I have a question about addiction. So far, I've only been able to play solo. I am hoping to figure out the best way to handle this before I play with others. Does addiction go away? I can't find any reference to losing addiction, but if you can't then you can never get well rested once you've become addicted.

Here is how I see it. If you are addicted, when you pay the Caps to unexhaust the drug(s) you are addicted to, the addiction status goes away and you have to test again next time you use it. If you used a camp action to do this, you still do not gain week rested, but the next time you do, you could gain it (as long as you don't become addicted again before then).

However, another interpretation could be that you never lose addiction and playing the cost simply makes the item usable again (the cost of your next hit, as it were). This means over you've become addicted you cannot gain well rested the rest of the game.

In addition, using the first method, one would be able to sell/discard the drug after paying the cost to unexhaust it, as you lose the addicted trait. With the second method you would never be able to remove the item from your inventory.

Any thoughts or how you guys play with your group would be great. Also, if I missed in the rules where it explains this let me know (though I've been through them a few times).

Thanks!

There is an item called Addictol that cures addiction. It's one of the shop items IIRC. Having the Addiction status cleared by camping would be too easy.

Just don't do drugs!

Oh I hadn't seen that card, that does change things! I kinda thought camping was a bit easy too. Thanks!

My addiction question is this:

What happens when you don't have the caps to pay?

40 minutes ago, Zrob314 said:

My addiction question is this:

What happens when you don't have the caps to pay?

Then you can't exhaust the card.......... I guess?

We had an addiction question come up last game...what happens when an addicted character has 4+ drugs in inventory? They must discard down to 3 but they can't discard any of them.

1 hour ago, Ryric said:

We had an addiction question come up last game...what happens when an addicted character has 4+ drugs in inventory? They must discard down to 3 but they can't discard any of them.

The way I see it is a soon as you take Addictol and become "cured" then you would have to discard one of them.

However using four drugs and paying to unexhaust them all would be very expensive, 4 caps OUCH!!!!

Always remember the "Golden Rule" text on the card over rule the rule book.

how would that happen?

You'd have to have the first three addictions in your inventory. How did they even get the 4th as a substance to which they were not yet addicted?

11 hours ago, Vetnor said:

Then you can't exhaust the card.......... I guess?

That makes sense. I was reading it as you just had to pay two caps per turn, period.

7 hours ago, Zrob314 said:

how would that happen?

You'd have to have the first three addictions in your inventory. How did they even get the 4th as a substance to which they were not yet addicted?

If you have the Lab Coat you can carry as many drugs as you want, they don't count towards your inventory limit. You could then lose or sell the coat.

On 12/30/2017 at 1:41 PM, Zrob314 said:

how would that happen?

You'd have to have the first three addictions in your inventory. How did they even get the 4th as a substance to which they were not yet addicted?

You're either addicted or not, there is no way to track which substances you are addicted to. If you have the addicted token it applies to all drugs with addiction text. So you could already have three when you draw a new one as a reward from the loot deck.

1 hour ago, Ryric said:

You're either addicted or not, there is no way to track which substances you are addicted to. If you have the addicted token it applies to all drugs with addiction text. So you could already have three when you draw a new one as a reward from the loot deck.

Unless I'm mistaken if you already have three drugs in your inventory you can't place another one in your inventory unless you have the lab coat.

Just checked the RRG and to place another drug in your inventory when you already have three you would have to discard an existing drug which you can't do because you're addicted. Unless I'm mistaken again drawing a loot card doesn't automatically place it in your inventory, you have to have the space to place it in there.

load lifter might also be a way to get onto this problem as it ups your inventory to 5.

5 hours ago, Vetnor said:

Just checked the RRG and to place another drug in your inventory when you already have three you would have to discard an existing drug which you can't do because you're addicted. Unless I'm mistaken again drawing a loot card doesn't automatically place it in your inventory, you have to have the space to place it in there.

In the RR pg 9, your Inventory is defined as "Items and companions a survivor possesses but does not have equipped". From that it looks like any item you get (such as purchased or as loot) goes directly into your inventory and the you must discard from your inventory to get down to your inventory limit.

That's how I've been playing it.

18 hours ago, Hedgehobbit said:

In the RR pg 9, your Inventory is defined as "Items and companions a survivor possesses but does not have equipped". From that it looks like any item you get (such as purchased or as loot) goes directly into your inventory and the you must discard from your inventory to get down to your inventory limit.

That's how I've been playing it.

If that is the way FFG intends it to be played then being addicted is a huge handicap.

Once you're addicted you dare not forage or kill anything with with a loot icon because if it turns out to be a drug it may "squeeze" out more useful items.

Using drugs can be powerful when you need them but being a drug addict is controlling and an expensive condition that will drain your caps to keep using and cost you money to cure and limiting what other useful items you can carry.

Not sure I want to go down that path...... :-(

Well addictions usually ARE bad for you in many or all aspects.

I think this

If you are addicted and draw drugs, you have to keep them in your inventory. If you have more drugs than you could normally carry, that is when the card rules trump the rulebooks.

