D&D 5E Party Balanced

[FrogReaver]

Well, you're forgetting a few important issues when it comes to darkvision that are more important:

1. When such situations do arise (and they will in most games IME), the party members NOT in armor are likely the first targets of that ambush salvo. Now, if your caster-types have Shield, they are probably not too badly off.

You have an odd idea of general enemy tactics

2. If you shot your Light-Arrow at the enemy, it only takes one of them one action to smother it.

It's lit by the light spell. The shaft of the arrow illuminates light. Not sure what they are smothering a whole arrow shaft with...

3. The most important issue with darkvision (in any case), is most creatures with it have a sight range of only 60 feet. Not very far at all.

No idea what this has to do with anything?

How these scenarios play out depends a LOT on the DM and players (strategy and experience and so forth).

My point was, as I stated, those two characters will be a liability at some point for not having darkvision. How much? Who knows? That depends on the table. And FYI, I do give darkvision a lot of weight as being able to see when others are potentially blind is a HUGE benefit IMO. Maybe not at your table, but it always has been at every single table I've played at.

And my point was that the liability can easily be overcome which makes it not so much an all the time liability but a minor inconvenience. That seems to be the level darkvision is supposed to be at.

 

[DND_Reborn]

You have an odd idea of general enemy tactics

And yet, so effective.

It's lit by the light spell. The shaft of the arrow illuminates light. Not sure what they are smothering a whole arrow shaft with...

Underground, or in darkness outdoors, lots of stuff... dirt, a cloak or other cloth, a shield... It depends on what's available, but hardly an issue to find something.

No idea what this has to do with anything?

Because the distance is typically so short, after the initial ambush, possibly closing in on the ambushers with a move and dash or move and return ranged attacks.

And my point was that the liability can easily be overcome which makes it not so much an all the time liability but a minor inconvenience. That seems to be the level darkvision is supposed to be at.

LOL then play at our table sometime and you'll find out how much a "minor inconvenience" it is! Sure, it can be overcome but either the cost has issues (such as lighting up your group) or some 2nd level spell slots.

I've said my caution to the OP about it, and they can take it or leave it as they please. Whether or not it is an issue to you is not something worth arguing since obviously we see it very differently.

 

[aco175]

I guess my question is; how many people always play PCs with darkvision? How about the whole party needing darkvision? It has never been something that my group determines is a must. The same with covering all the bases in class selection. Some games become harder without a class like a cleric, so maybe someone multiclasses if the group thinks they need it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I guess my question is; how many people always play PCs with darkvision? How about the whole party needing darkvision? It has never been something that my group determines is a must. The same with covering all the bases in class selection. Some games become harder without a class like a cleric, so maybe someone multiclasses if the group thinks they need it.

Well, IME (and it is hardly surprising) that most PCs have darkvision. But, then again, most core races have darkvision: dwarves, elves, gnomes, half-elves, half-orcs, and tieflings. Only 3 of the 9, humans, halflings, and dragonborn, don't have it.

I know a lot of tables also like the house-rule of giving darkvision to dragonborn (we do). However, we also reduced dwarf, elves, and gnomes to "shadowsight" (you see normally in dim light, but not at all in darkness) which is a middle ground between normal sight and darkvision.

Our current group, by chance and not design, had characters all with darkvision in the beginning. We now use Darkvision (the spell) to compensate for the PCs without it, but the loss of a few spell slots can be a bit of an issue at times. Not a big deal usually, but it has popped up.

 

[FrogReaver]

And yet, so effective.

I think the difference is you tend to have all your monsters having read the monster tactics for dummies manual. I don't find that kind of play particularly interesting. This isn't a chess match, it's an adventure. I vary up monster tactics even from one group of orcs to the next. Variation is key IMO.

Because the distance is typically so short, after the initial ambush, possibly closing in on the ambushers with a move and dash or move and return ranged attacks.

It sounds like you play differently with lighting rules than I.

LOL then play at our table sometime and you'll find out how much a "minor inconvenience" it is! Sure, it can be overcome but either the cost has issues (such as lighting up your group) or some 2nd level spell slots.

