I gather THC:CBD:CBN ratios can result in slightly differing highs, but none of that is linked in any consistent or reliable way to strains, right? It's my understanding those factors are far more linked to how the cannabis was grown and cared for than the plant's exact genetics.
And terpenes are not known to be psychoactive, yet a lot of people say they can influence the high to be either more sedating or stimulating. Is that true? My gut feeling is that's also bullshit and they only effect the smell and taste. I could see an argument that they indirectly influence the high in the same way your set and setting influences it, but certainly not in any consistent, reliable way, and especially not between different people.
My experience with weed, regardless of the terpene profile, strain, or indica/sativa has been that it's all basically the same high and there is not a soul on this Earth who could smoke some flower in a blind test and tell you what the strain is or even just if it's an indica or sativa.
Had too much weed in an edible one time, and I was literally derealizing and depersonalizing for 3 months.
You can tell people beforehand that you have fucked up mental health issues, so you don't want psychedelics, but nobody believes you, and they just keep pushing it
For me I used pot to create a baseline level to my dissociation to desperately try to smooth out the peaks and valleys. It never worked and for almost 19 years I was stoned with various breaks where when I came up for air to ask for help I got told to go back to toking. I think it contributed to me only transitioning at 34.