Glitterdust in the dark

On Mar 12, 3:04 am, "Malachias Invictus" <invictuse....DeleteThis@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> "Miracle" <.@.> wrote in messagenews:fr77n4$dut$1@ss408.t-com.hr...
> > Human wizard with a lit torch in his hand casts glitterdust on a drow.
> > Dark elf retreats 50ft away from him. Can a wizard see him,
>
> No. He has clear illumination out to 20', and shadowy out to 40'. Nowhere
> in the spell description does it state that Glitterdust provides its own
> illumination.

I think it's not that clear.
The drow will be covered in sparkling golden particles after all
(which don't need outside illumination to sparkle IMO).
These can be seen in darkness, although they won't provide
illumination for the victim.

IRL one can see the red glow of a light cigarette from
1000' away...

> > and how clearly? What if drow enters area under darkness spell?
>
> Well, Darkness, according to the spell description, radiates shadowy
> illumination, so you would be able to see him. Then again, in my experience
> most folks do not allow Darkness to increase the illumination of an area
> that is already dark.

Maybe he wanted to know, if Darkness would counter Glitterdust.
Although it's Conjuration (Creation) and not Evocation [Light],
I'd allow it as a DM. IMO Glitterdust probably should have
the [Light] descriptor.

LL
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

On Mar 11, 5:21 pm, Miracle <.@.> wrote:
> Human wizard with a lit torch in his hand casts glitterdust on a drow.
> Dark elf retreats 50ft away from him. Can a wizard see him, and how
> clearly?

No. Glitterdust does not provide any illumination. 50' is out of the
illumination.

> What if drow enters area under darkness spell?

Darkness doesn't prevent vision, it just obscures it. As long as the
Drow is still within the range of the wizard's light source he can be
seen, but still has the full effects of darkness, which is a 20% miss
chance. If he's out of the wizard's light source then he can't be
seen anyway (barring other light sources).

- Justisaur
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

Lorenz.Lang DeleteThis @gmx.de wrote:
> On Mar 12, 3:04 am, "Malachias Invictus" <invictuse... DeleteThis @yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> "Miracle" <.@.> wrote in messagenews:fr77n4$dut$1@ss408.t-com.hr...
>>> Human wizard with a lit torch in his hand casts glitterdust on a drow.
>>> Dark elf retreats 50ft away from him. Can a wizard see him,
>>
>> No. He has clear illumination out to 20', and shadowy out to 40'.
Nowhere
>> in the spell description does it state that Glitterdust provides its own
>> illumination.
>
> I think it's not that clear.
> The drow will be covered in sparkling golden particles after all
> (which don't need outside illumination to sparkle IMO).
> These can be seen in darkness, although they won't provide
> illumination for the victim.

So, pinpoint - yes, but still a 50% miss chance?
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

"Justisaur" <justisaur.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f11804e6-9a3e-42f5-898c-670b57b8b990@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 11, 5:21 pm, Miracle <.@.> wrote:
>> Human wizard with a lit torch in his hand casts glitterdust on a drow.
>> Dark elf retreats 50ft away from him. Can a wizard see him, and how
>> clearly?
>
> No. Glitterdust does not provide any illumination. 50' is out of the
> illumination.

If, instead of a glitterdust-covered Drow, there were a mirror 50 feet down
the corridor, facing the torch holder, would he see a reflection of himself
holding an illuminated torch?

Even if you rule that glitterdust generates no light of its own, it still
consists of thousands of tiny glittering particles, each of which reflects
light just as well as a mirror. Even outside the torch's normal illumination
radius, they're going to throw back a significant amount of light.

--
Mark.
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

On Mar 12, 10:44 pm, Miracle <.@.> wrote:
> Lorenz.L... RemoveThis @gmx.de wrote:
>
> > On Mar 12, 3:04 am, "Malachias Invictus" <invictuse... RemoveThis @yahoo.com> > wrote:
>
> >> "Miracle" <.@.> wrote in messagenews:fr77n4$dut$1@ss408.t-com.hr...
> >>> Human wizard with a lit torch in his hand casts glitterdust on a drow.
> >>> Dark elf retreats 50ft away from him. Can a wizard see him,
> >>
> >> No. He has clear illumination out to 20', and shadowy out to 40'.
> Nowhere
> >> in the spell description does it state that Glitterdust provides its own
> >> illumination.
> >
> > I think it's not that clear.
> > The drow will be covered in sparkling golden particles after all
> > (which don't need outside illumination to sparkle IMO).
> > These can be seen in darkness, although they won't provide
> > illumination for the victim.
>
> So, pinpoint - yes, but still a 50% miss chance?

The 50% miss is for blinded or unable to see (because of darkness),
so my answer is No. The drow is visible in the dark => no miss chance.

