FitzTheRuke
Legend
I guess you'd have to examine one. They look like a robed person with a statue for a face. Your best guess is that they are elementally enhanced cultists.
D&D 5E (OOC) Vault of the Dracolich 5E (Full)
- Thread starter FitzTheRuke
- Start date
I guess you'd have to examine one. They look like a robed person with a statue for a face. Your best guess is that they are elementally enhanced cultists.
Old versions made darkvision to be more like infrared. Darkvision just means they are able to see a type of light that normal people can't. It's not magical, but biological. It'd be like a cat that can see better than we can in the dark. Hence, magical darkness actually being void of all kinds of light.
If this is the case, then yeah, they'd see something in the mirror, as whatever type of light they are seeing, infrared or whatever, would still bounce off it.
Sent from my iPad using EN World
If this is the case, then yeah, they'd see something in the mirror, as whatever type of light they are seeing, infrared or whatever, would still bounce off it.
Sent from my iPad using EN World
Prickly Pear
Adventurer
I'm fine with the ruling that dark vision can't see through (via?) mirrors.
Since nobody can tell HOW dark vision works we can't use normal science to explain it.
Sent from my iPhone using EN World
Since nobody can tell HOW dark vision works we can't use normal science to explain it.
Sent from my iPhone using EN World
gargoyleking
Adventurer
Yeah... Best not to try to impose reality on a fantasy setting in general.
Squirrels are evil!
Squirrels are evil!
I really hate that logic, by the way. All the fantasy setting does is introduce magic, which bends the laws of nature. The laws of nature are still there. They just get bent. It's HOW they get bent that would decide these things.
I had a guy on here say that in order for a fireball to make steam, you'd have to cast two spells, one with magical fire, and one with magical water, because magical fire doesn't mix with regular water the way magical water would, so if you cast both of those spells together, it'd make steam, but if you cast a fireball under normal water, it would just be negated. Oh. My. Goodness. I couldn't even respond to him.
Fire makes water evaporate, water makes fire go away (by taking the heat and becoming steam). It's simple logic.
Darkvision is a racial thing, not a magical thing. It lets people see in darkness without light. In older editions, it was infrared, which I liked. It made sense. Those creatures were bred to see in total darkness, so they developed other ways of seeing.
Now it's this ambiguous "Darkvision". I still prefer to think of it like infrared (which isn't "red", btw, more like the night vision on a camera).
Devil's Sight is different. It's magical. It lets you see through magical darkness as well. It bends the rules of reality to make it so you can see perfectly fine, in color, without light at all.
These things can make sense when you draw them out logically, using Suspended Disbelief to add in Magic, defining Magic as something that breaks or bends the laws of physics. BUT THE LAWS OF PHYSICS DON'T JUST DISAPPEAR!! The spell COULD be comprehensive enough to negate all laws of physics and let magical fire burn underwater. Or it could just create a hot spot hot enough to ignite the atmosphere, creating a fireball. DM's choice, as both works fine. All you have to decide is: what does the spell actually do? Create the effect in its entirety, or simply manipulate the laws of nature so the effect happens? Does it create a ball of fire, flames and all? Or does it create a hot spot that ignites the atmosphere, thus creating a ball of fire? Once the DM decides between those two choices, the rest makes sense.
Sent from my iPad using EN World
I had a guy on here say that in order for a fireball to make steam, you'd have to cast two spells, one with magical fire, and one with magical water, because magical fire doesn't mix with regular water the way magical water would, so if you cast both of those spells together, it'd make steam, but if you cast a fireball under normal water, it would just be negated. Oh. My. Goodness. I couldn't even respond to him.
Fire makes water evaporate, water makes fire go away (by taking the heat and becoming steam). It's simple logic.
Darkvision is a racial thing, not a magical thing. It lets people see in darkness without light. In older editions, it was infrared, which I liked. It made sense. Those creatures were bred to see in total darkness, so they developed other ways of seeing.
