I have myopia, and I've come to appreciate its virtues, to the point that I sometimes feel sorry for those who can't share my experience. I tell you what, being nearsighted comes in pretty handy when plucking a tiny splinter out of someone's finger, or painting a miniature, or doing other up-close work. And there are moments when I prefer the blurry view of the world I get by just removing my glasses; lit-up Christmas trees offer a different experience to the nearsighted.
I have no plans to get Lasik, aside from any concern over risks. I've been wearing corrective eyewear for nearly half a century, and I plan to go on doing so, even with the existence of a near-magical "fix".
Good for you! And I'm sure if you were in a D&D dungeon and had your glasses broken, lost, or taken from you, you wouldn't have any issues.
Just because YOU wouldn't want to have glasses if you didn't need them does not mean that other people can't make other choices.
I don't think anyone ever said they couldn't, did they?
It just doesn't make sense to me that they could choose that. It's like mushrooms. I hate mushrooms, can't stand them and think they are disgusting, but other people like them. I don't know why... but that isn't my concern. However, if someone presents a gourmet dish and says, "
this looks wonderful and tastes terrific," but I see mushrooms, I'm not going to agree with them.
So, no, I don't agree that a powerful PC would wear eyeglasses for corrective purposes if they could afford magical aid instead. But hey, that's just how
I feel about it. I've never said others have to or should feel the same.
This is an entirely fair and valid perspective that is also extremely far from universal. The problem isn't from having this viewpoint; the problem comes when assuming nobody would have a different one.
And if I
actually assumed that I would completely agree with you. I can't recall anyone else doing that, either, which is probably why I've never understood why people find it difficult to accept that my viewpoint, is just that---mine.
Right, you would make one choice. But, I wear glasses and while I currently can't afford Lasik, I've often considered if I would bother with it if I could.
My glasses aren't particularly inconvenient, and I've had them long enough that I think my face would look weird without them. My choice, if I made it, to keep wearing glasses instead of spending money to not need them is just that, a choice. A choice you would make differently, but one that is still very much a choice that can be made in either direction.
Sure, I get that. I'm bald, have been balding since I was in my late teens. If I could have hair again I'd have to give it thought. I'd probably think I'd look wierd with hair at this point! Someone might ask, "why don't you regrow your hair?" to which I would reply: I might, or I might not. But the difference is me not having hair wouldn't impact me in an adventuring environment as much as relying on glasses could IMO, and so I see little reason to keep them if you didn't have to. You might not weigh the potential risk as highly as I would, which is fine, and decide to keep wearing glasses even then.
but she also shouldn't have glasses because of some nebulous notion of readily-available magical healing, even though no one can name a specific spell that would remedy her sight loss. I'm not sure why anyone would engage the services of a powerful cleric (or whatever) to fix their short-sightedness anyway, when it is presumably somewhat cheaper and easier to just buy glasses. Like in the real world.
Well, I have. Numerous times.
Lesser restoration might do it, and
heal can cure full blindness, so I'd imagine ruling it can help with vision impairment would be logical.
As far as cost is concerned, all I can say is according to AL,
lesser restoration is only 40 gp. While
heal isn't listed, it would likely be around 2,000 gp. Considering how many campaigns run IME, even
heal would be affordable by 5th level or so since it isn't too much more than a plate armor at 1,500 gp. Your experience might differ, that is just
mine.
It's been said multiple times in various ways in this thread, but it is actually okay if you simply don't like the piece. Your reasoning doesn't have to be grounded in formal logic or anything, but when people present obviously facetious arguments like the above, it does rather look like they might be deliberately avoiding pointing out something more obvious that irks them about it.
Yeah, you are dead wrong about that (bolded). I've provided very understandable and realistic arguments why her wearing glasses doesn't jive with me. You don't obviously have to
AGREE with my point of view, but this is the crap that irks me---assuming I must have hidden agenda or "something more obvious". Stop assuming please. Disagree, say you find my reasons insufficient if you like, but don't accuse people of saying something or implying it they never did. Thank you.
As for surgery, aside from the cost, there is always a chance for something to go horribly wrong. It might be small, but it is needless, so I wouldn’t have eye, or any other sort of cosmetic surgery.
Sure, that is a perfectly good reason why someone wouldn't have lasik! I had to think about it for a while before I decided to go ahead with it! But since
magic in D&D doesn't have a "botch" system/mechanic, I have to think it would be perfectly safe then. It isn't like when someone casts a
flying spell, you might not be able to fly (barring environmental concerns of course). You'd be able to fly.