D&D 5E Revisiting RAW Darkness Spell

[FitzTheRuke]

While the rules could have been written that way, they weren't. The errata'd rules literally say that observers are "effectively blind" when trying to see anything in a heavily obscured area.

If the DM rules that a creature in darkness is within hearing range, then its location may still be known if it isn't hidden, but that's based only on sound--per the Blinded condition, sight is impossible.

Edit: Which is, of course, why the silhouette interpretation of transparent darkness conflicts with the Heavy Obscurement rules--(effectively) blind creatures can't see silhouettes.

You're not wrong, of course, but we could question what they mean by "effectively blind" and whether or not sound has to be the only way of perceiving where the creature is, or if hard-to-make-out silhouettes, motion-without-detail, or other sight-based perception would still fall under "effectively blind". I mean, I know actual blind people who can see a little, so it's not totally crazy.

 

[Eric V]

You're not wrong, of course, but we could question what they mean by "effectively blind" and whether or not sound has to be the only way of perceiving where the creature is, or if hard-to-make-out silhouettes, motion-without-detail, or other sight-based perception would still fall under "effectively blind". I mean, I know actual blind people who can see a little, so it's not totally crazy.

Question: If they can see a little, do you think they're "blind" as the game uses the term?

 

[Charlaquin]

This is mostly a matter of aesthetic preference to me, but I dislike the idea of there being a mist or any other medium by which the sphere is darkened. My preference is that it's filled with a kind of elemental darkness, so completely transparent like the air of a pitch-dark room.

Rather than an obscuring effect on things on the other side of the sphere from an outside observer, which would imply to me they would be hidden or unseen like things inside the area of effect, I mentioned just up-thread the idea of a lensing effect, like looking through a darkened glass globe. That would be my preference.

Err... Wouldn’t a darkened glass globe literally be a medium?

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Question: If they can see a little, do you think they're "blind" as the game uses the term?

They're "effectively blind", so yeah. If the word "blind" isn't absolutely 100% totally worst-case-scenario completely literal all the time in the real world, why should it be taken that way in a game rule, in particular one that uses an adjective to suggest that it's not absolute?

You can tell that a creature is "there" in whatever way you (or your DM) feels like describing it, so why not?

 

[Xetheral]

Sure, it's reasonable to talk that way, but you're not really seeing the absence of green paint on the wall. You're seeing the white paint that makes the patch white instead of green. And sure, you can "see" a shadow, but it's not really seeing anything except the light that defines the shadow by its absence. I think, in terms of the darkness spell, it's pretty meaningless to say that seeing a shadow is seeing "something" in the area of the spell, which shouldn't be allowed because you can't see things in a heavily obscured area, because then you'd have to say that someone looking into the spell area couldn't even see the darkness inside of it.



This is mostly a matter of aesthetic preference to me, but I dislike the idea of there being a mist or any other medium by which the sphere is darkened. My preference is that it's filled with a kind of elemental darkness, so completely transparent like the air of a pitch-dark room.

Rather than an obscuring effect on things on the other side of the sphere from an outside observer, which would imply to me they would be hidden or unseen like things inside the area of effect, I mentioned just up-thread the idea of a lensing effect, like looking through a darkened glass globe. That would be my preference.

I'm confused. You say it's filled with "elemental darkness, so completely transparent like the air of a pitch-dark room". But you also say you want the darkness itself to be visible. How can the elemental darkness itself be visible if it's completely transparent?

 

[Hriston]

Err... Wouldn’t a darkened glass globe literally be a medium?

It was a metaphor. I didn't mean to imply the sphere was literally filled with glass. That would be highly impractical.

 

[Eric V]

They're "effectively blind", so yeah. If the word "blind" isn't absolutely 100% totally worst-case-scenario completely literal all the time in the real world, why should it be taken that way in a game rule, in particular one that uses an adjective to suggest that it's not absolute?

You can tell that a creature is "there" in whatever way you (or your DM) feels like describing it, so why not?

I suppose because games need easy-to-understand rules, whereas life is just...whatever.

The adjective is used to make sure people don't interpret it as "your visual organs are malfunctioning and not working" not to add "degrees of blindness" to the game.

 

[Seramus]

Um, those are creatures, so seeing them is seeing a creature, right? Maybe I'm not getting the joke.

Seeing creatures that are pitch black does not impose penalties to attack, assuming they are not Hiding.

 

[Hriston]

I'm confused. You say it's filled with "elemental darkness, so completely transparent like the air of a pitch-dark room". But you also say you want the darkness itself to be visible. How can the elemental darkness itself be visible if it's completely transparent?

Transparent in the sense that light can pass through it. Visible like the shadow is visible, provided there is light to provide contrast. This might seem like a paradox, but remember that it's dark inside the sphere, and the light that passes through it cannot illuminate it.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I suppose because games need easy-to-understand rules, whereas life is just...whatever.

The adjective is used to make sure people don't interpret it as "your visual organs are malfunctioning and not working" not to add "degrees of blindness" to the game.

I personally don't find it hard to understand: "It's really hard to see, so you have the same penalties as you would if you had the "blind" condition, except that you obviously know where they are (they are not hiding) so you can use any description you like, based on this specific instance, to show how you know. Are they moving? Then you can see movement. Are they making noise? Then you can hear them. Is there a light source behind them? Then you can make out a shadow. Whatever works at the time. But you still have the penalties (disadvantage) of the blind condition, because it's an existing rule that approximates the situation best." YMMV.