Candles vs. Torches (and other oddly-priced items)

[Segev]

Both cost 1 cp. Torches weigh a pound each. Candles weigh so little that it doesn't list a weight. (Makes bulk calculation harder, though.) Both burn for 1 hour. Candles raise light levels within 5 ft. by 1, and can't raise it higher than normal. Torches raise the light level to normal within 20 ft., and by one level outside that radius.

So, why would you get candles? Sure, they're lighter, but it takes at least two to raise from dark to normal lighting, so they're twice as expensive, and raise the light only in a tiny radius. They're not going to keep you from being visible; light sources are visible well outside their light radius.

I was trying to figure out how to do a bulk weight estimation for a scholarly character who probably carries a lot of them around for use late at night, but even the burn time of 1 hour suggests that these 1 cp candles are only one inch long, which seems a bit...small. Even birthday candles are longer than that (admittedly, birthday candles last for minutes, not an hour, and aren't as thick as the taper candles I was getting data on).

I'm tempted to try to convince a DM that a candle should burn for 6 hours, but otherwise use the same rules. It'd be a six inch taper candle by default, which I think is about the size of the "cartoon" candle we usually see old-timey folk carrying on their candle-holders around dark manors or using at their writing desks in fiction. Not useful for adventuring, but worth having for personal lighting even if you want to burn two of them at a time for "normal" light levels to work by, compared to a torch.

Thoughts? (I know, this is so on the low-end of optimization that it's nearly pointless dithering, but this kind of detail bothers me once I see it.)

Edit to add: And ink! It's 8 gp for normal ink, 5 gp for glowing ink, and 2 gp for the simplest kind of invisible ink! You could theoretically use invisible ink as normal ink by using the simple kind that responds to heat, writing your message, then exposing it to heat before bothering to send it.

Also, paper: normal paper is 4 sp per sheet, and it expressly isn't useful for making magic scrolls. Parchment is 2 sp per sheet, and expressly is. Why use normal paper? Rice paper, at 5 cp per sheet, is the cheapest, but at least that's not less usable than a more expensive kind!

[Psyren]

So, why would you get candles?

You wouldn't - they're not really meant for adventurers, not all goods and services are. Practicality for adventurers is not the only factor that determines an item's cost, after all; it's the same reason you can find a painting that costs as much as a magic amulet or sword.

With that said, I wouldn't have a problem letting you buy multiple candles for the price of one torch as a GM.

[Crake]

Candles are more discreet, if you're trying to sneak around in the dark, they're much less obvious.

Paper and ink, well, it's like asking why would you buy a fountain pen and fancy paper when you can buy cheap paper and a ball point pen.

[Elkad]

I'm thinking the "candles" may be more like rushlights (reed soaked in fat) if you want any kind of historical accuracy. Those only burn about 20 minutes though. If you lit both ends you got more light at the expense of time, giving rise to the matching phrase for living hard and fast.
Or tallow candles at best, which work, but smell rather unpleasant - scorching animal fat - and smell even worse if you had to use lard instead of tallow.

Beeswax was for the rich. Paraffin is a petroleum product of the 18th century. Braided wicks came fairly late as well, prior to that you had to trim the wick often, and the flame flickered heavily.

In 1770 Williamson, due to a tallow shortage, you got one candle a night, and it was suggested that if you and a friend shared, you got about 90 minutes of light out of your two tallow candles burned in succession. So the hour figure isn't far off according to that account.

As to why you wouldn't prefer torches? Torches are bulky, heavy, light the curtains on fire, and often make huge amounts of smoke. D&D doesn't model it, but torches also use quite a bit more oxygen to make that extra light, a concern if your party is hiding out in a small dungeon room without adequate ventilation. 1000' cubic feet of air (10x10x10) will support burning less than 10 pounds of fuel. So an 10 hour rest using a succession of torches for the watchkeeper, assuming it uses half the torch as fuel, takes half the oxygen in the room. Which is bad for the humans, even if they don't die of smoke inhalation or carbon monoxide poisoning first. Of course the torches go out sooner than that (after about 5 hours), even without people breathing as well. Actually, they go out before you are unconscious, so you know to open the door.

