Vision and Light Question

[valeren]

Hello.

Got a question here regarding vision and light. In 4e, light is broken down to just bright, dim and darkness. The table in p262 of the PHB gives the type of light sources and a radius taht is affected for such light sources. But, there doesn't seem to be any rules stating anything outside of that.

I'm asking this with the concern of low-light vision capable characters. Also, baack in 3.5e, there were rules for light sources outside the bright areas (provide shadow illumination).

How is this supposed to be handled in 4e?

Thanks.

 

[satin]

I'd love to get some advice on this one... we had the same question come up in our game last weekend.

It seemed kind of strange to have illumination drop from full light to total darkness just outside the stated radius.

But we couldn't figure out how large the "low light" zone should be.

 

[mattdm]

The idea that light sources project a perfect square of even light which stops exactly at its border is an abstraction to reduce the need to fumble about with sines and cosines in combat. Take it as: for the purposes of resolving combat, your torch is making this area bright enough to fight in without penalties. For all other purposes, a light source acts as it really would.

So, the answer to how to treat the light falloff issue depends on what exactly the question is — is it about being able to see some detail, or is it about combat modifiers?

If the absolute line still bothers you, I suggest making the last square (or the square just outside) of the area of a bright light source be dim light. Way easier to keep track of than the (more accurate to be sure) double-radius dim light 3E approach.


The abstraction is particularly good for moving light sources. For static sources — terrain features, basically — I suggest making bright, dim, and dark be where it makes sense. We did this in my game last session and no one seemed bothered by the fact that I was using slightly different rules for the light from the bonfire than for light from the torches people were holding.

 

[Stalker0]

I like the new vision rules, its cleaner and easier to adjudicate than the previous rules.

But I dislike the light sources, especially that a cheap sunrod provides 20 squares of illumination. So far low light has seemed pretty worthless to me.

 

[Dayspire]

(snip)But I dislike the light sources, especially that a cheap sunrod provides 20 squares of illumination. So far low light has seemed pretty worthless to me.

I couldn't agree more, Stalker. I recently 'nerfed' the sunrod in my game to be far, far more expensive.

 

[Syrsuro]

First: I think sunrods either need to have a far smaller radius or be far more expensive (or both and exist in two versions). That falls into the "what were they thinking?" category.

Second: I have ruled that outside of the radius of any light source is a second circle of light the next brightness down. I.e. if a torch illuminates out to 5 squares of bright light, it also illuminates some larger circle of dim light. There is no rule in the book which says either that there is total darkness outside of that circle (although I saw DMs make that ruling at GenCon) or that there is dim light as I have ruled. Additionally, some RPGA modules specify torch lighting in some areas with dim lighting beyond the reach of those torches, without attributing that dim lighting to any specific source.

But I think it just makes sense. On the other hand, I don't think that the radius of that light source should necessarily be dependant upon the radius of the sunrod. Rather, it should extend for some fixed distance beyond the the limits of 'bright light'. I'm still considerng what that radius should be but at present am going with an additional circle of 5 squares.

Which raises the second point: If Dim light is as Bright light to a character with low light vision, than there should be a dimmer light that is dim light to one with low light vision and darkness to one without. Thus I would consider any underground region with line of sight to a light source (perhaps with a max. distance) to be dim lighting to one with low light vision, even if that light source is too distant to provide illumination to one with normal sight.

Carl

 

[StormCrow42]

First: I think sunrods either need to have a far smaller radius or be far more expensive (or both and exist in two versions). That falls into the "what were they thinking?" category.

Remember, a sunrod is also essentially a 20 square radius "Look, HERE we are!!!" as well.

 

[Syrsuro]

Remember, a sunrod is also essentially a 20 square radius "Look, HERE we are!!!" as well.

I've pointed this out to my players a few times. And since I apply 'common sense' as above, it actually advertises their presence further away than that (assuming low light vision on the party of their opponents).

Eventually they'll learn. (The rogue is already starting to wish for a bit less light sometimes).

But that small drawback doesn't outweight its benefits enough to make it not still either too cheap or two bright.

Carl

 

[frankthedm]

Well, a solution might be to

1. Cut sunrod's light radius in half.
2. Have light sources emit shadowy illumination 2 squares beyond their bright light radius.
3. Rule that this shadowy illumination is enough for attempting a hide check.

I'm normally one for boning rogues , but if you add shadowy illumination back onto light sources, the errata from Stealth really gets painful.

 

[Mad Hamish]

I like the new vision rules, its cleaner and easier to adjudicate than the previous rules.

But I dislike the light sources, especially that a cheap sunrod provides 20 squares of illumination. So far low light has seemed pretty worthless to me.

Low light is a way of moving through the wilderness without making it blindingly apparent you're coming.

My elven ranger uses it for scouting.
It's not overly useful in dungeons currently on what I've seen.