D&D 5E Does Faerie Fire light up natural terrain?

[Prakriti]

I had this come up in a game recently, and I wasn't sure about the answer.

I ruled "no," but I guess it depends on what an "object" is. There are bound to be small pebbles, grains of sand or dirt, or bits of twig, etc. in any outdoor area. If we consider those to be objects, then pretty much any outdoor area is going to be fully illuminated by all the little glowing "objects." Maybe that's RAW, but I don't think it's RAI.

What do you think?

 

[iserith]

Objects in the DMG are defined as "a discrete, inanimate item like a window, door, sword, book, table, chair, or stone, not a building or a vehicle that is composed of many other objects." But this is for the purposes of the rules in the DMG which includes AC, hit points, damage immunity, damage threshold, etc. It may not apply to spells exactly. I think it's probably a good starting place though.

 

[mrpopstar]

My call as Dungeon Master would be to say no. The spell faerie fire targets discrete objects, not the tiny details of terrain.

 

[DND_Reborn]

HAH! First "YES" vote. LOL

It makes the spell more magical IMO and I even have the ground radiate a bit of light in the AoE. But, I certainly wouldn't appeal if another DM said "no." It is just a matter of preference I suppose.

 

[anthr]

after reading the spell description I think it should look like this:


So maybe not every grain of sand, but definitely stones and twigs larger than an inch.

 

[Li Shenron]

I think the spell is meant to help attacking a target AND foil invisibility. The light generation is not the intended use of the spell, but why not allowing as a secondary use (there are better cantrips for that anyway).

The invisibility part is what got me thinking. The idea behind the spell is probably that you're able to see invisible things thanks to the illuminating effects which "outlines" them. You don't really see them normally/clearly but you at least see their shapes. So how about an invisible (indeed short) bridge or an invisible hut or an invisible cart. Would it make more sense to rule that they stay invisible because they are composed by smaller parts, or that they ARE affected by the outlining and that is the RAI, to make invisible stuff at least partly visible? To me the latter makes more sense.

As far as the ground (or whatever is on it) is outlines, I can see it ruled both ways. It probably doesn't matter in 99% of cases, unless you're specifically trying to create (dim) light in a small area. But once again, why not allowing it?

 

[Oofta]

Yes. Any physical object is lit up. A grain of sand, a pebble and a boulder are only different because of scale, they are both objects.

I can see that items too small to see or liquids would not qualify (otherwise the air would glow). But if it is solid and big enough to be seen I would consider it an object.

[EDIT] P.S. If you have to look up the definition of "object" in the DMG for something like this you are being far, far to technical in my opinion.

 

[Shiroiken]

While probably not RAI, I wouldn't object to giving the area a glittering glow.

 

[Oofta]

Another thought on this. D&D 5E uses natural language and relies on game terms as little as possible.

According to dictionary.com an object is defined as "anything that is visible or tangible and is relatively stable in form."

So my previous post/vote stands. A grain of sand may be small, but it is visible and has stable form.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The wording of the spell says "objects AND affected creatures". That indicates that the writer intended the spell to affect to affect things that are not creatures.