If you look at the spell of Create Bonfire - it doesn't mention that it makes any form of light (such as Produce Flame) - and it seems like it would emit heat, since it can burn something - and if it can burn something - that logically means, like a bonfire - it has, well - fire - and fire produces light. But elsewhere there's been an ongoing discussion (read: debate) about whether this spell actually produces heat (like cast it on the ground to keep warm around it) and whether it produces light (like any fire would).
Create bonfire creates a bonfire and bonfires create light. The spell doesn't tell you exactly how much light it creates, so ask your DM if you want to know for sure. I am of the mind that we should expect that most things (bonfires, for instance) in D&D behave more or less the way they behave in the real world, unless there is a rule or feature that changes that expectation. The rules for vision and light tell us that fires produce bright light, so there you go.
We can all agree that the spell itself doesn't say it sheds any light. So beyond that, you have to decide for yourself. What mechanical effects are you willing to give a spell beyond what its description provides?
We can all agree that the spell itself doesn't say it sheds any light. So beyond that, you have to decide for yourself. What mechanical effects are you willing to give a spell beyond what its description provides?
It is a bit of a slippery slope, if fire spells mechanically emit light, then shouldn't lightning and radiant spells? What about force spells?
Can we even use darkness in combat when there are spellcasters around? Does the wizard's firebolt illuminate the darkness enough that the rogue isn't considered hidden anymore?
Probably simpler and more fun for everyone to pretend magic doesn't make light unless it says it does (or it says it sets things on non-magic fire, then up to DM how bright that is). That is my 2 cp on it anyway.
We can all agree that the spell itself doesn't say it sheds any light. So beyond that, you have to decide for yourself. What mechanical effects are you willing to give a spell beyond what its description provides?
It is a bit of a slippery slope, if fire spells mechanically emit light, then shouldn't lightning and radiant spells? What about force spells?
Can we even use darkness in combat when there are spellcasters around? Does the wizard's firebolt illuminate the darkness enough that the rogue isn't considered hidden anymore?
Probably simpler and more fun for everyone to pretend magic doesn't make light unless it says it does (or it says it sets things on non-magic fire, then up to DM how bright that is). That is my 2 cp on it anyway.
I completely agree, but there was a rather long thread (which I admit I participated in defending that idea) over this. Apparently "it does what the tin says" isn't a universally accepted concept.
Create bonfire creates a bonfire and bonfires create light. The spell doesn't tell you exactly how much light it creates, so ask your DM if you want to know for sure. I am of the mind that we should expect that most things (bonfires, for instance) in D&D behave more or less the way they behave in the real world, unless there is a rule or feature that changes that expectation. The rules for vision and light tell us that fires produce bright light, so there you go.
I'd rule it on this basis; it says "you create a bonfire", and it does have a duration, so we know that for that duration there is a bonfire. It seems unreasonable that a bonfire would not shed heat or light, but for whatever reason it's left up to your DM to decide what that means, as for any other source of "basic" illumination in the environment.
It is a bit of a slippery slope, if fire spells mechanically emit light, then shouldn't lightning and radiant spells? What about force spells?
Can we even use darkness in combat when there are spellcasters around? Does the wizard's firebolt illuminate the darkness enough that the rogue isn't considered hidden anymore?
I don't see these as problems; whether or not any of these produce light is dependent upon their descriptions, but if there is a full lightning bolt involved then it absolutely should produce a flash of light, however shocking grasp may be more like a tazer (contact sparks), a fire bolt should be visible in the dark and maybe produce a brief flare on impact etc.
However, if all of these are instantaneous then they are of no use when it comes to seeing in the dark for the rest of your turn, or into someone else's as they do not persit. Spells with duration however could definitely provide enduring "basic" illumination that's left up to your DM (as with candles, fireplaces etc. in the environment), but it depends on how they're described as that's usually what informs how visible or audible they might be.
The spell Create Bonfire not creating any light as written is clearly an error to me as non-instantaneous fire effect normally do.
