No. I would allow it to speak with dead. Like I let the the druid metal armour restriction work even though it is worded somewhat unorthodoxly (though it doesn't actually have a similar obvious error like your example.) But thinking that 'Speak with Dad' does nothing because of weird wording would be analogous to people here saying that druid armour limitation is not a rule because nonstandard wording. And that would obviously be absurd.
Do you allow characters to see someone holding a torch in darkness? Because by RAW the darkness obscures the light.
This is not true. It is written in the rule section amongst other rules and repeated in the class rule summary box. You can't just declare that a rule is not a rule.
Lighting rules are dumb, and I don't use the strict RAW of them when I GM. I'm still not claiming that they're not actual rules.
Wait, what's wrong with the lighting rules?
LOL I'm big on mornings, actually (much to the chagrin of whomever I'm sleeping next to).
Of course! Darkness cause creatures to effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area, not into brightly lit areas beyond. So humans can see into bright light area just fine.
