Can a Glamour Torch shed real light?

[tymire]

Actually not quite, she didn't cast anything.  Lash has perfect memory and could overwrite Harry's senses.  So since Harry had seem the location before hand, he was trusting Lash to overwrite his senses and provide accurate information.  She also can come up with things on her own, however she is limited to Harry's senses when seeing out.  He uses this talent quite a few times in the books.  For example: memorizing the necro book, Tomas's buliten board, etc..

[ralexs1991]

Well seeing as we are able to see things because of the light bouncing off of the object and into our eyes I'd say that anysort of glamour  emits it's own light rather than reflecting the suns light off of it so yes I thing a glamour torch would give off light

[Lukas the Dead]

Well seeing as we are able to see things because of the light bouncing off of the object . . .

Adding physics to the discussion makes it kind of tricky as: if a glamour is a source of light then can it cast a shadow?

Then you go: "Well, it just doesn't cast light in that direction"

Then they go: "Oh, so in darkness it would have a shadow but in light it still wouldn't and it's going to not have any projection in the direction of the shadow . . ."

The answer can always be "it's magic so yes/no/sometimes," but then you really reset the argument back to the beginning. The "sometimes" part could lead to players checking everything for shadows and could be fun.  

[Ophidimancer]

Here's a comment about glamour, I found it because I'm in the middle of re-reading.

A myrk wasn’t like other forms of faerie glamour. Those could create appearance, and could simulate emotional states related to that appearance.

It's not much to go on, actually, in relation to this discussion, but it expands the purview of glamour to include simulated emotional states.

I personally think I'm going to rule that seemings interact with light as if they were really the objects they portray.  So seeming torches shed real light, and seeming objects cast shadows.  I draw the line at allowing glamour laser to actually burn anything, though.

[wyvern]

Though that'd be a fun excuse for taking "breath weapon" - Behold the power of my imaginary laser!

[neko128]

Well seeing as we are able to see things because of the light bouncing off of the object and into our eyes I'd say that anysort of glamour  emits it's own light rather than reflecting the suns light off of it so yes I thing a glamour torch would give off light

This is really the crux of it.  There are two ways a person can perceive a glamour - using their eyes (in which case, it's a physical property of the glamour) or because it's an illusion imposed on their mind.  In the former case, IMHO, a glamour of a torch should be assumed to generate light; in the latter, it doesn't create light, but that brings up the other possibility that was tossed out there - if you can get the information some other way, a glamour can be used *instead* of sight.

Actually not quite, she didn't cast anything.  Lash has perfect memory and could overwrite Harry's senses.

Well, I put it in spoiler tags to avoid using her name or specify what she did, as this is officially a spoiler-free board.  But never mind that.  :-P

I'm willing to accept that what she did was directly affect his mind instead of using an illusion...  I read it most recently a couple months ago.  But that brings us back to what I just said above; someone's perceiving the glamour either physically (with their eyes) or mentally.  In the former, it *is* generating light; otherwise, the glamoured torch would not appear to glow.  In the latter, it opens up a different can of worms.  Unless you can think of a third way that glamour might work.

In Shadowrun terms, it's physical vs. mana spells.  There were two types of illusion spells; physical and mental.  The former tended to be higher drain, had physical components (you could touch them), and affected cameras.  The latter were purely mental - you weren't imposing an illusion on the physical world, you were imposing an illusion on the minds of the people seeing it.

[wyvern]

So, I'm going to go devil's advocate for the remainder of this post.  (I.E. this is not the ruling I'd go with, but I think the argument is worth mentioning anyway.)

I direct your attention to YS11: Science Fails.  Sure, from a scientific point of view, the idea of a torch that is visible but casts no light is total hogwash.  But we're explicitly not dealing with science here.  And from a holistic point of view, there's no reason that the appearance of a torch should be connected to the effect of a torch.  What does a real torch do?  It casts light.  So what can a fake torch obviously not do...?  Now, a torch that doesn't cast light would look mighty odd in a dark room - probably giving large bonuses to alertness or investigation rolls to reveal it as fake - but for a magical illusion, even one that can be captured by camera, it'd be totally doable.  (You'd never get people to believe the pictures, though.  Obviously photoshopped.)

[ralexs1991]

@Lukas the Dead

[ralexs1991]

@Lukas the Dead: I think you just gave me a great idea for my campaign haha 

@Neko128 If it's the sort of Glamour cast into one's mind wouldn't that make it in direct violation of the laws of magic

[babel2uk]

@Neko128 If it's the sort of Glamour cast into one's mind wouldn't that make it in direct violation of the laws of magic

As far as I recall the Laws of Magic do not apply to faerie, and Glamour is faerie magic.

As far as the light issue goes. I'd say no as far as the lesser Glamour is concerned. It can alter the appearance of or hide existing items and people (it says this specifically) so you could make something look like a flashlight, but it wouldn't work like one unless what you were using actually produced light itself. It's only when you get to Greater Glamours that you can actually create something (out of ectoplasm - which gets around the physics aspect as that can basically mimic anything it needs to).