For instance, say an elf is holding a lantern with a 30' light radius (low light vision means she can see 60') and a human is standing 50' away from the elf, the elf can see the human but the human cannot see the elf?
But anybody knows you can see a light source for literally miles. So I would assume the human cant see any details, maybe not even see the elf, but surely they CAN see the lantern?
Is there a rule for this? Because it sounds incredibly daft if not the case.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
The Earth curves about 8 inches per mile. As a result, on a flat surface with your eyes 5 feet or so off the ground, the farthest edge that you can see is about 3 miles away. The military teaches soldiers and sailors that the glow of a cigarette can be see AT LEAST that far away. Torches and bonfires would be even farther.
Other factors would also come into play that would limit the observability of a light source. Elevation, atmospheric conditions, intervening cover, etc would all change the equation. Assuming flat plains or across water then 3 miles is a good estimate.
Now, seeing the person doing the smoking or tending the fire at that distance isn't possible. You can see the light, not the things illuminated by the light. Pathfinder rules are -1 perception/10'. There are 5,280'/mile. So you're perception check to see the person would be made with a -1500 penalty.
The elf is in the radius of the light source, the human see him perfectly.
CRB, pag 172 wrote: Dwarves and half-orcs have darkvision, but the other races presented in Chapter 2 need light to see by. See Table 7–10 for the radius that a light source illuminates and how long it lasts. The increased entry indicates an area outside the lit radius in which the light level is increased by one step (from darkness to dim light, for example). It can be written better, but if something is in the radius of illumination, it is illuminated and visible.
To make an RL example, an electric torch doesn't illuminate you (unless you point it to yourself) but you can see the stuff in the beam of light, while you don't see your hand.
In your example, if the elf is using a shuttered lantern so that it emits a beam but doesn't illuminate him, the human will not see him, but he can guess his position by the origin of the beam of light.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
TRY THIS
It doesn't answer all the questions you're asking, but it does solve the problems for your PCs.
MrCharisma wrote: TRY THIS
It doesn't answer all the questions you're asking, but it does solve the problems for your PCs.
I have never seen this item before an it is AMAZING!
I know right. There are some incredibly useful items for under 5,000gp. It's worth going through some of the utility items.
Lantern of Hidden Light, $1000 AdvrGd115.
hooded lantern
it's a mixed bag but a plus for a party member.
Darkvision is a 2nd lev spell with target:touch with 60ft rng on darkvision that lasts CstrLvl hrs. No occupied hand and better than 30 + 1LgtLvl 31 to 60ft.
OrigPost
The rules are very simple when it comes to illumination (only 4 levels: darkness, dim light, normal light, and bright light) and vision. Overlapping areas created a Blog Post back in 2015. Other than that it's perception modifiers versus DCs.
A Candle Lamp is 1 lb and essentially lets you shutter part of the illumination of a candle so that it only illuminates 1-3 squares in front of you. Also there is no spell that creates only a candle-worth of normal light. Could you then, by RAW, use Prestidigitation to put a light source that only illuminates the number of squares a candle does (5' Radius), but that is Normal light in that radius, such that then using the Candle Lamp you put Normal light into 1-3 squares from the device?
I'm asking because then, by RAW, you could send a flying Familiar with the Valet archetype into an area using the Candle Lamp and their own Prestidigitation at will ability to generate Normal light in front of them in 3 squares. If said Familiar also had Low-Light Vision, say, an Owl, the Familiar would actually be seeing double that radius out in Normal light, another double that out in Dim Light, but by the nature of the Candle Lamp those spotting the light wouldn't AUTOMATICALLY spot the Familiar since the familiar would be outside the area of Normal light.
Also, as with the Owl, since the Familiar is technically holding the Candle Lamp and is 1 square removed from the Normal light radius it provides being behind the Normal light radius, wouldn't the Familiar be looking from a square of Dim light?
