continual darkness

[lordxaviar]

one of my peeves with hasbro.. well wotc started it. they changed spell names with out giving a good list of them... worse they eliminated spells (many without good reason) with no list. same with magic items...but enough rant


Continual darkness.. one of my fav's (loved the strobe light effect when mixed with light spell)
ths starts with continual light... i tgried for years... (80-97) to get the all high and mighty Sage advice to answer whether or not this spell gave off sunlight..( we wanted to build underground farms so that the seiged would not go hungry). never got an answer... instead...they lame it out into continual flame and then add Daylight spell. they left darkness alone but i havent seen continual darkness around? did they update it? did anyone here? curious...

as for conversions... most seem to have lost interest. i have posted one mod... had one person look and want it...but no changes or suggestions...

monsters...had a few comments... but the lord of the conversion here wont touch anything that has an offical change... pretty weak i think... left a comment on the bullywug sage...

anyway...man im on a major bent to day...but im bored...

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I'm not sure the "strobe light effect" ever existed outside your table. It's not in the RAW.

 

[lordxaviar]

I'm not sure the "strobe light effect" ever existed outside your table. It's not in the RAW.

i shall find it..for ya.. the cause was that light wasnt enough to shut off continual darkness and vice vs... so it would blink or strobe until the duration wore off... and it was many tables... in the chicago area...and gen con back in the late 70 early 80,,, i wasnt dming yet..

 

[Dross]

I'm not sure the "strobe light effect" ever existed outside your table. It's not in the RAW.

I thought that if equal level light and darkness spells met, they negated each other leaving the ambient light being predominate.

From the 3.5 Light spell "A light spell (one with the light descriptor) counters and dispels a darkness spell (one with the darkness descriptor) of an equal or lower level."

 

[Greenfield]

I think he's talking about 1st/2nd Ed D&D for the strobe light effect. I don't think there's been a "Continual Darkness" since then.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

i shall find it..for ya.. the cause was that light wasnt enough to shut off continual darkness and vice vs... so it would blink or strobe until the duration wore off... and it was many tables... in the chicago area...and gen con back in the late 70 early 80,,, i wasnt dming yet..

I've been playing just as long. I think that was just a common set of house rules, much like almost everyone puts cash in Free Parking in Monopoly, despite that not being in the rules, either.

 

[lordxaviar]

I thought that if equal level light and darkness spells met, they negated each other leaving the ambient light being predominate.

From the 3.5 Light spell "A light spell (one with the light descriptor) counters and dispels a darkness spell (one with the darkness descriptor) of an equal or lower level."

yes thats true... and the next statement is correct as well.. but I think its a loss not to have continual darkness... that was the point of the post not

the strobe light effect... it might have even been a sage advice answer
opps possibly not...checked one archive on it and only found this one

Question I want to make a continual light wand (by casting the third level cleric spell on a metal rod). In the DMG, under spell explanations, it says, “Darkness spells are the bane of this device....” Does the darkness spell have to be cast on the rod itself in order to negate the light? If so, what would happen-if someone holding the continual light wand (light exposed) walked into an area under a darkness spell? Would the light be cancelled, the darkness be cancelled, or both be negated? Would the wand be negated if a darkness spell is cast in a general area containing the wand, but while it is enclosed so that the light isn’t visible?


Answer Either a Continual Darkness or Dispel Magic spell can negate a Continual Light spell, whether the light had been placed over an area or upon an object. Continual Darkness does not have to be cast on the rod itself in order to ruin the light wand; the darkness negates not only the light of the spell, but also the magic which caused the rod to give off the light in the first place. As long as the light wand is in, or is brought into, the area of effect of the darkness spell, both spells would cancel each other out. The same would be true if the wand were in a lightproof container inside the area of effect: That container is not magic-proof, and it is the magic itself, not just the visible effects of that magic, which is negated. It’s important to understand the difference between a light wand of this type and an item which is actually enchanted to give off light, such as a Wand of Illumination or a Gem of Brightness. When actual magic items are employed to produce magical light, a darkness spell would at best only neutralize the charge(s) currently in use; the item is not rendered unusable as long as other charges remain. For example, Continual Darkness will negate the effect of a Gem of Brightness for only one day — or not at all, if the owner of the item expends charges to offset the darkness. A continual light wand, on the other hand, is no more than a stick with a spell cast on it. When that spell is dispelled, the stick’s light goes out for good (or until another Continual Light is cast upon it). Dispel Magic is effective against a continual light wand, again because it neutralizes the magic of the spell which was applied to the rod. Dispel Magic cannot, as the spell description indicates, weaken or negate the power of a “specially enchanted” item such as the Gem of Brightness. The success of Dispel Magic against a continual light wand or other similar object depends in part on which particular kind of Continual Light was used to manufacture the wand; the dispelling would be more likely to succeed against the magic-user version of Continual Light, since that is a second level spell and the cleric and illusionist versions of the same spell are third level incantations.



from the clerical spell

Continual light brought into an area of magical darkness (orvice versa) cancels the darkness so that the otherwise prevailing light conditions exist in the overlapping areas of effect. A direct casting of a continual light spell against a similar or weaker magical darkness cancels both

good history of light spells and dnd
http://www.gmoracle.com/?p=642

 

[lordxaviar]

Continual light brought into an area of magical darkness (orvice versa) cancels the darkness so that the otherwise prevailing light conditions exist in the overlapping areas of effect. A direct casting of a continual light spell against a similar or weaker magical darkness cancels both

ok think i have it... if you are carrying a continual light on a stick into the area of a darkness... and swing it around it will cause the over lapping area to go from light to dark... giving a strobe light effect as it were... further with the new continual flame which would flicker on its own this effect might be more pronounced. not the strobe light i was thinking of...but i shall continue to look, I was sure that I had read it not just heard it in a game.

 

[Greenfield]

I've heard it also, but it was 1st/2nd edition, not 3rd.

 

[lordxaviar]

I've heard it also, but it was 1st/2nd edition, not 3rd.

yes there is no word on what happens when you bring a continual flame spell into a darkness spell except

PHB Light spells counter and dispel darkness
spells of an equal or lower level

so just having a continual flame will dispel any darkness spell? what happens to the continual flame? is it also dispelled? i know I could prob. find the answer by reading but...has anyone already done this read?