Recent Posts
Jason, please, please, please tell me you are considering making "Darkness" actually dark, and not "Dimness" or "Shadowy Illumination". Magical darkness used to be pitch black! Make it so again!
If it were me, I'd rename 3.5's "Darkness" spell as "Shadow", and make it oppose "Light". Then the "Darkness" spell (pitch black, as in earlier editions) would oppose "Daylight".
The thing that pisses me about the 3.5 darkness is how if you cast it in an area that is already dark it actually makes things lighter and easier to see. You can actually cast darkness at night in order to read a book. And that's stupid.
-Frank
I agree. The way darkness works in 3.5 is a travesty. ANYTHING that actually makes it into an area of magical darkness would be an improvement - even if said change is simply to add a clause preventing it from providing light in an area with less than shadowy illumination.
I use a simple fix for the darkness spells--darkness drops the illumination in an area by one level, while deeper darkness drops it by two levels; both interfere with low-light and darkvision. Thus casting darkness in a clearing under direct sunlight creates an area of shadowy illumination, but casting it in a shadowy dungeon corridor creates an area of total darkness. Casting deeper darkness in that same clearing would create an area of total darkness.
This is generally very simple to adjudicate, works well in conjunction with similar spells (light raises the illumination in an area by one level, while daylight raises it by two levels; thus darkness and light negate each other and darkness can dim, but not negate, daylight), and makes a heck of a lot more sense without getting into the "overpowered" problem of pre-3.5 darkness.
I use a simple fix for the darkness spells--darkness drops the illumination in an area by one level, while deeper darkness drops it by two levels; both interfere with low-light and darkvision. Thus casting darkness in a clearing under direct sunlight creates an area of shadowy illumination, but casting it in a shadowy dungeon corridor creates an area of total darkness. Casting deeper darkness in that same clearing would create an area of total darkness.
This is generally very simple to adjudicate, works well in conjunction with similar spells (light raises the illumination in an area by one level, while daylight raises it by two levels; thus darkness and light negate each other and darkness can dim, but not negate, daylight), and makes a heck of a lot more sense without getting into the "overpowered" problem of pre-3.5 darkness.
I like this... It makes sense.
I like this... It makes sense.I use a simple fix for the darkness spells--darkness drops the illumination in an area by one level, while deeper darkness drops it by two levels; both interfere with low-light and darkvision. Thus casting darkness in a clearing under direct sunlight creates an area of shadowy illumination, but casting it in a shadowy dungeon corridor creates an area of total darkness. Casting deeper darkness in that same clearing would create an area of total darkness.
This is generally very simple to adjudicate, works well in conjunction with similar spells (light raises the illumination in an area by one level, while daylight raises it by two levels; thus darkness and light negate each other and darkness can dim, but not negate, daylight), and makes a heck of a lot more sense without getting into the "overpowered" problem of pre-3.5 darkness.
Seconded!
Seconded!I like this... It makes sense.I use a simple fix for the darkness spells--darkness drops the illumination in an area by one level, while deeper darkness drops it by two levels; both interfere with low-light and darkvision. Thus casting darkness in a clearing under direct sunlight creates an area of shadowy illumination, but casting it in a shadowy dungeon corridor creates an area of total darkness. Casting deeper darkness in that same clearing would create an area of total darkness.
This is generally very simple to adjudicate, works well in conjunction with similar spells (light raises the illumination in an area by one level, while daylight raises it by two levels; thus darkness and light negate each other and darkness can dim, but not negate, daylight), and makes a heck of a lot more sense without getting into the "overpowered" problem of pre-3.5 darkness.
Thirded!
revshafer
(Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber; GameMastery Superscriber)
This is one thing that I do not understand...why does a DM put up with this? If someone cast darkness and then said, "I'm reading a book"...I'd say, "That's ridiculous." I don't care how its written, because when something this silly happens I just wouldn't go with it.
It will be interesting to see the revamp, and I am looking forward to more spells!
Thanks,
Scott
In general, it's because players build assumptions based on the rules (a valid thing to do, BTW). Now, in a homegame where we're all buddies sitting around, an odd situation might come up where a rules quirk doesn't make sense. We all come to some agreement and it is thus forever more. However, if I'm running a game at a con, or at the local D&D Meet-Up, then I might have players that I don't even know. In these cases it's important to have some baseline for working together, and often times going with the "letter of the law" is the quickest way. Then there are specific tournament style games, where it's not just a game, it might be a competition. In these situations, players come up with some pretty crazy strategies to win--because there is a winner.
All that said, I'm a DM that favors whacking a player over the head with a rolled-up Dungeon magazine as needed when silliness like this gets argued at my table...
And I'm glad folks like the fix! It (the 3.5 incarnation) bugged the heck out of me, but at the same time I have seen the devastation that the 3.0 version could cause. Back before d20 darkvision/blindsight/blindfolds of darkseeing came into being this was never as big an issue. Of course, then we got to deal with the joys of infravision (and even ultravision in some cases)...
This is one thing that I do not understand...why does a DM put up with this? If someone cast darkness and then said, "I'm reading a book"...I'd say, "That's ridiculous." I don't care how its written, because when something this silly happens I just wouldn't go with it.
It will be interesting to see the revamp, and I am looking forward to more spells!
Thanks,
Scott
Because while this is true, the rules should still be edited to remove such cases for clarity. In 99% of campaigns, it wouldn't be allowed, yes; it's the fact that the rules as written allow it, and thus they should be rewritten to make them fall in line with common sense.
Thirded!Seconded!I like this... It makes sense.I use a simple fix for the darkness spells--darkness drops the illumination in an area by one level, while deeper darkness drops it by two levels; both interfere with low-light and darkvision. Thus casting darkness in a clearing under direct sunlight creates an area of shadowy illumination, but casting it in a shadowy dungeon corridor creates an area of total darkness. Casting deeper darkness in that same clearing would create an area of total darkness.
This is generally very simple to adjudicate, works well in conjunction with similar spells (light raises the illumination in an area by one level, while daylight raises it by two levels; thus darkness and light negate each other and darkness can dim, but not negate, daylight), and makes a heck of a lot more sense without getting into the "overpowered" problem of pre-3.5 darkness.
Fourded! Uhhh....fourthed? Never mind.