[Medbook] Question on content

[Ineti]

A question sparked by the other thread:

Should the medbook contain as comprehensive a list as possible of established drugs, diseases, etc. as seen in the various series and films?

Initially I said no, that would be too much and redundant with the Encyclopedia, but I'm waffling now. I'm thinking it might be better to have all that info in one book, to cut down on having to flip back and forth between books.

Thoughts?

[KillerWhale]

Personnally I'd like to have the info in one place, but that would be a hell of work...

[Ineti]

Actually, it wouldn't be too bad. The encyclopedia's nicely arranged. It would just be a matter of going through it page by page and culling out the medical references.

I did it for the first edition encyclopedia, and that ended up being about nine pages of stuff. I could do it again. A little time-consuming, but there are benefits.

[Owen E Oulton]

What would be nice is a set of game effects for each drug - for instance, Cordrazine in normal doses is used to treat Exploding Console of Doom victims, restoring X number of damage levels/ hit points/whatever.

[Evan van Eyk]

As far as I know there is already a good load of game effects of medicines in the player's guide from LUG.

[Dan Gurden]

... Which will need to be converted over into CODA, although it may be better to offer those as a CODA add on, and all the other drugs and medecines covered using that small sampling as a base...

[Ineti]

Evan, there's a chart in the CODA PG that is a good start. I'll add to that in the Medbook. I'm not converting anything from Icon. It will all be "scratchbuilt" in Coda. I'll leave it to the ICON converters to convert it to their heart's desire.

[Balok]

My vote would be to include the material from the Encyclopedia, if that's relatively easy to do. It keeps everything neatly in one place.

[Ineti]

Thanks for the feedback, folks! I'll add the information from the Encyclopedia in the hopes of having as close to a one-book tool as possible.

[Owen E Oulton]

One thing they got wrong in ICON and, I assume, CODA, is making Psychology a Specialisation of the Medical skill. This doesn't work - I've separated it out with its own Specialisations. Let's face it - it just doesn't make sense that studying the way people think would allow you to, say, take out someone's appendix.

Check out the House Rules subsection under the Star Trek: Universe section of my page for an ICON treatment. A CODA version shouldn't be hard to concoct.

[Aldaron]

Re: Medicine & Psychology.

Just as a point to think about, Psychiatrists have to be fully qualified medical doctors before specialising in psychiatry - just as a cardiologist has to be a doctor before specialising in cardiology.

Psychologists don't - they're about equivelant to registered nurses or physiotherapists.

In practice, the difference is whether or not the practitioner can prescribe drugs: a psychiatrist can, a psychologist can't.

That said, I've always envisaged Troi (for example) as more of a psychologist than psychiatrist - to my knowledge, we never saw her prescribe any drugs, and she even referred Riker to Crusher when he needed 'something to help him sleep'.

So perhaps a more accurate breakdown would be that the Psychology could be a specialisation of either Medicine or Persuade/Influence, depending on the practitioner.

Hmmm...have to think about that one...

[Owen E Oulton]

I seperate Psychology out as a skill on its own, complete with its own specialisations:

Psychology (Intellect)
Abnormal Psychology, Forensic Psychology, Psychoanalysis, Psychology (Specific Race or Culture), Xenopsychology

The Psychology skill deals with the workings of the sapient mind. Abnormal Psychology deals with the study of mental illnesses; Forensic Psychology with reconstructing the motivations behind a particular act (usually as part of a criminal investigation), Psychoanalysis with the treatment of psychological disorders; Psychology (Specific Race or Culture) with the psychological processes of a specific species; and Xenopsychology with the study of the psychological processes of unfamiliar races.

[Ineti]

Good points, Aldaron. I forgot the differences between psychologists and psychiatrists. I'll implement some of that into the medbook.

Thanks!