Glitterdust gives -40 to hide and Invisibility gives +40,
that's a hint how much visible he would be, i.e. completely.

LL
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

On Mar 13, 1:52 pm, Miracle <.@.> wrote:
> Lorenz.L....RemoveThis@gmx.de wrote:
> >> So, pinpoint - yes, but still a 50% miss chance?
>
> > The 50% miss is for blinded or unable to see (because of darkness),
> > so my answer is No. The drow is visible in the dark => no miss chance.
>
> This is what I want to discuss - does drow become visible in (magical /
> regular) darkness because of glitterdust?

I see two possibilities:
1. You desperately want to nerf Glitterdust. Then you could just
insist,
that the rules (in the spell desc. of Glitterdust) don't say anything
about
darkness. Therefore the drow covered in sparkling golden dust can
enter
normal or magical darkness and benefit from it as if he wasnt't under
the effect of Glitterdust.

2. You interpret "sparkling" as a form of light which doesn't provide
illumination, but can be seen in the dark, although the rules don't
say
so explicitly - the reason could be that it was so obvious to the
designers
that they forgot to mention it.

The "sparkling" blinds the targets and makes invisible creatures
visible,
which are two good reasons to go with option 2.
My common sense reasoning and mind-reading capabilities regarding
the game designers of WotC are reason 3 and 4...

> > Glitterdust gives -40 to hide and Invisibility gives +40,
> > that's a hint how much visible he would be, i.e. completely.
>
> It's a hint that glitterdust negates invisibility, not darkness.

Creatures in normal (complete) darkness, with invisibility and
blinded
attackers are treated similarly by the rules.

> While you're in darkness, another creature might not see you, even if
> you don't make a hide check (you don't even have to be avare of other
> creature, for that matter).

Of course. But the drow is covered in sparkling golden dust.

> And by the way - if an invisible creature falls under effect of
> glitterdust, it becomes 'visible' in a "pinpoint a location" way, but it
> still retains 50% miss chance (I believe).

Ahhh, you really want to nerf it, admit it already!!
Seriously, why should this be the case? Pinpointing the location
is used against invisible targets with the help of other senses
(hearing
or scent). Glitterdust makes creatures just plain visible,
there's no miss chance at all.

LL
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

On Mar 12, 4:29 pm, "Mark Blunden"
<markATmarkdbDOTplusDOT... RemoveThis @addresss.invalid> wrote:
> "Justisaur" <justis... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:f11804e6-9a3e-42f5-898c-670b57b8b990@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Mar 11, 5:21 pm, Miracle <.@.> wrote:
> >> Human wizard with a lit torch in his hand casts glitterdust on a drow.
> >> Dark elf retreats 50ft away from him. Can a wizard see him, and how
> >> clearly?
>
> > No. Glitterdust does not provide any illumination. 50' is out of the
> > illumination.
>
> If, instead of a glitterdust-covered Drow, there were a mirror 50 feet down
> the corridor, facing the torch holder, would he see a reflection of himself
> holding an illuminated torch?
>
> Even if you rule that glitterdust generates no light of its own, it still
> consists of thousands of tiny glittering particles, each of which reflects
> light just as well as a mirror. Even outside the torch's normal illumination
> radius, they're going to throw back a significant amount of light.
>

By the rules you still don't see well enough to target outside of the
illumination of the torch.

- Justisaur
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

On Mar 13, 4:13 pm, Darin McBride
<dmcbr... RemoveThis @naboo.to.org.no.spam.for.me> wrote:
> Lorenz.L... RemoveThis @gmx.de wrote:
> >> And by the way - if an invisible creature falls under effect of
> >> glitterdust, it becomes 'visible' in a "pinpoint a location" way, but it
> >> still retains 50% miss chance (I believe).
>
> > Ahhh, you really want to nerf it, admit it already!!
> > Seriously, why should this be the case? Pinpointing the location
> > is used against invisible targets with the help of other senses
> > (hearing
> > or scent). Glitterdust makes creatures just plain visible,
> > there's no miss chance at all.
>
> I'd probably want to play with it a bit depending on the circumstances.
>
> Since it's the glitter that reflects light, rather than giving off its own
> light (otherwise it'd have the [Light] descriptor), I'd probably go with a
> sliding scale.

With your reasoning Glitterdust would not function in darkness at all.
No light, no reflection, no blinding effect, no counter to
invisibility!?

The [Light] descriptor is for interaction with other spells, abilities
etc.
and not a prerequisite for each and every spell that causes light.
Flaming Sphere illuminates(!) the same area as a torch and is
Evocation [Fire] and not [Light], for example.

