Darkvision through a telescope

[Mistwell]

Looking more closely at the rules, it says "a penalty applies on such checks." What does it mean by such checks? Spot checks to determine the beginning of an encounter.

Yes, which is one of the two reasons I keep saying "encounter" in our debate, and why I stress that a city or the moon is not generally an encounter.

In other words, only in this specific use of the spot skill does the penalty apply. It says nothing about a penalty for opposed Hide checks,

EXACTLY my point. It's NOT about hide checks. It's about starting an encounter, in general, regardless of hiding or out in the open. Same stuff as in the DMG.

or spotting things father in the distance.

Now that part makes no sense. The rule is a distance rule. Of course it is about spotting things at a distance. That's all the rule is about in fact.

And it seems this use of spot checks is entirely optional: "The Dungeon Master MAY call for spot checks."

No, sorry, may in that context is not an "this rule is optional". It's an alert to be prepared for such an happenstance, and how it is adjudicated. Optional rules are pretty well spelled out, and are usually in a sidebar. That's a skill check rule right there, so it is no more optional than any other rule. "May" is in fact used in a LOT of places in the rules, where the context is that it's not an option just a normal use of the word "May".

So really I don't see how this optional use of the spot skill relates to the telescope argument at all.

If your argument is that the spot rule about distance is optional, I think you will be all alone in that one. It's not a strong argument in my opinion (and I suspect in just about everyone else's as well).

 

[Branduil]

Yes, which is one of the two reasons I keep saying "encounter" in our debate, and why I stress that a city or the moon is not generally an encounter.



EXACTLY my point. It's NOT about hide checks. It's about starting an encounter, in general, regardless of hiding or out in the open. Same stuff as in the DMG.



Now that part makes no sense. The rule is a distance rule. Of course it is about spotting things at a distance. That's all the rule is about in fact.



No, sorry, may in that context is not an "this rule is optional". It's an alert to be prepared for such an happenstance, and how it is adjudicated. Optional rules are pretty well spelled out, and are usually in a sidebar. That's a skill check rule right there, so it is no more optional than any other rule. "May" is in fact used in a LOT of places in the rules, where the context is that it's not an option just a normal use of the word "May".



If your argument is that the spot rule about distance is optional, I think you will be all alone in that one. It's not a strong argument in my opinion (and I suspect in just about everyone else's as well).

It's possible I'm wrong, however that's still irrelevant to the main argument, which is whether or not there is a maximum range to normal vision. Unless you can point to a rule which states the maximum range for normal vision it's simply incorrect to compare it to Darkvision.

I think this thread does show that the rules for spot are extremely poorly written. They really should be clear enough that debate like this isn't necessary.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Looking more closely at the rules, it says "a penalty applies on such checks." What does it mean by such checks? Spot checks to determine the beginning of an encounter. In other words, only in this specific use of the spot skill does the penalty apply. It says nothing about a penalty for opposed Hide checks, or spotting things father in the distance.

Huh... I've never noticed that before.

The Listen DC modifiers look to be globally applicable, but the way the Spot description is written, the distance penalty and distraction penalty are specifically for determining encounter distance.

-Hyp.

 

[Branduil]

Huh... I've never noticed that before.

The Listen DC modifiers look to be globally applicable, but the way the Spot description is written, the distance penalty and distraction penalty are specifically for determining encounter distance.

-Hyp.

Well, I think they do mean for them to be universally applicable. It's just poorly written.

In any case I don't think the distance rules make much sense. The difference between 10 and 20 feet is many magnitudes larger than the difference between 200 and 210 feet. It really doesn't make sense to have a linear penalty, though I guess a more realistic system would require more computation. Hopefully 4e will make spot both logical and easy to use.

