New Errata?

[Xenocrat]

Pretty crazy and unfair how my combat medics in my platoon had to set down their rifle and open up their gear bags to treat anyone.

[Lightning Raven]

Didn't catch that! It definitely was a sneaky update to the ERRATA then.

[Nocte ex Mortis]

Xenocrat wrote:

Pretty crazy and unfair how my combat medics in my platoon had to set down their rifle and open up their gear bags to treat anyone.

Your combat medics didn’t exist in a world of superhuman beings capable of being dropped from LEO without a parachute and walking away without a scratch, repeatedly.

Edit: Also pretty crazy how they couldn’t take someone literally bleeding to death with their organs hanging out of their body, take six to twelve seconds (because Battle Medicine sure as Hell takes more than just one action now), and have them ready to go for round 2.

[Bast L.]

Hmm, some inconsistency in the rules.

Tool checks say, "you have x tools" as a requirement. Quick alchemy says you have alchemy tools, but also a free hand, as the requirements, which would be impossible, if "you have" implied you're holding them. But certainly it's reasonable to interpret "you have" for healer tools, or thief tools, as being in-hand, so why not for alchemy tools?

Battle medicine having different healer tools wording than treat wounds leaves a possibility for it not being 2-handed.

Either way, some clarification would be useful. How is quick alchemy even supposed to work? 0, 1, or 2 hands on alchemy tools (almost certainly not 2, unless you have a third hand).

[ikarinokami]

thenobledrake wrote:

A note on the topic of whether or not battle medicine now requires hands free to implement the tools that are now required:

all the other uses of medicine which require healer's tools say "Requirement: you have healer's tools" - so either all of these, battle medicine included, require the same free hands or battle medicine is actually more restrictive because you must hold or wear the tools, not just have them (such as in a backpack).

it isnt restrictive all those other uses require 10 minutes. do the rules really need to spell out every step for a 10 minute activity. Battle medicine requires more specificity due to the compress time - seconds/actions instead of minutes.

[ikarinokami]

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Uh...wearing Healer's Tools requires zero hands. So the Feat seems to require zero hands per current errata.

wearing healers tools requires a bandolier to access them, which reduces the need to use two hands to just one hand.

in effect you either need the kit and two hands free to use it or wearing a bandolier and one hand to access the kit on the bandolier.

[ikarinokami]

Nocte ex Mortis wrote:

Xenocrat wrote:

Pretty crazy and unfair how my combat medics in my platoon had to set down their rifle and open up their gear bags to treat anyone.

Your combat medics didn’t exist in a world of superhuman beings capable of being dropped from LEO without a parachute and walking away without a scratch, repeatedly.

Edit: Also pretty crazy how they couldn’t take someone literally bleeding to death with their organs hanging out of their body, take six to twelve seconds (because Battle Medicine sure as Hell takes more than just one action now), and have them ready to go for round 2.

one has nothing to do with the other. even in startrek they have to have acess to the med kit. in super hero movies the doctor still has to use his med kit.

battle medicine is not magic. i would compare it more to super medical device in star trek, no matter how advance at is, you still need to use your hands to use it.

[Draco18s]

Do I have to pull out this quote?

SIGH. Fine.

Quote:

Realistic? Apparently, you've forgotten that you're playing a game in which you're a troll firing an anti-equipment rifle one handed to kill a roach spirit.

Make whatever substitutions you need to in order to make it Pathfindery.

[Bast L.]

ikarinokami wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Uh...wearing Healer's Tools requires zero hands. So the Feat seems to require zero hands per current errata.

wearing healers tools requires a bandolier to access them, which reduces the need to use two hands to just one hand.

in effect you either need the kit and two hands free to use it or wearing a bandolier and one hand to access the kit on the bandolier.

I'm not seeing anything for bandolier reducing hands needed. That's an interpretation, as far as I can tell, and perhaps a reasonable one, but the bandolier specifically says you draw the tools. Drawing an item is 1 or 2 handed, but if you're using something that's 2-handed, you need to draw with both hands, or use a separate action to place a second hand on it (pg 273, footnote 1 of table 6-2).