This is the most plausible argument for saying the spell should do something different than it says. And considering it is from one of the early additional sources to the game, it is also a reasonable proposition. The trouble is that WotC has already addressed problems from some of these other early sources with errata, advice and re-printings.
The spell Create Bonfire not creating any light as written is clearly an error to me as non-instantaneous fire effect normally do.
This is the most plausible argument for saying the spell should do something different than it says. And considering it is from one of the early additional sources to the game, it is also a reasonable proposition. The trouble is that WotC has already addressed problems from some of these other early sources with errata, advice and re-printings.
I agree it never got any errara thus far that would indicate the type and radius of light it shed if any.
Its as if for balance reasons R&D decided to not have the cantrip Create bonfire shed any light rather than a persistent oversight or reliance on crossreferencing with general Vision and Light rules for it to.
I think the thing I would say is that a spell may still be visible and or even shed light, just not enough to be mechanically significant. Not enough to go from darkness to dim light.
At the same time, even a small candle sheds bright light in a 5-foot radius and dim light for an additional 5 feet and most people i'm sure would assume a bonfire is quite bigger.
Someone know if a bonfire was ever published in a sourcebook or adventure? If so what were the specs?
The bottom line in this discussion is to ask your DM.
RAW, the answer isn't as well defined as we might like ... one side wants an explicit statement the other relies on the general rules for fire which do not list the characteristics of how much light a fire emits.
Here is the text of the spell:
"You create a bonfire on ground that you can see within range. Until the spell ends, the magic bonfire fills a 5-foot cube. Any creature in the bonfire’s space when you cast the spell must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take 1d8 fire damage. A creature must also make the saving throw when it moves into the bonfire’s space for the first time on a turn or ends its turn there. The bonfire ignites flammable objects in its area that aren’t being worn or carried."
1) The spell does not SAY it emits light in game terms so it doesn't. Spells only do what they say they do. Does it emit heat? It doesn't explicitly say that it can warm things up so it doesn't. It only says it can do fire damage or light things on fire. How can it do this without emitting heat or light? Magic. This is the very strict interpretation of exactly what the spell says.
2) However, another approach is, specific beats general only when a specific rule over-rides the general rule.
"This compendium contains rules that govern how the game plays. That said, many racial traits, class features, spells, magic items, monster abilities, and other game elements break the general rules in some way, creating an exception to how the rest of the game works. Remember this: If a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule wins."
A specific rule will take precedence over a general one. D&D rules are a list of non-inclusive exceptions. If something does not list a specific rule that overcomes the general rule then the general rules still apply.
.. and ..
The rules are written in natural English. e.g. from a SAC comment in reference to a specific answer "Speaking of “line of sight,” the game uses the English meaning of the term, which has no special meaning in the rules."
What is a bonfire?
From the Oxford dictionary: "bonfire: a large open-air fire used as part of a celebration, for burning trash, or as a signal"
If the rules are written in English then a bonfire ... which is exactly the term the spell uses ... IS a LARGE fire.
We then have:
"Even gloomy days provide bright light, as do torches, lanterns, fires, and other sources of illumination within a specific radius."
Since the general rules say that fire creates bright light, the natural English definition of bonfire (which is exactly what the spell creates) states that it is a large fire - then from the general rules we could say that the bonfire created by the spell produces bright light because the spell does NOT say it produces no light. The rules ONLY list exceptions where specific beats general. Assuming that the spell create bonfire creates no light because it doesn't say it does is ignoring the general rules on fires which DO create light - and a bonfire is a large fire.
A candle, a torch or a campfire are sources of both light and heat (a campfire can attract a Frost Salamander which looks for heat sources (MTOF)). In both our normal experience, and the D&D rules, fires are a source of light and heat.
Should a bonfire produce light and heat? I would say, based on the general rules for fires, yes.
How much? Completely a DM call because the rules do not give information on the light emitted by a normal campfire. They also do not give rules for a bonfire which is bigger than a campfire. Fires can vary from blazing flames emitting a lot of light to flaming coals that emit little light but a lot of heat. However, since the rules don't say - the amount of heat and light supplied by a campfire or a bonfire is up to the DM.
