No you said it right at the end there. If the DM had a problem with what PC1 did they could/would have stopped it.
The spell doesn't say you are blinded so it is very much the "walking to the bathroom at midnight sort of moment."
The character didn't know how big the darkness was, but do assume the the character would what, stand still, in the darkness when they just saw a dragon? If you saw the space as a character, it is not unreasonable to move in a straight line in the exact direction you want until you are free of the darkness.
the only instance of meta gaming I see is the cleric using their ability because how would they know to use their ability? The action clearly calls out magical darkness, and as you said none of you had experience with the spell so how would they know to use an ability that only effects magical darkness?
How does the Fighter know there is an edge to the spell? How does he know if it is 20 feet, 40 feet, or the entire room? How does he know he has not been Blinded? When I was a kid we went to a retired coal mine. We were warned, and the lights turned out. You WERE blind. It is the precisely the same effect.
Why would the fighter not attempt to run? If I were suddenly enveloped in darkness I'd sure try and find a way out. These are also worlds where magic is very real so couldn't someone know what the darkness spell is?
Also, the Light Cleric's Channel Divinity: Radiance of the Dawn, which I presume is the feature you mean, specifically banishes magical darkness. Why would the cleric NOT know that?
I'm really interested to know what you thought that first player should have done.
How does the player KNOW it is the Darkness spell, when they have never encountered it before. We started at level 1, so I know precisely what the players have been exposed to. The player could just as easily think they are blind. And how do they know the size and shape of the Darkness spell, even if they guessed what it was.
Like Is said, the Cleric did his thing, so I did not have to deal with the meta-gaming issue. But I was going to have my char shout "I can't see, can anyone?", and then take a shot in the dark, literally, with the bow I had in my hands. My char had no idea what was happening, since he could be blind, or someone turned the lights out. I would not have a clue which way to run.
There's a difference between meta gaming and playing a stupid character.
So I run all terrain inside darkness as difficult terrain because if someone is magically blind, it's different(in my head) than just being dark. You know your eyes are open, and the perception of sight is completely enveloped in black with zero notice. This is disconcerting and disorienting to a point. If the characters are making obvious decisions based on knowledge of the room, I'm ok with that. "Hey there was an exit in that direction, I run toward that exit"? Cool, we're fine. "I run forward/backward to try and get out?" Cool, still fine. That said, this has to be the first thing they do. If they try to engage in combat or start bumping into things? Well, now I take over that movement to a degree. If it's obvious that the player is trying to head toward the closest exit point of the darkness spell? I roll to see what direction they actually move in per the rules in the Confusion spell.
All the fighter has to do is "I turn around and move the way I came" because that makes sense. No metagaming involved. The Light Cleric using their new ability to clear out the darkness is totally in line. "HEY I JUST LEARNED HOW TO DO THIS LETS SEE IF IT WORKS" is the logic here. Mainly for the Light Cleric, part of their class description is "Others are tireless sentinels whose eyes pierce every shadow and see through every deception. " Well, that is enough for me for them knowing it ain't right.
If the problem is either magical darkness, or magical blindness, and I only have the solution to one of those problems, I'm going to try it over the one I can't. Running away is just as much taking a shot in the dark as shooting at something you can't see. If you've got a problem with other players in your campaign taking these kinds of actions, talk to your DM about what they consider acceptable, and see if you can live with it or not.
No you said it right at the end there. If the DM had a problem with what PC1 did they could/would have stopped it.
The spell doesn't say you are blinded so it is very much the "walking to the bathroom at midnight sort of moment."
The character didn't know how big the darkness was, but do assume the the character would what, stand still, in the darkness when they just saw a dragon? If you saw the space as a character, it is not unreasonable to move in a straight line in the exact direction you want until you are free of the darkness.
the only instance of meta gaming I see is the cleric using their ability because how would they know to use their ability? The action clearly calls out magical darkness, and as you said none of you had experience with the spell so how would they know to use an ability that only effects magical darkness?
How does the Fighter know there is an edge to the spell? How does he know if it is 20 feet, 40 feet, or the entire room? How does he know he has not been Blinded? When I was a kid we went to a retired coal mine. We were warned, and the lights turned out. You WERE blind. It is the precisely the same effect.
HE DOESN'T - he moves until he is out. If that is 20 then he moved twenty and "Saw the light." Sorry but we're talking about not small children, it is very easy to have seen a room for a few minutes and the lights go out and be able to navigate. If you are FIGHTING A DRAGON to then as the fighter has every right in their knowledge run in the direction of the dragon and either 1) some how be able to see again 2)run into the dragon. Neither of those are meta gaming.
Go turn off a light and attempt to navigate through that part of the house - chances are you'll be able to do it with minor issues.
Perhaps I should clarify one thing. The Fighter knew the original location of the Dragon before magic was cast. The Dragon remained stationary. The Fighter DID NOT move in a straight line towards the Dragon, but in a straight line at a 45 degree angle in relation to the Dragon. He moved solely to escape a spell he had zero knowledge of the mechanics of, and could not even know what spell it was. As I have said repeatedly, he could just as easily have failed a save for Blindness. The resultant condition would be identical.
It is incumbent on DM's to keep this kind of information hidden from the player as much as possible to avoid meta-gaming. In the online situation I originally described, it is virtually impossible for the DM to do so, and has to rely on the integrity of the players.
