D&D 5E Lighting Effects

Charlaquin · Jul 8, 2019

DEFCON 1 said:
I also do everything based not on the lighting conditions of what the observer is standing in... I do it based on what the object or person being perceived is standing in.

- If the target is in bright light, any perception checks made to notice details are made normally.
- If the target is in dim light, any perception checks to notice details are made with disadvantage.
- If the target is in darkness, you cannot make any perception checks to notice details, and in fact cannot see the target at all.

If you have darkvision, move each result up one line. Perception checks to notice details on targets in bright light and dim light are made normally, perception checks on targets in darkness are made with disadvantage.

I treat the darkness spell not as though the area is just regular darkness, but rather that it is a sphere of what you might essentially consider black ink. It would be considered a "solid" object as far as light sources are concerned (whether within the sphere or behind the sphere). A light source brought into a darkness sphere disappears (and does not radiate any light out to any radius), and likewise a light source that goes behind the sphere also disappears, although the radius of light it projects might be noticed if it is wider than the sphere of darkness. Most of the time it does, and you'll probably have a zone of dim light haloing around the darkness sphere that the perceiver can notice.

This is the most reasonable interpretation, in my opinion.

Ovinomancer · Jul 8, 2019

FrogReaver said:
Suppose you have a PC and an NPC. The NPC is surrounded by total non-magical darkness but stands beside a torch. 20ft bright light radius and 20ft dim light radius. (assuming no darkvision)

Suppose the PC stands in the dim light area and the NPC is in the Bright light area. If the PC wanted to perceive something about the NPC does he have disadvantage? If the NPC want's to perceive something about the PC does he have disadvantage?

Now suppose the PC is standing
50 ft from the torch in the dark area
and the NPC is in the bright area.
Does anything change?

Now suppose the PC is standing 50 ft from the torch in the dark area and the NPC in the dim area. Does anything change?

Thoughts?

Case 1: PC in dim light, NPC in bright light -- PC makes perception checks normally, NPC has disadvantage (on vision based checks).

Case 2: PC in darkness, NPC in bright light -- PC makes perception checks about the NPC normally, NPC cannot make vision based perception checks about the PC (is effectively blinded with regards to the PC in darkness).

Case 3: PC in darkness, NPC in dim light -- PC makes vision based perception checks with disadvantage. NPC cannot make vision based perception checks about the PC.

With regards to the darkness spell -- this is poorly written. I run it as "ink cloud", where it blocks all vision in and through except in cases of an ability to see in magical darkness. Has the least 'weird' effects while being easy to adjudicate.

Ed Laprade · Jul 8, 2019

This is why I ignore 5E lighting conventions, and just wing it.

DEFCON 1 · Jul 8, 2019

Ed Laprade said:
This is why I ignore 5E lighting conventions, and just wing it.

Oh no, don't skip out on the lighting conventions... LuminCon is one the highlights of the year!

Esker · Jul 8, 2019

DEFCON 1 said:
Oh no, don't skip out on the lighting conventions... LuminCon is one the highlights of the year!

And I hear HighlightCon has some real luminaries this year.

Hriston · Jul 10, 2019

FrogReaver said:
Suppose you have a PC and an NPC. The NPC is surrounded by total non-magical darkness but stands beside a torch. 20ft bright light radius and 20ft dim light radius. (assuming no darkvision)

Suppose the PC stands in the dim light area and the NPC is in the Bright light area. If the PC wanted to perceive something about the NPC does he have disadvantage?

You’re skipping the step where the DM determines whether the result of the PC’s effort is uncertain and has a meaningful consequence for failure. If it is and does, and the DM calls for a check, I see no reason given here that it would be made with disadvantage, but that would be up to the DM to decide.

FrogReaver said:
If the NPC want's to perceive something about the PC does he have disadvantage?

Again, with the above caveat that the DM first determines that the result of the NPC’s effort is uncertain and has a meaningful consequence for failure and calls for a Wisdom (Perception) check to determine the result, if the NPC’s effort relies on sight, then yes, I think the check would likely be made with disadvantage unless the NPC had some source of advantage that would cancel it out.

FrogReaver said:
Now suppose the PC is standing 50 ft from the torch in the dark area and the NPC is in the bright area. Does anything change?

Yes, the NPC can no longer see the PC.

FrogReaver said:
Now suppose the PC is standing 50 ft from the torch in the dark area and the NPC in the dim area. Does anything change?

Yes, now if the DM asks the player for a Wisdom (Perception) check that relies on sight to resolve the PC’s attempt to notice something about the NPC, the check is made with disadvantage unless the PC also has a source of advantage.

FrogReaver said:
Thoughts?

I think you should make your point more clear. I don’t see what you’re getting at.

FrogReaver · Jul 10, 2019

Hriston said:
You’re skipping the step where the DM determines whether the result of the PC’s effort is uncertain and has a meaningful consequence for failure. If it is and does, and the DM calls for a check, I see no reason given here that it would be made with disadvantage, but that would be up to the DM to decide.

Okay then.... Suppose the PC wants to notice something about the NPC that the DM has determined is uncertain. I shouldn't have to go back and reclarify something this freakin basic. I mean SERIOUSLY?

Hriston · Jul 10, 2019

FrogReaver said:
Okay then.... Suppose the PC wants to notice something about the NPC that the DM has determined is uncertain. I shouldn't have to go back and reclarify something this freakin basic. I mean SERIOUSLY?

“Reclarify” would indicate you’ve already made an attempt to clarify this. I must have missed the part of the thread where you did that.

FrogReaver · Jul 10, 2019

Hriston said:
“Reclarify” would indicate you’ve already made an attempt to clarify this. I must have missed the part of the thread where you did that.

Read the post you just quoted. You'll find the reclarification right after the …. and right before I went off on you for even being rude enough to make that comment in the first place.

Hriston · Jul 10, 2019

FrogReaver said:
Read the post you just quoted. You'll find the reclarification right after the …. and right before I went off on you for even being rude enough to make that comment in the first place.

Right, but where is the original clarification?

Anyway, I’d hoped there’d be a point to this thread, but I guess not?