 

[Elethiomel]

Yes, it's variable from character to character, and object to object, and circumstance to circumstance (which I said earlier). However, for any given character, object/creature, and circumstances, there is a fixed maximum range you can notice something. Same goes for many uses of Darkvision as well. I gave the example of the drow vs. the human, and BOTH could only see 100' for their average roll, regardless of whether they used darkvision or normal vision.

Of course there's a fixed maximum for a given character, object/creature, and circumstance. That describes a situation. That doesn't make the "fixed distance" in any way comparable to the maximum range of Darkvision, which only depends on one variable - your Darkvision range. For a given object (I'm using the grammatical sense of object here, rather than the rules sense of it, because I find the "object/creature" grammatical construct to be inelegant.) in a given situation, the maximum distance at which you can spot that object may be less than your Darkvision range. As long as it is dark, however, the maximum distance that you can spot any object is never larger than your Darkvision range.

 

[chriton227]

If seeing the Dragon was the start of the encounter (it isn't by the way in most games - unless you actually go to the melee grid to move a mile until you arrive, all while in initiative). Unless your spot check was high enough, if it were the encounter, then absolutely correct.

Here is where this interpretation of the rules breaks down for me. Take the following situation:

Colossal Red Dragon is circling a keep blasting it with its fire breath every chance it gets. The keep is in a clear area. Standing 2000' away is a L20 wizard with Alertness, Skill Focus(Spot), max ranks in spot (11 due to cross-class), and a +3 wisdom. That would be a +19 spot, which is just about as good as you could reasonably expect from a pure class wizard. If I understand your interpretation of the rules, since we are not in an encounter, at that distance it should be easy for the wizard to see the dragon attacking the keep. That makes sense to me, it is a flame-spitting creature the size of a medium commercial jet airplane less than half a mile away.

The wizard player decides that he needs to distract the dragon and save the keep, and tries to cast his prepared Enlarged Ice Storm (range is 800' + 80'/caster level, or 2400'). Since we are now in an encounter, the wizard needs to make a spot check at a -200 penalty for distance. Even with his +19 spot, the DM would have to give him a +161 circumstance bonus to be able to see the dragon that he could already see on a natural 20 (by the spot rules there are no bonuses or penalties for size, those are only in the hide rules, and the dragon isn't hiding). Had he been using an Enlarged Acid Arrow, he would have had the same spell range, but would need to make an attack roll at no range penalty.

If I were the GM in this situation and told the player to make a spot check when they declared they wanted to cast the spell, then told them they suddenly couldn't see the dragon, I would expect to be on the receiving end of a lot of yelling and the proud GM of a game looking for a replacement player. I would also feel the need to call for spot checks all the time. Hasted fighter with a move of 60' wants to charge an orc shaman standing 120' away casting a summon monster spell? He would have to make a spot check (I hope he can make a DC12). 4th level sorcerer casting Acid Arrow? It doesn't matter that his range on the spell is 560', he would be lucky to have a +15 spot assuming he spent both feats, 12 skill points, and put an 18 in Wisdom, which would limit him to effectively 250' reliable range on the spell (taking 10 on spot, it would take 20 rounds to take 20). In fact, at 20th level the sorcerer still would have trouble seeing far enough to take advantage of the range of a 3rd caster level wand of Acid Arrow.

That interpretation of the spot rules may be debatably correct (I am not saying it is, but that it is debatable), but I would never enforce that interpretation on my players, nor would I play in a game where that interpretation was enforced. If that works well for your group, more power to you, that just means that your group's priorities and preferences are different than mine. For my group, requiring spot checks only for seeing creatures that are hiding or concealed, or for noticing fine details (I have seen plenty of "Spot DC 20 to notice this detail" in published material) is both more realistic and more fun.

