|
The 3.5 rules on interactions between light and darkness spells interacting was a mess! It relied on parts of the rules being in a spell description and other parts of the rules being in other spell descriptions.
PF improved it, but this thread shows that there is still a way to go.
The houserule I use simplifies things enormously. First, counterspelling and dispelling work normally (including light/dark spells being useable to counter/dispel dark/light spells).
I'm talking about what happens when the areas of darkness and light spells overlap. Simply, if the spells are of different levels (heightened works here) then the higher level spell works normally and lower level spells don't change the illumination levels in the intersecting area, no matter how many spells are overlapping; spells aren't aware of other spells unless it says they are!
If the spells are of the same level then neither changes the illumination in the intersecting area. Both spells still exist in that area, and if a third (lower level) spell exists or is brought into the area it won't change the level of illumination because the higher level spell still stops it from doing so, even when it is not changing the level because of it's equal level rival.
Does that make sense? This applies to all spells with the light or darkness descriptor.
sorry, missed the part about the 10' radius on the Daylight.still wondering:
how is this effected by Low-Light vision, which would see the daylight spell as effecting of twice the radius? Would Elves and Humans see it differently?
Nope, low-light and daylight spell don't really interact. The daylight spell just raises light in a specific area, it doesn't radiate light. Low-light allows you to double the radiated area of a light source. Because daylight is an area effect, and not a radius emination, it doesn't have a radius to double.
The only effect you'd get is that any light sources in the daylight spell area would still double radius illuminated for the low-light person, right up tot he edge of the daylight (where it ran into the darkness spells again).
Example, if you had a 60ft radius daylight spell centered on a torch, in a cave that was under a permanent deeper darkness effect, then an elf carrying the torch could see 40 ft out (since that's still inside the radius of the daylight spell, which is canceling deeper darkness). A human would only see 20 ft.
|
|
Wow! So wrong!
Daylight doesn't have an are of effect. It's range is touch and the target is object touched.
You touch an object when you cast this spell, causing the object to shed bright light in a 60-foot radius. This illumination increases the light level for an additional 60 feet by one step (darkness becomes dim light, dim light becomes normal light, and normal light becomes bright light).
So Low-Light vision works fine, and then Daylight gives you 120-feet radius bright light and increases the light level by one step for an additional 120-feet.
Wow! So wrong!
Daylight doesn't have an are of effect. It's range is touch and the target is object touched.
You touch an object when you cast this spell, causing the object to shed bright light in a 60-foot radius. This illumination increases the light level for an additional 60 feet by one step (darkness becomes dim light, dim light becomes normal light, and normal light becomes bright light).So Low-Light vision works fine, and then Daylight gives you 120-feet radius bright light and increases the light level by one step for an additional 120-feet.
You need to quote the entire spell, since we are talking about the interaction between Daylight and Deeper Darkness, not what the spell does under normal circumstances. If you cast it at night with no deeper darkness spells around, then yes, you are correct, Low-Light Vision doubles it's effect to 120ft.
Daylight brought into an area of magical darkness (or vice versa) is temporarily negated, so that the
Note the words 'AREA OF EFFECT', for purposes of how they interact when being negated, the spell does indeed have an area of effect, the 60 ft it normally radiates, and you having low-light does NOT extend how far the spell's area of effect is when it interacts with deeper darkness or other darkness spells.
|
|
The Daylight spell does not have an area af effect. The range is touch and the target is object touched.
Now, the effect of the spell is that the touched object radiates bright light in a certain radius and increases the light levels in the same radius again (60'/120')
This 'radiation' is exactly how all the light sources work in chapter 7!
Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius. Double the effective radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
The 60-feet radius is not the area of effect of the spell, it is the area illuminated by the object touched; that object is the target of the spell.
Darkness/Deeper Darkness also target an object and that object radiates darkness!
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.
So the 'overlapping areas of effect' is referring to the areas of light and darkness radiating from the touched objects. They are not the areas of effect of the respective spells!
Malachi Silverclaw,
Your interpretation doesn't work due to the following issue.
Daylight spell cast on Wizard's robe. Wizard is human. Wizard emits 60ft radius light. Wizard's Ranger friend, who is an elf, can see 120ft.
