Let's try not to derail the thread into what would be a believable illusion or not. There are other places to discuss such a topic. Let's stick to the matter at hand.
Pattern: Like a figment, a pattern spell creates an image that others can see, but a pattern also affects the minds of those who see it or are caught in it. All patterns are mind-affecting spells.Judging by how pattern spells work, you only have to be caught in the spell to be effected. Only sightless creatures are not effected, as per the specific wording of the spell.
This, along with BadBird's argument of it being a hallucination, I think make the most sense. If you're caught in it, it affects you. It does say "or", so by RAW, even if you can't see it, but are caught in it, it affects you.
For the sightless exemption thing (unless Pathfinder actually defines the word, which I don't believe they do, but do use it as a descriptor on some creatures - correct??) - I would interpret that as a sightless creature, not a creature that is in the dark. When you're in the dark, you are not sightless, you just aren't having any light come into your eyes. You can see, it's just all black. The same is true when you shut your eyes - you're just covering your eyes that are still seeing.
Sightless (again, my interpretation unless paizo has one) means that sight is not one of your senses, and you have no framework for what a visual illusion or hallucination is. For a character that could see at one time, and is now permanently blind... I guess you could cross that bridge if you ever come to it. I guess I would consider that character "blind" but not "sightless". (However, if you ruled that a character who could see, but is now permanently blinded did hallucinate illusions that affected them, they would gain an odd metagame effect of knowing if something is an illusion simply by the fact that they are "seeing" it.)
A contrasting example would be Mirror Image, which says that you must be able to see the figments, and doesn't use the word sightless.
I'm sorry, this is the rules forum and you are actively ignoring a line of a rule that you acknowledge is there?If you cannot see it you do not have to save. Always played it like that (despite the line of 'caught in it').
Pattern: Like a figment, a pattern spell creates an image that others can see, but a pattern also affects the minds of those who see it or are caught in it. All patterns are mind-affecting spells.
This is the rules forum but I assumed we were all speaking openly as I barely saw any citations for Figments or Patterns.
Let me go back to quote mode and clarify then.
Lets take a look at a list of every Pattern effect for completion sake.
Sightless creatures are not affected by color spray.
Affected creatures become fascinated by the pattern of colors. Sightless creatures are not affected.
If the view of the lights is completely blocked, creatures who can't see them are no longer affected. The spell does not affect sightless creatures.
Sightless creatures are not affected by scintillating pattern.
Illusion (Pattern) [Light] [Mind-Affecting]
We can draw a few things from this.
1. All Illusions fall under the Mind-Affecting Tag (as per the school description) and Patterns are a Subschool.2. All of them (except Wandering Star Motes) do NOT affect sightless creatures.
3. Wandering Star Motes HAS a Light Descriptor, meaning that if Color Spray or Rainbow Pattern, etc needed a Light Descriptor, it would have had one.
4. Rainbow calls out line of sight (more on this later)
You need sight. It says straight out that sightless creatures are not affected. When one is in total darkness (sans Darkvision) you are effectively Blinded and suffer the same penalties.
In areas of darkness, creatures without darkvision are effectively blinded.
When you are Blinded:
All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) against the blinded character.
Total Concealment follows...
If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight, he is considered to have total concealment from you.
If you cannot see a Color Spray, due to darkness, a wall in front of you, or because you put a blindfold over your eyes, you are not affected as you are sightless relative to the effect.
EDIT: To answer the quote above, it really should be 'who can see it AND are caught in it'. Otherwise this means Colour Spray has a near infinite range as you can almost always see it, whether you are in the cone or not and it would also always hit the caster as well.
The rules for patterns say that it affects the mind of those who can see it OR are caught in it. So if my ally is on the other side of a 50 room and gets color sprayed and I can see it happening am I required to make a save since I can see it even though I'm not in the area of effect?
No, you don't have to make a save against the effects of color spray in that situation. The "those who see it or are caught in it" part of the pattern rules is covering the different ways that pattern spells might affect you - you have to work out which it is for each pattern spell. Color spray, which affects a cone-shaped area in a burst, is a "caught in it" type of pattern spell - note that it actually says "Each creature within the cone is affected" in the spell's text.
