D&D 5E Eliminating darkvision from most races

[CapnZapp]

That was the assumption that I was asking about. Picking your character's race based on pure rules mechanics (such as whether or not they have darkvision) rather than flavour is a more optimisation style of play.

It really isn't.

If you use the term "more optimisation style of play" merely to describe someone who realizes darkvision helps if your character concept is sneaker, skulker or scout, I would say the term has lost all meaning. Then everybody is an optimizer unles you're brand new to the game, or almost chaotic in your choices.

It was whether or not a scout character would feel restricted as to the races that they could be in order to be viable, and whether the DM would simply assume they would pick the 'right' race, or consider the ramifications of removing darkvision from PC races while retaining it for the sort of enemies that the party would face in general.

I submit no "ramifications" need to be considered.

I haven't brought up the subject of retaining it for enemies, and I feel doing so only needlessly complicates the issue.

In some games its fine to accept that the houserules introduced are going to restrict player choices regarding race or class. In others it isn't going to be what the DM wants. That is why its an important knock-on effect to consider when discussing the change, before its made.

*shrug*

Elves on night vision worked well for 3rd edition.

I'm sure it will work equally well for 5th edition.

There's no need to call this a "houserule" as if it's something new and untested. There are no important "knock-on effects" to be expected.

All this suggestion does is subtly shifting the probability away from an all-darkvision party. The players can still make such a party - 5th offers a great variety of player races, many with darkvision. (It will still be exceedingly simple for one party member to pick a darkvision race; so there should be zero issues for the player wanting to play a Rogue). The only difference is that the group will have to make a token effort to make it happen - they can't just keep to the stereotypical Human, Dwarf, Elf, Halfling party by going Half-Elf, Dwarf, Elf, Gnome.

Hopefully, they will prioritize classical fantasy tropes and stick to a somewhat regular group, and if they do, the OP gets what he wants with minimal changes.

That's all there is to it. No game world ramifications. No big and messy changes.

Just a quick and simple tweak

 

[Ilbranteloth]

When I DM, one of the things I really like to establish is mood and setting for my players. I want to play up the dread and unknown when they venture into a dark, damp dungeon. I want them to almost hear the scraping of the flint and the crackling fire as they light their torch. I want them to see the light dance upon the cavern walls, or light an ancient underground tomb that hasn't seen light in hundreds of years. I want them to wonder what else lurks out in the darkness just beyond where their light reaches.

I also want their light spells to be meaningful and useful. I want magical potions of darkvision, or goggles of night, to be coveted items.

I think my examples showed that this is still quite possible. The fact that the complete darkness starts farther than "their face" doesn't mean that you can't play up the atmosphere. In fact, I can't think of many novels, movies, TV shows, etc. that play up the pitch darkness much. Sure, there are times where things go black and they light the torch. But playing up that aspect of it, that lasts all of a few seconds every once in a while, seems that the focus is a bit narrow.

No, horror movies, stories books and such play on the dim light, the shadows dancing at the edge of your vision, what's just beyond what you can see. When you can see nothing, then nothing is happening. Once they have a bit of light, then it gets interesting. Exactly as you mention - that wonder is what makes it creepy.

But the fact that most all the races have darkvision simply ruins things. Sure it makes it easier of DMs that want to forget about running lighting and vision rules anyway, but I want to run those rules. That's a big part of the ambiance of dungeon crawling, in the way I run my games.

So in my own homebrew universe, I am thinking about getting rid of darkvision for all but Drow and Snirvneblin. Are there some potential game-breaking problems if I do that? Have any thoughts on running a game without racial darkvision?

Not really, for reasons I've already outlined. The "making it easier for DMs" is wrong in my opinion. Remembering to add disadvantage to every Perception check that requires sight means the DM has to engage the rules. I find that when I discuss this, that it's all to easy for DMs to forget that it hinders creatures with darkvision and that a light source makes sense for them as well.

 

[Cyrinishad]

Because carrying a torch is even worse - it effectively alerts every scary monster to your presence for as far as that light travels. (And this is ambient and scattered light we're talking about; it easily travels around corners)

The chance of a monster just sitting there in the dark, continually readying its action hour after hour, is simply not very large (in my opinion). Some animals and bizarre monsters, sure. But most creatures would find that boring as hell.

At least I find the risk much higher of the same monster just milling about, minding its own business when it detects an approaching light from a hundred yards away, and has plenty of time to prepare an ambush.

Besides, a lantern creates the exact same 60-foot bubble of visual perception.

What I mean by this isn't to say you're playing the game badwrongfun if your adventurers prefer the "safety" of lanterns and torches. I only want understanding and acceptance of the fact that some players might not go for that line of argumentation.