I do believe that if you have a full inventory of drugs and are addicted, the letter of the rules would say that you would always remain addicted, because even if you somehow bought addictol, you would immediately have to discard it before you could use it.

As a house rule, I'm letting someone who is in that situation absolutely get unaddicted in the middle of the shopping action, but I acknowledge that is not the rule as written.

The game designers seem to want you not to take loot if addicted, in order to allow you to eventually buy the addictol.

I believe that if you are addicted, camp, and either don't want to or can't pay the unexhaust cost, you simply don't unexhaust the drugs.

I also believe that you can pass on any reward you don't want, so if you complete a quest and it awards loot, you can pass on that. I can't remember where I read that though.

What happens when you are addicted and are killed? That might be a path to cure addiction.

I think you found the way around our problem with a full inventory and addictol.

That makes me think even more that you can't use addictol if you have 3 or more drugs in your inventory, barring a lab coat or load lifter.

from the blue covered rules reference, it says “if you draw loot cards in excess of your limit, you must discard down to your limit”

addictol says “you may discard this card to lose the addicted trait”

the operative word here is “discard”.

i would interpret that as meaning that when you pick up the addictol, you “discard” it, which would also mean you apply its effect.

I’m pretty sure that the intent here is not for you to get hopelessly, permanently addicted beyond redemption, just by virtue of not having enough backpack space to hold the addictol for the 2 seconds it takes to draw a puff from the inhaler... it’s not like the chem bottles are glued to your hands like cursed items in D&D preventing you from picking other stuff up and handling it.

again, yeah, i’m interpreting the “spirit” of it.

in the video games, addiction is easily cured by the use of addictol or a doctor visit. it is impossible to become permanently addicted in the video game.

although, i do concede that there is the whole storyline with Cait, where she actually IS hopelessly addicted and the only way to cure her is to bring her to this experimental machine that might kill her and you can use it on her to cure her addiction, but for the most part, i believe it was in the “spirit”of the item to allow you to use it on pickup without having to “add it to your inventory first”

just like with the fistful of caps, which is not an “item” per se, as you are instructed to immediately “discard” it and apply the effect which is to give you 3 caps.

if you are going to rule that a player must first add the addictol to their inventory first in order to then “discard” it to apply it’s effect, then you must be consistent across the board and require a player to have an empty inventory slot to first place the fistful of caps in, before they can discard it to gain the 3 caps. meaning that if they have 3 items, they have to either throw an item away or throw the caps away which makes no sense...

2 hours ago, eviltwin61878 said:

...i believe it was in the “spirit”of the item to allow you to use it on pickup without having to “add it to your inventory first”...

Rulebook sais that survivor can use items from theirs inventory.

Quote

Items that cannot be equipped (aid, drugs, and magazines) can be used while in a survivor's inventory.

20 hours ago, eviltwin61878 said:

just like with the fistful of caps, which is not an “item” per se, as you are instructed to immediately “discard” it and apply the effect which is to give you 3 caps.

if you are going to rule that a player must first add the addictol to their inventory first in order to then “discard” it to apply it’s effect, then you must be consistent across the board and require a player to have an empty inventory slot to first place the fistful of caps in, before they can discard it to gain the 3 caps. meaning that if they have 3 items, they have to either throw an item away or throw the caps away which makes no sense...

Fistful of caps is an event, not an aid item.

I would play that rule with stimpaks, food, etc.

Its all about how you want to handle addiction, until an FAQ comes out. As long as everyone is playing by the same rules, the game is fair, if not necessarily how the designer intended.

I generally feel pretty OK with a loot-pile "grace period" of sorts. You have a full inventory and find a delicious jug of dirty water? Drink it immediately and we're all good, in my book. If someone needed that healing anyway, it's a real crapper to have to ditch an item (which you can't pick up again later - it's just gone), then drink, and then have a hole in your inventory where an otherwise useful or saleable item used to be. I'm all for letting people sift through the loot bag and use up some goodies as they pare down, finally finishing their current action with no more than 3 items left.

not to beat a dead horse...and please don't take this the wrong way.

I'm not deliberately being antagonistic

but I play a lot of board games with a lot of different people at a local venue, so i often end up at tables with people I never played with before.

I constantly end up in this kind of discussion because there is ALMOST ALWAYS someone at the table who tries to twist the contextual meaning of a card to fit their interpretation.

like they will continue to ignore one of the operative words, reading the card verbatim again and again while "conveniently" leaving out that one word so that it changes the meaning to fit how they think it should works, despite me repeatedly hammering it into them that they left out a word and then they get agitated, telling me to stop repeating it, but then every time they go to read they continue to ignore the wording.

