












Andre'

-- We exist because you want us to, because you are
|__|__ afraid to fact the facts. We are what you fear
/\ /\ \ in the deep recesses of your soul, yourselves.
|\ /\ /| | It is there in the shadows of your soul and those
|/ \/ \| | of the street that we exist. Through the use of
\/__\/ might, magic, cunning, blood, sweat and tears we
protect you from your fears, from youselves, from
others and keep your utopia, not ours, intact.
Message no. 24
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 12:12:23 +0100
Tom Pendergrast <shadowrn@********.itribe.net> said on 1:11/22 Apr 96...

> > Imagine having a firefight while pumped up on hallucnagins (sp).
>
> ((Think about it. Think how much drek is going on in a firefight. Think
> how confusing it is. bullets are flying eveywhere, people are screaming,
> blood, loud gunshots, all sorts of stuff... now multiply it by ten. When
> you kick in one of those drugs, it'll really mess with your
> perceptions... do you really want to think you're able to do stuff you're
> not? "Hey, I can take that guy do-<BLAM>.... things are crazy enough as
> it is, without complicating the whole thing...

So? Load some darts or a SuperSquirt with fast-acting hallucinogens, and
shoot at the enemy...

You'd be pretty stupid if you use the stuff yourself before a firefight,
but it might work on the enemy. (Then again it may not -- a good number
of military agencies have experimented with ways to use LSD and similar
drugs as a weapon, but the fact that nobody uses such weapons might be
enough of a hint to their effectiveness.)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Early to rise, early to bed, makes a man healthy, wealthy, and dead.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 25
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 96 20:42:36 +1030
>You'd be pretty stupid if you use the stuff yourself before a firefight,
>but it might work on the enemy. (Then again it may not -- a good number
>of military agencies have experimented with ways to use LSD and similar
>drugs as a weapon, but the fact that nobody uses such weapons might be
>enough of a hint to their effectiveness.)

Or it could just be that there are more effective weapons... want to kill
them? Load up with a variety of your favourite nerve gasses. Want to
knock them out, or otherwise disable them? Use tear gas, or a selection
of various sophorics. Why the hell would you like to make them see purple
men from Mars?


--
_______________________________________________________________________
/ \
| "As soon as we started programming, we found to our surprise that it |
| wasn't as easy to get programs right as we had thought. Debugging |
| had to be discovered. I can remember the exact instant when I |
| realized that a large part of my life from then on was going to be |
| spent in finding mistakes in my own programs." -- Maurice Wilkes |
| Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au |
\_______________________________________________________________________/
Message no. 26
From: "Andre' Selmer" <031ANDRE@******.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 13:29:39 GMT + 2:00
<snip>

@ So? Load some darts or a SuperSquirt with fast-acting hallucinogens, and
@ shoot at the enemy...

Nice idea for about 5 seconds. Situation: PC takes a double pot
shot at standard street sam (Assuming PC wins init.) Street Sam Joe
takes double burst at PC with APDS. 2nd Action PC drops Squirter
(free action), draws SMG (simple action) fires a burst. SS Joe double
bursts in reply. SS Joe resists hallucinogen. End of Round One:

Street Sam Joe: Two squirts sent his way (did he dodge, get past
armour, has toxin filters)?
One burst his way

PC: Four bursts (Dodge,Armour)

Thanks in a do or die situation the squirter is too costly for the
benefit at the end.


@ You'd be pretty stupid if you use the stuff yourself before a
firefight,
@ but it might work on the enemy. (Then again it may not -- a good number
@ of military agencies have experimented with ways to use LSD and similar
@ drugs as a weapon, but the fact that nobody uses such weapons might be
@ enough of a hint to their effectiveness.)

In hand to hand combat, they have their uses. My character has a
squirter built into his arm. It works wonders as a surprize strike,
filled with DMSO Trank(10) mix, rarely fails to impress.
Alternatively there is Neurostun XII, or alternatively Tear Gas
Powder. But otherwise I concur, for large scale use of drugs as a
weapon (unless in placed in communial food, or as a delayed contact
drug around the edge of the loo (hay ! it worked)) is to slow and
required to large amount of the drug.



Andre'

-- We exist because you want us to, because you are
|__|__ afraid to fact the facts. We are what you fear
/\ /\ \ in the deep recesses of your soul, yourselves.
|\ /\ /| | It is there in the shadows of your soul and those
|/ \/ \| | of the street that we exist. Through the use of
\/__\/ might, magic, cunning, blood, sweat and tears we
protect you from your fears, from youselves, from
others and keep your utopia, not ours, intact.
Message no. 27
From: "A Halliwell" <u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 12:29:36 +0100 (BST)
|
|>You'd be pretty stupid if you use the stuff yourself before a firefight,
|>but it might work on the enemy. (Then again it may not -- a good number
|>of military agencies have experimented with ways to use LSD and similar
|>drugs as a weapon, but the fact that nobody uses such weapons might be
|>enough of a hint to their effectiveness.)
|
|Or it could just be that there are more effective weapons... want to kill
|them? Load up with a variety of your favourite nerve gasses. Want to
|knock them out, or otherwise disable them? Use tear gas, or a selection
|of various sophorics. Why the hell would you like to make them see purple
|men from Mars?

In the middle of combat, you wouldn't, but as a psyching agent to scare the
shit out of a building full of people, lacing the water tanks with a nice
big dose of LSD would make a wonderful diversion, don't you think?
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack in |
|u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk |the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you can't |
| |move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell |Consider how lucky you are that life has been good |
|Principal subjects in:-|to you so far... |
|Comp Sci & Visual Arts | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy. |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/FA>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ 5++ |
|X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can still say FUCK! Americans can't|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 28
From: PDL@****.dacom.co.kr
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 96 20:41:39 PDT
---------------Original Message---------------
So as far as you're concerned, it's a matter of professionalism? Cool.
That would explain why my character doesn't do drugs, but went on a pub
crawl last night with a polar bear. (OK, so the party mage was messing
around with a shapechange spell...)

Lady Jestyr

Elle Holmes
----------End of Original Message----------
I only have two things to say. Were these characters on a run at the time. There is a
difference between between being non-professional and having a sense of humor.

Patrick
Message no. 29
From: Lady Jestyr <s421539@*******.gu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 22:12:37 +1000 (EST)
> >You'd be pretty stupid if you use the stuff yourself before a firefight,
> >but it might work on the enemy. (Then again it may not -- a good number
> >of military agencies have experimented with ways to use LSD and similar
> >drugs as a weapon, but the fact that nobody uses such weapons might be
> >enough of a hint to their effectiveness.)
>
> Or it could just be that there are more effective weapons... want to kill
> them? Load up with a variety of your favourite nerve gasses. Want to
> knock them out, or otherwise disable them? Use tear gas, or a selection
> of various sophorics. Why the hell would you like to make them see purple
> men from Mars?

Humour value if nothing else! Let's face it, many GMs give out karma
awards now and then just for making them laugh...

Lady Jestyr

------------------------------------------------------
I don't have enemies, it's just that my best friends
are trying to kill me.
------------------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes s421539@*****.student.gu.edu.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503/
------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed are my own, unless you don't
agree with them, in which case they are my evil twin
sister's opinions.
Message no. 30
From: Lady Jestyr <s421539@*******.gu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 22:17:10 +1000 (EST)
> ---------------Original Message---------------
> So as far as you're concerned, it's a matter of professionalism? Cool.
> That would explain why my character doesn't do drugs, but went on a pub
> crawl last night with a polar bear. (OK, so the party mage was messing
> around with a shapechange spell...)
>
> Lady Jestyr
>
> Elle Holmes
> ----------End of Original Message----------
> I only have two things to say. Were these characters on a run at the time.

Kinda - but we were just doing some unimportant legwork at the time...
and we had a nice big trog with us anyway...


Lady Jestyr

------------------------------------------------------
I don't have enemies, it's just that my best friends
are trying to kill me.
------------------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes s421539@*****.student.gu.edu.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503/
------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed are my own, unless you don't
agree with them, in which case they are my evil twin
sister's opinions.
Message no. 31
From: mbroadwa@*******.glenayre.com (Mike Broadwater)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 07:49:49 -0500
Attrition. Ever had this situation happen?:

"Wow man, look at the pretty colored armor those guys are wearing. I can
almost hear it..."
"Get down Dave!"
"No way. Wow, I'm on such a great trip..."
BLAM BLAM
thud
"Well, there goes Dave."

A drug user isn't going to be able to do their job as well, and is going to
get themselves or the people they work with killed. It's not as if this is
a big secret ("Holy Shit! These things are bad for you?!" - Denis Leary)

Mike Broadwater
http://www.olemiss.edu/~neon
"Madness takes it's toll. Please have exact change."
Message no. 32
From: Sakura <jeffj@**.com>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 08:29:05 -0500 (CDT)
On Mon, 22 Apr 1996, Mike Broadwater wrote:

> A drug user isn't going to be able to do their job as well, and is going to
> get themselves or the people they work with killed. It's not as if this is
> a big secret ("Holy Shit! These things are bad for you?!" - Denis Leary)

OK, we all (hopefully) know that in the real world, drugs are a Bad
Thing[tm]. BUt, this is cyberpunk, where even if they -are- a Bad
Thing[tm], people are gonna use 'em to get that 'edge'...it's part of the
genre that people are doing these horrible things to themselves just to
get ahead...or maybe it's not by choice. Lots of ex-military characters
in various cyberpunk sources are addicted to a wide variety of noxious
chems, because the army found that the drugged soldiers served their
purpose better...

In a culture where people are willing to hack their arm off to get a
replacement, or have their nervous system layered with fine gold wire, a
little drug use is hardly going to be the exception. So why don't my
characters use drugs? There's about one (1) useful combat drug in the
book - kamikaze - and FASA went out of its way to make it seem
unattractive.

I wouldn't mind seeing more drugs for Shadowrun...maybe the stuff the guy
was juiced up on in the story from _Mirrorshades_? (Can't remember
it...the one with the ex-pilot.)
Message no. 33
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 11:04:25 -0400 (EDT)
At 12:29 4/22/96 +0100, you wrote:
[SNIP]
>In the middle of combat, you wouldn't, but as a psyching agent to scare the
>shit out of a building full of people, lacing the water tanks with a nice
>big dose of LSD would make a wonderful diversion, don't you think?
>--
>

Remeber folks. It takes a half an hour for a standard dose of acid to kick
in. I haven't really seen that larger doses (say four tabs vs one) getting
into the person's body any quicker. In the water it will work. In a
weapon......Don't think so. Most other drugs (at least now) have an "onset"
period. They don't kick in as soon as you take them.

Sasquatch
(The technican formerly known as BLAIR)

------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Support Bacteria! |
| It's the only culture some people have. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 34
From: Larry <lomion@********.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 12:28:14 -0400
>In the middle of combat, you wouldn't, but as a psyching agent to scare the
>shit out of a building full of people, lacing the water tanks with a nice
>big dose of LSD would make a wonderful diversion, don't you think?
>--
That was done in Neuromancer, when Molly had to get the ROM of Dixie
Flatline. The panthern Moderns gang set it up. Forget what the drug was
called tho.

Larry
Member HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org
lomion@**.cybernex.net
http://www2.cybernex.net/~lomion
-----------------------------------------------
"I see the eyes but not the tears
This is my affliction"
>From "Eyes that last I saw in tears", T.S. Eliot
-----------------------------------------------
Message no. 35
From: Tom Pendergrast <pendergr@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 09:42:04 -0700 (PDT)
> Humour value if nothing else! Let's face it, many GMs give out karma
> awards now and then just for making them laugh...

There is a difference between doig something funny and gettiing geeked
for it, and doing something funny at the apporopriate time and getting karma.
---Tom---
Message no. 36
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 19:05:20 -0500
>"Wow man, look at the pretty colored armor those guys are wearing. I can
>almost hear it..."
>"Get down Dave!"
>"No way. Wow, I'm on such a great trip..."
>BLAM BLAM
>thud
>"Well, there goes Dave."

If Dave's that far gone (sounds about half a sheet to the wind...) he won't
be moving at all. He'd just be sitting around drooling and dancing in his
mind to the sound of frying synapses.

>A drug user isn't going to be able to do their job as well, and is going to
>get themselves or the people they work with killed.

If the drug is something like LSD, yeah... that'll happen.

But even today, people use drugs to do better work. From athletes to
programmers. Speed is a WHOLE lot different than hallucinogens and would
help greatly in combat.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 37
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 19:05:16 -0500
>> Would you pop a pill if you knew you were going to get into a
>> rough fight? Answer that question while you're laid up for a couple months
>while they sew you back together from the time you didn't and the other guy
did.

>((That's assuming, of course, that it helps out more than the drugs'
>value in 'ware. For not much 'yen you can get stuff like boosted refs...
>sure they aren't wires, but if you're that desperate for an edge, you
>probably don't have them...

It costs 50 nuyen for a dose of kamikaze (an unrealistically harmful drug
even in the 1990's) and it also gives +1 body, +1 quickness, +2 strength,
and +1 willpower. You could buy 300 doses for the same price as boosted
reflexes 1. That's why the corps make their people use kamikaze, its
cheaper and does more than a good deal of 'ware. Sure there's a downside,
it'll kill you if you take 40 doses (again, severely unrealistic), but
kamikaze is an emergency measure. Top-level steroids (from 1990's) will
surpass the effects of kamikaze without anywhere near the side effects.
Sure there's a downside (and a pretty big one) but you won't die after
swallowing the 40th pill. You'll probably have heart failure around 50.
The life expectancy of a shadowrunner is usually measured in 3-5 second
intervals.

Anyway, I'm babbling. Kamikaze is unrealistic, but is FAR cheaper than the
'ware equivalent and works better. It has devastating side effects, but can
be more than worth it if you need that little bit of edge. A realistic drug
system for SR would blow away kamikaze in effectiveness and produce far less
damaging side effects.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 38
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 19:05:23 -0500
>I wouldn't mind seeing more drugs for Shadowrun...maybe the stuff the guy
>was juiced up on in the story from _Mirrorshades_? (Can't remember
>it...the one with the ex-pilot.)

