Renamed Medical Chems

[Chada1]

@Skull132 @MattAtlas What do you two think about the list as of now?

[Snakebittenn]

I'd still rather not relearn all the chem names, even if they are better than whatever the initial versions were.

[Doxxmedearly]

It is less than twenty, and just about half of those are mental meds that haven't been used outside of prescriptions since brainmed did away with traumas. Most will probably get reworked.

The three pain meds are close enough in name that they're easy to recognize.

Ipecac and Imidazoline's new forms are pretty obvious. 

Most of the common core meds are totally unchanged. There will be some adaptation by current medical players, but overall it should not be terribly tricky to get used to. Also I believe Geeves has a PR for some chem codexes for easy in-game reference, and the wiki will be there. 

A small period of uncomfortable adaptation is worth the change IMO.

[Carver]

Just slap a book in medical and the library that says what each renamed chem does. Keep in mind this change also further outdates more or less every single medical-related book in the database.

Edited July 20, 2020 by Carver

[Chada1]

8 hours ago, Connorjg1 said:

The main issue I would see with this is my inability to google the drugs themselves for a small synopsis on there real world counterpart so I can gauge a tiny bit about how they work irl lol. If they had descriptions that told a bit about what they did when you examined em this'd be better but I can't imagine it's a huge issue either way

I added some but there wasn't a whole lot to add, I added to the description the general purpose of the chem and a little bit of other fluff.

[kermit]

I’m kind of against the need to change the names of real-life chemicals to made up chemicals because I foresee it being detrimental to a lot of roleplay involving the pharmacy and people who stick prescriptions on their record. By having real life drugs, it allows folk to do a cursory bit of research on it, see what they can and cannot do when on that medication, etc., and with that information, include some aspects to their characters that may help develop them - I’ve seen this several times when I play chemist; I’ve done it a handful of times with my own characters. Removing real life chemicals makes this task impossible and requires you to resort to whatever little amount of information there will be about on the made-up drug and pharmacists/chemists won’t be able to explain drugs and how they work to interested prescription-collectors, unless they create their own head-lore (which will, of course, be inconsistent among players). By solving the small, medium or large issue of people complaining that “X drug is not realistic because X drug in real life does this and this, not that.” - which is an issue, I agree - I feel like you will only cause another issue of people not being able to look at real life effects of the drug at all due to them being stripped from the game which could be beneficial in their roleplay.

Another detriment to this change is the lack of effort behind some of the proposed chemical names. Because of this and the seeming inevitability that this PR will go through, I spent roughly two hours coming up with what feels like a lexicon of chemical names which are mash-up of Latin and pre-existent chemicals (see below). I feel like more time needs to be put into creating new, alternative names for the chemicals you wish to re-name because, currently, some of the names feel like a cruel joke - Antihistadryl, for example - and, when you consider that these changes will likely be semi-permanent, that’s not a good thing. It feels like you’re trying to merge this PR too fast, with too little feedback, and with too little thought put into each chemical name.

 

Some suggested alternatives and their explanations:

Spoiler

Alternatives for "Traumatonin" (Tramadol) and "Oxycorphine" (Oxycodone) and "Paraphenol" (Paracetamol): Fentamine, Methocaine, Methocodone, Mortacodone, Mortacaine, Oxycomorphone, Oxycomorphine, Oxyfentanil, Oxyfentanyl, Methofentanil, Oxyfentanol, Mortanol, Perconol, Oxymonocaine, Monocodone, Ketanol, Ketamorphone, Ketanyl, Ketacodone, Methophenyl, Methophenol, Mortaphenyl, Mortaphenol.

Alternatives for "Antihestadryl" (Antihistamine): Cetadine, Fenadine, Fenadryl, Cetahydramine, Fenahydramine, Levodryl, Levodine, Levohydramine, Levodryl, Bromadryl, Bromadine, Bromahydramine. 

Alternatives for "Emetinol" (Ipecac Syrup): Puranol, Puradryl, Mundanol, Verunol, Verudryl, Verudine, Verupuranol, Aspuonol, Aspuodryl, Detranol, Detradine. Apstodine Syrup, Puradryl Syrup, Puracac Syrup, Puradryl Syrup, Verucac Syrup, Detracac Syrup. Purafel, Verufel, Mundafel, Detrafel.

Alternatives for "Dialynol" (Calomel): Diectanol, Diectadryl, Laxanol, Laxadryl, Laxadine, Puranol, Puradryl, Puradine, Laxapuradryl, Laxapuranol, Laxapuradine, Liquetine. Flumenectionem, Fluectionem, Fluvectionem, Vitectionem, Vascuectionem

Alternatives for "Concusil" (Duloxetine), "Neuranol" (Mannitol): Emoxanil, Emoxanyl, Emoxidine, Emoxanol, Sincunyl, Sincunol, Sincudine, Capunyl, Capunol, Capudine, Vosonyl, Vosodine, Levosonyl, Levosodine, Levocapunyl, Levocapunol, Levosincunol, Levosincudine, Cataleptinol, Cataleptipan

 

Traumatonin feels misleading and infers that it's used to treat traumatic injuries, which it is not, it is an analgesic medication for treating pain. The suggested alternatives for traumatonin are mash-ups of other widely known opiod medications that are similar enough but also dissimilar enough that they both convey that the drug is used for treating pain, but also isn't tramadol. Oxycorphine is alright, though I feel like there are better alternatives. Paraphenol sounds more like a chemical precursor, of which phenol is, and also sounds like paraphernalia - I feel it has better alternatives.

