|
| 8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So a fellow player and I have had a big argument about deeper darkness. Now our scenario is a simple room only lit by mundane normal lighting. Torches, candles, campfire take your pick. Now player X believes if deeper darkness is cast within this room the lighting of the room will only drop to darkness level and his dark vision still works. But the line in the deeper darkness spell "anything below dim light is supernatural darkness" would make the light level per the deeper darkness spell drop two levels and become darkness and there for supernatural darkness and his dark vision would not work.
Confirm this for me please.
Imagine if all mundane (and magical) sources of light didn't exist. That is the ambient light for the situation. In this case of the "simple room" you didn't mention what the ambient light level was. If it's a room in a cottage with a window to the outside in the middle of the day, ambient might be normal light. In this case, deeper darkness would cause the ambient light within its area to drop two steps to normal darkness and darkvision continues to work.
If the room was in a dungeon with solid walls, the ambient light is darkness. In this case, deeper darkness drops the ambient light conditions within its area by two steps to supernatural darkness (and beyond!).
The mundane lighting doesn't matter for determining the effective light level within the area of darkness/deeper darkness. As per the spell:
Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness.
The mistake that the player might be making is taking the normal light being emitted by the torches and making that to be the ambient light level, then resolving deeper darkness from that. Again, the ambient light level is what the room's light level would be if those torches didn't exist.
Your friend is correct. Torches provide normal lighting which is lowered two steps to darkness, not supernatural darkness. However, this is only true fo the first 20 ft. around the torch. The next 20 ft. the torch provides dim light and that gets lowered to supernatural darkness.
You misquoted the spell, which explains your confusion. The spell doesn't say "anything below dim light is supernatural darkness", it says "Bright light becomes dim light and normal light becomes darkness. Areas of dim light and darkness become supernaturally dark." You should read that as "areas that START OUT as dim light or darkness TURN INTO supernatural darkness." You shouldn't read it as "After lowering the light level by two steps, all areas that are now dim light or lower become supernaturally dark." I do see how you could make that mistake, though.
The mundane lighting doesn't matter for determining the effective light level within the area of darkness/deeper darkness. As per the spell:
Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness.The mistake that the player might be making is taking the normal light being emitted by the torches and making that to be the ambient light level, then resolving deeper darkness from that. Again, the ambient light level is what the room's light level would be if those torches didn't exist.
Ah, yeah, I forgot about that. So it seems you were right after all, but for the wrong reason. ;)
As an aside, couldn't you argue that the sun is also a nonmagical source of light, so the ambient light level of every place that doesn't have magical lighting is darkness?
As an aside, couldn't you argue that the sun is also a nonmagical source of light, so the ambient light level of every place that doesn't have magical lighting is darkness?You have discovered why, RAW, the darkness rules are broken. :-)
Hehe. So how do we fix them? By treating the sun as a special case, and keeping - say - a sunrod to the RAW?
Okay, I thought I understood this until I read Ansel's post. You're saying that even though there are torches and candles spaced evenly in a room, that doesn't mean that the room has a "normal" ambient light level to begin with? Or after deeper darkness is cast it doesn't matter that there are torches, etc. lit in the room? Speak slowly and condescendingly, like you would if you were explaining it to a small child. ;)
Edit: Even more confused after reading thejeff's post.
|
|
Yea, the main thing he complains is the fact that his dark vision should work within the confines of spell, solely because of some preconceived notion that the torch should just drop it down into a darkness and misses the line in the spell where "darkvision does not work within the confines of the spell" clause. Ya I saw where he thinks that because grammatically the deeper darkness reads as where the dim light and below all become supernatural darkness reads like a clause that super cedes everything. And as far as ambient light goes, for the argument it is a windowless room so darkness as ambient light.
The Light spells start from the existing lighting conditions. They do not suppress equal or lower level Darkness spells in the same way Darkness spells suppress Light spells.
I'm afraid I don't quite follow. Both counter or dispel their opposite, no?