The best drug-related story from _Mirrorshades_ is "Solstice" from james
Patrick Kelly. By adding the feel of that story to Shadowrun, some
magnificent things could happen...

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 39
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 19:05:12 -0500
>>So only typical street punks are on drugs? Pardon me a minute, I feel a
>>giggle coming on...

>The way the game portrays a Runner they above steet punk level if they're
>successful. They've got more goin for them

Of course they're a step up from average street punks, they've got bigger
guns and juju. But aside from that, there's really no difference. And you
still missed my point, there are far more people out there using than just
street punks. In fact, I would well wager that there are more private
sector users now than street punks users.

The only thing that shadowrunners have going for them over the average punk
is a bit of experience (no doubt earned by working the streets just like
those punks).

>>BTL's are rarely made by corps, persay. More often made by corp-supported
>>black market groups (kinda like how shadowruns aren't done by corps, they're
>>done by people hired by corps). And the corps do have control. It isn't
>>paranoia if it it's true.

>True, but runners are still paranoid. And most Runners have the attitude of
>looking down on BTL'ers and their ilk. I get that from sourcebooks

I don't think it's paranoia of corps that keeps them away from BTL's. It's
the people wandering the streets like zombies reliving some hyped-up sim
over and over that does that.

>>Working your way up from "that guy on the street" to shadowrunner means
a
>>lot of work, and certain things can make that work easier. Things like
>>friends, cyberware, magic, cash, and sometimes drugs. Every little bit of
>>edge helps. Would you pop a pill if you knew you were going to get into a
>>rough fight? Answer that question while you're laid up for a couple months
>>while they sew you back together from the time you didn't and the other guy
>did.

>Most drugs like that are short-lived before the cons affect the pros. Look
>at Kamikaze it'll screw up the users system very rapidly after the first
>hit.

Kamikaze is an unrealistic drug using unrealistic rules. We can make drugs
now that don't have that severe of a side effect and produce equal or better
primary effects.

>I'd stay away from anything that has
>limited use and could end up really fragging me up. Besides the amount of
>money needed for side-effect free drugs is more than your average runner can
>afford.

"Side effect free" isn't possible. But you can get it tamed down (or
balance the crash with other drugs). Anything can really mess you up if
you're clueless about using it. Another thing that I've noticed is that
people seem to think that drugs cost an absurd amount of money. They don't
now and would be far cheaper in 205X. Synthetic designer drugs would rule
the market and would be produced so cheaply that they could be all but given
away.

If you want to stick with a Shadow-esque ruling on the effects of drugs,
look at Geraint from Marc Gasciogne and Carl Sargent's books. He has a
canula implant that allows him to mainline drugs straight to his brain. He
uses dozens of different drugs in the books and would provide a very good
example on how they would be in 205X.


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 40
From: cobaltblue@********.net
Subject: RE: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 96 22:24:54 PDT
On Sun, 21 Apr 1996 12:09:52 +1000 (EST) Lady Jestyr wrote:
>
>Sounds athletic, doesn't it?
>
>Anyway, a thought crept into the dim recesses of my mind the other day...
>drugs are a BIG part of the street scene even now, right? Drugs are a big
>part of the streets in every major visualised cyberpunk setting, right?
>(I'm thinking of things like Gibson's Mona Lisa Overdrive here...) So why
>is it that our street-born shadowrunners refuse to touch the stuff? The
>only character I've ever seen with any kind of drug use is my boyfriend's
>decker character - a 60-a-day smoker.
>
>Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
>we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
>characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
>can find...)

The group I am currently GMing has three drug users in it, one who accidentally became
hooked on Kool trying to talk his way into a hospital, and two who are habitual Jazz
abusers. Can't remember where I got it, but there was a pretty nice list of drugs posted
somehwhere.

cobaltblue@********.net

Rod Schmidt
Ft. Bragg, NC
Message no. 41
From: Tom Pendergrast <pendergr@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 19:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
> Kamikaze is an unrealistic drug using unrealistic rules. We can make drugs
> now that don't have that severe of a side effect and produce equal or better
> primary effects.

((Here's something that we have to deal with in the SR world, that we
don't in RL : Game balance. If there was a drug out there that really
did work like <you've> been saying, that would really mess with the
game. Everyone would have it. Balance would be thrown out the door, and
everything would degrade into the typical poewr-gaming that I've seen all
too many times. Sure <we> may very well be able to make this fantastic
drug cheaply, but it won't happen in SRII.))

---Tom---
Message no. 42
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 96 12:34:56 +1030
>Top-level steroids (from 1990's) will
>surpass the effects of kamikaze without anywhere near the side effects.

Top level steriods won't work in 2 seconds, either.


--
_______________________________________________________________________
/ \
| "As soon as we started programming, we found to our surprise that it |
| wasn't as easy to get programs right as we had thought. Debugging |
| had to be discovered. I can remember the exact instant when I |
| realized that a large part of my life from then on was going to be |
| spent in finding mistakes in my own programs." -- Maurice Wilkes |
| Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au |
\_______________________________________________________________________/
Message no. 43
From: tsbtal@********.com (Tal Kedem)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 23:38:03 -0400
On Apr 22, 1996 07:49:49, 'mbroadwa@*******.glenayre.com (Mike Broadwater)'
wrote:


>
>"Wow man, look at the pretty colored armor those guys are wearing. I can
>almost hear it..."
>"Get down Dave!"
>"No way. Wow, I'm on such a great trip..."
>BLAM BLAM
>thud
>"Well, there goes Dave."
>
>A drug user isn't going to be able to do their job as well, and is going
to
>get themselves or the people they work with killed. It's not as if this
is
>a big secret ("Holy Shit! These things are bad for you?!" - Denis Leary)

I thought they had vitamin C and stuff in em! You fucking dolt! - Denis
Leary again

>Mike Broadwater
>http://www.olemiss.edu/~neon
>"Madness takes it's toll. Please have exact change."

Agreed, as stated before, "runners" are the best-of-the-best, cause they
haven't been geeked (yet). Then again, if you were playing a go-ganger, it
could be acceptable to do a drug or two, but probably a combat drug (such
as Jazz, et al) or a combat drug in addition to normal drugs (one to get
high, one to keep me alive [and then later kill me]).

`Sides, wouldn't it be fun to see a "psycho-delic" (get it? Gharf, gharf,
snicker) character that coalesces between being completely high-happy,
completely low-stoned out, and completely friggin crazy!

--
Tal Kedem
GAT d- s: a--- C++++ ULC>+++ P+>+++ L+>++ E W+ N+ o !K-- w !O M--
V PS+ PE+ Y++ PGP t++ !5 X R+ tv+ b+++ DI++ D+ G+ e@ h@ !r y?
- tsbtal@***.pipeline.com - tallion@*****.steinmetz.albany.edu
-tallion@******.net -
"Cthulhu in `96 - Why settle for a lesser evil?"
Message no. 44
From: "Andre' Selmer" <031ANDRE@******.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 09:10:19 GMT + 2:00
@
@ > Kamikaze is an unrealistic drug using unrealistic rules. We can make drugs
@
@ > now that don't have that severe of a side effect and produce equal or bette
@ r
@ > primary effects.
@
@ ((Here's something that we have to deal with in the SR world, that we
@ don't in RL : Game balance. If there was a drug out there that really
@ did work like <you've> been saying, that would really mess with the
@ game. Everyone would have it. Balance would be thrown out the door, and
@ everything would degrade into the typical poewr-gaming that I've seen all
@ too many times. Sure <we> may very well be able to make this fantastic
@ drug cheaply, but it won't happen in SRII.))

Despite everything else, combat cyberware is not that terribly
common on the streets. In order to prevent every Tom, Dick and Harry
having cyberware, at the same time trying to present the characters
with a little bit of a challenge can be difficult. Hence there is a
market for drugs after all, what chance has a street punk of facing
up to and surviving a quasi street sam (or mage as a matter of fact).

Slightly off the topic, when our mage recieved his specially modified
pistol, he said (after a day doing survallance)

'You know I've never fired my gun before, there's a random shooting
that night'








Andre'

-- We exist because you want us to, because you are
|__|__ afraid to fact the facts. We are what you fear
/\ /\ \ in the deep recesses of your soul, yourselves.
|\ /\ /| | It is there in the shadows of your soul and those
|/ \/ \| | of the street that we exist. Through the use of
\/__\/ might, magic, cunning, blood, sweat and tears we
protect you from your fears, from youselves, from
others and keep your utopia, not ours, intact.
Message no. 45
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 11:19:37 +0100
Tom Pendergrast <shadowrn@********.itribe.net> said on 19:56/22 Apr 96...

> ((Here's something that we have to deal with in the SR world, that we
> don't in RL : Game balance. If there was a drug out there that really
> did work like <you've> been saying, that would really mess with the
> game. Everyone would have it. Balance would be thrown out the door, and
> everything would degrade into the typical poewr-gaming that I've seen all
> too many times. Sure <we> may very well be able to make this fantastic
> drug cheaply, but it won't happen in SRII.))

Drugs are automatically game-balanced: you get addicted to them, you need
money to buy them, you'll need more to get the same effect the longer you
use them, you get those downs when they wear off, they'll kill you in the
long run.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Have I run too far to get on?
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 46
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 11:19:37 +0100
TopCat <shadowrn@********.itribe.net> said on 19:05/22 Apr 96...

> Anyway, I'm babbling. Kamikaze is unrealistic, but is FAR cheaper than the
> 'ware equivalent and works better. It has devastating side effects, but can
> be more than worth it if you need that little bit of edge. A realistic drug
> system for SR would blow away kamikaze in effectiveness and produce far less
> damaging side effects.

The reason here is obvious -- it's exactly the same as FASA saying that
sacrifice geasa can never be learned by PCs: FASA thinks the PCs are the
good guys, and good guys don't do bad things. Sure, they may do things
that aren't socially acceptable (like blowing away a dozen guards just to
get into a research facility), but they are doing that for the "right
reasons" -- making the world a better place, somehow.
Drug use doesn't seem to fit into that (possibly also because FASA doesn't
want to seem like they're promoting RL drug use -- they're an American
corp, after all).

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Have I run too far to get on?
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 47
From: "A Halliwell" <u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 11:06:19 +0100 (BST)
|
|>"Wow man, look at the pretty colored armor those guys are wearing. I can
|>almost hear it..."
|>"Get down Dave!"
|>"No way. Wow, I'm on such a great trip..."
|>BLAM BLAM
|>thud
|>"Well, there goes Dave."

|If Dave's that far gone (sounds about half a sheet to the wind...) he won't
|be moving at all. He'd just be sitting around drooling and dancing in his
|mind to the sound of frying synapses.

Possibly not. I don't think the situation above is very realistic either.
He'd be more likely to be saying......
"It's a DEMON! Get it off, GET IT OFFFFF!!!!!" <BLAM BLAM BLAM>
(As he shoots friend and foe alike, and possibly his own leg....)

The thing about psychadelic drugs is that the trip depends on Set and
Setting.

Set: The mood of the person will be magnified. If he's already scared the
watch out!

Setting. In a nice peicefull atmosphere you are probably going to have a
good trip. In a combat situation, *WOA* GET THESE SPIDERS OFF ME!!!!!!!
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack in |
|u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk |the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you can't |
| |move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell |Consider how lucky you are that life has been good |
|Principal subjects in:-|to you so far... |
|Comp Sci & Visual Arts | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy. |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/FA>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ 5++ |
|X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can still say FUCK! Americans can't|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 48
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 96 21:03:20 +1030
>Drug use doesn't seem to fit into that (possibly also because FASA doesn't
>want to seem like they're promoting RL drug use -- they're an American
>corp, after all).

OTH, Kamikaze is ludicrously cheap, works almost instantly, and can be
survived reasonably well. This is your street level combat drug.

Other drugs would be possible... more expensive, perhaps slower working
(ie, take them 5 minutes before battle, and call the doc in the morning
to get the bullet holes fixed), and longer lasting. A good commercial
battle drug should last at LEAST half an hour. A relatively easy balance
(though hard to roleplay) is an illusion of invincibility, ala the mercs
that Katherine Hart hires in "Find Your Own Truth".

The kind of switch-on,switch-off stuff that kamikaze does WOULD cause
serious damage over time.


--
Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
Message no. 49
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 10:47:59 -0400 (EDT)
At 11:19 4/23/96 +0100, you wrote:
>
>Drugs are automatically game-balanced: you get addicted to them, you need
>money to buy them, you'll need more to get the same effect the longer you
>use them, you get those downs when they wear off, they'll kill you in the
>long run.
>
>--
>Gurth@******.nl

Wrong. Game world this maybe true. In the real world not all drugs are
addictive. I've only used non additive "hippy" drugs, and I've been on the
wagons for over a month with NO side-effects. The harder a drug is the more
additiveit is, but all drugs are not inherently additive.


Sasquatch
(The technican formerly known as BLAIR)

------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Support Bacteria! |
| It's the only culture some people have. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 50
From: Tom Pendergrast <pendergr@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 09:28:47 -0700 (PDT)
> Drugs are automatically game-balanced: you get addicted to them, you need
> money to buy them, you'll need more to get the same effect the longer you
> use them, you get those downs when they wear off, they'll kill you in the
> long run.

((In the short run, however, they blow the crap out of 'ware.))

---Tom---
Message no. 51
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 13:08:47 -0400 (EDT)
On Sun, 21 Apr 1996, Lady Jestyr wrote:

> Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
> we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
> characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
> can find...)

Actually, I have had several players play drug-addicted
characters. Some of them have started out as addicts and others have
become so along the way. It can add alot to the depth and motivation of
the characters in question, and it is certainly "in genre."

Marc
Message no. 52
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 11:18:43 -0600 (MDT)
|On Sun, 21 Apr 1996, Lady Jestyr wrote:
|
|> Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I know that
|> we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player knowledge... street
|> characters would still be hooked on every pretty-looking chemical they
|> can find...)

