Find Familiar treats your spell cast as if it were the Familiar who cast it. That doesn't mean mechanically you treat it as though you cast the spell - but without the "as if it" wording, things like your caster's spell slots break down and what not after using the spell thru your familiar's reaction action. In other words, the Familiar casts your spell for you; "as if it" cast the spell itself (but it has no spellbook or slots so it needs your spell casting info)... Hence the phrasing "as if it"
This is also so much nonsense.
"Finally, when you cast a spell with a range of touch, your familiar can deliver the spell as if it had cast the spell. Your familiar must be within 100 feet of you, and it must use its reaction to deliver the spell when you cast it. If the spell requires an attack roll, you use your attack modifier for the roll."
Your familiar can deliver a spell as if it had cast it, and uses its reaction to do so. That's all. You absolutely do treat the spell as though you cast it yourself, because you did cast it yourself. The only mechanical difference is that your familiar becomes the point of origin for the touch spell - the familiar does the touching for you.
lol - this is exactly my point. we're using two interpretations of the same rule to say different things. You say, "as if it" doesn't mean "as if it" - I say it does. Where's your rule? Also - how are you not getting the hand-off of mechanics here? Changing the Point of Origin for a TOUCH spell is HUGE. Change Darkness to Dim Light is HUGE. Its literally the entire point of the language/rule/mechanic and you're trying to fudge it
(also, the rule you're looking for is Simultaneous Effects - Xanathar's - I'm not saying the two SHOULD conflict, but rather there should be a "not-open-for-interpretation" rule. And there is. So there. lol)
No, I'm interpreting the mechanic. You're saying that "the Familiar casts your spell for you", which is absolutely incorrect.
No you're not - you're stretching phrasing trying to get a 1-up somewhere, lol. The rule literally says "as if it casts it itself" which is effectively the same as "the Familiar casts your spell for you" and includes additional language to establish exactly how it works (which turns out, is as if your familiar cast it itself/casts your spell for you).
[REDACTED]
"As if it cast it itself" literally means "it's like it cast it itself, but it didn't". Your familiar doesn't cast your spell for you. It delivers a touch spell that you cast as if it had cast it, that's all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Darkvision says "You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light."
It doesn't change the fact that you are still trying to see in darkness.
Therefore the devil's sight rules can still be applied.
It does change the fact because you mechanically treat it as dim light. The fact that I can just as easily say the opposite means this interpretation does not actually clarify any potential conflicts between the ruleset.
In other words, you're claiming the benefit of the darkness becoming dim light, and then ignoring that mechanic to gain the benefit of devil's sight. Bear in mind the wording of Darkvision is to ensure players essentially always get its benefit - not to straddle the line with other very clear rules. To do what you're suggesting would break down the rules for light for the remainder of your campaign - Players saying, "well teeechnically I'm in this kind of light sooo" with a wide variety of spells and abilities. I could reach as far as saying like a torch in a dark tunnel - technically you're still in the dark but you have a bubble of light within it with your interpretation.
But do not be dismayed! You can still gain the benefits of both by declaring you see w/ Devil's Sight over Darkvision if you ever had to squeeze that rule out. Again, we're just playing w/ rule phrasing and your interpretation is every bit as legit as mine - but again, the fact that I can claim the rules could be interpreted the opposite leaves us at square one.
Darkvision and Devil's Sight don't change the ambient light at all so they both interact with what the light actually is, not what you perceive it as.
Mechanically, they DO change what it "actually" is. I'm blown away by how many people seem to think the perception of darkness and actual darkness are two separate things... Being in darkness and how you perceive it are the exact same thing. HOW you perceive it is up to the individual and whether they have things like Darkvision or Devil's Sight. Seriously, think about it: they are one in the same, lmao
In other words, you're basically saying, "well it's darkness for other players so its darkness for you"
The wording of the rule is designed to avoid "group" conflicts. Otherwise, if it didn't say "treat as" or "as if it" then people could argue, under RAI, that since one person had Darkvision, everyone in the party could see. "It said with Darkvision Darkness looks like Dim Light - They must be explaining to me what I see or something."
The rules MUST specify such considerations we take for granted as participants (either player or DM).
