|
Post by delta on Jul 29, 2018 23:15:41 GMT -6
That's awesome. Thanks so much for sharing that.
|
|
|
Post by delta on Aug 18, 2018 22:22:42 GMT -6
N.B. Another consistent point in the DMG under encounter distance (p. 62): "A light source reliance limits the encounter distance to twice the normal visual radius of the source (2 × radius of the light source)." No such doubling for infravision (next sentence). Default encounter distance here is 5-10 scale inches.
|
|
|
Post by rustic313 on Aug 19, 2018 5:32:07 GMT -6
N.B. Another consistent point in the DMG under encounter distance (p. 62): "A light source reliance limits the encounter distance to twice the normal visual radius of the source (2 × radius of the light source)." No such doubling for infravision (next sentence). Default encounter distance here is 5-10 scale inches. Excellent find. Seems like another vote for linking light radius and encounter distance. If you use 1" = 5 ' with this data in mind, then one of two things happens... 1). Keep encounter distance at 4-8" . Reduce light illumination to 4" bright and 8" shadowy . That is only 20' / 40'. This is quite low compared to our real world data but works for the scale of the game. This is what d20 does fwiw (shudder). 2). Bump encounter distance out to 8-16" , or perhaps just 3d6" or 1d 20". This preserves the real world light thro w but has significant implications for closing to melee, efficacy of missile weapons, etc. I personally just got a few 15mm minis and 12mm dice (for monster tokens) and have been trying out 1" =10' scale again. I've been pretty pleased.
|
|
|
Post by magremore on Aug 19, 2018 7:25:56 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by delta on Aug 19, 2018 11:37:06 GMT -6
N.B. Another consistent point in the DMG under encounter distance (p. 62): "A light source reliance limits the encounter distance to twice the normal visual radius of the source (2 × radius of the light source)." No such doubling for infravision (next sentence). Default encounter distance here is 5-10 scale inches. Excellent find. Seems like another vote for linking light radius and encounter distance. If you use 1" = 5 ' with this data in mind, then one of two things happens... 1). Keep encounter distance at 4-8" . Reduce light illumination to 4" bright and 8" shadowy . That is only 20' / 40'. This is quite low compared to our real world data but works for the scale of the game. This is what d20 does fwiw (shudder). 2). Bump encounter distance out to 8-16" , or perhaps just 3d6" or 1d 20". This preserves the real world light thro w but has significant implications for closing to melee, efficacy of missile weapons, etc. I personally just got a few 15mm minis and 12mm dice (for monster tokens) and have been trying out 1" =10' scale again. I've been pretty pleased. Good thoughts. Personally what I've done (after copious flip-flopping) is to set the torch light visibility at 30' good, 60' dim -- which is 6/12" at the 1" = 5 ft scale -- so as to keep things in the same multiple-of-3 system as basic movement, missile, and magic ranges. Then arguably I can roll 2d6 for the spotting distance in inches (in place of the book 2d4). Coincidentally the dim range is the same as PC infravision so there's less concern/difference about who's looking with what.
|
|
|
Post by delta on Aug 19, 2018 11:49:22 GMT -6
For those interested in realism re light sources, the Lindybeige videos may be useful: Thanks, I was looking for something like that! Will find time to watch those later.
