NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Caliburn101" data-source="post: 7011015" data-attributes="member: 6802178">How interesting, understandable, and frankly, odd...There seems to be an assumption made by more than one person that Underdark races would use light in Underdark warfare because of the perceived advantages. Is this right, or could it bely a lack of experience in night fighting as it is done in the real world and a lack of the application of self-reflection on the effect of our shared human experience on our personal point of view?I would say that seems likely.Let me make a couple of illustrative examples with the rules mechanics thrown in to get the ball rolling on my point of view on this;1. Attacking at disadvantage due to dim light/darkvision mechanics:I can find no justification as to why darkvision races would give up the advantage of surprise to increase the chance to hit, they would I think just volley fire in volume at range to increase the number of hits. As nearly any enemy with darkvision (except for those with tremorsense mobs) would be at the same disadvantage in melee the issue balances out at shorter ranges. One only has to look at the effectiveness of the use of volley fired 'night arrows' in the medieval period - how it was both terrifying and regarded as dishonourable (note: this really meant 'too effective' due to the sneaky surprise factor) to see this would not be an advantage readily discarded in a way which evened the odds. Whe one considers longer range darkvision where one has a huge edge over 'normal' darkvision races, this becomes an utter no-brainer.2. Darkvision and living underground:With darkvision, in most of the Underdark, or caves, or dungeons (etc.) the next stone wall or turn in the tunnel is going to be within 60ft, and certainly 120ft. Check out real life cave systems, and look at the many dungeons and cavern systems mapped out over the years for D&D and count the instances of this - you will find the overwhelming majority of spaces are smaller, and once again, with longer range Darkvision, we are talking a very high percentage indeed. Why introduce a light source unless some threat you are expecting can only be discerned by colour and not shape... in truth, how many of these threats fit this incredibly narrow definition?This brings me to my other point -  the effect of 'humanocentric' perception bias on the issue.Where Drow cities in vast caverns are depicted in illustrations, sure, there are light sources, but these would in practicality be about landmark navigation as much as architects wanting everyone to see their magnificent handiwork. With good signage, or the kind of familiarity a denizen would have, even this would prove unnecessary.It is HUMANS who created D&D and it's races, and humans who expect to see things with a background, and in colour. When is the last time you saw an Underdark scene without a light source and in black and white? That's right - you haven't, because we simply don't value this kind of image. The flipside of this of course is that we use such images as a subliminal baseline for 'what it should look like', and thus you get such illogical nonsense as Drow Houses who use colour in their heraldic devices to differentiate their houses - when in reality, shape of device would be far more prevalent. Drow on Drow fights have no need to include light - whatsoever - unless of course they are using coloured devices to differentiate themselves, in which case why would they use them at all considering the disadvantages?They wouldn't...We are all human of course, and are limited to this extent to the capabilities of our senses - but very small numbers of humans DO have experience of using darkvision to fight, and I can tell you from personal experience (I am ex-army), that the use of night vision equipment (a little cumbersome, and makes your blurrier more immediate environment green...) gives you a massive advantage in the darkness (despite the inconvenience and drawbacks of an equipment-based capability) over those without it. No-one would give that up given the alternatives, and if the military ever developed biotech eyeballs with nightvision capabilities, the advantages of using it would be even greater - especially if the user could not be temporarily blinded by bright light (as the short range darkvision races illogically enjoy...).If you disagree with what I am saying, then of course you are entirely entitled to do so. But if I may ask, if you could justify in your rejoinder why it is you think every advanced army in the world is wrong about this I would genuinely be interested to hear what your reasoning is.Thanks.</blockquote>

Verification