The correct answer is that Half-Elves and Half-Orcs should not have Darkvision either. Far too many species have Darkvision.
Even if Dragonborn join the darkvision club as seems likely to happen in OneD&D, there are still around 26 other first-party races without it. You really don't need to take it away from anyone else.
26? It should be 2 or 3. And those species should only be playable within setting specific games, as deemed by the DM. When everyone has a feature, especially something as valuable as Darkvision, it totally trivializes the game.
26? It should be 2 or 3. And those species should only be playable within setting specific games, as deemed by the DM. When everyone has a feature, especially something as valuable as Darkvision, it totally trivializes the game.
That's 26 WITHOUT Darkvision. That includes powerful races like Variant Human, Aarakocra and Fairy. You're spoiled for choice.
26? It should be 2 or 3. And those species should only be playable within setting specific games, as deemed by the DM. When everyone has a feature, especially something as valuable as Darkvision, it totally trivializes the game.
That's 26 WITHOUT Darkvision. That includes powerful races like Variant Human, Aarakocra and Fairy. You're spoiled for choice.
First off, there should never be 26 species in the entire game. There should be 9,8, maybe even 6, max available as PC's. And almost all of them should not have Darkvision. Like I said, when so many have something like that, it trivializes the game. Monty Haul at level 0.
Darkvision does not trivialize the game; it answers a problem that is traditionally overlooked in any case. And only 9 races sounds like a terribly narrow setting design.
Darkvision does not trivialize the game; it answers a problem that is traditionally overlooked in any case. And only 9 races sounds like a terribly narrow setting design.
And almost all of them should not have Darkvision. Like I said, when so many have something like that, it trivializes the game. Monty Haul at level 0.
What? It doesn't trivialize the game at all. Are you saying you're incapable of challenging your players unless they're forced to carry torches around? Because that's not a system issue.
Moreover, even races with Darkvision benefit from light. Darkvision merely raises pitch darkness to dim light, which means they are rolling to find traps, hidden creatures and the like with disadvantage (i.e. -5 on their passive checks). That's still a drawback for the PCs relying on Darkvision.
Darkvision does not trivialize the game; it answers a problem that is traditionally overlooked in any case. And only 9 races sounds like a terribly narrow setting design.
What problem is that?
Seeing in the dark, of course. Something that few games aside from survival-horror put much effort into representing realistically.
Darkvision does not trivialize the game; it answers a problem that is traditionally overlooked in any case. And only 9 races sounds like a terribly narrow setting design.
What problem is that?
Seeing in the dark, of course. Something that few games aside from survival-horror put much effort into representing realistically.
Oh, so a fundamental premise of this game, and many games, is a "problem". Standard problem solving for "modern times". If something is challenging and requires planning and forethought, just remove the challenge.
Here is the thing. Dragonborn, of all the species (btw, I never allow them at my table) SHOULD have Darkvision. Dragonborn clearly have some DNA they share with Dragons, so Darkvision makes sense. So should Elves, Dwarves, (Dwarves and Elves are not playable NPC's in my game, same as Dragonborn) and Gnomes. Any species that lives underground, and Elves, well, just because. But not Half-Orcs, nor Half-Elves, nor any other species.
And Darkvision should be ruined in the presence of a light source. And it should take some time for it to kick in once a light source is removed. Ask any night sniper about that.
And Darkvision should be ruined in the presence of a light source. And it should take some time for it to kick in once a light source is removed. Ask any night sniper about that.
Ask any cat how impaired their vision is by going from lights off to lights on. Natural night vision on animals that are frequently exposed to daylight is well ahead of night vision goggles.
And Darkvision should be ruined in the presence of a light source. And it should take some time for it to kick in once a light source is removed. Ask any night sniper about that.
Ask any cat how impaired their vision is by going from lights off to lights on. Natural night vision on animals that are frequently exposed to daylight is well ahead of night vision goggles.
Darkvision does not trivialize the game; it answers a problem that is traditionally overlooked in any case. And only 9 races sounds like a terribly narrow setting design.
What problem is that?
Seeing in the dark, of course. Something that few games aside from survival-horror put much effort into representing realistically.
