|
| 13 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. |
Scenario: We're in the underdark, you've thrown a sunrod down which produces normal light. Your drow opponent drops darkness which reduces your light to dim. You want to raise the light again to normal, you drop 2 more sunrods on the same location. Does this cause the light to return to normal?
Experiment: We went into our basement with candles and created a truly pitch black room. We couldn't see a durn thing and I have a banged shin to prove it. Lit one candle and measured how far the readable light went. By tripling the number of candles, we effectively doubled the distance we could read.
|
Scenario: We're in the underdark, you've thrown a sunrod down which produces normal light. Your drow opponent drops darkness which reduces your light to dim. You want to raise the light again to normal, you drop 2 more sunrods on the same location. Does this cause the light to return to normal?
No; darkness is only countered by magical sources of light.
|
No; darkness is only countered by magical sources of light.
...which must be a higher spell level than the darkness it is trying to overcome (exception, daylight) or the magical lightsource is temporarily negated, does not operate at all and the darkness spell prevails.
We examine lighting conditions and their interaction with darkness in depth in Episode #009 of Chronicles: Pathfinder Podcast.
Right. You could have a room with one lit candle or 100 and the magical darkness would have the exact same effect.
Right. You could have a room with one lit candle or 100 and the magical darkness would have the exact same effect.
Not quite.
Darkness reduces the natural lighting by a step or two. A single candle will light a single square, but 100 candles will light up the area like a torch or perhaps even a daylight spell.
If you have enough candles to make it bright light, rather than dim light, won't the darkness make it dim light rather than pitch black?
|
|
Right. You could have a room with one lit candle or 100 and the magical darkness would have the exact same effect.Not quite.
Darkness reduces the natural lighting by a step or two. A single candle will light a single square, but 100 candles will light up the area like a torch or perhaps even a daylight spell.
If you have enough candles to make it bright light, rather than dim light, won't the darkness make it dim light rather than pitch black?
I don't think the game mechanics work this way RAW. While logically and real life would say if you had enough light you could reach bright or daylight.
"Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness. Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness." -Quote from Darkness spell
I may make a houserule on this, but I'm very anti-houserule because they tend to complicate things in ways I never foresaw.
Maybe I am just still used to the old ways of running magical light and dark from 1st and 2nd edition, where magical darkness negates all natural sources of light within the area of effect.
|
|
Maybe I am just still used to the old ways of running magical light and dark from 1st and 2nd edition, where magical darkness negates all natural sources of light within the area of effect.
It was that way in 3.5 if memory serves. PFRPG changed the spells as far as I can tell, but even still there are no rules for X amount of torches/sunrods creating more than normal light.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Darkness reduces the natural lighting by a step or two. A single candle will light a single square, but 100 candles will light up the area like a torch or perhaps even a daylight spell.
No. The only thing which lights up an area like "daylight" are two things:
1 - The SUN
2 - A Daylight spell.
That's it; that's all. A Sunburst spell will also do this as a flare for a very brief instant in time. Sunburst, however, is not a light spell so much as it is a fire and forget area attack that takes the form of a flash of intense light.
If you have enough candles to make it bright light, rather than dim light, won't the darkness make it dim light rather than pitch black?
You will never, ever have enough candles so as to make it bright. Bright means the level of light emitted by the sun on a clear day in a field without any cover of a tree canopy. That's really, REALLY bright, ok?
The light emitted by the sun is not a trivial number of lumens. The light emitted by 100 candles -- even burning at both ends -- on the other hand, is trivial in comparison.
The lighting rules in PFRPG are scattered over the core rule book and are easy to misinterpret. I strongly urge that you listen to Episode #009 of Chronicles: Pathfinder Podcast where we devote about 45 minutes of the podcast to discussing all rules concerning light and darkness in the game.
Episode #009 should be ready for download tonight. I'll post the link to it here as a reminder.