Both approach an area of Deeper Darkness spell. 5 ft into the Deeper Darkness spell is a normal torch. The normal torch does not radiate any light at all due to being effected by the deeper darkness spell. By your interpretation, the torch would suddenly start working when the Ranger is 115 feet from it, because the daylight spell works twice as well for him as it does for the human Wizard who cast it, because he has low-light.
When it comes to the spells interaction, they DO have an area of effect. That area of effect is NOT affected by low-light vision, it's the area of effect the spell radiates out to normally. Any other interpretation leads to the spells working differently based on the racial abilities of the people who are in the area, not the spells themselves.
|
|
Malachi Silverclaw,
Your interpretation doesn't work due to the following issue.Daylight spell cast on Wizard's robe. Wizard is human. Wizard emits 60ft radius light. Wizard's Ranger friend, who is an elf, can see 120ft.
Both approach an area of Deeper Darkness spell. 5 ft into the Deeper Darkness spell is a normal torch. The normal torch does not radiate any light at all due to being effected by the deeper darkness spell. By your interpretation, the torch would suddenly start working when the Ranger is 115 feet from it, because the daylight spell works twice as well for him as it does for the human Wizard who cast it, because he has low-light.
When it comes to the spells interaction, they DO have an area of effect. That area of effect is NOT affected by low-light vision, it's the area of effect the spell radiates out to normally. Any other interpretation leads to the spells working differently based on the racial abilities of the people who are in the area, not the spells themselves.
No. The areas of radiation interact by neither changing the level of illumination in the intersecting area.
Any other effect of either spell, such as not allowing non-magical light sources to work, remain unaffected by the overlapping areas of radiation.
In your example, when the creature with low-light vision is 115-feet away, the non-magical torch is still within the area of the darkness being radiated by that object and is still subject to that clause of the Darkness spell, so remains unable to increase the illumination.
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.Daylight counters or dispels any darkness spell of equal or lower level, such as darkness.
You are wrong. They counter each other, and thus, the effects of the darkness (which negates natural light sources) is canceled, and the torch (the otherwise prevailing light source) is allowed to shed light only when the area of effect of the daylight spell overlaps with the deeper darkness.
By your interpretation, either the torch works different based on who observes it, or else no non-magical non-area light source works ever.
The second interpretation means that Deeper Darkness effectively negates all light in an underground area, since there is no prevailing light condition other than darkness in the area, even if a Daylight spell is cast. The torch would not work if you cast Daylight on it, so the elf and the human would see the area of deeper darkness as a giant black nothing they couldn't see into, even when stepping into it with torches and the daylight spell.
So, basically, your interpretation means daylight is either useless, or it has some quantum effect where it works differently based on who is observing.
My interpretation of the words of the spell make it work such that it works the same regardless of the observer's special abilities, and daylight and deeper darkness actually cancel each other out and anything in the overlapping area works normally.
Which of the two interpretations do you think is the one that should be used, all things being equal?
|
|
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.Daylight counters or dispels any darkness spell of equal or lower level, such as darkness.
You are wrong. They counter each other, and thus, the effects of the darkness (which negates natural light sources) is canceled, and the torch (the otherwise prevailing light source) is allowed to shed light only when the area of effect of the daylight spell overlaps with the deeper darkness.
By your interpretation, either the torch works different based on who observes it, or else no non-magical non-area light source works ever.
The second interpretation means that Deeper Darkness effectively negates all light in an underground area, since there is no prevailing light condition other than darkness in the area, even if a Daylight spell is cast. The torch would not work if you cast Daylight on it, so the elf and the human would see the area of deeper darkness as a giant black nothing they couldn't see into, even when stepping into it with torches and the daylight spell.
So, basically, your interpretation means daylight is either useless, or it has some quantum effect where it works differently based on who is observing.
My interpretation of the words of the spell make it work such that it works the same regardless of the observer's special abilities, and daylight and deeper darkness actually cancel each other out and anything in the overlapping area works normally.
Which of the two interpretations do you think is the one that should be used, all things being equal?
Neither interpretation you've just given is mine; they are both yours! And both are wrong!
Darkness and Daylight can be used to counterspell each other, when usually you need to cast the same spell. That's the long way of saying 'daylight counters darkness'.
Daylight can also be used to dispel Darkness and vice versa, like casting a targeted Dispel Magic that always works. That what it means by 'daylight dispels any darkness spell of equal or lower level'.