> Treat the light source as if it were doubled in range. e.g., if you're
> fighting within 40' of a torch, you have no trouble. Heck, even in 80',
> you should be able to catch the glint to know where your opponent is.
> After that, ranged attacks would be treated as full concealment (you have
> the right square, 50% miss chance), while melee would gradually get there
> as you keep getting further from the light source (even faster if
> you "grant cover" to the glitterdusted creature vs the light source).

Such a ruling seems ok, even if one assumes that Glitterdust creates
dim light (i.e. sparkles) of its own. I'd use greater ranges, but
okay...

> Magical darkness prevents any light source (other than magical light of
> equal or higher level), so you wouldn't be able to see the glitter - light
> couldn't get in to reflect.

Glitterdust hasn't got the [Light] descriptor and therefore can't be
affected
by spells like Darkness by the RAW.


> > 2. You interpret "sparkling" as a form of light which doesn't provide
> > illumination, but can be seen in the dark, although the rules don't
> > say
> > so explicitly - the reason could be that it was so obvious to the
> > designers
> > that they forgot to mention it.
>
> Um, no. If they thought that, they likely would have used the Light
> descriptor.

It's a Conjuration [Creation] that creates sparkling dust. The spell
creates no light but a magical substance, which in turn causes light.

> I think the inspiration here is the child's craft substance that sometimes
> goes by the same name. If that stuff were magically held in the air, what
> effect would that have on invisible creatures? That's pretty much about
> it. It's like spreading flour in an area to find invisible creatures, but
> with magic. And glitter.

So it doesn't work at all without a light source?
The spell description disagrees with you IMHO.

LL
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

On Mar 13, 4:28 pm, Justisaur <justis... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 12, 4:29 pm, "Mark Blunden"
>
>
>
> <markATmarkdbDOTplusDOT... DeleteThis @addresss.invalid> wrote:
> > "Justisaur" <justis... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:f11804e6-9a3e-42f5-898c-670b57b8b990@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > On Mar 11, 5:21 pm, Miracle <.@.> wrote:
> > >> Human wizard with a lit torch in his hand casts glitterdust on a drow.
> > >> Dark elf retreats 50ft away from him. Can a wizard see him, and how
> > >> clearly?
>
> > > No. Glitterdust does not provide any illumination. 50' is out of the
> > > illumination.
>
> > If, instead of a glitterdust-covered Drow, there were a mirror 50 feet down
> > the corridor, facing the torch holder, would he see a reflection of himself
> > holding an illuminated torch?
>
> > Even if you rule that glitterdust generates no light of its own, it still
> > consists of thousands of tiny glittering particles, each of which reflects
> > light just as well as a mirror. Even outside the torch's normal illumination
> > radius, they're going to throw back a significant amount of light.
>
> By the rules you still don't see well enough to target outside of the
> illumination of the torch.

Two parties 50' apart in the dark but with torches have total
concealment from each other, as if they were standing in the dark?

LL
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

Lorenz.Lang DeleteThis @gmx.de wrote:
>> So, pinpoint - yes, but still a 50% miss chance?
>
> The 50% miss is for blinded or unable to see (because of darkness),
> so my answer is No. The drow is visible in the dark => no miss chance.

This is what I want to discuss - does drow become visible in (magical /
regular) darkness because of glitterdust?

> Glitterdust gives -40 to hide and Invisibility gives +40,
> that's a hint how much visible he would be, i.e. completely.

It's a hint that glitterdust negates invisibility, not darkness.
While you're in darkness, another creature might not see you, even if
you don't make a hide check (you don't even have to be avare of other
creature, for that matter).
And by the way - if an invisible creature falls under effect of
glitterdust, it becomes 'visible' in a "pinpoint a location" way, but it
still retains 50% miss chance (I believe).
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

Lorenz.Lang DeleteThis @gmx.de wrote:

>> And by the way - if an invisible creature falls under effect of
>> glitterdust, it becomes 'visible' in a "pinpoint a location" way, but it
>> still retains 50% miss chance (I believe).
>
> Ahhh, you really want to nerf it, admit it already!!
> Seriously, why should this be the case? Pinpointing the location
> is used against invisible targets with the help of other senses
> (hearing
> or scent). Glitterdust makes creatures just plain visible,
> there's no miss chance at all.

I'd probably want to play with it a bit depending on the circumstances.

Since it's the glitter that reflects light, rather than giving off its own
light (otherwise it'd have the [Light] descriptor), I'd probably go with a
sliding scale.

Treat the light source as if it were doubled in range. e.g., if you're
fighting within 40' of a torch, you have no trouble. Heck, even in 80',
you should be able to catch the glint to know where your opponent is.
After that, ranged attacks would be treated as full concealment (you have
the right square, 50% miss chance), while melee would gradually get there
as you keep getting further from the light source (even faster if
you "grant cover" to the glitterdusted creature vs the light source).