Though candles may not have been the best example, my logic is still sound. Just replace candles with a more sensible light source. You get enough lanterns or torches and you will easily get it bright enough to be "bright." That means darkness will only be able to make the area "normal" rather than dim, much less darkness.
|
|
Though candles may not have been the best example, my logic is still sound. Just replace candles with a more sensible light source. You get enough lanterns or torches and you will easily get it bright enough to be "bright." That means darkness will only be able to make the area "normal" rather than dim, much less darkness.
Except the rules of the game state that no non-magical light source operates in the presence of a darkness spell. Even magical sources of light must be higher in level to function.
You are trying to "solve" a rule of magic with some real-world sleight of hand. Under RAW - it doesn't work.
|
|
Though candles may not have been the best example, my logic is still sound. Just replace candles with a more sensible light source. You get enough lanterns or torches and you will easily get it bright enough to be "bright." That means darkness will only be able to make the area "normal" rather than dim, much less darkness.Except the rules of the game state that no non-magical light source operates in the presence of a darkness spell. Even magical sources of light must be higher in level to function.
You are trying to "solve" a rule of magic with some real-world sleight of hand. Under RAW - it doesn't work.
wait are you saying when I'm in the underdark, and someone casts darkness and I'm carrying a sunrod, that it's completely negated, not just toned down to dim?
Though candles may not have been the best example, my logic is still sound. Just replace candles with a more sensible light source. You get enough lanterns or torches and you will easily get it bright enough to be "bright." That means darkness will only be able to make the area "normal" rather than dim, much less darkness.Except the rules of the game state that no non-magical light source operates in the presence of a darkness spell. Even magical sources of light must be higher in level to function.
You are trying to "solve" a rule of magic with some real-world sleight of hand. Under RAW - it doesn't work.
Read the darkness spell dude. It decreases the light in an area in stages. It doesn't make things totally dark anymore, not unless the light was already dim. If you cast it in a room with dozens of lanterns (that are jointly making bright light) then the spell will only bring the room down to normal light.
EDIT: Granted the rules don't specifically say multiple light sources can raise the light level, but it is obviously the intent. There have been enough modules out there with bonfires that create daylight levels of light (that is, 60-ft. radius with an additional 120-ft. of dim light).
And what is a bonfire if not a LOT of burning torches in one spot?
EDIT 2: Ah, I think I know what's going on. I'm talking about preexisting light sources wheres you THINK I'm talking about bringing in more light sources AFTER the spell has been cast. Is that right?
Bringing a sunrod into the above example room after darkness has been cast does nothing to raise the light level. I agree with you there.
Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness.
If the torch cannot increase the light level, then it's influence on an area's illumination is nulled. If you're in a cave and the only source of light is a torch, then the torch's light is negated and then the illumination is reduced a step; but the cave has no other source of light, so it'll just be enforced darkness where only 3rd level or higher light magic is allowed to even have an effect.
This brings to question as to whether natural sunlight is nonmagical. If not, then barring spells of level 3+ (therefore, only daylight means anything), darkness ALWAYS creates an area of total darkness.
One exception is to Heighten continual flame to 3+, which will create dim light in a darkness spell. You only want to do this to have a non-spell draining source of light, only using daylight when necessary. Of course, once you do cast daylight, all sources of magical darkness are completely negated and your other sources of light work normally.
|
|
This brings to question as to whether natural sunlight is nonmagical. If not, then barring spells of level 3+ (therefore, only daylight means anything), darkness ALWAYS creates an area of total darkness.
Sunlight (and moonlight/starlight) is "ambient" light under the rules. If it is present, it operates, unless suppressed in a specific spot by a spell effect, or barred by an interposing object. Otherwise, it prevails in accordance with its current condition.
Note as well that Continual Flame (cleric) is a 3rd level spell and not 2nd level. This is important to consider when assessing whether or not darkness suppresses all Everburning Torches in the area. By default, I assume the lesser Wizard version of the spell is in effect unless the PCs go out of their way to obtain the 3rd level cleric version.
