Darkness - What is "shadowy illumination"?

[werk]

An oxymoron?

I much prefer the oldskool Darkness. None of this black-light bs.

Blacklight is an excellent spell, not BS at all.

Why do you call BS? What specifically is your problem? (I'm very curious)

If darkness is played as written, it's just a miss chance, NBD. If played as total darkness, it's a heck of an obstacle and a little too much for 2nd level IMHO.

 

[Drowbane]

Blacklight is an excellent spell, not BS at all.

Why do you call BS? What specifically is your problem? (I'm very curious)

If darkness is played as written, it's just a miss chance, NBD. If played as total darkness, it's a heck of an obstacle and a little too much for 2nd level IMHO.

black-light. Not Blacklight. Minor distinction, but important for understanding my gripe.

Darkness as it used to be was fine. No real need (IMO, of course) for this "shadowy illumination"... aka... "black-light"... bs.

What is the major obstacle of the old darkness spell? It is easily countered or otherwise dealt with.

Anybody else find it silly that a spell called "darkness" brightens unlit areas?

edit: ...and conjuring an area of darkness is far too weak for a 3rd level spell.

 

[ValhallaGH]

I like Cedric's homebrew interpretation, but I'm still not clear what the actual, literal 3.5e game effect is- just shadowy illumination with 20% miss chance? Kind of dull...

Remember, this makes everyone inside the darkness immune to sneak attack, even on the blows that land.

 

[werk]

Anybody else find it silly that a spell called "darkness" brightens unlit areas?

edit: ...and conjuring an area of darkness is far too weak for a 3rd level spell.

I do find it a little silly that darkness would raise the light level in a total dark situation, but have never played in a group that reads the rule that way. I played it that way IMC to see what would happen, and it was fine. Are there any real problems with shadowy illumination?

Blacklight, the spell, conjures complete darkness that the caster can see through...so a little better than just standing in the dark.

 

[frankthedm]

The DM was somewhat surprised when I told him what the spell actually does in 3.5, but in fairness he did not change the NPcs action. I don't think any more sorcerers will be using that tactic to escape from barbarians

That is not fairness, that is stupidity. The foe intended to creat a line of sight barrier. The DM was ambushed by one of wotc's largest changes to spells. The DM should have simple swithced te effect over to Obscuring mist.

 

[Drowbane]

caution!! here there be opinions!

I do find it a little silly that darkness would raise the light level in a total dark situation, but have never played in a group that reads the rule that way. I played it that way IMC to see what would happen, and it was fine. Are there any real problems with shadowy illumination?

Blacklight, the spell, conjures complete darkness that the caster can see through...so a little better than just standing in the dark.

Hmm, I admit I'm fuzzy on the Blacklight spell. I suppose that is worth a 3rd lvl slot... but darkness as written in 3.5 still blows chunks.

 

[frankthedm]

Hmm, I admit I'm fuzzy on the Blacklight spell. I suppose that is worth a 3rd lvl slot.

It sounds [too]good for a rogue with UMD. Though being all alone in the dark does have it's hinderances. It might wind up hurting PCs more in the long run as NPC rogues make too much use of the spell.

Now I understand the 3.0 darkness spells are logistically problematic, perhaps running them like obscuring mist might be better, those with light sources are illuminated, the square adjacent to them has shadowy illumination at best, beyond that, pitch. Thus rogues can sneak attack someone next to them who has a light if they were entitled to in the first place, those who have light are not slowed down and line of sight is still blocked beyond 5’.

 

[Justin Bacon]

Its like light, but with a dark gray color instead. (I prefer the old style of it actually being darkness instead)

Wow. I hadn't noticed that change from 3.0 to 3.5. On the plus side, it's now established as both The Stupidest Rule I've Ever Read in an RPG and The Worst Rule Change from 3.0 to 3.5. Way to over-achieve, mighty designers of 3.5.

DM: Your torch blows out. It's utterly dark in the tight confines of the dungeon.
Player: Not a problem, I cast deeper darkness.
DM: Uh... what?
Player: Sure, it radiates shadowy illumination. It's still kinda dark, but it's not too bad.

 

[airwalkrr]

I prefer Light becomes Shadowy, Shadowy becomes Dark.

The best of both worlds without overly slowing down the game.

This is the way I interpret it. The term "shadowy illumination" simply does not make sense, especially in the ridiculous scenario where the heroes cast darkness in a pitch black dungeon so they can suddenly see. A spell cannot create light while at the same time preventing it, especially considering that darkness is not a light spell. After reading the spell very closely, I came to the conclusion that what was really MEANT was that the spell creates shadows in the area that essentially grant 20% miss chance to characters that can see in darkness. The statement in the spell description that light cannot illuminate the area suggests to me that it really is pitch black in the area unless a character can somehow see in darkness or has a light spell of 2nd level or higher operating, in which case there is merely a 20% miss chance.

Lots of people think I am making a house rule with this ruling. So be it. The RAW do not make sense. A darkness spell does not illuminate crap.

 

[FireLance]

Anybody else find it silly that a spell called "darkness" brightens unlit areas?

Anybody else find it silly that a spell called expeditious retreat also works when you're charging at your enemy?

If I really needed to justify it, I'd say that darkness was named with the same level of precision.