Does the DM do the same in return? If a PC drops darkness on anything that realistically would be in the same situation as low lvl PCs does it just kinda freeze up and do absolutely nothing like your inferring the players should of done?
I see a lot of talk usually about player meta-gaming, mostly at low levels because it's always 'you haven't encountered that! you shouldn't know!" Well sorry but I've never encountered wolves/cheetahs/lions/bears/red pandas/automatic weapons/tanks/missiles/fighter jets/attack helicopters/jack hammers/strip mining equipment/bulldozers/bridge layers/tunnel borers/on and on and on but you know what? I know about em. Why is it assumed every adventurer is a country bumpkin that spent his entire life on a farm doing nothing but farm stuff until he suddenly picked up a sword and magically became lvl 1.
I can see a campaign based on the concept or in a setting where magic barely exists but in most circumstances someone trained the vast majority of these people, really just gonna teach em how to swing a sword and not the dangers they'll face once they step beyond Swarthy Sal's Sword Swinging Syndicate's doors? Darkness is only a lvl 2 spell, I wouldn't consider that something exotic or rare in practically any D&D campaign, the characters should in most circumstances know what it was.
Kinda tired of the age old trope of your character shouldn't know X, like using fire on trolls. Why not? its should be bog standard lesson's for people being trained to be adventurers. "Use fire when fighting furiously flailing trolls!" "when dropped into Dimmest Darkness, Dont dwadle! double time it!"
Perhaps I should clarify one thing. The Fighter knew the original location of the Dragon before magic was cast. The Dragon remained stationary. The Fighter DID NOT move in a straight line towards the Dragon, but in a straight line at a 45 degree angle in relation to the Dragon. He moved solely to escape a spell he had zero knowledge of the mechanics of, and could not even know what spell it was. As I have said repeatedly, he could just as easily have failed a save for Blindness. The resultant condition would be identical.
Did you expect a character who can't see anything to run towards an aggressive dragon?
As for the resultant condition: "Darkness creates a heavily obscured area. Characters face darkness outdoors at night (even most moonlit nights), within the confines of an unlit dungeon or a subterranean vault, or in an area of magical darkness."
I think it should be possible to tell the difference between being blind and being in a heavily obscured area. If you want to keep them guessing that's up to you, but personally I'd at least allow an Int or Wis check to determine if they're aware of what's going on (and probably not even bother, but again that's up to you).
Either way, let's say I'm in this predicament and I don't know whether I'm blind or it just got really dark around me. The thing is, I almost certainly can't do anything about the former but I'm probable aware there are going to be limits to the latter. That means I have very little reason to proceed under the assumption that I'm blind - if that's the case I'm completely screwed and should probably just curl up in the foetal position and wait for death's sweet release. If it is a magical darkness effect and it's limited, I should be able to get out of it and markedly improve my chances of survival. So, prepare for the worst, hope for the best and do what's most likely to result in a good outcome: in this case, that's assuming I'm not blind and can find my way out of the dark (without walking up to a dragon).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
There is absolutely no point in trying to argue with Vince. He is always right. Period. He only ever comes on here when he is bored, and then deliberately posts controversial opinions to cause a ruckus. I don't really understand why the mods let him continue to do it, but I think it is because he is friends with one of them.
He zips up a black circle of 20 foot radius in about 5 seconds and covers the char's icons (we are little circles with an initial of our name).
And there's your problem right there.
If the DM tells the players it's a circle of effect, then they will act as if they know it's a circle of effect. By drawing it on the map, the DM has basically declared to the party that they know where the edge is, because where the edge is has been told to the players.
I agree that the fighter shouldn't have known that there was an edge to the darkness - to them, they should think the whole room is in darkness, and shouldn't really be running to get out of it.
If I were DMing, I would have taken the map away from the players as soon as they are in the darkness and only given it back when they got out of it or got rid of it. "suddenly, the room is filled with impenetrable darkness" would instill a different response to "suddenly you're in the middle of a 20ft. radius circle of impenetrable darkness". If there were any characters who should recognise it (EG the cleric) then I would tell them on their initiative step, as they shouldn't be communicating too much outside their turns, as talking is included in the description of their turns. In their turn they might shout "It's magical darkness! it's not the whole room" and if they fail to banish it, then the other players will know to move away from where they were.
In short, the map should show what the characters can see - if they only see darkness, the DM shouldn't show them where the edges are.
He zips up a black circle of 20 foot radius in about 5 seconds and covers the char's icons (we are little circles with an initial of our name).
And there's your problem right there.
If the DM tells the players it's a circle of effect, then they will act as if they know it's a circle of effect. By drawing it on the map, the DM has basically declared to the party that they know where the edge is, because where the edge is has been told to the players.
I agree that the fighter shouldn't have known that there was an edge to the darkness - to them, they should think the whole room is in darkness, and shouldn't really be running to get out of it.
If I were DMing, I would have taken the map away from the players as soon as they are in the darkness and only given it back when they got out of it or got rid of it. "suddenly, the room is filled with impenetrable darkness" would instill a different response to "suddenly you're in the middle of a 20ft. radius circle of impenetrable darkness". If there were any characters who should recognise it (EG the cleric) then I would tell them on their initiative step, as they shouldn't be communicating too much outside their turns, as talking is included in the description of their turns. In their turn they might shout "It's magical darkness! it's not the whole room" and if they fail to banish it, then the other players will know to move away from where they were.
