A hag takes a 5' step away from someone and turns invisible. The party member assumes since she took a 5' step she didn't move further and casts light, holds the charge takes a 5' step and wants to release on the hag.
Does Total Concealment come into play here and make them make a touch attack with 505 miss?
If it hits, would it stick and cause the light source to follow her while invisible?
1) Light can only target objects. Hags are not objects. Therefore the situation has already failed.
2) However, if they did want to cast some spell in that square, then they would suffer the normal total concealment 50% miss chance.
Ok for argument purposes, let's say they want to touch the hag's garment. So they make a 50% check and pass. The garment would emit light as the hag moved around, even though she was still invisible?
"An invisible burning torch still gives off light, as does an invisible object with a light or similar spell cast upon it."
|
The way I read the invisibility and light rules, the effect is that of a light with no source. That means no shadows are pointing toward it, but it's just an increase of the ambient light.
If you wanted to take the time to suss out the edges of the light, you MIGHT be able to pinpoint the center. But I'd make you use a full round survival check DC20 to find an edge. I'd make you pick a direction to move, make your survival check as a second move action, and stop you (if you made your check) when you got to the edge. If you didn't reach the edge, or if you didn't make your check, you'd stop at the end of a movement. Remember, the light spell still has an effect in the second 20ft - it raises the light level one step from whatever it had been. So while mechanically there's a difference, it's not a bright bold line as seen by the characters. So you're basically trying to find the edge between normal light and dim light. If the surroundings are dim light, then you're looking for the 40ft border, since you now have 40ft of normal light.
But it wouldn't be impossible, and if two characters found edges, I'd let a third try to triangulate the location and lob and arrow or a bag of flour or something. But you'd better do it quickly, because my hag isn't stupid, and she can see what you are doing. She just might strip, leave the garment in the center of the room, and sneak quietly away! (Edit: at the very least she'd move.)
I will say, though, that it would be amusing to me to see a character with a light on himself walk away forever looking for the edge.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
She just might strip, leave the garment in the center of the room, and sneak quietly away! (Edit: at the very least she'd move.)And since she gets invisibility at will, she'd naturally cast it on the garment after stripping but before dropping! There's no VSM component, so who's to know?
And that's when see invisibilty became a bad idea...
IMO, if you manage to tag someone with a light spell, they can be automatically pinpointed, unless they are in an area with a higher light level.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, if you manage to tag someone with a light spell, they can be automatically pinpointed, unless they are in an area with a higher light level.
I understand what you're saying, but I don't think that's how the rules read:
The creature or object touched becomes invisible. If the recipient is a creature carrying gear, that vanishes, too. If you cast the spell on someone else, neither you nor your allies can see the subject, unless you can normally see invisible things or you employ magic to do so.
Items dropped or put down by an invisible creature become visible; items picked up disappear if tucked into the clothing or pouches worn by the creature. Light, however, never becomes invisible, although a source of light can become so (thus, the effect is that of a light with no visible source). Any part of an item that the subject carries but that extends more than 10 feet from it becomes visible.
Of course, the subject is not magically silenced, and certain other conditions can render the recipient detectable (such as swimming in water or stepping in a puddle). If a check is required, a stationary invisible creature has a +40 bonus on its Stealth checks. This bonus is reduced to +20 if the creature is moving. The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe. Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character's perceptions. Actions directed at unattended objects do not break the spell. Causing harm indirectly is not an attack. Thus, an invisible being can open doors, talk, eat, climb stairs, summon monsters and have them attack, cut the ropes holding a rope bridge while enemies are on the bridge, remotely trigger traps, open a portcullis to release attack dogs, and so forth. If the subject attacks directly, however, it immediately becomes visible along with all its gear. Spells such as bless that specifically affect allies but not foes are not attacks for this purpose, even when they include foes in their area.
(Emphasis added to salient portion)
What exactly is light with no visible source? It sure as heck isn't a floating star in a particular square. Instead, I imagine a situation where the light seems to come from everywhere. Where the sources of light are so diffuse as to eliminate shadow. Think of being outside on a heavily overcast day. There aren't really any shadows, because the sun doesn't directly light the ground. The clouds disperse and diffuse the light, so that it doesn't really seem to come from anywhere, but instead just...is.
I think you're over-interpreting "light without a visible source".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, I think that's fairly clear. I would give a bonus on attempts to pinpoint, though. Maybe +4 to +10, but not too high. Keep in mind that this is already one of the top four cantrips in the game—it's pushing the "cantrip" label as-is.
Make a touch attack, roll miss chance, and hope for the best. At the least, it will make it hard for the hag to stealthily escape.
I think you're over-interpreting "light without a visible source".
Yeah, this isn't "ambient light from nowhere" light without a visible source. The light isn't coming from no source, rather it's coming from an invisible source. And by definition an invisible source can't be a visible source.
Given the situation, I think a better way to visualize it would be to say "Imagine a shirt that is glowing, now photoshop out the shirt but leave the light".
|
I think Casual Viking's take is reasonable. It's a directional light without apparent source, but going in many directions, so if there's enough shadow you could look for what point all the light is coming from.