I personally feel that your position is presenting a false dichotomy, either you have to make spot checks for everything, or everything is visible at any distance. My viewpoint is that there is a middle ground. It requires the DM to use good judgement, but it has worked so far for me. In the case of the red dragon attacking the keep, I might call for a spot check and based on the result, give a varying level of information. A DC 5 would easily see that there is a creature attacking the keep. A 15 would identify the creature as a red dragon (it's a distinctive creature, assuming the character would recognize one when he saw one). It might be a DC 35 or 40 to identify the dragon as Pyroflex, the dragon plaguing the area that the party has encountered before who has a distinctive patterning on his wings. A DC 60 might catch a glint off the amulet of natural armor that the dragon is wearing, although I'd only tell the player that the catch a glint from something around its neck. In this way there is value to the spot skill, but it also passes my internal "does this make sense" check.

 

[werk]

The example of noticing something large in plain sight obviously already takes into account distance modifiers... it's simply referring to something anyone would notice. Putting aside a strict reading of the rules, which I still don't agree you are right on, someone can obviously see large city a mile away from a hilltop, or the moon on a cloudless night. There is no such thing as a limit to how far you can see with normal vision. None. You could theoretically see something on the other side of the universe if it was large enough.

I love this (distracting) argument because you can't see those things using darkvision, which is what the OP is about. If it is outside the range of darkvision you can't see it, no matter how easy it is to see using another mode of vision.

I work with xrays to see (and measure) bones. When using 'xray vision' I can see bones, but I can't see skin or hair...when using regular vision I can't see bones... This does not seem to be a contradiction to me, specialized modes for specialized purposes.

 

[Jhaelen]

There is no such thing as a limit to how far you can see with normal vision. None. You could theoretically see something on the other side of the universe if it was large enough.

What kind of 'theoretically' is that? Theoretically within the D&D rules or within the rules of real-world physics?

I'm definitely with Mistwell, btw. regarding spotting distances for encounters.

As you've been pointing out earlier, the situations where the far shot feat is actually useful are pretty limited. Unless you have access to a scrying spell/device or you have spotted a creature from a closer range and later retreated back to make use of your extended firing range (without losing sight to the creature), it'll be practically useless.

 

[Mistwell]

It's possible I'm wrong, however that's still irrelevant to the main argument, which is whether or not there is a maximum range to normal vision. Unless you can point to a rule which states the maximum range for normal vision it's simply incorrect to compare it to Darkvision.

We are discussing that very rule.

If you are a human with a +0 bonus to spot, and there is a large creature in plain sight in good lighting that is a foe, the maximum range for normal vision to be able to notice that creature for purposes of an encounter is 200 feet (a natural 20 on your spot check). That is that character's maximum range for normal vision for that encounter. That is what the spot rules say, and what the DMG says about starting an encounter as well, and what the DC chart says.

If you do not agree, why not? How is that not a maximum range? Maximums can vary depending on the circumstances (they do with lots of skill checks). It doesn't make them any less a maximum however because of those potential modifiers.

 

[Mistwell]

Of course there's a fixed maximum for a given character, object/creature, and circumstance. That describes a situation. That doesn't make the "fixed distance" in any way comparable to the maximum range of Darkvision, which only depends on one variable - your Darkvision range.

No it doesn't. Darkvision range is just another limit on the check along with many others. Darkvision has the same variable modifiers as normal vision for spotting things. I gave the example of the drow and the human, and both had an average range of 100' to start the encounter, and the maximum range of darkvision played no role despite darkvision being used by the drow.

For a given object (I'm using the grammatical sense of object here, rather than the rules sense of it, because I find the "object/creature" grammatical construct to be inelegant.) in a given situation, the maximum distance at which you can spot that object may be less than your Darkvision range. As long as it is dark, however, the maximum distance that you can spot any object is never larger than your Darkvision range.

Correct, unless you use a spy glass and the interpretation I have offered. In my view, the maximum range for darkvision is no different than the maximum range of normal vision, despite Normal Vision being variable based on the creature and object in question more often than Darkvision is variable based on the creature or object in question. Heck, the darkvision range itself is variable based on the character in question as well, since there are all sorts of things that can modify your darkvision range.