I'm not saying that YOU are one of those players

just that

the operative words there are "discard" "to do" (this thing)

granted, fistful of caps says "discard this card, then gain 3 caps", so I acknowledge, that card might not be a good parallel, I'll admit, I did not notice it says "event" at the top of the card. I just was always playing it that way, that when you draw it, you discard it, then take the caps.

but addictiol says "during your turn, you may discard this card to lose addicted"

it says "discard to lose addicted"

it doesn't lay out any other special conditions like "it must be in your inventory before you discard it at the time you choose to discard it to lose addicted"

let's break this down

first it says

"during your turn"

at the time you pick it up, it is still your turn, so why shouldn't this condition be considered to be met?

it is during my turn.

then it say "you may", meaning that you have the option to discard it at any time during your turn, not "at the beginning of your turn" like the faction agenda cards say, just "during your turn, you may"

"discard it to lose addicted"

which implies a cause and effect,that when you discard it, you lose addicted. that the "effect" is "caused" by the act of "discarding" it.

why should it be ruled that just because you are unable to add it to your inventory first before you discarded it, that now you can't apply the effect.

you "discarded it during your turn" so you ought to get to "do the thing"

so, as far as I'm concerned, you met ALL the conditions written on the card to get the full effect.

p.s.

I do agree with your logic, that if everyone at the table can come to an agreement on how something should work, even if it is the wrong interpretation, as long as everyone agrees and applies it consistently, then it IS fair.

On 1/18/2018 at 10:16 AM, eviltwin61878 said:

not to beat a dead horse...and please don't take this the wrong way.

I'm not deliberately being antagonistic

but I play a lot of board games with a lot of different people at a local venue, so i often end up at tables with people I never played with before.

I constantly end up in this kind of discussion because there is ALMOST ALWAYS someone at the table who tries to twist the contextual meaning of a card to fit their interpretation.

like they will continue to ignore one of the operative words, reading the card verbatim again and again while "conveniently" leaving out that one word so that it changes the meaning to fit how they think it should works, despite me repeatedly hammering it into them that they left out a word and then they get agitated, telling me to stop repeating it, but then every time they go to read they continue to ignore the wording.

I'm not saying that YOU are one of those players

just that

the operative words there are "discard" "to do" (this thing)

granted, fistful of caps says "discard this card, then gain 3 caps", so I acknowledge, that card might not be a good parallel, I'll admit, I did not notice it says "event" at the top of the card. I just was always playing it that way, that when you draw it, you discard it, then take the caps.

but addictiol says "during your turn, you may discard this card to lose addicted"

it says "discard to lose addicted"

it doesn't lay out any other special conditions like "it must be in your inventory before you discard it at the time you choose to discard it to lose addicted"

let's break this down

first it says

"during your turn"

at the time you pick it up, it is still your turn, so why shouldn't this condition be considered to be met?

it is during my turn.

then it say "you may", meaning that you have the option to discard it at any time during your turn, not "at the beginning of your turn" like the faction agenda cards say, just "during your turn, you may"

"discard it to lose addicted"

which implies a cause and effect,that when you discard it, you lose addicted. that the "effect" is "caused" by the act of "discarding" it.

why should it be ruled that just because you are unable to add it to your inventory first before you discarded it, that now you can't apply the effect.

you "discarded it during your turn" so you ought to get to "do the thing"

so, as far as I'm concerned, you met ALL the conditions written on the card to get the full effect.

p.s.

I do agree with your logic, that if everyone at the table can come to an agreement on how something should work, even if it is the wrong interpretation, as long as everyone agrees and applies it consistently, then it IS fair.

So, by your logic, when we sell cards we are also triggering their effects? Or when an excess card from the shop gets discarded, it would also trigger the effect?
Because well, it's my turn, and they're being discarded.

I believe the key words we're looking for here are not "discard it during your turn" , because a lot of other effects trigger that, like the shop. The key word we're looking for here is MAY .
The discard needs to be triggered by a choice, and to specifically gain the effect of that item, and not by a forced rule. That constitutes as a USE of the item, as described in the ITEMS section of the rules.

I do agree that, thematically, it would make sense to just immediately use the item, but I do not believe that's how it was intended to be played. If that's how it was, then the Event-type cards would literally have no reason to exist, since they are the only type of item to be immediately used, that is, at the time of the reveal, and before readjustment of inventory. A fistful of caps, for example, is never in your inventory, that's just a way of the game to say "hey, ignore this card and just get 3 caps instead".

Furthermore, in the ITEMS section of the Rules Reference, it says:

- Items that cannot be equipped (aid, drugs, and magazines) can be used while in a survivor's inventory.

A little before that, in the INVENTORY section:

- If a survivor gains cards in excess of his or her inventory slots, he or she must choose and discard cards until there are only three remaining.

The cards in excess are NOT in the inventory, they are in excess of the inventory, so they CANNOT be used according to the ITEMS section.

Now, that does leave the question: is this how addiction was really intended to be played out? It's really rough to not be able to use Addictol if you have 3+ drugs, and to have to rely on the lab coat. Granted that the Endurance test is easy to pass, especially if you have Endurance and other means to reroll. My opinion is that it was really intended to be this way, leaving drugs as powerful last-resort type items in case all your rerolls and extra hits fail, and with a chance to screw with your inventory until the endgame, or until you find an alternative.