Those are both different from moving two objects closer so that their areas of radiation overlap. In the case of 'counter', the spell is used with the counterspell action, it is never cast on an object. In the case of 'dispel', the spell is cast at the same object that is radiating.
In the case of 'overlapping areas of radiation', if the same level the spells are 'temporarily negated', in terms of their ability to change light levels; the ability of Darkness to prevent non-magical light sources working is not affected by the presence of Daylight.
In the example of two 3rd level spells, one Deeper Darkness and one Daylight, both radiating in an overlapping area which includes a lit non-magical torch, in an area with no natural illumination (such as underground), then neither spell changes the light level and the torch is ineffective, leaving the overlapping area naturally dark.
The best bet is to cast a 4th level or higher light spell, or simply move the torch further than 60-feet from the object radiating darkness.
If you want to critique my actual position, rather than a nonsensical one you made up and attributed to me, go right ahead.
Did I mention the Shadow Grasp? Anyone approaching me needs to make a save or be entangled.
Wouldn't that mean you'd be constantly entangled as well?
I'm necro-ing this thread because we're about to fight this very battle in this Saturday's game. (Fighting a Shadow demon and a bunch of mooks with darkvision in a cave, when only one PC has darkvision, so it's going to be ugly.)
Here is my interpretation of the discussion so far, and how darkness/light "should" be interpreted. Feel free to re-open the discussion, as getting this to a playable state is important for this Saturday's game.
- Since all the spells involved have a range of touch, the idea of counterspelling or dispelling is moot here. So I'm restricting the conversation to "What happens when areas of effect overlap?"
- Unfortunately, I tend to agree with Malachi here:
(1) Overlapping Daylight and Deeper Darkness spells cancel each other's lighting effects out, so the "prevailing" condition applies. In a cave, this would be darkness. At night outside, it would be low light. In the daytime outside, it would be daylight.
(2) I agree with Malachi's interpretation that this "cancellation" does not affect the spells' secondary effects: No Darkness of less than 3rd level has any effect, nor does any Light spell or light source.
So it's a very quick stalemate: One side casts Deeper Darkness, one side casts Daylight, and barring any dispelling or metamagic feats, you're done.
I don't like it, because it hoses our party, but the alternative is:
ROUND 1:
"I cast Daylight to light the cave!"
"Ha! I cast Deeper Darkness! Stalemate!"
ROUND 2:
"Since your Deeper Darkness is cancelled and you can't stack it, I cast Light! Take that, you fiend!"
"Ha! Fortunately, I have Darkness! Wonderful darkness again!"
ROUND 3:
"Well, all the available lighting spells have been cast, can't stack, and don't affect lower-level stuff because they're canceling each other out. I light a torch. What are you going to do now?"
"%&%&$*$"
That was my original interpretation too, until I saw just how many creatures have at-will Deeper Darkness in certain APs. It kind of cheeses any campaign that features such creatures by forcing players to stick to races that have darkvision.
So either:
(a) You allow the second Deeper Darkness to take effect and tell the PCs that next time they should choose races with darkvision, or
(b) You don't allow stacking of the same spells and you end up in the situation I listed above, where the torch becomes the ultimate weapon against the darkness because there's no mundane counterpart that sheds darkness.
As a GM, I dislike either of these choices as too restrictive on the players.
EDIT: In fact, *EVERY* AP I've run or played in has included a creature with at-will Deeper Darkness in a large unlit area, usually as a guardian. A sensible guardian would just keep a large area in supernatural darkness, feeding out to a massive ambush in regular darkness. Which is... gee.. exactly the situation our party's facing on Saturday. So our tactics heavily depend on which "interpretation" of the rules we use, and I'd prefer to find out, "What do they do in PFS?", because that's usually the most playtested one.
Perhaps THIS would be of use to you?
I vastly appreciate it, but it:
(a) Reinforces Tels' and N N 959's statements(b) Doesn't explain whether or not the at-will Deeper Darkness critter can just cast it a second time and kill off your Daylight spell.
EDIT: And well-said, N N 959! Our -entire- issue is that MANY creatures you encounter in APs have at-will Darkness or Deeper Darkness. I've never seen a PC with such a powerful at-will ability.
Which returns us to the, "You didn't choose a race with darkvision? Well, then, you're a moron!" approach to gaming. For some reason, I don't care for this approach...
EDIT 2: And honestly, we're resolving the issue at our table by -forcing- one of the wizards to take Communal Darkvision to end the debate. Yeah. That's going over well...
