Disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight
Seems like a harsh rule, but with what darkvision does grant is it fair. I personally feel it forces players into do i want to use light or rely on darkvision. Do i want to attract monsters with light etc.. Seems fair but i see other DM's not even implementing it.
Depends on the situation and circumstances. If a character has an eyepatch his vision sucks for a while until he gets used to it. These are naturally very rare and situational situations.
In case of a dark cave... well of course they won't see a damn thing unless they have darkvision or a light source. This is used standard by pretty much everyone. Didn't bring a light source to a dark cave, you won't see a damn thing and you're completely blinded unless you have darkvision. That is why there are cantrips like Dancing Lights or to cast Light on something. Or simply bring torches or a hooded lantern. This isn't harsh at all. And yes...some creatures will react if they see a light sources in the distance of their usually dark habit. However this relies on their intellect or bestial nature as well.
As DM you create the scenario's and the main threads of the story. Your NPC's/World will provide basic information regarding the situation at hand. Then the players can ask more questions if they want more / specific information. If the players go to the cave and didn't prepare with sufficient light sources... well then they're shit out of luck and have to go back to town and buy the required materials.
As DM I sometimes willingly and knowingly create scenario's where the players could receive such a disadvantage on sight. Makes it easier for Lurkers and such to set up an ambush on the players. Not to mention that you can also use it to create narrative tension and claustrophobia as the players enter and explore such an environment. And then you drop the ambush on them for a nice scare.
D&D isn't a videogame where everything is handed to players on a silver platter. Treat is like the real world with plausible scenario's. The players have the freedom to approach any situation as they desire. But it'll have consequences if they didn't prepare well for whatever it is they got planned. And consequences lead to drama and storytelling threads all by itself.
Basically never unless the player brings it up. Last session took place on a battlefield that was dimly lit throughout. The party's rogue pointed out the dim light for the purpose of hiding and I, not being one to play against my players, went along with it. In the future, I think I will have relevant monsters use the environment to their advantage as well, should the players choose to get granular with details like that.
Some races have darkvision but can't see color, and darkvision has a very limited range, you could use that, it wouldn't be fair to your players or make any logical sense to punish them for using their ability to see in the dark by just slapping disadvantage on them and calling it a day.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Giant flaming rocks filled with tarrasques fall, everyone dies.
Phb pg 183, vision and light, 2nd paragraph says when in lightly obscured conditions SUCH as dim light, you get disadvantage on Wis (perception) checks that rely on sight.
Phb pg 183,184 Darkvison. You can see in dim lighting as if normal lighting. You can see in darkness as if in dim lighting.
Therefore, when someone with Darkvison is in darkness, NOT dim lighting, they see like someone without darkvison would in dim lighting, and get disadvantage on Wis (perception) checks that rely on vision.
Also, in 5th edition, the default for Darkvision is shades of grey. In previous editions it was more race dependent. I don't know of any creature with darkvison in 5th that sees color or "heat maps" when using it, but there might be.
Now, all that said, I hardly ever use this rule, it just creates hassle as my whole party has access to Darkvison one way or another and reminding them to decide how good they really want to see is tedious.
It’s important out of combat when you are trying to find traps. During combat, dim light doesn’t impose any penalties on attacking. With hiding, you are also using your hearing to detect hidden enemies so I’m not sure if it applies. For example, an invisible hidden character can be detected by sound and you then know where it is, it is no longer hidden but still invisible. A hidden character that is not invisible should also be able to be detected by sound and once you know where it is you should be able to see it even if it is in dim light. It doesn’t say anywhere that perception with sound alone gives you disadvantage and there are many creatures the have advantage on perception checks with sound.
There is a feat that says you can hide in dim light but I read in other places that dim light is sufficient to attempt to hide. That basically makes that part of the feat pointless so....?
That’s how I interpret it but I not going to claim it’s not confusing.
Darkvision does not impose any "drawbacks", or are you talking about:
a Drow, Duegar and Kobold's (among other's) sunlight sensitivity
The draw backs that being in dim light naturally imposes on perception based on sight
As it stands, Dim Light imposes disadvantage and darkness imposes an automatic failure on perception checks based on sight. What this means is a creature with Darkvision in Darkness actually has disadvantage on Perception checks based on sight. While a creature without Darkvision in darkness automatically fails their perception checks based on sight.
I do impose the drawbacks to dim light and darkness within my campaigns.
So you couldn’t hide in the middle of a dimly lit room but you could hid behind the curtains that cover half your body? That sounds logical.
With Skulker feat, you can hide in the middle of the dimly lit room?
Going back to the original question, relying on dark vision is going to give disadvantage on finding traps and allow other creatures to hide in some but not all cases.
Ya i like the idea of how there is more risk/reward with dark vision. But didn't know how other DM's felt. I have never used the disadv but this week end i will be using it. Does passive precept still work or no for dark vision?
Passive perception gets a -5 for disadvantage in dimly lit conditions (either no darkvision and dimly lit or darkness with darkvision).
Some DMs forget to apply this but honestly it doesn't come up much except when searching for traps/secret doors and trying to remain unobserved in the dark or possibly for passive/active checks to see hidden opponents under dimly lit conditions.
