D&D 5E Revisiting RAW Darkness Spell

[Nefermandias]

That's why the game is run by a human being capable of making case-by-case judgements and not by an algorithm. With visibility you ultimately have to consider the POV of the people looking.

Wholeheartedly agree.

 

[Minato]

I’d also argue they’re not in what would be considered darkness by D&D 5e rules. I’d call that dim light. Which is what “transparent darkness” would realistically produce when illuminated.

What would it look like in the equivalent of 5e Darkness to your mind? The ground and the people in the image can get shades darker but it would not make a difference. The only thing that would help obscure them is if what was behind them wasn't still clearly visible.

 

[Charlaquin]

What would it look like in the equivalent of 5e Darkness to your mind? The ground and the people in the image can get shades darker but it would not make a difference. The only thing that would help obscure them is if what was behind them wasn't still clearly visible.

Yes, that is the point of contention in this thread. My position is that what’s behind them can’t be clearly visible.

 

[Minato]

Yes, that is the point of contention in this thread. My position is that what’s behind them can’t be clearly visible.

Ah, agreed.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

"Suppresses light" doesn't make any sense.

I guess? I mean, it's doing whatever the magic is doing to make it dark, in spite of light sources.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I’d also argue they’re not in what would be considered darkness by D&D 5e rules. I’d call that dim light. Which is what “transparent darkness” would realistically produce when illuminated.

Sure, but the spell makes it darker than that. Dark enough to be heavily obscured. I would argue that it definitely makes it harder to see targets beyond it, like others here have said, but maybe not hard enough for mechanical penalties, seeing as they are in (whatever light they are in).

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Actually, come to think on it, it might be a good idea to imagine that any creature beyond the darkness spell shows up, if they are in a light source, as the silhouettes like in the above pictures (so not heavily obscured), while any creatures in the darkness are in the darker looking foreground, if that makes more sense.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Actually, come to think on it, it might be a good idea to imagine that any creature beyond the darkness spell shows up, if they are in a light source, as the silhouettes like in the above pictures (so not heavily obscured), while any creatures in the darkness are in the darker looking foreground, if that makes more sense.

Sorry, but it really doesn't... They both would have the same background, i.e. whatever is seen through the darkness spell.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Sorry, but it really doesn't... They both would have the same background, i.e. whatever is seen through the darkness spell.

Not if the spell makes sure that it stays dark in its own area, as it does. But you do whatever you want! I don't feel any need to convince you of anything.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Not if the spell makes sure that it stays dark in its own area, as it does. But you do whatever you want! I don't feel any need to convince you of anything.

No, but I genuinely want to know how you imagine this working. Because I literally can't imagine it.

Like if darkness is cast on these people so that the guy is in it but the woman is not in it, but is behind it from our perspective, what are you imagining we would see?