My group considers it to be a weakness that just isn't worth it. Playing a
character who is an addict isn't very attractive. And no one seems to be
interested in having a character that is a recreational user. We're just to
straight I guess :)

>From the character's standpoint it could be that Mr. Johnsons aren't
willing to hire addicts, whether by appearance (agitated, has the
jitters, stares at his hand) or by reputation. Unless, of course,
Johnson is looking to set someone up.

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
~~~~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.html~~~~~~
Message no. 53
From: melchar@****.darkside.com (Melchar)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 96 11:14:04 PDT
TopCat <topcat@******.net> writes:
> It costs 50 nuyen for a dose of kamikaze (an unrealistically harmful drug
> even in the 1990's) and it also gives +1 body, +1 quickness, +2 strength,
> and +1 willpower. You could buy 300 doses for the same price as boosted
> reflexes 1. That's why the corps make their people use kamikaze, its
> cheaper and does more than a good deal of 'ware. Sure there's a downside,
> it'll kill you if you take 40 doses (again, severely unrealistic), but
> kamikaze is an emergency measure. Top-level steroids (from 1990's) will
> surpass the effects of kamikaze without anywhere near the side effects.
> Sure there's a downside (and a pretty big one) but you won't die after
> swallowing the 40th pill. You'll probably have heart failure around 50.
> The life expectancy of a shadowrunner is usually measured in 3-5 second
> intervals.
>
> Anyway, I'm babbling. Kamikaze is unrealistic, but is FAR cheaper than the
> 'ware equivalent and works better. It has devastating side effects, but can
> be more than worth it if you need that little bit of edge. A realistic drug
> system for SR would blow away kamikaze in effectiveness and produce far less
> damaging side effects.

I've never understood myself why kamikaze was written up to be so
ridiculously harmful. You state the problem extremely well.
Message no. 54
From: melchar@****.darkside.com (Melchar)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 96 11:27:52 PDT
> OTH, Kamikaze is ludicrously cheap, works almost instantly, and can be
> survived reasonably well. This is your street level combat drug.
>
> Other drugs would be possible... more expensive, perhaps slower working
> (ie, take them 5 minutes before battle, and call the doc in the morning
> to get the bullet holes fixed), and longer lasting. A good commercial
> battle drug should last at LEAST half an hour. A relatively easy balance
> (though hard to roleplay) is an illusion of invincibility, ala the mercs
> that Katherine Hart hires in "Find Your Own Truth".
>
> The kind of switch-on,switch-off stuff that kamikaze does WOULD cause
> serious damage over time.

But having it fry all of a persons' cyberware is pretty damned
extreme. (In which case, it would make tons of sense to dope _all_
captured 'runners with 1 dose of kamikzae to slag their 'ware...)
Message no. 55
From: melchar@****.darkside.com (Melchar)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 96 11:29:56 PDT
Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu> writes:

> At 11:19 4/23/96 +0100, you wrote:
> >Drugs are automatically game-balanced: you get addicted to them, you need
> >money to buy them, you'll need more to get the same effect the longer you
> >use them, you get those downs when they wear off, they'll kill you in the
> >long run.
>
> Wrong. Game world this maybe true. In the real world not all drugs are
> addictive. I've only used non additive "hippy" drugs, and I've been on the
> wagons for over a month with NO side-effects. The harder a drug is the more
> additiveit is, but all drugs are not inherently additive.

I tried anything someone would give me in my teens (including speed
& LSD & alcohol). None of it did anything to me or for me -- and I
_wanted_ it to at the time. Finding out I was either already beyond the
pale <grin> or immune then <sigh> made me very popular amongst my using
friends <'hey, we know who the designated driver'll be'>.
And by being cold sober whilst surrounded by variously bombed or
stoned folks allowed me to note that users under the influence are less
than wholly rational, but hardly the 'gee mom I can fly'//'eek lookit
alla spiders!'//'watch me play in traffic' generic druggie images that
authority likes to site as reasons not to use mood altering drugs. In
the main, they'd act silly, lose some inhibitions and giggle a lot.
Of course, none of them were on combat drugs at the time :)
Message no. 56
From: Mike Yagupsky <myagup@*******.bgu.ac.il>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 00:51:11 +0300 (IDT)
On Sat, 20 Apr 1996, J Hulley-Miller wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> 21 Apr 96 12:09, Lady Jestyr <s421539@*******.gu.edu.au> wrote:
>
> >LJ> Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I
> >LJ> know that we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player
> >LJ> knowledge... street characters would still be hooked on every
> >LJ> pretty-looking chemical they can find...)
>
> Runners cant afford to loose their edge, which 'recreational' drugs would
> definatly effect.
>
> jhm
>
> --
> J Hulley-Miller <jhm@*****.com>
> ____ <fidonet#1:107/330>
> \/\/ "Human nature is never so weak as in a bookstore" - Henry Ward Beecher
>
My character was hooked on drugs for sometime, but quickly stopped.

MIKE YAGUPSKY
Message no. 57
From: MENARD Steve <menars@***.UMontreal.CA>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 21:38:51 -0400 (EDT)
On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, Mike Yagupsky wrote:

> On Sat, 20 Apr 1996, J Hulley-Miller wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> > 21 Apr 96 12:09, Lady Jestyr <s421539@*******.gu.edu.au> wrote:
> >
> > >LJ> Why does no-one ever make their character a drug user? (Yes, I
> > >LJ> know that we all know drugs are bad for you, but that's player
> > >LJ> knowledge... street characters would still be hooked on every
> > >LJ> pretty-looking chemical they can find...)
> >

I once made a character who used to be hooked on just about
anything he could shoot in his veins or sniff. He was an enforcer for a
small time street doc. He used to "persuade" peaople to pay their bills.
Anyway one time he got very badly hurt. When he woke up he was in a
hospital bed, deeply indebted to his boss and completely incapable to use
drugs : his boss installed a high rating blood filter. He could still get
high, but a the amount needed, he could not afford it!

Needless to say, he keeps away from getting a datajack.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- |\_/| Still The One and Only Wolfbane! ---
--- |o o| " Hey! Why ya lookin' at me so weird? Ain't ya 'ver seen a ---
--- \ / decker witha horn ?" --- Scy, Troll decker with a CC ---
--- 0 Steve Menard menars@***.UMontreal.Ca ---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 58
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 96 18:24:20 +1030
>Wrong. Game world this maybe true. In the real world not all drugs are
>addictive. I've only used non additive "hippy" drugs, and I've been on the
>wagons for over a month with NO side-effects. The harder a drug is the more
>additiveit is, but all drugs are not inherently additive.

No... all truly effective drugs are addictive. The key characteristics
are the amount of usage required for the addiction, and the nature of
addiction. Even if there is no physical addiction, there often develops a
psychological addiction.

Psychological addiction is not solely the province of drugs, of course...


--
* *
/_\ "A friend is someone who likes the same TV programs you do" /_\
{~._.~} "Eternal nothingness is fine if you happen {~._.~}
( Y ) to be dressed for it." -- Woody Allen ( Y )
()~*~() Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au ()~*~()
(_)-(_) (_)-(_)
Message no. 59
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 96 18:45:56 +1030
>> The kind of switch-on,switch-off stuff that kamikaze does WOULD cause
>> serious damage over time.
>
> But having it fry all of a persons' cyberware is pretty damned
>extreme. (In which case, it would make tons of sense to dope _all_
>captured 'runners with 1 dose of kamikzae to slag their 'ware...)

Not necessarily... first, remember that the neural signals being sent
down to the cyber from the brain are extremely weak. So you need very
sensitive detectors to pick them up. Now, sensitive detectors are usually
fairly easy to burn out by overload. So all you have to do is assume
kamikaze achieves its effects by causing the brain to emit vastly
stronger signals (how possible this is, I wouldn't have a clue... :) ).
This would also cause the other various effects, and I'd also worry about
epilepsy.

Second, the point of kamikaze is to even the odds against the uncybered.


--
Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
Message no. 60
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 11:17:50 +0100
Hairy Smurf <shadowrn@********.itribe.net> said on 10:47/23 Apr 96...

> Wrong. Game world this maybe true. In the real world not all drugs are
> addictive. I've only used non additive "hippy" drugs, and I've been on
> the wagons for over a month with NO side-effects. The harder a drug is
> the more additiveit is, but all drugs are not inherently additive.

I'm perfectly aware of that -- I live in the only country in the world
whose laws make that distinction :) However, the only drugs you'd want to
use to give yourself an edge in combat seem to me to be the ones that
*are* addictive.
Sure, it might be nice to feel good after you smoked something, but I
don't think it will help you much to stay alive.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Have I run too far to get on?
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 61
From: LOGGING V <LOGGING_5@**_AUI.DECAUX.VNO.mts.dec.com>
Subject: RE: Drugs and Runners
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 11:03:57 +0000 (GMT)
Huh?
Got no problem with that.
My mage character used to take large quantities of various legal psychedelics
when going on an astral quest,claiming it would enhance his intuitive
skills
My rigger character has been a speedfreak until he went to the Australian
Outback where he experienced things that made him reject drugs from then on
Daniel
Message no. 62
From: LOGGING V <LOGGING_5@**_AUI.DECAUX.VNO.mts.dec.com>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 11:17:25 +0000 (GMT)
Heroin and Morphine have no harmful effects besides the addiction!?

Don't get me wron I'm not completely anti drug,but one of my friends got hooked
on heroin.Witnessing the following effect it had on her I'd say this addiction
is harmful enough.You stop eating enough,endanger your health by not caring
anymore
etc. want anything else.
Daniel
Message no. 63
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:29:37 -0500
>>Top-level steroids (from 1990's) will
>>surpass the effects of kamikaze without anywhere near the side effects.

>Top level steriods won't work in 2 seconds, either.

But they will work in about 1-5 minutes. If you know you're going into
combat, then popping one of those is easy. Also, steroids have a tendency
to produce similar (albeit lesser) effects long after they've been
introduced into the body. So some of that combat ability would always be
available.

You really can't appreciate the sheer destructiveness that a 'roid user can
achieve until you've witnessed it first hand. After that, you'll probably
never want to witness it again.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 64
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:29:49 -0500
>No... all truly effective drugs are addictive. The key characteristics
>are the amount of usage required for the addiction, and the nature of
>addiction. Even if there is no physical addiction, there often develops a
>psychological addiction.

Using that rational nearly every single activity in the world is addictive
in some way, shape or form. While I won't say that that statement is wrong,
I will point out that there is a difference between drugs and say...a
roleplaying game.

>Psychological addiction is not solely the province of drugs, of course...

And is rarely the province of drugs...


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 65
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:29:37 -0500
>>Top-level steroids (from 1990's) will
>>surpass the effects of kamikaze without anywhere near the side effects.

>Top level steriods won't work in 2 seconds, either.

But they will work in about 1-5 minutes. If you know you're going into
combat, then popping one of those is easy. Also, steroids have a tendency
to produce similar (albeit lesser) effects long after they've been
introduced into the body. So some of that combat ability would always be
available.

You really can't appreciate the sheer destructiveness that a 'roid user can
achieve until you've witnessed it first hand. After that, you'll probably
never want to witness it again.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 66
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:29:52 -0500
Time to make a statement here...

A hefty percentage of this argument has dealt with runners on hallucinogens
and opiates. It's highly doubtful that a runner will be frying on a job
(though they may well take the next 8 hours or so after the job to go
a'tripping). What would be very likely, however, is runners using steroids,
amphetamines, methamphetamines, PCP, and others of those sorts.

A common occurence in Japan today is a permanent smile on the faces of some
workers. Why? Because they've taken amphetamines to work longer, faster,
and smarter. After a while it burns away at your brain and leaves you
smiling 24 hours a day. But these cases use them every day and in hefty
quantities and they can still get work done as well (or better) than
"normal" employees. Is it good for them? No, but it allows them to do
things they normally would never be able to do. And they get paid well for it.

Why not use pure adrenalin in Shadowrun? Run the effects like an adrenal pump.

Anyway... there's some thoughts.


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 67
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:29:42 -0500
>|If Dave's that far gone (sounds about half a sheet to the wind...) he won't
>|be moving at all. He'd just be sitting around drooling and dancing in his
>|mind to the sound of frying synapses.

>Possibly not. I don't think the situation above is very realistic either.
>He'd be more likely to be saying......
>"It's a DEMON! Get it off, GET IT OFFFFF!!!!!" <BLAM BLAM BLAM>
>(As he shoots friend and foe alike, and possibly his own leg....)

Never seen it happen before. Seen plenty of fights going on around (and
involving) people on hallucinogens. Truthfully, I think it helped them.
They didn't seem to feel a thing and moved more fluidly.

>The thing about psychadelic drugs is that the trip depends on Set and
>Setting.

They are more mood (I hate using that word) dependent. If you feel good in
an alley in the projects, then you'll be just fine there playing with the
rats and winos. You could be in a field of flowers and maybe just not feel
right and you'd get anxious and want to leave.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 68
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:29:45 -0500
> And by being cold sober whilst surrounded by variously bombed or
>stoned folks allowed me to note that users under the influence are less
>than wholly rational, but hardly the 'gee mom I can fly'//'eek lookit
>alla spiders!'//'watch me play in traffic' generic druggie images that
>authority likes to site as reasons not to use mood altering drugs. In
>the main, they'd act silly, lose some inhibitions and giggle a lot.

*applause rings out from the crowd*

Exactly. Couldn't have put that better myself.

> Of course, none of them were on combat drugs at the time :)

One of the nastiest combat drugs around is PCP. Acts fast, lasts long, and
makes a "normal" person nearly invincible. HUGE downside to it of course,
so I don't recommend going out and loading up on the stuff. But PCP would
be comparable, I think, to kamikaze, only it's much cheaper.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 69
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:30:43 -0500
At 11:14 AM 4/23/96 PDT, Melchar wrote:
>TopCat (that's me!) <topcat@******.net> writes:
>>[snipped my kamikaze-slamming rant]

> I've never understood myself why kamikaze was written up to be so
>ridiculously harmful. You state the problem extremely well.

Thanks :)

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 70
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:30:36 -0500
>> Kamikaze is an unrealistic drug using unrealistic rules. We can make drugs
>> now that don't have that severe of a side effect and produce equal or better
>> primary effects.

>((Here's something that we have to deal with in the SR world, that we
>don't in RL : Game balance. If there was a drug out there that really
>did work like <you've> been saying, that would really mess with the
>game. Everyone would have it. Balance would be thrown out the door, and
>everything would degrade into the typical poewr-gaming that I've seen all
>too many times. Sure <we> may very well be able to make this fantastic
>drug cheaply, but it won't happen in SRII.))

Never heard of PCP? Steroids? Amazing drugs that can now and would then
produce better effects than kamikaze. By 205X pure adrenalin would be the
combat drug of choice. Natural and effective, lasts a fair while, and cheap
to produce (vat grown adrenal glands pumping out top-notch chemicals 24
hours a day). There's a nasty crash effect, but still not near as bad as
kamikaze.

And here's a note of interest...

Drugs SHOULD be an effective and powerful thing. They're scary now and they
will only become more so. They should be a viable competitor for cyberware,
perhaps with some rules that make some of them more expensive or
debilitating to people who have 'ware. But they should be there and they
should be very effective.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 71
From: mbroadwa@*******.glenayre.com (Mike Broadwater)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:54:28 -0500
>>Psychological addiction is not solely the province of drugs, of course...
>
>And is rarely the province of drugs...

Sure. Right. Those workers you mentioned before, they can quite whenever
they want, right? They don't think they need it to do a better job. 'Roid
users don't think they need the drugs to make them better athletes, etc., do
they? They can quite whenever they feel like it, and go back to being
"normal" with no problems. Almost every drug is psychologically addicting
because the user feels they "need" whatever benefit the drug brings with it.
Strength, alertness, the high, whatever.


Mike Broadwater
http://www.olemiss.edu/~neon
"Madness takes it's toll. Please have exact change."
Message no. 72
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 14:37:30 -0500
At 12:54 PM 4/25/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>>Psychological addiction is not solely the province of drugs, of course...

>>And is rarely the province of drugs...

>Sure. Right. Those workers you mentioned before, they can quite whenever
>they want, right? They don't think they need it to do a better job. 'Roid
