Real Magical Darkness

[FireLance]

I like the new darkness although I think it could do with a better name. The old darkness could really slow down a game. I hardly ever used it in 3.0e because as a DM, I didn't want to deal with the hassle of working out where each PC and NPC was in relation to all the others, miniatures or no miniatures.

Darkness + combat between two opposing groups who cannot see in the dark (in my experience) = a huge jumbled mess for the DM who has to decide (or roll to see) if each PC and NPC attacks an opponent, an ally or empty space, or even moves in the direction that he thinks he is moving in. Avoid if possible.

Darkness + combat between PCs who cannot see in the dark and opponents who can (usually) = a jumbled mess for the DM for pretty much the same reasons as above, but can really make the players fear for their characters if done right. Use sparingly.

Combat between PCs and opponents that they cannot see (and remain unseen even after they attack) = achieves most of the advantages of making players fear for their characters without the mess of requiring the DM to keep track of everything. Usually good enough for me.

 

[Mistwell]

It's one of the few 3.5 changes that we all decided to completely toss out. Darkness should be DARK, not just shadows. SO many light spells cancel darkness that it was really never an issue to deal with beyond a round or two.

 

[reanjr]

Where did it state that creatures who used darkness were immune? I always assumed they were just as blind in it as any other creature. I take that assumption from novels though, so I could be wrong.

Most creatures I've seen with darkness are just as susceptible to it as the PCs (well, they usually have blind-fight or something, but they're still at a disadvantage).

 

[the Jester]

Devils, with their ability to see in magical darkness, are the best for using it. Besides, they're usually crafty and chock full of powers they can use from a distance.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Darkness + combat between PCs who cannot see in the dark and opponents who can (usually) = a jumbled mess for the DM for pretty much the same reasons as above, but can really make the players fear for their characters if done right. Use sparingly.

I ran a fantastic combat once using purely mundane darkness. A huge temple - lots of lovely wide open spaces - inhabited by a band of orcs who had long-since tarred over all the windows. Pitch black inside. Only one PC with darkvision.

Torches and light spells gave 20 feet of light, and another 20 feet of shadowy illumination; the orcs have 60 foot darkvision. And, of course, if the PCs were holding their light sources, they were visible from even further away.

Most fun, of course, was when the impatient monk tore off into the blackness, and discovered that fighting creatures with darkvision, in unknown numbers, when you can't see a thing and none of your allies know where you are, is a Bad Idea...

-Hyp.

 

[Li Shenron]

Basicly, the old darkness never took into account the conditions when the spell was cast. High noon in the desert? No problem. Vampire wants to stroll around during the day at high noon in the desert? Sure. Other than the "shadowy illumination" phrasing that can actually make an area brighter if the conditions are right, the new version seems to try and take that into account.

This has never been an issue for us. Light spells do the same, they create magical light in total natural darkness, so why shouldn't magic darkness work in natural light?

In 3.0 Darkness was not so powerful exactly because it affected the caster as well. There was a 0th-level spell in FR (IIRC) called "No Light" which created darkness that didn't block darkvision. Now THAT would have been much more useful for a dwarf or drow, and it was a mere cantrip...

 

[Hypersmurf]

In 3.0 Darkness was not so powerful exactly because it affected the caster as well. There was a 0th-level spell in FR (IIRC) called "No Light" which created darkness that didn't block darkvision. Now THAT would have been much more useful for a dwarf or drow, and it was a mere cantrip...

Book of Vile Darkness.

I ran a PbEM combat with an evil Cleric casting that on one of his gnoll henchmen. It would have been tricky tabletop, I think, but with the PbEM format, I was able to update the map each round to show the interactions between No Light and Light, natural darkness, and sunrods... made for quite a nifty tactical situation. "If I move here, then Bob will be in darkness as my Light spell moves away, but at least we'll be able to get the sunrod shedding some light in this corner again..."

-Hyp.

 

[Terath Ninir]

AMEN. Of all the changes for 3.5, this was the dumbest. I'll grant that "Dimness" makes an interesting new 1st level spell, but a spell that makes things brighter in many, many conditions is NOT a "darkness" spell.

 

[the Jester]

AMEN. Of all the changes for 3.5, this was the dumbest. I'll grant that "Dimness" makes an interesting new 1st level spell, but a spell that makes things brighter in many, many conditions is NOT a "darkness" spell.

Hear, hear.

 

[Henry]

I didn't like it myself. I remember a previous thread here which discussed its pros and cons in detail, and someone did come up with a plausible abusive combo using 3.0 darkness and several prestige classes and feats (can't recall any of it now), but in my experience it never made a difference.

Actually, it DID make a difference, because no spellcasters in our parties EVER carried magical light spells, but they learned the hard way...