In short, the map should show what the characters can see - if they only see darkness, the DM shouldn't show them where the edges are.
Yes, I think your approach is a good one. I was lying in bed last night thinking along the same lines.
There is absolutely no point in trying to argue with Vince. He is always right. Period. He only ever comes on here when he is bored, and then deliberately posts controversial opinions to cause a ruckus. I don't really understand why the mods let him continue to do it, but I think it is because he is friends with one of them.
I will propose a slight tweak to this, and then I want those that suggest I am too harsh to to extrapolate what should happen.
Assume the same conditions, but one. The Darkness is not centred over the middle of the group, but is skewed, so let's say the Fighter will have to deal with 35 feet of Darkness if he moves forward, but only 5 feet if he moves back. How do you adjudicate that?
I may be off the mark with what "Metagaming" actually is, but I am under the impression that it's using your own knowledge of the game instead of the information which has been provided to you in the game to influence your decisions.
The issue isn't what the player did, it's what the DM did. The DM told them "if you're in this area, you can't see". The fighter did exactly what you'd expect - they moved out of the area so that they could see. That's not metagaming - they used information they were given to make the decision.
It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to not know something that you know. If the map clearly shows you that there's an edge to the spell, then at that point you know there's an edge to the spell, and you will use that knowledge to decide what to do. If the DM didn't want them to move out of the spell, they shouldn't have told them where its edges were.
In your new example, the fighter will still move in such a way as to continue to fight, If they move back they won't be able to see through the darkness, so they might move forwards. I would expect the fighter to move in the knowledge that the spell ends 35 feet ahead and 5 feet behind, assuming the DM tells them so. IF the DM just tells them "It goes dark", then they might have to guess what they want to do. This might involve potential trip hazards, or traps, or whatever.
I may be off the mark with what "Metagaming" actually is, but I am under the impression that it's using your own knowledge of the game instead of the information which has been provided to you in the game to influence your decisions.
The issue isn't what the player did, it's what the DM did. The DM told them "if you're in this area, you can't see". The fighter did exactly what you'd expect - they moved out of the area so that they could see.
It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to not know something that you know. If the map clearly shows you that there's an edge to the spell, then at that point you know there's an edge to the spell, and you will use that knowledge to decide what to do. If the DM didn't want them to move out of the spell, they shouldn't have told them where its edges were.
In your new example, the fighter will still move in such a way as to continue to fight, If they move back they won't be able to see through the darkness, so they might move forwards. I would expect the fighter to move in the knowledge that the spell ends 35 feet ahead and 5 feet behind, assuming the DM tells them so. IF the DM just tells them "It goes dark", then they might have to guess what they want to do. This might involve potential trip hazards, or traps, or whatever.
Yes, I definitely agree in principle. But that is also the crux of the matter. If the DM had made some rolls behind the screen, and then said "All of you now see nothing. It is as if you are blind.", without altering the map, or better, taking the map away, I would have loved that.
The Fighter's decisions would then be made without knowing what is truly happening, and would be purely organic. But then the potential meta-gaming can continue. Say the Fighter charges forward, with a purely organic decision. No problem there. Say he then breaks the curtain of darkness. Still no problem. But what if does NOT shout "There is an edge to this blackness. I can see again!" Say he stays silent. How does the Cleric know it is a Darkness spell versus a Blindness spell?
I realize there is no real answer to this, but it is incumbent on the players to really immerse themselves in the situation, and think about what is fair and reasonable for the char to know, versus the player. And far too often, I do not see the players do that.
I may be off the mark with what "Metagaming" actually is, but I am under the impression that it's using your own knowledge of the game instead of the information which has been provided to you in the game to influence your decisions.
The issue isn't what the player did, it's what the DM did. The DM told them "if you're in this area, you can't see". The fighter did exactly what you'd expect - they moved out of the area so that they could see.
It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to not know something that you know. If the map clearly shows you that there's an edge to the spell, then at that point you know there's an edge to the spell, and you will use that knowledge to decide what to do. If the DM didn't want them to move out of the spell, they shouldn't have told them where its edges were.
In your new example, the fighter will still move in such a way as to continue to fight, If they move back they won't be able to see through the darkness, so they might move forwards. I would expect the fighter to move in the knowledge that the spell ends 35 feet ahead and 5 feet behind, assuming the DM tells them so. IF the DM just tells them "It goes dark", then they might have to guess what they want to do. This might involve potential trip hazards, or traps, or whatever.
Yes, I definitely agree in principle. But that is also the crux of the matter. If the DM had made some rolls behind the screen, and then said "All of you now see nothing. It is as if you are blind.", without altering the map, or better, taking the map away, I would have loved that.
The Fighter's decisions would then be made without knowing what is truly happening, and would be purely organic. But then the potential meta-gaming can continue. Say the Fighter charges forward, with a purely organic decision. No problem there. Say he then breaks the curtain of darkness. Still no problem. But what if does NOT shout "There is an edge to this blackness. I can see again!" Say he stays silent. How does the Cleric know it is a Darkness spell versus a Blindness spell?
I realize there is no real answer to this, but it is incumbent on the players to really immerse themselves in the situation, and think about what is fair and reasonable for the char to know, versus the player. And far too often, I do not see the players do that.