>users don't think they need the drugs to make them better athletes, etc., do
>they? They can quite whenever they feel like it, and go back to being
>"normal" with no problems. Almost every drug is psychologically addicting
>because the user feels they "need" whatever benefit the drug brings with it.
>Strength, alertness, the high, whatever.

The workers I mentioned are physically addicted, which is far different than
psychologically. If they quit, they'd crash so far they'd never return. So
they set their alarms, wake up, pop pills before they even roll out of bed,
and then they're able to start the day.

Steroids aren't addictive. People don't go out trying to score them like
they would with cocaine or heroin. They use them to put on mass which
(through a great deal of exercise) turns into muscle. They can quit at any
time. But have you ever seen what happens to people who used steroids to
work out and then stopped using them? They lose a little weight, don't have
the amazing workouts they used to have, and drop a bit physically (but still
remain in pretty good shape). Now what happens when they stop working out
altogether? All that precious muscle turns immediately to fat. Look at
athletes who retired from the games they played and you'll easily spot the
ones who did this. Do they start twitching for more steroids? No, because
they'd have to work out too or they'd just add more fat. Steroids are
useless if you don't exercise (and combat is one hell of an exercise).

Many drugs are not addicting whatsoever. Weak-willed people like to use
that as an excuse not to quit things, because it gives them a running excuse
for anything they do wrong by putting the blame on the drug. I know dozens
of people who have quit various hard drugs. The only people that I ever saw
take it badly were cocaine, speed, and heroin users. Marijuana, LSD, and
Psilocybin users had no problems. Steroid users go as I said above. Most
of what people call "addiction" is simple, recreational use. If you like to
do something, then you'll probably do it. Can you quit doing it? Yep, but
why quit if you like it?

What all psychological addictions boil down to is that most people don't
want to take responsibility for their actions. "It's not my fault I'm
addicted to this, it's the drug's fault!" makes me laugh more than anything
else I've seen. People also want to be "addicted" because it makes them
something. I've seen a lot of people who say "yeah, I was/am an addict"
like its something they should be proud of.

Yikes, have I been on a rant again? Anyway, I think I've made my point
(based on personal and close experiences not hearsay). Think as you will
but always remember one thing... Opinions are what people have when they
don't have the facts. When you have the facts, you don't need an opinion.


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 73
From: mbroadwa@*******.glenayre.com (Mike Broadwater)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 15:02:11 -0500
>Yikes, have I been on a rant again? Anyway, I think I've made my point
>(based on personal and close experiences not hearsay). Think as you will
>but always remember one thing... Opinions are what people have when they
>don't have the facts. When you have the facts, you don't need an opinion.

Well, to respond, psychological addiction is what you just described, people
not quiting because they think they need the drug, whether or not they
actually do. I understand that we may have differing views on this, but to
say that your experiences with drugs and people doing drugs are the be all
and end all of it, and fuck anyone elses, is arrogant in the extreme. I
almost have trouble believing that you could be that pretentious. Perhaps
you'd like to get off your throne and come discuss things with us lesser,
obviously not as informed about drugs as thou, beings? Or do you refuse to
listen to no one but yourself? If so, why are you even bothering to speak?

Mike Broadwater
http://www.olemiss.edu/~neon
"Madness takes it's toll. Please have exact change."
Message no. 74
From: "Sedah Drol" <CCRODRIG@****.indstate.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 16:02:31 EST
> >No... all truly effective drugs are addictive. The key characteristics
> >are the amount of usage required for the addiction, and the nature of
> >addiction. Even if there is no physical addiction, there often develops a
> >psychological addiction.
>
> Using that rational nearly every single activity in the world is addictive
> in some way, shape or form.

Yes anything that a person does frequently can lead to psychological
addiction (note: ppl usually call it a habit). Take excersice nuts
for example: they actually become physically addicted to the high
level of endorphins that are naturally released by the body, which
makes them feel invulnerable. And
when they can't get their excercise fix, they'll act much like a
crack addict who can't get his. Exercise can also kill you. Too
much can make your heart arrest.

> While I won't say that that statement is wrong,
> I will point out that there is a difference between drugs and say...a
> roleplaying game.

Let's see, you need to ingest/inject drugs, but you don't need to
that with roleplaying games, though you could. Many drugs are
illegal, and only a select few of roleplaying games could be (just
depends on what you do). Besides those two diffences I don't think
there are any other differeces.
They both can lead to psychological addiction, hell even the
endorphin rush from a really good adventure can become physcially
addicted. And they both can lead to death (depends how you play the
roleplaying game: real guns+real bullets may equal real death.)
Moderation and self discpline are the key factors on addiction.
There is no drug on this planet that will get everybody hooked the
first time.

>
> >Psychological addiction is not solely the province of drugs, of course...
>
> And is rarely the province of drugs...

How wrong you are.
Actually all drugs can lead to psychological addiction. Take
nicotine for example. Physical addiction is over approximately 4
days after the last introduction of nicotine into the system. But
yet the person will still have the urge(psychological) to smoke
another cigarette when stressed.
In many cases psychological addiction is the hardest addiction to break.
Ever try to quit chewing your fingernails, and finally you did, but
then one day you chip a nail and chew it off and the addiction
resurfaces.


---Sedah Drol

This is a test.....
For the next several lines there will be a test signature.
If this were an actual .sig it would be proceeded with:
a Geek Code script
a Home Page
a quote
and any other information I wish to disclose.
Repeat this was only a test....
Message no. 75
From: Tom Pendergrast <pendergr@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 15:39:14 -0700 (PDT)
>>>Psychological addiction is not solely the province of drugs, of course...
>>And is rarely the province of drugs...
>How wrong you are.

((Have any of you actually checked? You know, looked it up? Asked
someone who would know? Until you do, all you have is hearsay and
opinions.))

>Anyway, I think I've made my point (based on personal and close
>experiences not hearsay). Think as you will but always remember one
>thing... Opinions are what people have when they don't have the facts.

((I repeat my previous statement))

>When you have the facts, you don't need an opinion.

((I'm sorry, but I don't believe that you have much in the way of facts...))

>I understand that we may have differing views on this, but to say that
>your experiences with drugs and people doing drugs are the be all and
>end all of it, and fuck anyone elses, is arrogant in the extreme. I
>almost have trouble believing that you could be that pretentious. Perhaps
>you'd like to get off your throne and come discuss things with us lesser,
>obviously not as informed about drugs as thou, beings? Or do you
>refuse to listen to anyone but yourself? If so, why are you even bothering
>to speak?

((Is this really necessary? If you want to say something like that, do
it over private E-mail, so the rest of us don't have to listen to it.))

---Tom---
Message no. 76
From: Paul@********.demon.co.uk (Paul Jonathan Adam)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 23:01:27 GMT
In message <9604251730.AA05397@**.cencom.net> TopCat writes:
> Drugs SHOULD be an effective and powerful thing. They're scary now and they
> will only become more so. They should be a viable competitor for cyberware,
> perhaps with some rules that make some of them more expensive or
> debilitating to people who have 'ware. But they should be there and they
> should be very effective.

Actually, I have to agree. Kamikaze is a great idea, and its costs are
overstated in 2050s terms given the sort of development push that
corporations would apply.

Makes a shadowrun quite challenging, if you have to eliminate/pacify/
neutralise the security before they pop their combat drugs...

OTOH if it's that good, why get wired reflexes? I can see both sides
of the argument, and FASA work on the "drugs are bad and nasty"
basis.

--
"When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude
towards him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem.
For better or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him." R. A. Lafferty

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 77
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 01:30:15 -0500
>Well, to respond, psychological addiction is what you just described, people
>not quiting because they think they need the drug, whether or not they
>actually do.

I don't feel that psychological addiction refers to what I stated. My
examples didn't think they needed the drug, they let the drug become an
excuse or they just did the drug because they felt like it. Not because
they felt like they HAD to, because they felt like doing it.

>I understand that we may have differing views on this, but to
>say that your experiences with drugs and people doing drugs are the be all
>and end all of it, and fuck anyone elses, is arrogant in the extreme. I
>almost have trouble believing that you could be that pretentious. Perhaps
>you'd like to get off your throne and come discuss things with us lesser,
>obviously not as informed about drugs as thou, beings? Or do you refuse to
>listen to no one but yourself? If so, why are you even bothering to speak?

I listen to everyone and try to inform, not opinionate. As a former (stress
that again for me will you) user I know how drugs affect people first-hand.
I also know that I quit every drug I was doing in one day, with no
side-effects. I used many drugs (mainly alchohol, LSD, Psylocibin, and
Marijuana) very often (pretty close to every day on Marijuana and alchohol,
while dropping @***** a week).

I am not arrogant about my knowledge of the subject, I just know about it
because I've seen these things first-hand. I find it strange how other
people who have seen drug effects first-hand agree with me and those who
have not (who seem to be very vocal in their opinions of how things are)
tend not to.

If its what you want, I'll apologize for knowing about drug use and
answering questions (and questionable statements) about it. Don't know if
that does any justice to the subject, but far be it from me to argue "the
truth".


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 78
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 01:30:25 -0500
>>>Psychological addiction is not solely the province of drugs, of course...

>> And is rarely the province of drugs...

>How wrong you are.
>Actually all drugs can lead to psychological addiction.

Ouch. One of the very first things that people learn now is that "all" is a
word that just begs to be argued. But you toned that with another word that
provides an outlet for everything that doesn't fit "all"... can. Anything
can be psychologically addicting if someone (even yourself) beats you over
the head with info on it enough (which is really conditioning, see below).

>nicotine for example. Physical addiction is over approximately 4
>days after the last introduction of nicotine into the system. But
>yet the person will still have the urge(psychological) to smoke
>another cigarette when stressed.

Nicotine isn't heroin. Nor is it marijuana or alchohol. Plus, with all the
hype about how addicting cigarettes are, people believe their hooked from
the second they see one. If that hype wasn't there, I wonder how many
people would truly be psychologically addicted to them.

As an example, if I take a child from birth and teach it that if a bell
rings it'll get food, it'll expect food when that bell rings. Now if I
teach that same child that cigarettes are addicting and you'll smoke one
whenever your'e stressed and you'll smoke one whenever you don't have
anything to do with your hands and you'll smoke one whenever you drink,
etc... that kid'll be infused with a NEED to smoke in those situations. Was
it an addiction or outside conditioning?

>In many cases psychological addiction is the hardest addiction to break.

I would say that conditioning is the hardest thing to break and that true
psychological addiction to the effects of something is a rare thing indeed.
But those are troubled waters to sail upon, so I'll leave that to the rest
of us closet psychiatrists.


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 79
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 01:30:28 -0500
>((Have any of you actually checked? You know, looked it up? Asked
>someone who would know? Until you do, all you have is hearsay and
>opinions.))

Yep, did papers on it in college and high school. Used for 4 years. Have
quit, live a happy life now with no nasty side effects or desires for drugs
(took 1 day to get that way, if that long).

>((I'm sorry, but I don't believe that you have much in the way of facts...))

I have my life and the lives of a very large group of people who I grew up
with, as well as my (albeit not career-level) study of the subject to
produce my papers.

>>[snipped Mike's rant]

>((Is this really necessary? If you want to say something like that, do
>it over private E-mail, so the rest of us don't have to listen to it.))

He gets like that every once in a while. Don't worry, we all get over it.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 80
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 01:30:31 -0500
>OTOH if it's that good, why get wired reflexes? I can see both sides
>of the argument, and FASA work on the "drugs are bad and nasty"
>basis.

Get wired reflexes because its permanent and doesn't do as much damage to
your body (or does it? 2-5 essence points...). It also doesn't leave you
with a nasty drug hangover. It also works better. Costs more, but in the
long run it'll come out ahead.

I can see the FASA standpoint (if there really is one and they aren't just
discounting drugs because they want chips to be the "drug" of 205X) that
they're bad for you too. So I can go along with that.

The only thing about the argument that really bothered me was the
stereotypical (for once without any backing) view that all users see nasty
beasties and want to jump off of buildings. I felt a need to argue that
point and state what drugs would probably be in use at the time and how
effective they would be. Then there's this "addiction" thing, but I don't
think I'll carry that part of the thread any further as it gets too nasty.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 81
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 96 18:04:58 +1030
TopCat writes:
>But they will work in about 1-5 minutes. If you know you're going into
>combat, then popping one of those is easy. Also, steroids have a tendency
>to produce similar (albeit lesser) effects long after they've been
>introduced into the body. So some of that combat ability would always be
>available.

I did mention this, Bob... I was pointing out that Kamikaze works in 2
seconds!! _That's_ why it has the harmful effects mentioned.


--
Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
Message no. 82
From: "Andre' Selmer" <031ANDRE@******.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 12:31:54 GMT + 2:00
@ Why not use pure adrenalin in Shadowrun? Run the effects like an adrenal pum
@ p.
@
@ Anyway... there's some thoughts.

One of the problems with adrenalin, although natural and all
that, it still stresses the body. I would suggest that any individual
taking pure adrenalin, should make a body roll or such, modified by
synthcardium etc or suffer the equivilent of a heart attack. The
reason why I am mentioning this is because a couple of years ago, my
friends and myself where dipping into hypnosis. On one occation we
suggested to a friend that he was *very* excited and that adrenalin
was coursing through his veins. It took us about an hour to calm his
down and stop his hyperventalating, you could see his temples
throbbing 19 to the dozen.

Adding adrenalin to an already over active body will cause some
harmful side effects.





Andre'

-- We exist because you want us to, because you are
|__|__ afraid to fact the facts. We are what you fear
/\ /\ \ in the deep recesses of your soul, yourselves.
|\ /\ /| | It is there in the shadows of your soul and those
|/ \/ \| | of the street that we exist. Through the use of
\/__\/ might, magic, cunning, blood, sweat and tears we
protect you from your fears, from youselves, from
others and keep your utopia, not ours, intact.
Message no. 83
From: "Andre' Selmer" <031ANDRE@******.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 12:43:53 GMT + 2:00
@
@ OTOH if it's that good, why get wired reflexes? I can see both sides
@ of the argument, and FASA work on the "drugs are bad and nasty"
@ basis.

Image. You are considered a lot more dangerous when you react in
milliseconds to a sudden event. The alternative 1, NPC shoots at you,
you dive behind wall, fumble with appropriate drug, inject, wait,
...<DEAD?>. Alternative 2, NPC Shoots at you, you draw and fire a him
before he even pulls the trigger.

Availability. After having one hell of a run into Amazonia, you
now have to run out, reaching for you faithful dispensor youy
squeeze. Phut. <Insert Epithath> you ran out, nasty looking Naga
that, OOPs.


Admittidly you can be more creative with certain drugs. I
remember a mage we hurt very badly but shoving him full of drugs MR
<pop>,<pop>,<pop>.




Andre'

-- We exist because you want us to, because you are
|__|__ afraid to fact the facts. We are what you fear
/\ /\ \ in the deep recesses of your soul, yourselves.
|\ /\ /| | It is there in the shadows of your soul and those
|/ \/ \| | of the street that we exist. Through the use of
\/__\/ might, magic, cunning, blood, sweat and tears we
protect you from your fears, from youselves, from
others and keep your utopia, not ours, intact.
Message no. 84
From: "A Halliwell" <u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 11:40:21 +0100 (BST)
|
|>Well, to respond, psychological addiction is what you just described, people
|>not quiting because they think they need the drug, whether or not they
|>actually do.
|
|I don't feel that psychological addiction refers to what I stated. My
|examples didn't think they needed the drug, they let the drug become an
|excuse or they just did the drug because they felt like it. Not because
|they felt like they HAD to, because they felt like doing it.

How many times have you heard smokers saying.
