I dunno, it was intuitive to me. Maybe I just process that kind of extrapolation more easily than most? I dunno, but like I said, I’ll grant that it is not the way everyone intuitively interprets the text, but I don’t think it’s especially unintuitive, and it’s certainly more technically accurate. But, sure, I guess it’s fair to say that it’s not the most intuitive reading, even if it is how I intuitively read it.
No worries. If you were being pedantic, so was I, so sorry about my part in it as well.
Yeah, that's what I meant by lawyering, btw. Very poorly worded. I think you just go through that process automatically, where others don't.
Anyway, for what it's worth, I think that your first interpretation is how it should work. Darkvision should make all darkness into dim light, but dim light only becomes bright within 60 feet.
Thanks all for the input. I can understand the Darkvision interpretation debate from either side, and don't think either reading is more sensible than the other. One was the spirit of the ability, the other the literal interpretation of the text. The reading of all darkness as dim lights removes the arbitrary 60" range on total sight distance, instead limiting the bright light from dim to that range. Either works. *shrug*
Maybe for Perception checks beyond 120 feet, Elves have advantage? Or, if you house-rule any sight-based Perception check beyond 120 feet is at disadvantage, Elf-eyes would counter that.
Right now we're still playing RAW, but I did give the Dragonborn character Darkvision simply because it was also my error from the beginning. The player appreciates it, because he was shocked when I told him Dragonborn normally don't have it. Since I nerfed their Move Speed to 25, it seems like a balanced trade-off.
I like the elf vision variant you've got there. Simpler, for sure. Then again, is it simpler to have rules for how far you can see without disadvantage? I know there is data on this for humans with statistically average eyesight and those with perfect eyesight, so it's not like we couldn't have an accurate-ish simplified range at which it becomes hard to see fine details, and then another range at which is becomes impossible, and elf eyes could simply double those range, and have the ability to treat an area far away as within their normal vision range. I think this general idea could benefit from a thread.
Everything and its dog has Darkvision in 5th Edition - it's ridiculous - a very foolish design decision. WotC have added to the mass of DV races by adding it in nearly every statblock. It's like a 'filler' ability these days.
They even had to design the Gloom Stalker Ranger so their 'hide the dark' abilities fool Darkvision. Otherwise it would be practically useless.
It was a simplification gone too far, Low Light Vision is easy to run - you see in dim light like bright light... there... done.
In my games none but Underdark races and the right sorts of Monsters have Darkvision, and all relevant PC races etc. have had it replaced with Low Light Vision.
It works much better and takes nothing from the game or the players.
I recommend you replace it too, and enjoy running night ambushes that actually work as intended again.
The Gloom Stalker isn't built that way because darkvision is too common. They're built that way because many of the creatures they are thematically fighting/stalking have always had something like darkvision, and the point of the ability is that they are invisible to such creatures' special sight, making them terrifying monsters in the dark, for races that have never had to fear the dark.
Low light and Dark vision as separate visions isn't less complex. 5e darkvision is simple. In dim light, you see clearly within the radius, and in darkness you see at disadvantage within the radius.
If night ambushes aren't working "as intended" with 5e RAW, that's on the DM, not the rules.
Slightly off-topic but, out of curiosity, Does dim light affect combat in any way? When I first learned the game I made the assumption that it gave disadvantage to perception and attacks but this isn't the case, correct?
You can skulk around in the dark and sneak up on creatures with darkvision and still sneak attack them, correct?
Or does dim light not give you enough concealment to use sneak up to a creature? hence the need for the skulker feat?
I just feel like I'm getting things mixed up from the previous edition, possibly...
Just like sneaking up on a character carrying a torch, you have to start the turn in darkness, and gank the fool before they have a chance to see you. Your DM might call for a stealth check just for the last part of sneaking up on him, ie a check to avoid his field of vision for the moment before you strike, or you might simply have to attack from outside the range of the torch/darkvision.
Creatures with darkvision don't have any benefit to sight outside the radius of their darkvision. It's narratively weird, but mechanically simple.
That's because subtlety is a lost art form.
I can have entire threads titled, "Paladins are the worst things ever and I am going to kill off all of them and burn every single document that references them, Muahahahahahaha!" and people still ask me, "So, um, what do you think of Paladins, eh?"
But what are your thoughts on rapiers, and gnomes? Gnome Paladins with rapiers?
What are your thoughts on Gnome Paladins with Rapiers riding giant Corgis?