Anyway, point is, you do not need to use a metamagic Heighten Spell to achieve this. While the Wizard version of the spell is 2nd level, the cleric version is already cast at level 3 by default.
Of course, once you do cast daylight, all sources of magical darkness are completely negated and your other sources of light work normally.
I am not sure that this is necessarily the correct interpretation. The rule is this:
"Daylight brought into an area of magical darkness (or vice versa) is temporarily negated, so that the otherwise prevailing light conditions exist in the overlapping areas of effect.
You are saying that both Daylight and Darkness temporarily supress one another, negating the effect of each within its zone of effect. I think that's under Daylight's spell description and that is correct.
The question is, does "otherwise prevailing light conditions" mean "ambient", (i.e., the effect the sun/moon/stars has on that zone) or does it mean "ambient, as a result of taking into effect all other non-celestial light sources, as Darkness no longer suppresses those sources in this case?"
This is a difficult interpretation and the result you suggest is not necessarily the only possible interpretation. To be clear, I do think that your interpretation is a reasonable one and is probably correct, but it is not the only possible interpretation.
Another interpretation is that all soources of light equal to or less less than the darkness are extinguished; the daylight and darkness[/i] are negated as well (insofar that neither affects the ambient light in the area), and we are left instead with ambient light without any light source less than third level being taken in to account as to whether the zone is illuminated or not.
If you want to avoid that result, use Daylight as a dispel magic on the Darkness, rather than to have it temporarily negate it. Then the result you suggest is proper and would certainly occur.
I don't think it works that way at all.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
The way I'm reading it Natural/ambient/sunlight forms of light would be taken down 1 step, and artificial light Sunrods/torches/everburning torches/etc. would be completely shut down in the area of darkness. I rule everburning torches because while they're magical they only recreate the same kind of light they're making permanent, torch, lamp, candle, and etc. Not sure of a way to create a sunlight powered light with continual flame spell. That's my thoughts unless someone can give me some convincing evidence otherwise.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
The way I'm reading it Natural/ambient/sunlight forms of light would be taken down 1 step, and artificial light Sunrods/torches/everburning torches/etc. would be completely shut down in the area of darkness. I rule everburning torches because while they're magical they only recreate the same kind of light they're making permanent, torch, lamp, candle, and etc. Not sure of a way to create a sunlight powered light with continual flame spell. That's my thoughts unless someone can give me some convincing evidence otherwise.
Where are people getting this interpretation from? I've read the darkness spell half a dozen times and I'm just not seeing any support for it anywhere.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
Where are people getting this interpretation from? I've read the darkness spell half a dozen times and I'm just not seeing any support for it anywhere.The way I'm reading it Natural/ambient/sunlight forms of light would be taken down 1 step, and artificial light Sunrods/torches/everburning torches/etc. would be completely shut down in the area of darkness. I rule everburning torches because while they're magical they only recreate the same kind of light they're making permanent, torch, lamp, candle, and etc. Not sure of a way to create a sunlight powered light with continual flame spell. That's my thoughts unless someone can give me some convincing evidence otherwise.
Because it says this:
"This darkness causes the illumination level in the area to drop one step, from bright light to normal light, from normal light to dim light, or from dim light to darkness."
That's a direct quote.
That's the effect it has on ambient light caused from the sun, or moon and stars (celestial bodies). We know that this must refer to the lighting in an area cause by celestial bodies of light, because of what it says about non-magical source of light:
Against non-magical sources of light, darkness does this:
"Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness."
That's a direct quote. There isn't any room for interpretation there.
As for magical sources of light, it says this:
Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness."
That's a direct quote. Again, no room for interpretation there.
From this we conclude:
1- Non-magical sources of light, other than ambient light from the sun (or moon and stars), do not work at all.