So a candle (which uses roughly the same amount of oxygen as a human breathing, and may burn much cleaner) is a better option. You get a lot less light, but you don't die of oxygen deprivation, smoke inhalation, or carbon monoxide poisoning in an enclosed space.

Edit: I left out the torch benefits.. More light. Improvised weapon. A proper lime sulfur torch can survive being dunked in water briefly without going out as well.

[Crake]

D&D doesn't model it, but torches also use quite a bit more oxygen to make that extra light, a concern if your party is hiding out in a small dungeon room without adequate ventilation. 1000' cubic feet of air (10x10x10) will support burning less than 10 pounds of fuel.

Actually, I think you'll find that under the slow suffocation rules (suffocation in limited spaces due to consuming all the oxygen), torches are actually set to consume the same amount as a medium creature breathing, so dnd does actually model a torch's oxygen consumption.

[Elkad]

Actually, I think you'll find that under the slow suffocation rules (suffocation in limited spaces due to consuming all the oxygen), torches are actually set to consume the same amount as a medium creature breathing, so dnd does actually model a torch's oxygen consumption.

OK, then they model it incorrectly. A candle matches a medium creature (30 grams/hour) resting. A torch should be much higher.

Edit: Slow suffocation rules are too fast for just oxygen consumption though. Probably some attempt to model carbon dioxide poisoning.

[Crake]

OK, then they model it incorrectly. A candle matches a medium creature (30 grams/hour) resting. A torch should be much higher.

Edit: Slow suffocation rules are too fast for just oxygen consumption though. Probably some attempt to model carbon dioxide poisoning.

Based on a brief search, it does seem that CO2 poisoning would be a concern before O2 deprevation would be.

[Blackhawk748]

Because a candle flame is incredibly small and makes almost no smoke, whereas a torch is this giant ball of fire next to you and makes a lot of smoke.

Really torches should never be used inside.

[weckar]

hey're not going to keep you from being visible; light sources are visible well outside their light radius. While true, in 3.5 a light source can be seen from 10 times its illumination range. That's 4x as far for a torch!

Additionally, after a candle finishes burning or even while it is burning it leaves useful was for sealing and the like. A skilled peasant could even reform the wax into a candle if they had a wick. None of this re-usability is true for torches.

Finally, they can quite safely burn in lantern housings and in low-oxygen conditions, whereas torches most certainly cannot!

[Segev]

While true, in 3.5 a light source can be seen from 10 times its illumination range. That's 4x as far for a torch!

Additionally, after a candle finishes burning or even while it is burning it leaves useful was for sealing and the like. A skilled peasant could even reform the wax into a candle if they had a wick. None of this re-usability is true for torches.

Finally, they can quite safely burn in lantern housings and in low-oxygen conditions, whereas torches most certainly cannot!

Not sure that lantern housings are all that useful, save for high-wind conditions that (by the RAW) only affect candles, and not torches.

That said, the 10x illumination range does mean that candles stop being visible after a mere 50 feet.

[Psyren]

Because a candle flame is incredibly small and makes almost no smoke, whereas a torch is this giant ball of fire next to you and makes a lot of smoke.

Really torches should never be used inside.

In a house maybe, but in a large stone enclosure like a castle or keep, candles would be far too impractical for most indoor lighting needs. Specific rooms might use them, but not the halls, dungeon, throne room etc.

[Blackhawk748]

In a house maybe, but in a large stone enclosure like a castle or keep, candles would be far too impractical for most indoor lighting needs. Specific rooms might use them, but not the halls, dungeon, throne room etc.

The entirety of the Medieval period disagrees. You don't continually light the interior of castles, only bringing a light with you if you need it. Otherwise, the room is dark, and it was candles.

[Elkad]

In a house maybe, but in a large stone enclosure like a castle or keep, candles would be far too impractical for most indoor lighting needs. Specific rooms might use them, but not the halls, dungeon, throne room etc.

You just used more candles. Sometimes a LOT more, like the annual salary of your entire castle staff in a single evening if you were hosting a ball or something.

[Segev]

You just used more candles. Sometimes a LOT more, like the annual salary of your entire castle staff in a single evening if you were hosting a ball or something.

