Ioun Stone questions...

[Scion]

How do you get invisible flames that emit light from a continual flame spell?

Umm... magic

You are thinking of it from a physics point of view, it is comeing from a magic point of view.

If you want to take it that far then creatures who are invisible should be blind as well. After all, the photons are passing right through you (or bending around you depending on the way flavor text of the setting) and so are not being absorbed by the photo receptors in your eyes. No photons to the rods and/or cones? no sight.


But of course I still put it with, 'if your dm does this' because if you look at the invisiblity spell itself it says that the object emitting the light becomes invisible but the light itself never does. One could read this in a couple of different ways but the least likely one is the one that my last dm picked.

It was a fun way to do it. Completely nonsensical to me with my physics degree, but completely reasonable within the bounds of 'its magical, and hey you can see while invis so shut up physics'

 

[Lord Pendragon]

only if you put continual flame on them as well.. assuming that your dm does as my last dm did and ruled that the flames were invisible but still emitted light

Bah. Belt of Dwarvenkind. Darkvision, baby!

Still though, that could be a good idea. Although they would be 'much' harder to take down later..lol

Why ever take them down?

 

[Coredump]

How do you get invisible flames that emit light from a continual flame spell? The flames are the source of the radiating light. If you can't see the flame it must be because you can't see the light. If you can see the light, then you must be able to see the flame. The two are linked in a way that I can not comprehend how you could see one but not the other.

But you have no issues with a stone, that is on fire, but doesn't burn, and the flames last forever, but give off no heat, and don't need air.

but yeah, I guess invisible just isn't realistic.....

I just think of it as improved indirect lighting....

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

You mean like cloaks and circlets and rings and boots and ....

Well, those are pretty hard to take away from someone. You've just got to catch an Ioun stone to make it your own.

 

[Mithran]

Well, those are pretty hard to take away from someone. You've just got to catch an Ioun stone to make it your own.

Exactly, sure you *can* take a persons boots but that is, to say the least, somewhat hard to do in combat.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Exactly, sure you *can* take a persons boots but that is, to say the least, somewhat hard to do in combat.

It's trivial if you have improved grab, a +40 on your grapple check, and your target doesn't have freedom of movement.

 

[Scion]

It's trivial if you have improved grab, a +40 on your grapple check, and your target doesn't have freedom of movement.

Doesnt freedom of movement make your boots fall off when you try to work? After all, they are binding

 

[Mithran]

I think that would be considered a special set of circumstances, Infiniti2000.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Well, it would make for an interesting NPC. Someone geared up and optimized for stealing stuff - when the opponent is awake and ready.

Think of the fun this will be for the session while the other players rib the one player for losing his boots to a random troll. And he didn't even get hurt.

 

[Mithran]

What a great (and horribly mean I might add) idea!