The Robot Handbook: Medical Nanorobots and Drugs

Adenla Kal

Mongoose
On pg. 83 of the Robot Handbook we have Medical Nanorobots that can be used to simulate the effects of drugs for the duration of the nanorobots (1 year at TL 13). How does this interact with drugs like Combat Drugs or Anti-Rad that have set durations and/or dosage limits?

Relevant rules for convenience:
"A smarm controller is required to initially program medical nanorobots but once injected or ingested, medical nanorobots operate autonomously, although a swarm controller could be used to deactivate them prior to their effective end-of-life."
"A single package can provide the effects of common drugs such as panaceas for the duration of the nanorobots’ effectiveness. Negative effects of multiple or prolonged use of certain drugs are manifest in nanorobot packages just as in normal medications. "

The way I see it there are a couple options

1. The nano-drugs are always active
1.1 Duration is set to nano's duration with any crash hitting at the end (plus any psychological effects of being hyped up 24/7 while active)
1.2 Drug auto renews when duration ends or dose is used....quickly leading to overdoses
1.3 For dosage based drugs like Anti-Rad it automatically provide 1 "free" dose per day/safe period
2. The nano-drugs are activated by some stimulus much like an auto injector. This still has the question of what (if any) dosage safeties get programed in.

For drugs without major side effects, 1.1 makes the most sense. (Panaceas, Nervous Response Dampner, G-Tolerance)
For drugs with dosage restrictions, 1.3 make the most sense (Anti-Rad, Adrenaliser, G-Tolerance)

So far so good as those two even work together well as demonstrated by G-Tolerance. However, neither of those work with the simulant type drugs such as Combat Drugs, Metabolic Accelerators. For those you would need type 2 programing.

In the end, I guess it comes down to how, and how well, did the nanos get programed to deal with activations and/or overdoses. Or just say that nanos cant replicate stimulant type drugs. (which just feels lazy when nanos can regrow limbs, enhance characteristics, and slow down aging)
 
On pg. 83 of the Robot Handbook we have Medical Nanorobots that can be used to simulate the effects of drugs for the duration of the nanorobots (1 year at TL 13). How does this interact with drugs like Combat Drugs or Anti-Rad that have set durations and/or dosage limits?
You bring up some good points.
The intent is to replicate drug behaviour without the drugs, so in general, drug restrictions concerning duration and side-effects should apply.
...
The way I see it there are a couple options

1. The nano-drugs are always active
1.1 Duration is set to nano's duration with any crash hitting at the end (plus any psychological effects of being hyped up 24/7 while active)
Crashes and addiction effects should be as normally, so for any drug like adrenaliser, combat drug, metabolic accelerator, your 1.3 is more appropriate. But for panaceas or one dose of g-tolerance, a year-long effect is appropriate
1.2 Drug auto renews when duration ends or dose is used....quickly leading to overdoses
nope. that sounds bad.
1.3 For dosage based drugs like Anti-Rad it automatically provide 1 "free" dose per day/safe period
Yes
2. The nano-drugs are activated by some stimulus much like an auto injector. This still has the question of what (if any) dosage safeties get programed in.

For drugs without major side effects, 1.1 makes the most sense. (Panaceas, Nervous Response Dampner, G-Tolerance)
Yes, but see below for activation - though a preset trigger stimulus is certainly an option.
For drugs with dosage restrictions, 1.3 make the most sense (Anti-Rad, Adrenaliser, G-Tolerance)
Yes
So far so good as those two even work together well as demonstrated by G-Tolerance. However, neither of those work with the simulant type drugs such as Combat Drugs, Metabolic Accelerators. For those you would need type 2 programing.

In the end, I guess it comes down to how, and how well, did the nanos get programed to deal with activations and/or overdoses. Or just say that nanos cant replicate stimulant type drugs. (which just feels lazy when nanos can regrow limbs, enhance characteristics, and slow down aging)
You are pointing out a weakness (mine) in the description when it comes to drugs that require activation. If the smarm controller is only required for initial programming, then what allows them to 'kick-in' for things like combat drug, or even fast drug?

So that part that I didn't think through until this post is how that happens. The 'quick-and-dirty' answer beyond a preset trigger stimulus is that 'There's an App for That'. Meaning - with appropriate security built in - any mobile comm/neural link equivalent with at least Computer/0 can activate the nano-specific effect, but the future equivalent of the FDA would prevent nanos from over-activating. Unless they were questionable black market tiny robots...

(And if using a preset trigger, a slightly evil Referee may decide that vaguely-worded triggers work like vaguely-worded Wishes: Unexpected activations might include a very spicy meal triggering a combat drug response, or a temporary drop in oxygen levels - or even holding your breath just a little too long - triggers a week of hibernation.)

Nanos might not be for every campaign setting. I put them in there not specifically to apply to the Third Imperium universe, though nothing prevents it from being used in there. The world of Neumann and the associated Pirates of Drinax adventure is a place in that universe where such things exist without question, but in other locations, legal or cultural restrictions might prevent the widespread, or at least common, use of nanos.
 
First of all a big thank you to both of you for the quick replies.

I did check the main thread (and quite a few others) before posting but wasn't sure what rules were on thread necro and so felt safer with a new thread. (My first post on a forum in a long time)

I'm a bit used to having to expand on and/or interpret how some systems interact in MgT, but this was vague enough that I wanted to check my common sense; especially as things can make sense to people in different ways. I meant to mention manual activation, and then totally forgot, so it was very nice to see your ruling on that.
 
Back
Top