Now it's this ambiguous "Darkvision". I still prefer to think of it like infrared (which isn't "red", btw, more like the night vision on a camera).
Devil's Sight is different. It's magical. It lets you see through magical darkness as well. It bends the rules of reality to make it so you can see perfectly fine, in color, without light at all.
These things can make sense when you draw them out logically, using Suspended Disbelief to add in Magic, defining Magic as something that breaks or bends the laws of physics. BUT THE LAWS OF PHYSICS DON'T JUST DISAPPEAR!! The spell COULD be comprehensive enough to negate all laws of physics and let magical fire burn underwater. Or it could just create a hot spot hot enough to ignite the atmosphere, creating a fireball. DM's choice, as both works fine. All you have to decide is: what does the spell actually do? Create the effect in its entirety, or simply manipulate the laws of nature so the effect happens? Does it create a ball of fire, flames and all? Or does it create a hot spot that ignites the atmosphere, thus creating a ball of fire? Once the DM decides between those two choices, the rest makes sense.
Sent from my iPad using EN World
FitzTheRuke
Legend
I agree with you in principle, for the most part.
But... I disagree that darkvision would let you see in a mirror. It's not about what the darkvision can do, it's about what the mirror can do. It doesn't reflect light that isn't there.
I suppose that if you could argue that if there was even a "little" light (which there would technically be in the store-room, for example, because there's light in the adjacent room, through a portcullis) there would probably be just enough for the mirror to reflect that biological darkvision could pick up on (like, say, how nightvision goggles work. They don't work when there's NO light but they pick up on what little light is around). I'd probably give it to you, then.
According to what I've read though, a 'normal' mirror doesn't reflect enough infrared for infrared detectors. You'd need a special mirror on top of special infrared detectors, even with modern science.
At any rate, I started playing games here to avoid 'wasting' time with these sorts of discussions. I don't really mind having them (in fact, on a level, I can't resist them), but let's not get too carried away with it.
But... I disagree that darkvision would let you see in a mirror. It's not about what the darkvision can do, it's about what the mirror can do. It doesn't reflect light that isn't there.
I suppose that if you could argue that if there was even a "little" light (which there would technically be in the store-room, for example, because there's light in the adjacent room, through a portcullis) there would probably be just enough for the mirror to reflect that biological darkvision could pick up on (like, say, how nightvision goggles work. They don't work when there's NO light but they pick up on what little light is around). I'd probably give it to you, then.
According to what I've read though, a 'normal' mirror doesn't reflect enough infrared for infrared detectors. You'd need a special mirror on top of special infrared detectors, even with modern science.
At any rate, I started playing games here to avoid 'wasting' time with these sorts of discussions. I don't really mind having them (in fact, on a level, I can't resist them), but let's not get too carried away with it.
FitzTheRuke
Legend
On the subject of multiple possible interpretations of "how" an element of D&D actually "works", I usually like to leave it up to the individual character, generally. For instance, Pyrus' darkvision is absolutely a heat-sensor. Auraia's is probably "subtle air-pressure changes make an image in her mind." Etc.
As long as a player has a cool interpretation of how it works for their character, I usually will play along.
I absolutely don't think that there is any distinction between magical fire and fire aside from how it was generated. A magic fire is a fire that was created with magic. Not some kind of "fake fire".
As long as a player has a cool interpretation of how it works for their character, I usually will play along.
I absolutely don't think that there is any distinction between magical fire and fire aside from how it was generated. A magic fire is a fire that was created with magic. Not some kind of "fake fire".
FitzTheRuke
Legend
[MENTION=6805410]Fradak[/MENTION] You like the icon I used for Lorenn's Grease spell? I googled 'grease' looking for a nice greasy image to use... and that's all that came up!
gargoyleking
Adventurer
Figures! Don't step on Travoltas hair or you'll slip and fall!Squirrels are evil!
Similar Threads