@ N N 959: I can tell that you think I got something wrong, but I can't tell what you think I got wrong. Can you reference something I wrote, and say "This is wrong because [rule/FAQ]"? Then I might be able to reply meaningfully.
I do not believe you got anything "wrong". I believe you failed to address the, "Monster casts at-will Deeper Darkness. PC casts Daylight. Monster casts second at-will Deeper Darkness. What happens?" question.
Ruling 1: Because Deeper Darkness doesn't stack, nothing.
Ruling 2: Because the first Deeper Darkness and Daylight are cancelling each other out, you're back in deeper darkness. Tough luck, bub.
EDIT: As I've tried to indicate, I'm open to either interpretation of the initial conditions (once Deeper Darkness and Daylight are cancelling, no lower levels of light or darkness sources are doing anything, or once they're cancelling, lower-level sources work just fine), and I think there are good arguments for both in RAW.
The problem comes when you have an at-will darkness creature spamming Darkness or Deeper Darkness and turning a whole adventure into a game of, "Who has Darkvision and who's sitting out this session?"
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
EDIT: Ninja'd.
Perhaps THIS would be of use to you?I vastly appreciate it, but it:
(a) Reinforces Tels' and N N 959's statements
If you're going to reference "so-and-so's statements" from two years ago, you might want to quote or link the statements you mean if you want me to know what the heck you're talking about. ;)
(b) Doesn't explain whether or not the at-will Deeper Darkness critter can just cast it a second time and kill off your Daylight spell.
I'm not sure where the issue is. Maybe because I don't know what you mean by "kill off"?
If you mean dispel, then yes, he could use a fresh casting of DD to dispel daylight; however, DD has a range of "touch", so he might have difficulty accomplishing this.If you're referring to the "magical light sources only increase the light level in the area if they're of a higher spell level", that's irrelevant because daylight never sheds light within the area of a magical darkness effect, due to its special mutual-negation effect.
If you're asking whether a second DD in the same area would drop the light level while daylight #1 is mutually-negating DD #1, then you're talking about a situation where you have an area of magical darkness within the area of a daylight spell, and daylight tells us that this results in the magical darkness effect being negated.
What's still unclear?
EDIT 2: And honestly, we're resolving the issue at our table by -forcing- one of the wizards to take Communal Darkvision to end the debate. Yeah. That's going over well...
A potion of darkvision costs 300gp and lasts 3 hours. Just sayin'.
If you're asking whether a second DD in the same area would drop the light level while daylight #1 is mutually-negating DD #1, then you're talking about a situation where you have an area of magical darkness within the area of a daylight spell, and daylight tells us that this results in the magical darkness effect being negated.
This.
A potion of darkvision costs 300gp and lasts 3 hours. Just sayin'.EDIT 2: And honestly, we're resolving the issue at our table by -forcing- one of the wizards to take Communal Darkvision to end the debate. Yeah. That's going over well...
The usual "uninhabited island with caves" scenario. Can't buy any gear to deal with the situation we found...
And just to continue being argumentative, because I respect your opinions, Jiggy:
- We have a Daylight in an area. from your link:
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.
Anyway, the important part of daylight as an answer to darkness effects is that in the overlapping area, it's not shedding its usual bright light; it's doing its special mutual-negation thing. So if you want that area to be anything other than the natural ambient light, you're going to need additional light sources.
My problem right here is that it makes Daylight TOO powerful. It has cancelled itself with *all* sources of magical darkness, whether multiple Deeper Darknesses (explicitly forbidden by RAW) or by a Deeper Darkness and a Darkness.
So now your torch or your Light spell wins, because Daylight has cancelled everything.That's why I like the "only the highest-level light and darkness effects affect the area". It's *very* simple. But I figure after seeing two excellent threads and a FAQ on light-vs-darkness, I would have expected at least a formal PFS statement on how it worked, if not a FAQ.
And I'm still not seeing a definitive rules statement about multiple lights and darknesses. Even in your original post in the other thread, you say,
Note: Some GMs believe that only the "reduce X steps" portion of a darkness effect is negated in this area, meaning your other light sources are still suppressed. If so, combo your daylight with some source of darkvision. Additionally, there's some dispute as to whether the negation of one darkness effect will allow a second one to function within that same area; ask your GM about that as well.