Antihestadryl is probably the worst chemical name in the list. @VisVirific summed it up well by saying "[It feels like] you've put them through a dyslexia simulator" which gave me a laugh (thanks). Antihistamine is a category composed of two categories of medications, akin to how analgesic refers to pain medication and is composed of several more categories (opiods, NSAIDs, etc.). I believe - and I think I'm echo'ing the suggestions of others - that antihistamine should just be renamed to an actual chemical names (suggestions above) as opposed to being referred to as "antihistamine", the category of drugs it belongs to. 

Emetinol is alright and does convey what it's function is, though I suggested some alternatives that I, personally, find better. Some of the alternatives suggest rejecting/spitting (verunol, aspuonol), refer to the stomach (mundanol), and some refer to purification (puranol). "Syrup" can also be stuck onto the end of any of the names as, assuming the function of ipecac remains unchanged, it will only work when ingested, not injected.

Dialynol could be better, I believe. I like the idea of bridging pulmodeiectionem and calomel closer together with names which include the "deiectionem" suffix (meaning purge). Some alternatives suggest purification (puranol), the expunging of waste (laxanol), or refer to streams or fluids (fluiectionem, fluvectionem), an obvious metaphor for the blood stream.

Concusil and Neuranol also could have better alternatives that sound less immediately obvious and in-your-face. The drug names like "emoxanyl" I like a lot as I based the naming off of an experimental Russian drug which increases cerebral circulation, quite fitting given the setting of the Aurora's universe. Other alternatives include drugs which refer to the head or a broken mind (Capunyl, Sincunyl, Cataleptinol)

Anyway, that’s all I have.

Thanks.

Edited July 20, 2020 by SadKermit
Fixed a formatting mistake.

[nonno_anselmo]

Ich ech och uch

I'd like to see the names of tr*ckchems changed before touching real world chemicals to be honest. 70% of chemicals take their names from star trek chemicals which is unnerving to say the least, expecially when we can go ahead and change them into actual unique names perhaps flavored to sound like words from the typical language used by other races. 

 

With that said i support changing the names of real life chems into actual standalone names, while it is all fun and games to base yarr pee on stuff you can google and sound knowleadgeable to your peers who just want to grill, i think a moderately detailed description on the wiki is going to be more than enough to wash away all headcanons aswell as reflect the fact that we are 400 years in the future and new psychoactive drugs have probably been found.

 

 

edit: The whole "it causes confusion" and "it means i'd have to remember all chems" is bogus, it is a literal case of git gud. Keeping the wiki open in a separate tab while you go ahead and ctrl + f to check on the name of that one brute healing chemical untill you remember it is not going to be an excruciating process, all of us already went through that once.

 

tl;dr : change the names of trekchems for yeb's sake.

Edited July 20, 2020 by nonno_anselmo

[MoondancerPony]

12 minutes ago, SadKermit said:

I’m kind of against the need to change the names of real-life chemicals to made up chemicals because I foresee it being detrimental to a lot of roleplay involving the pharmacy and people who stick prescriptions on their record. By having real life drugs, it allows folk to do a cursory bit of research on it, see what they can and cannot do when on that medication, etc., and with that information, include some aspects to their characters that may help develop them - I’ve seen this several times when I play chemist; I’ve done it a handful of times with my own characters. Removing real life chemicals makes this task impossible and requires you to resort to whatever little amount of information there will be about on the made-up drug and pharmacists/chemists won’t be able to explain drugs and how they work to interested prescription-collectors, unless they create their own head-lore (which will, of course, be inconsistent among players). By solving the small, medium or large issue of people complaining that “X drug is not realistic because X drug in real life does this and this, not that.” - which is an issue, I agree - I feel like you will only cause another issue of people not being able to look at real life effects of the drug at all due to them being stripped from the game which could be beneficial in their roleplay.

I second this entirely. Even if you don't think the aforementioned is an issue, it's still bad writing. The premise is, supposedly, that by 2462 these chemicals would have been improved, but all we have to go off of is the name and description. In fact, since it's literally just a rename, they haven't been improved at all. They are exactly as functional as their current counterparts, and we just have to pretend that they're better.

Instead, if you want to add new chemical names and get away from current ones, leave them in. Use them as precursors for more advanced iterations. Create a version of oxycodone with less addictive potential, or a version of paracetamol that puts less stress on the liver. The important thing is that these are improved versions of the current drugs, which is shown by virtue of the current drugs being used to create them.

