Illusions and darkness

[ChimericDream]

So, I was curious how this would work. In the game I'm currently playing in, some of the baddies had cast a darkness spell (not sure exactly which one, but it was around 3rd or 4th level from the SC). It's a level adjust campaign, so we've got two pixies in the party. One of them, a fairly new player, decided to use permanent image (a 6th level SLA) to conjure up an illusion of several hundred lamps in the darkened area. Now, assuming people failed their Will save (voluntarily or otherwise), and seeing as this is a higher level spell, would this negate the magical darkness?

The DM ruled that it wouldn't, as it was an illusion spell conjuring light instead of a [Light] spell, but I'm not sure. When I DM, I like to reward creativity, and that seemed like an interesting concept.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

It is the magic of the light spell that counters the darkness spell, not the amount of light the spell emits. An illusion does not have that same kind of magic, it doesn't matter how many images of lamps were created or even the image of a burning sun, it wouldn't penetrate the magical darkness.

 

[TheGogmagog]

The DM ruled that it wouldn't, as it was an illusion spell conjuring light instead of a [Light] spell, but I'm not sure. When I DM, I like to reward creativity, and that seemed like an interesting concept.

As far as rules go, no the darkness spell is not countered by higher level illusion spells.

When I DM I like to eat candy. But I'm not the DM of the ruling in question.

 

[accipiter]

I hear you -- I always hate to rule against my players when it comes to creative ideas. One of the things I've discovered though, running a straight D&D game, is that some rulings open up cans of worms that should not be opened.

My players are very creative and clever, and if I ruled that they could use illusion like that, they'd run with it, and try to use it for all sorts of other things. They're not petty (I wouldn't hear "But you let so and so do it with the lamps and darkness!") but I'd feel like I was being inconsistent if I allowed it in one case but not another.

 

[frankthedm]

IIRC Illusions can't make light at all. A few spells got moved to Evocation [Light] because of this.

 

[phindar]

Yeah, illusionary lamps always bugged me too. What about an illusion with thermal elements, would an illusionary campfire ward off frostbite?

For me, I like it to all come down to a few easy to remember truisms, and the one for illusions is Illusions Aren't Real. As a player of an illusionist once yelled out in great frustration: "Illusions suck! They don't do anything!" But that's kind of the point. (I wasn't running that game, and it was 2e, but I always thought that was hilarious. Right up there with "Challenges are supposed to be easy!" on my list of things players say in total seriousness at games. "Kick his ass in the face," although not a gamer and not at a game, but still on the list.)

Illusions don't reveal anything, they obscure it. An illusion of a torch provides the illusion of light, the pages of your book look yellow, but you still can't make out the text. A Major Illusion of a campfire doesn't prevent damage from cold, although it might make a character unaware of the damage he's taking from exposure. (I'd be tempted to rule it that way, if it ever came up in the game.)

Illusions only really work if the GM is willing to reward the pc's creativity. Creativity is really all you got with illusions. But it should still be within the rules.

 

[Hypersmurf]

IIRC Illusions can't make light at all. A few spells got moved to Evocation [Light] because of this.

Interesting sequence, there.

In the 3E PHB, the Illusion school description stated "Figments cannot illuminate darkness".

Dancing Lights and Continual Flame were figments.

So when they reprinted the 3E PHB, they changed Dancing Lights and Continual Flame to Evocation [Light]... and also removed the line stating that figments cannot illuminate darkness.

So they made a change to make the spells legal... and then removed the rule that made them illegal as figments in the first place!

-Hyp.

 

[TheGogmagog]

Interesting. So Major Image can create the thermal elements of a bonfire but shed no light?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Interesting. So Major Image can create the thermal elements of a bonfire but shed no light?

As noted, the line that "Figments cannot illuminate darkness" was removed.

-Hyp.

 

[Raspen]

hehe funny i seem to think backwards on everything but would it not be just as easy to put an illusion over the object that is causeing the darkness?