[Cottoncaek]

Bast L. wrote:

ikarinokami wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Uh...wearing Healer's Tools requires zero hands. So the Feat seems to require zero hands per current errata.

wearing healers tools requires a bandolier to access them, which reduces the need to use two hands to just one hand.

in effect you either need the kit and two hands free to use it or wearing a bandolier and one hand to access the kit on the bandolier.

I'm not seeing anything for bandolier reducing hands needed. That's an interpretation, as far as I can tell, and perhaps a reasonable one, but the bandolier specifically says you draw the tools. Drawing an item is 1 or 2 handed, but if you're using something that's 2-handed, you need to draw with both hands, or use a separate action to place a second hand on it (pg 273, footnote 1 of table 6-2).

This is absolutely correct, and the only applicable RAW. Goodbye, Battle Medicine abuse! Now if only they'd errata it to no out of combat use.

[Raveve]

Cottoncaek wrote:

Bast L. wrote:

ikarinokami wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Uh...wearing Healer's Tools requires zero hands. So the Feat seems to require zero hands per current errata.

wearing healers tools requires a bandolier to access them, which reduces the need to use two hands to just one hand.

in effect you either need the kit and two hands free to use it or wearing a bandolier and one hand to access the kit on the bandolier.

I'm not seeing anything for bandolier reducing hands needed. That's an interpretation, as far as I can tell, and perhaps a reasonable one, but the bandolier specifically says you draw the tools. Drawing an item is 1 or 2 handed, but if you're using something that's 2-handed, you need to draw with both hands, or use a separate action to place a second hand on it (pg 273, footnote 1 of table 6-2).

This is absolutely correct, and the only applicable RAW. Goodbye, Battle Medicine abuse! Now if only they'd errata it to no out of combat use.

Not really abuse, was pretty much the only thing stopping clerics from being a 100% requirement.

[Cottoncaek]

Raveve wrote:

Cottoncaek wrote:

Bast L. wrote:

ikarinokami wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Uh...wearing Healer's Tools requires zero hands. So the Feat seems to require zero hands per current errata.

wearing healers tools requires a bandolier to access them, which reduces the need to use two hands to just one hand.

in effect you either need the kit and two hands free to use it or wearing a bandolier and one hand to access the kit on the bandolier.

I'm not seeing anything for bandolier reducing hands needed. That's an interpretation, as far as I can tell, and perhaps a reasonable one, but the bandolier specifically says you draw the tools. Drawing an item is 1 or 2 handed, but if you're using something that's 2-handed, you need to draw with both hands, or use a separate action to place a second hand on it (pg 273, footnote 1 of table 6-2).

This is absolutely correct, and the only applicable RAW. Goodbye, Battle Medicine abuse! Now if only they'd errata it to no out of combat use.

Not really abuse, was pretty much the only thing stopping clerics from being a 100% requirement.

I mean, when one feat is something *EVERYBODY* needs to take, that's just as imperfect.

[Deadmanwalking]

ikarinokami wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Uh...wearing Healer's Tools requires zero hands. So the Feat seems to require zero hands per current errata.

wearing healers tools requires a bandolier to access them, which reduces the need to use two hands to just one hand.

in effect you either need the kit and two hands free to use it or wearing a bandolier and one hand to access the kit on the bandolier.

Wielding the tools (the thing that requires two hands) is not a listed requirement, only wearing them. Indeed, I can find no evidence saying that 'having a tool' equates to needing to wield it, in a rules sense.

In fact, per the 'Wielding Items' section on p. 272, some things simply require you to have an item, rather than requiring you to wield it...and I see precisely zero evidence that Battle Medicine is not one of them.

Now, clearly in the fiction the tools are being 'used', but that does not necessarily imply they are being wielded in the game sense.

Do you have a rules citation otherwise?

[Samurai]

Cottoncaek wrote:

I mean, when one feat is something *EVERYBODY* needs to take, that's just as imperfect.

Everybody doesn't need to take it. Battle Medicine can only work once per day per induvial. It says after the HP are healed, the target then becomes immune to Battle Medicine for 1 day, as it says on pg 258.