Interesting. So if you are standing outside on a sunny day and you close your eyes then it becomes obvious that you are standing in darkness because everything is dark? Perception does not affect the number of photons reaching your eyes each second. Perception allows you to make the most of those photons. The perception of darkness and actual darkness are fundamentally different things - I don't see how you can possibly say that they are the same. :) ... the amount of light in the environment defines the actual lighting conditions every creature is subject to while whether you are blind, have normal vision, can see in the dark with darkvision or devils sigh. These only affects how the character perceives the surrounding lighting conditions. What is actually there and how you perceive it ARE fundamentally different in an objective reality.
Darkness, dim light and brightly lit are objective conditions, not subjective ones. How you perceive them does NOT affect what is actually there. Both darkvision and devil's sight modify how you perceive your surroundings. Neither changes the amount of light in the environment. The wording of both effects refers to the light in the environment not how you perceive it.
If how you perceive it matters ... all you need to do on a sunny day is close your eyes so that you are then in darkness and no one can see you.
PS - note it reads "X can see in Y within the radius as if it were Z" so the room is dark/dim still, but as far as the character's sight goes its dim/bright
This is indeed what they say, and this is what we've been arguing all along. It's "you can see in darkness as if in dim light", it's not "when in darkness you are treated as if in dim light". "You can see in darkness" literally says you are in darkness. If you are in darkness, Devil's Sight applies.
No, it says, "see in darkness" as in, "into" - there's nothing that says you have to be in the darkness to use the sense/effect
I'm saying, "a character with darkvision sees it as dim light" as in as far as their sight is concerned, it is effectively dim light if using Darkvision (not both Dim and Dark) - otherwise, the darkness is still darkness. Not you treat the character as if they're standing in Dim Light. They would be visible still and everything. This is why the "as if it" language is so key. It's simply to separate the character with darkvision's sight from all other effects which may be in play. This is why I'm saying if you apply Darkvision before Devil's Sight, then running off what the character sees, it would not apply to the dim light. You would have to declare (if your DM required such things, the vast majority wouldn't) you're using Devil Sight first, and then Darkvision.
Think of it this way: You're programming a software platform for the game and wanted to code the buffs - you would have to stack the effects Devil's Sight and then Darkvision, otherwise you would have conflicts - the platform would crash or the effect wouldn't work as intended. You could code Simultaneous Effects and Combining Magical Effects in to assist in organizing the stack too. That's how the Rules are supposed to work. If you plug them into a computer, all conditions would be satisfied to create the desired effect. No human brain required to mull it over and imagine one scenario where someone might see it differently.
Once again, I'm not debating whether you can use Devil's Sight and Darkvision together where you see Bright and Dark normally, and Dim Light as Bright (so full standard vision within range of the twos effects, regardless of the light level or whether its magical or not). I'm looking for the rules which say explicitly that you can. I know this post is a bit older than the others but I just saw it.
1 - except you only apply a benefit once - you can't apply darkvision to yourself twice. At most, you add the ranges together [NEXT!]
Show me the RAW. Darkvision is not a magical effect, assuming it's innate and not the result of a spell.
LOL - what a joke!
1) First of all, with your interpretation of the rule here (trying to prove a point and failing), nobody's interpretation of Darkvision works. That's your first hint. In other words, if that was true, all your versions of Darkvision interpretations are also broken. So which is it? Can players apply Darkvision over and over? You're riding the point that I said they see the darkness as dim light so you're trying to say they could just "look twice" or something and turn it into bright light. I can apply that same broken logic to your points - if they look at darkness as if it was dim light, they look again and see it as if it was bright light. Your point proves nothing! It doesn't render MY point moot if it renders all YOUR points moot too, ahahaha.
2) Secondly, there's nothing in Darkvision that grants the ability to turn Darkness into Bright Light - absolutely nothing. Since, we already established it doesn't actually remove Darkness (that way, the rest of the effects which don't have to do with their sight apply as well as leaving the darkness in tact for other characters who have no special effects). But for that character, they can see the Darkness as though it was Dim Light with Darkvision... Or they can see it as regular Darkness. One or the other. YOU have to come up w/ the rule that says you can do more - not me.