That is one thing the PF rules don't model well: multiple candles extending the range of illumination. Those chandelliers with dozens of candles in a single five-foot space would have normal light levels within five feet of them, but be utterly dark on the ground 15 feet below. (That said, it only takes two candles to light darkness to normal light in your five foot radius.)



Anybody got any insight as to why ink is more expensive than glowing ink or basic forms of invisible ink?

[Crake]

That is one thing the PF rules don't model well: multiple candles extending the range of illumination. Those chandelliers with dozens of candles in a single five-foot space would have normal light levels within five feet of them, but be utterly dark on the ground 15 feet below. (That said, it only takes two candles to light darkness to normal light in your five foot radius.)



Anybody got any insight as to why ink is more expensive than glowing ink or basic forms of invisible ink?

Not sure about glowing ink, but invisible ink can be made with lemon juice, like, literally just diluted lemon juice. It's really easy to make, but it doesn't look good at all, while proper ink is much more expensive to make, and a lot more high class/fancy, plus you don't have to risk burning the paper to read it.

[Segev]

Not sure about glowing ink, but invisible ink can be made with lemon juice, like, literally just diluted lemon juice. It's really easy to make, but it doesn't look good at all, while proper ink is much more expensive to make, and a lot more high class/fancy, plus you don't have to risk burning the paper to read it.

That's fair, though at that rate, one wonders why lemon juice costs 2 gp/vial, let alone takes a DC 15 alchemy check to create.

Admittedly, as soon as you hit "average" invisible ink (defined by working with up to two triggers that simple invisible ink works with, or one "uncommon" trigger, e.g. acid or blood), it's 2 gp more expensive per vial than regular ink. 10 as opposed to 8.

[Malphegor]

Main benefit of a torch that I only realised recently as a formerly devout sunrod user (I like to imagine them as glowsticks no matter what the book and my DM tell me. EVERY DUNGEON'S A RAVE! untz untz untz untz! also they're super hygienic compared to a sooty mucky torch)

is that in the phb they also count as a weapon, what with it basically being a club with fire on the end. I think without checking the books, it deals (if a medium torch) 1d4 bludgeoning, +1 fire damage?

[Crake]

That's fair, though at that rate, one wonders why lemon juice costs 2 gp/vial, let alone takes a DC 15 alchemy check to create.

Admittedly, as soon as you hit "average" invisible ink (defined by working with up to two triggers that simple invisible ink works with, or one "uncommon" trigger, e.g. acid or blood), it's 2 gp more expensive per vial than regular ink. 10 as opposed to 8.

Why DC15 alchemy, i'm not sure, but the price could easily be justified by it being a "trade secret" so to speak.


Main benefit of a torch that I only realised recently as a formerly devout sunrod user (I like to imagine them as glowsticks no matter what the book and my DM tell me. EVERY DUNGEON'S A RAVE! untz untz untz untz! also they're super hygienic compared to a sooty mucky torch)

is that in the phb they also count as a weapon, what with it basically being a club with fire on the end. I think without checking the books, it deals (if a medium torch) 1d4 bludgeoning, +1 fire damage?

I believe it's 1d3 +1 fire, and -4 to hit for an improvised weapon.

Edit: Yeah, damage equal to gauntlet of it's size (1d3 for medium) plus 1 fire damage. It is an improvised one handed weapon though, so you can wield it with two hands for 1.5x str damage, and as a bonus, the fire damage can actually be dealt to swarms that you would otherwise be unable to damage, and it increases to 1d3 fire damage instead of just a flat 1.

[Geddy2112]

So, why would you get candles?
Being weightless, you can have tons of them in a bag. Plus they look cooler and are far more appropriate for summoning circles, omnious ceremonies, and other places where torches would be inappropriate.

A group holding lit candles vs a group holding lit torches conveys a very different message.

[Lapak]

Why DC15 alchemy, i'm not sure, but the price could easily be justified by it being a "trade secret" so to speak.Outside of (sub)tropical climates, lemon juice is not going to be readily available and you're going to have to craft your own ink. Pretty sure that's what they're modeling, not the readily-available fresh citrus of our times.

[Psyren]

The entirety of the Medieval period disagrees. You don't continually light the interior of castles, only bringing a light with you if you need it. Otherwise, the room is dark, and it was candles.