When you do not have sight, you are sightless.
There is no monster ability that I can find with Sightless as an ability, not on the Universal Monster Ability page, not even with a quick 3.5 search.
What you do find is Blind.
Lets take the iconic Ooze type.
Blind (but have the blindsight special quality), with immunity to gaze attacks, visual effects, illusions, and other attack forms that rely on sight.
Creatures that are Blind (or in Darkness, or without Line Of Sight) have immunity to gaze attacks, visual effects, illusions and sight attacks.
Only looking directly at a creature with a gaze attack leaves an opponent vulnerable.
sight·less
ˈsītlis/Submit
adjective
unable to see; blind.
Well I suppose the answer to the OP is to expect table variation. Hubaris and those like him would say you are not effected while the rest of us say you will be.
Right, forgot about the OP.
In answer to your question, if you can see the Pattern effect you are affected.
The Darkvision in itself (even though it is monochrome), still allows you to see the pattern and makes you save against it.
Feel free to take from this thread what you will.
Sources and all.
EDIT: OT who CDG's a Level 1 party? -.-'
Hubaris,
In the Bestiary 3 the Guant Sea Anemine has the following special ability:
Sightless (Ex) A sea anemone is blind and is not affected by any effect that relies on sight, such as gaze attacks or blindness.
The question to ask is the word "sightless" in describing creatures a game term or a general term? If it is a game term, then Color Spray affects creatures in darkness. If it is a general term, then Color Spray will not affect creatures in darkness.
I think it would be difficult to say that the developers only intended the Giant Sea Anemone to be resistant to Color Spray so we can apply it as a general term.
I interpret "sightless" to mean creatures that lack a means of sight. This does not mean normally sighted creatures that are in darkness as they are sighted but their sight is obscured by the darkness. The same could be true of normally sighted creatures that may be blind, but I could argue either way on the blind condition.
An ooze, however, does not have sight. They are:
Blind (but have the blindsight special quality), with immunity to gaze attacks, visual effects, illusions, and other attack forms that rely on sight.
That is a sightless creature in my interpretation of the rules.
In the original poster's circumstance I would say the Color Spray would have affected them. I would also say, and this is an opinion and not a rule issue, that their DM was a poor DM for killing all of the 1st level characters like that in an almost no-win situation. Color Spray is a nasty spell at low levels and combined with poor chances to make a save it will lead to death, but to kill the whole party is bad DMing in my opinion. Of course, I do not know what the players did to put themselves in that situation so I will curb my opinion a little bearing more evidence that the DM did not set them up for the unfortunate TPK.
Bestiary 3, I stand corrected.
I don't have a large bestiary outside of core and 3.5.
Determining whether its a game term or a dictionary term is tricky I'll admit.
Any creature with the scent ability gains a +2 bonus on attack and damage rolls made against a target marked with a pheromone arrow. This effect lasts for 1 hour or until the target spends 1 minute washing.
Creatures cannot use the scent ability to track you (though they can still track you through standard means such as footprints). Creatures with scent can detect your presence by smell at half the normal distance, but cannot pinpoint your location with scent.
In this case it refers to 'ability', as they are dictionary words (Scent).
Or on the other side, when you have fantasywords.
You may use the Stealth skill to hide from any creature attempting to perceive you using blindsight or blindsense, even if you are clearly in that creature's perceptual field. This feat does not confer any advantages against other forms of perception, such as scent, vision, or tremorsense.
You gain tremorsense to a range of 10 feet.
In this case we have three terms that are non-dictionary terms so its fine.
So I get what you're saying in the sense that you have to determine what type of term it is (dictionary or fantasy). Though to me Sightless is exactly that, having no ability to see. It matches up with the most amount of resource available. That and when we get to how a brain views colours, it makes a lot more sense when you deprive light from the situation.
"When you look at a banana, the wavelengths of reflected light determine what color you see. The light waves reflect off the banana's peel and hit the light-sensitive retina at the back of your eye. That's where cones come in. Cones are one type of photoreceptor, the tiny cells in the retina that respond to light."