3) Next, I already gave you the rule that says only one effect can be applied at a time as far as effects go, lmao! Combining Magical Effects Different game effects can affect a target at the same time. For example, two different benefits can give you a bonus to your Armor Class. But when two or more effects have the same proper name, only one of them (the most powerful one if their benefits aren't identical) applies while the durations of the effects overlap. For example, if bless is cast of you when you're still under the effect of an earlier bless, you gain the benefit of only one casting. Similarly, if you're in the radius of more than one Aura of Protection, you benefit only from the one that grants the highest bonus.
So you only get one Darkvision benefit at a time. Darkness is only ever Dim Light. Dim Light is only ever Bright Light if using Darkvision.
Oh dear...
1) Darkvision works fine with my interpretation, since I don't use this "treats as" stuff you're adamant about. The problem's with yours, because Darkvision doesn't treat darkness as dim light. Darkvision doesn't allow you to see color in darkness, but in dim light you do see color.
2) Correct, there's nothing in Darkvision that grants the ability to turn Darkness into Bright Light. However, your interpretation suggests there is. That's my point.
3) That's the rule for magical effects. Racial Darkvision is not a magical effect.
1 - there's no problem with my interpretation and you are using the "treats stuff as" since when you apply Darkvision, your characters are seeing in Dim Light, right? They're now treating the darkness like dim light as far as their sight is concerned. Devil's Sight kicks of what they're seeing, "can see normally in darkness". Saying "The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray" actually confirms that you can't stack Devil's Sight like you proposed before (it locks you into a single application regardless of other rules) and it makes no mention of the how Dim Light looks because Bright Light sets it to normal. Magical darkness can have other effects, so they "see normally" but still are affected by anything else in specific darkness spells (beyond simple Darkness).
2 - my interpretation never once said Darkness turns into any other kind of light! But how you treat that darkness depends on certain abilities. Like Darkvision - says "can see as if not darkness" which changes the mechanics of that characters sight - they see Dim Light where everyone else sees Darkness. Others see them as though they are in Darkness but they see others in the same darkness as though Dim. This language leaves the potential for conflict. "If I'm seeing the Darkness as if it was Dim Light and reaping the benefits of that effect, how can I also say I'm seeing in Darkness which would leave me blind?" If the rule said, "Darkness no longer heavily obscures your vision; you see it in greyscale" then ok - it says "see/treat it as if it were Dim; you see the Darkness in greyscale" so again, I can just as easily say "the Character is using Seeing in Dim Light mechanics, therefore, Devil's Sight has no benefit" - there's absolutely nothing in the rules from stopping me from making that interpretation based on those rules alone. It's all there. (again, you can have both benefits, no conflicts - you just need to mention the general rule "Simultaneous Effects" if this or similar ever comes up)
3 - that's the title. read the rule - its any effect.
PS - note it reads "X can see in Y within the radius as if it were Z" so the room is dark/dim still, but as far as the character's sight goes its dim/bright
This is indeed what they say, and this is what we've been arguing all along. It's "you can see in darkness as if in dim light", it's not "when in darkness you are treated as if in dim light". "You can see in darkness" literally says you are in darkness. If you are in darkness, Devil's Sight applies.
2) No, it says, "see in darkness" as in, "into" - there's nothing that says you have to be in the darkness to use the sense/effect
I'm saying, "a character with darkvision sees it as dim light" as in as far as their sight is concerned, it is effectively dim light if using Darkvision (not both Dim and Dark) - otherwise, the darkness is still darkness. Not you treat the character as if they're standing in Dim Light. They would be visible still and everything. This is why the "as if it" language is so key. It's simply to separate the character with darkvision's sight from all other effects which may be in play. This is why I'm saying if you apply Darkvision before Devil's Sight, then running off what the character sees, it would not apply to the dim light. You would have to declare (if your DM required such things, the vast majority wouldn't) you're using Devil Sight first, and then Darkvision.
Think of it this way: You're programming a software platform for the game and wanted to code the buffs - you would have to stack the effects Devil's Sight and then Darkvision, otherwise you would have conflicts - the platform would crash or the effect wouldn't work as intended. You could code Simultaneous Effects and Combining Magical Effects in to assist in organizing the stack too. That's how the Rules are supposed to work. If you plug them into a computer, all conditions would be satisfied to create the desired effect. No human brain required to mull it over and imagine one scenario where someone might see it differently.
