Not having to diagnose obvious illnesses/injuries

It is obvious when a wolf has distemper, fleas, mange, open wound, ringworm, or ticks because the art is changed and because of that I believe it is pointless to have to pay SC to get told information you already know. My suggestion is to make it so you no longer have to diagnose wolves with an illnesses/injury I have listed. I am not suggesting removing diagnosing entirely, though that would be nice.

Update: This is not a visual illness but a few people have mentioned cough being obvious because the only symptom is having a cough. While this is not a visual illness I still believe this should be among the illnesses we do not have to diagnose since it is a given OR change the symptoms to shortness of breath, hoarseness, and chest pain—it makes it less obvious, which is the point of diagnosing.

i suggest instead of not diagnosing it at all that your herbalist must diagnose it a certain number of times before you dont have to diagnose it anymore. not diagnosing it at all goes right past the point of diagnosing in the first place, but i do partially agree.

I feel like maybe this should be so for some illnesses... Like okay, while ringworm may always look the same on the art, in real life ringworm can look different case to case, and could potentially be difficult to identify for certain. Same with some other illnesses, like mange maybe.

However, an open wound is an open wound. Please, herbalist, my wolf has a gaping open wound. I promise it's not distemper, or pox, or ear mites. It's a wound. And my wolf got it 1 minute ago. It's not infected. Please just let me give my wolf a bandaid. 

There is already a thread suggesting using cures on undiagnosed wolves based on their symptoms, you can find it here.

@starchaser

My suggestion is slightly different. That other thread is referring to not having to diagnose any illnesses while mine is not having to diagnose certain illnesses. Thank you for pointing that out to me though, I will edit my post for clarification.

What if, instead not having to diagnose visual illnesses, if your herbalist encounteres an illness a certain number of times depending on how common it is, they can identify it without needing to diagnose it. However  since some illnesses can be similar, there is a chance it is misidentified, at which poimt you need to diagnose it. Or maybe if you think your herbalist may have misidentified it, you can get a second opinion by diagnosing it.

For example, after encountering an open wound three times, your herbalist can identify it on sight, but later on, they may misidentify it as an infection, or mange. Or ear mites might be mistaken for ticks or fleas. It would always be an illness related to the actual diagnosis or similar in symptoms.

I generally support this proposition, with some suggestions. 

Agreeing with red [#1252], an open wound is an obvious thing you know, as the symptoms and art change are visually recognizable. Agreeing [and adding on to] with what 🍂𝖂𝖎𝖘𝖍𝖙𝖍𝖔𝖚𝖓𝖉🍂 [#3648] and Orias [#10844] have touched on, a said herbalist should be able to have the chance to identify a certain illness/wound on site. I do think that the said wolf in the herbalist position should have a certain amount of proficiency. For example: 

To be able to instantly recognize the common illness [open wound, diarrhea, etc], your herbalist in place must have at least 50% proficiency.
To be able to instantly recognize the uncommon illness [hepatitis, ear mites, ticks, etc], your herbalist in place must have at least 75% proficiency.
To be able to instantly recognize the rare illness [influena, pox, etc], your herbalist in place must have at least 100% proficiency.

Again, digging on another point red [#1252] brought up, while some viruses, illnesses, and diseases may be easily identified in real life [like an open wound] while others are harder to recognize [distemper is very similar to hepatitis in canines]. As a Vet Tech, I work with animals, specifically canines and felines, all day and the doctors that have worked there for 20 years have trouble diagnosing certain things. For example, Canine Parvovirus and Canine Hepatitis [irl] have very similar symptoms. Even though parvovirus usually only affects puppies, both the virus [parvo] and the disease [hepetitis] have symptoms including, but not limited to: loss of appetite, lethargy, bloating/swollen belly, and vomiting. Mange, in differential, is very distinctive as the canine is covered in scabs and shows balding, but we always verify by looking at a skin sample under the microscope.

Ooh wonderful additions from an expert!

I do think maybe a few categories of illnesses, from easiest to hardest to diagnose on sight, combined with a system using herbalist proficiency might work.

Yeah I really felt this when the symptom was Cough and the diagnosis was... Cough...

Yeah, some things are so easy that it feels really silly to diagnose them. Open wounds, diarrhea/constipation, cough... It'd be different if the cough was a symptom of influenza or something, but when it's just a cough that gets diagnosed as a cough, what's the point?