rdquodomine's page

I read this thread with a high degree of interest, as I have a champion with the battle medicine feat due to background. It's a thematic fit.

After watching the back and forth, I do think RAW is, as many people say, handwaving the "equipment use by hand" logic. The following is not to change anyone's mind, but to be informative, so you can rule or play the way you feel is best for your table.

I asked my dad, who trained as a combat medic with the US Army in the 1960s, what he learned. He didn't get deployed to Vietnam, but he did do a lot of work stateside. So, here's some takeaway.

A battlefield medic's first job is to assess the safety situation, ensure personal safety (if the medic is dead, so is the rifleman), keep weapon available, then diagnose, then stabilize the person enough to get them to a MASH unit. Obviously, not all of this may apply, especially with healing magic.

Things you can do without hands: assess situation and make an initial diagnosis.

Things you can do with one hand, in his view: staunch bleeding through pressure and cloth, feel for pulse, grab more first aid kit, feel for injury.

Things you need two hands for: set bones, make a tourniquet or similar advanced bandage, perform a carry.

So, let's assume that in the moment, the situation is already assessed, and it's now a question of what you consider healing to be. To me, being trained as a battlefield medic, in any fantasy setting, is not to recreate real life, but rather to create the basis for a character's application of their skillset that they already have. A battlefield medic can do a lot of the above actions extremely quickly because they're trained to do so. In my view, the handwaving of the "use of hands" is representative of the training the character has, not the actual use of hands. Of course a character would really need hands to do most of the actions, but I don't think that's really what Paizo is attempting to relate in not specifically mentioning use of hands. It's a little bit like doing something very skillfully because you have been doing it for years versus a relative novice doing so. The same actions require less *time*, not less hands, but from a game perspective, Paizo seems to be saying, RAW, your training lets you do this without the hands because that's how we're showing action economy for trained people.

I'm not taking sides here, I hope everyone has fun and roleplays at a table that suits them. I thought the perspective from someone who did that before might be germane information for us all. It is an interesting discussion, and I got a nice hour long conversation with my dad, who's 82. :)

My best wishes for health to all of you.

I've worked with the disability community for almost 30 years in a volunteer or professional capacity. While I'm neuroatypical, I do not have a visual disability and I do not speak for that community. I do think the OP had a good point about privilege within the role playing community. I think the majority of people don't intend to be dismissive, but having not experienced it themselves, just might be unaware of the challenges. I also think the OP just hit some really jerky GMs.

So, there's two things I see as possible solutions. Coding for people with visual disabilities can be a challenge, so I asked around and here's a link to some coding insights from a person with similar frustrations: https://www.perkinselearning.org/technology/blog/accessible-coding

As to the table itself, any decent GM should welcome diverse participation. You may want to communicate privately and see if their pace or GM style matches your play style and are willing to work with you. Ideally, every GM should be able to, but we all know that's not always the case.

For the rest of us, self included, here are some links on inclusive gaming. This seems like a good time to explore the issue:

https://www.masterthedungeon.com/inclusive-dd/

And this is a look from the criticism side, which offers insights as to how 5e failed a few times:
http://analoggamestudies.org/2018/03/blinded-by-the-roll-the-critical-fail- of-disability-in-dd/

Ultimately, table quality determines a person's enjoyment of any game, including PF and other TTRPGs. A GM should work to make their table inclusive door all players. In my 5e table, we have one Latina, two people with non binary gender expression, one of whom is neuroatypical, another neuroatypical male whom is white, and two white guys including the DM. There are a few others who are not always guaranteed to participate. But the table has felt welcome each time, and I hope OP finds one who is willing to work with them. I wish you all health and happy role playing!

Gortle wrote:

Classic fantasy deities can have very little to do with real world religions.

Depends on the real world religion...

Heck, even something like Hinduism, which is soft polytheism and quite different, is a lot more similar to the religion in something like Pathfinder than Judaeo-Christian religion is.

Quick note, and I know you don't mean offense, but... Judeo-Christian isn't a thing. It's a common parlance used by Christians to describe Jewish roots of Christianity but the two are very different in multiple ways. A better term might be Abrahamaic religions, to include monotheism among Jews, Christians and Muslims, and their related or adjacent sects. Full disclosure: I'm Jewish.

To get back to the OP, I often find those who play clerics should reflect on how faith is a motivator for the character, rather than as a set of rules. One should but become a cleric of any god without inspiration to do what that god might want, but that part is internal. The god then recognizes both the drive and the magical talent and so blesses it. But that's a result of some initial belief. And the belief should grow with the character, as should its expression. And beliefs can and do change, so a change in belief might negate deity-specific power but not necessarily ability. So, if one cleric in a multifaith society changes faith, it doesn't change their magical ability / divine casting. But it might change the spells they're able to use and any powers granted specifically but the deity. However, even if they do change deities, the new one might hear an honest converts' prayer and recognize their talent and bestow appropriate powers, especially in time of need. I don't think that would apply for a character that changes deities like they change socks.