D&D (2024) Darkvision: it's here to stay for most races. What penalties could be added to keep is viable, but still have incentive to use light?

[Horwath]

Not just terrain.

For that to happen they need:

A) Terrain.

true, not always available

B) The correct weapons.

if we are not talking about cr1/4 mooks, everyone has best weapon available(non magic ofc)

just take CR 1/2 scout; two attacks with +4 at 150ft

C) Not to be terrible with them.

even with 12 dex, longbow with advantage is a very good choice. you deal some damage and receive none.

The vast majority of monsters just don't even have a ranged attack. Let alone one worth using and with 150' range. The chances of all that lining up in D&D are pretty damn low in most games.

dumb melee monsters are just filler or tanks for more intelligent ones.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

dumb melee monsters are just filler or tanks for more intelligent ones.

This isn't World of Warcraft mate lol.

 

[Horwath]

This isn't World of Warcraft mate lol.

ofc not,

it's just, if you have better ranged options than your opponent, try to keep range as long as possible.

if you have some trained animals, mind bended thralls or undead to help you keep range, even better.

 

[tetrasodium]

ofc not,

it's just, if you have better ranged options than your opponent, try to keep range as long as possible.

if you have some trained animals, mind bended thralls or undead to help you keep range, even better.

Trouble being that

• A: 5e gave ranged attacks too much range putting them into drone warfare/rods from god analogs capable of comfortably hitting basically any point on a battlemat from any other point without once mitigating factors like firing into melee.
• B: Few monsters have the tohit needed to regularly hit player ACs & almost never have a meaningful enough AC of their own to not be hit nearly every attack from players.

 

[Reynard]

Disadvantage on Perception checks using visi-- oh, wait.

 

[Horwath]

Trouble being that

• A: 5e gave ranged attacks too much range putting them into drone warfare/rods from god analogs capable of comfortably hitting basically any point on a battlemat from any other point without once mitigating factors like firing into melee.

this is true. I would halve the range on all weapons and give -1 penalty for every range increment over that.
also -2 attack when firing into melee is good houserule(negated by sharpshooter feat)

• B: Few monsters have the tohit needed to regularly hit player ACs & almost never have a meaningful enough AC of their own to not be hit nearly every attack from players.

they have truckload of HP to compensate for low AC.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Dancing light helps a lot to see in front og you and not be seen outside the darkvision range.
But yeah, if many races only had low light vision (also only in 60ft range) and darkvision would be extraordinary, I am all for it.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I give dim light 1/2 cover against attacks from more than 10 feet away, 3/4 for darkness.
Plus the aforementioned disadvantage on check relying on sight (perception, investigation, insight, thieve's tools, climbing etc)

 

[Stalker0]

The main problem is the "real world" issue. Humans are terrible at seeing in the dark, and there are many animals much much MUCH better at seeing in the dark than us. Further, many stories are all about "monsters lurking in the dark".

So on the one hand, you want monsters to be functional in darkness, they aren't very scary if they are fumbling about. On the other, humans seeing just fine in the dark is a dissonance from our reality, that's simply not how we operate. So how do you reconcile that?

 

[HammerMan]

The funniest thing for me is, Darkvision was supposed to be a simplification and to make everything easier than the Infravision/Ultravision or Low-Light Vision/Darkvision days,

I miss infravision. I miss predator style heat signatures.

I miss low light vision. Not everyone can see in pitch black but some just have good night sight