|
|
|
Post by rustic313 on Aug 19, 2018 16:02:47 GMT -6
Excellent find. Seems like another vote for linking light radius and encounter distance. If you use 1" = 5 ' with this data in mind, then one of two things happens... 1). Keep encounter distance at 4-8" . Reduce light illumination to 4" bright and 8" shadowy . That is only 20' / 40'. This is quite low compared to our real world data but works for the scale of the game. This is what d20 does fwiw (shudder). 2). Bump encounter distance out to 8-16" , or perhaps just 3d6" or 1d 20". This preserves the real world light thro w but has significant implications for closing to melee, efficacy of missile weapons, etc. I personally just got a few 15mm minis and 12mm dice (for monster tokens) and have been trying out 1" =10' scale again. I've been pretty pleased. Good thoughts. Personally what I've done (after copious flip-flopping) is to set the torch light visibility at 30' good, 60' dim -- which is 6/12" at the 1" = 5 ft scale -- so as to keep things in the same multiple-of-3 system as basic movement, spell and missile ranges, etc. Then arguably I can roll 2d6 for the spotting distance in inches (in place of the book 2d4). Coincidentally the dim range is the same as PC infravision so there's less concern/difference about who's looking with what. Seems very reasonable... Just to tease out the implications (I'm flip flopping too). 2-8" Encounter Distance
- Heavy Foot Charging: About 18.75% of encounters begin at 7-8". This is beyond the ability of 6" move types to close to melee in a single round, and if I read chainmail correctly, those at 6" move don't gain bonus move from charging. - Javelins: The same percentage of encounters also begin beyond javelin range, making it impossible for attackers to hurl spears and then charge forth. Defenders, OTOH, can always leverage pass through fire to hurl missiles at approaching foes so that is largely a moot point. - Other hand missiles: About 80% of encounters begin at 4" or more, making it impossible for attackers to hurl axes and the like and then charge. Heavy foot can always advance 6" and hurl a missile, though. - Bows: Not a factor, always within range. 2-12" Encounter Distance
- Heavy Foot Charging: About 59% of encounters begin at 7"+. This is beyond the ability of 6" move types to close to melee in a single round, and if I read chainmail correctly, those at 6" move don't gain bonus move from charging. Those at 9" move are fine regardless, even with a 12" encounter, as they can charge up to 9+6". - Javelins: The same percentage of encounters also begin beyond javelin range, making it impossible for attackers to hurl spears and then charge forth. Defenders, OTOH, can always leverage pass through fire to hurl missiles at approaching foes so that is largely a moot point. - Other hand missiles: About 92% of encounters begin at 4" or more, making it impossible for attackers to hurl axes and the like and then charge. 16.66% of the time, the encounter begins at 10" or more; this means heavy foot cannot even advance 6" and be able to hurl. - Bows: Not a factor, always within range. So in summary, going to a 2d6 encounter distance hurts heavy foot's ability to close to melee significantly and also significantly decreases the effectiveness of hurled missiles when attacking, especially javelins (but likely not defending). Of course, the missile issues could be adjusted by upping the ranges (presumably if using a 1" = 5' scale, the javelin range is doubled from 6" to 12"), so then you're just left with a penalty for plate wearing fighters and clerics. I don't think monsters are much affected. Very few monsters move at 6", and many monsters don't use missiles. If anything, I'd say that in general increase distance favors the party as the PCs are more likely to leverage missiles and magic at distance.
|
|
|
Post by delta on Aug 19, 2018 21:31:33 GMT -6
I will say that in my own games, possibly the single biggest systemic change I make is to missile ranges and modifiers. I fear that I've got enough written on my blog on that topic to choke a sage (and more in the queue). I do allowing throwing up to 60' (12") with a penalty.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Aug 20, 2018 17:48:41 GMT -6
There is good work being done in here!
|
|
|
Post by Red Baron on Aug 24, 2018 15:21:35 GMT -6
I have written in my binder: torch 40', light 30', sword 20'
Those values might be an ad&dism
|
|
|
Post by rustic313 on Sept 2, 2018 19:46:23 GMT -6
OK, on our Labor Day camping trip I tested outdoor numbers. Test protocol was abbreviated due to bed time for my hobbit stand in test partner.
With the 60 watt bulb with reflector, detect in an open field was 31 paces. A knife could be discerned at 16 paces. With the NVD, the knife could be detected out nearly to 31, call it 29ish.
I also tested a medium campfire blaze. It was a decent size fire with flames up to 4` and at least 20 lbs of firewood. Here, detect was at 15 paces and knife around 9. The NVD did great under these conditions with detect out to 25 to 30 paces.
To put it in inches context, I think an outdoor encounter distance of 3d6 inches (10 foot equals one inch) is reasonable, as would 2d6. If you go with one inch equals 10 yards then a realistic encounter distance in outdoor darkness is 1d6+2 or 2d4 yards...
|
|
|
Post by rustic313 on Sept 2, 2018 20:06:40 GMT -6
PS - I thought the indoor test might allow for longer detect ranges... Especially inside a modern house with semi gloss paint to reflect light, etc. Instead I found that the multiple shadows, narrow doorways for light to pass through, and nearby reflecting surfaces (walls) that threw light back into my eyes degraded detects compared to the simple, uncluttered outdoor test in an open field.