Oh, so a fundamental premise of this game, and many games, is a "problem". Standard problem solving for "modern times". If something is challenging and requires planning and forethought, just remove the challenge.
Here is the thing. Dragonborn, of all the species (btw, I never allow them at my table) SHOULD have Darkvision. Dragonborn clearly have some DNA they share with Dragons, so Darkvision makes sense. So should Elves, Dwarves, (Dwarves and Elves are not playable NPC's in my game, same as Dragonborn) and Gnomes. Any species that lives underground, and Elves, well, just because. But not Half-Orcs, nor Half-Elves, nor any other species.
And Darkvision should be ruined in the presence of a light source. And it should take some time for it to kick in once a light source is removed. Ask any night sniper about that.
You're free to keep playing AD&D rules. Nobody's going to stop you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I agree, Darkvision should be ruined by bright light.
Because when there is bright light you no longer need your Darkvision so you can see normally.
My dogs have no noticeable adjustment time. If you want to say there is then I'd place it in the 1-2 second range which isn't even a single round of combat.
Aside from they're dragon-like, and you want it, what other compelling reason is there to give Dragonborn Darkvision?
There are many other races that don't have it, and none of those players are crying about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
Darkvision does not trivialize the game; it answers a problem that is traditionally overlooked in any case. And only 9 races sounds like a terribly narrow setting design.
What problem is that?
Seeing in the dark, of course. Something that few games aside from survival-horror put much effort into representing realistically.
Oh, so a fundamental premise of this game, and many games, is a "problem". Standard problem solving for "modern times". If something is challenging and requires planning and forethought, just remove the challenge.
Here is the thing. Dragonborn, of all the species (btw, I never allow them at my table) SHOULD have Darkvision. Dragonborn clearly have some DNA they share with Dragons, so Darkvision makes sense. So should Elves, Dwarves, (Dwarves and Elves are not playable NPC's in my game, same as Dragonborn) and Gnomes. Any species that lives underground, and Elves, well, just because. But not Half-Orcs, nor Half-Elves, nor any other species.
And Darkvision should be ruined in the presence of a light source. And it should take some time for it to kick in once a light source is removed. Ask any night sniper about that.
You're free to keep playing AD&D rules. Nobody's going to stop you.
I'm pretty sure that almost all the non-humans in AD&D had infravision.
I'm pretty sure that almost all the non-humans in AD&D had infravision.
There were plenty that didn't. They just tended to get ignored because there was so little point in playing a non-human character if you didn't get infravision.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I agree, Darkvision should be ruined by bright light.
Because when there is bright light you no longer need your Darkvision so you can see normally.
My dogs have no noticeable adjustment time. If you want to say there is then I'd place it in the 1-2 second range which isn't even a single round of combat.
Aside from they're dragon-like, and you want it, what other compelling reason is there to give Dragonborn Darkvision?
There are many other races that don't have it, and none of those players are crying about it.
I mean, to be clear, "they're dragon-like" is more than enough reason. I suspect this is why WotC changed their mind.
I'm pretty sure that almost all the non-humans in AD&D had infravision.
There were plenty that didn't. They just tended to get ignored because there was so little point in playing a non-human character if you didn't get infravision.
While this is technically true it is because others had ultravision, instead, with infravision being seeing heat and ultravision seeing uv, which each had different advantages and disadvantages in low light. Which races from 1e had neither? There were not so many official races back then.
None of the demi-human races in the 1e Players Handbook had ultravision, while only humans lacked infravision entirely. Some groups I knew back then houseruled elves had ultravision and dwarves infravision, but it wasn't official.
I'm pretty sure that almost all the non-humans in AD&D had infravision.
There were plenty that didn't. They just tended to get ignored because there was so little point in playing a non-human character if you didn't get infravision.
While this is technically true it is because others had ultravision, instead, with infravision being seeing heat and ultravision seeing uv, which each had different advantages and disadvantages in low light. Which races from 1e had neither? There were not so many official races back then.
None of the demi-human races in the 1e Players Handbook had ultravision, while only humans lacked infravision entirely. Some groups I knew back then houseruled elves had ultravision and dwarves infravision, but it wasn't official.