However, a comparison can be made to the torch (20' bright, 20' dim) or the produce flame cantrip (10' bright, 10' dim) or a candle (5' bright, 5' dim) if a DM wants to get some guidance on how much illumination they want from a specific fire.
P.S. From personal experience, campfires or bonfires can vary greatly.
-----
Anyway, those are the two viewpoints as I understand them. I lean toward the natural language interpretation (assuming that the spell MEANT to use the word bonfire to describe its effect) and the general rule that fire produces bright light and the Create Bonfire spell does NOT contradict that rule.
-----
However, does ruling that a bonfire sheds light and heat impact anything else?
In general no.
1) Other damage types, like lightning, radiant or force do NOT have a general rule stating that they emit light. They don't appear in the lighting rules. You could argue that radiant damage produces heat since it "sears the flesh like fire" but it still doesn't say it creates light. So, ruling that a bonfire creates light and heat has no knock on effects for other damage types.
2) What about other fire spells? Do these create light? All the rules say is that fire creates light - it does not say how much. So it is up to the DM to determine. So ruling that bonfire creates light DOES require the DM to decide which other fire spells emit light and how much. Some spells already state like Flaming Sphere (20' bright, 20' dim), but others do not like Wall of Fire or Fire Bolt. Fire Bolt produces "a mote of fire" so a DM could rule it is visible but doesn't emit enough light to illuminate anything.
----
Anyway, ruling that any fire only produces light based on an explicit statement which over rides the general rules and does not emit light without those specific statements is ignoring the general rules that fires emit bright light and the natural English usage of the word fire or bonfire but it is certainly a valid way for a DM to run the game.
----
Finally, :) , the question about fire comes up because almost everyone knows what fire is - they have seen candles, campfires and other sources of light and heat. They sit around campfires roasting marshmallows. However, this is a D&D magic vs physics comparison - real world fire vs D&D fire - there is every chance that they aren't the same and can't be expected to behave the same.
For example, asking if a lightning bolt spell emits light is an interesting question. Our everyday experience is that lightning emits light - but that is an effect of the physics involved - not the magic of D&D. We see light from a lightning bolt because it ionizes atoms in the path of the electrical discharge due to the flowing electrons colliding with the particles that make up the atmosphere, when these electrons and atoms recombine (or the electrons fall to lower energy states) they emit radiation, some of which is in the form of visible light. Does all of that happen with a D&D lightning bolt? Who knows ... it is magic. In D&D a lightning bolt travels in a straight line, while in the real world it arcs to the nearest ground and follows a non-linear path.
So, does a lightning bolt in D&D emit light? The spell doesn't say. There is no general rule that lightning emits light to fall back on - so RAW, the answer would be no. However, a DM can rule it for their game in whatever way makes the most sense for how their game world runs.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form| Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock | He/Him/They/Them
The spell creates a bonfire but does not create light. The bonfire creates light. This is not slopistry, it relates to how it interacts with the spell darkness.
Because the light is created by the bonfire rather than the spell itself, the light is non-magical (and therefore does not penetrate the Darkness) and more importantly, the spell darkness does NOT dispel the Bonfire despite blocking the light.
We can all agree that the spell itself doesn't say it sheds any light. So beyond that, you have to decide for yourself. What mechanical effects are you willing to give a spell beyond what its description provides?
It is a bit of a slippery slope, if fire spells mechanically emit light, then shouldn't lightning and radiant spells? What about force spells?
Can we even use darkness in combat when there are spellcasters around? Does the wizard's firebolt illuminate the darkness enough that the rogue isn't considered hidden anymore?
Probably simpler and more fun for everyone to pretend magic doesn't make light unless it says it does (or it says it sets things on non-magic fire, then up to DM how bright that is). That is my 2 cp on it anyway.
