Infravision

[IronWolf]

Though I didn't have much trouble with infravision in the old days, I am happy to see Low-light vision and Darkvision in the newer versions.

I have a DM in a game I play in that dropped Low-Light and Darkvision in favor of infravision. It seems rather silly now looking back and wish we were using the Low-Light and Darkvision of the 3.x rules.

 

[Knight Otu]

I've gotten used to darkvision, but two years ago, I tried to "reinvent" infravision. It looked like that:

Infravision (Ex): A halutan has the ability to see heat sources within 120 ft., including most creatures except for Undead, Constructs, incorporeal or ethereal creatures, as well as creatures with the Cold subtype. Invisibility and concealment is not a factor, but cover may be. For the purpose of determining whether or not a creature is visible via Infravision, treat this abililty like any of the Detect Alignment spells. Infravision cannot be used to determine details of viewed creatures. At most, it can provide the size and general shape. Great ambient heat may render this ability useless.

As I said, I wrote that two years ago, so don't ask me about some of the choices I made

 

[Tonguez]

Ultravision makes more sense than Infravision (and many real creatures do have Ultravision so its a biological possibility too) Infravision does not exists in rl nature (detecting heat is not the same thing) and was messy

Ultravision has been renamed Darkvision in 3e so its all good

 

[dagger]

I couldn't stand it, every group I played in had a different way of doing it.

 

[irdeggman]

For one the poll is slightly slanted. IMO the choice to include was "I prefer Darkvision to Infravision" not "I mis infravision but have gotten used to darkvision".

One of the problems with infravision was people trying to use an absence of heat to use an aura around the creature not giving off heat. Hence an undead could be seen becasue of the absence of heat. Far too many problems with infravision - darkvision and low light vision are much better mechanically.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Hi everybody!

This is Dr. Saeviomagy, here to tell you all about IR heat sensors.

You know how you look at a mirror and you don't actually see the mirror - instead you see what's near the mirror?

Well - when you're looking with heat, most things are a little bit shiny. That means that for a lot of things, you see a bit of the heat that is in them, and a bit of the heat that is around them. Some things are more shiny, and some things are less shiny.

As an example - human flesh is not very shiny at all. When you see it in infra-red, mostly you'll see what temperature the flesh is at.

A brick wall is quite shiny. You'll see quite a lot of the surrounding heat and some of the heat from the wall.

A zombie, like a human, is not shiny. When you look at one, you'll see room temperature, because that's what temperature most zombies are at.

Unpainted metal is very shiny indeed. When you look at some, it's like looking at a shiny piece of metal with normal light - you don't really see the color of the metal - you see reflections of what is near it. If the metal is actually polished, then it will act like a mirror to heat vision.

Which means if you're standing in front of a brick wall, and a zombie is standing between you and the wall, you will probably be able to see him - he'll be at a different temperature to the brick wall, because the brick wall will usually be a bit above or below room temperature.

If, on the other hand, you're standing in front of an unpolished metal wall, and a zombie stands between you and the wall, the wall will reflect the room temperature, and the zombie will be at room temperature, and you won't be able to see him.

Unless the zombie was recently lying on the stone floor, in which case you'll probably be able to see him against the metal wall as well as the stone one.

And of course you can probably see him against the stone floor anyway.

Throw in all sorts of other things, and it gets even worse.

Hmm, complex.

And this is why infravision is a silly thing to try to make realistic game mechanics for.

Might I suggest that everyone simply says "it's blindsense", and be done with it?

 

[DragonLancer]

The way D&D handles the situation now is much better, for the reasons SKR mentioned on that page and because its easier to handle now.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

A zombie, like a human, is not shiny. When you look at one, you'll see room temperature, because that's what temperature most zombies are at.

Actually, putrifying meat does produce heat, so zombies, while cooler than living flesh, do produce a small amount of heat. Skeletons on the other hand....

Otherwise a verygood explanation.

And I do think infravision was dumb. Poorly thought out, (does anybody remember how elves eyes were supposed to glow red while using it?) Badly ruled (Why does that goblin show up as the same distance as the red dragon?), and badly explained. The only good thing about it was the 'whiteout' effect of high ambient temperatures.

The Auld Grump

 

[archastrel]

The only good thing about it was the 'whiteout' effect of high ambient temperatures.

Maybe this is a stupid question, but, wouldn't it be easy to say "Creatures with darkvision, in my campaign, are blinded by high heat sources." Or something like that?

 

[Laslo Tremaine]

Maybe this is a stupid question, but, wouldn't it be easy to say "Creatures with darkvision, in my campaign, are blinded by high heat sources." Or something like that?

It seems to me that this would open the same can of worms as infravision. If you like the concept of infravision, and have researched it enought to have a VERY firm grasp on how it would work, I would say go ahead and use it.

Otherwise, you get a whole slew of existing preconceptions and misconceptions of what infravision can and cannot do, making it a major pain in the a**...