Anagathics

[Jae]

Does anyone know if there was ever an upper limit placed on the effects anagathics can have on a standard human?

I.e do anagathics prevent death from old age occurring as long as its used or does it cause the user to not show the effects of aging but would still mean they would die at a certain, admittedly extended age?

2nd is there any canon that states when anagathics first began to be used?

3rd What if any are the restrictions on nobility (ie, the Emperor, Sector Dukes etc.) using the same?

Anyone???

Oh, completely off-topic but I can't be bothered to post again: does anyone know what restrictions if any exist to quoting appropriate library data in a free publication or website - I want to include a few appropriate entries from existing library data in the encyclopaedia I'm working on but don't want to upset anyone especially as I hope to distribute the material for free when completed...

Thanks

 

[Hyphen]

Dear Jae -

Does anyone know if there was ever an upper limit placed on the effects anagathics can have on a standard human?

I.e do anagathics prevent death from old age occurring as long as its used or does it cause the user to not show the effects of aging but would still mean they would die at a certain, admittedly extended age?

Not from memory. You may want to house-rule it.

2nd is there any canon that states when anagathics first began to be used?

Again,nothing I can remember in canon.

3rd What if any are the restrictions on nobility (ie, the Emperor, Sector Dukes etc.) using the same?

I have seen it mentioned that anagathics are forbidden to nobility (something about the successors becoming increasing restless to inherit their inheritance - to the point of assisting "nature" on its way, and thus causing instability in the aristocracy).

I do not know whether this has become canon or not - can anyone assist who has Loren's "Nobles" book?

Oh, completely off-topic but I can't be bothered to post again: does anyone know what restrictions if any exist to quoting appropriate library data in a free publication or website - I want to include a few appropriate entries from existing library data in the encyclopaedia I'm working on but don't want to upset anyone especially as I hope to distribute the material for free when completed...

Marc has a standard disclaimer about it. As long as you attribute it correctly, there should be no problems ("fair use" is "about a page at a time").

If you want, see my site for details (link is in my .sig). Go to:
-->Tavonni Repair Bays
--> Licencing and Other Pastimes
--> FarFuture FAQ: Net Policy on Use of Role Playing Titles - 22 Jun 1998

Another place to look is Traveller Library Data (also on my site) under "Copyright" (a link in each page footer).

 

[Vargr]

I don't remember reading anywhere of Imperial laws against anagathics. Individual worlds may outlaw the production, sale and use of these drugs as they see fit.

Anagathics use by nobles is "frowned", but I guess people with lots and lots of money can think of many other behaviours that will meet with even more disaproval from their peers.

 

[Jae]

Thanks, but...

Ah, everyone so far but I still need to know when anagathics were discovered (if anyone knows or if its been stated anywhere) and if anyone knows how they work? Are they an immortality serum or a death delayer???

I had this idea of a business family who has grandchildren and great grandchildren waiting for the patriarch to die/retire but he (and poss. his children) all use anagathics and the rest of his descendants can't afford to and financially are limited. The grandchildren are now in their 80's and aging ungracefully, their children are looking as though they will never inherit (especially if the anagathic-taking people remain fertile) and the grandchildren and their descendants are likely to be disinherited just because there will be too many people in the family still alive..

So what happens to the descendants' inheritance if the patriarch never dies and remains in power?

 

[Lycanorukke]

Ah, everyone so far but I still need to know when anagathics were discovered (if anyone knows or if its been stated anywhere) and if anyone knows how they work? Are they an immortality serum or a death delayer???

There was this article was was meant to be published at one point by Philip Athan, but never happened. Anagathics: Doping the Inevitable

If you use that anagathics were 'developed' about 53Imp.

Canon wise from TNE, extended (about 60 years of use) use of anagathics came with side effects- cysts, growths, mutation and eventually psychosis. It got worse as years of usage increased - +1 DM per additional term of use IIRC. So by the TNE rules you could keep munching anagathics indefinetly - if you didn't mind being a psychotic mutant who looked to be in their 30's.

