Clesestial brilliance [Archive] - Wizards Community

Clesestial brilliance [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
strenoth
03-18-04, 06:21 PM I liek this spell. it's nice and fun. But a question:

if a fiend or undead is caught in the area of 2 or more of this spell, ie, is wiht in 60 ' unobstructed fo two (or more) items wiht this spell cast on them, does it take damage from each source? I jsut had images fo a 4 person party with one or more items with this spell on it.. the devistation that would wreck if you encountered either of the above. for 4 spells, that would be 4d6 per round for undead, and 8d6 per round for fiends.
Princeoflowlight
03-18-04, 09:57 PM Generally, spells don't stack with themselves. Like getting hit with two Melf's Acid Arrows won't make you take 4d4 damage a round. I may be wrong, though.
strenoth
03-18-04, 10:32 PM hmm, now with Melf's, i was sure you would get 4d4 damage a round. otherwise it seems like damage-over duration spells would be nerfed compared to direct damage spells. If a (very tough) creature got hit with 10 fireballs in the same round, it'd take damage from all of them, so why wouldn't the same creature take damage from being hit with multiple Melf's arrows? each spell is definatley a seperate effect. Oh, and it was stated some where that penalties always stack, for effects like Curse and such, so longas it's seperate castings. i don't remember where, and may be misremembering the passage or quote, so feel free to take that with a grain of salt.

For Celestial Brilliance, my thought has to do with the area of effect. taking 2x damage in an overlapping area of effect implies that that area is 2x as bright too (which actually makes sense). so for a 4 person party, 4x as bright as daylight... um, anybody got sunglasses? Sorry, I mean Shaded Spectacles? ;)

and anyay, to me the real distinction here, asside from brightness, is should it be considered to be a damage-dealing spell, and damage dealing spells do stack as far as I know, or should it be considered an effect spell, in which case you simply have the same effect hitting you twice (and thus have to make two SR checks, which isn't applicable to this spell.. mmm, nice, no SR allowed! anyway..) and tus are garuanteed to be under an effect that happens to hurt you.

right now, i'm leaning towards the first case, especially as the fiend/undead would take the damage on the turn of the person bearing the effected item I do beleive. Any one got evidence to the contrary? I'll play devils advocate for btoh ways too.
Dartanel
03-18-04, 10:57 PM As much as I like the spell myself, I'd have to say no. The damage is an incidental effect, and allowing it to stack would be broken.

Say, for example, what's to stop a midlevel cleric from casting a half-dozen celestial brilliances on himself, then casting an extended blindsight and wading into a lair of undead or demons, erasing them all with little to no effort on his part?
strenoth
03-19-04, 01:58 PM well, in the case that is likely to come up soon, we have a decent sized party with a heavy spell caster slant. I'm going to end up with every oen having one of these anyway after a few days (we NEED them right now, walking through demon-infested woods..just kepe them hidden in a pocket or under your clothes till combat please, light source in fog = monster attention getter)

so we are going to wind up with over lapping areas, just trying to figure out what the effect will be. if I see some decent discussion over both sides of the effect, i'll then pass this thread on to my GM, and let him review before makign hsi judgement.

so you aren;t tryign to convince me, you have to convince my DM, and he's very particulkar about going exactly by the rules (unless he specifically house rules something and writes the house rule out or decides a rule is to stupid to be allowed to live)
God of Slivers
03-22-04, 04:42 PM I was just thinking about this the other day. Think of it like this. You take a spotlight and shine it on your hand, it is warm. You take spotlight 2 and shine it on your hand, it is also warm. Now you shine both lights on your hand at the same time, it is warmer and brighter.

While I agree that having overlapping areas of celestial brillience is very strong, it no where states that overlapping areas of effect dont stack. Some spells state that multiple castings dont overlap, but damage dealing spells ALWAYS overlap.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
strenoth 03-18-04, 06:21 PM	I liek this spell. it's nice and fun. But a question: if a fiend or undead is caught in the area of 2 or more of this spell, ie, is wiht in 60 ' unobstructed fo two (or more) items wiht this spell cast on them, does it take damage from each source? I jsut had images fo a 4 person party with one or more items with this spell on it.. the devistation that would wreck if you encountered either of the above. for 4 spells, that would be 4d6 per round for undead, and 8d6 per round for fiends.
Princeoflowlight 03-18-04, 09:57 PM	Generally, spells don't stack with themselves. Like getting hit with two Melf's Acid Arrows won't make you take 4d4 damage a round. I may be wrong, though.
strenoth 03-18-04, 10:32 PM	hmm, now with Melf's, i was sure you would get 4d4 damage a round. otherwise it seems like damage-over duration spells would be nerfed compared to direct damage spells. If a (very tough) creature got hit with 10 fireballs in the same round, it'd take damage from all of them, so why wouldn't the same creature take damage from being hit with multiple Melf's arrows? each spell is definatley a seperate effect. Oh, and it was stated some where that penalties always stack, for effects like Curse and such, so longas it's seperate castings. i don't remember where, and may be misremembering the passage or quote, so feel free to take that with a grain of salt. For Celestial Brilliance, my thought has to do with the area of effect. taking 2x damage in an overlapping area of effect implies that that area is 2x as bright too (which actually makes sense). so for a 4 person party, 4x as bright as daylight... um, anybody got sunglasses? Sorry, I mean Shaded Spectacles? ;) and anyay, to me the real distinction here, asside from brightness, is should it be considered to be a damage-dealing spell, and damage dealing spells do stack as far as I know, or should it be considered an effect spell, in which case you simply have the same effect hitting you twice (and thus have to make two SR checks, which isn't applicable to this spell.. mmm, nice, no SR allowed! anyway..) and tus are garuanteed to be under an effect that happens to hurt you. right now, i'm leaning towards the first case, especially as the fiend/undead would take the damage on the turn of the person bearing the effected item I do beleive. Any one got evidence to the contrary? I'll play devils advocate for btoh ways too.
Dartanel 03-18-04, 10:57 PM	As much as I like the spell myself, I'd have to say no. The damage is an incidental effect, and allowing it to stack would be broken. Say, for example, what's to stop a midlevel cleric from casting a half-dozen celestial brilliances on himself, then casting an extended blindsight and wading into a lair of undead or demons, erasing them all with little to no effort on his part?
strenoth 03-19-04, 01:58 PM	well, in the case that is likely to come up soon, we have a decent sized party with a heavy spell caster slant. I'm going to end up with every oen having one of these anyway after a few days (we NEED them right now, walking through demon-infested woods..just kepe them hidden in a pocket or under your clothes till combat please, light source in fog = monster attention getter) so we are going to wind up with over lapping areas, just trying to figure out what the effect will be. if I see some decent discussion over both sides of the effect, i'll then pass this thread on to my GM, and let him review before makign hsi judgement. so you aren;t tryign to convince me, you have to convince my DM, and he's very particulkar about going exactly by the rules (unless he specifically house rules something and writes the house rule out or decides a rule is to stupid to be allowed to live)
God of Slivers 03-22-04, 04:42 PM	I was just thinking about this the other day. Think of it like this. You take a spotlight and shine it on your hand, it is warm. You take spotlight 2 and shine it on your hand, it is also warm. Now you shine both lights on your hand at the same time, it is warmer and brighter. While I agree that having overlapping areas of celestial brillience is very strong, it no where states that overlapping areas of effect dont stack. Some spells state that multiple castings dont overlap, but damage dealing spells ALWAYS overlap.