There should be no expectation that you can just fire off lightning bolts without giving yourself away.
There should be no expectation that the rules will present a realistic description of reality either.
While this statement is about as reasonable as the alternative, we should acknowledge it is your subjective opinion on the matter and not something codified in the game's rules.
There should be no expectation that you can just fire off lightning bolts without giving yourself away.
There should be no expectation that the rules will present a realistic description of reality either.
While this statement is about as reasonable as the alternative, we should acknowledge it is your subjective opinion on the matter and not something codified in the game's rules.
Just as it is subjective opinion that flaming objects illuminate an area?
Yeah, you're right. It is just subjective opinion that the rules and reality are different.
RAW, all fire produces bright light. The problem is that not every fire source is given an explicit radius, which means that it is up to the DM to decide.
Bright light lets most creatures see normally. Even gloomy days provide bright light, as do torches, lanterns, fires, and other sources of illumination within a specific radius.
Create bonfire definitely creates an actual bonfire, and a bonfire is absolutely a 'fire'. These two points are pretty hard to dispute. So it does give off bright light - its just up to the DM to say how far the bright light goes.
I personally just use standard torchlight. I suppose a DM could always rule that the radius is 0 feet because of magic, but that is no more RAW than a 20 foot radius, or even a 40 foot radius. Its also a DM ruling.
I played a game once where this mattered. It was dark, under water and our opponents dispelled our light source.
We ruled the following:
1) Without any light source that round , you had no idea where the enemy was unless they were in melee with you. You also had not idea of where your allies were or the walls were.
2) In any round that an incidental light creating spell or similar effect went off, (Warding Flare from a Light Cleric) then you had a general idea where they were and could make a ranged attack (i.e. spell that did not require you to see the target) with disadvantage due to not seeing them. You also could tell where your allies were and the walls were, although that was less important.
3) Light effects that were constant but did not mention a radius were enough to put your own 5ft square in dim light you up but no distance. In effect they let people see you but did not you see others.
This gave a small benefit from using items that gave off light but did not let you actually see anything.
I gave this thread a quick re-read, and I am wondering what is the origin of the idea that a source of light must define an area of illumination in order to give off any illumination at all. As far as I am aware, that is just an inference that, because some spells and items indicate a defined radius of bright and/or dim light, then any spell or item that does not include this information must not give off any at all. Is there actually a rule that says anything that emits light will tell you exactly how much it emits? Since we do revel in the pedantic in this subform (I say that with love), it seems like we generally try to shy away from inferences and fall back on defined rules, particularly when our last line of defense when justifying the absurd is, "sometimes the rules aren't logical."
Is there actually a rule that says anything that emits light will tell you exactly how much it emits?
Yes.
Well, I guess the other side of the argument is "even though the rules tell you that sources of light indicate how much light they shed, it doesn't say 'all of them will give you exact dimensions every time' in the rule."
RAW, all fire produces bright light. The problem is that not every fire source is given an explicit radius, which means that it is up to the DM to decide.
Bright light lets most creatures see normally. Even gloomy days provide bright light, as do torches, lanterns, fires, and other sources of illumination within a specific radius.
With that, I am now moving my opinion to: both arguments are an interpretation of RAW.
At least as far as create bonfire is concerned. Instantaneous fire spells I still argue don't illuminate the area but are visible in darkness, because invisible fire (while a real thing) isn't intended.
As the OP asks in the title, the real question isn't whethercreate bonfire any spell that doesn't mention light creates light; the question is how much. And the answer is not RAW. It isn't written.
Stop with the Create Bonfire discussion already - there is an active thread discussing it.
Even if spells like Fireball or Fire Bolt did produce a momentarily flash of light, it is more likely to blind everybody whose eyes have adjusted to the darkness than reveal the location of any enemy in the area.
Yeah, I now wish I hadn't mentioned fire at all. :-(
So, my question (it came up in a game a couple of years ago) - does eldritch blast give off enough light to be able to (briefly) see what's in an otherwise-dark room?