2- Magical light does not work unless it is higher in spell level than the darkness spell (darkness wins ties); and
3- the only reason it isn't INSTANTLY pitch black due to a darkness spell is because ambient light from celestial bodies still works, but is instead decreased in intensity by one light level.
If celestial light did not function at all, and non-magical sources did not function - and magical lights of 2nd level or less didn't work -- well it would already be dark, right? So you would have to take Dim and Normal off the table. (It can't mean the daylight spell, as that operates differently, and both daylight and darkness temporarily negate one another. Because that's what the daylight spell description tells us what happens when those two lighting zones intersect.)
But as dim or even normal are possible results, we know that the ambient light from the sun must still work. If the sun didn't still work, the brightest it could be would be the light from moon/stars (which is a baseline of ambient "dim") and Dim -1 = DARK.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Where are people getting this interpretation from? I've read the darkness spell half a dozen times and I'm just not seeing any support for it anywhere.The way I'm reading it Natural/ambient/sunlight forms of light would be taken down 1 step, and artificial light Sunrods/torches/everburning torches/etc. would be completely shut down in the area of darkness. I rule everburning torches because while they're magical they only recreate the same kind of light they're making permanent, torch, lamp, candle, and etc. Not sure of a way to create a sunlight powered light with continual flame spell. That's my thoughts unless someone can give me some convincing evidence otherwise.
Because it says this:
"This darkness causes the illumination level in the area to drop one step, from bright light to normal light, from normal light to dim light, or from dim light to darkness."
That's a direct quote.
That's the effect it has on ambient light caused from the sun, or moon and stars (celestial bodies). We know that this must refer to the lighting in an area cause by celestial bodies of light, because of what it says about non-magical source of light:
Against non-magical sources of light, darkness does this:
"Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness."
That's a direct quote. There isn't any room for interpretation there.
As for magical sources of light, it says this:
Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness."That's a direct quote. Again, no room for interpretation there.
From this we conclude:
1- Non-magical sources of light, other than ambient light from the sun (or moon and stars), do not work at all.
2- Magical light does not work unless it is higher in spell level than the darkness spell (darkness wins ties); and
3- the only reason it isn't INSTANTLY pitch black due to a darkness spell is because ambient light from celestial bodies still works, but is instead decreased in intensity by one light level.If celestial light did not function at all, and non-magical sources did not function - and magical lights of 2nd level or less didn't work -- well it would already be dark, right? So you would have to take Dim and Normal off the table. (It can't mean the daylight spell, as that operates differently, and both daylight and darkness temporarily negate one another. Because that's what the daylight spell description tells us what happens when those two lighting zones intersect.)
But as dim or even normal are possible results, we know that the ambient light from the sun must still work. If the sun didn't still work, the brightest it could be would be the light from moon/stars (which is a baseline of ambient "dim") and Dim -1 = DARK.
Except there is no mention of ambient/celestial/natural light anywhere in the spell's text--much less a differentiation between ambient light and light in general! You're basically making rules up.
"Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness."
It seems pretty obvious to me that this statement is referring to NEW light sources being brought into the area of darkness.
If there is a small 20' diameter room with a torch at its center, it is normal lighting. Cast darkness on the torch's handle and the room is now dimly lit. Bring a sunrod into the dimly lit room and it remains dimly lit because the sunrod is not magical and is incapable of increasing the surrounding light (it is not a higher level spell).
Too many problems crop up with any other interpretation.
No room for interpretation? Whatever. *rolls eyes*
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Which is why I made a ruling, which my players stopped by this thread, read the book where referenced, and agreed with my ruling. There is always room for different interpretations. The only way this would be settled 100% is if one of the game creators stopped in and laid down the law. Which unless they're bored, would be a waste of their time when they could be getting me another book ready!
|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Steel_Wind I have to agree with Ravingdork, I think there is an order of operations when it comes to Darkness.