[Cottoncaek]

Samurai wrote:

Cottoncaek wrote:

I mean, when one feat is something *EVERYBODY* needs to take, that's just as imperfect.

Everybody doesn't need to take it. Battle Medicine can only work once per day per induvial. It says after the HP are healed, the target then becomes immune to Battle Medicine for 1 day, as it says on pg 258.

Boy are you in for a surprise! The target becomes immune to *your* battle medicine, friendo. Everyone can have it, and everyone can use it on everybody, once per day, per person. Four person party? Each person can be Battle Medicined 4 times per day, and if you end up with Godless Healing->Mortal Healing, it gets even more insane.

[Deriven Firelion]

Ok. I don't get it. What specifically has changed? What is the specific wording that is suddenly causing the hand wringing?

I require a free hand to do Battle Medicine.

[Cottoncaek]

Deriven Firelion wrote:

Ok. I don't get it. What specifically has changed? What is the specific wording that is suddenly causing the hand wringing?

I require a free hand to do Battle Medicine.

Prior to the change, it asininely didn't require Healers Tools and therefore didn't require a free hand. Now it does, and it may even require two hands. Which would be lovely.

[Creative Burst]

Battle medicine only uses one action the errata on the website requires you to hold or wear it. Having them in your bandolier definitely qualifies as wear them, so I don't think it will add an action to use them if you're using a bandolier. I do think you need one hand but that comes from the manipulation trait that battle medicine has always had.

[Cottoncaek]

Creative Burst wrote:

Battle medicine only uses one action the errata on the website requires you to hold or wear it. Having them in your bandolier definitely qualifies as wear them, so I don't think it will add an action to use them. I do think you need one hand but that comes from the manipulation trait that battle medicine has always had.

The Bandolier allows you to use the tools within as part of the action of using them, so doesn't *add* an action, but it *does* require the suggested amount of hands the tools require. In this case, two.

For an exception to this rule, thus proving its validity, examine the Quick Alchemy feat, which makes a specific exception that it only requires one hand.

[Vlorax]

Cottoncaek wrote:

Samurai wrote:

Cottoncaek wrote:

I mean, when one feat is something *EVERYBODY* needs to take, that's just as imperfect.

Everybody doesn't need to take it. Battle Medicine can only work once per day per induvial. It says after the HP are healed, the target then becomes immune to Battle Medicine for 1 day, as it says on pg 258.

Boy are you in for a surprise! The target becomes immune to *your* battle medicine, friendo. Everyone can have it, and everyone can use it on everybody, once per day, per person. Four person party? Each person can be Battle Medicined 4 times per day, and if you end up with Godless Healing->Mortal Healing, it gets even more insane.

How is that a problem?

[Deadmanwalking]

Cottoncaek wrote:

The Bandolier allows you to use the tools within as part of the action of using them, so doesn't *add* an action, but it *does* require the suggested amount of hands the tools require. In this case, two.

Battle Medicine is not specified as an action using them, though. It requires you to have them, but nowhere does it say you must 'use' them in the strict mechanical sense.

[Bast L.]

Raveve just posted the "Wielding Items" section to me, and it actually says that if you have to carry or have an item, you don't have to wield it. (page 272)

So maybe no tools require a free hand?

edit: except for things like quick alchemy, which specifically mention needing a free hand.

[Pirate Rob]

Theory:

Bandolier is going to change to allow you to use a set of tools in it without otherwise pulling them out.

This simplifies a bunch of action economy/hand juggling that kits currently require whenever you need to disable a trap in combat, treat poisons, use higher level quick repair or even use battle medicine.

Maybe will require some number of hands free, maybe not.

It's a surprisingly elegant solution that deals with a bunch of squiggly edge and ambiguous cases and explains why the battle medicine solution was complicated and intertwined enough that it didn't make the first round of errata.

[Cottoncaek]

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Cottoncaek wrote:

The Bandolier allows you to use the tools within as part of the action of using them, so doesn't *add* an action, but it *does* require the suggested amount of hands the tools require. In this case, two.

Battle Medicine is not specified as an action using them, though. It requires you to have them, but nowhere does it say you must 'use' them in the strict mechanical sense.