As an aside, I'm going to decide "yes" to lightning bolt, because having been less than a km from the impact of one, I can say it did light up the room brightly. The after images made it seem like the room was brightly lit for many seconds!
So, my question (it came up in a game a couple of years ago) - does eldritch blast give off enough light to be able to (briefly) see what's in an otherwise-dark room?
Eldritch blast doesn't say it gives off any light at all. It only mentions "crackling energy", which is sound if anything - and unlike something like fire or lightning, a beam of crackling energy doesn't have something nonmagical that it's analogous to.
While this statement is about as reasonable as the alternative, we should acknowledge it is your subjective opinion on the matter and not something codified in the game's rules.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Just as it is subjective opinion that flaming objects illuminate an area?Yeah, you're right. It is just subjective opinion that the rules and reality are different.
RAW, all fire produces bright light. The problem is that not every fire source is given an explicit radius, which means that it is up to the DM to decide.
Create bonfire definitely creates an actual bonfire, and a bonfire is absolutely a 'fire'. These two points are pretty hard to dispute. So it does give off bright light - its just up to the DM to say how far the bright light goes.
I personally just use standard torchlight. I suppose a DM could always rule that the radius is 0 feet because of magic, but that is no more RAW than a 20 foot radius, or even a 40 foot radius. Its also a DM ruling.
I played a game once where this mattered. It was dark, under water and our opponents dispelled our light source.
We ruled the following:
1) Without any light source that round , you had no idea where the enemy was unless they were in melee with you. You also had not idea of where your allies were or the walls were.
2) In any round that an incidental light creating spell or similar effect went off, (Warding Flare from a Light Cleric) then you had a general idea where they were and could make a ranged attack (i.e. spell that did not require you to see the target) with disadvantage due to not seeing them. You also could tell where your allies were and the walls were, although that was less important.
3) Light effects that were constant but did not mention a radius were enough to put your own 5ft square in dim light you up but no distance. In effect they let people see you but did not you see others.
This gave a small benefit from using items that gave off light but did not let you actually see anything.
I gave this thread a quick re-read, and I am wondering what is the origin of the idea that a source of light must define an area of illumination in order to give off any illumination at all. As far as I am aware, that is just an inference that, because some spells and items indicate a defined radius of bright and/or dim light, then any spell or item that does not include this information must not give off any at all. Is there actually a rule that says anything that emits light will tell you exactly how much it emits? Since we do revel in the pedantic in this subform (I say that with love), it seems like we generally try to shy away from inferences and fall back on defined rules, particularly when our last line of defense when justifying the absurd is, "sometimes the rules aren't logical."
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Yes.
Well, I guess the other side of the argument is "even though the rules tell you that sources of light indicate how much light they shed, it doesn't say 'all of them will give you exact dimensions every time' in the rule."
With that, I am now moving my opinion to: both arguments are an interpretation of RAW.
At least as far as create bonfire is concerned. Instantaneous fire spells I still argue don't illuminate the area but are visible in darkness, because invisible fire (while a real thing) isn't intended.
As the OP asks in the title, the real question isn't whether
create bonfireany spell that doesn't mention light creates light; the question is how much. And the answer is not RAW. It isn't written.Yeah, I now wish I hadn't mentioned fire at all. :-(
So, my question (it came up in a game a couple of years ago) - does eldritch blast give off enough light to be able to (briefly) see what's in an otherwise-dark room?
As an aside, I'm going to decide "yes" to lightning bolt, because having been less than a km from the impact of one, I can say it did light up the room brightly. The after images made it seem like the room was brightly lit for many seconds!
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorEldritch blast doesn't say it gives off any light at all. It only mentions "crackling energy", which is sound if anything - and unlike something like fire or lightning, a beam of crackling energy doesn't have something nonmagical that it's analogous to.