2 hours ago, Chada1 said:

I added to the description the general purpose of the chem and a little bit of other fluff.

The description is only ever visible if you click the seldom-used 'analyse' button in the chemmaster.

 

Building on what I said earlier, the reasons presented for this change (that I've seen) are not valid.

• Using real-life chemical names is not ethical.
  • This is entirely not true. No one has ever complained to Goon, who have many, many more real-life medicines than we do, that their medicines are unethical.
  • Other IPs use chemical names in even worse ways, like epipens being a speed boost in L4D2. The rebuttal to this was that L4D2 is being satirical with this usage, but that's not correct; L4D2 is parodying action movies, not satirising epipens. No one has been using epipens for speed boosts IRL after L4D2 came out.
  • If you want to argue ethics, there are many other things you could go after before coming to chemical names.
    • We present IRL surgery in a very, very loose manner; you can safely treat someone with arterial bleeding as long as you have a table, a glass shard, some wire, and a cigarette. No one is demanding that we change surgery to use fake tools like "slapcels" instead of scalpels, in case someone suddenly decides they know enough about surgery from a video game to attempt it in real life.
    • You could also say that the functions of a lot of organs are inaccurate; the liver doesn't heal other organs, and the only effect of kidneys until recently was causing toxins when you drink coffee if they're damaged. However, no one has gone into a moral panic and declared that kidneys need to be renamed to childknees or else people could endanger themselves in real life.
  • I also think that this argument is patronising; it infantilises our playerbase, acting as if they lack common sense entirely.
• SS13 was not intended as a 1:1 simulation of reality.
  • I mean, this isn't true? It was intended as a (mildly) realistic atmospherics simulator, following the ideal gas law and everything, and grew out of that. I have never seen anyone push for changing the ideal gas law or making it so the math doesn't work anymore.
  • Claiming anything follows the "intent" of SS13 is just wrong, since it's changed so much since Exadv1 made it.
• Medicine will have advanced enough by 2463 that these chemicals would be entirely outmoded.
  • Basic pharmacodynamics (the way drugs get their effect) will not change. Paracetamol will not cease to be a painkiller that is neither an NSAID or an opiate just due to the passing of time. Oxycodone will not cease to be effective for extreme pain just due to the passing of time. You will not discover an entirely new nociception system that requires specialised drugs to block in the time between now and 2462. There is a reason we create things like Ultracet (tramadol and paracetamol, known by some in SS13 as ParaTram) rather than a completely new chemical. Our understanding of pharmacology is sufficiently advanced that any new drugs will likely come from improvements on existing ones or fill niches that are currently unfilled, like safe anti-cancer drugs or anti-Alzheimer's drugs, or treatments for rare diseases.
  • Even if new, more effective forms of these drugs are discovered, just renaming the current ones to reference "ancient paracetamol" is not sufficient to convey that. To be frank, it's bad writing; telling instead of showing.
    • The proper thing to do would be to keep the current drugs and add more advanced versions with different names. Take hydroxychloroquine, for example; it's a safer form of chloroquine, but it's still made using chloroquine as a precursor. Chloroquine didn't just stop existing when hydroxychloroquine was discovered.
    • This way, you could keep the drugs that are already well-known while still being able to add new versions with extra features in the future.
• Related to the previous point: If we base drugs off of real chems, we can't give them additional effects in the future.
  • You shouldn't be basing name changes off of hypothetical future changes. If we need to change the name to reflect a mechanical difference, that mechanical difference should be more than just hypothetical.
  • You can follow the kelotane/dermaline or alkysine/mannitol model with this: Keep the basic version, and add an advanced version with new mechanics. That way, it makes sense that it would have additional effects.
• It puts everyone on a level playing field with chem names/this only hurts people who already use out-of-game medicine knowledge to help them in-game
  • What. People have been using most of these chemical names for years in SS13 and many people have experience with them out of the game, too (I'm sure most people have taken paracetamol as a fever reducer or painkiller). This point essentially admits that it would be a detriment to many and a boon to none, so why is this anything but an argument against it?

I'm sure I missed some, but this covers most of the points I've seen presented in favour of this PR.

Also, pre-emptively: I am not a medical student. I am not a doctor. I am not a chemist. I am not an EMT. Lots of people tend to imply that the reason I am for/against certain changes to Medical is because of extensive knowledge of IRL medicine, which, while flattering, is entirely incorrect. I have a first aid certificate. That's all. I'm a loser compsci major who almost dropped out of high school several times, with no formal medical education. The entire reason I know this stuff is because someone claimed my character's skillset was unrealistic so I set out to learn it out-of-character to prove that it wasn't.

[Snakebittenn]

1 minute ago, MoondancerPony said:

Instead, if you want to add new chemical names and get away from current ones, leave them in. Use them as precursors for more advanced iterations. Create a version of oxycodone with less addictive potential, or a version of paracetamol that puts less stress on the liver. The important thing is that these are improved versions of the current drugs, which is shown by virtue of the current drugs being used to create them.

