Should D&D Morality be Less PC?

[Hassassin]

Magically reducing infant mortality is a recipe for short-term good feelings followed by long-term misery.

Unless economic productivity improves, and continues to improve, as quickly as the population explodes, the quasi-medieval society will become even more miserable than before.

(If economic productivity does improve continuously, you have a dynamic, "modern" economy.)

Then again, settings like FR have also assumed the ready availability of birth control. Low infant mortality wouldn't have to imply huge population growth. That's before even taking into account frequent monster problems that cull the population.

 

[mmadsen]

Then again, settings like FR have also assumed the ready availability of birth control. Low infant mortality wouldn't have to imply huge population growth. That's before even taking into account frequent monster problems that cull the population.

Well, readily available birth control would change everything! I suppose the gods of the Forgotten Realms also welcome such a thing?

I find it grimly amusing that, in a Malthusian setting, monsters culling the population would also raise its standard of living.

I thought it would be interesting to have, say, elves with contraceptive magic, low mortality, and relative modern values, versus men with a rather medieval outlook, and orcs with a simple barbarian culture.

 

[Alzrius]

But it's the little things like this - something that practically denizens of all socio-economic status - care about that you would think magic would be used towards. And simply writing in a line that "magically trained midwives helped to reduce birth complications and infant mortality" thereby gives settings tremendous leeway in alleviating the need for presuming a gender-oppressive society.

I think there are some problems with that supposition though; for example, that it's dying in labor that's the root of prejudice against women - I always thought it had more to do with the incapacitating effects of pregnancy during the later months, rather than the possibility of dying in childbirth.

Having said that, there's a lot of problems with the idea of "magic would be used towards." As shown previously, if childbirth does deal Constitution damage, rather than hit point damage, then only higher-level adepts are likely to be able to help.

That shifts the burden onto local clerics, druids, and paladins. Now, it's nice to say that the burden is so universal that any magically-assisted care would be offered free to the local populace. However, I personally find that unrealistic; people haven't been that free with things that are for the community's benefit ever - food isn't free, and in many countries even today, healthcare isn't free.

Hence, your local cleric or druid (I don't have the 3.5 DMG with me, so I can't comment on the population tables, but in rural areas I recall that paladins are pretty rare) is going to charge for spellcasting when using lesser restoration, which (being a 2nd-level spell for them) will cost a minimum of 60 gp. That's per casting, and since it only restores 1d4 ability points, multiple castings could conceivably be needed.

3.5 doesn't have rules for the cost of living, but Pathfinder does (and so far, everything else rules-based that I've posted has been the same for both systems; the one exception being the reference to the 3.5 population tables), and they paint a pretty bleak picture for paying those costs, since being able to pay 100 gp a month is considered "wealthy."

So yes, quality magical-healthcare for a woman in labor may be more than can be afforded for most families in a typical D&D world.

I'd treat pregnancy as a disease. Diseases typically deal ability score damage, but allow several Fortitude saves. And the Heal skill can be used by someone in place of your Fort save.

I don't think the existence of healing magic and the Heal skill is enough to prevent maternal mortality throughout the setting. Wikipedia (yay! it's not blacked out anymore!) says that most maternal deaths are preventable. The reason they happen in developing countries is often because of the rural setting's lack of access to skilled care workers.

In the D&D world, most of the world is rural. It's a world where most peasants never travel more than 10 miles from home, let alone a pregnant peasant.

Hm, now this is an interesting way of looking at it, though it'd need to be modified slightly on the duration, how much damage is inflicted at what rate, and how long the pregnancy lasted. But yeah, I can see this being how it's done.

That said, this one is more of a roll of the die (pun intended). A commoner of even 5th-level will have a +1 Fort save bonus; +2 if their racial bonus went towards Constitution (presuming a standard array wherein all ability scores are 10 or 11). So most commers have awful Fort saves.

In this case, using another person's Heal check is certainly more viable, since it's far easier to inflate a skill bonus for even a low-level character. That said, depending on the DC, the number of checks necessary during labor, and how much Con damage would be taken...a few bad rolls can still lead to things getting very bad very quickly. Presumably, however, cost wouldn't be an issue (I imagine such a midwife would fall under the "trained hireling" heading, costing only 3 silver pieces per day, which is affordable even for a family of modest means).