Darkvision Ruins Dungeon-Crawling

[Reynard]

If I were a VTT guy I'd definitely use Foundry.

I think if I were becoming a VTT guy right now, I would too. But I started with Fantasy grounds and I am way too invested in it to move to a different platform. I know, I know, sunk cost and all that, but that's the reality.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah this is a key issue that I've been pointing out with darkvision since 3E. It's not modelling anything that makes any sense, nor is it actually like anything players encounter in, say, videogames or TV. It's one of the most profoundly game-ish elements of the WotC editions, and it doesn't really seem cool or interesting, or even really solve a problem.

Blindsight (as contrasted with Blindsense) is even worse, but you hit it less often.

I think dropping alternate vision modes entirely would be pretty reasonable, and if not that, going to low-light vision, which makes intrinsic sense and is something people do encounter in other media or even IRL with fancy cameras (even your phone camera in some cases), would be a straightforwardly better solution and have less of a negative impact on any "horror" elements of dungeons (indeed plenty of videogames have shown that low-light vision systems and horror are quite compatible).

Though its easier to manage that effect with a visual display than it is with description without the latter having an odor of the rix being on (i.e. missing things just because the GM wants you to). It depends on how much the players actually want, or at least accept, a horror experience.

I'd definitely avoid thermal imaging/infrared until that becomes something that's extremely common (it'll probably be on feature phones as standard within a couple of decades), because it just leads to a lot of discussions about how exactly it works and leaves a lot of room for players and DMs to trip themselves up.

A fair number of people have at least seen that, too. Conceptually, seeing by heat isn't hard.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because its still going to be a factor in many cases in the games they run, too, unless the conditions (lack or heavily reduced opponents with dark vision or its equivalent) too. It didn't get this way in 5e by random accident. The fact some people are okay with it doesn't mean it isn't still going to get pushback; people can like other games without liking that element of them.

Of course they can, but I don't think you can assume that players of any of these games are going to feel the same way as 5.5 players do about it, especially if light mechanics are important to the game in question.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Dynamic lighting sounds cool, but I've seen more than one complaint that it shows down the program or doesn't work altogether, due to technical limitations. It seems to not quite meet up with the average VTT user's system from a technical standpoint.

It also often requires some extra effort when setting up maps that, if you do a lot of them yourself, can be pretty tedious.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Of course they can, but I don't think you can assume that players of any of these games are going to feel the same way as 5.5 players do about it, especially if light mechanics are important to the game in question.

I think its at least as big a jump assuming you won't, again assuming the same rest state (a lot of monsters that can see in the dark).

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think its at least as big a jump assuming you won't, again assuming the same rest state (a lot of monsters that can see in the dark).

Here's an area where your popularity arguments could be a factor. If we assume that the fanbases of these other games are smaller than WotC's (which I think we can), then the whole reason they are playing those other games at all is likely because at least some member of the group is excited about that specific game, likely including the various mechanical ways it differs from WotC's game. This makes it less likely (though of course still perfectly possible) that the players have an issue with things like how that game handles lighting.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm confused, you give multiple descriptions of the same room back to back? "In bright light the room looks like X, you see a sign and some prints. In dim light the room looks like Y, you see a sign. What do you do?" Like that?

No. I fully describe the brightly lit area and then let them know that it's dim and hard to make things past that. If they want to know more, they can ask and either tell me they move further with the light or that they have darkvision.

I don't describe things further than the bright, because dim light is really hard to see through. You know how sometimes you go into your kids room for something after they are asleep and all you have is a bit of light from the hallway? Sometimes you see the toy on the ground, and sometimes you trip or stub a toe and let out a quiet curse. You can see the kid's dresser and some stuff on it, but you often can't make out what is on it.

That's dim light. That's what an entire party of darkvision users is constantly walking through. A party like that should frequently be making perception(passive) and dex checks if they walk through ground that's uneven or has even a little rubble on it, because they'd be tripping over stuff they fail to see with their disadvantage to visual perception.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Here's an area where your popularity arguments could be a factor. If we assume that the fanbases of these other games are smaller than WotC's (which I think we can), then the whole reason they are playing those other games at all is likely because at least some member of the group is excited about that specific game, likely including the various mechanical ways it differs from WotC's game. This makes it less likely (though of course still perfectly possible) that the players have an issue with things like how that game handles lighting.

Yes, but as I noted, interest in a game doesn't have to be unitary. Just because you like 95% of what The Deep Delver Game provides, doesn't mean you still can't find the same old "everything sees in the dark but the PCs" every bit as unattractive as you would in D&D. I have little evidence that people have a "take it or leave" it attitude toward any game system; if anything my experiences have taught me people are more likely to put up with it in big popular games because being able to find the common experience there is often a factor.

 

[Piperken]

As a player, my response would be "Noted. And we'll get back to that. Now, what do I see?"

And on getting back to that: "Just what sorts of things would my experience as a competent adventurer tell me that I might miss? Just what are the limitations of Darkvision as you run it?"

In this hypothetical, that'd be fine; I'd omit details one would miss when relying on darkvision when it's pitch black. (I don't use Perception checks a lot for standard room searches).

I'd explain how darkvision functions as has been explained by others already.

My players asked the first time this came up; when they understood in what ways they could be hobbling themselves, they immediately decided to keep light on hand.

 

[Piperken]

...You know how sometimes you go into your kids room for something after they are asleep and all you have is a bit of light from the hallway? Sometimes you see the toy on the ground, and sometimes you trip or stub a toe and let out a quiet curse. You can see the kid's dresser and some stuff on it, but you often can't make out what is on it...

Small toy meaning a lego, a shard of pottery, a caltrop, or a ball bearing. I hate stepping on a single lego after thoroughly searching a brightly lit room for them