If you simply just play the game, without thinking too hard about how someone would really percieve an approaching light in an otherwise pitch black cave, that's fine. It's certainly not something the rules have a say about.

Your point about torches is exactly why an all darkvision party is not an advantage for the players, because even if the PCs are not carrying light sources, I would expect the inhabitants of Dungeons & Underdark environments to utilize strategic placement of light sources (Torches, Bio-Luminescent Fungi, etc.) as a defensive measure for the very reason that they can see intruders approaching very clearly while they are waiting in dark places... Even monsters or animals would take advantage of this kind of thing, just as they do here on Earth... Just look at how an Angler Fish hunts its prey as an example of this. The observed habits of ambush predators in the natural world exhibit the exact behavior you are discounting as improbable. Ambush predators do sit there continually readying its action hour after hour until something gets close enough for them to surprise attack.

I am not in the habit of shooting down my players ideas, character concepts, tactical strategies, etc. If they wanted to make an all darkvision group that avoids using light sources, I definitely wouldn't discourage them... My players appreciate that I always try to find a way to say "yes" to their ideas, knowing that I will always find ways to challenge them while rewarding their creativity... and I absolutely give you my understanding and acceptance that everyone is entitled to their opinions, and I wholeheartedly encourage you to continue play the game & interpret the rules however you wish at your table.

 

[CapnZapp]

Your point about torches is exactly why an all darkvision party is not an advantage for the players, because even if the PCs are not carrying light sources, I would expect the inhabitants of Dungeons & Underdark environments to utilize strategic placement of light sources (Torches, Bio-Luminescent Fungi, etc.) as a defensive measure for the very reason that they can see intruders approaching very clearly while they are waiting in dark places... Even monsters or animals would take advantage of this kind of thing, just as they do here on Earth... Just look at how an Angler Fish hunts its prey as an example of this. The observed habits of ambush predators in the natural world exhibit the exact behavior you are discounting as improbable. Ambush predators do sit there continually readying its action hour after hour until something gets close enough for them to surprise attack.

I am not in the habit of shooting down my players ideas, character concepts, tactical strategies, etc. If they wanted to make an all darkvision group that avoids using light sources, I definitely wouldn't discourage them... My players appreciate that I always try to find a way to say "yes" to their ideas, knowing that I will always find ways to challenge them while rewarding their creativity... and I absolutely give you my understanding and acceptance that everyone is entitled to their opinions, and I wholeheartedly encourage you to continue play the game & interpret the rules however you wish at your table.

I'm sure there are predator monsters that do that, but we were talking about humanoids and such.

This thread isn't about discouraging players. It's about encouraging torches and the ambiance they give.

Once the party carries light, the question about individual party members became much less pressing. If they want to use darkvision, let them. As long as everyone isn't using darkvision, and the group stays reasonably together, you'll accomplish every goal you set for yourself, and interaction while down in caves and passages will work the way you want it.

Of course, you can have underdark dwellers use light too. But to me, that's playing on easy mode.

If you're preparing an ambush, you will want to stay in complete darkness. This will give you plenty of advance warning when the surface dwellers and their lanterns come bumbling about.

Even for darkvision foes, not using a light at least means you won't be instantly and automatically spotted. Even using a light as a lure is questionable, assuming intelligent foes.

 

[Cyrinishad]

I'm sure there are predator monsters that do that, but we were talking about humanoids and such...

...Once the party carries light, the question about individual party members became much less pressing. If they want to use darkvision, let them. As long as everyone isn't using darkvision, and the group stays reasonably together, you'll accomplish every goal you set for yourself, and interaction while down in caves and passages will work the way you want it.

Of course, you can have underdark dwellers use light too. But to me, that's playing on easy mode.

If you're preparing an ambush, you will want to stay in complete darkness. This will give you plenty of advance warning when the surface dwellers and their lanterns come bumbling about.

Even for darkvision foes, not using a light at least means you won't be instantly and automatically spotted. Even using a light as a lure is questionable, assuming intelligent foes.

I'm not suggesting that Underdark dwellers are walking around holding light sources and making themselves easy to spot. I am saying that humanoids would use strategic placement of stationary light sources in underground environment. Thereby enabling them to remain concealed in darkness, while intruders must move through well-lit areas to approach. So, humanoids with darkvision can very easily create defensive circumstances that maximize their effectiveness of both darkvision and concealment. Essentially, I am trying to say that while intelligent foes could try to use a light source as a lure, they would also certainly utilize light sources to create an additional layer of defensive terrain... It seems to me that "easy mode" for the players would actually be if the DM didn't have humanoids using these kinds of tactics.