Once again, I'm not debating whether you can use Devil's Sight and Darkvision together where you see Bright and Dark normally, and Dim Light as Bright (so full standard vision within range of the twos effects, regardless of the light level or whether its magical or not). I'm looking for the rules which say explicitly that you can. I know this post is a bit older than the others but I just saw it.
1) There is no "treat as" in the definition of Darkvision.
Darkvision
Accustomed to twilit forests and the night sky, you have superior vision in dark and dim conditions. You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. You can’t discern color in darkness, only shades of gray.
So no, that's literally not what they do.
2) And I'm saying darkness is not effectively dim light when using Darkvision. It's still darkness. For one, because the character with Darkvision can't see color in darkness but can in dim light; they can't be effectively the same since there's a clear and meaningful difference. For another, because "as if it were" literally means "it seems like it even if it's not". And for yet another, because Darkvision doesn't create light.
"It's simply to separate the character with darkvision's sight from all other effects which may be in play" - no, it's not, because it doesn't have to do that. Darkvision and Devil's Sight don't have to be separated, they are separate to begin with and don't affect one another. Devil's Sight only working when seeing in darkness isn't affected by Darkvision, because Darkvision doesn't stop you from seeing in darkness. Seeing in darkness as if it were dim light is still, literally, absolutely, without a doubt, seeing in darkness.
Darkvision says "You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light."
It doesn't change the fact that you are still trying to see in darkness.
Therefore the devil's sight rules can still be applied.
It does change the fact because you mechanically treat it as dim light. The fact that I can just as easily say the opposite means this interpretation does not actually clarify any potential conflicts between the ruleset.
In other words, you're claiming the benefit of the darkness becoming dim light, and then ignoring that mechanic to gain the benefit of devil's sight. Bear in mind the wording of Darkvision is to ensure players essentially always get its benefit - not to straddle the line with other very clear rules. To do what you're suggesting would break down the rules for light for the remainder of your campaign - Players saying, "well teeechnically I'm in this kind of light sooo" with a wide variety of spells and abilities. I could reach as far as saying like a torch in a dark tunnel - technically you're still in the dark but you have a bubble of light within it with your interpretation.
But do not be dismayed! You can still gain the benefits of both by declaring you see w/ Devil's Sight over Darkvision if you ever had to squeeze that rule out. Again, we're just playing w/ rule phrasing and your interpretation is every bit as legit as mine - but again, the fact that I can claim the rules could be interpreted the opposite leaves us at square one.
Darkvision and Devil's Sight don't change the ambient light at all so they both interact with what the light actually is, not what you perceive it as.
Mechanically, they DO change what it "actually" is. I'm blown away by how many people seem to think the perception of darkness and actual darkness are two separate things... Being in darkness and how you perceive it are the exact same thing. HOW you perceive it is up to the individual and whether they have things like Darkvision or Devil's Sight. Seriously, think about it: they are one in the same, lmao
In other words, you're basically saying, "well it's darkness for other players so its darkness for you"
The wording of the rule is designed to avoid "group" conflicts. Otherwise, if it didn't say "treat as" or "as if it" then people could argue, under RAI, that since one person had Darkvision, everyone in the party could see. "It said with Darkvision Darkness looks like Dim Light - They must be explaining to me what I see or something."
The rules MUST specify such considerations we take for granted as participants (either player or DM).
Interesting. So if you are standing outside on a sunny day and you close your eyes then it becomes obvious that you are standing in darkness because everything is dark? Perception does not affect the number of photons reaching your eyes each second. Perception allows you to make the most of those photons. The perception of darkness and actual darkness are fundamentally different things - I don't see how you can possibly say that they are the same. :) ... the amount of light in the environment defines the actual lighting conditions every creature is subject to while whether you are blind, have normal vision, can see in the dark with darkvision or devils sigh. These only affects how the character perceives the surrounding lighting conditions. What is actually there and how you perceive it ARE fundamentally different in an objective reality.
Darkness, dim light and brightly lit are objective conditions, not subjective ones. How you perceive them does NOT affect what is actually there. Both darkvision and devil's sight modify how you perceive your surroundings. Neither changes the amount of light in the environment. The wording of both effects refers to the light in the environment not how you perceive it.