To my mind, this is another DM element. If the DM loudly states "you break out of the wall of darkness" so that everyone can hear, then they are telling everyone it has an edge, whether the fighter does or doesn't. They should either pass a note to the fighter or direct message them if online, and then let the fighter decide whether they will communicate or not. Perhaps they should offer a "do you want to call back to the party to tell them?" so they remember that they're supposed to be communicating. If they say yes, then they can work more openly with their descriptions - there's no point describing everything to the player so they can describe it to the other players!
I may be off the mark with what "Metagaming" actually is, but I am under the impression that it's using your own knowledge of the game instead of the information which has been provided to you in the game to influence your decisions.
The issue isn't what the player did, it's what the DM did. The DM told them "if you're in this area, you can't see". The fighter did exactly what you'd expect - they moved out of the area so that they could see.
It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to not know something that you know. If the map clearly shows you that there's an edge to the spell, then at that point you know there's an edge to the spell, and you will use that knowledge to decide what to do. If the DM didn't want them to move out of the spell, they shouldn't have told them where its edges were.
In your new example, the fighter will still move in such a way as to continue to fight, If they move back they won't be able to see through the darkness, so they might move forwards. I would expect the fighter to move in the knowledge that the spell ends 35 feet ahead and 5 feet behind, assuming the DM tells them so. IF the DM just tells them "It goes dark", then they might have to guess what they want to do. This might involve potential trip hazards, or traps, or whatever.
Yes, I definitely agree in principle. But that is also the crux of the matter. If the DM had made some rolls behind the screen, and then said "All of you now see nothing. It is as if you are blind.", without altering the map, or better, taking the map away, I would have loved that.
The Fighter's decisions would then be made without knowing what is truly happening, and would be purely organic. But then the potential meta-gaming can continue. Say the Fighter charges forward, with a purely organic decision. No problem there. Say he then breaks the curtain of darkness. Still no problem. But what if does NOT shout "There is an edge to this blackness. I can see again!" Say he stays silent. How does the Cleric know it is a Darkness spell versus a Blindness spell?
I realize there is no real answer to this, but it is incumbent on the players to really immerse themselves in the situation, and think about what is fair and reasonable for the char to know, versus the player. And far too often, I do not see the players do that.
To my mind, this is another DM element. If the DM loudly states "you break out of the wall of darkness" so that everyone can hear, then they are telling everyone it has an edge, whether the fighter does or doesn't. They should either pass a note to the fighter or direct message them if online, and then let the fighter decide whether they will communicate or not. Perhaps they should offer a "do you want to call back to the party to tell them?" so they remember that they're supposed to be communicating. If they say yes, then they can work more openly with their descriptions - there's no point describing everything to the player so they can describe it to the other players!
Agreed. I pass notes to individual players all the time when it comes to certain events. This should be added to the list.
I will propose a slight tweak to this, and then I want those that suggest I am too harsh to to extrapolate what should happen.
Assume the same conditions, but one. The Darkness is not centred over the middle of the group, but is skewed, so let's say the Fighter will have to deal with 35 feet of Darkness if he moves forward, but only 5 feet if he moves back. How do you adjudicate that?
Depends on the group. I've had several in which most players would have their character act in a rational manner regardless of metagame knowledge. With other groups I may have needed to obfuscate more. DMing is an art, not an exact science.
I will propose a slight tweak to this, and then I want those that suggest I am too harsh to to extrapolate what should happen.
Assume the same conditions, but one. The Darkness is not centred over the middle of the group, but is skewed, so let's say the Fighter will have to deal with 35 feet of Darkness if he moves forward, but only 5 feet if he moves back. How do you adjudicate that?
Depends on the group. I've had several in which most players would have their character act in a rational matter regardless of metagame knowledge. With other groups I may have needed to obfuscate more. DMing is an art, not an exact science.
On that we can agree. DM'ing is an art. I brought up the entire thread to demonstrate a scenario that DM's, including myself, can learn from.
I may be off the mark with what "Metagaming" actually is, but I am under the impression that it's using your own knowledge of the game instead of the information which has been provided to you in the game to influence your decisions.
I would define it as using your knowledge of things your character would not know, to make decisions the character does not have the information to make. As a note, I readily admit that not everyone would agree with this definition. But it is mine.
For example, a short sword does 1d6 and a dagger 1d4 damage. It is not metagaming for a player to RP that his character knows a dagger is a less damaging weapon than a short sword. Although there are no "dice of damage" in character, the damage dice reflect the in-character world, and all characters understand how the world they live in operates. Just like we understand that a super soaker is more dangerous than a small water pistol in a water-gun fight.
On the other hand, if the character has never met a Slaad before, and has no IC reason to know what a Slaad is or does, having the PC automatically know what they do and that they can infect you with tadpoles or viruses would be metagaming.
Regarding the OP, I am not sure it would be possible for the PCs to know that they are in a Darkness Field vs. a Blindness spell. However, they are smart enough to know that in their normal world, under normal circumstances, the world doesn't just suddenly go pitch black when you were able to see in it before. So they probably know something is up, and if they know that dragons are magical (which they probably would in a D&D world), and that magic spells exist to do all kinds of things (Light, after all, is a cantrip so probably every adventurer in the world has seen it a few times), it would not be metagaming to have the PCs assume that the dragon has cast a magical spell that in some way is either blinding you or darkening the area.