Magical darkness prevents any light source (other than magical light of
equal or higher level), so you wouldn't be able to see the glitter - light
couldn't get in to reflect.

> 2. You interpret "sparkling" as a form of light which doesn't provide
> illumination, but can be seen in the dark, although the rules don't
> say
> so explicitly - the reason could be that it was so obvious to the
> designers
> that they forgot to mention it.

Um, no. If they thought that, they likely would have used the Light
descriptor.

I think the inspiration here is the child's craft substance that sometimes
goes by the same name. If that stuff were magically held in the air, what
effect would that have on invisible creatures? That's pretty much about
it. It's like spreading flour in an area to find invisible creatures, but
with magic. And glitter.
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

"Justisaur" <justisaur DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:83a779c6-a778-44ea-8bdf-fe083234f86e@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 12, 4:29 pm, "Mark Blunden"
> <markATmarkdbDOTplusDOT... DeleteThis @addresss.invalid> wrote:
>> "Justisaur" <justis... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:f11804e6-9a3e-42f5-898c-670b57b8b990@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Mar 11, 5:21 pm, Miracle <.@.> wrote:
>> >> Human wizard with a lit torch in his hand casts glitterdust on a drow.
>> >> Dark elf retreats 50ft away from him. Can a wizard see him, and how
>> >> clearly?
>>
>> > No. Glitterdust does not provide any illumination. 50' is out of the
>> > illumination.
>>
>> If, instead of a glitterdust-covered Drow, there were a mirror 50 feet
>> down
>> the corridor, facing the torch holder, would he see a reflection of
>> himself
>> holding an illuminated torch?
>>
>> Even if you rule that glitterdust generates no light of its own, it still
>> consists of thousands of tiny glittering particles, each of which
>> reflects
>> light just as well as a mirror. Even outside the torch's normal
>> illumination
>> radius, they're going to throw back a significant amount of light.
>>
>
> By the rules you still don't see well enough to target outside of the
> illumination of the torch.

Fair enough, but personally I'd consider the dust's glitter-factor to at
least double the torch's illumination range for purposes of targeting the
subject.

--
Mark.
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark 

Lorenz.Lang.TakeThisOut@gmx.de wrote:

> On Mar 13, 4:28 pm, Justisaur <justis....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 12, 4:29 pm, "Mark Blunden"
>>
>>
>>
>> <markATmarkdbDOTplusDOT....TakeThisOut@addresss.invalid> wrote:
>> > "Justisaur" <justis....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> >news:f11804e6-9a3e-42f5-898c-670b57b8b990@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > > On Mar 11, 5:21 pm, Miracle <.@.> wrote:
>> > >> Human wizard with a lit torch in his hand casts glitterdust on a
>> > >> drow. Dark elf retreats 50ft away from him. Can a wizard see him,
>> > >> and how clearly?
>>
>> > > No. Glitterdust does not provide any illumination. 50' is out of
>> > > the illumination.
>>
>> > If, instead of a glitterdust-covered Drow, there were a mirror 50 feet
>> > down the corridor, facing the torch holder, would he see a reflection
>> > of himself holding an illuminated torch?
>>
>> > Even if you rule that glitterdust generates no light of its own, it
>> > still consists of thousands of tiny glittering particles, each of which
>> > reflects light just as well as a mirror. Even outside the torch's
>> > normal illumination radius, they're going to throw back a significant
>> > amount of light.
>>
>> By the rules you still don't see well enough to target outside of the
>> illumination of the torch.
>
> Two parties 50' apart in the dark but with torches have total
> concealment from each other, as if they were standing in the dark?

? No, because they're within the circle of visibility of a light source -
the one they're holding. Makes them easy to see by anyone, not just
someone holding the torch that lights them up.

Justisaur appears to be talking about a single torch, you're adding a new
one to the mix, changing the description, though not the mechanics.

If you're out of the range of a light source, you can't be seen. Period.
The difference of opinion, however, seems to be whether glitterdust
provides its own source of light or not (and whether that source of light
overpowers magical darkness if that's thrown in the mix). I see nothing in
the RAW spell that indicates that the "golden particles" are their own
source of light. You, apparently, do.

I would likely take the route that the glitterdust, being glittery, would
likely throw back enough light to be seen at further ranges from the light
sources than a non-glittery creature would, but it would still be
completely ineffective outside the increased range from all sources of
light, or in magical darkness. (Note that the "darkness" spell isn't full
darkness, but "shadowy" darkness, which would be similar to the outer edges
of the range of a torch or whatever, which would NOT negate the glitter.
Glittering someone and then casting darkness on the area would be and
effective tactic.)
 >> Stay informed about: Glitterdust in the dark