I'm clarifying all of this because in one game I have a Wizard 1 with an Owl familiar. I've proposed the Owl creating light with Prestidigitation but the players don't want the bird giving away our position and I'm nervous about the light painting a giant bullseye on the Familiar's head. If all of the above works by RAW though, the Owl could
1. Use Prestidigitation to light the Candle Lamp with a 5' radius of Normal light
2. Close the Candle Lamp so it projects 3 squares of Normal light
3. Have the Owl fly holding the device (only 1 LB so even at size Tiny it is not encumbered so no penalties to movement and such)
4. While flying and holding the Candle Lamp the Familiar can technically see out double the area of Normal, double the area of Dim Light, so directly in front of themselves out to 12 squares
5. While sitting on the wizard's shoulder the Owl is in her square, therefore she's starting in a square of Dim light so she gains a +3 on her visual Perception checks since that is the special ability that the owl gives her
If my GM agrees to that use of Prestidigitation, do I have the rest of that right?
While I don't have rules support for this, I would say that if the distance from the light source to the object plus the distance from the object to you is less than twice the distance illuminated, then you can see the object.
The reasoning is that if you hold the source and can see up to a certain distance, then the light travels there and back, or twice the distance. If you don't hold the source, then if the light travels that distance or less, then you see the object.
/cevah
detecting a light and discerning an object with and without obscuring light sources are different things.
So a target needs to be discerned AND recognized as human (or hostile).
BBC, What are the limits of human vision article by Adam Hadhazy 27th July 2015 wrote: ... Theoretically, studies have shown, the best we can do is about 120 pixels per degree of arc, a unit of angular measurement. That works out to about a fingernail held at arm's length with 60 horizontal and 60 vertical lines on it, alternating in black and white, creating a checkerboard pattern. "That's about the finest pattern you could ever see," says Landy. considering arm's length to be 1 meter, and a fingernail to be 1.2cm, the image to be discerned is an average human 175cm tall(longest dimension){comprised of 60*60 lines} that's 146m(479ft) under ideal conditions.
20/20 vision means discerning 1.75mm contours(black-white-black lines) at 6 meters. Extending that to 175cm yields a distance of 6000m, but just 3 lines... for 60 lines that's 6000*3/120=150m(492ft).
You can compare that to game design Perception of 0DC and +1DC per 10ft.
If you just want to detect some light photons, that's not too difficult (in a dark room under controlled conditions), but that just sensing some light.
Rayleigh Criterion is useful for discerning point sources. Yellow light 565-590nm. Diameter of pupil (2-8mm) 5.8mm large RMS average. LumenLearning's Physics of the eye.
so that's 30 lines (alternating black and white)
moves the 20/20 vision estimate to 6000*3/60=300m(984 ft).
120 pixel person... not much resolution at 0.686dpi.
I can see a bicycle with a headlight on it (or at least the area around it) from a couple of km away when looking at a dark hillside. The bike's headlight certainly doesn't illuminate me from that distance, not even close.
Perception wrote: Notice a visible creature = DC 0 From this we know that there is an established DC for seeing the creature illuminated by the light, though not the light itself. Every Wilderness environment in the game has visibility limits, though not dungeons; this is the distance by which you can reliably detect other creatures. In a sparse forest for example, you can use your Perception check up to 3d6 x 10', for a max visibility of 180'.
Now also on the Perception chart there are suggested ticks up and down on the DC based on the strength of the stimulus you're detecting. Hearing the sound of battle for example is a -10 starting DC. This is a loud, boisterous sound so it is very easy to detect.
My rule of thumb, in an environment such as a dungeon where there are no obvious rules for visibility distance, I take a light source as one of these strong stimuli; a base Perception DC of -10. Then I apply the -1 per 10' of distance between the perceiver and the light source itself. If the perceiver is taking a 10 on their Perception check and has no bonuses to the skill whatsoever, that means they can see a light source at a distance of 200'.
But then, I'm also a stickler for dungeon dressing.
Rough-hewn dungeons have irregularly shaped walls, sometimes with crevices or abutments off of them; caves feature stalactites, stalagmites and columns; mines have upright supports; fine masonry may be buttressed with archways or adorned with pilasters. I don't just say these things to paint a pretty picture in my players' heads. Even if the abutment sticking off the wall is only a few inches out this can obscure the actual light source, meaning all an enemy will see at 200' is the pool of radiance created by the source. They will NOT be able to pinpoint the square the light source is in easily.
