If I cast the Light spell on 50 feet of rope (identified as a single object by the rules), and extend it out to its maximum length, would the entire distance emanate light as the spell, or does it fall under the Too Good to Be True clause?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, radius implies a single point of light at Light's center, somewhere on the rope which emits in a sphere.
I don't know that it's "TGtBT" for the whole rope, but it does seem too generous to count the whole length of the rope as "like a torch". And the trick could easily be taken to extremes if applied to say a length of thin string. Heck, that'd become a norm for groups, with the ropes on PC shoulders as they disperse. It would be a bit much for one Cantrip to carry light into several distinct areas where PCs carry the "single" string or rope.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, radius implies a single point of light at Light's center, somewhere on the rope which emits in a sphere.
That's the way I read it, too. Regardless of the item's shape, the spell only creates a single sphere of light.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really feel this discussion is rather pointless. Torches are not extremely expensive. And unlike ropes you can throw them around to light not only behind you but on the sides and in front of you. If you really need light everywhere, torches are your best bet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"The object glows, casting bright light in a 20-foot radius (and dim light for the next 20 feet) like a torch. If you cast this spell again on a second object, the light spell on the first object ends."
I feel like it hinges on the word radius. Radius is infrequently used to describe distance from an irregularly shaped object, usually it's used in relation to a circle or sphere with a defined center, or distance from something relatively small compared to the radius.
If they intended it to emanate from anywhere along an object's surface, it would likely use the word emanate.
In any case, it does appear to be too good to be true. Using Light in such a way would allow you to completely banish darkness from a huge room or clearing, giving you the benefit of many Light spells at once.
I really feel this discussion is rather pointless. Torches are not extremely expensive. And unlike ropes you can throw them around to light not only behind you but on the sides and in front of you. If you really need light everywhere, torches are your best bet.
Torches take time to light, expire quickly, might sputter out on the ground, create smoke, have weight, and could cause an uncontrolled fire. Casting light on a spool of thread and spreading it around to give constant light for 24 hours in an arbitrarily large region without any expenditure is significantly better.
I would likely employ the technique extensively if it were allowed.
I really feel this discussion is rather pointless. Torches are not extremely expensive. And unlike ropes you can throw them around to light not only behind you but on the sides and in front of you. If you really need light everywhere, torches are your best bet.Torches take time to light, expire quickly, might sputter out on the ground, create smoke, have weight, and could cause an uncontrolled fire. Casting light on a spool of thread and spreading it around to give constant light for 24 hours in an arbitrarily large region without any expenditure is significantly better.
I would likely employ the technique extensively if it were allowed.
If you need to light your home, I agree. But in the context of dungeon exploration, the rope trick wouldn't light an arbitrarily large region, it will light behind. And that's where you rarely need lighting.
Also, the rope takes at least one hand. Because it you attach it around your wrist, you are immobilized everytime it gets stuck or an enemy grabs it, something you'd prefer to avoid.
The torches are definitely the best way to light an arbitrarily large region around you. It's extremely versatile as a mean of lighting. Only drawback, you have to carry tons of torches. But that's only an issue during the very first levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"The object glows, casting bright light in a 20-foot radius (and dim light for the next 20 feet) like a torch. If you cast this spell again on a second object, the light spell on the first object ends."
I feel like it hinges on the word radius. Radius is infrequently used to describe distance from an irregularly shaped object, usually it's used in relation to a circle or sphere with a defined center, or distance from something relatively small compared to the radius.
If they intended it to emanate from anywhere along an object's surface, it would likely use the word emanate.
In any case, it does appear to be too good to be true. Using Light in such a way would allow you to completely banish darkness from a huge room or clearing, giving you the benefit of many Light spells at once.
I think the phrase "like a torch" is also important here. A torch creates a single sphere of light.
I really feel this discussion is rather pointless. Torches are not extremely expensive. And unlike ropes you can throw them around to light not only behind you but on the sides and in front of you. If you really need light everywhere, torches are your best bet.
While true, Torches take up hands to use, and if you are trying to plant them down into a wall or something, this requires exploring it first, which may not always be possible or wise to do (assuming potential threats exist in the area).