Something like a fire bolt or word of radiance happens “instantaneously,” it flashes so quickly it would be like a single strobe light flash and then darkness again. It has to produce light logically, but not sustained light, so it’s irrelevant when it comes to illuminating the darkness to any mechanical degree. That logic allows for it to make sense both logically and mechanically. It only breaks down for a spell like create bonfire which is a non-instantaneous effect, since logically the bonfire created should shed at least as much light as a torch, if not more.
No one is disputing the fact that it creates a bonfire, (it specifically say so) but rather that it doesn't say it shed light with any given radius and degree of illumination that any light source provide.
So as written create bonfire creates a bonfire but no light source, leaving DMs free to add any if desired.
Those looking to rationalize the fact that it burns but otherwise doesn't shed light can always say it creates a dying bonfire without flamme but coals still burning 😉
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If you look at the spell of Create Bonfire - it doesn't mention that it makes any form of light (such as Produce Flame) - and it seems like it would emit heat, since it can burn something - and if it can burn something - that logically means, like a bonfire - it has, well - fire - and fire produces light. But elsewhere there's been an ongoing discussion (read: debate) about whether this spell actually produces heat (like cast it on the ground to keep warm around it) and whether it produces light (like any fire would).
Check out my publication on DMs Guild: https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?author=Tawmis%20Logue
Check out my comedy web series - Neverending Nights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wr4-u9-zw0&list=PLbRG7dzFI-u3EJd0usasgDrrFO3mZ1lOZ
Need a character story/background written up? I do it for free (but also take donations!) - https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?591882-Need-a-character-background-written-up
Mechanically it makes fire/heat, but not light.
Does it make sense? Not really, but it is a magic spell in a game. Up to DM if they want it to emit light. Anything it sets on fire should at least.
Create bonfire creates a bonfire and bonfires create light. The spell doesn't tell you exactly how much light it creates, so ask your DM if you want to know for sure. I am of the mind that we should expect that most things (bonfires, for instance) in D&D behave more or less the way they behave in the real world, unless there is a rule or feature that changes that expectation. The rules for vision and light tell us that fires produce bright light, so there you go.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
That would also be in at least one other thread on these forums.
Yea there has been some debate on the subject here too. Have a look if you feel like it, I think it mostly ended in a disagree to disagree style.
We can all agree that the spell itself doesn't say it sheds any light. So beyond that, you have to decide for yourself. What mechanical effects are you willing to give a spell beyond what its description provides?
It is a bit of a slippery slope, if fire spells mechanically emit light, then shouldn't lightning and radiant spells? What about force spells?
Can we even use darkness in combat when there are spellcasters around? Does the wizard's firebolt illuminate the darkness enough that the rogue isn't considered hidden anymore?
Probably simpler and more fun for everyone to pretend magic doesn't make light unless it says it does (or it says it sets things on non-magic fire, then up to DM how bright that is). That is my 2 cp on it anyway.
I completely agree, but there was a rather long thread (which I admit I participated in defending that idea) over this. Apparently "it does what the tin says" isn't a universally accepted concept.
The other thread ran to 10 pages - you won't get a consensus in this thread.
The spell Create Bonfire not creating any light as written is clearly an error to me as non-instantaneous fire effect normally do.
I'd rule it on this basis; it says "you create a bonfire", and it does have a duration, so we know that for that duration there is a bonfire. It seems unreasonable that a bonfire would not shed heat or light, but for whatever reason it's left up to your DM to decide what that means, as for any other source of "basic" illumination in the environment.
I don't see these as problems; whether or not any of these produce light is dependent upon their descriptions, but if there is a full lightning bolt involved then it absolutely should produce a flash of light, however shocking grasp may be more like a tazer (contact sparks), a fire bolt should be visible in the dark and maybe produce a brief flare on impact etc.
However, if all of these are instantaneous then they are of no use when it comes to seeing in the dark for the rest of your turn, or into someone else's as they do not persit. Spells with duration however could definitely provide enduring "basic" illumination that's left up to your DM (as with candles, fireplaces etc. in the environment), but it depends on how they're described as that's usually what informs how visible or audible they might be.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
This is the most plausible argument for saying the spell should do something different than it says. And considering it is from one of the early additional sources to the game, it is also a reasonable proposition. The trouble is that WotC has already addressed problems from some of these other early sources with errata, advice and re-printings.
