Something That Never Made Sense: Light Radius

[Mattachine]

If Theater of the Mind is going to encompass combat, it's going to encompass exploration, too.

I hate the disconnect when DMs want a described, somewhat abstracted battle--using no minis and no grid; but then, when it comes to exploration or searching, the game suddenly turns into nitpicking over a couple feet, the exact burn time of lamp oil, or the particular behavior of a light source.

Just go with what makes sense. A lot of games don't specify things like this, and don't need to.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Also, let the giant character be Large, and let the winged character fly, and lets not freak out too much about first level teleports if that's what you want. Really, I'd love 5e a bunch if it wasn't so friggin' fragile about everything.

So that's definitely being held over from 4th? *sigh*

 

[I'm A Banana]

So that's definitely being held over from 4th? *sigh*

As of right now, none of those are part of Next. And honestly they don't make a lot of sense for a very "basic D&D" experience, so I wouldn't expect them in a narrowly basic core. All I'm sayin' is that I want 5e in general not to be so fragile. Darkvision shouldn't break the game. Neither should flight, or teleportation, or whatever. It must be flexible enough to embrace such things.

I hate the disconnect when DMs want a described, somewhat abstracted battle--using no minis and no grid; but then, when it comes to exploration or searching, the game suddenly turns into nitpicking over a couple feet, the exact burn time of lamp oil, or the particular behavior of a light source.

Honestly, it's no different to me than 4e saying "FIGHTS ARE AWESOME, and everything else is a skill challenge." Which is fine for some groups.

Different groups want different focuses in different areas. Simple in certain areas, complex in others. There isn't a One Size Fits All, and someone who wants really simple combat might want elaborate rules for reputation and encumbrance. They should have it. D&D is about your games. Whatever you want to jam into them.

 

[Nytmare]

I never understood why light has a radius in D&D. It doesn't even make, like, physical sense. What is "bright light in a 20' radius?" After 20 feet, does it just stop being bright? Is the light source invisible from more than 20 feet away?

Every once in a while someone asks a question that makes me think we should all agree to shut down the forums for a day and have everyone go spend the day outside.

 

[nightwalker450]

I just don't want sunrods in 5th to be like they were in 4th.

As in dirt cheap, and negating all lighting considerations.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Perhaps, as Teddy Pendergrass suggest, you need to...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61lke-zN8GU&feature=youtube_gdata_player]Turn Off The Lights - Teddy Pendergrass (1979) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Argyle King]

Actually, that was exactly my thinking on this particular rule. It's one that I think has enough tradition in D&D that most people will expect it, but it's not one that I think must occur for a sweet D&D game to happen. As optional as the half-elf and the bard.



This is a little bit of a tangential rant for me, but really, I think lighting in D&D has almost always been more complicated and more "valuable" than it really needs to be.

If you're using a simplified three-stage lighting system (you're either able to see normally, able to see a little bit, or not able to see), all low-light vision or darkvision does is change one or two of those categories to "able to see normally." It does precisely what a torch does. It's not remarkably powerful to give a first level character an auto-torch. Let the dwarf see in the dark. NO BIG DEAL.

Also, let the giant character be Large, and let the winged character fly, and lets not freak out too much about first level teleports if that's what you want. Really, I'd love 5e a bunch if it wasn't so friggin' fragile about everything.

I disagree that being able to see in the dark isn't a big deal. Even in a game where you're using you're three stage approach, it's still a huge advantage to be able to see without needing light. Mainly because some of your enemies probably are going to require light. If they do carry light, you're now in a situation where you can see them perfectly, and you're effectively invisible to them as long as you stay outside of their light's radius. Targeting the enemy's light sources becomes a viable tactic; a tactic you would not otherwise have. As I said elsewhere, there's a reason behind why the military invented night vision optics.

Likewise, flight is most certainly a game changer. Increase your ability to move from 8 directions of movement to 26 (if my off the cuff math is correct) is huge. Both defensively and offensively; in combat and out, my options for movement -with flight- increased quite a bit.

You can experiment with this quite easily already in 4E by looking at the rules for jumping. Because of how much better the PCs are than the world around them, a very cheesy -yet surprisingly effective- tactic is to jump before employing powers which have burst and/or radius based effects. It's also quite easy to just simply jump over the enemy front line and get to the squishies behind them. With flight, you need not even risk failing an athletics roll to do such things. Being able to maneuver is one of three (ability to fight, ability to move, and ability to communicate) main considerations for tactics and strategy in warfare. Increasing your ability in an area that important by 3 times is significant.

I'm not saying you're wrong for not feeling as though things matter. As always, play what you want at your own table. However, my personal opinion is that night vision and flight are game changers when it comes to tactics.

 

[I'm A Banana]

If they do carry light, you're now in a situation where you can see them perfectly, and you're effectively invisible to them as long as you stay outside of their light's radius....Targeting the enemy's light sources becomes a viable tactic; a tactic you would not otherwise have. As I said elsewhere, there's a reason behind why the military invented night vision optics.

This is true if combat is a sport where all sides must be evenly matched.

This is not true if combat is war where an overwhelming advantage doesn't break the game.

5e needs to be a game where an overwhelming advantage in a few encounters doesn't break the game.

Or else we're back to balancing the game around dissociated assumptions like "maybe they don't have any ranged attacks!"

The answer can be: "Then they get killed."

If you're dudes who need torches to see and you go to attack a fortress full of creatures who can see in the dark in the middle of a night and happen to get a bucket of water dumped on your head, guess what? You deserve to loose.

Alternate light sources should be ample and well available and cheap and fairly reliable, etc., but none of that mandates removing darkvision. Same with flight or Large size or teleportation or...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If you're dudes who need torches to see and you go to attack a fortress full of creatures who can see in the dark in the middle of a night and happen to get a bucket of water dumped on your head, guess what? You deserve to loose.

"I say, old chap, at what time of day does the Lodge's traditional Vampire Hunt begin, again?"

"I believe it's the same time as the Ladies' Auxiliary Annual Drow Raid, right after they serve us a hearty dinner!"

 

[Argyle King]

This is true if combat is a sport where all sides must be evenly matched.

This is not true if combat is war where an overwhelming advantage doesn't break the game.

5e needs to be a game where an overwhelming advantage in a few encounters doesn't break the game.

Or else we're back to balancing the game around dissociated assumptions like "maybe they don't have any ranged attacks!"

The answer can be: "Then they get killed."

If you're dudes who need torches to see and you go to attack a fortress full of creatures who can see in the dark in the middle of a night and happen to get a bucket of water dumped on your head, guess what? You deserve to loose.

Alternate light sources should be ample and well available and cheap and fairly reliable, etc., but none of that mandates removing darkvision. Same with flight or Large size or teleportation or...

I'm most certainly not considering combat "as a sport."

I am perfectly fine with combat being war; that's by far what I prefer. It's from the perspective of war that I made my previous statements.

That being said, I do feel everyone should at least start the game on a level playing field. The building blocks being used to put my character together should be in generally same ballpark of usefulness. If option B gives me 3 times more options than option A without any drawbacks, is option A honestly a real option?