Remember, PF2e is intended for you to read the rules a conversation, not a law text. If it says you need to be holding them, or wearing them (and the only way you can wear them is to have a Bandolier, which allows you to be holding them as part of the action to use them,) then the clear intent is that you use them and therefore need hands available.

[Raveve]

Cottoncaek wrote:

Creative Burst wrote:

Battle medicine only uses one action the errata on the website requires you to hold or wear it. Having them in your bandolier definitely qualifies as wear them, so I don't think it will add an action to use them. I do think you need one hand but that comes from the manipulation trait that battle medicine has always had.

The Bandolier allows you to use the tools within as part of the action of using them, so doesn't *add* an action, but it *does* require the suggested amount of hands the tools require. In this case, two.

For an exception to this rule, thus proving its validity, examine the Quick Alchemy feat, which makes a specific exception that it only requires one hand.

To me quick alchemy proves the validity of the other actions/skills not needing to have a free hand, the exact opposite of what you are getting from it.

[Deadmanwalking]

Cottoncaek wrote:

Remember, PF2e is intended for you to read the rules a conversation, not a law text. If it says you need to be holding them, or wearing them (and the only way you can wear them is to have a Bandolier, which allows you to be holding them as part of the action to use them,) then the clear intent is that you use them and therefore need hands available.

The 'Wielding Items' section on p. 272 strongly argues otherwise.

Bast L. wrote:

Raveve just posted the "Wielding Items" section to me, and it actually says that if you have to carry or have an item, you don't have to wield it. (page 272)

So maybe no tools require a free hand?

edit: except for things like quick alchemy, which specifically mention needing a free hand.

Disable Device also specifically says it sometimes requires you to use Thieve's Tools, so that one definitely requires your hands free sometimes. Pick a Lock, however, lacks such text...which is interesting.

[Cottoncaek]

Raveve wrote:

Cottoncaek wrote:

Creative Burst wrote:

Battle medicine only uses one action the errata on the website requires you to hold or wear it. Having them in your bandolier definitely qualifies as wear them, so I don't think it will add an action to use them. I do think you need one hand but that comes from the manipulation trait that battle medicine has always had.

The Bandolier allows you to use the tools within as part of the action of using them, so doesn't *add* an action, but it *does* require the suggested amount of hands the tools require. In this case, two.

For an exception to this rule, thus proving its validity, examine the Quick Alchemy feat, which makes a specific exception that it only requires one hand.

To me quick alchemy proves the validity of the other actions/skills not needing to have a free hand, the exact opposite of what you are getting from it.

The Tools listening a requirement of Two Hands, and then a Feat specifying that *in this case* you need One Hand, does not imply that magically you would ordinarily need Zero Hands. Come on now.

[Raveve]

Cottoncaek wrote:

Raveve wrote:

Cottoncaek wrote:

Creative Burst wrote:

Battle medicine only uses one action the errata on the website requires you to hold or wear it. Having them in your bandolier definitely qualifies as wear them, so I don't think it will add an action to use them. I do think you need one hand but that comes from the manipulation trait that battle medicine has always had.

The Bandolier allows you to use the tools within as part of the action of using them, so doesn't *add* an action, but it *does* require the suggested amount of hands the tools require. In this case, two.

For an exception to this rule, thus proving its validity, examine the Quick Alchemy feat, which makes a specific exception that it only requires one hand.

To me quick alchemy proves the validity of the other actions/skills not needing to have a free hand, the exact opposite of what you are getting from it.

The Tools listening a requirement of Two Hands, and then a Feat specifying that *in this case* you need One Hand, does not imply that magically you would ordinarily need Zero Hands. Come on now.

Like Deadmanwalking pointed out, the wielding items section on page 272 covers it. If an ability says to just have/carry an item you don't have to wield it. It is VERY clear with that section in mind now.

[Samurai]

Cottoncaek wrote:

Samurai wrote:

Cottoncaek wrote:

I mean, when one feat is something *EVERYBODY* needs to take, that's just as imperfect.

Everybody doesn't need to take it. Battle Medicine can only work once per day per induvial. It says after the HP are healed, the target then becomes immune to Battle Medicine for 1 day, as it says on pg 258.