Now to the question of how do you know it is a Darkness field. I would permit an Arcana check to figure it out, if they had not seen it before. If you are talking a Light cleric, then I'm looking at giving advantage since this is kind of that cleric's specialty (light and darkness being two sides of the same coin). Other ways of telling would be, if the RP was that the PCs are all saying, "I can't see. Can you see?" If multiple people can't see then the logical assumption would be Darkness, not Blindness (perhaps a faulty assumption, if you had an AOE blindness spell, but I would think the standard logic would default to Blindness = single target, Darkness = AOE, unless there is some evidence to the contrary).
All that said, I do agree with the basic premise that it's not obvious how, absent any other factors, the first character to go after this happened and before anyone else has said anything, would know it was Darkness not Blindness. If the player started saying, "I try to walk out of the Darkness field," I very well might, as DM, ask, "How does Bill know this is a Darkness field and not a Blindness spell, in character?" And see what the player says. If they can convince me Bill would know it, I'll let it go. If not, then I'd say, "Make an Arcana check to see if Bill knows this is a Darkness field and not a Blindness spell" and require the player to RP accordingly. If they have no magical background, I might impose disadvantage. All depends on the circumstance.
My players have generally been awesome at this kind of thing though, so I don't need to worry about it. When they fail at detecting illusions, often when half of them fail and the other half succeed, the ones who fail do a great job of RPing their character's belief in the illusion. So if I told them there is no way to tell the difference, I am sure they would RP accordingly.
I may be off the mark with what "Metagaming" actually is, but I am under the impression that it's using your own knowledge of the game instead of the information which has been provided to you in the game to influence your decisions.
I would define it as using your knowledge of things your character would not know, to make decisions the character does not have the information to make. As a note, I readily admit that not everyone would agree with this definition. But it is mine.
For example, a short sword does 1d6 and a dagger 1d4 damage. It is not metagaming for a player to RP that his character knows a dagger is a less damaging weapon than a short sword. Although there are no "dice of damage" in character, the damage dice reflect the in-character world, and all characters understand how the world they live in operates. Just like we understand that a super soaker is more dangerous than a small water pistol in a water-gun fight.
On the other hand, if the character has never met a Slaad before, and has no IC reason to know what a Slaad is or does, having the PC automatically know what they do and that they can infect you with tadpoles or viruses would be metagaming.
Regarding the OP, I am not sure it would be possible for the PCs to know that they are in a Darkness Field vs. a Blindness spell. However, they are smart enough to know that in their normal world, under normal circumstances, the world doesn't just suddenly go pitch black when you were able to see in it before. So they probably know something is up, and if they know that dragons are magical (which they probably would in a D&D world), and that magic spells exist to do all kinds of things (Light, after all, is a cantrip so probably every adventurer in the world has seen it a few times), it would not be metagaming to have the PCs assume that the dragon has cast a magical spell that in some way is either blinding you or darkening the area.
Now to the question of how do you know it is a Darkness field. I would permit an Arcana check to figure it out, if they had not seen it before. If you are talking a Light cleric, then I'm looking at giving advantage since this is kind of that cleric's specialty (light and darkness being two sides of the same coin). Other ways of telling would be, if the RP was that the PCs are all saying, "I can't see. Can you see?" If multiple people can't see then the logical assumption would be Darkness, not Blindness (perhaps a faulty assumption, if you had an AOE blindness spell, but I would think the standard logic would default to Blindness = single target, Darkness = AOE, unless there is some evidence to the contrary).
All that said, I do agree with the basic premise that it's not obvious how, absent any other factors, the first character to go after this happened and before anyone else has said anything, would know it was Darkness not Blindness. If the player started saying, "I try to walk out of the Darkness field," I very well might, as DM, ask, "How does Bill know this is a Darkness field and not a Blindness spell, in character?" And see what the player says. If they can convince me Bill would know it, I'll let it go. If not, then I'd say, "Make an Arcana check to see if Bill knows this is a Darkness field and not a Blindness spell" and require the player to RP accordingly. If they have no magical background, I might impose disadvantage. All depends on the circumstance.
My players have generally been awesome at this kind of thing though, so I don't need to worry about it. When they fail at detecting illusions, often when half of them fail and the other half succeed, the ones who fail do a great job of RPing their character's belief in the illusion. So if I told them there is no way to tell the difference, I am sure they would RP accordingly.
And that is all I ask of players. To be true to the RP of a situation. Illusions are brutally tough to adjudicate, when half the group fails, and half pass. They are virtually impossible when even one player starts meta-gaming.
No you said it right at the end there. If the DM had a problem with what PC1 did they could/would have stopped it.
The spell doesn't say you are blinded so it is very much the "walking to the bathroom at midnight sort of moment."
The character didn't know how big the darkness was, but do assume the the character would what, stand still, in the darkness when they just saw a dragon? If you saw the space as a character, it is not unreasonable to move in a straight line in the exact direction you want until you are free of the darkness.
the only instance of meta gaming I see is the cleric using their ability because how would they know to use their ability? The action clearly calls out magical darkness, and as you said none of you had experience with the spell so how would they know to use an ability that only effects magical darkness?
Hm, I'd actually say that if a character has the ability to counter an effect, like darkness for instance, then the character is well aware of situations where such a counter is to be used. Someone that have trained in dispel magic is well aware of when they might be subjected to magic, and thus they deem a dispel magic is to be used.
