Can you stabilize a dying invisible character with a heal check?

[RoboEmperor]

----------

[Thurbane]

There could be a -2 circumstance penalty, but other than that, I can't see why not.

[Zanos]

My DM said "you can't see the blood nor the wounds so how can you stabilize her?"
A penalty seems reasonable to me. Less 'realistic' things are can be done in 3.5 with reasonable skill check modifiers, especially after level 5 or 6 or so.

Remind your DM that it's a fantasy game and that you don't necessarily need to use magic to accomplish things that aren't possible for humans in the real world. Although whether or not this would be impossible for someone in the real world is debatable. Touch is a fairly powerful sense. I could see an accomplished healer stop someone from immediately bleeding out without vision.

[Matticussama]

My DM said "you can't see the blood nor the wounds so how can you stabilize her?"

I agree with your DM regarding attempting to use the Heal check, considering the First Aid would logically require you to see the wounds that you're treating. However, the Cure spells do not require you to see the wounds to stabilize the target; you are only required to touch the target. Did no one have any Cure spells prepared/scrolls/wands, and/or is there not a Good aligned Cleric in the party who could spontaneously convert their spells to Cure spells?

[tadkins]

There could be a -2 circumstance penalty, but other than that, I can't see why not.

I agree with this one. Someone skilled at healing might be able to wing it, and attempt healing with a disadvantage.

[lsfreak]

I agree with the others, a -2 penalty seems like a good general rule. If you're big on realism it might depend on the wound, if someone's been stabbed in the shoulder it won't be hard at all to find the wound and should only be a pretty minor inconvenience to pack the wound, apply pressure, and bandage it up, while someone with internal injuries from bludgeoning weapons might take a bigger penalty. But then realistically the second person is probably ****ed and no skill check should be able to do it anyways.

[Angelmaker]

I would simply apply the conditions imposed from " blind". So that's a -5 modifier, as far as I am aware. But if i can freaking attack a square with an invisible target in it, I might be freaking able to use an out of combat action just about as equally fine.

[Platymus Pus]

I agree with your DM regarding attempting to use the Heal check, considering the First Aid would logically require you to see the wounds that you're treating. However, the Cure spells do not require you to see the wounds to stabilize the target; you are only required to touch the target. Did no one have any Cure spells prepared/scrolls/wands, and/or is there not a Good aligned Cleric in the party who could spontaneously convert their spells to Cure spells?
You use the other sense called, touch.

[Dr TPK]

I would say a flat 50% failure chance up front. If success, then you can roll a Heal check.

[ben-zayb]

Ask your DM if it's possible for a blind person to stabilize someone. If the answer is a non-zero chance, then that could also be applied in the case of an invisible creature (possibly with some penalties or mechanical limitations)

[Cespenar]

Pour some flour over her.

[Ashtagon]

Apply the same penalties you would if you were blinded.

[lytokk]

How far does the blood on the person actually have to travel before it becomes visible? There should be a pooling on the ground in the general vicinity of the wound.

Now you said this is a fireball wound, and I really don't know how a heal check can really stop a person from dying from that, realistically I mean. You can wrap the body in cloth to prevent infection but I really can't think of what else to do.

<-- Not an EMT

[Twilightwyrm]

How far does the blood on the person actually have to travel before it becomes visible? There should be a pooling on the ground in the general vicinity of the wound.

Now you said this is a fireball wound, and I really don't know how a heal check can really stop a person from dying from that, realistically I mean. You can wrap the body in cloth to prevent infection but I really can't think of what else to do.

<-- Not an EMT

Well I suppose this assumes they have burns over most of their body (not an entirely unrealistic assumption to make in the case of a Fireball, but still), rather than a couple really bad burns in specific places (say, the part that took the brunt of the fire). If it is the latter case, and it is immediately life-threatening, then wrapping the wound until they can find the right ingredients to treat burns might work for the whole "stabilization" part of it. If they wish to do further healing, cure spells, or gathering of ingredients to treat burns would be in order (and even then, they're likely to look like Sandor Clegane if they survive).

[TheIronGolem]

Now you said this is a fireball wound, and I really don't know how a heal check can really stop a person from dying from that, realistically I mean. You can wrap the body in cloth to prevent infection but I really can't think of what else to do.


Well THERE'S yer problem!

[Galen]

My DM said "you can't see the blood nor the wounds so how can you stabilize her?"
*sigh* Yet another potentially-cool moment sacrificed on the altar of faux-realism.

[Fitz10019]

'Stabilize' could also be viewed as getting the breathing and heart rhythm steady. That's what paramedics do for people who aren't bleeding (or after binding the bleeding spots). You shouldn't need visibility to find the chest and mouth.

[Arcanist]

I'd be wondering why there is an invisible dying character in front of me more than anything else. I'd be suspect if a heal check worked so in this situation it might just be more helpful to use a cure light wounds on them or something.