I suspect that detects in a complex, dense outdoor environment such as a dense forest would be more comparable to indoor detection ranges.
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 3, 2018 0:15:17 GMT -6
This is the kind of real-world D&D research and dedication that makes me feel super lazy. Well done!
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Sept 7, 2018 7:13:02 GMT -6
First let me ask about your scale notation. I don't know what "Large Text - 7.5 / 9" means. Is that 7.5 feet, or inches or yards or what? I have several problems with the indoor tests Rustic. I know a thing or two about light, having been a cinematographer back in the '90's. Tests using incandescent or florescent lights can not be used as stand ins for torches and hurricane lamps. These lights sources have an entirely different color temperature and range from flame based sources. There is also the issue of steady and consistent output - something you definitely don't get with flickering torches. My second issue is with your test location. A hallway in a modern structure is MUCH more relfective than a dungeon corridor. Rough stone and dirt does not reflect light the way painted walls do. To do the experiment with actual dungeon applicable results you would need to be in a rough stone structure - an old basement maybe with stone walls (not concrete block) - and you would need to use a standard hurricane lamp burning lamp oil (refined kerosene). Like this one Lantern and OilOne of my favorite commentaries on light in dungeons is in this Dungeons of Sign 'blogpostAlso, if you want to look at some old original material outside the 3lbbs, the Beyond This Point be Dragons manuscript does have a section on light: "Light: In the Underworld, generally passages have no light source. In this case, especially for hobbits and men, players must have some kind of light source. A lit torch will permit a player to "see" maximum of 15 feet, after which only dim shadows are slightly visible. A lantern has a maximum range of 30', with similar viewing after this distance. Of course this will make them seeable to creatures in the darkness. All monsters automatically see in total darkness." p13
|
|
|
Post by rustic313 on Sept 7, 2018 13:25:23 GMT -6
First let me ask about your scale notation. I don't know what "Large Text - 7.5 / 9" means. Is that 7.5 feet, or inches or yards or what? I have several problems with the indoor tests Rustic. I know a thing or two about light, having been a cinematographer back in the '90's. Tests using incandescent or florescent lights can not be used as stand ins for torches and hurricane lamps. These lights sources have an entirely different color temperature and range from flame based sources. There is also the issue of steady and consistent output - something you definitely don't get with flickering torches. My second issue is with your test location. A hallway in a modern structure is MUCH more relfective than a dungeon corridor. Rough stone and dirt does not reflect light the way painted walls do. To do the experiment with actual dungeon applicable results you would need to be in a rough stone structure - an old basement maybe with stone walls (not concrete block) - and you would need to use a standard hurricane lamp burning lamp oil (refined kerosene). Like this one Lantern and OilOne of my favorite commentaries on light in dungeons is in this Dungeons of Sign 'blogpostAlso, if you want to look at some old original material outside the 3lbbs, the Beyond This Point be Dragons manuscript does have a section on light: "Light: In the Underworld, generally passages have no light source. In this case, especially for hobbits and men, players must have some kind of light source. A lit torch will permit a player to "see" maximum of 15 feet, after which only dim shadows are slightly visible. A lantern has a maximum range of 30', with similar viewing after this distance. Of course this will make them seeable to creatures in the darkness. All monsters automatically see in total darkness." p13 The scale is 5 foot paces. I totally concur that the light sources are not equivalent, not are the wall coverings. If anything my results should be seen as "best case" - matte walls and flickering light would only degrade detection ranges. When I was a kid I lived in a stone fort (100 percent truth, a no kidding Vauban stone fort that was converted to housing), but alas I no longer do, so my ability to gather data in that type of environment is limited.