So it just seems neither RAW nor FAQ nor PFS have addressed "at-will light battles in a cave" yet.
We can house rule anything we want. But with so much confusion, seems like someone would have run into it and made a formal statement already.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
From my perspective, and maybe I missed some key rule, there is no clear indication of what happens when a sorc continual flame and Darkness spell overlap.
Here's the "key rule" you missed for that particular question:
Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness.
So barring a specific effect stating otherwise, simply compare the magical light source's spell level to that of darkness. A sorcerer's continual flame is 2nd level. This is not "of a higher spell level than darkness", and therefore does not meet the listed criteria necessary for it to successfully increase the light level.
Therefore, a sorcerer's continual flame sheds no light within the area of a darkness spell. Granted, much of darkness' text is clumped in a single, thick paragraph, so it's easy to overlook what could perhaps have been better served as a bullet point.
You point out that only Daylight talks about cancellation, but that doesn't preclude the other spells from working the same way.
The general rules don't need to say "also, light spells don't all do that thing that daylight specifically says it does" in order for that to be the case. One item within a category having an ability does not make it valid to believe that maybe everything in that category has that ability. That would be like saying we need a rule stating that half-human races don't gain a bonus feat. That would be absurd; all we need is for there to not be anything saying they do.
The best argument I have against some of what you propose is that it's just too complex for what's at stake. In the absence of a Designer saying, "Yeah, that's exactly how convoluted we wanted it to be," I'm of the opinion they haven't figured out how they want it to work. And if you've understood exactly what Paizo wants, that's a problem because it's detrimental to making this game fun to play, imo.
Whether they're happy with the current rules or not has no bearing on whether or not those are, in fact, the current rules. I would love it if changes were made to simplify things, but currently there are rules/FAQs already in place defining how things work (in almost all cases; I noted the undefined elements in my guide). Undesirability is not the same as ambiguity.
Scenario: Deeper Darkness has been cast upon two different stones. Daylight has been cast upon a third stone. The three stones are all located in the same 5 foot space and none of them are covered up.A) Deeper Darkness prevails.
B) Ambient lighting conditions prevail.
C) None of the above (state reason).Im curious what people answer with.
- Gauss
Ambient lighting conditions prevail.
Casting additional Daylight/Deeper Darkness spells has no affect.
And a post I can 100% agree with! :P
Ninja'ed -- Jiggy, your response to N N 959 answers my previous question. The Darkness is cancelled, but prevents Light or torches from working.
I like that solution...
So, taking it to my personal battle this weekend:
- Oracle casts Daylight, shadow demon casts Deeper Darkness. Boom! We're in prevailing conditions (darkness).
- Oracle casts Light. Shadow demon does not have Darkness, and can't re-cast Deeper Darkness so Light wins.
- Mook casts Darkness to save shadow demon. It is now dark, and the oracle can't do anything about it (save Dispel Magic or some such).
Does this meet with your impressions, Jiggy?
|
I've pretty much just skimmed the discussion so I imagine there might be some finer points that someone has mentioned that I've overlooked. That being said, I haven't seen anyone actually quote the entirety of the spells in question:
This spell causes an object to radiate darkness out to a 20-foot radius. 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. This spell has no effect in an area that is already dark. Creatures with light vulnerability or sensitivity take no penalties in normal light. All creatures gain concealment (20% miss chance) in dim light. All creatures gain total concealment (50% miss chance) in darkness. Creatures with darkvision can see in an area of dim light or darkness without penalty. 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.
If darkness is cast on a small object that is then placed inside or under a lightproof covering, the spell's effect is blocked until the covering is removed.
This spell does not stack with itself. Darkness can be used to counter or dispel any light spell of equal or lower spell level.
This spell functions as darkness, except that objects radiate darkness in a 60-foot radius and the light level is lowered by two steps. Bright light becomes dim light and normal light becomes darkness. Areas of dim light and darkness become supernaturally dark. This functions like darkness, but even creatures with darkvision cannot see within the spell's confines.
This spell does not stack with itself. Deeper darkness can be used to counter or dispel any light spell of equal or lower spell level.
You touch an object when you cast this spell, causing the object to shed bright light in a 60-foot radius. This illumination increases the light level for an additional 60 feet by one step (darkness becomes dim light, dim light becomes normal light, and normal light becomes bright light). Creatures that take penalties in bright light take them while within the 60-foot radius of this magical light. Despite its name, this spell is not the equivalent of daylight for the purposes of creatures that are damaged or destroyed by such light.