Characters are not clueless about the world. You know what your abilities do and what your abilities counter. That there's magic that make everything goes dark all of a sudden isn't news to anyone, and when it happens abruptly it's safe to assume that it may be magic. ESPECIALLY if your friends that normally can see in darkness suddenly can't.
No you said it right at the end there. If the DM had a problem with what PC1 did they could/would have stopped it.
The spell doesn't say you are blinded so it is very much the "walking to the bathroom at midnight sort of moment."
The character didn't know how big the darkness was, but do assume the the character would what, stand still, in the darkness when they just saw a dragon? If you saw the space as a character, it is not unreasonable to move in a straight line in the exact direction you want until you are free of the darkness.
the only instance of meta gaming I see is the cleric using their ability because how would they know to use their ability? The action clearly calls out magical darkness, and as you said none of you had experience with the spell so how would they know to use an ability that only effects magical darkness?
How does the Fighter know there is an edge to the spell? How does he know if it is 20 feet, 40 feet, or the entire room? How does he know he has not been Blinded? When I was a kid we went to a retired coal mine. We were warned, and the lights turned out. You WERE blind. It is the precisely the same effect.
When you're blind you don't see darkness. You don't see anything. You see about the same thing that you see with your foot.
Who says the fighter knew that there was an edge? The characte moves to either attack or flee. The character still knows where the enemy was the last instant or where the door was before the darkness hit.
No you said it right at the end there. If the DM had a problem with what PC1 did they could/would have stopped it.
The spell doesn't say you are blinded so it is very much the "walking to the bathroom at midnight sort of moment."
The character didn't know how big the darkness was, but do assume the the character would what, stand still, in the darkness when they just saw a dragon? If you saw the space as a character, it is not unreasonable to move in a straight line in the exact direction you want until you are free of the darkness.
the only instance of meta gaming I see is the cleric using their ability because how would they know to use their ability? The action clearly calls out magical darkness, and as you said none of you had experience with the spell so how would they know to use an ability that only effects magical darkness?
How does the Fighter know there is an edge to the spell? How does he know if it is 20 feet, 40 feet, or the entire room? How does he know he has not been Blinded? When I was a kid we went to a retired coal mine. We were warned, and the lights turned out. You WERE blind. It is the precisely the same effect.
Why would the fighter not attempt to run? If I were suddenly enveloped in darkness I'd sure try and find a way out. These are also worlds where magic is very real so couldn't someone know what the darkness spell is?
Also, the Light Cleric's Channel Divinity: Radiance of the Dawn, which I presume is the feature you mean, specifically banishes magical darkness. Why would the cleric NOT know that?
I'm really interested to know what you thought that first player should have done.
How does the player KNOW it is the Darkness spell, when they have never encountered it before. We started at level 1, so I know precisely what the players have been exposed to. The player could just as easily think they are blind. And how do they know the size and shape of the Darkness spell, even if they guessed what it was.
Like Is said, the Cleric did his thing, so I did not have to deal with the meta-gaming issue. But I was going to have my char shout "I can't see, can anyone?", and then take a shot in the dark, literally, with the bow I had in my hands. My char had no idea what was happening, since he could be blind, or someone turned the lights out. I would not have a clue which way to run.
But how did the CLERIC know that it was magical darkness? Why is there "meta gaming" okay but the fighter's isn't? The cleric could have also "just been blind" so why did they use a channel divinity that ONLY works on magical darkness? You say that none of you have experience with the spell - so there is no way the cleric knew to use a channel divinity made for a magical darkness. If everyone was supposed to just "think they were blind" as you keep inferring everyone should have been thinking. The cleric was also meta gaming when they dispelled the darkness.
The cleric would know the darkness spell because the cleric has an ability that has directly trained him to deal with magical darkness. He's been an expect in dealing with magical darkness from the day he picked up that feature.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There's a difference between meta gaming and playing a stupid character.
So I run all terrain inside darkness as difficult terrain because if someone is magically blind, it's different(in my head) than just being dark. You know your eyes are open, and the perception of sight is completely enveloped in black with zero notice. This is disconcerting and disorienting to a point. If the characters are making obvious decisions based on knowledge of the room, I'm ok with that. "Hey there was an exit in that direction, I run toward that exit"? Cool, we're fine. "I run forward/backward to try and get out?" Cool, still fine. That said, this has to be the first thing they do. If they try to engage in combat or start bumping into things? Well, now I take over that movement to a degree. If it's obvious that the player is trying to head toward the closest exit point of the darkness spell? I roll to see what direction they actually move in per the rules in the Confusion spell.
All the fighter has to do is "I turn around and move the way I came" because that makes sense. No metagaming involved. The Light Cleric using their new ability to clear out the darkness is totally in line. "HEY I JUST LEARNED HOW TO DO THIS LETS SEE IF IT WORKS" is the logic here. Mainly for the Light Cleric, part of their class description is "Others are tireless sentinels whose eyes pierce every shadow and see through every deception. " Well, that is enough for me for them knowing it ain't right.
If the problem is either magical darkness, or magical blindness, and I only have the solution to one of those problems, I'm going to try it over the one I can't. Running away is just as much taking a shot in the dark as shooting at something you can't see. If you've got a problem with other players in your campaign taking these kinds of actions, talk to your DM about what they consider acceptable, and see if you can live with it or not.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
Does the DM do the same in return? If a PC drops darkness on anything that realistically would be in the same situation as low lvl PCs does it just kinda freeze up and do absolutely nothing like your inferring the players should of done?