I agree it never got any errara thus far that would indicate the type and radius of light it shed if any.
Its as if for balance reasons R&D decided to not have the cantrip Create bonfire shed any light rather than a persistent oversight or reliance on crossreferencing with general Vision and Light rules for it to.
I think the thing I would say is that a spell may still be visible and or even shed light, just not enough to be mechanically significant. Not enough to go from darkness to dim light.
At the same time, even a small candle sheds bright light in a 5-foot radius and dim light for an additional 5 feet and most people i'm sure would assume a bonfire is quite bigger.
Someone know if a bonfire was ever published in a sourcebook or adventure? If so what were the specs?
The bottom line in this discussion is to ask your DM.
RAW, the answer isn't as well defined as we might like ... one side wants an explicit statement the other relies on the general rules for fire which do not list the characteristics of how much light a fire emits.
Here is the text of the spell:
"You create a bonfire on ground that you can see within range. Until the spell ends, the magic bonfire fills a 5-foot cube. Any creature in the bonfire’s space when you cast the spell must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take 1d8 fire damage. A creature must also make the saving throw when it moves into the bonfire’s space for the first time on a turn or ends its turn there. The bonfire ignites flammable objects in its area that aren’t being worn or carried."
1) The spell does not SAY it emits light in game terms so it doesn't. Spells only do what they say they do. Does it emit heat? It doesn't explicitly say that it can warm things up so it doesn't. It only says it can do fire damage or light things on fire. How can it do this without emitting heat or light? Magic. This is the very strict interpretation of exactly what the spell says.
2) However, another approach is, specific beats general only when a specific rule over-rides the general rule.
"This compendium contains rules that govern how the game plays. That said, many racial traits, class features, spells, magic items, monster abilities, and other game elements break the general rules in some way, creating an exception to how the rest of the game works. Remember this: If a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule wins."
A specific rule will take precedence over a general one. D&D rules are a list of non-inclusive exceptions. If something does not list a specific rule that overcomes the general rule then the general rules still apply.
.. and ..
The rules are written in natural English. e.g. from a SAC comment in reference to a specific answer "Speaking of “line of sight,” the game uses the English meaning of the term, which has no special meaning in the rules."
What is a bonfire?
From the Oxford dictionary: "bonfire: a large open-air fire used as part of a celebration, for burning trash, or as a signal"
If the rules are written in English then a bonfire ... which is exactly the term the spell uses ... IS a LARGE fire.
We then have:
"Even gloomy days provide bright light, as do torches, lanterns, fires, and other sources of illumination within a specific radius."
Since the general rules say that fire creates bright light, the natural English definition of bonfire (which is exactly what the spell creates) states that it is a large fire - then from the general rules we could say that the bonfire created by the spell produces bright light because the spell does NOT say it produces no light. The rules ONLY list exceptions where specific beats general. Assuming that the spell create bonfire creates no light because it doesn't say it does is ignoring the general rules on fires which DO create light - and a bonfire is a large fire.
A candle, a torch or a campfire are sources of both light and heat (a campfire can attract a Frost Salamander which looks for heat sources (MTOF)). In both our normal experience, and the D&D rules, fires are a source of light and heat.
Should a bonfire produce light and heat? I would say, based on the general rules for fires, yes.
How much? Completely a DM call because the rules do not give information on the light emitted by a normal campfire. They also do not give rules for a bonfire which is bigger than a campfire. Fires can vary from blazing flames emitting a lot of light to flaming coals that emit little light but a lot of heat. However, since the rules don't say - the amount of heat and light supplied by a campfire or a bonfire is up to the DM.
However, a comparison can be made to the torch (20' bright, 20' dim) or the produce flame cantrip (10' bright, 10' dim) or a candle (5' bright, 5' dim) if a DM wants to get some guidance on how much illumination they want from a specific fire.
