Ridding Elves and Half-Elves of Darkvision

GameOgre · Dec 12, 2018

Am I the only one with plans to take away all Darkvision? I never understood really why they had it in the first place other than to seem more non-human.

It seems so much better if nobody could see in the dark but each race used their environment to create there own style light sources.

Dwarves deep underground with Glowing Fungi Lanterns and Goblins with there Ill scented candles ect..

Much easier to keep track of and set up online as well.

WhosDaDungeonMaster · Dec 12, 2018

Getting rid of all Darkvision isn't a bad thing--it would make things simpler. Certain races I would probably give some form of enhanced vision to (like the Drow) as far as seeing in the dark (I am a fan of good ol' Infravision LOL). I was thinking about giving elves advantage on Perception tests, so that really would be their "enhanced" vision.

Caliburn101 · Dec 12, 2018

GameOgre said:
Am I the only one with plans to take away all Darkvision? I never understood really why they had it in the first place other than to seem more non-human.

It seems so much better if nobody could see in the dark but each race used their environment to create there own style light sources.

Dwarves deep underground with Glowing Fungi Lanterns and Goblins with there Ill scented candles ect..

Much easier to keep track of and set up online as well.

I regularly replace it with Low Light Vision because it is simpler, and keep it for Underdark and dark-living races exclusively - Drow, Duegar, etc. any who are the 'Morlock' versions of their respective races, and the right monsters.

After all the arguments are said and done, finally, I don't believe most PC races should have an always-on, undispellable second level spell as a minor feature they didn't really sacrifice anything for in their racial stablocks...

CapnZapp · Dec 12, 2018

GameOgre said:
It seems so much better if nobody could see in the dark

This.

Monsters excepted, of course. Whole point of darkness is, after all, the absence of a sunny flower meadow where you feel safe and cuddly.

While high-level D&D is beyond such petty concerns as "things go bump in the dark", that doesn't mean a level 1 party should easily be able to ignore darkness.

TaranTheWanderer · Dec 12, 2018

I like the idea of removing the 60 feet of dim light in total darkness from certain races but keeping the ability to upgrade dim light to normal light. It's easy to implement if you just say, "This race does not get penalties to perception checks in dim light."

As for what is considered dim or total darkness - that's a DMs call. If I want to describe a 'moon lit night' mechanically, I can also say it's 'dim light'. That's my choice even though the books might not describe that as dim light. In fact, If I want, I can say it's dim light out to 60 feet and beyond total darkness - even for the humans -(because there's snow on the ground and things stick out more up close, or whatever).

It's up to the DM to describe the scene and set the boundries. Then the players can add their abilities to compensate for whatever obstacles the DM has set.

I have one DM who never uses darkness as an obstacle. Even in caves. There always seems to be some kind of ambient light. I honestly think it's because he doesn't want to bother with tracking it. Which is always a bit of an annoying thing as a player who has a character with Darkvision. Because, when the humans can see fine, Darkvision becomes completely unnecessary and you feel like you should get some kind of 'advantage.' It certainly makes things flow quicker but makes certain feats and abilities useless.

5ekyu · Dec 12, 2018

TaranTheWanderer said:
I like the idea of removing the 60 feet of dim light in total darkness from certain races but keeping the ability to upgrade dim light to normal light. It's easy to implement if you just say, "This race does not get penalties to perception checks in dim light."

As for what is considered dim or total darkness - that's a DMs call. If I want to describe a 'moon lit night' mechanically, I can also say it's 'dim light'. That's my choice even though the books might not describe that as dim light. In fact, If I want, I can say it's dim light out to 60 feet and beyond total darkness - even for the humans -(because there's snow on the ground and things stick out more up close, or whatever).

It's up to the DM to describe the scene and set the boundries. Then the players can add their abilities to compensate for whatever obstacles the DM has set.

I have one DM who never uses darkness as an obstacle. Even in caves. There always seems to be some kind of ambient light. I honestly think it's because he doesn't want to bother with tracking it. Which is always a bit of an annoying thing as a player who has a character with Darkvision. Because, when the humans can see fine, Darkvision becomes completely unnecessary and you feel like you should get some kind of 'advantage.' It certainly makes things flow quicker but makes certain feats and abilities useless.