The question was posited when attempting to go down a dark hole to illuminate the entire way down (keeping the entire tunnel and the bottom lit for characters to see what parts of the tunnels are safe to kick/touch), and a player asked why they couldn't just cast it on the rope to light the entire way down.
I initially let it slide since I thought it wasn't overly powerful at the time (and was a pretty smart use of the cantrip to overcome an obstacle presented to the party), but it appears this is something that I will need to clarify with my groups in the future, since there is enough evidence brought up to counter it, and, as noted, there are plenty of other uses that could leave it up for Too Good to Be True territory (such as creating a "ring" of light with a Rope for constant vision at a camp).
See, this feels like the kind of thing that to me falls under the jurisdiction of "Just because a spell only describes one thing, doesn't mean a clever person can't make it work a different way". Yeah, there are ways it can be very useful, but I highly doubt it's going to break anything. If you need an area to be dark, magical darkness that overpowers the light can still be a thing.
All that being said, I'd probably but some limitations on it, not for mechanical reasons, but flavor reasons. Since the light is spread out over such a wider area, you only get an aura of dim light, not bright light, unless you roll the rope up.
...
The question was posited when attempting to go down a dark hole to illuminate the entire way down (keeping the entire tunnel and the bottom lit for characters to see what parts of the tunnels are safe to kick/touch), and a player asked why they couldn't just cast it on the rope to light the entire way down.
...
If a party has more than one person who can cast light then I don't see any rules that forbid you from casting them at intervals along the rope. Casting one 20' from the end of the rope and another about 40' further would brightly illuminate about 80'. If the rules don't allow casting the spell more than once on a single object, then you could attach small items to the rope and cast light on them.
On the other hand, this situation seems exactly what dancing lights is designed for. If the well is less than 140' then you can stand at the top and move them up and down the well to spot any major dangers. Then by keeping two pairs of lights 10' apart, you can brightly illuminate about 50' of depth while you descend. Two people casting the spell could cover about 100'.
If a party has more than one person who can cast light then I don't see any rules that forbid you from casting them at intervals along the rope. Casting one 20' from the end of the rope and another about 40' further would brightly illuminate about 80'. If the rules don't allow casting the spell more than once on a single object, then you could attach small items to the rope and cast light on them.
Or just use pebbles that you throw to approximately the correct position.
Adventuring by playing kick the glowing can.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Throwing a rope with light forward, downward (example of the well) or upward can be done with various simplicity.
A) downward automatic - gravity - just fix one end
B) forward - attach a weight on one side to throw it
C) upwards - use a grappling hook as weight (you might get away in b with improvised items)
Mathematically the 50 foot rope is 3 1/2 light spells. One cast at 0, 20, 40 (and 50).
No harm done for rule of cool down a well - but should be clarified it is not as intended and as GM I would stop it as soon as they start to abuse it.
See, this feels like the kind of thing that to me falls under the jurisdiction of "Just because a spell only describes one thing, doesn't mean a clever person can't make it work a different way".Any ruling on how a single spell works that resolves as the spell doing something it doesn't exactly say it does means the player cannot learn how their spells work by reading them, only through negotiating all the ways they can think of them working with the GM to see which pass the arbitrary test of "clever".
Might as well make up the whole rule-book if you're willing to turn that large of a portion of it into an unreliable source of information.
That seems really unnaturally restrictive to me. And it is the kind of thing that would never be done with things that aren't magic spells specifically.
You wouldn't ever say "A dagger doesn't say that you can use it to cut a rope in it's description, so the one and only thing you can use a dagger for is damaging things with hit points".
Would you say a Scorching Ray can't burn down a tree because the spell says that it must target a creature?
Light says that it can be cast on an object of light bulk. A rope is an object of light bulk, and thus is a viable target for the spell.
And yes, of course you learn how a spell works by reading the book. That gives you a literal description of exactly what the spell does, but yes also you of course then think about what that thing is and talk to your GM about clever ways to utilize those effects that are not explicitly drawn out in the book.