 

I would prefer this over the OP. We could make advanced 'Plus' versions of those chems or something with these names.

[MoondancerPony]

Just now, Snakebittenn said:

I would prefer this over the OP. We could make advanced 'Plus' versions of those chems or something with these names.

To be fair, I would be opposed to "Paracetamol Plus" as well. The alternate names suggested by SadKermit could be good for advanced medications.

Also, I don't really mind changes to the psychology chems. We've gone through like, at least three generations of antidepressants, antipsychotics, etc. since 1960, so it would make sense to have completely different ones by 2462. That's the one place our knowledge of pharmacodynamics is spotty enough to justify a complete and total replacement.

Obligatory not a psychiatrist either, I only know about this from researching my own IRL prescription.

[MattAtlas]

46 minutes ago, MoondancerPony said:

Basic pharmacodynamics (the way drugs get their effect) will not change. Paracetamol will not cease to be a painkiller that is neither an NSAID or an opiate just due to the passing of time. Oxycodone will not cease to be effective for extreme pain just due to the passing of time. You will not discover an entirely new nociception system that requires specialised drugs to block in the time between now and 2462. There is a reason we create things like Ultracet (tramadol and paracetamol, known by some in SS13 as ParaTram) rather than a completely new chemical. Our understanding of pharmacology is sufficiently advanced that any new drugs will likely come from improvements on existing ones or fill niches that are currently unfilled, like safe anti-cancer drugs or anti-Alzheimer's drugs, or treatments for rare diseases.

The fact that me, a contributor, a 17 year old with too much time on their hands has to go through this kind of feedback post to make a simple medical change is exactly why real world parallels need to go as soon as humanely possible. Like I genuinely just have no clue what I'm reading here. It's 2462 with magic space engines for Christ's sake. I should be able to make changes without wading through paragraphs of technobabble about how "It's more realistic this way so it HAS to stay!"

Edited July 20, 2020 by MattAtlas

[MoondancerPony]

6 minutes ago, MattAtlas said:

The fact that me, a contributor, a 17 year old with too much time on their hands has to go through this kind of feedback post to make a simple medical change is exactly why real world parallels need to go as soon as humanely possible. Like I genuinely just have no clue what I'm reading here. It's 2462 with magic space engines for Christ's sake. I should be able to make changes without wading through paragraphs of technobabble about how "It's more realistic this way so it HAS to stay!"

"The way medicines work isn't going to change significantly, except maybe for psychiatric drugs, in the time between now and the setting. That's the reason we combine multiple drugs in real life instead of just coming up with new ones on the fly. To have completely new ones would require basic biology to change, which won't happen in the span of 442 years. New medications will probably do stuff we don't have medicines for yet, or be better versions based on the old ones, not completely obsolete current medications to the extent that they would be considered 'ancient', as described by the PR."

That's what it's intended to convey. I ran it past multiple people and they said it looked good and wasn't too hard to understand, that's why I phrased it that way.

It comes across as dismissive to only respond to that point and boil it down to complaints over 'realism'. The post is written as a direct response to individual points brought up by other people; the quoted point was directed at others' arguments on how modern medications would realistically be completely obsolete by 2462. Calling it unintelligible technobabble is an aggressive response that discourages any sort of discussion, which makes the point of a feedback thread moot. It invites ridicule of others' feedback rather than simply viewing the feedback on its own merit.

[Scheveningen]

Worth the change. It's a video game and it should be roughly playable, not literal compartmentalized suffering such as that real-world pharmacists have to contend with in terms of having to memorize extremely specific. We should not have to en-burden the developers of this game with the concept of having to do hours of painstaking research for subjects related to their projects just to satisfy an extremely specific number of individuals who get very upset when their immersions get mildly assaulted by a relative inaccuracy of video game logic vs. real world logic.

In a world with space magic engines and a mcguffin energy resource it's surprising a sect of the community even cares this much about accurate pharmacology in a sci-fantasy roleplaying game. Don't forget the existence of psionics, which is essentially (cool!) space brain magic. This server is closer to StarCraft than Star Trek, really - it's that dystopic. Making chemicals sound like something they actually help or harm based on their naming structure is a hell of a lot better than what we have now. Psuedoscience (relative to our reality) in a video game never hurt anybody.

 

[geeves]

i've always wanted this since it frees us of the burdens of real life medicine and takes up yet another step further away from annoying irl knowledge being dangled over heads

[Chada1]

8 hours ago, MoondancerPony said:

Spoiler

 

I second this entirely. Even if you don't think the aforementioned is an issue, it's still bad writing. The premise is, supposedly, that by 2462 these chemicals would have been improved, but all we have to go off of is the name and description. In fact, since it's literally just a rename, they haven't been improved at all. They are exactly as functional as their current counterparts, and we just have to pretend that they're better.

Instead, if you want to add new chemical names and get away from current ones, leave them in. Use them as precursors for more advanced iterations. Create a version of oxycodone with less addictive potential, or a version of paracetamol that puts less stress on the liver. The important thing is that these are improved versions of the current drugs, which is shown by virtue of the current drugs being used to create them.