And there is no light, no way to see, or no [light] descriptor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well everybody, I think we should wrap this up. No new evidence is being presented on either side, and while I disagree with Hubaris's interpretation, I think it is reasonable enough that I wouldn't have a problem with that being the rule in a game I was in. Let's agree to disagree here.
|
Since there has been a question about why it happened here is some more background.
Let's not let the thread derail into how much of a dick somebody was or wasn't and the roleplaying of a paladin. Let's keep on topic.
I'm sorry, this is the rules forum...
I'm sorry, this is the rules forum...
You're doing it wrong dangnabbit!!
The spell says
A vivid cone of clashing colors springs forth from your hand...
The description of "Vivid" is brite...
.
Flash Powder
Creatures within a 10-foot-radius burst are blinded for 1 round.
This spell is not considered a source of light because it's Instantaneous... Just like Flash Powder that also blinds.
Nothing about the level of light is in ether description because it is not used as a light source.
This spell is not considered a source of light because it's Instantaneous... Just like Flash Powder that also blinds.
Nothing about the level of light is in ether description because it is not used as a light source.
The spell isn't a source of light because it's an illusion, not an evocation. Rainbow Pattern isn't instantaneous, but it wouldn't be a source of real light either. It's the reason that illusion spells can't be used in place of real light - you can create the illusion of a light source, but it won't actually illuminate anything because it isn't really there. You can create the illusion that it illuminates things as they really are, but only if you already know what they really are and fake it.
In the Rainbow Pattern description
Colourful LIGHTS with a 20' spread
I have not seen where it says an Illusion can't create light. Can you please tell me where to find this.
In the Rainbow Pattern description
Colourful LIGHTS with a 20' spread
I have not seen where it says an Illusion can't create light. Can you please tell me where to find this.
Illusion spells deceive the senses or minds of others. They cause people to see things that are not there, not see things that are there, hear phantom noises, or remember things that never happened.
Pattern: Like a figment, a pattern spell creates an image that others can see, but a pattern also affects the minds of those who see it or are caught in it. All patterns are mind-affecting spells.
It's illusion spells 101: nothing is real.
Then you should know...
** spoiler omitted **
All hail the glory of Dreamed Secrets...
It's illusion spells 101: nothing is real.
Not all illusions are all in your head. For example, with invisibility, you're still invisible to creatures who are immune to mind-affecting affects. It's a different kind of illusion, not a trick of the mind but a trick of the light.
It's illusion spells 101: nothing is real.
What you are saying is Illusion 101, if you are not in the area of effect of the illusion you see/hear/feel nothing. So if the guy beside you gets hit with colourspray. You would not see any thing hit him and have no idea why he just calapsed. Or if one guy is standing in the area effect of a HALLUCINATORY TERRAIN spell he can see it. But the guy standing in the next 5' square can't.
That makes no sense.
It's illusion spells 101: nothing is real.What you are saying is Illusion 101, if you are not in the area of effect of the illusion you see/hear/feel nothing. So if the guy beside you gets hit with colourspray. You would not see any thing hit him and have no idea why he just calapsed. Or if one guy is standing in the area effect of a HALLUCINATORY TERRAIN spell he can see it. But the guy standing in the next 5' square can't.
That makes no sense.
All I was saying is that, by definition, Illusion spells don't create anything real. They operate in all sorts of very odd ways, but they don't obey any laws of reality. Saying that you couldn't see a color spray in the dark is like saying a figment of a knight couldn't walk through a wall. Saying that Rainbow Pattern would cast light on things is like saying that a figment of a knight would leave footprints.
Illusion spells don't create anything real.
Shadow spells do to be fair.
... Kind of.... Sometimes.
... Partially.
But if I'm in a completely dark room and throw a bucket of red paint on something. Is the thing red now? Yes it is.
If we're talking reality, I say that it is colorless, although possessed of properties that would cause it to become red if light were shone upon it. There's no color in the dark.
Here's a peculiar illusion question: Pattern spells are considered to be figment-like images. Can a Pattern spell affect someone with True Seeing, since they 'see through' the image like they see through any other illusion?