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Sept 10, 2018 7:51:01 GMT -6
The scale is 5 foot paces. Okay, so "7.5" would be 37.5 feet. Got it. When I was a kid I lived in a stone fort (100 percent truth, a no kidding Vauban stone fort that was converted to housing), but alas I no longer do, so my ability to gather data in that type of environment is limited. That's really cool!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2021 12:14:21 GMT -6
I cast Raise Thread on this post!
I have also done some experiement with candlelight in my house. Basically, what I found is that a single candle can provide enough light to read a signs and identify faces 15' and enough dim/shadowy light to identify doorways, pillars, and people at 30' or more away. When I say 'people', I don't mean I can clearly recognize their faces, but I can tell the difference between my son, daughter, and wife easily.
Given that Scientific American (thanks Delta!) states that torches provide a good light at 10-15 yard radius outdoors, I think we can safely state that 30' radius for a torch in a dungeon is reasonable. Which incidentally is the maximum surprise distance in 0D&D. Also, Holmes Basic gives the radius of torchlight at 30'.
In the AD&D Unearthed Arcana, the dim cantrip treats candlelight as one-half as effective as torchlight. That jibes with my candle experiment, the Scientific American article, 0D&D maximum surprise distance, and Holmes Basic.
As for the dim/shadowy distance of torches? 0D&D says that the maximum non-surprise encounter distance in the underworld is 80'.
In the AD&D DMG, Gygax retains the 80' maximum non-surprise encounter distance underground for torches by stating that torches have a 40' radius of normal light and double that (80') for encounter distance.
So Gygax clearly prefers the 80' encounter distance underground and chose to increase torchlight to 40' rather than retaining Holmes' 30' and the implicit 30' of 0D&D.
Which is more realistic for torchlight, 60' or 80' encounter distance? From an abstract perspective, doubling the light source radius is the simplest one. Candles then are 15'/30' and torches are 30'/60'. And considering the supernatural nature of dungeons, it can be argued that light is less effective there thus justifying a more conservative value.
But I wouldn't go as far at the 3rd edition giving candles 5'/10' and torches 20'/40' light/encounter distance values.
However, as this was done inside my house, the candle values are best case scenario since the walls are painted white. But how much light does an adventurer really need in order to determine friend from foe, notice secret doors, and read cryptic inscriptions? I think that candlelight is enough for melee combat but noticing secret doors should definitely be impacted by the brightness of the light.
|
|
|
Post by cooper on May 3, 2021 7:51:41 GMT -6
If it's any help. Ad&d puts vision at 2x light source. Monsters can still be "spotted" at greater ranges, but it's auditory only. Example: If the party isn't surprises and the DM rolls, like, 80' for the start of the encounter, but the group has a torch 30' (60' shadowy) then the DM should describe it by sound instead of visuals.
|
|
|
Post by Red Baron on May 5, 2021 17:08:03 GMT -6
How would one go about putting out a torch?
|
|
|
Post by qomannon on Jan 4, 2022 21:39:23 GMT -6
Yes. All good information, but what I really need for my campaign is the duration of a burning hobbit as a light source...
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Jan 5, 2022 0:38:23 GMT -6
Yes. All good information, but what I really need for my campaign is the duration of a burning hobbit as a light source... Hobbits don't burn. They explode like TNT.
|
|
ThrorII
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 109
|
Post by ThrorII on Jan 5, 2022 19:20:03 GMT -6
Yes. All good information, but what I really need for my campaign is the duration of a burning hobbit as a light source... Hobbits don't burn. They explode like TNT. Which is good for distracting monsters when running away. Second breakfast all over the walls, floors, and ceilings. It saves you a ration.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Jan 6, 2022 10:54:44 GMT -6
You see, in the underworld a torch will let characters see as much as the referee can describe. Otherwise it’s pitch black and they will probably be dead soon!
|
|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Jan 6, 2022 15:02:24 GMT -6
Hey, folks. I may simply have passed over them, but I don't see in Volume III where the ranges for torchlight, etc. are stated. Did I miss it? Given that encounter distance is given as 20-80 feet, I figure a light source (torch or lantern) gives light out to about 80 feet or so.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Feb 8, 2023 12:52:42 GMT -6
Bumping this thread and posing a question:
How should continual light or infravision change the encounter distance?
|
|