So:
Darkness + Light: -0 level from ambient
|
Yea, the main thing he complains is the fact that his dark vision should work within the confines of spell, solely because of some preconceived notion that the torch should just drop it down into a darkness and misses the line in the spell where "darkvision does not work within the confines of the spell" clause. Ya I saw where he thinks that because grammatically the deeper darkness reads as where the dim light and below all become supernatural darkness reads like a clause that super cedes everything. And as far as ambient light goes, for the argument it is a windowless room so darkness as ambient light.
except that sentence is taken out of context without the previous sentence
"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."
Meaning darvision doesn't work in supernatural darkness. It would still work in regular darkness if that was the end result of the spell. So the qustion lies in what lighting is and is not affected by the spell to determine the final light level.
|
|
Yea, the main thing he complains is the fact that his dark vision should work within the confines of spell, solely because of some preconceived notion that the torch should just drop it down into a darkness and misses the line in the spell where "darkvision does not work within the confines of the spell" clause. Ya I saw where he thinks that because grammatically the deeper darkness reads as where the dim light and below all become supernatural darkness reads like a clause that super cedes everything. And as far as ambient light goes, for the argument it is a windowless room so darkness as ambient light.except that sentence is taken out of context without the previous sentence
"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."
Meaning darvision doesn't work in supernatural darkness. It would still work in regular darkness if that was the end result of the spell. So the qustion lies in what lighting is and is not affected by the spell to determine the final light level.
The highlighted part seems to disagree, as read so long as you are within this dark space your darkvision is nullified.
Yea, the main thing he complains is the fact that his dark vision should work within the confines of spell, solely because of some preconceived notion that the torch should just drop it down into a darkness and misses the line in the spell where "darkvision does not work within the confines of the spell" clause. Ya I saw where he thinks that because grammatically the deeper darkness reads as where the dim light and below all become supernatural darkness reads like a clause that super cedes everything. And as far as ambient light goes, for the argument it is a windowless room so darkness as ambient light.
In a windowless room, the torch is irrelevant once you cast Deeper Darkness. Like Ansel said, the spell description clearly states that nonmagical light sources don't function in Deeper Darkness. So first they are canceled, returning the ambient light to darkness. Then Deeper Darkness kicks that to Darkness (0) -> Supernatural Darkness (-1) -> (Even Darker than) Supernatural Darkness (-2). His darkvision won't work.
In your OP, you didn't base your argument on the nullification of nonmagical light sources, but on the fact that the spell description says "anything below dim light is magical darkness." This leads me to believe you are arguing that in a field on a normal day (ambient light: normal), darkvision would not work in an area filled with Deeper Darkness. But it does.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think my brain just went into a field of deeper darkness.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Easiest way to fix it IMHO? Get rid of the 'normal lights are surpressed' bit.
Per the CRB 172, there are four levels of light. (Low to high) Darkness -> Dim -> Normal -> Bright. The deeper darkness spell adds 'Supernatural Darkness' as a 5th catagory.
If you allow normal light sources to work, then darkness will make the immediate radius of non-magical light dim, and the dim light darkness. deeper darkness will drop that to dark/supernatural darkness respectively.
Then we don't worry about if the big fusion reactor in the sky is magical or normal light (it's normal) humans/low light vision characters aren't completely hosed by a low level spell, and darkvision is still useful. We also won't have to worry about "I hold my torch 5' away from the darkness so it isn't supressed, so I can see into the darkness 15' away." and if that works.
The highlighted part seems to disagree, as read so long as you are within this dark space your darkvision is nullified.Yea, the main thing he complains is the fact that his dark vision should work within the confines of spell, solely because of some preconceived notion that the torch should just drop it down into a darkness and misses the line in the spell where "darkvision does not work within the confines of the spell" clause. Ya I saw where he thinks that because grammatically the deeper darkness reads as where the dim light and below all become supernatural darkness reads like a clause that super cedes everything. And as far as ambient light goes, for the argument it is a windowless room so darkness as ambient light.except that sentence is taken out of context without the previous sentence
"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."
Meaning darvision doesn't work in supernatural darkness. It would still work in regular darkness if that was the end result of the spell. So the qustion lies in what lighting is and is not affected by the spell to determine the final light level.
So indeed your take is that darkvision would not work in an area of Deeper Darkness with normal ambient lighting.
