Darkvision through a telescope

[Slaved]

That's pretty funny. You quote the SRD on one hand and ignore it on the other?

Are you talking to Mistwell? Because I already accounted for that in my post implicitly by something being hidden from sight via a blocking mechanism such as trees, hills, or whatever other type of terrain happens to be blocking view.

I see nothing about the maximum distance a creature can see with no intervening obstacles nor anything about reading at a distance.

Unless you are implying that with no intervening obstacles the distance a person can see is random?

 

[Zurai]

You stated that the only rules for spot were for hidden or difficult to see creatures, and that anything else was an automatic success. The SRD says otherwise (as does every single module that includes a spot check to notice something).

You're also making the classic mistake of "Spot defines how far my eyes are capable of seeing". This is not true. Spot defines how well you are capable of interpreting what you see. This is why a telescope helps Spot checks - because, at a larger magnification, it's much easier to see details that help you interpret what you see.

 

[Slaved]

You stated that the only rules for spot were for hidden or difficult to see creatures, and that anything else was an automatic success. The SRD says otherwise (as does every single module that includes a spot check to notice something).

I do not understand. I stated what the rules say and quoted them, you put up a quote that supports what I said. Where are we having the disconnect?

You're also making the classic mistake of "Spot defines how far my eyes are capable of seeing". This is not true. Spot defines how well you are capable of interpreting what you see. This is why a telescope helps Spot checks - because, at a larger magnification, it's much easier to see details that help you interpret what you see.

So you are speaking to Mistwell and not me. Ok! That makes more sense.

 

[Mistwell]

Sure they are. You merely lack the capacity to resolve and identify them with your naked eye.

Lacking capactiy to resolve and identify something with the naked eye is beyond my visual range, in game terms. I either can see it with the naked eye or not. If I can't, it's beyond my visual range. That's all that beyond visual range means as far as being able to see things for a game.

I don't think the intent behind Darkvision's range was that it's like normal vision except extremely near-sighted.

And I think the intent was precisely that, which is why they put the line about it being just like normal vision except for color. So, we disagree on intent, and maybe that is what is "coloring" both our views (pun intended).

If it was there would be penalties by the foot for vision-based skills and checks. Of course you can do whatever you want in your own game, but it's basically a house-rule.

We disagree on interpreting the rules as written regarding the spy-glass, normal vision, spot checks, and the dark vision description. Just because we don't see this issue the same way doesn't mean it's a house-rule to go with one interpretation over the other. Given we don't know the answer from WOTC, and probably never will, either interpretation seems fair, and both are drawn from the rules as written.

 

[Slaved]

But where is your rules source Mistwell? The spot skill does not support your stance, what does?

We know that darkvision only works out to a certain range, that is how it is defined after all. You would need to find something which directly states that there are exceptions or modifications to that range.

 

[Mistwell]

All of the uses in the spot skill from the players handbook are for various forms of hiding or being hidden, disguise, and reading lips.

Given I just quoted you two items from the spot check that are not that, I am not sure how you can come to that conclusion. The distance an encounter begins at has nothing to do with hiding, disguising, or reading lips. And when it said not hidden just hard to spot, how did you conclude that meant hidden, disguised, or reading lips? Come on Slaved, the skill is clearly used for purposes other than just the three you named. It's spelled out as such.

I do not see anything at all about reading at a distance or judging how well you can make something out aside from what I mentioned above.

No that part is just logic. If your characters can read any size writing at any distance in your games because you couldn't find a rule on it, and the skill titled "spot" wasn't enough for you, then I guess you and I have very different games. For me, and probably 99% of people playing this game, we would use a spot check (and we would not consider it a house rule to do so). Call it the distance at which the encounter of reading words on the sign of a barn a mile away begins, if you must, to use the skill.

A dungeon master is free to use whatever he feels is appropriate, of course, but I do not see anything explicit about it. It looks like anything that you have line of sight on that is not trying to be hide, and was not hidden, you can simply see.

So when it said sometimes things are just hard to see but not hiding, that sentence had no meaning for you?

Actually, there is another major difference, darkvision stops at a specified range. Beyond that range nothing can be seen.

So does normal vision, if you account for the spot rules.

Where is this maximum range under the spot rules???

When you get to such a high negative that no check can succeed, you have reached the maximum range.

Everything I have read so far says that your normal sight goes until something blocks it.

So your players can see around the curvature of the planet and spot the back of their head with equal degree of difficulty and detail as their own hand in front of them?

