Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Medicine Checks
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7852520" data-attributes="member: 6779196"><p>When a player declares an action that has an uncertain outcome, I will call for a check with a DC I feel is appropriate, with the ability I feel is most relevant. When I do so, the player is free to suggest that their proficiency in Medicine might be relevant. If the action involves diagnosing or treating an injury or ailment, or applying medical training, it is likely I will agree, and they can add their Proficiency Bonus. I could probably make up an example of a scenario and an action a hypothetical player might declare in the scenario that I would call for a Wisdom check to resolve if that exact situation occurred, and that I would be willing to allow Medicine proficiency to apply to. But I don’t believe that would be a valuable exercise. It involves too many assumptions to be practically useful, as it is highly unlikely for just such a scenario to come up in game. And in general I find that only bad things come from trying to guess in advance what actions the players might take and pre-planning checks and DCs for those assumed actions.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I didn’t answer the Frankenstein question because I don’t have enough context to make a ruling with any confidence. If you give me a scenario, and an action (with clear goal and approach), I can rule on it, but again, I don’t think doing so would be a valuable exercise, for either of us.</p><p></p><p></p><p>It’s not a question I am particularly interested in answering. But if you give me more context I’ll tell you how I would rule, if you want me to do that for some reason.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Neither of us is trained in the things your character is trained in. Any action you describe and I resolve is an abstraction of what your character might do. But you are still the one in control of your character, you have to be the one who says what they do. You don’t have to be especially detailed, just reasonably specific and concise. You’ve already described a fair few actions that satisfy that requirement.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Between the abstraction that separates what we say at the table from what occurs in the fiction, and the bonuses that you apply to checks in the event that a check is needed to resolve your action, I think that gap is pretty well accounted for.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You don’t have to go to a medical library. Just tell me what you intend to accomplish, and what your character does in the fiction to try and accomplish it. “I examine Bob’s symptoms to try and determine the best way to treat them” was a beautiful action declaration. It expresses your goal and your approach concisely and with a reasonable degree of specificity. You didn’t need to be a surgeon to do that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 7852520, member: 6779196"] When a player declares an action that has an uncertain outcome, I will call for a check with a DC I feel is appropriate, with the ability I feel is most relevant. When I do so, the player is free to suggest that their proficiency in Medicine might be relevant. If the action involves diagnosing or treating an injury or ailment, or applying medical training, it is likely I will agree, and they can add their Proficiency Bonus. I could probably make up an example of a scenario and an action a hypothetical player might declare in the scenario that I would call for a Wisdom check to resolve if that exact situation occurred, and that I would be willing to allow Medicine proficiency to apply to. But I don’t believe that would be a valuable exercise. It involves too many assumptions to be practically useful, as it is highly unlikely for just such a scenario to come up in game. And in general I find that only bad things come from trying to guess in advance what actions the players might take and pre-planning checks and DCs for those assumed actions. I didn’t answer the Frankenstein question because I don’t have enough context to make a ruling with any confidence. If you give me a scenario, and an action (with clear goal and approach), I can rule on it, but again, I don’t think doing so would be a valuable exercise, for either of us. It’s not a question I am particularly interested in answering. But if you give me more context I’ll tell you how I would rule, if you want me to do that for some reason. Neither of us is trained in the things your character is trained in. Any action you describe and I resolve is an abstraction of what your character might do. But you are still the one in control of your character, you have to be the one who says what they do. You don’t have to be especially detailed, just reasonably specific and concise. You’ve already described a fair few actions that satisfy that requirement. Between the abstraction that separates what we say at the table from what occurs in the fiction, and the bonuses that you apply to checks in the event that a check is needed to resolve your action, I think that gap is pretty well accounted for. You don’t have to go to a medical library. Just tell me what you intend to accomplish, and what your character does in the fiction to try and accomplish it. “I examine Bob’s symptoms to try and determine the best way to treat them” was a beautiful action declaration. It expresses your goal and your approach concisely and with a reasonable degree of specificity. You didn’t need to be a surgeon to do that. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Medicine Checks
Top