You just used more candles. Sometimes a LOT more, like the annual salary of your entire castle staff in a single evening if you were hosting a ball or something.

What were all those torch sconces/brackets for then? That might be what threw me.


That is one thing the PF rules don't model well: multiple candles extending the range of illumination. Those chandelliers with dozens of candles in a single five-foot space would have normal light levels within five feet of them, but be utterly dark on the ground 15 feet below. (That said, it only takes two candles to light darkness to normal light in your five foot radius.)

I would imagine that a chandelier should be treated as a single (more powerful) light source, obviating this issue.

[Segev]

I would imagine that a chandelier should be treated as a single (more powerful) light source, obviating this issue.

Probably, yes. Just as a bag full of candles wouldn't weigh as little as an empty bag, despite candle weight being "--". It's just one of those "how many grains of sand make a heap?" questions.

[ericgrau]

Candles vs Torches: Torches are much better for adventurers. Candles are much better for writing on a desk without a giant scary flame near your wooden home and all your valuables. The burn time does seem like it's too low compared to real candles. Perhaps D&D candles have thicker wicks for more light than our merely decorative candles which might not even function as desk lights. You know, "a candle that burns twice as bright burns half as long". Some brief Googling showed pictures of larger candle flames and/or complaints about needing multiple candles. It's fine if you want to convince your DM they last longer, that's a possibility too and not really broken. But for prices in cp I wouldn't bother even bringing up something that may or may not be true.

Ink: At least home-made invisible ink I've seen isn't nearly as dark as regular ink so it's not great contrast. And at least the crude kind is much easier to make so I can see why it could be cheaper. Since it's so thin it might be more difficult to write with too, requiring much more frequent dipping. But it does seem silly that whoever priced glowing and invisible ink did it how they did and didn't simply add a few gp. The author probably didn't look at the price of regular ink and would be shocked to find out it's so much.

Parchment vs paper: According to wikipedia, parchment was invented when papyrus got too expensive. Today parchment is more expensive though. Technology causing the flip didn't come until the 1400s though. The printing press also demanded higher quantities than were available from animals, also driving up the price of parchment above paper. D&D's pseudo-medieval setting is most likely before the printing press. Parchment use largely stopped except for government documents meant to last a long time, since it lasts longer. Other than that it's a pain in the butt, since it doesn't tend to stay flat. Paper is preferred not only for price but also for ease of use for most purposes. For long lasting, formal or decorative purposes then you use parchment. So it's no wonder it's what D&D uses for scrolls. For books you need lots of costly and/or time consuming precautions to flatten it to avoid a mess. Rice paper is thin, flimsy, tears easily and is semi-transparent. it's not as useful for typical writing. Your pre-printing press scholar character should totally use both parchment and paper as appropriate. Stack of pages or book, use paper. Formal 1 page document or legally binding document (with any number of pages) that must last, parchment. Fancy book, parchment, along with a clasp to flatten it when closed, and the expectation that it will probably hold fewer pages. Rice paper probably not at all. And for dark, deeply black ink that's easy to read, just carry regular ink.

[OracleofWuffing]

Anybody got any insight as to why ink is more expensive than glowing ink or basic forms of invisible ink?
For that matter, how should one extrapolate the price of invisible glowing ink?

[ericgrau]

For that matter, how should one extrapolate the price of invisible glowing ink?

If it's like the real thing then it's invisible or barely perceptible by default. But maybe in PF it's not as pure. So then the price depends on the difficulty of purification.

[Segev]

Candles vs Torches: Torches are much better for adventurers. Candles are much better for writing on a desk without a giant scary flame near your wooden home and all your valuables. The burn time does seem like it's too low compared to real candles. Perhaps D&D candles have thicker wicks for more light than our merely decorative candles which might not even function as desk lights. You know, "a candle that burns twice as bright burns half as long". Some brief Googling showed pictures of larger candle flames and/or complaints about needing multiple candles. It's fine if you want to convince your DM they last longer, that's a possibility too and not really broken. But for prices in cp I wouldn't bother even bringing up something that may or may not be true.

