RAW, the only way an illusion spell can create light is using shadow evocation to replicate a light or daylight spell. (i'm sure you see the irony.)
but what if you were to use silent image to create the illusion of a burning torch? would that give off light? likewise, could you simply create the illusion of a shaft of sunlight striking your position to deter a vampire or the like, and if you did (and there were no other sources of light in the area) would you be able to see?
Interesting question. Is an illusion like a hologram or is it all in the mind? If the former, yes it can and will cast light. If the latter, no, it will only appear to cast light, and what it casts light on will likewise be an illusion.
a figment is a 'real' illusion, while one of the other discriptors (can't remember which) is all in the mind.
so if you think there's a torch burning and giving off light, but it's all in your mind, can you see by that imaginary light?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When you make the illusion of a torch, you also make the area around it look lit up, but things won't work well, I don't think.
Or something. It's a confusing area. Figments, such as Silent Image, cannot make something appear what it is not. Glamers can. Here are examples of what figments can do.
Phantasms are in your mind.
|
RAW, the only way an illusion spell can create light is using shadow evocation to replicate a light or daylight spell. (i'm sure you see the irony.)
but what if you were to use silent image to create the illusion of a burning torch? would that give off light? likewise, could you simply create the illusion of a shaft of sunlight striking your position to deter a vampire or the like, and if you did (and there were no other sources of light in the area) would you be able to see?
An illusory torch doesn't give off real light. The caster can create the illusion of light and the illusion of what the light reveals, if the latter fits into his area of effect. If the caster doesn't know what's there, he has to make it up. The image is not real sight to the thing depicted (for example, for the purpose of targeting spells) even if it happens to look the same as the real thing.
An illusory torch doesn't give off real light. The caster can create the illusion of light and the illusion of what the light reveals, if the latter fits into his area of effect. If the caster doesn't know what's there, he has to make it up. The image is not real sight to the thing depicted (for example, for the purpose of targeting spells) even if it happens to look the same as the real thing.
so does that mean that an illusion of a lighted area cannot be seen unless there's a light source to reveal the presence of the illusionary light? in other words, because the illusionary light does not provide illunimation it requires actual illumination in order for the illusion's 'light'to be seen?
|
|
That's an interesting point and ties in directly to something I wrote about color spray (a pattern) some time ago, which another poster has brought up. Let's see about figments:
A figment spell creates a false sensation. Those who perceive the figment perceive the same thing, not their own slightly different versions of the figment ..
Because figments and glamers are unreal, they cannot produce real effects .. Figments and glamers cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements.
I'm still convinced it's a logical extension of the latter part to exclude providing light by which to see real objects. However, if a figment creates a false sensation, there is probably no reason that it can't create the false sensation that a viewer sees the image, regardless of darkness. I had better revisit my remarks about color spray too.
Where does it say that illusions cannot creat lgiht? I've never seen anything of the sort within the rules.
Where does it say that illusions cannot creat lgiht? I've never seen anything of the sort within the rules.
i don't think it specifies that they cannot, but nor does it specifically say that it can. of course all the spells that create light (and have the light discriptor) are Evocation, so no help there. i believe there are some pattern spells that specify they give off light, but it's not mentioned in silent image or its derivatives (which, rightly or wrongly, are the first thing that comes to my mind when i think of illusions.)
a figment is a 'real' illusion, while one of the other discriptors (can't remember which) is all in the mind.
so if you think there's a torch burning and giving off light, but it's all in your mind, can you see by that imaginary light?
I suppose it can illuminate what you think is there.
Where does it say that illusions cannot creat lgiht? I've never seen anything of the sort within the rules.Figments and glamers cannot produce real effects.
If you're using a figment, I don't see why it couldn't have a very real illuminating effect.
I'd give a hard no on this one. If it could create light then what's the purpose of 'Light' spells? On top of that it's a low level illusion spell. The low level spells seem to be more about tricking you into seeing something that isn't real instead of directly screwing with your mind. You can't see in darkness so you can't see the illusion of light. It's got a very catch 22 feel. On top of that it starts an odd power creep with spells when you start trying to get the max mileage out of them. Keep it simple. Especially so since it's a low level spell.
I'd give a hard no on this one. If it could create light then what's the purpose of 'Light' spells? On top of that it's a low level illusion spell. The low level spells seem to be more about tricking you into seeing something that isn't real instead of directly screwing with your mind. You can't see in darkness so you can't see the illusion of light. It's got a very catch 22 feel. On top of that it starts an odd power creep with spells when you start trying to get the max mileage out of them. Keep it simple. Especially so since it's a low level spell.
5th level (persistant image, the first spell in the chain without concentration in the duration) is low level?
i'm not really seeing power creep here, as illusions (unlike true light spells) cannot be moved once cast, generally require concentration, and effects 10-foot cubes rather than a radius (light generates normal light in an area of up to 4/3 pi r cubed, or 33510 cubic feet {please confirm math} which will take a level 28 caster to match with silent image. {each 10*10*10 cube generates a thousand cubic feet, and the spell generates 4+1 per cl})
5th level (persistant image, the first spell in the chain without concentration in the duration) is low level?
In your first post you listed Silent Image -- a first level spell. Now you're listing a 5th level spell. Little bit of a difference there.
Now, as for Persistent Image, that's a whole different animal. It's the same level as oh, I don't know, Shadow Evocation. Shadow Evocation can, as you stated, replicate the spell Light. I'd be much more willing to give a bit of leeway on Persistent Image if only because of this reason.
Edit: Oh, and what I mean about power creep is trying to get spells to do as much as possible even if it seems out of their category. Hell, look at Prestidigitation. If I remember right it specifically says you can't start fires with it, but in almost every player made list of things you can do with it one of them is always, "Start a fire".
5th level (persistant image, the first spell in the chain without concentration in the duration) is low level?
In your first post you listed Silent Image -- a first level spell. Now you're listing a 5th level spell. Little bit of a difference there.
Now, as for Persistent Image, that's a whole different animal. It's the same level as oh, I don't know, Shadow Evocation. Shadow Evocation can, as you stated, replicate the spell Light. I'd be much more willing to give a bit of leeway on Persistent Image if only because of this reason.
as far as visual effects are concerned, there is no difference between silent image and persistant spell.
as far as visual effects are concerned, there is no difference between silent image and persistant spell.
Just listing a thematic difference. It seems that a 1st level spell shouldn't be capable of things a 5th level spell is even if they share a quality.
as far as visual effects are concerned, there is no difference between silent image and persistant spell.Just listing a thematic difference. It seems that a 1st level spell shouldn't be capable of things a 5th level spell is even if they share a quality.
the real kicker is duration. if daylight was duration: concentration and couldn't be put onto an object and carried around (to say nothing of having a smaller area) then making it a first level spell would hardly be unbalancing.