The description is only ever visible if you click the seldom-used 'analyse' button in the chemmaster.

 

Building on what I said earlier, the reasons presented for this change (that I've seen) are not valid.

• Using real-life chemical names is not ethical.
  • This is entirely not true. No one has ever complained to Goon, who have many, many more real-life medicines than we do, that their medicines are unethical.
  • Other IPs use chemical names in even worse ways, like epipens being a speed boost in L4D2. The rebuttal to this was that L4D2 is being satirical with this usage, but that's not correct; L4D2 is parodying action movies, not satirising epipens. No one has been using epipens for speed boosts IRL after L4D2 came out.
  • If you want to argue ethics, there are many other things you could go after before coming to chemical names.
    • We present IRL surgery in a very, very loose manner; you can safely treat someone with arterial bleeding as long as you have a table, a glass shard, some wire, and a cigarette. No one is demanding that we change surgery to use fake tools like "slapcels" instead of scalpels, in case someone suddenly decides they know enough about surgery from a video game to attempt it in real life.
    • You could also say that the functions of a lot of organs are inaccurate; the liver doesn't heal other organs, and the only effect of kidneys until recently was causing toxins when you drink coffee if they're damaged. However, no one has gone into a moral panic and declared that kidneys need to be renamed to childknees or else people could endanger themselves in real life.
  • I also think that this argument is patronising; it infantilises our playerbase, acting as if they lack common sense entirely.
• SS13 was not intended as a 1:1 simulation of reality.
  • I mean, this isn't true? It was intended as a (mildly) realistic atmospherics simulator, following the ideal gas law and everything, and grew out of that. I have never seen anyone push for changing the ideal gas law or making it so the math doesn't work anymore.
  • Claiming anything follows the "intent" of SS13 is just wrong, since it's changed so much since Exadv1 made it.
• Medicine will have advanced enough by 2463 that these chemicals would be entirely outmoded.
  • Basic pharmacodynamics (the way drugs get their effect) will not change. Paracetamol will not cease to be a painkiller that is neither an NSAID or an opiate just due to the passing of time. Oxycodone will not cease to be effective for extreme pain just due to the passing of time. You will not discover an entirely new nociception system that requires specialised drugs to block in the time between now and 2462. There is a reason we create things like Ultracet (tramadol and paracetamol, known by some in SS13 as ParaTram) rather than a completely new chemical. Our understanding of pharmacology is sufficiently advanced that any new drugs will likely come from improvements on existing ones or fill niches that are currently unfilled, like safe anti-cancer drugs or anti-Alzheimer's drugs, or treatments for rare diseases.
  • Even if new, more effective forms of these drugs are discovered, just renaming the current ones to reference "ancient paracetamol" is not sufficient to convey that. To be frank, it's bad writing; telling instead of showing.
    • The proper thing to do would be to keep the current drugs and add more advanced versions with different names. Take hydroxychloroquine, for example; it's a safer form of chloroquine, but it's still made using chloroquine as a precursor. Chloroquine didn't just stop existing when hydroxychloroquine was discovered.
    • This way, you could keep the drugs that are already well-known while still being able to add new versions with extra features in the future.
• Related to the previous point: If we base drugs off of real chems, we can't give them additional effects in the future.
  • You shouldn't be basing name changes off of hypothetical future changes. If we need to change the name to reflect a mechanical difference, that mechanical difference should be more than just hypothetical.
  • You can follow the kelotane/dermaline or alkysine/mannitol model with this: Keep the basic version, and add an advanced version with new mechanics. That way, it makes sense that it would have additional effects.
• It puts everyone on a level playing field with chem names/this only hurts people who already use out-of-game medicine knowledge to help them in-game
  • What. People have been using most of these chemical names for years in SS13 and many people have experience with them out of the game, too (I'm sure most people have taken paracetamol as a fever reducer or painkiller). This point essentially admits that it would be a detriment to many and a boon to none, so why is this anything but an argument against it?

I'm sure I missed some, but this covers most of the points I've seen presented in favour of this PR.

Also, pre-emptively: I am not a medical student. I am not a doctor. I am not a chemist. I am not an EMT. Lots of people tend to imply that the reason I am for/against certain changes to Medical is because of extensive knowledge of IRL medicine, which, while flattering, is entirely incorrect. I have a first aid certificate. That's all. I'm a loser compsci major who almost dropped out of high school several times, with no formal medical education. The entire reason I know this stuff is because someone claimed my character's skillset was unrealistic so I set out to learn it out-of-character to prove that it wasn't.

 

 

It is unethical to misrepresent medicine in media. The idea that it isn't is completely ridiculous. You going 'nu uh' isn't going to change that, it never will. It's partially WHY Medical professionals get upset about our Chems (And Chems in other media, and mental illness, and literally anything else) being real and not being realistic/represented right. It causes real harm to people on a daily basis.