P.S. From personal experience, campfires or bonfires can vary greatly.
-----
Anyway, those are the two viewpoints as I understand them. I lean toward the natural language interpretation (assuming that the spell MEANT to use the word bonfire to describe its effect) and the general rule that fire produces bright light and the Create Bonfire spell does NOT contradict that rule.
-----
However, does ruling that a bonfire sheds light and heat impact anything else?
In general no.
1) Other damage types, like lightning, radiant or force do NOT have a general rule stating that they emit light. They don't appear in the lighting rules. You could argue that radiant damage produces heat since it "sears the flesh like fire" but it still doesn't say it creates light. So, ruling that a bonfire creates light and heat has no knock on effects for other damage types.
2) What about other fire spells? Do these create light? All the rules say is that fire creates light - it does not say how much. So it is up to the DM to determine. So ruling that bonfire creates light DOES require the DM to decide which other fire spells emit light and how much. Some spells already state like Flaming Sphere (20' bright, 20' dim), but others do not like Wall of Fire or Fire Bolt. Fire Bolt produces "a mote of fire" so a DM could rule it is visible but doesn't emit enough light to illuminate anything.
----
Anyway, ruling that any fire only produces light based on an explicit statement which over rides the general rules and does not emit light without those specific statements is ignoring the general rules that fires emit bright light and the natural English usage of the word fire or bonfire but it is certainly a valid way for a DM to run the game.
----
Finally, :) , the question about fire comes up because almost everyone knows what fire is - they have seen candles, campfires and other sources of light and heat. They sit around campfires roasting marshmallows. However, this is a D&D magic vs physics comparison - real world fire vs D&D fire - there is every chance that they aren't the same and can't be expected to behave the same.
For example, asking if a lightning bolt spell emits light is an interesting question. Our everyday experience is that lightning emits light - but that is an effect of the physics involved - not the magic of D&D. We see light from a lightning bolt because it ionizes atoms in the path of the electrical discharge due to the flowing electrons colliding with the particles that make up the atmosphere, when these electrons and atoms recombine (or the electrons fall to lower energy states) they emit radiation, some of which is in the form of visible light. Does all of that happen with a D&D lightning bolt? Who knows ... it is magic. In D&D a lightning bolt travels in a straight line, while in the real world it arcs to the nearest ground and follows a non-linear path.
So, does a lightning bolt in D&D emit light? The spell doesn't say. There is no general rule that lightning emits light to fall back on - so RAW, the answer would be no. However, a DM can rule it for their game in whatever way makes the most sense for how their game world runs.
The spell creates a bonfire.
/thread
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock | He/Him/They/Them
You can try DDB for free using the Basic Rules, free adventures, MCV1:SC, and homebrew. Answers about physical books, purchases, and subbing.
What is it like to be on the forums.
The spell creates a bonfire but does not create light. The bonfire creates light. This is not slopistry, it relates to how it interacts with the spell darkness.
Because the light is created by the bonfire rather than the spell itself, the light is non-magical (and therefore does not penetrate the Darkness) and more importantly, the spell darkness does NOT dispel the Bonfire despite blocking the light.
Something like a fire bolt or word of radiance happens “instantaneously,” it flashes so quickly it would be like a single strobe light flash and then darkness again. It has to produce light logically, but not sustained light, so it’s irrelevant when it comes to illuminating the darkness to any mechanical degree. That logic allows for it to make sense both logically and mechanically. It only breaks down for a spell like create bonfire which is a non-instantaneous effect, since logically the bonfire created should shed at least as much light as a torch, if not more.
No one is disputing the fact that it creates a bonfire, (it specifically say so) but rather that it doesn't say it shed light with any given radius and degree of illumination that any light source provide.
So as written create bonfire creates a bonfire but no light source, leaving DMs free to add any if desired.
Those looking to rationalize the fact that it burns but otherwise doesn't shed light can always say it creates a dying bonfire without flamme but coals still burning 😉