On Edit: I vaguely remember an article about early tech(TL12+ ?, JTAS?) anagathics - they worked but were incredibly dangerous and expensive (megacreds rather than 20,kCr) I'll see if I can find it.

On edit 2: Found it. Traveller Digest #10 p40.
Experimental at TL 12, 5MCr +50,000 month and gradually increases in safety and drops in price to TL 15. So technically they could be about during the Rule of Man. Though with a formidable/hazardous roll it could easily (and probably) be fatal more often than not .

 

[Whipsnade]

Ah, everyone so far but I still need to know when anagathics were discovered (if anyone knows or if its been stated anywhere) and if anyone knows how they work?

Jae,

Traveller Wiki is always a good place to start.

There was an article in SJGames' JTAS that dealt with the discovery and development of various anagathics. As for how they actually work, that's always been left rather vague.

IIRC, there was a set of tables produced for MT by DGP that presented side effects.

Are they an immortality serum or a death delayer???

They've always been a "death delayer". Only Yaskodray/Grandfather is immortal and he isn't explaining how he does it.

Basically, anagathics allow you to ignore aging rolls for the period you're taking them. There's an upper limit to how long you can ignore those roll and that's usually pegged around a century. Once you go off anagathics or hit the century mark, you start making aging rolls according to your apparent age.

Let's say you've been on them since before Term 4, or age 34, when aging rolls start. When you hit 100, you roll on the Term 4 column, four years later you roll on Term 5, four years later Term 6, and so on.

Next, let's say you hit a rough patch financially in your forties; you began taking anagathics before age 34 and then had to stop for a period. When you stopped you would have then rolled on the Term 4 column. Your finances improve and you're able to afford the drugs until reaching 100. At that point, you'd begin by roll on the Term 5 column because you'd already rolled on Term 4.

Simply put, anagathics don't roll the clock back, they instead keep the clock from ticking for a while.

I had this idea of a business family (big snip of an interesting situation) So what happens to the descendants' inheritance if the patriarch never dies and remains in power?

Strictly speaking, there is no "inheritance" because no one has died yet. How can a will come into force when the person who wrote it isn't dead?

You've also illustrated why the use of anagathics by the nobility is "frowned upon". You've also shown why wealthy families throughout history have used trust funds and other mechanisms to distribute at least a portion of the parent's money to any adult children, which then raises the question of why the elders in your business family haven't done the same thing.

One answer to that question of why trust funds and similar mechanisms haven't been created is that there isn't enough money left to do it.

Imagine that your patriarchs are the great-to-the-nth-grandchildren of the people who originally made the money in question. After that "earning" generation, the succeeding ones have done nothing but clip coupons. No one even attempted to add to the original fortune and the investments that fortune was placed in have been failing for a generation or two. The generation currently controlling what's left, your patriarchs, know there's enough to finance their own lifestyles and anagathic use but nothing more. They're devouring the seed corn, much as their own parents and grandparents did, and their own children are going to have to make do.

Sounds like a perfect excuse for murder to me.

Regards,
Bill

 

[Jae]

Thanks, thanks, thanks...

Hi Bill
Thanks for the thoughts - I'll deal with the last one first - "Sounds like a perfect excuse for murder to me." That was what was going through my mind.

Strictly speaking, there is no "inheritance" because no one has died yet. How can a will come into force when the person who wrote it isn't dead?

Exactly what I meant - no inheritance until great, great, great grand-daddy pops his clogs and ever increasing numbers in the family - yes a trust fund works but when you have say several generations of the family all living, all increasing in number with new family members and each level above the youngsters trying to hold on to as much money and power as they can (because they have no idea how many more years they will have to wait until (if) they inherit and what percentage of the whole (especially if 185 yr old patriarch is still marrying nubile 18 year old wives and having children!) they might eventually inherit.

You've also illustrated why the use of anagathics by the nobility is "frowned upon". You've also shown why wealthy families throughout history have used trust funds and other mechanisms to distribute at least a portion of the parent's money to any adult children, which then raises the question of why the elders in your business family haven't done the same thing.

