One last time, nothing in the feature describes what is being touted as gospel by many in this thread. If it did it would be great if it was spelled out like it is in other examples in the game, eg the Darkness and Shadow of Moil spells, both of which explicitly call out how they interact with light, whereas Twilight Sanctuary does not. D&D is an exceptions based rule system, so by RAW (rules as written in the actual book), and the natural language in which they are written, nothing makes this possible by RAW. You are however encouraged, by the game and the designers, to make exceptions and home brew things any way you want at your table and your game. But attempting to rules lawyer this one feature (Steps of the Night) based on non-existent language and feelings or interpretations based on why it is thematic, are irrelevant to actual RAW, which is my only argument. Perhaps a designer can fill in the blanks on the Rules As Intended (RAI) someday, or it is erratad and fixed by RAW, but until then, you do you boo. Peace out.
The dim light shed does not change or negate other light.
It just emits dim light. Doea not negate or change anything
Example... at night, turn the light off in a room of your house. Its darkness yeh
Now light a candle.... wah lah... thats dim light. Now turn the light of the room back on, its not dim anymore from the candle, its bright now right... but the candle is still emitting its same dim light.....
The ability doesn't say it sheds light like a candle, so it doesn't.
Instead, it creates a sphere of twilight. In it is dim light. Simple.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Could someone please point to where twilight sanctuary specifies that the dim light created works any differently than any other source of dim light?
The difference people are arguing is the difference between a light source that sheds dim light and an effect (not a light source) that fills an area with dim light. Kind of like how fog cloud fills an area with fog.
Could someone please point to where twilight sanctuary specifies that the dim light created works any differently than any other source of dim light?
The difference people are arguing is the difference between a light source that sheds dim light and an effect (not a light source) that fills an area with dim light. Kind of like how fog cloud fills an area with fog.
The dim light comes from the effect, thus the effect is a source of dim light. That's what I meant - I wasn't claiming that the light emanates from a specific point, that is, a light source, but rather that the effect creates (and is therefore a source of) light, just as a torch creates (and is therefore a source of) light. My point was that light is light and functions the same, unless noted otherwise. If it says it behaves differently, it does. If it doesn't say it behaves differently, it doesn't.
To your point about fog cloud, the spell creates fog and says exactly how that fog behaves mechanically. There are no rules governing natural fog, but given that TCoE suggests using the effect of the fog cloud spell to emulate natural fog, it's reasonable to assume that fog cloud doesn't have any special behavior that natural fog wouldn't have. If it behaved unusually, it would say so.
The same goes for the light created by twilight sanctuary. The spell creates dim light, which there are actually rules for. Nothing in the rules for dim light says that it dims/reduces bright light, so it doesn't unless a specific instance says that it does. Twilight sanctuary doesn't have any wording to suggest that it dims/reduces bright light, so it doesn't. It doesn't matter whether the light comes from a specific point or is just there. What matters is that it's dim light, and we already know how dim light works.
But for the record, as if it matters, the sphere that is filled with dim light "emanates from you."
Could someone please point to where twilight sanctuary specifies that the dim light created works any differently than any other source of dim light?
The difference people are arguing is the difference between a light source that sheds dim light and an effect (not a light source) that fills an area with dim light. Kind of like how fog cloud fills an area with fog.
The dim light comes from the effect, thus the effect is a source of dim light. That's what I meant - I wasn't claiming that the light emanates from a specific point, that is, a light source, but rather that the effect creates (and is therefore a source of) light, just as a torch creates (and is therefore a source of) light. My point was that light is light and functions the same, unless noted otherwise. If it says it behaves differently, it does. If it doesn't say it behaves differently, it doesn't.
To your point about fog cloud, the spell creates fog and says exactly how that fog behaves mechanically. There are no rules governing natural fog, but given that TCoE suggests using the effect of the fog cloud spell to emulate natural fog, it's reasonable to assume that fog cloud doesn't have any special behavior that natural fog wouldn't have. If it behaved unusually, it would say so.
The same goes for the light created by twilight sanctuary. The spell creates dim light, which there are actually rules for. Nothing in the rules for dim light says that it dims/reduces bright light, so it doesn't unless a specific instance says that it does. Twilight sanctuary doesn't have any wording to suggest that it dims/reduces bright light, so it doesn't. It doesn't matter whether the light comes from a specific point or is just there. What matters is that it's dim light, and we already know how dim light works.
But for the record, as if it matters, the sphere that is filled with dim light "emanates from you."
I believe I've mentioned this before but I don't remember if it was in this thread.
The difference of opinion, I believe, is in what "filled with dim light" means. Does it fill the area with the condition "dim light" in which case you would expect it to override any existing lighting condition, or does it fill it with light that is dim just like a light source would.
In the first option, where the effect of the feature is to change the light level inside the sphere to "dim light" it is not a light source as much as it is a light regulator, in that in forces any previous existing light level to be "dim light". It is not "adding" dim light to the area, it is straight up setting the condition to be "dim light". I hope that makes sense.
With regards to the "emanates from you" bit, that is refering to the sphere that is filled with the dimmed light condition, not the dimmed light itself.