Boy are you in for a surprise! The target becomes immune to *your* battle medicine, friendo. Everyone can have it, and everyone can use it on everybody, once per day, per person. Four person party? Each person can be Battle Medicined 4 times per day, and if you end up with Godless Healing->Mortal Healing, it gets even more insane.

I asked my GM about this and his ruling was that each additional attempted Battle Medicine only allows the single highest result rolled to apply each day, (same way Temporary HPs work), even if you have since lost those HPs because of recent damage. The limit resets each day after you sleep.

If every single PC can apply Battle Medicine to every other PC every day and they all stack, without limit, then why force multiple characters to all take the same feat? Just allow the same character to do it multiple times a day.

[Gisher]

Here are the three versions of the feat for those who, like me, have only recently joined this conversation.

CRB wrote:

BATTLE MEDICINE

Actions: Single Action
Feat Level: 1
Tags: General, Healing, Manipulate, Skill
Prerequisites: trained in Medicine
-

You can patch up yourself or an adjacent ally, even in combat. Attempt a Medicine check with the same DC as for Treat Wounds and provide the corresponding amount of healing. As with Treat Wounds, you can attempt checks against higher DCs if you have the minimum proficiency rank. The target is then temporarily immune to your Battle Medicine for 1 day.

Errata 1 wrote:

BATTLE MEDICINE

Actions: Single Action
Feat Level: 1
Tags: General, Healing, Manipulate, Skill
Prerequisites: trained in Medicine
-

You can patch up yourself or an adjacent ally, even in combat. Attempt a Medicine check with the same DC as for Treat Wounds and provide the corresponding amount of healing. Attempt a Medicine check with the same DC as for Treat Wounds, and restore a corresponding amount of Hit Points; this does not remove the wounded condition. As with Treat Wounds, you can attempt checks against higher DCs if you have the minimum proficiency rank. The target is then temporarily immune to your Battle Medicine for 1 day.

Errata 2? wrote:

BATTLE MEDICINE

Actions: Single Action
Feat Level: 1
Tags: General, Healing, Manipulate, Skill
Prerequisites: trained in Medicine
Requirements: You are holding or wearing healer's tools.
-

You can patch up yourself or an adjacent ally, even in combat. Attempt a Medicine check with the same DC as for Treat Wounds, and restore a corresponding amount of Hit Points; this does not remove the wounded condition. As with Treat Wounds, you can attempt checks against higher DCs if you have the minimum proficiency rank. The target is then temporarily immune to your Battle Medicine for 1 day.

[thenobledrake]

Page 272 "wielding items" seems like it is creating problems where there shouldn't be any - and I think it's because the wording isn't clear whether it is talking about items you have to use that require hands like healer's tools, or the idea that you don't necessarily have to have a hand free to activate a magic ring because you don't have to wield an item to use it.

Especially because page 287 says "Hands - This lists how many hands it takes to use the item effectively." which establishes a general rule for anything on Tables 6-9 and 6-10, since those are the tables referenced in the section of rules that this Hands paragraph is a sub-section of.

So healer's tools (which are found on table 6-9) require 2 hands "to use the item effectively." The description of healer's tools found on page 290 - the place we would look to see what using this item actually means - points us to the Medicine skill actions which each list "Requirements You have healer's tools."

That certainly looks to me like the rules are saying that if you are doing these actions, you are using the healer's tools to do so, including that the tools are occupying your hands during that time.

And that extends to Battle Medicine, where the best case scenario for use is that you'll have the tools in a bandolier so you only need to spend actions to free up your hands (dropping stuff being preferable), then do Battle Medicine, then pick up whatever you needed to get out of your hands to start with.

Sure, that might sound like a lot of actions to make a thing work... but weigh your options and the benefits, and I think you'll eventually conclude that there are plenty of circumstances in which it's absolutely worth the "trouble."

[Bast L.]

I dunno, the wording seems pretty clear. "You're wielding an item any time you're holding it in the number of hands needed to use it effectively. When wielding an item, you’re not just carrying it around—you’re ready to use it. Other abilities might require you to merely carry or have an item. These apply as long as you have the item on your person; you don’t have to wield it."