Absolutely, the Gm can house rule his setting and chose to hand wave away the game rules as he sees fit to suit the needs and to de facto fix the IMO broken (conflicts with genre norms) lighting rules in 5e.

Thats exactly what i did in my game, redefined the basic lighting status/definitions for my Shards, Shimmer and Shadow campaign and it did the trick. i did not find a new then to redefine the vision rules per se since the cases where the lighting creates "blinded" are far fewer, not everyday events and then become more of a specific scene element and tactical consideration as opposed to a day-in and day-out affair that makes the typical trope of overland journeys through outdorrs less than suicidal for humans and other non-darkvision races.

its an easy setting-definition fix for the 5e standard rules.

Hriston · Dec 12, 2018

James Grover said:
Story is part of it, of course. That's why I decided Dragonborn should have Darkvision.

Without understanding the story you have in mind, I can't really comment on this, but to me damage resistance and draconic language proficiency are more evocative of dragonborn's draconic heritage than darkvision. The default story of the pride and self-sufficiency of dragonborn clans doesn't evoke any particular connection with darkness.

James Grover said:
But, and to be honest this bothers me even a bit with non-Duergar Dwarves, "underground" Elves, such as in Mirkwood, have lights everywhere!

Then why elves? Why not take darkvison away from dwarves as well, and any humanoid race intelligent enough to use fire for illumination and warmth? Of the intelligent races, I think only trolls have a good reason to not use fire. Maybe they should be the only ones with darkvision.

Also, I think any argument about elves in Middle-earth related to darkvision should take into account the idea that elves are night-adapted.

James Grover said:
In prior versions of enhanced vision, light ruins its ability in many ways, so that is my take on it here. I know 5E simplified many things, so there are no rule mechanics to reflect this, but for me the feel of the ability should still deal with adjustment somehow.

In AD&D 1E, the period of adjustment for infravision is a minimum of 2 segments (12 seconds), so you could impose something like that if you're interested in tracking whether a character's darkvision is turned on or off. Since the combat round in 5E is only 6 seconds (instead of 1E's 1 minute round), however, I'd be tempted to say that any adjustment period is negligible.

James Grover said:
While I will probably remove Darkvision from elves, the Moonsight (or whatever I called it in an earlier post) will be gained. So, they still gain some benefit to enhanced vision, and with everything else they get I feel that is enough.

Is it part of your reason for removing darkvision from elves, then, that you feel they're OP?

GameOgre · Dec 12, 2018

For myself I just think it sucks that nobody is afraid of the dark. Also it's a major pain when playing online with battlemaps.
But mostly the Dark is something most of us have experience with fearing. Going from a well lit place to complete darkness is unsettling. It takes time for your eyes to adjust to even dim moonlit nights and all that time you can't see but you can hear things moving about ect...

Not being able to see anything is terrifying in a lot of conditions and places. Testing each step forward ect... It's just a lot of of really cool stuff that just doesn't make it into D&D. Keeping track of torches was never a fun thing but it used to be necessary because make a mistake and you could get screwed FAST. Also there used to be a wide variety of underdark hazards that just scared the crap out of you. Ever been in a game,fighting in the underdark in a half submerged tunnel when someone drops the torch? I have and 25 years later It's one of my most scary D&D memories.

Now entire parties have darkvision. It's not rare in my games for players to all pick dark vision races just to not have to worry about it.

Now all this is a lot of bother for frankly something that will only really come into play every great once in a while. Make vision very important and well,PC's will find ways to work around it. 95% of the time it's all going to end up playing the same way so I can see....it's not that big a deal.

5% of the time though.......you might find yourself with memories that will stick around for 25 years!

WhosDaDungeonMaster · Dec 12, 2018

Hriston said:
Without understanding the story you have in mind, I can't really comment on this, but to me damage resistance and draconic language proficiency are more evocative of dragonborn's draconic heritage than darkvision. The default story of the pride and self-sufficiency of dragonborn clans doesn't evoke any particular connection with darkness.