1. Darkness reduces the current lighting level of an area by 1 step.
2. Light sources brought into area of magical darkness:
2a. Non-magical light sources brought into an area of darkness cannot raise the level of light.
2b. Magical light sources only raise the level if their spell level is higher.
Take that 20ft. room used in the example, it's lit with a torch. Darkness is cast on the unattended torch and the room goes from normal to dim light. You break out a sunrod but it's useless as its nonmagical, you pull out an everbunring torch (straight from the equip list) but it doesn't work because it's not a high enough spell level. Finally a cleric casts daylight in the area and both spells suppress each other returning the area to it original lighting level.
This is definitely a FAQ item, no doubt. Also I've cried since 3.0 that Moonlight & Starlight be game defined into what level of light they provide.
--School of Vrock
|
The only interpretation that makes sense to me is that:
1) light sources of any type that are physically _outside_ the area of darkness have their light level dimmed by one step as their light passes _inside_ the area of darkness.
2) light sources that are physically _inside_ the area of darkness do not function at all unless they are higher level magical light sources.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Steel_Wind I have to agree with Ravingdork, I think there is an order of operations when it comes to Darkness.
1. Darkness reduces the current lighting level of an area by 1 step.
2. Light sources brought into area of magical darkness:
2a. Non-magical light sources brought into an area of darkness cannot raise the level of light.
2b. Magical light sources only raise the level if their spell level is higher.Take that 20ft. room used in the example, it's lit with a torch. Darkness is cast on the unattended torch and the room goes from normal to dim light. You break out a sunrod but it's useless as its nonmagical, you pull out an everbunring torch (straight from the equip list) but it doesn't work because it's not a high enough spell level. Finally a cleric casts daylight in the area and both spells suppress each other returning the area to it original lighting level.
This is definitely a FAQ item, no doubt. Also I've cried since 3.0 that Moonlight & Starlight be game defined into what level of light they provide.
--School of Vrock
The above may be correct, given the evolution of the rule from the beta to the Core.
Problem is, it simply doesn't say what you propose is the correct interpretation; any more than it "doesnt say" what I (and others) have interpreted as the "correct meaning" of the rule.
I think you are referring to deeper darkness in this example rather than darkness. (Or at least a heightened or some other modified form of darkness.)
Who the heck needs deeper darkness anymore if normal darkness snuffs out all the torches, sunrods, and light spells?
I propose that your interpretation (1) makes darkness too powerful and (2) makes deeper darkness too weak.
|
|
I think you are referring to deeper darkness in this example rather than darkness. (Or at least a heightened or some other modified form of darkness.)
Who the heck needs deeper darkness anymore if normal darkness snuffs out all the torches, sunrods, and light spells?
I propose that your interpretation (1) makes darkness too powerful and (2) makes deeper darkness too weak.
Those with darkvision. Darkness doesn't block darkvision.
Can we try to use the Piazo PRD? I followed Tom Baumbach's link and although the text had nothing wrong with it, I had to Google it to find a reference to Sunrods. Here's a stack of Piazo links, not that any of them come down decisively on one side or the other.
Vision and Light under Additional Rules.
*makes note of the date* - I agree with Ravingdork.
I actually asked this question at PaizoCon, at the "Playing the Pathfinder RPG" seminar.
I can't say the answer was entirely clear to me (and we were short on time), but it firmly rebuffed the idea that a single darkness spell would obliterate all light in an area no matter what (excluding strong magical light).
I believe Ravingdork's interpretation is the correct one (and it's the one I've used). However Zomb's interpretation would fit as well.
Might be worth re-recording that segment Steel.
Might be worth re-recording that segment Steel.Regardless, the podcast is done. And available here
Right - I did a quick look around and didn't see it up (on the main site) - only just found the link in the forums.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So, how does the FAQ system work where I can get a paizonian to come figure this out for us. I'm now back on the fence with no clear decision on which way to go, because I clearly see both interpretations argument. Hooray, for vague and not well written rewrites of old rules.
