Darkvision Ruins Dungeon-Crawling

[TiQuinn]

It seems that half of my group play human or a race without DV. They always have light going when underground. There might be a sneak ahead guy with it, but it tends to get handwaved a lot.

Handwaved because half have it and half don’t?

 

[payn]

Like pooping in your chainmail when that torch goes out mid-fight.

Save against dropping mud?

 

[delericho]

A human and a grue sit at an inn's common room (just go with it), talking about their quests.

Mystery is a big part of fantasy. What we can't see is mysterious. We can't see in the dark. Darkvision allows us to see in the dark.

Ergo, darkvision ruins fantasy. Dungeon-crawling, in particular.

Agree or disagree? Does everyone in your party have darkvision? Does your GM remember to enforce darkness rules (if any)?

I agree. I've been fortunate enough to have had experience with real world 'dungeons' a couple of times, and it wasn't until I had that experience that I appreciated just how vital light and light sources are. Removing the need for those does the game a real disservice, IMO.

Also, IMO, I'm inclined to think that almost every creature and species that currently has darkvision should have it removed entirely, and the few that retain it should have it downgraded to low-light vision only.

 

[R_J_K75]

I'm not even sure on this... thematically I agree, but from a gameplay standpoint if I were to choose unlimited utility or damage cantrips... limited utility cantrips seems to suggest make harder choices. limiting damage cantrips seems to just mean casters have to drop back to darts, slings, crossbows, etc. The utility cantrips are the ones that usually get around obstacles, like Light, Mage Hand, Message, Mending, etc.

Wasn't it 3rd edition where 0-level spells were introduced? IIRC they were more utility spells, and if they did do damage, it was minimal at best 1d3 maybe? You make a good point that I hadn't thought of that without cantrips that do damage spell caster are forced to resort to mundane weapons. I'm not opposed to cantrips, but I do think that unlimited casting at 1d6 (or more) damage is a little excessive.

 

[R_J_K75]

Save against dropping mud?

I cast...ROAD APPLES...

 

[Bill Zebub]

Also, IMO, I'm inclined to think that almost every creature and species that currently has darkvision should have it removed entirely, and the few that retain it should have it downgraded to low-light vision only.

Oh, I like the monsters being able to see in the dark.

So...much...scarier.

 

[MGibster]

Darkvision doesn't ruin fantasy, the mechanic itself ruins gameplay. Every time I lay out a scenario and a player interrupts, "but my character has darkvision", my first response is screw your darkvision. I'm seriously considering removing it from my game as a PC option and replacing it with nothing.

It wouldn't be so bad if so many species didn't have it. 77.7% of the playable species in the Player's Handbook have darkvision with only halflings and humans doing without.

 

[payn]

Wasn't it 3rd edition where 0-level spells were introduced? IIRC they were more utility spells, and if they did do damage, it was minimal at best 1d3 maybe? You make a good point that I hadn't thought of that without cantrips that do damage spell caster are forced to resort to mundane weapons. I'm not opposed to cantrips, but I do think that unlimited casting at 1d6 (or more) damage is a little excessive.

It was, but they were per day. Then, in PF1 it became unlimited. Due to system math, this was pretty much worthless as offense past third level, but yeah you cast all day and all night.

On the topic of unlimited cantrips; at first I too was down on the idea. Though, in 5E I saw the great benefit. Instead of players wanting to fill their packs full of utility scrolls and wands, they gasp prepped the spells instead. The unlimited scaling attack cantrips allows some offensive power to get through numerous encounters and allows the spell slots to be strategic as they should be. No longer were all the slots taken by blasting and controlling spells. It was refreshing.

Sure, it also made things like dungeon darkness moot, but it only took a few moments to realize out of the myriad ways of making a dungeon exciting and challenging, darkness isnt a particularly interesting one anyways.

 

[R_J_K75]

It wouldn't be so bad if so many species didn't have it. 77.7% of the playable species in the Player's Handbook have darkvision with only halflings and humans doing without.

I agree, it definitely is the norm rather than the exception. In the games I've DM'd the majority of PCs have darkvision. As a DM I don't design encounters biased one way or the other based on what abilities the PCs have, but it's does seem that darkvision plays a role more often than not how an encounter is resolved.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think the design principle should not be that "resource management is fun" but rather "resource management is worth the (un-fun) effort if it enables something that is fun."

Like pooping in your chainmail when that torch goes out mid-fight.

I'm fine with that design philosophy too.

I'm really liking this alternate universe you and I find ourselves in.