Light is sort of a weird fringe case where the specific long shape of the object, despite it's light bulk, might interact in a way that is unintended by the devs. In these fringe cases, the GM makes a decision that is not in the book. My ruling of "it works, but it only makes 20 feet of dim light along the rope's length" is, I feel, an interesting take on it but one that is neither more or less right than any other.
But this is a TTRPG. Of course you negotiate with your GM, of course every single item, spell, and ability in the game can be used in ways that are not explicitly written out, and of course you make up those rules as you go along. The mindset that you would do anything else is alien to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We are in Pathfinder 2e so naturally a rope has hitpoints xD
Anyway, I would probably even allow the whole length of the rope to glow. It says the object starts to glow and not a single point on the object(which would in most cases not get a complete radius around the object anyway). Therefore if you stretch the robe the object would now be in multiple squares and around each of them it emits a radius of light. I don't think this would break the game.
It might not be game breaking, but it isn't how the spell says it works. It's supposed to shed light "like a torch." Singular. A single torch sheds light in a sphere centered around a single point.
If players want a cantrip that acts like multiple torches then they can use Dancing Lights. Letting Light illuminate more squares further apart than Dancing Lights can (and without needing to be sustained) would basically make Dancing Lights obsolete.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not necessarily. It could also be that the range is like a torch (20-foot radius (and dim light for the next 20 feet)).
Just like the rules for emanations:
An emanation issues forth from each side of your space, extending out to a specified number of feet in all directions. For instance, the bless spell's emanation radiates 5 or more feet outward from the caster. Because the sides of a creature's space are the starting point for the emanation, an emanation from a Large or larger creature affects a greater overall area than that of a Medium or smaller creature. Unless the text states otherwise, the creature creating an emanation effect chooses whether the creature at its center is affected.
I think you missed addressing Gisher's point that the Light spell should have a point of origin just like a torch does.
The idea that an uncoiled rope would take up the space of a large creature and that the Light spell would cause the entire thing to emanate light ... I don't think it works. I would instead say that only a coiled rope has bulk L. An uncoiled, stretched out rope has bulk greater than 1 and is therefore not a valid target for the spell.
Remember that bulk is not dependent on weight alone. It is also based on size and shape too. And there are pieces of equipment (such as a Backpack) that change their bulk rating because of how they are currently being used rather than just because they changed weight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the rules for torches there is nothing about a single point of emanation:
Are you in all seriousness making the argument that a single torch could have multiple points of origin for the light (multiple meaning in noticeably different squares on the grid)? That seems like a really strange argument to me.
Yeah, there might technically not be anything in the rules explicitly preventing it, but there also isn't anything in the rules supporting it. And there is a lot of real-world assumptions about the meaning and nature of a 'torch' object that strongly indicates that the light is going to be coming from a single location. Not multiple points more than 5 feet distant. The rules are written in English after all.
A torch emanates light up to a certain range and so does the rope here.
Also, neither Light nor a torch say that they use emanation rules.
My last post might have sounded a bit harsh. Truly if you have any evidence that it is a burst of light I would be happy to know about it.
No worries. I have no problem with people telling me that I am dead wrong. Happens all the time lol.
And the torch creates a 'shed' of light - whatever that means. So not a burst or an emanation. (A Bullseye lantern does actually use the standard 60 ft cone. For whatever that is worth.)
Yes, a mathematical point is not what a torch's light source is. But a mathematical point isn't what I am talking about anyway. The point is that a torch is certainly only going to be creating it 'shed' of light from a single square. Not from all squares along a 50 foot length.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And the torch creates a 'shed' of light - whatever that means.
There you go then. A torch creates a 'shed' of light, while a glowing rope would clearly generate a shedload of light. Completely different things.
Cones emanate from a square so I guess that would be a point for emanation, if anything.
I only find that it sheds light and not creates a shed of light though.
So it's still possible that it sheds light in a burst or emanation.
Same. I generally treat it as an emanation too.
But not when some problematic player is trying to rules-lawyer me into getting some crazy shenanigans going where a single casting of the Light cantrip can light up an entire 50 feet of rope and produce bright light along a (50ft rope + 60ft on one end + 60ft on the other) 170ft long, 60ft wide hallway.