While we might think one uses healer's tools, the wording in treat wounds clearly says "You have healer’s tools", which matches the "have" text above.

I think it's a bit abstracted, and you don't, by the rules, have to wield the tools, though that would raise the question of why healers tools even says it takes 2 hands.

However, if we did go with your idea, that a "have" requirement implies a wield to use, then again, Quick Alchemy becomes impossible. Cottoncaek says quick alchemy gives an exception, but it doesn't. It simply lists 2 requirements, which are incompatible with each other (wielding in 2 hands, and having a free hand, that is, assuming you only have 2 hands).

Hopefully a detailed errata will put this to bed. (maybe tools and handedness need a rework)

[Grankless]

can this discussion go in to the bread intended for it that already got linked

[Bast L.]

Grankless wrote:

can this discussion go in to the bread intended for it that already got linked

There's no knead for that, it's related to the overall discussion, imo.

[thenobledrake]

Bast L. wrote:

While we might think one uses healer's tools, the wording in treat wounds clearly says "You have healer’s tools", which matches the "have" text above.

My point is that if there's not actually a time that you "use" healer's tools because all the things that rely on them only need you to "have" them rather than "use" them, then there shouldn't be a listing in the hands column on Table 6-9 for the healer's tool line.

Like how tack doesn't have a number of hands listed even though it includes the reigns a character would hold while leading or riding the animal because it doesn't occupy any hands to use the item

Bast L. wrote:

I think it's a bit abstracted, and you don't, by the rules, have to wield the tools, though that would raise the question of why healers tools even says it takes 2 hands.

The real issue is, in my view, that the rules have a "wielding items" section and also a section that just talks about "using" items - so we have some items that you "wield" and some that you "use" and a lack of clarity if those are supposed to be the same thing or not.

Bast L. wrote:

However, if we did go with your idea, that a "have" requirement implies a wield to use, then again, Quick Alchemy becomes impossible.

If we go with my idea, then the errata is just removing the "free hand" part of Quick Alchemy rather than re-writing more general rules.

[Ezekieru]

Honestly, not gonna consider the implications of this stealth errata until they announce the full errata 2.0 is out. Who knows why the additional change was made? I'd rather not start pulling out my hair about it without the full context of the rest of the changes.

[Xenocrat]

Bast L. wrote:

Grankless wrote:

can this discussion go in to the bread intended for it that already got linked

There's no knead for that, it's related to the overall discussion, imo.

At yeast try to be polite so tempers don’t rise.

[Saedar]

Samurai wrote:

If every single PC can apply Battle Medicine to every other PC every day and they all stack, without limit, then why force multiple characters to all take the same feat? Just allow the same character to do it multiple times a day.

Because multiple characters aren't forced to pick the feat. This is entirely a problem in your (group's?) mind.

My Extinction Curse group has a bard, druid, and the druid has battle medicine. No clerics. No "everyone has Medicine/Battle Medicine". We are doing fine.

[thenobledrake]

Saedar wrote:

Because multiple characters aren't forced to pick the feat. This is entirely a problem in your (group's?) mind.

My Extinction Curse group has a bard, druid, and the druid has battle medicine. No clerics. No "everyone has Medicine/Battle Medicine". We are doing fine.

Same.

There's a big difference between "there's a benefit to everyone having this feat" and "everyone will always have this feat" - and I also fail to see how the idea that a 4 man party all having this feat means it'd make sense to just remove the 1 per day per character limit, since "everyone gets 4 times per day this feat can be used on them" and "everyone can have this feat used on them however times per day they want" are drastically different things, and so is the action economy of everyone having to be willing to use actions for healing rather than just one character doing so.

[Thomas Keller]

Rules lawyers are silly. Of course you need a bandage to treat a wound, and of course you need two hands to apply a bandage. Use some common sense.

[Aratorin]

Samurai wrote:

Cottoncaek wrote:

Samurai wrote:

Cottoncaek wrote:

I mean, when one feat is something *EVERYBODY* needs to take, that's just as imperfect.

Everybody doesn't need to take it. Battle Medicine can only work once per day per induvial. It says after the HP are healed, the target then becomes immune to Battle Medicine for 1 day, as it says on pg 258.