"I can quit any time I want. I *LIKE* smoking."
And when they do try to quit, they can't.

|I listen to everyone and try to inform, not opinionate. As a former (stress
|that again for me will you) user I know how drugs affect people first-hand.
|I also know that I quit every drug I was doing in one day, with no
|side-effects. I used many drugs (mainly alchohol, LSD, Psylocibin, and
|Marijuana) very often (pretty close to every day on Marijuana and alchohol,
|while dropping @***** a week).

Apart from alchohol, none og the above drugs are addictive.
(In fact, LSD is "counter addictive", in the sense that the body builds up a
tolerance which takes a few days to a week to go away.
You take LSD 3 days in a row, and by the third day, it won't have any effect
at all.

|I am not arrogant about my knowledge of the subject, I just know about it
|because I've seen these things first-hand. I find it strange how other
|people who have seen drug effects first-hand agree with me and those who
|have not (who seem to be very vocal in their opinions of how things are)
|tend not to.

Sounds like the alt.drugs groups. The people who know are constantly
battling the people who know nothing.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack in |
|u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk |the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you can't |
| |move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell |Consider how lucky you are that life has been good |
|Principal subjects in:-|to you so far... |
|Comp Sci & Visual Arts | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy. |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/FA>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ 5++ |
|X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can still say FUCK! Americans can't|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 85
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 10:48:54 -0400 (EDT)
At 01:30 4/26/96 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Nicotine isn't heroin. Nor is it marijuana or alchohol. Plus, with all the
>hype about how addicting cigarettes are, people believe their hooked from
>the second they see one. If that hype wasn't there, I wonder how many
>people would truly be psychologically addicted to them.
>

I've seen pack a day smoker unable to buy a new pack start shaking and
fiending. Even those who quit still have an oral fixation. I don't think
that is a physical addiction.

>As an example, if I take a child from birth and teach it that if a bell
>rings it'll get food, it'll expect food when that bell rings. Now if I
>teach that same child that cigarettes are addicting and you'll smoke one
>whenever your'e stressed and you'll smoke one whenever you don't have
>anything to do with your hands and you'll smoke one whenever you drink,
>etc... that kid'll be infused with a NEED to smoke in those situations. Was
>it an addiction or outside conditioning?
>

What's the difference? Outside become a pshycological addiction. Training
someone to have a inate need for something at specific times sounds alot
like naturally having a inate need for the same thing at similar times. It's
still a psychological addiction just one was caused by someone else.

Sasquatch
(The technican formerly known as BLAIR)

------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Support Bacteria! |
| It's the only culture some people have. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 86
From: MikeE@******.dragonsys.com
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners -Reply
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 10:51:26 -0500
Mike Broadwater wrote: "I understand that we may have differing views on this,
but to say that your experiences with drugs and people doing drugs are the be all
and end all of it, and fuck anyone elses, is arrogant in the extreme. I almost have
trouble believing that you could be that pretentious. Perhaps you'd like to get off
your throne and come discuss things with us lesser, obviously not as informed
about drugs as thou, beings? Or do you refuse to listen to no one but yourself?
If so, why are you even bothering to speak?"

What are you talking about? When I read it I didn't find the original post any
more pretentious than the average statement on this list, probably less so in fact.
Please keep your tone more civil, or reply via private email.

Double-Domed Mike
Message no. 87
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 14:12:06 -0500
>Apart from alchohol, none og the above drugs are addictive.
>(In fact, LSD is "counter addictive", in the sense that the body builds up a
>tolerance which takes a few days to a week to go away.
>You take LSD 3 days in a row, and by the third day, it won't have any effect
>at all.

Never really thought of anything as counter-additive before. But it is true
that you build a tolerance (pretty rapidly) with LSD use. This tolerance
also disappears rapidly (as he mentioned, within a few days the
dosage:effect ratio will be back to normal). I wouldn't say it has no
effect after three days of use, but it is lessened (unless you take more of
it or get more potent stuff). I can't think of a time when I did 3 days in
a row, so I guess I can't answer that. But I do know that I had to do a lot
more at the end than at the start to get the effect I wanted.


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 88
From: "Sedah Drol" <CCRODRIG@****.indstate.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 01:13:03 EST
> >>>Psychological addiction is not solely the province of drugs, of course...

> >>And is rarely the province of drugs...
> >How wrong you are.
>
> ((Have any of you actually checked? You know, looked it up? Asked
> someone who would know? Until you do, all you have is hearsay and
> opinions.))

I would say I do know.
I use drugs on a daily basis. Why? The same reason many people
drink. Because they like too. I have done LSD, marijuana,
psylicblin, and even crack (which by the way is perhaps the most
boring drug in the world. I get a better high from drinking a cup of
coffee). There was a point that I was psychologically addicted to
LSD. It made me feel really good. I was dosing every other day
because I thought that the only way I could feel that good was with
the drug. My friends quickly pointed out how wrong I was. And I was
able to break that habit.

>
> >Anyway, I think I've made my point (based on personal and close
> >experiences not hearsay). Think as you will but always remember one
> >thing... Opinions are what people have when they don't have the facts.
>
> ((I repeat my previous statement))
>
> >When you have the facts, you don't need an opinion.
>
> ((I'm sorry, but I don't believe that you have much in the way of facts...))

What kind of facts are you looking for. Drugs are something that
affect people in differnt ways. The only thing you can do is
generalize. How do you generalize, by running tests or by personal
experiences. The only fact is that there are many organizations out
there that are determined to prove that drugs are bad and morally
wrong to use. You want facts here they are:

A drug is a foreing substance that is introduce to the body that
creates an inbalance in body chemistry (it affects the way chemicals
are produced and/or work in the body). The directly lethal ones are called
commonly called posions. By directly lethal I mean the substance
directly affects certain bodily fucntions in a way that it is lethal
to the organism. Note: a drug that causes cancer that later kills the
organism is not directly letal.

Note all drugs are illegal in arab nations, if my sources are
still correct.

Alcohol is a poison to homo-sapiens, the amount of the poison
required to kill is different per person though it tends to be quite
large. It is legal in most non-arab countries.
Those who are addicted to alcholol are commonly refered to as
alcoholics. The cause of the addiction is still unknown.

Nicotine is a poison to homo-sapiens, the amount of the poison
required to kill, one drop from an eyedropper (less than one gram).
Nicotine can be a physicaly addictive poison. Legal in most non-arab
nations.

Marijuana is a plant. It contains a chemical compound that is known as THC.
This compound is not physcially addictive and is not lethal. Many
"users" claim that it puts them in a state of eurphoria although
these claims are unsubstantiated. Why you may ask because peoples
individual perceptions may differ. It is illegal in many non-arab
nations, though it is used as a pain releiver for glaucoma and cancer
patients.

LSD is a chemical compound that is derived form lysergic amides
commonly found in the ergot fungus and milder forms are also found in
Hawaiin wood-rose seeds and morning glory seeds. This compound is
not addictive and not lethal. Many user's claim that it cause
"hallucinations", this cannot be substantiated due to the fact that
peoples individual perceptions may differ. It is illegal in may
non-arab nations, though some countries have experimented with its
potential as a psychiatric drug.

Cocaine is a derivitive from the coca plant. It can be physically
addictive (ususally caused by habitual use) and lethal (the amount of
cocaine needed to kill differs per person, from less than a gram to
kilo's of coccaine----Don't even try to argue about the kilo's part
Alister Crawely was a habitual cocaine user, he would introduce to
his body enough cocaine to kill a shit load of people, I can't
remember the exact quantity. Read up on his writings. Good luck not
to many place carry his works though, I do know that the Lake County
Public library in Merriville, Indiana (USA) carries some of his
works). Medically it is used as a pain reliever and a local
anesthetic in many non-arab countries.

Heroin is a derivitive from the poppy plant. It can be physically
addicted and lethal (though I do not know the quanities for
lethality, they should vary from person to person.) Derivatives from
the poppy plant are used as pain releivers in many non-arab
countries.

I do possess more knowledge than what I stated above. I love when
the drugs in shadowrun thread comes up. I love to teach to those who
are willing to listen, and I have also learned of some out dated
"facts" from other listmembers.

Wait a minute I never defined fact did I. Fact is a generic word for
data. Data is information gathered from perceptions. I believe it
was once a fact that the earth was flat, is it still? No, Facts
change as people gain the ability to perceive things differently.
Some facts are belived to be true. Let me tell you something there
is no truth. We can only perceive what we believe to be true. It seems to me that
some people want citations from books and other sources of data. And
when they get it they think that because a person has a Ph.D. in the
subject that it is true. For everything that someone says is Fact, I
can usually find something else that contradicts that Fact.
I am at work right now and it has taken me almost three hours to type
this message. So I have to go now I've written enought for right
now. Please excuse any thoughts that I wrote and didn't complete.
And as usual I did not intend to offend anyone, if I did, please
accept my most humblest appologies. And Mr. Broadwater I
congratulate you on not being as offensive as you usually are. I have
definately seen an improvement. :) We almost agree totally on something for
once.:)






>
> >I understand that we may have differing views on this, but to say that
> >your experiences with drugs and people doing drugs are the be all and
> >end all of it, and fuck anyone elses, is arrogant in the extreme. I
> >almost have trouble believing that you could be that pretentious. Perhaps
> >you'd like to get off your throne and come discuss things with us lesser,
> >obviously not as informed about drugs as thou, beings? Or do you
> >refuse to listen to anyone but yourself? If so, why are you even bothering
> >to speak?
>
> ((Is this really necessary? If you want to say something like that, do
> it over private E-mail, so the rest of us don't have to listen to it.))

I have to agree with you here, different language could of been used.
But I don't know how long you've been on the list, but he likes to
use that type of language and attack. I usually ignore it.



TC, don't worry my response to your conditioning vs. psychological
addiction is on my computer at home. I'll probably finish it
tommorrow. I know you just can't wait.
I just realize that I kind of put my closing statements in the middle
of this reply. I didn't mean two, It's just that I jump around alot
when I am responding. I apologize for any confusion it may have
cause. And I like to say one more thing on my behalf. I am sober
right now. In another couple of hours I don't plan on being sober.
Has anyone though of any rules to allow for addiction to stim
patches. After all they are a stimulant. Enough rambling for now.


---Sedah Drol





This is a test.....
For the next several lines there will be a test signature.
If this were an actual .sig it would be proceeded with:
a Geek Code script
a Home Page
a quote
and any other information I wish to disclose.
Repeat this was only a test....
Message no. 89
From: William Monroe Ashe <wma6617@*******.tamu.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 01:10:41 -0500 (CDT)
On Fri, 26 Apr 1996, TopCat wrote:

> Never really thought of anything as counter-additive before. But it is true
> that you build a tolerance (pretty rapidly) with LSD use. This tolerance
> also disappears rapidly (as he mentioned, within a few days the
> dosage:effect ratio will be back to normal). I wouldn't say it has no
> effect after three days of use, but it is lessened (unless you take more of
> it or get more potent stuff). I can't think of a time when I did 3 days in
> a row, so I guess I can't answer that. But I do know that I had to do a lot
> more at the end than at the start to get the effect I wanted.
Top Cat you naughty boy. But actually this brings up an interesting
point. If we now with all of the social bias against "DRUG" use of any kind
still take a pleasant day 'trip' now and then, why shouldn't (in the SRII
future where things like Kamikaze and BTL are almost legal) the use of happy
stuff ... chips, pills, shots ... be even MORE common. In fact I would
argue that among the "lower classes" where more of the street sammy's, or
chromed up go gangers come from drug use would be commonplace. In fact
it would be a very rare individual who wouldn't indulge. If you look at
the books that have come out recently it appears to me that substance USE
is almost guranteed. Please note the difference between use and abuse.
I tend to agree that an abuser would lose his/her edge and get geeked
pretty quick.

Oh well My opinion is worth the paper it's printed on ... so if you don't
like it don't print it

Bill
Message no. 90
From: Russ Myrick <rm91612@****.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 01:25:49 -0700
Andre' Selmer wrote:
> One of the problems with adrenalin, although natural and all
> that, it still stresses the body. I would suggest that any individual
> taking pure adrenalin, should make a body roll or such, modified by
> synthcardium etc or suffer the equivilent of a heart attack. The
> reason why I am mentioning this is because a couple of years ago, my
> friends and myself where dipping into hypnosis. On one occation we
> suggested to a friend that he was *very* excited and that adrenalin
> was coursing through his veins. It took us about an hour to calm his
> down and stop his hyperventalating, you could see his temples
> throbbing 19 to the dozen.
>
> Adding adrenalin to an already over active body will cause some
> harmful side effects.
> One of the things they tried to teach us in E&E/POW training was the use
of self induced adrenal shock to counter sodium pentalthol(sp?). Too
much adrenaline results in blackouts, heart seizures in the form of
aniginas mostly, and embolisms (the Bends), and the worst of all was
stroke usually massive/fatal -- one airdale when tits up because of it
during the class before mine.
Message no. 91
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 11:14:53 +0100
Andre' Selmer <shadowrn@********.itribe.net> said on 12:43/26 Apr 96...

> Image. You are considered a lot more dangerous when you react in
> milliseconds to a sudden event. The alternative 1, NPC shoots at you,
> you dive behind wall, fumble with appropriate drug, inject, wait,
> ...<DEAD?>. Alternative 2, NPC Shoots at you, you draw and fire a him
> before he even pulls the trigger.

But, as has been pointed out, this is a matter of being prepared. It's the
same sort of thing as walking around with an unloaded gun, and the
ammunition in your pocket. If you have a fully loaded gun, you can shoot
back much sooner...

It would be in your best interest to take the drugs before you start the
fight; and if you're not the on starting it, how about ending it without
taking drugs? Might improve your survival chances at that particular time,
IMHO.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
What's the difference between actors and politicians?
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 92
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:21:27 -0500
At 12:31 PM 4/26/96, Andre wrote:
>> Why not use pure adrenalin in Shadowrun? Run the effects
>> like an adrenal pump
>> Anyway... there's some thoughts.

>[snipped the need for harmful side effects if adrenalin is used as a drug]

S'why I said to run the effects like an adrenal pump. :)

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 93
From: Charlie <gaustin@********.com>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 10:26:05 -0400 (EDT)
Howdy,
I was just looking through the Lone Star Sourcebook, and I found
an interesting tidbits that I thought y'all would be interested in.

Page 85, Second Column
As of 2054, drug use is almost nonexistant, abandoned in favor of
illegally modified simsense chips. [lenghty description about simsense
chips snipped]

This is in shadowtalk, so if it's true or not depends on you or
your GM, but if you take it as truth, it would explain why your 'Runners
don't do drugs.

Just my 10=Y= (I'm expensive *grin*)
-Charlie

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Charlie @ Btech (all of 'em) Kerlin Kerensky @ Btech 3010
Head Director, Btech 3010 "The Clan Wars" Khan, Clan Coyote

[Normal snappy quote snipped on account of the fuckin' CDA.]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=gaustin@********.com-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Message no. 94
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:30:19 -0500
I guess I've failed to present _my_view_ on psychological addiction well.
So here goes...

Psychological addiction is not due to drug or anything other than the addict
himself. The drug or situation does absolutely nothing to make the addict
addicted. The addict chooses (sometimes subconsciously) to be addicted to
an item. If the drug makes the person addicted, then it is physical. If
the person becomes "addicted" because he likes it, it isn't due to the drug,
it's due to the "addict".

In essence, this is kind of like "bullets don't kill people, people kill
people". The same holds true for psychological addiction. Drugs won't make
you psychologically dependent on them, you'll do that (or in many cases, you
won't).

Hope this clears up things...


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 95