Ink: At least home-made invisible ink I've seen isn't nearly as dark as regular ink so it's not great contrast. And at least the crude kind is much easier to make so I can see why it could be cheaper. Since it's so thin it might be more difficult to write with too, requiring much more frequent dipping. But it does seem silly that whoever priced glowing and invisible ink did it how they did and didn't simply add a few gp. The author probably didn't look at the price of regular ink and would be shocked to find out it's so much.

Parchment vs paper: According to wikipedia, parchment was invented when papyrus got too expensive. Today parchment is more expensive though. Technology causing the flip didn't come until the 1400s though. The printing press also demanded higher quantities than were available from animals, also driving up the price of parchment above paper. D&D's pseudo-medieval setting is most likely before the printing press. Parchment use largely stopped except for government documents meant to last a long time, since it lasts longer. Other than that it's a pain in the butt, since it doesn't tend to stay flat. Paper is preferred not only for price but also for ease of use for most purposes. For long lasting, formal or decorative purposes then you use parchment. So it's no wonder it's what D&D uses for scrolls. For books you need lots of costly and/or time consuming precautions to flatten it to avoid a mess. Rice paper is thin, flimsy, tears easily and is semi-transparent. it's not as useful for typical writing. Your pre-printing press scholar character should totally use both parchment and paper as appropriate. Stack of pages or book, use paper. Formal 1 page document or legally binding document (with any number of pages) that must last, parchment. Fancy book, parchment, along with a clasp to flatten it when closed, and the expectation that it will probably hold fewer pages. Rice paper probably not at all. And for dark, deeply black ink that's easy to read, just carry regular ink.

Thanks for the in-depth analysis; I largely agree in theory. The parchment vs. paper thing, though, bugs me because it seems weird that the purpose I have for a PC buying a lot of writing materials would suggest paper is the proper material to choose, but the costs make parchment the one he'd go for. He writes letters home almost excessively. At 50% the cost, of course he'd go with parchment...but you'd think for a simple letter, paper would be the go-to choice.

[OgresAreCute]

Thanks for the in-depth analysis; I largely agree in theory. The parchment vs. paper thing, though, bugs me because it seems weird that the purpose I have for a PC buying a lot of writing materials would suggest paper is the proper material to choose, but the costs make parchment the one he'd go for. He writes letters home almost excessively. At 50% the cost, of course he'd go with parchment...but you'd think for a simple letter, paper would be the go-to choice.

Maybe postage/shipping being more expensive for parchment (since it's bulkier/heavier) makes paper more appealing? :smallbiggrin:

[Blackhawk748]

What were all those torch sconces/brackets for then? That might be what threw me.

I haven't seen many torch sconces in a castle, but I would imagine that it was for times where you were having a party outside during summer or something and wanted to light the walkways.

The reason you don't want them inside is because of the crazy amount of smoke a medieval torch can spew out

[The Random NPC]

I've heard that a man's nocturnal emissions can be used as invisible ink. If true, that may explain why it's cheaper than regular ink.

[ericgrau]

Thanks for the in-depth analysis; I largely agree in theory. The parchment vs. paper thing, though, bugs me because it seems weird that the purpose I have for a PC buying a lot of writing materials would suggest paper is the proper material to choose, but the costs make parchment the one he'd go for. He writes letters home almost excessively. At 50% the cost, of course he'd go with parchment...but you'd think for a simple letter, paper would be the go-to choice.
Today parchment is the fancy choice but it used to be the cheap choice. Simply put, paper is flatter which is far more practical and better for most purposes. For a letter home and most common purposes I'd go with parchment. For a book or manuscript, use paper. But for any purpose where you don't mind lack of flatness, parchment is both the cheaper and fancier option, as paradoxical as that may seem. So important legal documents or even fancified books (with limited pages) should also use parchment, as the drawback is only that they're more unwieldly and unflat. Otherwise the durability and so forth is superior.

So... in character start to think of parchment as the cheap choice and paper as the fancier choice for some purposes. But there are pros and cons, and for many purposes parchment is both the fancier choice and the more affordable choice.


Maybe postage/shipping being more expensive for parchment (since it's bulkier/heavier) makes paper more appealing? :smallbiggrin:
It's a binding/stacking issue mainly that makes the bulk a problem. Especially on a bookshelf with 100 books.