The point you are confused on (and it's an understandable mistake) is what "this" is referring to in the quote:
"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" should be read as "the areas that were previously dim light or darkness and have been reduced two steps by Deeper Darkness." "This" is not meant to include all areas of dim light and lower that result from casting Deeper Darkness." Otherwise even bright light would be turned into dim light by Deeper Darkness (which is correct) and nullify darkvision (which is incorrect).
Edit: thejeff got there faster. :)
ZordonAndAlpha, that's the exact way I've always interpreted (and played) it too. Which is why I got so confused by the early posts. I believe your way is not only playable, but what I would consider RAI. I mean the easiest way to use that spell is to look at the light level existing at the time of the spell being cast and drop it two steps. Anything that started as dim light or darkness is now supernatural and blocks darkvision, anything that was normal is now darkness, but darkvision still works, and anything that was bright, is now dim.
To me that seems like the easiest way to read that spell, and makes it a lot easier to play, otherwise you have to try and figure out what light is it canceling, and what light is it not canceling, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ZordonAndAlpha
Holy crap, that's a lot of text. I'm not going to copy-paste it and will read it all, then hopefully be able to give you a better reply (especially since there seems to be some $$ riding on the outcome).
As a first reaction, I think I can see why you two got into a big argument. You are arguing two completely different things.
You: "Nonmagical light that is in an area before the DD is cast, is NOT nullified. Therefore darkvision works in an area with torches."
He: "The spell says "(...) even creatures with darkvision cannot see within the spell's confines." So no matter what the ambient lighting or the source, the spell nullifies darkvision."
Is this correct?
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, I thought I understood this until I read Ansel's post. You're saying that even though there are torches and candles spaced evenly in a room, that doesn't mean that the room has a "normal" ambient light level to begin with? Or after deeper darkness is cast it doesn't matter that there are torches, etc. lit in the room? Speak slowly and condescendingly, like you would if you were explaining it to a small child. ;)
Edit: Even more confused after reading thejeff's post.
LOL! Understood.
First, let's just ignore overlapping light/daylight/darkness/deeper darkness spells. That gets... complicated (even to me and I'm constantly under the delusion that I fully understand light/dark rules in PF).
Ambient light is a term that's not explicitly defined in the rules. Actually, the word "ambient" doesn't exist in the CRB. The only guidelines I can find that describe what we're just going to call ambient light are on page 172 in the section of Exploration under Vision and Light. The final sentence of several paragraphs state:
Areas of bright light include outside in direct sunshine and inside the area of a daylight spell.
Areas of normal light include underneath a forest canopy during the day, within 20 feet of a torch, and inside the area of a light spell.
Areas of dim light include outside at night with a moon in the sky, bright starlight, and the area between 20 and 40 feet from a torch.
Areas of darkness include an unlit dungeon chamber, most caverns, and outside on a cloudy, moonless night.
The way I do this is I make a ruling, driven by those guidelines, on what the ambient light conditions are for the situation that the players are in. To make further rulings on the effect of darkness spells easier, I ignore all mundane sources of light such as candles, torches, and campfires. I take it as a given that the sun, moon, and stars are the sources of ambient light and thus I don't classify them as either mundane or magical otherwise the rules get nutty and start contradicting themselves--in numerous other threads about this topic, that's when the discussion degrades into people talking past each other and everything falls apart.
It probably helps if you've ever done any OpenGL programming or 3D modeling as this concept of "ambient light" will make perfect sense.
So, mentally in your mind, imagine the simple dungeon room with no windows, and remove all the torches ("point light sources" for the 3D modellers out there) from the wall. What level of light is there in the room? You'd look at the guidelines above ("unlit dungeon chamber") and say, "The light level is darkness."
Good, now add the torches back into the room so the players can see and you get areas of normal light fading off into dim light and then into darkness.
Finally, the evil villain Necro Man-tar casts darkness in the middle of the room. If the only sources of light in the room are the torches on the wall, you can skip the entire description of the darkness spell until this part:
Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness.