Sure, when can I join?

 

[FrogReaver]

Well, IME (and it is hardly surprising) that most PCs have darkvision. But, then again, most core races have darkvision: dwarves, elves, gnomes, half-elves, half-orcs, and tieflings. Only 3 of the 9, humans, halflings, and dragonborn, don't have it.

I know a lot of tables also like the house-rule of giving darkvision to dragonborn (we do). However, we also reduced dwarf, elves, and gnomes to "shadowsight" (you see normally in dim light, but not at all in darkness) which is a middle ground between normal sight and darkvision.

Our current group, by chance and not design, had characters all with darkvision in the beginning. We now use Darkvision (the spell) to compensate for the PCs without it, but the loss of a few spell slots can be a bit of an issue at times. Not a big deal usually, but it has popped up.

LOL. After all this arguing with me about how bad not having darkvision is, you finally come clean and admit that ya'll have found a simple solution (one of the ones I proposed) that causes you no real issues most of the time.

Thanks, for finally agreeing with me about lack of darkvision on a race being a minor inconvenience...

 

[DND_Reborn]

LOL. After all this arguing with me about how bad not having darkvision is, you finally come clean and admit that ya'll have found a simple solution (one of the ones I proposed) that causes you no real issues most of the time.

Thanks, for finally agreeing with me about lack of darkvision on a race being a minor inconvenience...

Really? Seriously? You think this is a victory for you or something? Get real.

Read my posts. I said it can be an issue and gave warning to the OP. Can it be overcome, sure, I never said it couldn't, but as I wrote there is a cost which can be avoided by choosing any of the 6 of the 9 races that already have darkvision.

We've had a blind (no light, no darkvision) human walking behind other characters with hand on shoulder being led in the dark. Why? Because using a light source would give away our position to every monster we were likely to run into. But, by doing so, we were also able to move up on enemies (who had cooking fires) unseen and get the jump on them!

 

[FrogReaver]

Really? Seriously? You think this is a victory for you or something? Get real.

Read my posts. I said it can be an issue and gave warning to the OP. Can it be overcome, sure, I never said it couldn't, but as I wrote there is a cost which can be avoided by choosing any of the 6 of the 9 races that already have darkvision.

We've had a blind (no light, no darkvision) human walking behind other characters with hand on shoulder being led in the dark. Why? Because using a light source would give away our position to every monster we were likely to run into. But, by doing so, we were also able to move up on enemies (who had cooking fires) unseen and get the jump on them!

LOL. Thanks for giving me more evidence. You just keep rolling it out on the red carpet for me. Exhibit B: Completely dark blind PC's get the drop on enemies by sneaking up to them in the dark! Further proof not having darkvision is a minor inconvenience, even in your games.

 

[DND_Reborn]

LOL. Thanks for giving me more evidence. You just keep rolling it out on the red carpet for me. Exhibit B: Completely dark blind PC's get the drop on enemies by sneaking up to them in the dark! Further proof not having darkvision is a minor inconvenience, even in your games.

That's because we're smart enough to know how to overcome it and use it to our advantage when the OTHER group is lit up (the cooking fires). So you are continuing to ignore the example where being a light in darkness makes you a target and vulnerable to ambushes (as we did). It works both ways, you know... or maybe you don't?

If you are ever in NY, come on over and I'll show you how not having darkvision can be a big problem. Until then, you're just blowing smoke.

 

[FrogReaver]

That's because we're smart enough to know how to overcome it and use it to our advantage when the OTHER group is lit up (the cooking fires).

I'm pretty sure if given the opportunity every group would have overcame it that same way.

So you are continuing to ignore the example where being a light in darkness makes you a target and vulnerable to ambushes (as we did). It works both ways, you know... or maybe you don't?

Nope. I'm just calling it what it is - a minor inconvenience.

If you are ever in NY, come on over and I'll show you how not having darkvision can be a big problem. Until then, you're just blowing smoke.

If only you lived closer!