Maybe not damage resistance, but a better AC. I've already houseruled Dragonborn have a base AC of 11, not 10, but I also reduced their base speed to 25 from 30. It is a matter of preference that I prefer them to be slower in movement (Speed), but not necessarily in reaction (Dex). Given how so many races have Darkvision, it makes sense to me for them to have it if most others do. But, again, that is preference.

Then why elves? Why not take darkvison away from dwarves as well, and any humanoid race intelligent enough to use fire for illumination and warmth? Of the intelligent races, I think only trolls have a good reason to not use fire. Maybe they should be the only ones with darkvision.

That was why I mentioned non-Duergar Dwarves with Darkvision also bothering me. Underdark creatures I would more reasonably see having Darkvision, most other monsters or races with good eyesight given advantage on perception checks would work just as well IMO.

Also, I think any argument about elves in Middle-earth related to darkvision should take into account the idea that elves are night-adapted.

Having better eyesight in dark is different from seeing in the dark. Even ruling Elven "Moonlight" allows Elves to see as well in Dim Light as in Bright Light would account for it.

In AD&D 1E, the period of adjustment for infravision is a minimum of 2 segments (12 seconds), so you could impose something like that if you're interested in tracking whether a character's darkvision is turned on or off. Since the combat round in 5E is only 6 seconds (instead of 1E's 1 minute round), however, I'd be tempted to say that any adjustment period is negligible.

Actually, if I stayed with the 12 seconds from 1E, it would take two rounds in 5E LOL! No, I wouldn't do anything that extreme, but maybe something like adjusting eyesight from normal to non-normal could be a bonus action or reaction. I'll have to talk to my players and think about it.

Is it part of your reason for removing darkvision from elves, then, that you feel they're OP?

I think a lot of races are a bit OP in 5E, but I know I am in the minority about this so I won't bother to argue why.

As in all things D&D, it is always a matter of preference.

Hriston · Dec 13, 2018

James Grover said:
Maybe not damage resistance, but a better AC. I've already houseruled Dragonborn have a base AC of 11, not 10, but I also reduced their base speed to 25 from 30. It is a matter of preference that I prefer them to be slower in movement (Speed), but not necessarily in reaction (Dex). Given how so many races have Darkvision, it makes sense to me for them to have it if most others do. But, again, that is preference.

I can see we have different conceptions of dragonborn. There's a lot to choose from in creating a humanoid that's more dragon-like. I like the way dragonborn's damage resistance mirrors but waters-down the damage immunities of dragons.

Natural armor is a good fit, but I don't see dragons as particularly slow, so I'm not sure where that's coming from. To me, it makes dragonborn seem more dwarf-like.

James Grover said:
That was why I mentioned non-Duergar Dwarves with Darkvision also bothering me. Underdark creatures I would more reasonably see having Darkvision, most other monsters or races with good eyesight given advantage on perception checks would work just as well IMO.

Removing darkvison from non-underdark races would be easy, as I mentioned up-thread, but I think advantage on all Wisdom (Perception) checks is too good to use as a substitute. Darkvision really isn't that valuable.

James Grover said:
Having better eyesight in dark is different from seeing in the dark. Even ruling Elven "Moonlight" allows Elves to see as well in Dim Light as in Bright Light would account for it.

Not without changing 5E's illumination categories. As they are now, the outdoors at night are an area of darkness unless there's a full moon at maximum, which happens only one night in two months in a given location. Dusk and dawn are also considered dim light, so I could see this in support of a conception of elves as twilight-adapted, but night-adaptation requires darkvision, IMO.

James Grover said:
Actually, if I stayed with the 12 seconds from 1E, it would take two rounds in 5E LOL! No, I wouldn't do anything that extreme, but maybe something like adjusting eyesight from normal to non-normal could be a bonus action or reaction. I'll have to talk to my players and think about it.

I think just imposing the requirement that to use darkvision no light sources can be present might do the job.

James Grover said:
I think a lot of races are a bit OP in 5E, but I know I am in the minority about this so I won't bother to argue why. As in all things D&D, it is always a matter of preference.

I agree about preference, but I meant OP versus the other PC races. My opinion is they're all pretty much balanced against one another.