So is my theory that characters with low light vision treating dim light as normal light the majority opinion?Not here. I'm in the camp that LLV doubles the range you can see using most light sources, but under a moonlit sky you can see as well as if it were daylight. It doesn't seem that complicated to me.
Just to be clear moonlight(which is dim lighting) equals no concealment but other dim lighting equals concealment?
I am not here to argue either way since I am not 100% sold on my own theory. I just want to make sure I understand your position.
Maybe they should just throw out the whole darkvision/low-light vision system and go back to infravision and ultravision. :)
It's not really a good example, as moonlight varies widely. The light from a thin crescent moon will do very little.
But if you have ever been out in the countryside under the light of a full moon you will recall that the light of a full moon is more than enough to see by. I would probably call that "normal light" if I was grading it, with "bright light" being direct sunlight.
In my home games, I allow melee sneak attacks in dim light, for thematic reasons, but I am well aware this is a house rule and not RAW.
However, thanks to the FAQ/errata around the stealth skill, I suspect that there was some confusion around the difference between concealment and total concealment among the guys who wrote those rules. But now that there are game mechanics to get around it we are stuck with it as it is.
Just to be clear moonlight(which is dim lighting) equals no concealment but other dim lighting equals concealment?
I think it depends on how the creature sees things.
Bright Light and Normal Light equals equals No Concealment for Humans and for creatures with LLV.
Dim Light for those with LLV equals Normal Light for Humans (No Concealment)
Dim Light equals concealment or humans. (20% miss chance)
Some areas of Darkness for humans may mean Dim Light for those with LLV.
|
The entire lighting rules need a revamp.
Not just low-light vision and darkness, but also the interaction of spells with [light] and [darkness] descriptors.
And Daylight is its own mess.
Plus the corner cases of natural sunlight and its effects on various creatures.
I feel that a really simple, universal system is achievable, but that the current web of rules interactions makes it difficult to overhaul.
|
The entire lighting rules need a revamp.
Not just low-light vision and darkness, but also the interaction of spells with [light] and [darkness] descriptors.
And Daylight is its own mess.
Plus the corner cases of natural sunlight and its effects on various creatures.
I feel that a really simple, universal system is achievable, but that the current web of rules interactions makes it difficult to overhaul.
Mark's indicated that they're working on a blog-style answer to the light & darkness issues, and that they have some pieces in place. E.g., <this post> from April 3rd:
I have no idea about the answers to my own "next time on FAQ Friday" questions. It's not outside the realm of possibility (which tells you that we at least are a little bit close for that to be the case), but with a blog-type release, that goes through more places first. Heck, I never could have gussed exactly when the Unchained blog I wrote would come out either![...]
Due to its requisite for a blog, Light and Darkness continues to reign supreme over the FAQs for another week! (not counting the mighty freebooter, which managed to overtake it again by alphabetical order on a tiebreak but is not from the RPG line) But will that continue? Might a blog FAQ appear to answer it? Or might the scrappy scorpion whip with its increasing number of FAQ clicks eventually skitter over into the #1 spot? Find out next time!
Keeping in theme with the questions, what is the chance we'll see the light and darkness blog before my next game? (there are two Fridays between now and then)
[...]
So is my theory that characters with low light vision treating dim light as normal light the majority opinion?Not here. I'm in the camp that LLV doubles the range you can see using most light sources, but under a moonlit sky you can see as well as if it were daylight. It doesn't seem that complicated to me.Just to be clear moonlight(which is dim lighting) equals no concealment but other dim lighting equals concealment?
I am not here to argue either way since I am not 100% sold on my own theory. I just want to make sure I understand your position.
A clear moonlit sky is a specific and specified exception.
A torch casts light out to 20', and dim light to 40' but even with LLV it eventually fades to ambient darkness at 80'. Moonlight touches everything, it never fades to ambient darkness.
|
|
Concealment and Precision Damage: Does concealment (the 20% kind, not total concealment) negate all kinds of precision damage? There is some confusion from the multiple places where precision damage appears.
Yes, in general concealment does negate all kinds of precision damage, unless you have a special ability that particularly says otherwise like the Shadow Strike feat or the Unchained rogue’s sneak attack.
Or True Strike?