EDIT: Figured out the FAQ system. Going to flag both sides. Look above, I've flagged what I feel are the best laid out sides of both arguments. Flag them so we can end this debacle.
|
|
Can we try to use the Piazo PRD? I followed Tom Baumbach's link and although the text had nothing wrong with it, I had to Google it to find a reference to Sunrods.
Prithee elaborate that I might understand the problem. (There was no direct link to sunrods on the darkness page? You can't actually be asking for that?)
My 2 cents, for what it's worth...
- First I rule thaht ambiant light is considered has natural ambiant light so in the underdark ambiant light is "darkness". (outside in the day it's "daylight", or if stormy weather "normal light", at night with no cloud and a moon it's "dim light" etc.)
- Second : a darkness spell negate all non-magical light in his area of effect and reduce the natural light one step, so, in this case, you immediatly fall in darkness (since the darkness spell cannot change darkness to deeper darkness).
If you consider ambiant light has "natural" light only it's easier to understand the mechanics I think.
Now with the magic stuff... If you cast two spells of equal level, one light one darkness then they dissipate each other for the duration of the shortest spell, darkness in this case do not negate normal light, nor a light spell of inferior level, it dispel only the light spell of same level.
If you cast darkness level 2 spell and there's a light level 0 spell in use it negate the light has per non-magical light and then you go to first (put non-magical light out of service and reduce natural light 1 step).
If you cast darkness level 2 spell and there's a cleric eternal light spell in use (so level 3) your darkness do nothing in the range of the eternal light spell, eternal light level 3 literally dissipate the effect of the darkness.
This is I have interpreted the rules... Maybe there's a flaw in my reasoning sorry... ;)
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
My 2 cents, for what it's worth...
- First I rule thaht ambiant light is considered has natural ambiant light so in the underdark ambiant light is "darkness". (outside in the day it's "daylight", or if stormy weather "normal light", at night with no cloud and a moon it's "dim light" etc.)
- Second : a darkness spell negate all non-magical light in his area of effect and reduce the natural light one step, so, in this case, you immediatly fall in darkness (since the darkness spell cannot change darkness to deeper darkness).
If you consider ambiant light has "natural" light only it's easier to understand the mechanics I think.
Now with the magic stuff... If you cast two spells of equal level, one light one darkness then they dissipate each other for the duration of the shortest spell, darkness in this case do not negate normal light, nor a light spell of inferior level, it dispel only the light spell of same level.
If you cast darkness level 2 spell and there's a light level 0 spell in use it negate the light has per non-magical light and then you go to first (put non-magical light out of service and reduce natural light 1 step).
If you cast darkness level 2 spell and there's a cleric eternal light spell in use (so level 3) your darkness do nothing in the range of the eternal light spell, eternal light level 3 literally dissipate the effect of the darkness.This is I have interpreted the rules... Maybe there's a flaw in my reasoning sorry... ;)
The words ambient, celestial, or natural, don't even appear within the darkness spell description.
Why are people adding them into their interpretations?
The words ambient, celestial, or natural, don't even appear within the darkness spell description.
Why are people adding them into their interpretations?
Argh... Well I was sure it appears somewhere in the illumination rules... sorry...
In fact the rule in french seems clearer than in english :D
In the french description of the spell it is clearly stated that non-magical source of light can't upgrade the illumination degree in the darkness zone... and that if you cast a darkness spell level 2 on e light spell level 0 (superior level) you counter AND dissipate the light spell (I was wrong, thought it counter and dissipate only temporarily)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
The words ambient, celestial, or natural, don't even appear within the darkness spell description.
Why are people adding them into their interpretations?
In my submission, you need to mindful of how lighting conditions are dealt with in the whole of the game and not restrict your focus only to one passage in how it explains how all lighting conditions work and interact. To do so is to be wilfully blind.