The only races I recall seeing with ultravision were all in Dragon Magazine.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Aside from they're dragon-like, and you want it, what other compelling reason is there to give Dragonborn Darkvision?
Being dragon-like sounds compelling enough to me. Dragons and kobolds both have it, and it's not like anyone is asking for dragonborn to have blindsight like full-fledged dragons do.
Aside from they're dragon-like, and you want it, what other compelling reason is there to give Dragonborn Darkvision?
Being dragon-like sounds compelling enough to me. Dragons and kobolds both have it, and it's not like anyone is asking for dragonborn to have blindsight like full-fledged dragons do.
As I have said, it is reasonable that Dragonborn get it, but it is equally reasonable that other species that have it should not.
26? It should be 2 or 3. And those species should only be playable within setting specific games, as deemed by the DM. When everyone has a feature, especially something as valuable as Darkvision, it totally trivializes the game.
That's 26 WITHOUT Darkvision. That includes powerful races like Variant Human, Aarakocra and Fairy. You're spoiled for choice.
First off, there should never be 26 species in the entire game. There should be 9,8, maybe even 6, max available as PC's. And almost all of them should not have Darkvision. Like I said, when so many have something like that, it trivializes the game. Monty Haul at level 0.
Darkvision does not trivialize the game; it answers a problem that is traditionally overlooked in any case. And only 9 races sounds like a terribly narrow setting design.
What problem is that?
Awful business model aside, that just sounds massively boring but you do you.
What? It doesn't trivialize the game at all. Are you saying you're incapable of challenging your players unless they're forced to carry torches around? Because that's not a system issue.
Moreover, even races with Darkvision benefit from light. Darkvision merely raises pitch darkness to dim light, which means they are rolling to find traps, hidden creatures and the like with disadvantage (i.e. -5 on their passive checks). That's still a drawback for the PCs relying on Darkvision.
Seeing in the dark, of course. Something that few games aside from survival-horror put much effort into representing realistically.
Oh, so a fundamental premise of this game, and many games, is a "problem". Standard problem solving for "modern times". If something is challenging and requires planning and forethought, just remove the challenge.
Here is the thing. Dragonborn, of all the species (btw, I never allow them at my table) SHOULD have Darkvision. Dragonborn clearly have some DNA they share with Dragons, so Darkvision makes sense. So should Elves, Dwarves, (Dwarves and Elves are not playable NPC's in my game, same as Dragonborn) and Gnomes. Any species that lives underground, and Elves, well, just because. But not Half-Orcs, nor Half-Elves, nor any other species.
And Darkvision should be ruined in the presence of a light source. And it should take some time for it to kick in once a light source is removed. Ask any night sniper about that.
Ask any cat how impaired their vision is by going from lights off to lights on. Natural night vision on animals that are frequently exposed to daylight is well ahead of night vision goggles.
AL creatures take time to adjust.
You're free to keep playing AD&D rules. Nobody's going to stop you.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I agree, Darkvision should be ruined by bright light.
Because when there is bright light you no longer need your Darkvision so you can see normally.
My dogs have no noticeable adjustment time. If you want to say there is then I'd place it in the 1-2 second range which isn't even a single round of combat.
Aside from they're dragon-like, and you want it, what other compelling reason is there to give Dragonborn Darkvision?
There are many other races that don't have it, and none of those players are crying about it.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I'm pretty sure that almost all the non-humans in AD&D had infravision.
There were plenty that didn't. They just tended to get ignored because there was so little point in playing a non-human character if you didn't get infravision.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I mean, to be clear, "they're dragon-like" is more than enough reason. I suspect this is why WotC changed their mind.
But I agree with the rest.
None of the demi-human races in the 1e Players Handbook had ultravision, while only humans lacked infravision entirely. Some groups I knew back then houseruled elves had ultravision and dwarves infravision, but it wasn't official.
The only races I recall seeing with ultravision were all in Dragon Magazine.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Being dragon-like sounds compelling enough to me. Dragons and kobolds both have it, and it's not like anyone is asking for dragonborn to have blindsight like full-fledged dragons do.
As I have said, it is reasonable that Dragonborn get it, but it is equally reasonable that other species that have it should not.
Such as...? Which races with Darkvision should lose it, or which ones gaining it shouldn't?