Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DrSpunj" data-source="post: 90851" data-attributes="member: 994">Well...I have to disagree with you on two counts, Spikey.While I agree Deeper Darkness would suppress a Continual Flame, I believe the first Deeper Darkness would suppress both of the Continual Flames in your example and a second Deeper Darkness not only is not needed, but wouldn't add anything (though it would make the area dark for a couple extra rounds, after the DAYS this spell lasts anyway).&nbsp; I don't have anything in the spell descriptions to directly support this; I'm using the 3E fundamental &quot;similar effects don't stack&quot; dogma.&nbsp; Rereading your post I am unsure if you mean Deeper Darkness is cast for effect each time or if you mean someone casts in purposely to dispel the Continual Flame.&nbsp; I believe you are thinking for effect because a little further down you talk about 2 Continual Flames hanging around and only 1 Deeper Darkness.&nbsp; If I'm wrong and you do mean to directly counter/dispel the Continual Flame then I agree with you, Deeper Darkness can be cast at Touch range to counter or dispel Continual Flame.The second thing I disagree about is this phrase:While Daylight, Darkness and Deeper Darkness all have passages describing what happens when they are brought near each other and overlap, Continual Flame doesn't have anything similar.&nbsp; I do not believe that was an error; I don't think the permanent effect from Continual Flame should be strong enough to negate Deeper Darkness.&nbsp; If I substitute Continual Flame in the above sentence with Daylight, then I agree 100%.Anyone else here have any thoughts?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DrSpunj, post: 90851, member: 994"] [b]Well...[/b] I have to disagree with you on two counts, Spikey. While I agree Deeper Darkness would suppress a Continual Flame, I believe the first Deeper Darkness would suppress both of the Continual Flames in your example and a second Deeper Darkness not only is not needed, but wouldn't add anything (though it would make the area dark for a couple extra rounds, after the DAYS this spell lasts anyway). I don't have anything in the spell descriptions to directly support this; I'm using the 3E fundamental "similar effects don't stack" dogma. Rereading your post I am unsure if you mean Deeper Darkness is cast for effect each time or if you mean someone casts in purposely to dispel the Continual Flame. I believe you are thinking for effect because a little further down you talk about 2 Continual Flames hanging around and only 1 Deeper Darkness. If I'm wrong and you do mean to directly counter/dispel the Continual Flame then I agree with you, Deeper Darkness can be cast at Touch range to counter or dispel Continual Flame. The second thing I disagree about is this phrase: While Daylight, Darkness and Deeper Darkness all have passages describing what happens when they are brought near each other and overlap, Continual Flame doesn't have anything similar. I do not believe that was an error; I don't think the permanent effect from Continual Flame should be strong enough to negate Deeper Darkness. If I substitute Continual Flame in the above sentence with Daylight, then I agree 100%. Anyone else here have any thoughts? [/QUOTE]

Verification