This thread isn't about discouraging players. It's about encouraging torches and the ambiance they give.

I know that this thread is partly about encouraging the use of torches to create an appropriate ambiance to underground environments, but it is also about the opinion of the OP that darkvision somehow "ruins" that ambiance and allows DMs to forget about lighting & vision rules, as can be seen in the following quote:

But the fact that most all the races have darkvision simply ruins things. Sure it makes it easier of DMs that want to forget about running lighting and vision rules anyway, but I want to run those rules. That's a big part of the ambiance of dungeon crawling, in the way I run my games.

This is why my responses to this thread have been trying to help show the readers that darkvision doesn't ruin the ambiance of torch-light, and show that the prevalence of darkvision doesn't allow DMs to simply "forget" about lighting and vision rules... Since in my experiences the existence of darkvision has actually required me to think more about the impact of lighting and vision rules.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I'm not suggesting that Underdark dwellers are walking around holding light sources and making themselves easy to spot. I am saying that humanoids would use strategic placement of stationary light sources in underground environment. Thereby enabling them to remain concealed in darkness, while intruders must move through well-lit areas to approach. So, humanoids with darkvision can very easily create defensive circumstances that maximize their effectiveness of both darkvision and concealment. Essentially, I am trying to say that while intelligent foes could try to use a light source as a lure, they would also certainly utilize light sources to create an additional layer of defensive terrain... It seems to me that "easy mode" for the players would actually be if the DM didn't have humanoids using these kinds of tactics.

Humanoids without darkvision would likely use the same tactics as this as well though: making your opponents cross areas of well-lit ground while you're in the dark is effective either way.
Its less important for a foe with darkvision, but they're still going to prefer shooting at an opponent that is in bright light rather than dim light.

 

[CapnZapp]

Humanoids without darkvision would likely use the same tactics as this as well though: making your opponents cross areas of well-lit ground while you're in the dark is effective either way.

Yes.

Still not sure why that was brought up as a counter-argument.

 

[CapnZapp]

This is why my responses to this thread have been trying to help show the readers that darkvision doesn't ruin the ambiance of torch-light, and show that the prevalence of darkvision doesn't allow DMs to simply "forget" about lighting and vision rules... Since in my experiences the existence of darkvision has actually required me to think more about the impact of lighting and vision rules.

I can't speak for the OP.

I can only say that there are only one really impactful scenario: when every party member has darkvision. That enables a whole host of tactics not otherwise available to the players. That is the situation you want to avoid (at low levels - at high levels darkvision issues aren't supposed to remain a hindrance).

Everything else is really up to the DM, with no serious balance issues either way.

Sure an intelligent humanoid can place lights. But I wouldn't expect it to be quite so commonplace as you seem to think. Outside larger settlements, sure - they're not going to evade detection anyway: you could as well maximize your chances of spotting intruders.

But for any smaller group, don't underestimate how far away you can detect an incoming light source if in an otherwise pitch black environment. Getting advance warning of an incoming threat would be vital to such a smaller group, I would think. They aren't ambush predators, they're intelligent humanoids. They can't keep up an ambush vigiliance all the time, they need rest and relaxation. Getting time to move into position greatly increases the chance of a successful ambush.

So yes, you can easily argue it makes sense to have torches. But you can also argue to not have torches.

Either way, it's kind of beside the issue. I can't imagine the OP will be satisfied by the suggestion every foe will always place helpful torches all over the place. This is about the party itself carrying lights.

 

[Uller]

This is why my responses to this thread have been trying to help show the readers that darkvision doesn't ruin the ambiance of torch-light, and show that the prevalence of darkvision doesn't allow DMs to simply "forget" about lighting and vision rules... Since in my experiences the existence of darkvision has actually required me to think more about the impact of lighting and vision rules.

I'm sorry. Maybe I'm miss reading what you are saying. Are you claiming that a party with all darkvision characters wouldn't have a fundamentally different experience exploring an underground complex than one with no or few characters with darkvision?

This thread is about a DM that wants to reduce the prevalence of darkvision available to his players for his game. Presumably his players are on board with that because they want to feel the fear that. I don't understand the need to argue against it.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Yes.

Still not sure why that was brought up as a counter-argument.

Just pointing out to Cyrinishad that darkvision-using races are still going to want to use light sources for the same reasons as, say humans outdoors at night will. Using Darkvision alone still gives penalties, so while they aren't going to have scouting patrols waving torches around all the time, they're still going to use light around their buildings, or when tracking for example.