And I'm not adding back the old Chems, that's the bottom line. When this PR goes in, the current Chems won't exist under their real life names. That's it. And yet the thing I care about the most isn't even the argument that's likely going to get the Chems in, and that's ?.

Help me improve the PR constructively instead of trying to countermine the entire purpose of my PR (To remove real life drugs).

 

9 hours ago, SadKermit said:

Spoiler

 

I’m kind of against the need to change the names of real-life chemicals to made up chemicals because I foresee it being detrimental to a lot of roleplay involving the pharmacy and people who stick prescriptions on their record. By having real life drugs, it allows folk to do a cursory bit of research on it, see what they can and cannot do when on that medication, etc., and with that information, include some aspects to their characters that may help develop them - I’ve seen this several times when I play chemist; I’ve done it a handful of times with my own characters. Removing real life chemicals makes this task impossible and requires you to resort to whatever little amount of information there will be about on the made-up drug and pharmacists/chemists won’t be able to explain drugs and how they work to interested prescription-collectors, unless they create their own head-lore (which will, of course, be inconsistent among players). By solving the small, medium or large issue of people complaining that “X drug is not realistic because X drug in real life does this and this, not that.” - which is an issue, I agree - I feel like you will only cause another issue of people not being able to look at real life effects of the drug at all due to them being stripped from the game which could be beneficial in their roleplay.

Another detriment to this change is the lack of effort behind some of the proposed chemical names. Because of this and the seeming inevitability that this PR will go through, I spent roughly two hours coming up with what feels like a lexicon of chemical names which are mash-up of Latin and pre-existent chemicals (see below). I feel like more time needs to be put into creating new, alternative names for the chemicals you wish to re-name because, currently, some of the names feel like a cruel joke - Antihistadryl, for example - and, when you consider that these changes will likely be semi-permanent, that’s not a good thing. It feels like you’re trying to merge this PR too fast, with too little feedback, and with too little thought put into each chemical name.

 

Some suggested alternatives and their explanations:

  Reveal hidden contents

Alternatives for "Traumatonin" (Tramadol) and "Oxycorphine" (Oxycodone) and "Paraphenol" (Paracetamol): Fentamine, Methocaine, Methocodone, Mortacodone, Mortacaine, Oxycomorphone, Oxycomorphine, Oxyfentanil, Oxyfentanyl, Methofentanil, Oxyfentanol, Mortanol, Perconol, Oxymonocaine, Monocodone, Ketanol, Ketamorphone, Ketanyl, Ketacodone, Methophenyl, Methophenol, Mortaphenyl, Mortaphenol.

Alternatives for "Antihestadryl" (Antihistamine): Cetadine, Fenadine, Fenadryl, Cetahydramine, Fenahydramine, Levodryl, Levodine, Levohydramine, Levodryl, Bromadryl, Bromadine, Bromahydramine. 

Alternatives for "Emetinol" (Ipecac Syrup): Puranol, Puradryl, Mundanol, Verunol, Verudryl, Verudine, Verupuranol, Aspuonol, Aspuodryl, Detranol, Detradine. Apstodine Syrup, Puradryl Syrup, Puracac Syrup, Puradryl Syrup, Verucac Syrup, Detracac Syrup. Purafel, Verufel, Mundafel, Detrafel.

Alternatives for "Dialynol" (Calomel): Diectanol, Diectadryl, Laxanol, Laxadryl, Laxadine, Puranol, Puradryl, Puradine, Laxapuradryl, Laxapuranol, Laxapuradine, Liquetine. Flumenectionem, Fluectionem, Fluvectionem, Vitectionem, Vascuectionem

Alternatives for "Concusil" (Duloxetine), "Neuranol" (Mannitol): Emoxanil, Emoxanyl, Emoxidine, Emoxanol, Sincunyl, Sincunol, Sincudine, Capunyl, Capunol, Capudine, Vosonyl, Vosodine, Levosonyl, Levosodine, Levocapunyl, Levocapunol, Levosincunol, Levosincudine, Cataleptinol, Cataleptipan

 

Traumatonin feels misleading and infers that it's used to treat traumatic injuries, which it is not, it is an analgesic medication for treating pain. The suggested alternatives for traumatonin are mash-ups of other widely known opiod medications that are similar enough but also dissimilar enough that they both convey that the drug is used for treating pain, but also isn't tramadol. Oxycorphine is alright, though I feel like there are better alternatives. Paraphenol sounds more like a chemical precursor, of which phenol is, and also sounds like paraphernalia - I feel it has better alternatives.

Antihestadryl is probably the worst chemical name in the list. @VisVirific summed it up well by saying "[It feels like] you've put them through a dyslexia simulator" which gave me a laugh (thanks). Antihistamine is a category composed of two categories of medications, akin to how analgesic refers to pain medication and is composed of several more categories (opiods, NSAIDs, etc.). I believe - and I think I'm echo'ing the suggestions of others - that antihistamine should just be renamed to an actual chemical names (suggestions above) as opposed to being referred to as "antihistamine", the category of drugs it belongs to. 