The effects of ambient light is discussed elsewhere in the Core rules. You can't divorce one from the other. This is implicit throughout the whole of the Pathfinder RPG on a variety of topics.
Moreover, the term "non-magical source of light" is not exhaustively defined in the spell description either, but the examples that are given do not suggest that something as pervasive and all powerful as the SUN is to be treated as the equivalent of a torch, right?
Further example, if you are going to discuss the effects of the Fly spell, you can't divorce that description from falling damage, massive damage, maneuverability in the air, hover, wingovers and the use of the skill description for flying. If you do that, you will be left with an incomplete picture of how the fly spell operates and functions within the game.
The words ambient, celestial, or natural, don't even appear within the darkness spell description.
Why are people adding them into their interpretations?
In my submission, you need to mindful of how lighting conditions are dealt with in the whole of the game and not restrict your focus only to one passage in how it explains how all lighting conditions work and interact. To do so is to be wilfully blind.
The effects of ambient light is discussed elsewhere in the Core rules. You can't divorce one from the other. This is implicit throughout the whole of the Pathfinder RPG on a variety of topics.
Moreover, the term "non-magical source of light" is not exhaustively defined in the spell description either, but the examples that are given do not suggest that something as pervasive and all powerful as the SUN is to be treated as the equivalent of a torch, right?
Further example, if you are going to discuss the effects of the Fly spell, you can't divorce that description from falling damage, massive damage, maneuverability in the air, hover, wingovers and the use of the skill description for flying. If you do that, you will be left with an incomplete picture of how the fly spell operates and functions within the game.
I haven't restricted my research to JUST the spell. The lighting rules don't have those words anywhere in their text either.
People are making things up for reasons I cannot fathom. Is it that they are remembering the v3.5 version of the rules or something?
|
|
Ravingdork you HAVE to take into account some basic assumptions in the game world. The RAW assumes there is a sun in the sky, moon, stars, etc and that they generally work like they do IRL.
So that being said... natural sources of light really need to have at least a little bit of game terminology put to them. You see it obliquely referenced here and there, such as tracking modifiers for the Survivial skill & mentions in the low-light vision ability description.
--Vrockets red glare
Ravingdork you HAVE to take into account some basic assumptions in the game world. The RAW assumes there is a sun in the sky, moon, stars, etc and that they generally work like they do IRL.
So that being said... natural sources of light really need to have at least a little bit of game terminology put to them. You see it obliquely referenced here and there, such as tracking modifiers for the Survivial skill & mentions in the low-light vision ability description.
--Vrockets red glare
I don't see how that impacts the way the spell works.
It seems pretty obvious to me: Determine the light level of the area (regardless of whether it is from natural light like the sun, artifical light such as torches, or a combination thereof) and then reduce it by one step.
Why is everyone over-complicating this simple, simple spell?
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Determine the light level of the area (regardless of whether it is from natural light like the sun, artifical light such as torches, or a combination thereof) and then reduce it by one step.
So if you have a 20' room. Normally, there is no light in the room (it's underground). You put some torches or whatever in there until it's normally lit. Now cast Darkness.
You say the lighting is now Dim light. But since the non-magical torches do not increase the light level in the area of darkness, where is the light coming from?
The reason people are 'over-complicating' it is there's no implication in the spell of when the non-magical lights are brought into the spell vs being in place when the spell is cast or when the target of the spell is brought into range. It makes more sense, to some of us, that Darkness reduces the regular illumination level of the area by one step, excluding non-magical sources of light and lower-level magical light.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just trying to explain why there is debate about it.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
Which is why I keep telling you all to hit the FAQ button already, so we can stop going round and round and round with the same argument, retold in a thousand different ways, with no additional information ever brought in. Until we get an official response, we are going to get absolutely no where. We've literally been arguing over the same thing for 24 hours without a single iota of new info. Are we all just arguing for the sake of arguing or do we actually want this debate resolved? HIT THE FAQ BUTTON!