Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aluvial" data-source="post: 2238137" data-attributes="member: 6862">I concede the point about the green scenario.  It makes sense.  I see what you are all trying to say.  That shadow, and shadowy illumination are different.  If they are different, just tell me how?  No, I see now that what you are differentiating on is the point that shadowy illumination gives concealment cover, where shadows do not.  I concede that point.  The two are clearly different in that regard.   My trouble lies in the assumtion that every shadowdancer could virtually be invisible (and I'm assuming a maxed hide score) to the average Spot score basically anywhere but in an open field under bright sunlit conditions.  If you are underground, and there is a light source (and it can be anywhere) there is a shadow somewhere within 10' so that the Shadowdancer can use his HiPS.  Does this make sense?  If this were the case, couldn't the same Shadowdancer hide in that same open field, because the blades of grass cast shadows on one another?   I want to keep the rules simple, yet I see that the Light/Shadow/Darkness problem has more holes in it the the game rules that address those rules have.  At least with my method there seemed to be a right or wrong (I suggest that each square on the board is in absolutely one of three conditions of light).  I'm not suggesting that my way was easy, in fact it looks like it is a real pain, but, it is a way of fixing most of the problems with HiPS.   For me, I can see why you go with two types of shadow, but for me it is the same thing.  Shadow is shadowy, shadowy is shadow.  Shadowy just has a concealment factor associated with it.   Just so you know why I had this problem in the first place....  my campaign sports a 19th level Shadowdancer who claims, since he is within 10' of his opponents shadow, he can remain absolutely hidden, even if right next to the source of a light!  If you go with the general concensus here, you would have to agree with him.  I cannot.  It just doesn't add up.   My problem is that there has to be some distinct way of determining the area of a Lit square, I figured you used the same method for radius that you would for a fireball.  Why not, makes sense.  So now light is blocky with that zig-zag pattern like other radius effects.  The problem with my analysis only seemed to fail when Low-Light Vision reared its ugly head.  Now there are characters who see twice as far as normal, under the same lighting conditions.  The question is asked, "Why do they see farther?"  Is it because they 1) their eyes are keener and therefore light has a double effect for them, or is it 2) They can see just into where ordinary darkness falls because of some other special/magic/extraordinary effect?  I argue that option one is the simpler of choices, so it must hold true.  Their eyes are keener.  Light effects are doubled for them.   So if that is the case, hope we can agree on that, then what is normally considered shadowy is actually Lit for them, and what is normally dark, is shadowy (up to double the new Lit radius).  This seems logical and well within the confines of the rules.  If you follow so far, then the next step is where everyone starts balking.  If a creature with Low-Light Vision sees the area as a Lit square, doesn't the Shadowdancer have to be within 10' of what they percieve as shadow?  As far as I'm concerned, this is the only sticky point to my argument.   My opponents (in this debate, not personal of course) see the question of where the shadow actually lies.  I contest that the shadow is in the eye of the beholder.   If I see twice as far as you do, I can see twice as far as you do.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />   I see twice as far.  Shadow for me is twice as far away.  It doesn't matter where normal shadow lies for the Shadowdancer, it matters where I see the shadow at.  For me I would witness the Shadowdancer trying to use a shadow that is much further away.  I can see what he's trying to do, because from my perspective, he is in a Lit area.  For me, he can't use a shadow, that for me doesn't exist and is much farther away.  Anyhow, that's my side of this coin.  IF you do maintain a divergent opinion, and that normal shadow is actual shadow, then how do you explain Low-Light Vision?  I understand what you are all trying to say, but someone has to admit that my point, athough ultimately complicating the situation in an effort to clear it up, is a decent point, regardless of how impractical it would be to run in game. Aluvial</blockquote>

Verification