I sometimes also use the visibility distances from the various Wilderness descriptions. If my dungeon is a massive open chasm, the monsters occupying as much vertical as horizontal space, and there's tons of open area with no obstructions I might reference Desert or Gentle Hills area visibility. On the other hand if we're talking rough-hewn dungeons, lots of little obstructions and ledges, and the occasional natural structure such as columns or stalagmites, I might use Sparse Forest rules.
I know that IRL people can see a light on the horizon for miles but this is a game and there are rules like Perception and Wilderness environments.
Aurore wrote: For instance, say an elf is holding a lantern with a 30' light radius (low light vision means she can see 60') and a human is standing 50' away from the elf, the elf can see the human but the human cannot see the elf?
But anybody knows you can see a light source for literally miles. So I would assume the human cant see any details, maybe not even see the elf, but surely they CAN see the lantern?
Is there a rule for this? Because it sounds incredibly daft if not the case.
I played for many years under the same misconception, but per Diego Rossi's post, yes, the human can see the elf.
The primary exception to this is if there is an area of magical darkness between the human and the elf. That would block all light from traveling between the two creatures. This is, as far as I know, not specified in the Core Rulebook but was changed after the fact in the "FAQ".
It's awkward and badly written, but officially there's an argument to be made that you can't:
Quote: A line of sight is the same as a Line of Effect but with the additional restriction that that it is blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight (such as Concealment). Quote: Concealment: To determine whether your target has concealment from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that provides concealment, the target has concealment. Darkness provides concealment, so therefore anything that has an area of darkness between you and it has concealment and can't be seen.
This is obviously nonsense and I'd never actually run it that way, but it's hard to get anywhere else from the rules themselves.
I'm okay with magical darkness working that way - though I'd also be okay with it just being like normal darkness.
Aurore wrote: For instance, say an elf is holding a lantern with a 30' light radius (low light vision means she can see 60') and a human is standing 50' away from the elf, the elf can see the human but the human cannot see the elf?
But anybody knows you can see a light source for literally miles. So I would assume the human cant see any details, maybe not even see the elf, but surely they CAN see the lantern?
Is there a rule for this? Because it sounds incredibly daft if not the case.
in 3.5 book the Underdark,is stated that light source can be seen at 20×radius with DC20 spot(perception) and auto detected at half that (10×)
so lantern(30ft bright illumination) is
DC 20 at 600ft
DC 10 at 500ft
DC 0 at 400ft
DC-10 at 300ft
maybe double that distance for someone who has low-light vision?
Perception lists lots of DCs for noticing stuff. Noticing a visible creature is 0. Let's call noticing a lit lantern in the dark as favorable conditions, so -2. Then there is a +1 to the DC for every 10 feet.
If you want an in-real-life answer, marcryser has the right idea, although I haven't checked his number (no offense, but that number is controversial because of Flat-Earthers.). Military guards I hear eschew smoking on guard duty because a sniper can see the glow of a cigarette from miles away, they say. Google says the horizon is 2.9 miles away, and refractory phenomena let you see even farther.
And we've seen pictures of city lights from orbit. Lights from stars can be seen trillions of miles away.
thejeff wrote: It's awkward and badly written, but officially there's an argument to be made that you can't:
Quote: A line of sight is the same as a Line of Effect but with the additional restriction that that it is blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight (such as Concealment). Quote: Concealment: To determine whether your target has concealment from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that provides concealment, the target has concealment. Darkness provides concealment, so therefore anything that has an area of darkness between you and it has concealment and can't be seen.
This is obviously nonsense and I'd never actually run it that way, but it's hard to get anywhere else from the rules themselves.
I'm okay with magical darkness working that way - though I'd also be okay with it just being like normal darkness.
First reaction: Line of sight is a mechnical term that isn't necessarily connected to whether something can be seen.
Second reaction: Of course, that would mean that even if Helen the human could see Egodriel the elf, Helen couldn't cast magic missile on Egodriel because even though Helen can see Egodriel, she doesn't have line of sight. That's kinda weird.