Emetinol is alright and does convey what it's function is, though I suggested some alternatives that I, personally, find better. Some of the alternatives suggest rejecting/spitting (verunol, aspuonol), refer to the stomach (mundanol), and some refer to purification (puranol). "Syrup" can also be stuck onto the end of any of the names as, assuming the function of ipecac remains unchanged, it will only work when ingested, not injected.

Dialynol could be better, I believe. I like the idea of bridging pulmodeiectionem and calomel closer together with names which include the "deiectionem" suffix (meaning purge). Some alternatives suggest purification (puranol), the expunging of waste (laxanol), or refer to streams or fluids (fluiectionem, fluvectionem), an obvious metaphor for the blood stream.

Concusil and Neuranol also could have better alternatives that sound less immediately obvious and in-your-face. The drug names like "emoxanyl" I like a lot as I based the naming off of an experimental Russian drug which increases cerebral circulation, quite fitting given the setting of the Aurora's universe. Other alternatives include drugs which refer to the head or a broken mind (Capunyl, Sincunyl, Cataleptinol)

Anyway, that’s all I have.

Thanks.

 

 

Hello!

The first half of your post could be solved by coding in some more side effects and also just giving them better wiki descriptions. So it's not that big of a deal.

The latter half I can try to fix just by listening to your feedback.

Thank you for the new proposed name changes, I'll absolutely use them. When I pick some out and change the current list, will you give me feedback again? ?

Edited July 21, 2020 by Chada1

[VisVirific]

I fully agree with SadKermit's points on how this PR feels like it's being merged too fast, and that a proper nomenclature system would need more time and concentration for them as it feels like a premise for an inevitable overhaul, especially now that it's been pointed out most of the fictional names are straight up from Star Trek.

As for the naming suggestions, here's my general recommendations:

Painkiller Alternatives

Spoiler

Recommending Against:

• Fentamine, Methocaine, Mortanol - Existing chemical compound names
• Mortacaine, Ketanol - Too similar to Actual IRL Brands
• Methofentanil - Similar to Methylfentanyl
• Methophenol - Similar to Methylphenol

 

Recommending FOR:

• Methocodone
• Mortacodone
• Monocodone
• Methophenyl
• Mortaphenyl - (Personal favorite for Tramadol/Traumatonin)
• Mortaphenol
• Oxycomorphone
• Oxycomorphine - (Personal favorite for Oxycodone/Oxycorphine)
• Oxyfentanil
• Oxyfentanyl
• Oxyfentano
• Oxymonocaine
• Ketamorphone
• Ketanyl - (Sounds legitimate enough to be another type of Painmed in my opinion)
• Ketacodone
• Perconol - (Personal favorite for Paracetamol/Paraphenol)

 

General Med Alternatives

Spoiler

Recommending Against:

Antihistamine/Antihestadryl:

• Bromadryl, Bromadine - Existing chemical compound names
• Levodryl - Actually Trademarked apparently???
• Levodine - Similar to Levodin

Ipecac Syrup/Emetinol:

• Puranol - Existing chemical compound name
• Mundanol - People might default to "Mundane" over stomach

Calomel/Dialynol:

• Lax prefix in general - People might default to "Laxatives".
• Laxanol, Laxadine, Puranol, Puradine - Existing chemical compound names

 

Recommending FOR:

Antihistamine/Antihestadryl:

• Bromahydramine
• Cetadine
• Cetahydramine - (Personal favorites for Diphenhydramine/Antihistamine/Antihestadryl)
• Fenadine - (Personal favorites for Diphenhydramine/Antihistamine/Antihestadryl)
• Fenadryl
• Fenahydramine
• Levohydramine

Ipecac Syrup/Emetinol:

• Aspuonol
• Aspuodryl
• Apstodine Syrup
• Detradine
• Detrafel
• Detranol
• Detracac Syrup
• Mundafel
• Puradryl
• Purafel
• Puradryl Syrup
• Puracac Syrup
• Verudryl
• Verudine
• Verufel
• Verunol - (Personalf favorites for Ipecac Syrup/Emetinol)
• Verupuranol
• Verucac Syrup

Calomel/Dialynol:

• Diectanol
• Diectadryl
• Flumenectionem - (Personal favorites for Calomel/Dialynol)
• Fluectionem
• Fluvectionem - (Personal favorites for Calomel/Dialynol)
• Laxadryl
• Laxapuradryl
• Laxapuranol
• Laxapuradine
• Liquetine
• Puradryl
• Vitectionem
• Vascuectionem

 

Duloxetine/Concusil - Mannitol/Neuranol Alternatives

Spoiler

Disclaimer: I fully think that Concusil is a pretty good placeholder for now, but I agree that Mannitol/Neuranol should be shifted a bit.