I did find this while looking around though..


Which at least says reading and spot are different.

I think they mean normal reading does not require any skill check. Reading something at a distance I think requires a spot check. Your game might vary, but that seems a logical and normal use of the skill. They shouldn't have to include every conceivable use of the skill in the text to be able to draw a natural conclusion from the text without calling it a house rule.

 

[Mistwell]

But where is your rules source Mistwell? The spot skill does not support your stance, what does?

I cited them. You not quoting me back and then claiming I didn't is a bit silly, don't you think? The spot skill does support my stance in my opinion, and I laid it out pretty plainly I think. You might disagree, but let's not pretend I didn't lay it out with rules.

We know that darkvision only works out to a certain range,

As does normal vision, per the spot rules. And we know that darkvision functions just like normal vision, except for color.

that is how it is defined after all. You would need to find something which directly states that there are exceptions or modifications to that range.

I did. Spyglasses magify things to twice their size. Whatever effect that has on normal vision, it also has on darkvision. I contend it doubles your normal vision range, and therefore your darkvision range. You disagree, but I have yet to hear your explanation for what a spyglass does for normal vision, given in your game apparently you don't need a spyglass to see anything any any distance.

 

[Zurai]

I do not understand. I stated what the rules say and quoted them, you put up a quote that supports what I said. Where are we having the disconnect?

My quote very specifically does NOT support your position. Your position, and I quote, is that "anything that you have line of sight on that is not trying to be hide, and was not hidden, you can simply see."

So you are speaking to Mistwell and not me. Ok! That makes more sense.

I don't see how such a conclusion is possible. At this point I must assume that you are simply trolling, and will cease responding to you.

 

[Slaved]

My quote very specifically does NOT support your position. Your position, and I quote, is that "anything that you have line of sight on that is not trying to be hide, and was not hidden, you can simply see."

It actually supports my position very well!

If something is out of line of sight because it is hidden behind something then you cannot see it.

In the case of terrain something would be sometimes partially in sight, sometimes not. In effect, it is hidden by the terrain, but not enough that a spot check cannot be made.

If something is completely behind an obstacle then it can not be spotted using the spot check. If something is completely out in the open with no obstacles at all in the way then it is always seen.

That is all supported from what I have seen in the rules.

Mistwells position, so far, seems to be outside of the rules.

I don't see how such a conclusion is possible. At this point I must assume that you are simply trolling, and will cease responding to you.

But the part that I quoted was what Mistwell was doing, not what I was doing. Hence the confusion.

 

[Slaved]

Given I just quoted you two items from the spot check that are not that, I am not sure how you can come to that conclusion. The distance an encounter begins at has nothing to do with hiding, disguising, or reading lips. And when it said not hidden just hard to spot, how did you conclude that meant hidden, disguised, or reading lips? Come on Slaved, the skill is clearly used for purposes other than just the three you named. It's spelled out as such.

But not being able to see something because it is hidden partially behind something else, such as encounter distance based on terrain, is perfectly in the rules!

Reading something at a distance however, is not mentioned. In fact, I quoted a rules bit which says that spot and reading are different things!

How do you reconcile that??

No that part is just logic. If your characters can read any size writing at any distance in your games because you couldn't find a rule on it, and the skill titled "spot" wasn't enough for you, then I guess you and I have very different games. For me, and probably 99% of people playing this game, we would use a spot check (and we would not consider it a house rule to do so). Call it the distance at which the encounter of reading words on the sign of a barn a mile away begins, if you must, to use the skill.

I am a-ok with saying that the rules have holes in them, because they do. But to say that it is a rule because it is not stated seems very bad to me!

So does normal vision, if you account for the spot rules.

Where does it say the maximum distance a character can see with no obstacles in the way????????

When you get to such a high negative that no check can succeed, you have reached the maximum range.

That no spot check can succeed? We know what the penalties to spot are, but what is the difficulty class that we are trying to hit? Is it set by a hide check? If so, then for a creature who cannot hide because there is nothing nearby then ANY spot check would either be considered to be automatic success or automatic failure since the target number is a -!

If we use something else what is it? Where is it defined??

So your players can see around the curvature of the planet and spot the back of their head with equal degree of difficulty and detail as their own hand in front of them?

The curvature of the planet, if the world being adventured on was something like a globe, would block line of sight itself because it is a solid object.

I am not saying that it makes sense to be able to see something at 50 feet as well as you can see something at 500 feet, I am simply saying that the rules are silent on the issue from what I can tell!