I get around it by dipping warlock on my rogue for devils sight and the ability to see perfectly in the dark.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight
Seems like a harsh rule, but with what darkvision does grant is it fair. I personally feel it forces players into do i want to use light or rely on darkvision. Do i want to attract monsters with light etc.. Seems fair but i see other DM's not even implementing it.
Depends on the situation and circumstances. If a character has an eyepatch his vision sucks for a while until he gets used to it. These are naturally very rare and situational situations.
In case of a dark cave... well of course they won't see a damn thing unless they have darkvision or a light source. This is used standard by pretty much everyone. Didn't bring a light source to a dark cave, you won't see a damn thing and you're completely blinded unless you have darkvision. That is why there are cantrips like Dancing Lights or to cast Light on something. Or simply bring torches or a hooded lantern. This isn't harsh at all. And yes...some creatures will react if they see a light sources in the distance of their usually dark habit. However this relies on their intellect or bestial nature as well.
As DM you create the scenario's and the main threads of the story. Your NPC's/World will provide basic information regarding the situation at hand. Then the players can ask more questions if they want more / specific information. If the players go to the cave and didn't prepare with sufficient light sources... well then they're shit out of luck and have to go back to town and buy the required materials.
As DM I sometimes willingly and knowingly create scenario's where the players could receive such a disadvantage on sight. Makes it easier for Lurkers and such to set up an ambush on the players. Not to mention that you can also use it to create narrative tension and claustrophobia as the players enter and explore such an environment. And then you drop the ambush on them for a nice scare.
D&D isn't a videogame where everything is handed to players on a silver platter. Treat is like the real world with plausible scenario's. The players have the freedom to approach any situation as they desire. But it'll have consequences if they didn't prepare well for whatever it is they got planned. And consequences lead to drama and storytelling threads all by itself.
Basically never unless the player brings it up. Last session took place on a battlefield that was dimly lit throughout. The party's rogue pointed out the dim light for the purpose of hiding and I, not being one to play against my players, went along with it. In the future, I think I will have relevant monsters use the environment to their advantage as well, should the players choose to get granular with details like that.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I can't find where the use of Darkvision causing Disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight. Is that is an errata I missed?
Some races have darkvision but can't see color, and darkvision has a very limited range, you could use that, it wouldn't be fair to your players or make any logical sense to punish them for using their ability to see in the dark by just slapping disadvantage on them and calling it a day.
Giant flaming rocks filled with tarrasques fall, everyone dies.
Rules break down time!
Phb pg 183, vision and light, 2nd paragraph says when in lightly obscured conditions SUCH as dim light, you get disadvantage on Wis (perception) checks that rely on sight.
Phb pg 183,184 Darkvison. You can see in dim lighting as if normal lighting. You can see in darkness as if in dim lighting.
Therefore, when someone with Darkvison is in darkness, NOT dim lighting, they see like someone without darkvison would in dim lighting, and get disadvantage on Wis (perception) checks that rely on vision.
Also, in 5th edition, the default for Darkvision is shades of grey. In previous editions it was more race dependent. I don't know of any creature with darkvison in 5th that sees color or "heat maps" when using it, but there might be.
Now, all that said, I hardly ever use this rule, it just creates hassle as my whole party has access to Darkvison one way or another and reminding them to decide how good they really want to see is tedious.
It’s important out of combat when you are trying to find traps. During combat, dim light doesn’t impose any penalties on attacking. With hiding, you are also using your hearing to detect hidden enemies so I’m not sure if it applies. For example, an invisible hidden character can be detected by sound and you then know where it is, it is no longer hidden but still invisible. A hidden character that is not invisible should also be able to be detected by sound and once you know where it is you should be able to see it even if it is in dim light. It doesn’t say anywhere that perception with sound alone gives you disadvantage and there are many creatures the have advantage on perception checks with sound.
There is a feat that says you can hide in dim light but I read in other places that dim light is sufficient to attempt to hide. That basically makes that part of the feat pointless so....?
That’s how I interpret it but I not going to claim it’s not confusing.
You still can't hide if someone can see you clearly, dim light or not. You need something to hide behind unless you are invisible.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Darkvision does not impose any "drawbacks", or are you talking about:
As it stands, Dim Light imposes disadvantage and darkness imposes an automatic failure on perception checks based on sight. What this means is a creature with Darkvision in Darkness actually has disadvantage on Perception checks based on sight. While a creature without Darkvision in darkness automatically fails their perception checks based on sight.
I do impose the drawbacks to dim light and darkness within my campaigns.
So you couldn’t hide in the middle of a dimly lit room but you could hid behind the curtains that cover half your body? That sounds logical.
With Skulker feat, you can hide in the middle of the dimly lit room?
Going back to the original question, relying on dark vision is going to give disadvantage on finding traps and allow other creatures to hide in some but not all cases.
Ya i like the idea of how there is more risk/reward with dark vision. But didn't know how other DM's felt. I have never used the disadv but this week end i will be using it. Does passive precept still work or no for dark vision?
Passive perception gets a -5 for disadvantage in dimly lit conditions (either no darkvision and dimly lit or darkness with darkvision).
Some DMs forget to apply this but honestly it doesn't come up much except when searching for traps/secret doors and trying to remain unobserved in the dark or possibly for passive/active checks to see hidden opponents under dimly lit conditions.
I get around it by dipping warlock on my rogue for devils sight and the ability to see perfectly in the dark.