Not if it repeats the same properties that are already present elsewhere, it’s easier just to reference the already existing abilities that create the same effects and note only the significant difference in the new one.
If the intent was that magical darkness (in general) blocks darkvision, they would either have magical darkness in the rules glossary, or change the wording of darkvision to
If you have Darkvision, you can see in Dim Light within a specified range as if it were Bright Light and in non-magical Darkness within that range as if it were Dim Light. You discern colors in that Darkness only as shades of gray. See also chapter 1 (“Exploration”).
If the effect is magical and created by magical means, then the magical representation of that effect in this case “darkness” means the spell of the same name supersedes the general concept of the effect.
So you and others can do you, I stand correct in my opinion and evidence, no you can not see through any form of “magical darkness” with darkvision no matter what, and anyone who claims otherwise are the ones who are wrong.
The official ruling from Devs Sage Advice is that Magical Darkness blocks Darkvision only if the rules text for a particular instance of Darkness says it does. For example, the Darkness spell specifies that Darkvision can’t see through it. That obstruction is a feature of the spell, not a feature of magical Darkness in general.
If the effect is magical and created by magical means, then the magical representation of that effect in this case “darkness” means the spell of the same name supersedes the general concept of the effect.
This is complete and utter nonsense, and it betrays a misunderstanding of how the rules work so fundamental that your opinion on any rule interpretation is suspect, at best
Sage Adivce is exactly what it says it is, Advice and NOT official Rules As Written, especially when it pertains to magical effects
Not it, you or anyone else can tell me the difference between non-magical and magical darkness isn’t clearly defined and that the lack of the proper context of which of those two very different phenomena are used elsewhere makes it perfectly acceptable to ignore that difference for the sake of agency.
Magical darkness is defined in a specific way, non-magical darkness is defined in general, specifically any magical darkness prevents darkvision from being useful in that effect, and stating otherwise is wrong.
Agree to disagree and you do you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
If the effect is magical and created by magical means, then the magical representation of that effect in this case “darkness” means the spell of the same name supersedes the general concept of the effect.
So you and others can do you, I stand correct in my opinion and evidence, no you can not see through any form of “magical darkness” with darkvision no matter what, and anyone who claims otherwise are the ones who are wrong.
The official ruling from Devs Sage Advice is that Magical Darkness blocks Darkvision only if the rules text for a particular instance of Darkness says it does. For example, the Darkness spell specifies that Darkvision can’t see through it. That obstruction is a feature of the spell, not a feature of magical Darkness in general.
If the effect is magical and created by magical means, then the magical representation of that effect in this case “darkness” means the spell of the same name supersedes the general concept of the effect.
This is complete and utter nonsense, and it betrays a misunderstanding of how the rules work so fundamental that your opinion on any rule interpretation is suspect, at best
Sage Adivce is exactly what it says it is, Advice and NOT official Rules As Written, especially when it pertains to magical effects
Not it, you or anyone else can tell me the difference between non-magical and magical darkness isn’t clearly defined and that the lack of the proper context of which of those two very different phenomena are used elsewhere makes it perfectly acceptable to ignore that difference for the sake of agency.
Magical darkness is defined in a specific way, non-magical darkness is defined in general, specifically any magical darkness prevents darkvision from being useful in that effect, and stating otherwise is wrong.
Agree to disagree and you do you.
Wrong:
Official Rulings
Official rulings on how to interpret rules are made here in the Sage Advice Compendium. A Dungeon Master adjudicates the game and determines whether to use an official ruling in play. The DM always has the final say on rules questions.
The public statements of the D&D team, or anyone else at Wizards of the Coast, are not official rulings; they are advice.
Sage Advice IS official rulings. Whatever someone from the staff at WotC or DDB says on interviews, Twitter, Discord, etc. regarding how to interpret the rules is advice--that's what that line at the end means. Someone quoting Sage Advice is giving you an official ruling by WotC, not something they made up. If YOU want to treat all darkness created by spells as magical darkness that blocks Darkvision--go ahead, but stop arguing in bad faith man
[...] - Hunger of Hadar does not create magical darkness, instead it is a gateway to another dimension that appears like mundane darkness to someone outside of it per it's very first line, hence "sphere of Darkness". It does not specify the "Darkness" is from the spell, but the Darkness defined from the Glossary (opaque).
[...] Hunger of Hadar does NOT create magical darkness because it does not say that in the spell, and every spell that creates magical darkness specifically says "magical darkness" in its description. [...]