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:45:01 -0500
At 10:26 AM 4/27/96 -0400, Charlie wrote:
>Page 85, Second Column
> As of 2054, drug use is almost nonexistant, abandoned in favor of
>illegally modified simsense chips. [lenghty description about simsense
>chips snipped]
> This is in shadowtalk, so if it's true or not depends on you or
>your GM, but if you take it as truth, it would explain why your 'Runners
>don't do drugs.

Check out the Aztlan sourcebook and the Denver set. Both mention drugs
repeatedly. And then there's the Chemistry section in ShadowTech. I know,
I know..."I can't believe SR would ever have conflicting statements in
different books". Go figure ;)

I'm also pretty sure there's mention of drugs in Lone Star other than that
blurb on pg. 85 (Jazz, as well as others, and the legal ramifications of
use/abuse). I don't own the book, but had borrowed it for a few months a
while back, so I could be wrong there.

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 96
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 96 00:19:56 +1030
>Page 85, Second Column
> As of 2054, drug use is almost nonexistant, abandoned in favor of
>illegally modified simsense chips. [lenghty description about simsense
>chips snipped]

That's for the UCAS... it's not the same everywhere. In particular, the
UK seems to still do drugs in favour of chips.


--
_______________________________________________________________________
/ \
| "As soon as we started programming, we found to our surprise that it |
| wasn't as easy to get programs right as we had thought. Debugging |
| had to be discovered. I can remember the exact instant when I |
| realized that a large part of my life from then on was going to be |
| spent in finding mistakes in my own programs." -- Maurice Wilkes |
| Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au |
\_______________________________________________________________________/
Message no. 97
From: Charlie <gaustin@********.com>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 10:58:09 -0400 (EDT)
On Sat, 27 Apr 1996, TopCat wrote:

[snipped me ramblin']

> Check out the Aztlan sourcebook and the Denver set. Both mention drugs
> repeatedly. And then there's the Chemistry section in ShadowTech. I know,
> I know..."I can't believe SR would ever have conflicting statements in
> different books". Go figure ;)

Grin, Well I have neither Atzlan nor the Denver set (Sound like they're
worth getting tho) And I have come to expect FASA to have conflicting
statements on just about everything. I just dropped that lil tidbit 'cuz
it seemed that one authors point of view was that Drugs are out. (Or he
could have just be trying to confuse the hell out've me.)

> I'm also pretty sure there's mention of drugs in Lone Star other than that
> blurb on pg. 85 (Jazz, as well as others, and the legal ramifications of
> use/abuse). I don't own the book, but had borrowed it for a few months a
> while back, so I could be wrong there.

Yep, Jazz and Laes. Both pretty kewl, if I may say so myself. Too bad
they fry your mind though. :P


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Charlie @ Btech (all of 'em) Kerlin Kerensky @ Btech 3010
Head Director, Btech 3010 "The Clan Wars" Khan, Clan Coyote

[Normal snappy quote snipped on account of the fuckin' CDA.]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=gaustin@********.com-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Message no. 98
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 11:09:38 -0500
>Wait a minute I never defined fact did I. Fact is a generic word for
>data. Data is information gathered from perceptions. I believe it
>was once a fact that the earth was flat, is it still? No, Facts
>change as people gain the ability to perceive things differently.

Wrong. Facts don't change due to perception. Situations that produce
different _data_ can happen though. And though people had the _opinion_
that the world was flat, they didn't have the facts because no-one had
thought to check it out. Mostly due to fear of the unknown. Facts are truth.

>Some facts are belived to be true.

Look up "fact" in a dictionary.

>Let me tell you something there is no truth.

Yeegads...

>We can only perceive what we believe to be true.

When it is personal perception alone that produces your results, you have an
opinion. If that includes personal experiences, you have data. If that
data matches up with all other data in a way that is too similar to call
different, then you have fact. As I said before, facts are truth.

>For everything that someone says is Fact, I
>can usually find something else that contradicts that Fact.

Then it wasn't ever a fact, it was an opinion or data. Perceptions often
form opinions and experiments can be tailored to produce the "right" data.
Facts are incontrovertible. There aren't a lot of facts out there. There's
a lot of data out there, though and a whole lot of opinion. Sometimes that
data will be able to produce fact. Sometimes opinions are correct. But you
don't know for sure until it becomes fact.

>TC, don't worry my response to your conditioning vs. psychological
>addiction is on my computer at home. I'll probably finish it
>tommorrow. I know you just can't wait.

Be sure to check out my latest post on psychological addiction as well...

--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 99
From: cobaltblue@********.net
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 96 12:07:58 PDT
On Sat, 27 Apr 1996 09:45:01 -0500 TopCat wrote:
snipped a buncha stuff..
>I'm also pretty sure there's mention of drugs in Lone Star other than that
>blurb on pg. 85 (Jazz, as well as others, and the legal ramifications of
>use/abuse). I don't own the book, but had borrowed it for a few months a
>while back, so I could be wrong there.

I mentioned Jazz at the beginning of this drug discussion, and no one commented. It's a
very good drug, low side effects, designed specifically for LS which adds +1 ini die (I
think, someone borrowed my book) for a max of +3 ini. PC/NPC resists light wound with
each dose, and it works fast. Of the combat drugs in SR, it's probably the best.

cobaltblue@********.net

Rod Schmidt
Ft. Bragg, NC
Message no. 100
From: "Sedah Drol" <sedahdro@******.holli.com>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 14:58:46 +500
> Ouch. One of the very first things that people learn now is that "all" is
a
> word that just begs to be argued. But you toned that with another word that
> provides an outlet for everything that doesn't fit "all"... can. Anything
> can be psychologically addicting if someone (even yourself) beats you over
> the head with info on it enough (which is really conditioning, see below).

Yes I realized that when I wrote it "All" means 100% there is nothing
that I can think of that is 100% correct. That is why I used "can".

Beating something into someones head is an attempt to condition. A
psychological addiction to anything is a psychological need to do
something, in other words your body doesn't need it but your psyche
does. Without the object of your addiction your personality and/or
emotions change and make you feel uncomfortable. The causes of
psychological addiction are still unknown.
A physcial addiction is when your body craves something.
This is caused by a substance being introduced to your body that is
normally not present. This substance tends to mimic another chemical
that is produce in the body naturally. The body then proceeds to
stop producing it's natural chemical in order to maintain a balance.
After a certin amount of time you body becomes completely dependent
on the "alien" substance for the chemical that in no longer produces.
When the person stops taking the substance the body asks for it, due
to the fact that it requires the chemical it mimic and has
"forgotten" how to produce it. Of course after a period of time the
body does relearn how to produce the natural chemical.

>
> >nicotine for example. Physical addiction is over approximately 4
> >days after the last introduction of nicotine into the system. But
> >yet the person will still have the urge(psychological) to smoke
> >another cigarette when stressed.
>
> Nicotine isn't heroin. Nor is it marijuana or alchohol. Plus, with all the
> hype about how addicting cigarettes are, people believe their hooked from
> the second they see one.

Actually, when I started smoking I did not believe that nicotine was
addictive at least to me. I am a strong believer in if mind over
body. If you believe something is true, you open a doorway for the
truth to become reality. If you disbelieve, you put up a wall to
help fight against something that could be fact but that is another
thread entirely. For me though smoking has become such an integral
part of life that it has become a habit (which is really what I
understand to be an example of psychological addiction).To my
knowledge my body doesn't crave nicotine which would be a physical addiction.


>If that hype wasn't there, I wonder how many
> people would truly be psychologically addicted to them.
>
> As an example, if I take a child from birth and teach it that if a bell
> rings it'll get food, it'll expect food when that bell rings.

Pavlov's dogs: ring the bell dogs salivate which is an example of
positve reinforcement classical conditioning (which of course the
most succesful type of conditioning)

>Now if I
> teach that same child that cigarettes are addicting and you'll smoke one
> whenever your'e stressed and you'll smoke one whenever you don't have
> anything to do with your hands and you'll smoke one whenever you drink,
> etc... that kid'll be infused with a NEED to smoke in those situations. Was
> it an addiction or outside conditioning?

Interesting. You bring up the point of beating something into
someones head to be true. If that person believes it to be true you
have successfully conditioned the person.
Makes me think can a person be conditoned to think they are
psychologically addicted to something? I would have to say yes.

>
> >In many cases psychological addiction is the hardest addiction to break.
>
> I would say that conditioning is the hardest thing to break and that true
> psychological addiction to the effects of something is a rare thing
>indeed. But those are troubled waters to sail upon, so I'll leave that to the rest
> of us closet psychiatrists.

Yes I have to agree conditioning would be harder to break then a
psychological addiction but there is a difference between the two.
How do you define psychological addiction?



I never looked at it that way, in our culture (U.S.) we are in a way
conditioned to believe that drugs are bad and all are addicting.
Perhaps that's why more people do become addicted to drugs they
expect it to happen. Those of us who are strong willed and question
everything that is told to us, tend to be able to fend off the
addiction.

---Sedah Drol

---------
ATTN: Due to lack of Interest, tommorow has been cancelled.
---------
GC3.1
GO>CS d- s:--- a21 c++++>$ u--- P L-- E? W+>W+++ N o? k?
w+>w++++ O--- M-- V PS+++ PE Y+ PGP- t++ 5+ x++ R++>+++$
b- DI++ D+ G++ e* h r++ y++
Message no. 101
From: "Sedah Drol" <sedahdro@******.holli.com>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 15:32:31 +500
> >Apart from alchohol, none og the above drugs are addictive.
> >(In fact, LSD is "counter addictive", in the sense that the body builds
up a
> >tolerance which takes a few days to a week to go away.
> >You take LSD 3 days in a row, and by the third day, it won't have any effect
> >at all.
>
> Never really thought of anything as counter-additive before. But it is true
> that you build a tolerance (pretty rapidly) with LSD use. This tolerance
> also disappears rapidly (as he mentioned, within a few days the
> dosage:effect ratio will be back to normal). I wouldn't say it has no
> effect after three days of use, but it is lessened (unless you take more of
> it or get more potent stuff). I can't think of a time when I did 3 days in
> a row, so I guess I can't answer that. But I do know that I had to do a lot
> more at the end than at the start to get the effect I wanted.

TC has the right idea on how LSD's "tolerance" works. To elaberate a
little bit more. Fist day you take one dose, the next day you must
take two doses to get the effect of one dose, the next day you need
to take three to four doses to get the effect of one dose. This
does vary from person to person from 1 extra dose to double dosage
depending on your metabolism (for me it is one extra dose). Because of this effect, one
should a wait a period of at least
24hrs before attempting to dose again (this is also different from
person to person), or else in can get quite expensive. Even if you
dose for three days straight, on average a wait of 24hrs is all that
is needed to be able to trip of of one dose. Also note that the
amount of micrograms per dose differs even with doses from the same
batch.

---Sedah Drol
---------
ATTN: Due to lack of Interest, tommorow has been cancelled.
---------
GC3.1
GO>CS d- s:--- a21 c++++>$ u--- P L-- E? W+>W+++ N o? k?
w+>w++++ O--- M-- V PS+++ PE Y+ PGP- t++ 5+ x++ R++>+++$
b- DI++ D+ G++ e* h r++ y++
Message no. 102
From: "Sedah Drol" <sedahdro@******.holli.com>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 15:32:31 +500
> I guess I've failed to present _my_view_ on psychological addiction well.
> So here goes...
>
> Psychological addiction is not due to drug or anything other than the addict
> himself. The drug or situation does absolutely nothing to make the addict
> addicted. The addict chooses (sometimes subconsciously) to be addicted to
> an item. If the drug makes the person addicted, then it is physical. If
> the person becomes "addicted" because he likes it, it isn't due to the
drug,
> it's due to the "addict".
>
> In essence, this is kind of like "bullets don't kill people, people kill
> people". The same holds true for psychological addiction. Drugs won't make
> you psychologically dependent on them, you'll do that (or in many cases, you
> won't).

Yes!!! That is exactly correct. The persons own psyche makes them
addicted. It's not a direct cause of the drug. Hell, and
conditioning doesn't help prevent the addiction either.
--- Sedah Drol

---------
ATTN: Due to lack of Interest, tommorow has been cancelled.
---------
GC3.1
GO>CS d- s:--- a21 c++++>$ u--- P L-- E? W+>W+++ N o? k?
w+>w++++ O--- M-- V PS+++ PE Y+ PGP- t++ 5+ x++ R++>+++$
b- DI++ D+ G++ e* h r++ y++
Message no. 103
From: Hairy Smurf <ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 18:06:09 -0400 (EDT)
At 14:58 4/27/96 +500, you wrote:
>
>How do you define psychological addiction?
>
> ---Sedah Drol

Webster's Dictionary

Psychological: 1a: of or relating to psychology b: MENTAL 2:directed toward
the will or toward the mind specif. in its conative function <~ warfare>

Addiction: 1: the quality or state of being addicted <~ to reading> 2:
compulsive physiological need for a habit-forming drug (as heroin)

Addict: 1: to devote or surrender (oneself) to something habitually or
obsessively <~ed to gaambling> 2: to cause (a person) to become
physiologically dependent upon a drug

Sasquatch: a mysterious animal reported as existing in the northwest
woodlands of North America and usu. thought to be a bear

------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Support Bacteria! |
| It's the only culture some people have. |
| |
| ab130f92@*******.adelphi.edu |
| tech@*******.adelphi.edu blair@*****.adelphi.edu |
| No Website (yet) |
------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 104
From: Russ Myrick <rm91612@****.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 10:35:30 -0700
I don't have the Lone Star Book, so I'm shootin' blind here.

Was the post to shadowtalk in LSSB made by an official from LS or .gov??

If so, it could be a case of yellow journalism. Putin' their spin on the
world to make JQ Public think they're a useful and "successful" entity in
the world -- "We're the Government. We're here to help. Just think what
it would be like without our interfer ... er, assistance. Trust us, you
can't help yourselves."

We see this alot here in the US. The various city police depts. telling
the city councils & the public how good they're doing (to gain the
confidence of the masses), then turnig around & cryin' for mo'money to
fight the bad guys. Case in point: Orlando, Florida -- "The Strip"
covers an area roughly 5 blocks either side of the Orange Blossom
Expressway & O.B.Trail, from about 4 blocks north of Hwy 50 south about 2
1/2 kliks. The police refer to it as "The Zone" on the scanners and "The
Strip" to the public. When you're in the zone and a fire fight breaks
out among the various drug factions, it is reasonable to assume that a
call to 911 will result in LEO arrival about 30-40min AFTER the shooting
stops. It was for this reason that the US Navy made the area of limits
to base personnel when I was stationed down there. During the 3 years
that I was there only one black & white unit bothered to stop in the zone
by itself -- stopped at a traffic light & was torched in less than
30sec.; there are no regular patrol routes through the zone except on
paper for the city council & public records. When "60 Minutes" inquired
about this situation several years ago they were severely stonewalled and
even got the bum's rush with the assistance of the US Treasury Dept.
Message no. 105
From: PDL@****.dacom.co.kr
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 96 12:52:42 PDT
---------------Original Message---------------
> As an example, if I take a child from birth and teach it that if a bell
> rings it'll get food, it'll expect food when that bell rings.

Pavlov's dogs: ring the bell dogs salivate which is an example of
positve reinforcement classical conditioning (which of course the
most succesful type of conditioning)


---Sedah Drol

----------End of Original Message----------
I would like to call your attention to the work of B.F. Skinner. He refers to the above
as respondent conditioning. He also discovered the extinction occurs when the subject is
not reinforced after a steady response rate. In Pavlov's example of dogs and salivation,
extinction will occur when the dogs are not reinforced with food after hearing the bell.

Someone mentioned Alstaire Crowley in this discussion, as he was addicted to drugs and he
kicked them. Yes, Crowley has written more on the subject of drugs then most human
beings. He did develop a drug treatment program during his life. I would also like to
point out that this man was far from your average human being. He held the title of Poet
Laurate, a speed mountain climbing record (for K2 I believe), founded the Golden Dawn
tradition of Hermetic magic, and those are just the things I thought of off the top of my
head. I don't think you can say the average person can necessarily do what Crowley did.
If you are looking to read his works, any good New Age books store should carry or at
least be able to order them. "Diary of a Drug Fiend" is a novel written by
Crowley which contains his views on drugs and is said to be highly autobiographical.

Patrick
Message no. 106
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 23:24:27 -0500
>Makes me think can a person be conditoned to think they are
>psychologically addicted to something? I would have to say yes.

Which is the point I try to get at, but never seem to reach... that accursed
tendency to ramble. :)

>I never looked at it that way, in our culture (U.S.) we are in a way