Third reaction: Then again, if the darkness isn't actually limiting normal sight in this case, is line of sight really blocked?
I'm okay with rationalizing based on #3.
blahpers wrote: thejeff wrote: It's awkward and badly written, but officially there's an argument to be made that you can't:
Quote: A line of sight is the same as a Line of Effect but with the additional restriction that that it is blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight (such as Concealment). Quote: Concealment: To determine whether your target has concealment from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that provides concealment, the target has concealment. Darkness provides concealment, so therefore anything that has an area of darkness between you and it has concealment and can't be seen.
This is obviously nonsense and I'd never actually run it that way, but it's hard to get anywhere else from the rules themselves.
I'm okay with magical darkness working that way - though I'd also be okay with it just being like normal darkness.
First reaction: Line of sight is a mechnical term that isn't necessarily connected to whether something can be seen.
Second reaction: Of course, that would mean that even if Helen the human could see Egodriel the elf, Helen couldn't cast magic missile on Egodriel because even though Helen can see Egodriel, she doesn't have line of sight. That's kinda weird.
Third reaction: Then again, if the darkness isn't actually limiting normal sight in this case, is line of sight really blocked?
I'm okay with rationalizing based on #3. My real first reaction: Damn the concealment rules are a hot mess.
It's basically caused by lumping different things together under "provides concealment". Fog provides concealment and it makes sense you can't see through it. Darkness provides concealment when you're within it, but it makes no sense at all you can't see through it.
Scott Wilhelm wrote: Perception lists lots of DCs for noticing stuff. Noticing a visible creature is 0. Let's call noticing a lit lantern in the dark as favorable conditions, so -2. Then there is a +1 to the DC for every 10 feet. The percetion rules also call out that they are used to:
1) Oppose stealth checks
2) Notice fine details in the environment
A person wandering around in lantern light 2 miles distance is very much a fine detail (at this scale).
It's a GM call whether the light of the lantern, at 2 miles distant, constitutes a fine detail or not. But let's make sure we apply the perception rules only when we should actually be applying them. (eg, the old argument of the sun is to far away to see based on perception rules is based on incorrectly applying perception rules - the sun is neither trying to stealth, nor is it a fine detail in the environment, so perception rules to see the sun do not apply).
So at the very end of a long hallway, I would probably use them to spot a creature moving about in a light source. A creature 20' away (that is not trying to hide) I wouldn't apply them. Up close like that I'd no longer consider them a fine detail (assuming of course we aren't talking about a tiny or smaller creature).
bbangerter wrote: Scott Wilhelm wrote: Perception lists lots of DCs for noticing stuff. Noticing a visible creature is 0. Let's call noticing a lit lantern in the dark as favorable conditions, so -2. Then there is a +1 to the DC for every 10 feet. The percetion rules also call out that they are used to:
1) Oppose stealth checks
2) Notice fine details in the environment
A person wandering around in lantern light 2 miles distance is very much a fine detail (at this scale).
It's a GM call whether the light of the lantern, at 2 miles distant, constitutes a fine detail or not. But let's make sure we apply the perception rules only when we should actually be applying them. (eg, the old argument of the sun is to far away to see based on perception rules is based on incorrectly applying perception rules - the sun is neither trying to stealth, nor is it a fine detail in the environment, so perception rules to see the sun do not apply).
So at the very end of a long hallway, I would probably use them to spot a creature moving about in a light source. A creature 20' away (that is not trying to hide) I wouldn't apply them. Up close like that I'd no longer consider them a fine detail (assuming of course we aren't talking about a tiny or smaller creature). My main point is that this is covered by the Perception rules.
You (Human without darkvision) can see from an area of darkness into an area of light.
You (Human without darkvision) can NOT see from an area of light into an area of darkness.
You (Human without darkvision) CAN see from an area of light ACROSS an area of darkness into ANOTHER area of light.
You (Human without darkvision) can NOT see anything (in the above scenarios) that is in the area of darkness, while...
You (Human without darkvision) CAN see things inside the area of light.
Distance and intervening obstacles matter.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