I cannot find it in this thread, but someone linked to an interview where a designer spoke about the UA version of the subclass and mentioned in passing that the twilight santuary feature was intended to also dim light, which in very much in theme with the subclass, which was sorta the last nail in the coffin for me, showing that it s indeed RAI that the sphere dims existing light conditions.
I'll concede that the designers have said that's how it's intended to work, but I don't see that intent reflected in the text itself. If that's indeed the case, it should be fixed or clarified in an errata.
If you read the text as I tried to explain it with RAI in mind I think it should make a decent amount of sense... However, I absolutely agree that them not making it more clear is a significant oversight.
I think if you read the text as I tried to explain it with RAI in mind I think it should make a decent amount of sense... However, I absolutely agree that them not making it more clear is a significant oversight.
True. Like how Tiny Hut says the environment inside is dry and comfortable no matter what it’s like outside. They should have done similar for this feature if that was the intention
If you read the text as I tried to explain it with RAI in mind I think it should make a decent amount of sense... However, I absolutely agree that them not making it more clear is a significant oversight.
Still more obvious than literally any of the implications of the wording of the echo knight's manifest echo lol.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
One last time, nothing in the feature describes what is being touted as gospel by many in this thread. If it did it would be great if it was spelled out like it is in other examples in the game, eg the Darkness and Shadow of Moil spells, both of which explicitly call out how they interact with light, whereas Twilight Sanctuary does not. D&D is an exceptions based rule system, so by RAW (rules as written in the actual book), and the natural language in which they are written, nothing makes this possible by RAW. You are however encouraged, by the game and the designers, to make exceptions and home brew things any way you want at your table and your game. But attempting to rules lawyer this one feature (Steps of the Night) based on non-existent language and feelings or interpretations based on why it is thematic, are irrelevant to actual RAW, which is my only argument. Perhaps a designer can fill in the blanks on the Rules As Intended (RAI) someday, or it is erratad and fixed by RAW, but until then, you do you boo. Peace out.
This is the way.
The ability doesn't say it sheds light like a candle, so it doesn't.
Instead, it creates a sphere of twilight. In it is dim light. Simple.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Could someone please point to where twilight sanctuary specifies that the dim light created works any differently than any other source of dim light?
This.
The difference people are arguing is the difference between a light source that sheds dim light and an effect (not a light source) that fills an area with dim light. Kind of like how fog cloud fills an area with fog.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
The dim light comes from the effect, thus the effect is a source of dim light. That's what I meant - I wasn't claiming that the light emanates from a specific point, that is, a light source, but rather that the effect creates (and is therefore a source of) light, just as a torch creates (and is therefore a source of) light. My point was that light is light and functions the same, unless noted otherwise. If it says it behaves differently, it does. If it doesn't say it behaves differently, it doesn't.
To your point about fog cloud, the spell creates fog and says exactly how that fog behaves mechanically. There are no rules governing natural fog, but given that TCoE suggests using the effect of the fog cloud spell to emulate natural fog, it's reasonable to assume that fog cloud doesn't have any special behavior that natural fog wouldn't have. If it behaved unusually, it would say so.
The same goes for the light created by twilight sanctuary. The spell creates dim light, which there are actually rules for. Nothing in the rules for dim light says that it dims/reduces bright light, so it doesn't unless a specific instance says that it does. Twilight sanctuary doesn't have any wording to suggest that it dims/reduces bright light, so it doesn't. It doesn't matter whether the light comes from a specific point or is just there. What matters is that it's dim light, and we already know how dim light works.
But for the record, as if it matters, the sphere that is filled with dim light "emanates from you."
I believe I've mentioned this before but I don't remember if it was in this thread.
The difference of opinion, I believe, is in what "filled with dim light" means. Does it fill the area with the condition "dim light" in which case you would expect it to override any existing lighting condition, or does it fill it with light that is dim just like a light source would.
In the first option, where the effect of the feature is to change the light level inside the sphere to "dim light" it is not a light source as much as it is a light regulator, in that in forces any previous existing light level to be "dim light". It is not "adding" dim light to the area, it is straight up setting the condition to be "dim light". I hope that makes sense.
With regards to the "emanates from you" bit, that is refering to the sphere that is filled with the dimmed light condition, not the dimmed light itself.
I cannot find it in this thread, but someone linked to an interview where a designer spoke about the UA version of the subclass and mentioned in passing that the twilight santuary feature was intended to also dim light, which in very much in theme with the subclass, which was sorta the last nail in the coffin for me, showing that it s indeed RAI that the sphere dims existing light conditions.
Edit: Found the designer thing. https://twitter.com/Dan_Dillon_1/status/1179861283429990400
Dan Dillion apparently worked on the subclass and should have a pretty trustworthy opinion on the RAI.
I'll concede that the designers have said that's how it's intended to work, but I don't see that intent reflected in the text itself. If that's indeed the case, it should be fixed or clarified in an errata.
If you read the text as I tried to explain it with RAI in mind I think it should make a decent amount of sense... However, I absolutely agree that them not making it more clear is a significant oversight.
True. Like how Tiny Hut says the environment inside is dry and comfortable no matter what it’s like outside. They should have done similar for this feature if that was the intention
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Still more obvious than literally any of the implications of the wording of the echo knight's manifest echo lol.