Boy are you in for a surprise! The target becomes immune to *your* battle medicine, friendo. Everyone can have it, and everyone can use it on everybody, once per day, per person. Four person party? Each person can be Battle Medicined 4 times per day, and if you end up with Godless Healing->Mortal Healing, it gets even more insane.

I asked my GM about this and his ruling was that each additional attempted Battle Medicine only allows the single highest result rolled to apply each day, (same way Temporary HPs work), even if you have since lost those HPs because of recent damage. The limit resets each day after you sleep.

If every single PC can apply Battle Medicine to every other PC every day and they all stack, without limit, then why force multiple characters to all take the same feat? Just allow the same character to do it multiple times a day.

That's a fine house rule, but it's not how the Feat works.

[Gorignak227]

Cottoncaek wrote:

The target becomes immune to *your* battle medicine, friendo. Everyone can have it, and everyone can use it on everybody, once per day, per person. Four person party? Each person can be Battle Medicined 4 times per day, and if you end up with Godless Healing->Mortal Healing, it gets even more insane.

Wow, didn't know about the Mortal Healing feat. Man, don't know why more people aren't using this as a standard 3rd action.

[Rysky]

Because lots of players like having deities in a fantasy setting.

[Gorignak227]

Rysky wrote:

Because lots of players like having deities in a fantasy setting.

Heh, most players i know would kick out their deities stained glass window for any character option they thought was advantageous.

[Vlorax]

Thomas Keller wrote:

Rules lawyers are silly. Of course you need a bandage to treat a wound, and of course you need two hands to apply a bandage. Use some common sense.

Lol, common sense has no place here. I've seen arguments about the placement of a comma go on for pages on these boards...

[Vlorax]

Gorignak227 wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Because lots of players like having deities in a fantasy setting.

Heh, most players i know would kick out their deities stained glass window for any character option they thought was advantageous.

there's also the issue that it doesn't work on Battle Medicine in PFS.

Quote:

PFS Note As Mortal Healing requires you to specifically use the Treat Wounds action, it does not apply when used with other actions related to medicine or healing, such as Battle Medicine.

[Deadmanwalking]

Thomas Keller wrote:

Rules lawyers are silly. Of course you need a bandage to treat a wound, and of course you need two hands to apply a bandage. Use some common sense.

Given the utter implausibility of many other Skill Feats by real world standards I am not at all convinced of this.

[HammerJack]

That's just pointing out an existing rule. It doesn't work with Battle Medicine in any game that isn't using a house rule.

[Lightning Raven]

This one is a bit stretching DMW. One thing is to jump really high and fall from any height, but another is breaking the game's own internal rules. So you need to use your hands and tools to heal someone slowly and without pressure but you don't need either despite doing the same thing but faster and under pressure?

Here's the deal breaker for me. If the feat wasn't tied to medicine and healer's tools, then I would be fine with being just doing some vague thing while adjacent to the target.

[Deadmanwalking]

Lightning Raven wrote:

This one is a bit stretching DMW. One thing is to jump really high and fall from any height, but another is breaking the game's own internal rules. So you need to use your hands and tools to heal someone slowly and without pressure but you don't need either despite doing the same thing but faster and under pressure?

Here's the deal breaker for me. If the feat wasn't tied to medicine and healer's tools, then I would be fine with being just doing some vague thing while adjacent to the target.

Technically speaking, Treat Wounds doesn't require you to wield Healer's Tools either, merely to have them. In fact, at the moment, nothing requires wielding Healer's Tools. Now, given that Treat Wounds takes 10 minutes, that matters verging on 0% of the time, but it's a true statement by the rules.

Which is to say, I don't think Battle Medicine is violating the game's internal rules by not requiring that.

Now, is this whole issue in need of an errata in general? Probably yes. Right now very few things have language making the number of hands tools take relevant, and something probably needs to be written to clarify that on things like Pick Lock (which I very much suspect is intended to require wielding)...but I wouldn't inherently assume that Battle Medicine will fall on the 'requires wielding' side of any such errata. It might, but it also might not.