But if there's too much ambient light there's not enough shadow.
This could be the combat where the party is trying to shut off their light sources so they can "see" the invisible enemy :P
Yes, you can cast light on an object she is carrying, with normal 50% miss rate.
If you do so, I think it reasonable that you only get the creature's general area, not her exact square. You could easily land a fireball, but an arrow would be a lot harder. While it is possibly to triangulate her position from shadows, it's not something you can do quickly or in combat. At least that's my take on it. I would certainly give a bonus on perception to notice what square she's in.
If you succeed in landing the light spell on some object in the invisible Hag's possession, you don't necessarily know exactly what object you got. You might have got her hat or her shoe or her satchel.
|
|
@Ozy: I wasn't disagreeing with that, exactly.
What I was getting at is that a Light spell creates directional light coming from an object. Specifically, with brightness equal to a torch.
On a sunny day outside, that's not necessarily enough. The ambient light from the environment might overwhelm it. On a sunny meadow, I don't think you could track an invisible torch by the light it sheds.
Indoors it would be doable maybe. I'd allow a Perception check each round to pinpoint it.
In an otherwise dark cavern, it would be an automatic success.
But you may want to have someone dismiss that Daylight spell.
There is no save or SR allowed vs light spell. It is not designed as a combat spell.
This is really pushing the limits of what a cantrip can or should do.
Items worn use the character's saves, as they are "attended".For spells that say attended items get saves, yes. For spells that do not specify attendance of objects either way and have no save, no.
Attendedness of objects is relevant to, for example, chill metal. It is totally irrelevant for light.
To target worn gear you basically have to deal with the character's defenses.Only to the extent of being able to touch it while it moves along with the witch, which is already all accounted for by needing to succeed in a melee touch attack and by the 50% miss chance for total concealment.
There are no other relevant "defenses" for this spell.
Light says target is "object touched".
It doesn't allow you to make a touch attack to touch the item. It isn't a held charge.
Again, touching a worn item in regards to this spell, is touching the character. There are no special provisions to do what you say it is doing in combat.
Edit:
Target or Targets
Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.
You can't just stick your hand into a square and " fish" for a touch to get the spell off. So the whole argument about the situation is irrelevant, it can't happen.
Items worn use the character's saves, as they are "attended".For spells that say attended items get saves, yes. For spells that do not specify attendance of objects either way and have no save, no.
Attendedness of objects is relevant to, for example, chill metal. It is totally irrelevant for light.
To target worn gear you basically have to deal with the character's defenses.Only to the extent of being able to touch it while it moves along with the witch, which is already all accounted for by needing to succeed in a melee touch attack and by the 50% miss chance for total concealment.
There are no other relevant "defenses" for this spell.
Light says target is "object touched".
It doesn't allow you to make a touch attack to touch the item. It isn't a held charge.
Again, touching a worn item in regards to this spell, is touching the character. There are no special provisions to do what you say it is doing in combat.
Er, what?
Shocking Grasp:
Target creature or object touched
Er, what are YOU talking about? The OP is about light on an invisible character.
Light isn't a held charge and as I pointed out above, you can't do it anyways.
Light has the same target language as shocking grasp, cure light wounds, and other touch spells. Why are you claiming that it works differently?
Because there is a HUGE difference between a held charge and a spell that requires a target at the point of casting.
Light says target is "object touched".
It doesn't allow you to make a touch attack to touch the item.
Touching a creature is a touch attack. This particular object is moving perfectly in sync with a creature. Touching the object is super obviously exactly equivalent in difficulty a touch attack to the thing that is moving it.
If you disagree, then what other better rules do you follow for touching attended objects?
You can't just stick your hand into a square and " fish" for a touch to get the spell off.Yes you can, CRB: "A creature can grope about to find an invisible creature. A character can make a touch attack with his hands or a weapon into two adjacent 5-foot squares using a standard action."
Are you suggesting that it's somehow harder to grope about for an object than a moving creature?
So you cast the spell, which requires a target, as it is NOT a held charge as a standard action. Then somehow the spell doesn't fizzle due to not having a target (like the rules state it would) as you spend another standard action groping for something?
If it were a held charge then yeah, you could do it that way. But spells that aren't charges need to have a target when the cast is completed or they fizzle. Light doesn't mention ANYTHING about being a held charge, you don't just get to say "it is" and use it that way, sorry.
So, why are you saying that light is not a held charge?Light has the same target language as shocking grasp, cure light wounds, and other touch spells. Why are you claiming that it works differently?Because there is a HUGE difference between a held charge and a spell that requires a target at the point of casting.
Does the spell say it is a held charge?
Because I'm not sure how it is in your wonderland, but in the real world, unless the spell states it is something you don't get to randomly assign properties because it sounds good to make it so.
A spell needs a target when it is cast unless otherwise stated. A held charge sticks around your hand which is what allows you to "fish" with it. There are two separate and distinct options here. You don't just get to lump them together because you want to use it a certain way.
If you are going to argue rules points, at least do yourself the favor of actually reading the subject matter.
This is pushing the limit for what a cantrip can do.
A 0th level spell does not counter a 2nd level spell. I don't care what the argument is.