Inside that area of darkness, those mundane sources of light that we call torches amount to squat. As a mental shortcut, you can recall that the ambient light for the room is really darkness and you start doing your mental calculations on reducing the level of light from that level. Darkness cannot lower light levels lower than darkness (re-read that phrase and notice where the italics are and aren't) so the area inside the spell's effect is now in darkness while the rest of the room is lit normally by the torches. That's great, but not very exciting as darkvision still operates. Necro Man-tar can do better than that so let's have him cast deeper darkness instead.
Deeper darkness "functions as darkness" per that spell's description only it lowers light by two levels and it has additional effects in dim light and darkness; plunging them into supernatural darkness. Remember that the torches on the wall are powerless against deeper darkness and that the ambient light level in this simple dungeon room is darkness. The area inside the spell's effect becomes supernaturally dark and now even darkvision fails to work. The rest of the room (if there is still any "rest of the room") remains lit by the torches.
zavarov both seem correct. Thank you. And I don't expect you to copy paste.
If that's the case, then per the description of the darkness spell (and thus deeper darkness by way of inclusion) your interpretation would be incorrect because:
Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not increase the light level in an area of darkness.
The FAQ further reinforces this:
No, sunrods can never increase the light level of an area of darkness because they are not magical sources of light. In such an area, it automatically defaults to the ambient natural light level, and then reduces it one step.
When the torches were lit, before or after the deeper darkness spell doesn't matter. They simply fail to increase the light level within the area of the spell. Period. I'll grant you that there are murky (heh) areas in the rules regarding light and darkness but this isn't one of them. The FAQ ruling only makes that more clear.
Your GM is making the right ruling... But he's mistaken about the reason why since deeper darkness in broad daylight (bright light ambient conditions) would only reduce light levels to dim light and under a forest canopy (for example; normal light ambient conditions) the light levels are reduced to darkness but not supernatural darkness so in either situation darkvision would continue to operate.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
@Ansel.
Is the Sun a big magical ball of light? (meaning either deeper darkness won't work at all in the shade or in the field (assuming the sun is a higher level) or it will make a sphere of absolute blackness (since the sun's a lower level)) Or is it a normal ball of light? (meaning that it won't affect any sort of darkness spell)
'Ambient' lighting isn't defined. that's the issue with the darkness rules
zavarov both seem correct. Thank you. And I don't expect you to copy paste.
Okay, well, like you, I and all other posters have been saying, Wrath's interpretation is wrong.
As for your take on things, strictly by RAW you are wrong (see the posts from Ansel, thejeff and me), but many agree with your interpretation of RAI (see Matthew Morris's posts).
Bottom line, IMHO you are both wrong, so the wager is void. Had I been your DM, I would have ruled that your darkvision didn't work (IF I had remembered the nonmagical light source clause, which in my first answer to the OP I obviously didn't), which would be in Wrath's favor. However, since Wrath more or less came to his conclusion by accident (the right answer for the wrong reason), that would be in your favor. End result: a wash.
End result: a wash.
Clearly, this means we should get the wagered money and split it amongst ourselves.
Clearly, this means we should get the wagered money and split it amongst ourselves.End result: a wash.
Clearly. :)
|
So, did we arrive at this conclusion?
1) Mundane light sources are always useless within the area of effect of deeper darkness.
2) Ignoring mundane light sources, if the light level was dim light or darker, deeper darkness creates supernatural darkness, and darkvision is useless.
3) Ignoring mundane light sources, if the light level was normal light or brighter, deeper darkness creates normal darkness (if light level was normal light) or dim light (if light level was bright light) and darkvision functions.
So, did we arrive at this conclusion?
1) Mundane light sources are always useless within the area of effect of deeper darkness.
2) Ignoring mundane light sources, if the light level was dim light or darker, deeper darkness creates supernatural darkness, and darkvision is useless.
3) Ignoring mundane light sources, if the light level was normal light or brighter, deeper darkness creates normal darkness (if light level was normal light) or dim light (if light level was bright light) and darkvision functions.
Agreed 100%. :)
Yes, with the added detail that the Sun (and Moon and Stars etc) are not mundane light sources.Agreed 100%. :)So, did we arrive at this conclusion?
1) Mundane light sources are always useless within the area of effect of deeper darkness.
2) Ignoring mundane light sources, if the light level was dim light or darker, deeper darkness creates supernatural darkness, and darkvision is useless.