If daylight is cast on a small object that is then placed inside or under a light-proof covering, the spell's effects are blocked until the covering is removed.
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.
Daylight counters or dispels any darkness spell of equal or lower level, such as darkness.
Since the OP asked for our opinions, I shall give mine:
1) Deeper Darkness specifically states that it doesn't stack with itself. So with that in mind, the number of Deeper Darkness spells is irrelevant.
2) Daylight specifically states that Daylight brought into any magical darkness, or any magical darkness brought into Daylight, is negated.
3) Darkness does not say that nonmagical light sources do not function, Darkness says that nonmagical light sources do not raise the light level in the area of Darkness.
All that having been established, I would rule that while within the overlap area of the Daylight/Deeper Darkness spells, ambient light conditions exist. If the radius of a nonmagical light source exists within that overlap area, the ambient light level is affected as per the specific nonmagical light source.
Of course, this opinion is made while sitting in front of my computer with time to think about it. I reserve the right to have a different ruling when made in the 'heat of the moment' because I completely forgot about what I wrote here.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Ninja'ed -- Jiggy, your response to N N 959 answers my previous question. The Darkness is cancelled, but prevents Light or torches from working.
I like that solution...
So, taking it to my personal battle this weekend:
- Oracle casts Daylight, shadow demon casts Deeper Darkness. Boom! We're in prevailing conditions (darkness).
- Oracle casts Light. Shadow demon does not have Darkness, and can't re-cast Deeper Darkness so Light wins.
- Mook casts Darkness to save shadow demon. It is now dark, and the oracle can't do anything about it (save Dispel Magic or some such).Does this meet with your impressions, Jiggy?
You keep mentioning things like "can't do a second deeper darkness, but can add darkness". But since DD says it functions as darkness, and darkness can't stack with darkness, it would be my interpretation that DD can't stack with darkness.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Whether dropping a second Deeper Darkness (or a Darkness) onto an area where Dayling and Deeper Darkness are already temporarily negating each other is a separate question.
One which is juuuuust unclear enough to be a "GM's call" area. I think the suppression of weak light sources is part of what gets negated by daylight, and I think that's the stronger of the two interpretations, but it's not 100% ironclad.
|
|
I don't follow the logic. Normally the ambient light conditions are what the light would be without people bringing in light sources. Mostly ambient light will be sun/moon/starlight, not torches. Torches don't change the ambient light conditions.
So what do you mean when you say that non magical light sources do not raise the light level in the area of Darkness, but the ambient light level is affected as per the specific nonmagical light source?Example: In an area of ambient dim light (outside under the stars) someone brings a torch into the area of a Darkness Spell. What is the resulting light level?
I would say "Dark". The ambient Dim reduced by one level. The torch, being non-magical does not raise that light level.
- The ambient light level of a cave is 'darkness'.
- A torch increases the light level to 'normal' out to 20' and 'dim' out to 40'.
- Deeper darkness is in effect within the cave.
- Because the torch may not increase the light level, the light level in the cave becomes 'supernatural darkness' ('darkness' to 'supernatural darkness').
- The torch doesn't cease to function. It is still emanating light out to it's respective radii, but because it is within the confines of deeper darkness, it is not allowed to raise the light level.
- Daylight is brought into the cave.
- In those areas in which the radius of deeper darkness overlaps with daylight, the effects of those spells are negated.
- Within the negated area, the light level returns to the ambient light level, which is 'darkness'.
- If the negated area falls within the radii of the torch, the light level is raised to either 'normal' or 'dim', as specified by the limits of the applicable radii.
EDIT
Whether dropping a second Deeper Darkness (or a Darkness) onto an area where Dayling and Deeper Darkness are already temporarily negating each other is a separate question.One which is juuuuust unclear enough to be a "GM's call" area. I think the suppression of weak light sources is part of what gets negated by daylight, and I think that's the stronger of the two interpretations, but it's not 100% ironclad.
Unfortunately, that's my original question, even if it isn't the OP's. I'll consult with our group of GMs and come to a consensus among ourselves.