I see a lot of talk usually about player meta-gaming, mostly at low levels because it's always 'you haven't encountered that! you shouldn't know!" Well sorry but I've never encountered wolves/cheetahs/lions/bears/red pandas/automatic weapons/tanks/missiles/fighter jets/attack helicopters/jack hammers/strip mining equipment/bulldozers/bridge layers/tunnel borers/on and on and on but you know what? I know about em. Why is it assumed every adventurer is a country bumpkin that spent his entire life on a farm doing nothing but farm stuff until he suddenly picked up a sword and magically became lvl 1.
I can see a campaign based on the concept or in a setting where magic barely exists but in most circumstances someone trained the vast majority of these people, really just gonna teach em how to swing a sword and not the dangers they'll face once they step beyond Swarthy Sal's Sword Swinging Syndicate's doors? Darkness is only a lvl 2 spell, I wouldn't consider that something exotic or rare in practically any D&D campaign, the characters should in most circumstances know what it was.
Kinda tired of the age old trope of your character shouldn't know X, like using fire on trolls. Why not? its should be bog standard lesson's for people being trained to be adventurers. "Use fire when fighting furiously flailing trolls!" "when dropped into Dimmest Darkness, Dont dwadle! double time it!"
Did you expect a character who can't see anything to run towards an aggressive dragon?
As for the resultant condition:
"Darkness creates a heavily obscured area. Characters face darkness outdoors at night (even most moonlit nights), within the confines of an unlit dungeon or a subterranean vault, or in an area of magical darkness."
I think it should be possible to tell the difference between being blind and being in a heavily obscured area. If you want to keep them guessing that's up to you, but personally I'd at least allow an Int or Wis check to determine if they're aware of what's going on (and probably not even bother, but again that's up to you).
Either way, let's say I'm in this predicament and I don't know whether I'm blind or it just got really dark around me. The thing is, I almost certainly can't do anything about the former but I'm probable aware there are going to be limits to the latter. That means I have very little reason to proceed under the assumption that I'm blind - if that's the case I'm completely screwed and should probably just curl up in the foetal position and wait for death's sweet release. If it is a magical darkness effect and it's limited, I should be able to get out of it and markedly improve my chances of survival. So, prepare for the worst, hope for the best and do what's most likely to result in a good outcome: in this case, that's assuming I'm not blind and can find my way out of the dark (without walking up to a dragon).
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
There is absolutely no point in trying to argue with Vince. He is always right. Period. He only ever comes on here when he is bored, and then deliberately posts controversial opinions to cause a ruckus. I don't really understand why the mods let him continue to do it, but I think it is because he is friends with one of them.
And there's your problem right there.
If the DM tells the players it's a circle of effect, then they will act as if they know it's a circle of effect. By drawing it on the map, the DM has basically declared to the party that they know where the edge is, because where the edge is has been told to the players.
I agree that the fighter shouldn't have known that there was an edge to the darkness - to them, they should think the whole room is in darkness, and shouldn't really be running to get out of it.
If I were DMing, I would have taken the map away from the players as soon as they are in the darkness and only given it back when they got out of it or got rid of it. "suddenly, the room is filled with impenetrable darkness" would instill a different response to "suddenly you're in the middle of a 20ft. radius circle of impenetrable darkness". If there were any characters who should recognise it (EG the cleric) then I would tell them on their initiative step, as they shouldn't be communicating too much outside their turns, as talking is included in the description of their turns. In their turn they might shout "It's magical darkness! it's not the whole room" and if they fail to banish it, then the other players will know to move away from where they were.
In short, the map should show what the characters can see - if they only see darkness, the DM shouldn't show them where the edges are.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
Yes, I think your approach is a good one. I was lying in bed last night thinking along the same lines.
Man, if you only knew the truth.
I will propose a slight tweak to this, and then I want those that suggest I am too harsh to to extrapolate what should happen.
Assume the same conditions, but one. The Darkness is not centred over the middle of the group, but is skewed, so let's say the Fighter will have to deal with 35 feet of Darkness if he moves forward, but only 5 feet if he moves back. How do you adjudicate that?
I may be off the mark with what "Metagaming" actually is, but I am under the impression that it's using your own knowledge of the game instead of the information which has been provided to you in the game to influence your decisions.
The issue isn't what the player did, it's what the DM did. The DM told them "if you're in this area, you can't see". The fighter did exactly what you'd expect - they moved out of the area so that they could see. That's not metagaming - they used information they were given to make the decision.
It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to not know something that you know. If the map clearly shows you that there's an edge to the spell, then at that point you know there's an edge to the spell, and you will use that knowledge to decide what to do. If the DM didn't want them to move out of the spell, they shouldn't have told them where its edges were.
In your new example, the fighter will still move in such a way as to continue to fight, If they move back they won't be able to see through the darkness, so they might move forwards. I would expect the fighter to move in the knowledge that the spell ends 35 feet ahead and 5 feet behind, assuming the DM tells them so. IF the DM just tells them "It goes dark", then they might have to guess what they want to do. This might involve potential trip hazards, or traps, or whatever.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
Yes, I definitely agree in principle. But that is also the crux of the matter. If the DM had made some rolls behind the screen, and then said "All of you now see nothing. It is as if you are blind.", without altering the map, or better, taking the map away, I would have loved that.