3) Ignoring mundane light sources, if the light level was normal light or brighter, deeper darkness creates normal darkness (if light level was normal light) or dim light (if light level was bright light) and darkvision functions.
Indeed. Nor are they magical. They are natural, which is something in-between. I like that. :)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Let's not head down that path. It's pretty clear, especially in light of the FAQ entry "natural light", that sunlight is not meant by "Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns".
Using sunlight to argue that torches and lanterns do count against Darkness is disingenuous. RAW you can argue that sunlight should be covered. There's no way it's RAI.
** spoiler omitted **
How big a light then? A bonfire? A burning witch? Mt Doom? Again the rules aren't clear.
It's not 'disingenuous'. Especially when you conceed that it can be argued that sunlight should be covered.
Again, the problem is 'ambient' isn't defined. We also don't know what makes lighting 'ambient'.
|
|
And no deadman and the jeff. I do not agree with that at all.
Because say you simply have a bigger torch. What then?
Or if you have light cast on your feet say. Like I did when the whole thing started. And said, no it'd only be 20 feet darkness then deeper.
I only used the torch example because it was easier than arguing with him falsely saying it was dispelled. When no, the light cast on the shoes was suppressed two levels. Not outright gone.(Getting to the core beginning of why we made the bet.)
Ah, but the light spell is "magical" so it counts to be suppressed. Thus, the fist 20' around the area of the light spell would then be darkness, not supernatural darkness.
Edit: I digress, the light spell is not a higher spell level than darkness thus it doesn't work.
Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness.
Light is a 0-level spell, Darkness is a 2nd-level spell.
I deleted my response to Matthew Morris as everyone else pretty much stated the same thing that I took too long to type out. :p
Ah, but the light spell is "magical" so it counts to be suppressed. Thus, the fist 20' around the area of the light spell would then be darkness, not supernatural darkness.And no deadman and the jeff. I do not agree with that at all.
Because say you simply have a bigger torch. What then?
Or if you have light cast on your feet say. Like I did when the whole thing started. And said, no it'd only be 20 feet darkness then deeper.
I only used the torch example because it was easier than arguing with him falsely saying it was dispelled. When no, the light cast on the shoes was suppressed two levels. Not outright gone.(Getting to the core beginning of why we made the bet.)
Ehh... Not exactly. The light spell is magical but it's a lower level than darkness/deeper darkness so...
Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness.
The effect you describe, anthonydido, only occurs when daylight overlaps with magical 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.
The light spell makes no such claim.
|
|
Ah, but the light spell is "magical" so it counts to be suppressed. Thus, the fist 20' around the area of the light spell would then be darkness, not supernatural darkness.And no deadman and the jeff. I do not agree with that at all.
Because say you simply have a bigger torch. What then?
Or if you have light cast on your feet say. Like I did when the whole thing started. And said, no it'd only be 20 feet darkness then deeper.
I only used the torch example because it was easier than arguing with him falsely saying it was dispelled. When no, the light cast on the shoes was suppressed two levels. Not outright gone.(Getting to the core beginning of why we made the bet.)
Ehh... Not exactly. The light spell is magical but it's a lower level than darkness/deeper darkness so...
Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area if they are of a higher spell level than darkness.The effect you describe, anthonydido, only occurs when daylight overlaps with magical 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.The light spell makes no such claim.
Yeah, I edited that post after seeing that. hehe.
Ansel's long post in reply to me (wherein he did as I asked and spoke slowly and deliberately, thanks for that) makes a whole lot of sense. Essentially casting darkness or deeper darkness ignores mundane sources of light entirely. For the purposes of determining the light level in an area where darkness or deeper darkness has been cast that is only lit by mundane sources it's dark or darker. Honestly though, I feel like I'd rather just roll back to the 3.5 versions of these spells. They seem to make more sense.
It seems like PFRPG made these two spells more complicated to understand. In 3.5 you drop darkness you got 20 ft of concealment, even for those with darkvision. That's easy to understand. You drop deeper darkness you got 60 ft of concealment, again, easy to understand. The whole dropping the light levels one step, two steps, and then were cha-cha-ing thing makes it much more convoluted.