We were just hoping for a "PFS official" ruling or some such so we don't have to justify ourselves to our players.EDIT: In case you care, here's what I sent to my fellow GMs:
|
|
EDIT: In case you care, here's what I sent to my fellow GMs:
My general rebuttal would be something to the effect of: if nonmagical light sources still don't work because they are "within the 60' radius" of deeper darkness, then darkvision probably shouldn't work for the same reason.
Generally speaking, my personal opinion is that deeper darkness' radius doesn't exist in an area that overlaps with daylight.
My general rebuttal would be something to the effect of: if nonmagical light sources still don't work because they are "within the 60' radius" of deeper darkness, then darkvision probably shouldn't work for the same reason.
Generally speaking, my personal opinion is that deeper darkness' radius doesn't exist in an area that overlaps with daylight.
In the first case, since Daylight and Deeper Darkness are negating each other, you're in "prevalent lighting conditions"; i.e. darkness. I don't see the argument as to why darkvision doesn't work. It's not raising the light level; it's seeing in the dark.
In the second case, that's the core of the debate, and we can either adjudicate a whole bunch of Venn diagrams and seeing which lights and darknesses are stacking or not stacking, or we can say, "It's ambient light. Done."
Call me lazy, but I prefer the latter...
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whether dropping a second Deeper Darkness (or a Darkness) onto an area where Dayling and Deeper Darkness are already temporarily negating each other is a separate question.One which is juuuuust unclear enough to be a "GM's call" area. I think the suppression of weak light sources is part of what gets negated by daylight, and I think that's the stronger of the two interpretations, but it's not 100% ironclad.Unfortunately, that's my original question, even if it isn't the OP's. I'll consult with our group of GMs and come to a consensus among ourselves.
We were just hoping for a "PFS official" ruling or some such so we don't have to justify ourselves to our players.EDIT: In case you care, here's what I sent to my fellow GMs:
For what it's worth, here's my thought process on this specific issue:
Daylight doesn't say that the magical darkness effect "is negated, such that it no longer reduces the light level by a number of steps". It doesn't even say "is negated, such that the ambient light level exists in the overlapping area".
How it defines the negation is that "the otherwise prevailing light conditions" exist in the area of overlap. Not "ambient light", but the "otherwise prevailing" light conditions.
The FAQ defines "ambient light" as the light level from the sun, moon, stars, etc. But that's not what daylight returns us to.
It returns us to the "otherwise prevailing" light.
What's the "otherwise prevailing" light? What light would be prevailing otherwise? What light would be prevailing if the whole daylight/deeper darkness thing wasn't happening?
All your other light sources would be prevailing, that's what.
So as I read it, daylight says to go back to that.
Now, you've stated before that "daylight + light source = win" seems too strong, but think about it: aren't "solution" spells almost always more powerful than what they answer, even if they're a lower-level spell?
I mean, see invisibility/invisibility purge completely negate the higher-level greater invisibility even if the baddy has GI at will and keeps spamming it every round. That's by design, because that's all that SI/IP actually do. They're just answers. Until you encounter that obstacle (invisibility), they do nothing, just like how until you encounter magical darkness, daylight basically does nothing (or at least not much more than a cantrip).
It seems intentional that if you go to the trouble to carry a resource (such as a spell) whose sole purpose is to answer a certain challenge, then using it trumps that challenge. In this respect, daylight is actually *weaker* than most solution spells, both because you still need another light source and because it's not a lower spell level than the thing it answers.
But that's all just my thoughts. :)
|
|
In the first case, since Daylight and Deeper Darkness are negating each other, you're in "prevalent lighting conditions"; i.e. darkness. I don't see the argument as to why darkvision doesn't work. It's not raising the light level; it's seeing in the dark.
In the second case, that's the core of the debate, and we can either adjudicate a whole bunch of Venn diagrams and seeing which lights and darknesses are stacking or not stacking, or we can say, "It's ambient light. Done."
Call me lazy, but I prefer the latter...
I don't disagree, but the presence of ambient light doesn't mean that the torch still doesn't have an effect.
The bigger question is: if there were no magic spells mucking things up, would the torch increase the light level of the ambient light? If the answer is yes, then it should still be yes even if the ambient light is due to two spells negating each other.
EDIT: or as Jiggy said.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep. The other GMs are agreeing with you guys, and I think Jiggy really argued it well.
We're going with that one. I'll shut up now.
Thanks, as always, for your patience!
EDIT: And I also need to actually get some work done. Occasionally my boss wants me to turn stuff in. Slave driver!