The Fighter's decisions would then be made without knowing what is truly happening, and would be purely organic. But then the potential meta-gaming can continue. Say the Fighter charges forward, with a purely organic decision. No problem there. Say he then breaks the curtain of darkness. Still no problem. But what if does NOT shout "There is an edge to this blackness. I can see again!" Say he stays silent. How does the Cleric know it is a Darkness spell versus a Blindness spell?
I realize there is no real answer to this, but it is incumbent on the players to really immerse themselves in the situation, and think about what is fair and reasonable for the char to know, versus the player. And far too often, I do not see the players do that.
To my mind, this is another DM element. If the DM loudly states "you break out of the wall of darkness" so that everyone can hear, then they are telling everyone it has an edge, whether the fighter does or doesn't. They should either pass a note to the fighter or direct message them if online, and then let the fighter decide whether they will communicate or not. Perhaps they should offer a "do you want to call back to the party to tell them?" so they remember that they're supposed to be communicating. If they say yes, then they can work more openly with their descriptions - there's no point describing everything to the player so they can describe it to the other players!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
Agreed. I pass notes to individual players all the time when it comes to certain events. This should be added to the list.
Depends on the group. I've had several in which most players would have their character act in a rational manner regardless of metagame knowledge. With other groups I may have needed to obfuscate more. DMing is an art, not an exact science.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
On that we can agree. DM'ing is an art. I brought up the entire thread to demonstrate a scenario that DM's, including myself, can learn from.
I would define it as using your knowledge of things your character would not know, to make decisions the character does not have the information to make. As a note, I readily admit that not everyone would agree with this definition. But it is mine.
For example, a short sword does 1d6 and a dagger 1d4 damage. It is not metagaming for a player to RP that his character knows a dagger is a less damaging weapon than a short sword. Although there are no "dice of damage" in character, the damage dice reflect the in-character world, and all characters understand how the world they live in operates. Just like we understand that a super soaker is more dangerous than a small water pistol in a water-gun fight.
On the other hand, if the character has never met a Slaad before, and has no IC reason to know what a Slaad is or does, having the PC automatically know what they do and that they can infect you with tadpoles or viruses would be metagaming.
Regarding the OP, I am not sure it would be possible for the PCs to know that they are in a Darkness Field vs. a Blindness spell. However, they are smart enough to know that in their normal world, under normal circumstances, the world doesn't just suddenly go pitch black when you were able to see in it before. So they probably know something is up, and if they know that dragons are magical (which they probably would in a D&D world), and that magic spells exist to do all kinds of things (Light, after all, is a cantrip so probably every adventurer in the world has seen it a few times), it would not be metagaming to have the PCs assume that the dragon has cast a magical spell that in some way is either blinding you or darkening the area.
Now to the question of how do you know it is a Darkness field. I would permit an Arcana check to figure it out, if they had not seen it before. If you are talking a Light cleric, then I'm looking at giving advantage since this is kind of that cleric's specialty (light and darkness being two sides of the same coin). Other ways of telling would be, if the RP was that the PCs are all saying, "I can't see. Can you see?" If multiple people can't see then the logical assumption would be Darkness, not Blindness (perhaps a faulty assumption, if you had an AOE blindness spell, but I would think the standard logic would default to Blindness = single target, Darkness = AOE, unless there is some evidence to the contrary).
All that said, I do agree with the basic premise that it's not obvious how, absent any other factors, the first character to go after this happened and before anyone else has said anything, would know it was Darkness not Blindness. If the player started saying, "I try to walk out of the Darkness field," I very well might, as DM, ask, "How does Bill know this is a Darkness field and not a Blindness spell, in character?" And see what the player says. If they can convince me Bill would know it, I'll let it go. If not, then I'd say, "Make an Arcana check to see if Bill knows this is a Darkness field and not a Blindness spell" and require the player to RP accordingly. If they have no magical background, I might impose disadvantage. All depends on the circumstance.
My players have generally been awesome at this kind of thing though, so I don't need to worry about it. When they fail at detecting illusions, often when half of them fail and the other half succeed, the ones who fail do a great job of RPing their character's belief in the illusion. So if I told them there is no way to tell the difference, I am sure they would RP accordingly.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
And that is all I ask of players. To be true to the RP of a situation. Illusions are brutally tough to adjudicate, when half the group fails, and half pass. They are virtually impossible when even one player starts meta-gaming.
Hm, I'd actually say that if a character has the ability to counter an effect, like darkness for instance, then the character is well aware of situations where such a counter is to be used. Someone that have trained in dispel magic is well aware of when they might be subjected to magic, and thus they deem a dispel magic is to be used.
Characters are not clueless about the world. You know what your abilities do and what your abilities counter. That there's magic that make everything goes dark all of a sudden isn't news to anyone, and when it happens abruptly it's safe to assume that it may be magic. ESPECIALLY if your friends that normally can see in darkness suddenly can't.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
When you're blind you don't see darkness. You don't see anything. You see about the same thing that you see with your foot.
Who says the fighter knew that there was an edge? The characte moves to either attack or flee. The character still knows where the enemy was the last instant or where the door was before the darkness hit.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
The cleric would know the darkness spell because the cleric has an ability that has directly trained him to deal with magical darkness. He's been an expect in dealing with magical darkness from the day he picked up that feature.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter