D&D 5E Darkness, Magical Darkness, and Heavily Obscured Areas

[Celtavian]

Not even going to entertain this idea of how darkness works.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

It's a 'pendulum swing' back towards vague natural language after previous editions' love affair with closely-parsed 'Rules As Written,' and precise jargon & 'exception based design.'

No, it's just bad writing. You can write clearly in natural language. WotC writers just have some bad habits which Strunk and White would probably take issue with.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

In case you didn't know, any of the errata that apply to the text of the Basic Rules have been incorporated into the online PDF and HTML versions. I find the errata document itself is helpful for finding out what's been changed and perhaps the intent behind the changes, but it doesn't give you the final language, or tell you what hasn't been changed.

But... the text you quote in post #17 doesn't appear in the Basic Rules 3.4. It says this instead:

A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. A creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition (see appendix A) when trying to see something in that area.

That's actually pretty clear, and I have no criticisms for the writing there.

 

[Hriston]

P

But... the text you quote in post #17 doesn't appear in the Basic Rules 3.4. It says this instead:



That's actually pretty clear, and I have no criticisms for the writing there.

Look at that. What I quoted was the html version, and I hadn't even read what I was quoting. I was actually looking at the text you quote from the pdf. I've noticed several times where the html version has been amended imperfectly. I just prefer to use it because it's slightly more accessible.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Hmmm. The only HTML version I know of is the Basic rules v0.2 here:

I don't know of a resource that has 0.3.4 in HTML format.

 

[Hriston]

Hmmm. The only HTML version I know of is the Basic rules v0.2 here:

I don't know of a resource that has 0.3.4 in HTML format.

Yeah, I've also noticed that they (Wizards) haven't changed the update log for the Online Player's Basic Rules (HTML) since November 3, and that it still says it's version 0.2. However, it has been edited since then to conform with the errata. For example, the hiding rules have been updated, although it didn't happen right away. Unfortunately it seems that some mistakes were made along the way, including the fact that they haven't changed the version name/number.

 

[Dausuul]

My feeling is that if the designers meant for the magical darkness to be a barrier that obscured all vision, they would have just said that creatures are blinded while in the magical darkness.

"Creatures are blinded while in the magical darkness" does not equal "barrier that obscures all vision," because it doesn't affect creatures outside the darkness.

The wording is not as clear as it could be, but the simplest and most logical reading is that it works the way we all expect it to work based on past editions: Within the area of darkness, all light is negated, whether it's coming from a source inside the darkness or coming in from outside. That means a creature outside the darkness can't see anything inside the darkness or on the other side of it, and a creature inside the darkness can't see at all.

 

[CapnZapp]

P

Look at that. What I quoted was the html version, and I hadn't even read what I was quoting. I was actually looking at the text you quote from the pdf. I've noticed several times where the html version has been amended imperfectly. I just prefer to use it because it's slightly more accessible.

What we should all learn by this:

Don't use the html version.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

As for casting it on a tree in a bright field? Yeah, if we run it that way, the tree would still block your view, effectively creating a shadow. That makes sense to me. Why are you casting Darkness in a bright field?

Imagine it is not a tree but an archer. If it blocks my view and I can see a shadow where the archer is then I can hit it with missile fire at no penalty (or maybe at light concealment penalty).

If there is an foe on the other side of the area of darkness, with no objects in the darkness between us, do I have any penalty to shoot them? In other words, is it advantageous for me to cast darkness halfway between my character and a foe, if the foe is out of range of darkness?

PC.....DARKNESS.....Foe

As an aside, I played another game where the darkness spell had no effect on those outside the area of effect. To those outside, the darkness could not be seen at all and had no effect on seeing into or past the area affected. In fact, those outside had no way of knowing darkness had even been cast. In that game, casting darkness on enemy archers was an extremely effective tactic.

 

[Celtavian]

Resurrected thread.

 

[Azurewraith]

Imagine it is not a tree but an archer. If it blocks my view and I can see a shadow where the archer is then I can hit it with missile fire at no penalty (or maybe at light concealment penalty).

If there is an foe on the other side of the area of darkness, with no objects in the darkness between us, do I have any penalty to shoot them? In other words, is it advantageous for me to cast darkness halfway between my character and a foe, if the foe is out of range of darkness?

PC.....DARKNESS.....Foe

As an aside, I played another game where the darkness spell had no effect on those outside the area of effect. To those outside, the darkness could not be seen at all and had no effect on seeing into or past the area affected. In fact, those outside had no way of knowing darkness had even been cast. In that game, casting darkness on enemy archers was an extremely effective tactic.

Wait unless you where inside the darkness it didn't exist? or rather you had no way of knowing it was there untill you stumbled in and "hey who turned out the lights?"

As for the archer scenario i find it unlikely you would hit as well a square on the grid is a 5ft square which is pretty dam large if you have a human sized target in there, which more than likely wont be standing stock still. I mean go outside get a buddy mark out a 5ft square close your eyes and get them to close there eyes and try lob a rock at them see how many times you score a hit(ok dont do that nothing sours a friendship more than blinding a buddy with a rock)

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

Wait unless you where inside the darkness it didn't exist? or rather you had no way of knowing it was there untill you stumbled in and "hey who turned out the lights?"

Yep, that's exactly the way it worked. It was strange.

As for the archer scenario i find it unlikely you would hit as well a square on the grid is a 5ft square which is pretty dam large if you have a human sized target in there, which more than likely wont be standing stock still.

What I am asking is where *both* the archer and the target are outside the area of darkness, but the darkness is between them. Does it block line of sight? What penalties, if any, does the attack roll have?

I have been ruling that the area of darkness is impenetrable. It casts a shadow. Anyone on one side cannot see through at all. However, after reading this thread I'm wondering if that's not the way I should be playing it.

 

[Azurewraith]

Yep, that's exactly the way it worked. It was strange.



What I am asking is where *both* the archer and the target are outside the area of darkness, but the darkness is between them. Does it block line of sight? What penalties, if any, does the attack roll have?

I have been ruling that the area of darkness is impenetrable. It casts a shadow. Anyone on one side cannot see through at all. However, after reading this thread I'm wondering if that's not the way I should be playing it.

"Puts his DM hat on before reading the post" I would treat it as invisibility but bear in mind i wrote that after like 3seconds going with my gut

 

[Finn MacDougall]

If you can't see into an area of magical darkness, you cannot see anything on the other side of that magical darkness. Normal light does not penetrate the magical darkness. So it creates a void of darkness that you cannot see into or beyond, darkvision be damned. Saying that you can see lighted areas of the other side of the darkness implies that normal light would have to penetrate the darkness, which the spell itself clearly indicates it does not.