Darkvision Ruins Dungeon-Crawling

[Micah Sweet]

My point was that almost none of them should be able to fly successfully without magic. Including ones that, while unusual looking, otherwise don't do anything magic (griffins, for example).

I get that, but IMO if something owes its existence to the presence of magic, it can potentially break the square-cube law and wingspan to weight ratios as well (although it certainly doesn't have to; I'd treat it case by case).

I am also in favor of such creatures suffering the full crushing weight of reality when in a place without magic.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Dealing damage, IMO, for the most part should not be magic's point of focus and i think it's a bit of a shame it has come to be seen for blasting first problem solving second, it's focus should be utility or facilitation, and the directly offensive spells that do exist would do well to fill utility/problem solving roles for combat, it would be interesting to see a TTRPG that has a long list of spells like DnD but only ~10 of those are levelled offensive spells,

maybe magic missile, chromatic orb, thunderwave, ray of sickness, rime's binding ice, wall of fire, cloudkill, chain lightning, whirlwind, power word: kill

Interesting idea.

I think that’s a decent list. I like that each one has a distinct flavor and/or mechanic.

 

[Bill Zebub]

It’s mandatory if it exists. If you have to factor in opponents with darkvision, and you don't have darkvision, that makes you useless as a scout. But if nobody has darkvision, the floor is level again and everybody can scout.

Or maybe not “nobody” but it’s rare. Humanoids, no. But weird, slimy, horrifying things from the depths?

 

[GMMichael]

Its mandatory if it exists. If you have to factor in opponents with darkvision, and you don't have darkvision, that makes you useless as a scout. But if nobody has darkvision, the floor is level again and everybody can scout.

Huh. Scouting without darkvision really makes one experience the dungeon in a new, non-visual way. If one must scout in the dark, one must use ears to listen carefully, hands to feel around, a nose to decide which way smells less foul . . . If you have a map of the dungeon, you can "memorize" it before you go into the dark. Then, even your memory is a tool that you would utilize for scouting, and one that could test players as well as characters.

Scouting against darksighted foes isn't useless. It's just a different, and slower, experience.

 

[Bill Zebub]

As in, its more likely to be progressively weaker across distance?

True, but very few games get into the weeds that far, even ones that care about lighting.

Oops that was a typo. I meant the DARK is less likely to be completely dark outdoors.

 

[Hand of Evil]

What interpretation? the rules are pretty straight forward.

Darkvision 5e: How It Really Works & Common Misconceptions

 

[GMMichael]

Darkvision 5e: How It Really Works & Common Misconceptions

I didn't catch the "common misconceptions" part of that blog. Nor:

Without darkvision, most creatures and characters don’t get to benefit from cool abilities. As soon as darkvision enters the game, we have a diverse spread of people on the battlefield, some of which can fight normally.

This isn't backed up, but seems to be the underlying prejudice of most of the blog post.

This makes things really interesting. If we’re looking for traps without darkvision in even dim light, we’re going to have a really hard time.
If you have a torch, you’re going to be able to see for 20 feet and dim light for another 20. Outside of that, it’s just darkness.
Darkvision essentially gives you an effective radius for the torch of 40 feet and puts anything else within your darkvision range just at disadvantage (dim light/lightly obscured).
This is a huge benefit, giving you enough time to see most traps coming – but not all.

So, traps can't be spotted within 20 feet, but they can within 40? I mean, some traps might "come" at the PCs, but I expect those to be the exception to the rule.

even if you have darkvision, you still might miss a group of goblins or kobolds trying to sneak up on you in the darkness.

Do these groups have Silence cast on them? Ears still work in the dark.

it adds new elements for us to explore.

Sure. The point of this thread, though, is that darkvision removes elements for us to explore.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I get that, but IMO if something owes its existence to the presence of magic, it can potentially break the square-cube law and wingspan to weight ratios as well (although it certainly doesn't have to; I'd treat it case by case).

I am also in favor of such creatures suffering the full crushing weight of reality when in a place without magic.

In a setting like those D&D reflects, trying to separate magical from non-magical abilities is largely a fool's errand. It only is relevant to the degree things like dispel's interacting with it; there are too many things that are magical just by existing even if they're not otherwise obviously magical (hill giants for example).

 

[Thomas Shey]

Oops that was a typo. I meant the DARK is less likely to be completely dark outdoors.

Absolutely true, depending on how you define "completely dark".

 

[Micah Sweet]

In a setting like those D&D reflects, trying to separate magical from non-magical abilities is largely a fool's errand. It only is relevant to the degree things like dispel's interacting with it; there are too many things that are magical just by existing even if they're not otherwise obviously magical (hill giants for example).

3e managed it alright, and I don't accept the argument that separating things that need magic to exist from things that don't is a "fool's errand". It absolutely can be done if you want to and are willing to put in the design and worldbuilding work. I won't ever assume otherwise. WotC not doing so now is simply a choice, one of many with which I disagree, because I don't share their design and sales goals.