In my scenario they had to the children and grandchildren and lesser amounts to the great grandchildren and even less to great, great's and so on and of course after so many decades some of the family will have been disinherited or at least threatened with... Lot's and lot's of bad feeling... It's also why I suggested a business family rather than a ducal... Though I do wonder how they'd enforce it if a sector Duke/Duchess decided to stay in power forever?

One answer to that question of why trust funds and similar mechanisms haven't been created is that there isn't enough money left to do it. Just deluted by the eighth living generation or so...

Imagine that your patriarchs are the great-to-the-nth-grandchildren of the people who originally made the money in question. After that "earning" generation, the succeeding ones have done nothing but clip coupons. No one even attempted to add to the original fortune and the investments that fortune was placed in have been failing for a generation or two. The generation currently controlling what's left, your patriarchs, know there's enough to finance their own lifestyles and anagathic use but nothing more. They're devouring the seed corn, much as their own parents and grandparents did, and their own children are going to have to make do.

Money gets hoarded even when trade is still increasing and of course the children, grandchildren will want to assume power rather that be a hanger-on and in my scenario its the grandchildren who might kill so their children might have a chance of inheriting.

Now imagine if the problem with long-term anagathic mutations was not natural but due to the Imperium trying to prevent just this problem so they contaminate the drug to prevent just this problem but a crime family finds out and manages to make a pure version...?

 

[Grognard]

Elizabeth Moons Herris Serrano novels explore the idea of anagthics and society quite nicely.

 

[Whipsnade]

Jae,

The idea behind a trust funds is to equitably, not equally mind you, but equitably share out the proceeds of the assets placed in the trust. In other words, assets in a trust can not directed more towards one party in the trust over the other parties in the trust unless the trust was set up that way to begin with. Furthermore, changes to payment schedules are not entirely, if at all, in the hands of the people receiving the money. Trustees are usually entirely outsiders who can dispassionately operate the trust in the manner it was devised.

Having the patriarch sitting on his trust funds while his many offspring await payment at some future date seems odd because that idea is exact opposite of what a trust fund is all about. When the founders are looting a trust or failing to share out it's proceeds, as they are in your scenario, the trust is either broken or does not exist. That's why I now don't think a trust fits the situation you've further described.

Your scenario is best met by an "Inheritance Only" situation. The many existing heirs are watching the overall inheritance diminish with every year of the patriarch's profligate lifestyle and watching their specific share get smaller with every birth. Meanwhile, the patriarch isn't doling out any money at all, either directly or through a trust system.

The patriarch ihas all the money in his direct control, not in some outside trustees' control, and he's deciding to spend it all on anagathics, wine, women, and song. (And not birth control apparently)

Each year the pie is getting smaller and is being sliced into more pieces. That's well worth killing over.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Jae]

Grognard,

Yes I am aware of the Herris Serrano novels - winning colours in particular comes to mind. It was the mechanics within the Imperium I wasn't sure of.

Bill, you're right I'm not really into trust funds - I had thought that trust funds only paid out to the named parties not necessarily each and every member of a (very) extended family, especially if the patriarch decided not to name anyone else after say the children. Their children may therefore be reliant on a share of their parents money and so on?

So what is the top age people can healthily live to if they used anagathics responsibly? Anyone ever figure it ?

 

[aramis]

Re Grandfather (Yaskodray)
AM Droyne explains how Grandfather does it; PSR15 droyne with awareness, that's how. Not anagathics.

Re Anagathics Limits of Effects:
In MT Anagathics automake two of your saves for you, not all three or four (depending upon line on the chart), and after one complete term of use, stop progression on the aging table. Note that in MT, until age 30, Anagathics have no effect, and thus no character goes without aging on the age 34 column.
Given the 2 saves made automatically and one rolled, roughly 1 stat point will be lost per 7 years...