>conditioned to believe that drugs are bad and all are addicting.
>Perhaps that's why more people do become addicted to drugs they
>expect it to happen. Those of us who are strong willed and question
>everything that is told to us, tend to be able to fend off the
>addiction.

I'm also from the US, and I know exactly what you mean. That last bit is
especially true, but there's not a lot of that around now. I don't like to
think I have a strong will (I dropped out of college and bow to certain
fashions), but I do like to question things.


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 107
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 23:51:10 -0500
>Yes!!! That is exactly correct. The persons own psyche makes them
>addicted. It's not a direct cause of the drug. Hell, and
>conditioning doesn't help prevent the addiction either.
> --- Sedah Drol

Same wavelength, different way of expressing it. Seems to be a common thread
in the arguments I pick nowadays...*sigh* <makes a note to try not to ramble
as much anymore>.


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 108
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 96 15:01:31 +1030
>>Let me tell you something there is no truth.
>
>Yeegads...

He's right. There is no truth, there is only experience. And as
experience is a function of memory, and memory is unreliable, there can
only be perceptions of what occured. And no set of perceptions will be
exactly alike. Many in fact will be radically different.

>>We can only perceive what we believe to be true.
>
>When it is personal perception alone that produces your results, you have an
>opinion. If that includes personal experiences, you have data. If that
>data matches up with all other data in a way that is too similar to call
>different, then you have fact. As I said before, facts are truth.

Correct up to a point... Personal experience usually results in
conflicting data, because people PERCEIVE the world through various
filters, which have the job of making sure that stuff we don't believe
doesn't get seen. (They also try to reduce the flow of information coming
in, as the brain doesn't like to handle that much). Because of these
filters, perceptions can be radically different.

Personal experience: "I walked from here to a city 300 kilometers away.
Now, if the Earth was round, I'd have spent most of the time going either
uphill or downhill (unless I walked over the edge of the curve, I guess),
and I'd now be standing on a slant! So the Earth must be flat. QED!"
Ignoring the conclusion at the end, we gather all the rest of the data we
can find, and there would be little differences. In addition, some people
would say "It was like I walked uphill all the way!". Oooh, what a
giveaway. So, from these FACTS (the last isn't fact), you can establish
the following:
The world is flat. Down is down, up is up, and everything is nice and
simple.
The world is round, but some unknown force attracts us to the center,
preventing us from falling off. Down is towards the center, up is away
from it. Oh come on, pull the other one!!

Facts are not truth. Facts _are_ true (or more accurately, correct), but
they are not truth.

--
_______________________________________________________________________
/ \
| "As soon as we started programming, we found to our surprise that it |
| wasn't as easy to get programs right as we had thought. Debugging |
| had to be discovered. I can remember the exact instant when I |
| realized that a large part of my life from then on was going to be |
| spent in finding mistakes in my own programs." -- Maurice Wilkes |
| Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au |
\_______________________________________________________________________/
Message no. 109
From: PDL@****.dacom.co.kr
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 96 15:13:38 PDT
---------------Original Message---------------
>>Let me tell you something there is no truth.
>
>Yeegads...

He's right. There is no truth, there is only experience. And as
experience is a function of memory, and memory is unreliable, there can
only be perceptions of what occured. And no set of perceptions will be
exactly alike. Many in fact will be radically different.

Facts are not truth. Facts _are_ true (or more accurately, correct), but
they are not truth.

| Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au |
----------End of Original Message----------
This thread can go on forever, every one has their point of view and this discussion is
not going to change it. So I only have one thing to say. Find your own truth.

Patrick
Message no. 110
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 15:54:48 -0500
>I would like to call your attention to the work of
>B.F. Skinner. He refers to the above as respondent
>conditioning. He also discovered the extinction
>occurs when the subject is not reinforced after a
>steady response rate. In Pavlov's example of dogs
>and salivation, extinction will occur when the dogs
>are not reinforced with food after hearing the bell.

True, but being conditioned with "You smoke when you drink, you smoke when
you have nothing to do with your hands" is different than "You eat when the
bell rings". You also won't die if you don't get a cigarette even after
conditioning, but will most certainly die if you do not eat.

>Someone mentioned Alstaire Crowley...[snip]

Crowley was (and is still) considered to be one of the most successful con
men the world has ever seen. One of my friends used to worship the guy,
until he really got into reading and learning everything he could about him.
Shortly thereafter, this former worshipper concluded that the thoughts of
him being little more than a con man were correct and that he laughed his
way through his time while people flocked to listen to whatever he said and
adhere to it as if there was nothing more true.

He was an avid drug user/abuser. That much is true. He was very
strong-willed and intelligent as well. I'll not argue any of the points.
But even his drug rehab program was nothing short of a con. People started
doing more and more drugs just so they could eventually follow his program
and say that they had done so. He was one hell of a con man, maybe the best
the world will ever see. My personal term for people like Crowley (and
Manson and Kerouac, etc) is realitician. They do for reality what
politicians do for politics. They say what people want to hear.


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 111
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 16:27:35 -0500
>He's right. There is no truth, there is only experience. And as
>experience is a function of memory, and memory is unreliable, there can
>only be perceptions of what occured. And no set of perceptions will be
>exactly alike. Many in fact will be radically different.

What people perceive will always be the same. Values will not.
Personalities will not. But everyone sees the same things, hears the same
things. Reacts to them in their own way based on their values and
personalities.

A thousand people could look at me and I would be the same to every single
one of them. Some might value certain aspects of me more than others while
some will despise certain aspects of me more. They all perceived the same
person, but they all will judge him differently. This is called opinion and
I worked over this word quite a bit earlier in the discussion.

>Correct up to a point... Personal experience usually results in
>conflicting data, because people PERCEIVE the world through various
>filters, which have the job of making sure that stuff we don't believe
>doesn't get seen. (They also try to reduce the flow of information coming
>in, as the brain doesn't like to handle that much). Because of these
>filters, perceptions can be radically different.

Personal experiences result in extremely similar data actually. Rarely ever
does it conflict, especially in the field of drugs. I have yet to find
someone who feels drunk after they start popping amphetamines. I have a
great deal of experience here, as well as a group of over 50 people to grab
other info from. They all experience the same basic hyper effect. If I
knew anyone in Japan, I could call them up and ask them how they react to
amphetamines, the results would be the same. I could call up someone in
germany, ask them the same question, get the same answer. I could go up to
someone that's never done them before, have them pop a few, and get the same
result. Among the gorup of people who I did drugs with, many did acid, and
among those we all experienced the same basic effects ("melting" of colors
and shapes, tracers, etc...). None of us saw little purple demons
fluttering about or anything of the sort. There were those who claimed to
have seen such things, but none of them could produce a source for the drug
and also let a few telltale lies slip (e.g. "I dropped and then I was
immediately tripping because the stuff was so good").

>[snipped the "world is flat" bit]

Funny, but incorrect.

We now know that the world is in _fact/truth_ round (or reasonably so) due
to many different discoveries.

The person who would've done that managed to get a bit of data, but not near
enough for it to be considered even as useful. 300km isn't all that far in
comparison the surface of the world. Also, the land they would've walked
would've been far from flat. You'd be very hard pressed to find 300km of
perfectly flat ground anywhere in the world.

It is possible to carry things through to the point where they become fact.
If you don't carry them far enough, they're just opinions. Sometimes
these'll be correct, sometimes not, but they aren't proved to be true.

People who like to think that things cannot be true, that they can
disbelieve something in a way that it no longer is true, are very good at
fooling themselves. In doing so they create an opinion, one that isn't
truth because they already discounted that and everything that led to it
being true.


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* The problem with this country today is that we're *
* getting almost as much government as we pay for. *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 112
From: "Andre' Selmer" <031ANDRE@******.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:43:30 GMT + 2:00
@ >Page 85, Second Column
@ > As of 2054, drug use is almost nonexistant, abandoned in favor of
@ >illegally modified simsense chips. [lenghty description about simsense
@ >chips snipped]
@
@ That's for the UCAS... it's not the same everywhere. In particular, the
@ UK seems to still do drugs in favour of chips.
@
That's 'cause you require about fourteen licences for a chipjack
in the UK. Hence not many chippers = not worth the market.

Andre'

-- We exist because you want us to, because you are
|__|__ afraid to fact the facts. We are what you fear
/\ /\ \ in the deep recesses of your soul, yourselves.
|\ /\ /| | It is there in the shadows of your soul and those
|/ \/ \| | of the street that we exist. Through the use of
\/__\/ might, magic, cunning, blood, sweat and tears we
protect you from your fears, from youselves, from
others and keep your utopia, not ours, intact.
Message no. 113
From: "Andre' Selmer" <031ANDRE@******.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 08:58:36 GMT + 2:00
@ >I would like to call your attention to the work of
@ >B.F. Skinner. He refers to the above as respondent
@ >conditioning. He also discovered the extinction
@ >occurs when the subject is not reinforced after a
@ >steady response rate. In Pavlov's example of dogs
@ >and salivation, extinction will occur when the dogs
@ >are not reinforced with food after hearing the bell.
@
@ True, but being conditioned with "You smoke when you drink, you smoke when
@ you have nothing to do with your hands" is different than "You eat when the
@ bell rings". You also won't die if you don't get a cigarette even after
@ conditioning, but will most certainly die if you do not eat.

What seems to be forgotten is that there are also biological
drives to eat etc. Smoking is not a biological drive, using Freudian
theory smoking would give you the *lowest* form of self satisfaction.
(Note I am using lowest as in most basic, earliest). The idividual
gains some oral satisfaction from smoking hence reducing the pressure
between his id, ego and superego. In this form smoking can act as a
form of reinforcement as the individual becomes 'addicited' to the
stress relief, which itself is relieving the conflict between the
biological drives (id) and 'nessesity of the situation and
morality' (superego). To break this form of addiction is much harder
as the individuals ego has to deal with the standard amount of
conflict and that conflict that was being relieved by the smoking.

<groan, its to early in the morning to be discussing Freud>

In this case, Willpower is a major determinent in getting rid of
additions, secondry is the conditions of stress. But there again all
of this is common knowledge.

Andre'

-- We exist because you want us to, because you are
|__|__ afraid to fact the facts. We are what you fear
/\ /\ \ in the deep recesses of your soul, yourselves.
|\ /\ /| | It is there in the shadows of your soul and those
|/ \/ \| | of the street that we exist. Through the use of
\/__\/ might, magic, cunning, blood, sweat and tears we
protect you from your fears, from youselves, from
others and keep your utopia, not ours, intact.
Message no. 114
From: "Andre' Selmer" <031ANDRE@******.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 09:12:30 GMT + 2:00
@ Andre' Selmer <shadowrn@********.itribe.net> said on 12:43/26 Apr 96...
@
@ > Image. You are considered a lot more dangerous when you react in
@ > milliseconds to a sudden event. The alternative 1, NPC shoots at you,
@ > you dive behind wall, fumble with appropriate drug, inject, wait,
@ > ...<DEAD?>. Alternative 2, NPC Shoots at you, you draw and fire a him
@ > before he even pulls the trigger.
@
@ But, as has been pointed out, this is a matter of being prepared. It's the
@ same sort of thing as walking around with an unloaded gun, and the
@ ammunition in your pocket. If you have a fully loaded gun, you can shoot
@ back much sooner...
@
@ It would be in your best interest to take the drugs before you start the
@ fight; and if you're not the on starting it, how about ending it without
@ taking drugs? Might improve your survival chances at that particular time,
@ IMHO.

I won't dispute that. But how many times have you been dumped
into a surprize situation. Prepared increases you chances for
survival dramatically, surprize can kill more often then not.


Andre'

-- We exist because you want us to, because you are
|__|__ afraid to fact the facts. We are what you fear
/\ /\ \ in the deep recesses of your soul, yourselves.
|\ /\ /| | It is there in the shadows of your soul and those
|/ \/ \| | of the street that we exist. Through the use of
\/__\/ might, magic, cunning, blood, sweat and tears we
protect you from your fears, from youselves, from
others and keep your utopia, not ours, intact.
Message no. 115
From: "Sedah Drol" <CCRODRIG@****.indstate.edu>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 13:03:49 EST
> Personal experiences result in extremely similar data actually. Rarely ever
> does it conflict, especially in the field of drugs. I have yet to find
> someone who feels drunk after they start popping amphetamines. I have a
> great deal of experience here, as well as a group of over 50 people to grab
> other info from. They all experience the same basic hyper effect.

Congratutions, you've just met someone who gets tired from drugs
intended to speed up their central nervous system: me. I can't drink
coffee without it making me extremely tired. That's what turned me
off of crack. It made me more tired than coffee does. And no I do
not partake in caffeine much, except for the caffeine found in
chocolate (BTW it has no effect whatsoever to me), so I know it is not tolerance. If I
want to
stay up, the only thing guaranteed to keep me up is LSD.
Actually it could very well be tolerance, a natural high
tolerance level or immunity to it.

And as far as depresents go I tend to get hyper off of them. I was
once prescribed codeine cough medicine, when I took it, I was hyper
as "Richochet Rabbit". If you consider marijuana a depressant it
usually makes me hyper, unless of course I smoke to much, then I just
doze off like a little baby. Turkey, though does make me tired.

The above examples I contribute to the fact that drugs affect
different people in different ways. For me some of them have a
completely opposite effect.

---Sedah Drol


This is a test.....
For the next several lines there will be a test signature.
If this were an actual .sig it would be proceeded with:
a Geek Code script
a Home Page
a quote
and any other information I wish to disclose.
Repeat this was only a test....
Message no. 116
From: MikeE@******.dragonsys.com
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners -Reply
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 15:34:11 -0500
Sedah Drol Wrote: "I was once prescribed codeine cough medicine, when I took
it, I was hyper as "Richochet Rabbit". "

Thats actually a very common reaction to codeine. It makes me clumsy (but not
tired) and gives me bad dreams. It also doesn't stop me from coughing or help
with pain control. I just tell doctors I'm alergic to it now (which is technically true).
You should have seen the nurse's face at the college med center when I refused
a perscription for codeine: she looked like she had seen a frat boy turn down free
beer.

Anyway, yes people have very different tolerances and reactions to various
drugs, especially ones that affect neurotransmitters (like most of the ones you
mentioned).

Double-Domed Mike

P.S. They gave me a perscription for percocet (sp?) instead of the codeine: it
was the only other painkiller they had!!! Man, that was fun!
Message no. 117
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners -Reply
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 14:03:04 -0600 (MDT)
MikeE@******.dragonsys.com wrote:
|
|
|P.S. They gave me a perscription for percocet (sp?) instead of the
|codeine: it was the only other painkiller they had!!! Man, that was
|fun!

Lucky you. They gave me perkocete(sp?) last year when I had my wisdom teeth
removed. You ever gotten sick and had to puke after having oral surgery?

What does this topic have to do with SRII? Well, how about all those GMs
out there changing the usual reaction to drugs and BTLs for their PCs? Sam
takes a hit of Kamakazi and has a "bad" reaction. Maybe his bonuses double,
but his Willpower takes a major fall for 24 hours afterword (or whatever).

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
~~~~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.html~~~~~~
Message no. 118
From: TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 16:44:18 -0500
>Congratutions, you've just met someone who gets tired from drugs
>intended to speed up their central nervous system: me. I can't drink
>coffee without it making me extremely tired. That's what turned me
>off of crack. It made me more tired than coffee does. And no I do
>not partake in caffeine much, except for the caffeine found in
>chocolate (BTW it has no effect whatsoever to me), so I know it is
>not tolerance. If I want to stay up, the only thing guaranteed
>to keep me up is LSD. Actually it could very well be tolerance,
>a natural high tolerance level or immunity to it.