Recommending Against:

• Capudine - An Old Chemical that, while no longer made, is still significant to be in museums.
• Levocapunol - Existing chemical compound name

Recommending FOR:

• Cataleptinol - (Personal favorites for Mannitol/Neuranol)
• Cataleptipan - (Personal favorites for Mannitol/Neuranol)
• Capunyl
• Capunol
• Emoxanil
• Emoxanyl
• Emoxidine
• Emoxanol
• Levosonyl
• Levosodine
• Levocapunyl
• Levosincunol
• Levosincudine
• Sincunyl
• Sincunol
• Sincudine
• Vosonyl
• Vosodine

 

As for the current arguments about the change itself, I'll agree with Skull's post and add my own opinion that, while a further intricate Medical system could be interesting, it wouldn't be friendly to the player base at large and would make it an even further daunting task to learn how to play Medical, plus I do think that separation would be a better alternative in the long term for everyone involved.

[Chada1]

It's true that the Star Trek chems are a thing and make up almost 30+% or more of our medical system, but I'm not trying to move a mountain here, I'm trying to remove real chems from the mix -- Star Trek chems are a reference, absolutely, but removing references (As a whole) isn't the purpose of this PR, there could be another one at a later time if that's deemed desirable but I think overall it's better to not just drop a whole medical chem rework (Every Chem being renamed) on the playerbase at the same time as this PR, if we're going to do that, I think we should do it at a different time so that the playerbase can gradually shift to be used to these, and then gradually shift to be used to those.

The primary objection here is referencing real life Chemicals, in that sense, the Star Trek chems ARE references, but they're not the kind I'm trying to eliminate here. I'm not totally against elimnating them later, but by including those (Which include chemicals used on a whoooole lot of different servers, too) we might just overload our medical playerbase with these changes, so gradual is probably the better option.

Also thank you both for the new Chem ideas and I'll sift through them and try to find what sticks.

Edited July 21, 2020 by Chada1

[Chada1]

Alright! The list has been updated as of now with the new chem names that stuck. I took most of Vis' suggestions of the new ones provided by Sadkermit ?

The only change I made is making Verunol (Ipecac) into Verunol Syrup instead of just Verunol.

[Chada1]

The PR has been updated with them as well. Anymore ideas are still v. welcome but the list is looking fantastic as of now.

[MattAtlas]

9 hours ago, VisVirific said:

I fully agree with SadKermit's points on how this PR feels like it's being merged too fast,

What do you mean? Not only have no maintainers approved it, it's not even awaiting merge, and it doesn't even have 2 approvals.

[UnknownMurder]

17 hours ago, VisVirific said:

I fully agree with SadKermit's points on how this PR feels like it's being merged too fast

It is is not too fast. I see people are heating it up and creating a fuss/drama over it. I share Geeves and Skull's perspective. From what I am looking at the PR, the Chada-1:Bone-Apple-Tea branch is still in-progress and is not ready for review. As a wiki maintainer, I would be more than happy to coordinate with Chada amd carry out this change on the wiki once it it is approved, passes testing phases if any, and merge with the master branch. I'll say this again. Fret not, everyone will have time and patience to pick up on the changed materials. If they are not willingly to have the time and patience to adapt, then they are careless and likely immature. Realistically (or not), name goes through a series of changes and it's best not to relate to the real world. Which happens to be in this case, I see more positives outweighing the negatives. Mechanics do not change. 

I am glad to see names are changing and evolving for the better. I won't lie, it was a bit difficult to pronounce but I imagine that some of medical terminologies are also difficult to pronounce. This is an interesting video related to medical terms. 

 

[Chada1]

TY UM and I hope you like the changes when/if they get in too. ?

Asinolyatrine has been changed to Asinodryl. It's the only dryl we have and it fits p. well since it's focused on reducing nausea and vomitting. Also Asinolyatrine wasn't a v. good name.

Edited July 22, 2020 by Chada1

[Chada1]

Alright here's a new thing for consideration:

Which is better for the replacement for Oxycodone? Oxycorphine or Oxycomorphine? I'm considering this rn.

[Chada1]

As of this moment, I'm working on revamping many of the new Chems descriptions and also some of the old ones with the help of some of our playerbase, some of the ones especially affected by the Chem changes. 

I'm also adding new flavor side effects to most of the new drugs.

It was also brought to my attention that the Chems

1. Chloral Hydrate

Are real world drugs and were missed, so they'll be added onto the list soon.

Edit: On consideration, Potassium Chloride and Potassium Chlorophoride will be kept, since it's actually just a salt that can be dissolved and used as a sedative, and the other doesn't actually exist. 

The other (Chloral Hydrate) will be changed to a more advanced version.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Chada1
Edited to avoid confusion.

[MoondancerPony]

8 hours ago, Chada1 said:

Potassium Chloride and Potassium Chlorophoride will be kept, since it's actually just a salt that can be dissolved and used as a sedative, and the other doesn't actually exist. The other will be changed to a more advanced version.

Potassium chloride only works if overdosed. It's not a medication, just a precursor. Potassium chlorophoride is intended to be a more potent version that works without having to overdose someone on it; giving it more features kind of misses the point.