In TNE, there's a side effects table, which pretty much nerfs Anagathics for long term use; after 80 years, you're likely to go insane, and failing that, have growths. It's entirely possible to make 300 years old, but you'd have had dozens of cancer episodes, and will be completely stark raving homicidally mad.
At 20 terms on anagathics, you WILL have effects; you're guaranteed to be a raging psychopath at 24 terms on Anagathics. (96 years) Minimum possible rolls:
Term20 roll is at +5, and produces growths and a cumulative +1 DM
Term21 roll is now at +6, minimum of 8, for a more growths and a +2 DM additional
Term22 Roll is now at +8, minimum 10, for major disfiguration and a +3 further DM.
Term23 Roll is now at +11, minimum 13, for profound psychological effects and a further DM+8
Term24 Roll is now at +19. Since 15+ is psychopathic behavior....

 

[Whipsnade]

I had thought that trust funds only paid out to the named parties not necessarily each and every member of a (very) extended family, especially if the patriarch decided not to name anyone else after say the children. Their children may therefore be reliant on a share of their parents money and so on?

Jae,

Any lawyer worth his salt is going to strongly advise the parties in involved to set a trust fund up for the long run if only to avoid the sort of situation you're describing. That means even if only one child has been born when the trust fund is created, there will be provisions for adding additional children and grandchildren as they come along.

Of course, your patriarch could have ignored all advice and set up the fund with only specific names listed. All that will do is whittle down your list of suspects. While the few offspring named in the trust fund may have their snouts happily in the trough, all the others will still be waiting for the old SOB to die and will be watching the pie get smaller every day.

So what is the top age people can healthily live to if they used anagathics responsibly? Anyone ever figure it ?

The finicky details were mostly left up to the GM. CT had no stated upper limit. Available at TL15, the 200K CrImp monthly dose lets you avoid aging rolls. Miss a monthly dose and aging begins. MT mentions the century mark. Use anagathics and, with good luck, you won't begin aging until then. TNE handled it differently. How long you've been dosing yourself becomes very important. So...

CT - No stated upper limit.
MT - About 100 extra years, then aging rolls begin.
TNE - Likely insane after 80 years of anagathic use, if the cancers don't kill you first.

IMHO, TNE's take is the one to go with while in your situation CT's model would allow the patriarch to have oodles of kiddies.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Jae]

Bill
I'm probably being totally thick here but how can a finite amount of money (the original trust fund) deal with an ever increasing number of possible beneficiaries?

Does everyone get a smaller share of the interest/shares everytime another child is born or does it pay out the same amount to everyone until it becomes bankrupt?

 

[Whipsnade]

I'm probably being totally thick here but how can a finite amount of money (the original trust fund) deal with an ever increasing number of possible beneficiaries?

Jae,

A trust fund isn't money stuffed under a mattress. It's a mass of working capital which (hopefully) is busily growing by earning interest and dividends. The payouts then come out of those earnings while the principle remains untouched. A trust fund is meant to self-sustaining over an indefinite, but very long, period of time.

Yes, if you keep adding beneficiaries to the fund the payouts for all will decrease, but killing the fund's founder doesn't (normally) break the trust and hand out the capital in big chunks because funds supposed to operate long after the founder's death.

Does everyone get a smaller share of the interest/shares everytime another child is born or does it pay out the same amount to everyone until it becomes bankrupt?

Yes, adding new beneficiaries will lessen to payments to all. Economic downturns will do the same thing too.

When it comes to divvying up the payout, it's all a matter of percentages. The sort of tipping point you're looking for would have occurred very early in the fund's existence when a small number of beneficiaries were sharing the pot. Once the number of beneficiaries grows past a certain point, adding others really doesn't change things that much. Let me explain.

Adam sets up a fund that will generate 1 million bucks per year for his kids to share. When he does this, he has 4 children so each gets 250,000 bucks. Adam then has a fifth child and the pay out for all drops to 200,000 bucks with the original 4 "losing" 50,000 each.