Ever get a hold of some amphetamines or PCP? Those are "speed" drugs, not
crack, not caffeine. They do a number on the brain too. Different
(designer, homebrew, and prescription) versions of amphetamines are all over
the place and cheap. For a low-level speed rush, try ephedrin (it's even
legal). For the high level stuff, well ask around. I didn't play with
those toys a whole helluva lot.

>The above examples I contribute to the fact that drugs affect
>different people in different ways. For me some of them have a
>completely opposite effect.

Crack makes most users dreamy. Unless its laced (which it often is) with
things like PCP. I never tried it, never will, but had some friends who
liked it and they all got spaced when they smoked it. I get tired when I
drink coffee too, when I drink really potent coffee or drink it in heavy
quantities, I get an effect I call "wired and tired" where it feels kinda
like the last few minutes of a trip. That's common (partly because coffee
is weak here, partly because warm liquids have a tendency to make people get
tired).


--------------------------------------------------------
* Bob Ooton -- <topcat@******.net> *
* Golden Tiger Association -- Submission Fighting Team *
--------------------------------------------------------
* All you need to start up an insane asylum is *
* an empty room and the right kind of people *
--------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 119
From: Russ Myrick <rm91612@****.net>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Thu, 02 May 1996 06:43:20 -0700
Sedah Drol wrote:
<snip>
> The above examples I contribute to the fact that drugs affect
> different people in different ways. For me some of them have a
> completely opposite effect.
>
> ---Sedah DrolAn' 'ere I though my wife was the only one
around with the strange
metabolism. -- Have a high copper count in your blood do you? She does,
leaves the MDs confused, but our vet thinks that explains the response to
the drugs. Says the lower reptile forms have a copper based blood and
respond to the drugs in a similar manner.
Message no. 120
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 11:36:14 +0100
Russ Myrick <shadowrn@********.itribe.net> said on 6:43/ 2 May 96...

> An' 'ere I though my wife was the only one around with the strange
> metabolism. -- Have a high copper count in your blood do you? She does,
> leaves the MDs confused, but our vet thinks that explains the response to
> the drugs. Says the lower reptile forms have a copper based blood and
> respond to the drugs in a similar manner.

So in fact he's saying your wife is a lower reptile form? :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I'm tired of this shit... All this talk about strife...
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 121
From: "Andre' Selmer" <031ANDRE@******.wits.ac.za>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 12:49:29 GMT + 2:00
@ Russ Myrick <shadowrn@********.itribe.net> said on 6:43/ 2 May 96...
@
@ > An' 'ere I though my wife was the only one around with the strange
@ > metabolism. -- Have a high copper count in your blood do you? She does,
@ > leaves the MDs confused, but our vet thinks that explains the response to
@ > the drugs. Says the lower reptile forms have a copper based blood and
@ > respond to the drugs in a similar manner.
@
@ So in fact he's saying your wife is a lower reptile form? :)

*groan* That was classic Gurth. Bravo. ;)


Andre'

-- We exist because you want us to, because you are
|__|__ afraid to fact the facts. We are what you fear
/\ /\ \ in the deep recesses of your soul, yourselves.
|\ /\ /| | It is there in the shadows of your soul and those
|/ \/ \| | of the street that we exist. Through the use of
\/__\/ might, magic, cunning, blood, sweat and tears we
protect you from your fears, from youselves, from
others and keep your utopia, not ours, intact.
Message no. 122
From: "A Halliwell" <u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Drugs and Runners
Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 22:05:43 +0100 (BST)
|
|Russ Myrick <shadowrn@********.itribe.net> said on 6:43/ 2 May 96...
|
|> An' 'ere I though my wife was the only one around with the strange
|> metabolism. -- Have a high copper count in your blood do you? She does,
|> leaves the MDs confused, but our vet thinks that explains the response to
|> the drugs. Says the lower reptile forms have a copper based blood and
|> respond to the drugs in a similar manner.
|
|So in fact he's saying your wife is a lower reptile form? :)

Either that, or she's a Vulcan.
Live long and prosper.

--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@**.keele.ac.uk |It has been widely reported in the newspapers, that |
|Andrew Halliwell | a so called "puppet" of the queen mother, would |
|Principal subjects in:-| appear on this weeks program. To the press, the |
|Comp Sci & Visual Arts |public, and the many members of parlaiment who have |
|-----------------------|so kindly rung in to complain,we would like to admit|
| that this is an outragious and contemptable untruth perpatrated by us, to |
| bring the program into line with current government policy guidelines |
| Spitting Image have never made such a puppet, and were on holiday at the |
|time it wasn't made.... Thank you. (Spitting Image, when it was still funny)|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/FA>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ 5++ |
|X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can still say FUCK! Americans can't|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Drugs and Runners, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!