Search results

Just go outside and look at that distant, lit farmhouse you mentioned. Anything between you and that house that you can see as dark contrast against that lit background is a silhouette.

Ok, so we're coming at this from entirely opposite directions. In technical terms, you're reading "something" as invoking an existential quantifier, whereas I'm reading it as invoking a universal quantifier. So for you, an area can be Heavily Obscured so long as there are sufficient places for a...

Use small "d" "darkness" (I'm talking about natural darkness in general) and you're pretty close. And magic can explain a physical impossibility, but just using "magic" as an explanation doesn't tell us what an observer sees. Somehow the DM has to describe to the player what the scene looks...

How about we agree to disagree as to the viewpoints of other posters expressed in past posts? The alternative is wading through 40 pages to find quotes, then arguing about the context of those quotes, and we'll likely just end up conceding that the other one's interpretation of the thread is...

Not being able to be seen clearly is the standard for hiding. For Heavy Obscurement an observer effectively suffers from the Blinded condition, which means the observer "can't see". It doesn't sound like you are effectively suffering from the Blinded condition with respect to seeing things in...

Would it help if I used your most recent dog/bunny/cat example? Or are you ok on the mechanics of it now? Interesting. In my mind "can't see" is basically the entire point of the Blinded condition, because it fundamentally changes how the character interacts with the game world (plus it's in...

It doesn't! :) I'm explicitly not making that claim. Claim A: "the Darkness spell needs to be an opaque ink-blot because otherwise creatures can see through walls." What I was trying to say: "I'm not saying (Claim A)." Hopefully that makes it clear? I do not think either of the...

But we know that foliage dense enough provide Heavy Obscurement gives effectively gives observers the Blinded condition when trying to see anything in the area. The only way that can be true is if every possible sight line is obstructed by foliage. So yes, in three dimensions the foliage isn't...

Ahh! Thanks! The intended structure of the sentence was: "I'm not saying that (the Darkness spell needs to be an opaque ink-blot because otherwise creatures can see through walls)." So my intent was to say something entirely orthogonal to what you read it as. The fault is mine for using...

I keep trying to explain and re-explain the transparent-walls issue (most recently in the post you quoted!), and every time I do you seem to come back with some variation on "I agree, but I don't have any idea what you were saying about the transparent walls." :) I'm happy to try again, but...

It doesn't and I'm not saying that. How are you parsing what you quoted to think I'm saying that? (Legitimate question here--I've been having hard time in this thread expressing myself without being misunderstood, so any clarity on why you're reading it that way would be helpful!)

That's been the claim I've been trying to support from my very first post in this thread. I fear I've done a poor job of supporting it, as my examples seem to produce more confusion than illumination.

The Blinded condition says that the creature "can't see". That seems pretty total to me. I think reinterpreting the condition to be "able to see, but not well" is a great way to fix the problematic interactions with Heavy Obscurement, but that approach both goes against the text and may produce...

The combination of darkness evidentially including areas that we would consider enough to (badly) see by, plus linking darkness to the Blinded condition, where sight is impossible, seems an odd design choice. Oooh, I hadn't considered it that way. I interpreted it as anything less than...

PHB 183 says: "Characters face darkness outdoors at night (even most moonlit nights)...." I entirely agree that treating characters as effectively suffering the from the blinded condition with respect to their environment on a moonlit night does not match real world experience.

I would note that it's entirely possible to run a CaW game with the DM not in an adversarial role. Illusionist CaW works just as well (or as badly, as I suspect you would say) as Illusionist CaS. :)

I'm fine with dropping it too. Thanks for letting me know.

You're modifying the Heavy Obscurement rules (or perhaps, you're modifying the Blinded Condition) to allow an observer to see something that they effectively suffer the blinded condition with respect to. In other words, despite ruling that a creature is seen by its silhouette, you're giving it...

If there was a plausible way for Bunny to stop being backlit (or if Bunny had a fancy hiding ability that applied), then yes. In the example you gave, dropping prone would probably be enough to stop being backlit (and become heavily obscured) to hide from Dog and Cat unless Bunny was much larger...

Thanks for clarifying. To make sure I understand correctly, you would rule that a dragon passing in front of the 3/4 moon at night would never be visible as a silhouette? We know that the dim light radius of the moon on most moonlit nights does not reach the surface of the earth, so the area the...