(sorry for snipping the replies; just trying to get what I need)
Interesting. I've been ruling that Darkness (the area), when created by a spell, is always magical since it's a Magical Effect, so you can dispel it with Dispel Magic, for example.
But you make a good point about the use of "magical" in the spell descriptions.
EDIT: I didn't see Pantagruel666's answer. It's more or less what I think too.
EDIT2: fix tooltip.
I mean, you're both right that the effect is magical because it's been caused by magic, and mechanically it refers to Darkness to describe it's a Heavily Obscured area, but you're not actually creating a patch of magical darkness because the spell doesn't actually say so (the spell refers to it as a Gateway, meaning a portal). For example, both Darkness and Maddening Darkness specify its a patch of magical darkness, but Summon Fey also uses "magical darkness" for one of the spirit's Bonus Actions, and this one doesn't say Darkvision can't see through it. Magical Darkness can also be dispelled by light created by spells higher than the one that created the darkness, but Hunger of Hadar cannot be dispelled in such a way because you're not actually blotting the light out of the area, but creating a portal, hence why the spell uses the term Darkness as in Heavily Obscured area.
Honestly, had they substituted Darkness for Heavily Obscured area, HoH wouldn't even be part of this conversation. At the end of the day though, Hunger of Hadar changed the sphere from Blackness to Darkness for convenience, since that's the game term used now for dark areas with absence of light.
Dr_Selastraga I get your point, and I really appreciate the way you explained it.
The difference between magical and non-magical Darkness when it's created by a spell is the only thing I didn't consider before.
And yeah, I completely agree that not all magical Darkness blocks Darkvision, other Special Senses, or senses granted by specific features unless a spell's effect says otherwise.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If the intent was that magical darkness (in general) blocks darkvision, they would either have magical darkness in the rules glossary, or change the wording of darkvision to
Sage Adivce is exactly what it says it is, Advice and NOT official Rules As Written, especially when it pertains to magical effects
Not it, you or anyone else can tell me the difference between non-magical and magical darkness isn’t clearly defined and that the lack of the proper context of which of those two very different phenomena are used elsewhere makes it perfectly acceptable to ignore that difference for the sake of agency.
Magical darkness is defined in a specific way, non-magical darkness is defined in general, specifically any magical darkness prevents darkvision from being useful in that effect, and stating otherwise is wrong.
Agree to disagree and you do you.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
Wrong:
Sage Advice IS official rulings. Whatever someone from the staff at WotC or DDB says on interviews, Twitter, Discord, etc. regarding how to interpret the rules is advice--that's what that line at the end means. Someone quoting Sage Advice is giving you an official ruling by WotC, not something they made up. If YOU want to treat all darkness created by spells as magical darkness that blocks Darkvision--go ahead, but stop arguing in bad faith man
I mean, you're both right that the effect is magical because it's been caused by magic, and mechanically it refers to Darkness to describe it's a Heavily Obscured area, but you're not actually creating a patch of magical darkness because the spell doesn't actually say so (the spell refers to it as a Gateway, meaning a portal). For example, both Darkness and Maddening Darkness specify its a patch of magical darkness, but Summon Fey also uses "magical darkness" for one of the spirit's Bonus Actions, and this one doesn't say Darkvision can't see through it. Magical Darkness can also be dispelled by light created by spells higher than the one that created the darkness, but Hunger of Hadar cannot be dispelled in such a way because you're not actually blotting the light out of the area, but creating a portal, hence why the spell uses the term Darkness as in Heavily Obscured area.
Honestly, had they substituted Darkness for Heavily Obscured area, HoH wouldn't even be part of this conversation. At the end of the day though, Hunger of Hadar changed the sphere from Blackness to Darkness for convenience, since that's the game term used now for dark areas with absence of light.
Dr_Selastraga I get your point, and I really appreciate the way you explained it.
The difference between magical and non-magical Darkness when it's created by a spell is the only thing I didn't consider before.
And yeah, I completely agree that not all magical Darkness blocks Darkvision, other Special Senses, or senses granted by specific features unless a spell's effect says otherwise.
Thank you for getting back to me!
If your stance is that you can't see the stars in the night sky, you've made a wrong turn in deciphering the rules. Reconsider and try again.
Edit, PS: Sage Advice is official rules for 2014. It actually says the only rulebooks are the 2014 ones. So, invalidates the 2024 ones. See:
It is pretty funny, really.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Don't know who your comment is directed to but regarding Sage Advice, we're talking about the 2024 version found here: https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/sae/sage-advice-compendium