D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Darkness questions

[Lord Pendragon]

I don't know if you would call this a nerf. While you can't plunge an area into 100% darkness, you can now cast the spell on yourself, and enjoy a 20% miss chance, as well as sneak attack immunity, while you can still easily throw targetted spells out. It's kind of like Blur with an area of effect, balanced by a downside; it affects the attacks of allies as well as enemies.

Seems like a fairly balanced spell to me

Interesting. You know, the more I learn about 3.5 spell changes, the more it seems like a lot of spells weren't exactly nerfed...just changed. Indeed, some spells which seem nerfed at first glance are actually quite useful...just in a completely different way. Look at Alter Self for instance. And now, Darkness is a wizard's fortification effect...

 

[Someone]

Interesting. You know, the more I learn about 3.5 spell changes, the more it seems like a lot of spells weren't exactly nerfed...just changed. Indeed, some spells which seem nerfed at first glance are actually quite useful...just in a completely different way. Look at Alter Self for instance. And now, Darkness is a wizard's fortification effect...

I´d add that the change makes the spell more playable IMO. The 3.0 version is so extreme (everyone blinded) that could only be useful in also extreme circumstances or being part of a combo (darkness+Vigilance power or blindsight)

 

[Caliban]

It's not really Darkness anymore, it's just Dimness now.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Darkness was quite useful in a number of 3.0 situations--it could block ranged attacks almost completely (quite useful against a beholder in a closed space); it also prevented the use of dodge or dex bonusses to AC (and was consequently very very useful against creatures like Nimblewights). It was also quite handy to cover a retreat. Toss down darkness and run away--you enemies can't see what direction you go. None of those functions are possible in 3.5.

I´d add that the change makes the spell more playable IMO. The 3.0 version is so extreme (everyone blinded) that could only be useful in also extreme circumstances or being part of a combo (darkness+Vigilance power or blindsight)

 

[Someone]

Darkness was quite useful in a number of 3.0 situations--it could block ranged attacks almost completely (quite useful against a beholder in a closed space); it also prevented the use of dodge or dex bonusses to AC (and was consequently very very useful against creatures like Nimblewights). It was also quite handy to cover a retreat. Toss down darkness and run away--you enemies can't see what direction you go. None of those functions are possible in 3.5.

You still have obscuring mist and fog cloud, both still available and able to do most of that things.

My last post was based on my own experience. One of my players used dakness and deeper darkness more than once and the "everyone blinded, no save" effect was quite disruptive for both the player characters and enemies alike.

 

[Pielorinho]

I just had a sad thought about why they changed the spell this way:

It makes it easier to handle miniatures.

You can still have the battle map out, still have all the miniatures in place, because everyone can still sort of see. In total darkness, it's tempting to remove the minis from the table, to prevent firewalling issues.

Harrumph. I may change deeper darkness back to its old form; otherwise, its name is pretty dumb.

Daniel

 

[frankthedm]

An unneeded change that completely ignores D&D precedent.

 

[Bauglir]

I disagree. The previous form of darkness was far too 'all or nothing'. It was an area of effect power word blind made worse by the fact that some creatures could use it while being immune to the effects themself.

A true seeing wizard who cast it on himself could then be immune to incoming targetted effects as well as enjoying a 50% miss chance vs all attacks which suffering no ill effects himself (assuming the enemy doesn't also have access to true seeing or an ability that allows them to see in magical darkness)

And that's only one use for the spell..

A bit much for a second level spell don't you think?

 

[Hypersmurf]

A bit much for a second level spell don't you think?

Not surprising, given that your example uses a 2nd level spell and a 6th level spell...

-Hyp.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

I don't mind the Darkness change. I think it's a very different spell rather than a better or worse one. I can see a strong motivation for the change given that most (not all) who have Darkness on their spell list also have Obscuring Mist, which in 3.0 overlaps greatly (though not perfectly) in function. What surprises me more is that Deeper Darkness isn't any darker, or that there isn't some other spell that creates a pitch black area. Both the old and new versions have their merits; why is there now only one?