Now jump forward all the decades you're proposing. Adam is still having kids and his kids had kids and those kids are having kids. Now there are 40 people sharing the million bucks each year with each getting 25,000 bucks. Adam has yet another child, making the numbers of beneficiaries 41, and everyone's share drops to 24,390.24 bucks for a loss of $ 609.74

You tell me. Are they more likely to kill Adam over losing fifty thousand bucks or over six hundred bucks? Over a Mercedes or a HDTV? Over one year's college tuition or one year's cable? Over a vacation home or a plane ticket?

That's why a trust isn't going to work in the situation you described. There isn't enough money in it when so many people are involved.

Now, if Adam was still sitting on all those millions which, if they'd been placed in a trust fund would produce a million payout each year, then his elderly kids or their middle aged kids are going to be tempted to whack him before they're too old to enjoy the boodle.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Jae]

Ta!

Thanks Bill,
despite my questions that is what I thought. Suddenly I can see a real incentive for someone (several someone's?) in the direct line of inheritance to kill the patriarch and any others above them so say their children can inherit... (the assassins can't benefit under law but their children can at least under British law provided it can be proved they did not conspire...)

Thanks everyone - much clearer...

 

[aramis]

One other thing about most trusts: Almost all recapitalize some of the growth to provide for further growth; say it's set for MCr1 per year total payout, but not until the death of the founder.

If he lives 20 years, those MCr20 will be added to the principal. (Which, in the OTU, is brobably some MCr200).. meaning that it coud quite possibly be growing steadily, and eventually, the trust managers either increase the payouts or shed some fo the capital in a capital distribution to the benficiaries, or quit working it as hard and reduce the principal by neglect. (Unfortunately the latter is the apparently normative response... but we only hear about bad management of trusts, so one can't be certain without some serious research.)

 

[Whipsnade]

Suddenly I can see a real incentive for someone (several someone's?) in the direct line of inheritance to kill the patriarch and any others above them so say their children can inherit...

Jae,

If they're not worried about being caught, and there are many reasons why they might not be worried about being caught, that would work very nicely. However, cops and other investigators always follow the money. It's actually an axiom of theirs'; If a situation is unclear, determine who benefits from it.

Knocking off only certain heirs is going to create a rather big trail right back to those who'll benefit from those deaths and, while they may not have been involved in the crime(s), the fact that they benefit will suggest suspects who "wish them well".

(the assassins can't benefit under law but their children can at least under British law provided it can be proved they did not conspire...)

Conspiracy can be hard to prove, depending on the legal system the world in question espouses. The social cost of inheriting in such a manner however would be high in all but the oddest human cultures.

Aramis' points about a trust being constructed and operated in a manner that produces growth, rather than just remaining static, are spot on. Because trusts are usually constructed in a manner so that they'll continue on after the founder dies, the patriarch's death may not trigger a pay out. However, your killer(s) may believe that death triggers a pay out and that means the murder(s) are still on.

I still think a straight inheritance situation is best. It's simple so the murderer(s) won't have to know the ins and out of a trust instead of the stipulations of a will, stipulations that may be legally mandated by the culture in question. A will, coupled with the patriarchs continued "failure" to share out his fortune, also allows animosity to build for decades where a trust would have seen some monies being handed out to some people.

One last note, I'd like to suggest that you write this scenario up and either place it the File Library here, pass it along to Jeff Zeitlin for his 'zine, or pass it along to Commander Drax for his 'zine. It's an idea that needs to be shared as widely as possible.


Regards,
Bill

 

[FreeTrav]

One last note, I'd like to suggest that you write this scenario up and either place it the File Library here, pass it along to Jeff Zeitlin for his 'zine, or pass it along to Commander Drax for his 'zine. It's an idea that needs to be shared as widely as possible.

Bill, I think you misspelled "and" at the highlighted word, and you don't need the word 'either', either...

 

[Whipsnade]

Bill, I think you misspelled "and" at the highlighted word, and you don't need the word 'either', either...

Jeff,

Ooopsie!


Regards,
Bill

 

[FreeTrav]

As a random comment on the subject of anagathics, the first part of the "Cities in Flight" trilogy by James Blish has as an important subplotline the development of the first anagathics (which they call antagathics); they're not a major focus for the rest of the series, although they do play an important role in several of the stories.