If how you perceive it matters ... all you need to do on a sunny day is close your eyes so that you are then in darkness and no one can see you.
At some point, some had said Darkness is simply the absence of light - so I pointed out Darkness is just a perception of the light level, and you could easily argue that fact based on RAW.
But focusing first on the objective light level rules - of course they determine the light level for every creature/character to utilize, regardless of whether they're blind, have darkvision, whatever. But how does Darkvision work for a Blind character? It doesn't - because they can't see - they treat even Bright Light as Heavily Obscured, which is the main mechanic of Darkness. The Blind character, who may have darkvision if they could see, sees Darkness even in Bright so that's how they respond to the games mechanics. Therefore, the character in Darkness applying Darkvision before Devil's Sight would only see Dim, just like the Blind guy only seeing Darkness.
Now RAW reflects the "perception" of light/darkness indirectly, established through other common rules, like being able to see and hear ordinarily or if you have a movement speed that you can walk. Now darkness might be objectively darkness since ordinarily or without a special rule the character's sight is heavily obscured by darkness. But (due to special effects/rules) how you see or what you see changes the function. Darkness for others might not be Darkness for you, RAW. The wording actually confirms their perception: Sight (up to and including affects on Perception checks - go figure).
You say, "If how you perceive it matters ... all you need to do on a sunny day is close your eyes so that you are then in darkness and no one can see you. Your analogy actually proves my point" when actually - you just proved mine. In spite of the fact its Bright Light/Daylight - I'm blind. Doesn't matter where I am, if I choose to close my eyes, its dark to me. One might say, "I see bright light as if it were darkness" --- This is how running Darkvision before Devil's Sight (Simultaneous Effects) works. I'm in a dark cave and use Darkvision - the Darkness is Dim Light; I cannot use Devil's Sight to see the Dim as Bright just like if I closed my eyes and tried Devil's Sight, I would see nothing. Returning to your quip, if I have Devil's Sight and close my eyes, to I see "normally"? Outside of the fact that Blind is Normal sight for closing your eyes, lol, no - I do not. Therefore you would not apply the bonus of Devil's Sight after applying the bonus for Devil's Sight - you would want to do it the other way around, under Simultaneous Effects, if it ever became a point of contention, which it really shouldn't.
I've said this time and time again within this thread - I'm not debating the functionality, that darkvision/devil's sight can't be stacked, none of that. I'm looking for specific rules you can't offer a opposite counter argument and leave it up to RAI/DM decision/flipping a coin.
We found it in this thread - OP updated yesterday: Simultaneous Effects on Page 5 on Xanathars confirms w/ specific rules that one ABSOLUTELY can reap the benefits of both darkvision and devil's sight - just if it came up, you would want to say you applied Devil's Sight first, then Darkvision (and then there's zero conflict, RAW)
1 - there's no problem with my interpretation and you are using the "treats stuff as" since when you apply Darkvision, your characters are seeing in Dim Light, right?
2 - They're now treating the darkness like dim light as far as their sight is concerned.
3 - Devil's Sight kicks of what they're seeing, "can see normally in darkness".
4 - Saying "The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray" actually confirms that you can't stack Devil's Sight like you proposed before (it locks you into a single application regardless of other rules) and it makes no mention of the how Dim Light looks because Bright Light sets it to normal.
5 - my interpretation never once said Darkness turns into any other kind of light! But how you treat that darkness depends on certain abilities. Like Darkvision - says "can see as if not darkness" which changes the mechanics of that characters sight - they see Dim Light where everyone else sees Darkness.
6 - that's the title. read the rule - its any effect.
1) Wrong. When using Darkvision and seeing in darkness, you're seeing as if in dim light. You're not seeing in dim light.
2) No, they're not - again, they can't see color which they could if it actually was dim light.
3) Devil's Sight doesn't 'kick off what they're seeing'.
Devil’s Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
It's what you're seeing in that matters, not what you're seeing.
4) I never proposed stacking anything. They are separate effects that don't affect one another. It's not one or the other, it's not one plus the other, it's simply both.
5) No, they don't see dim light. They see things as if they were in dim light, except in tones of grey rather than colour. It's not about how you 'treat darkness'; it's about how darkness affects you.
6) The title is part of the rule.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
1 - there's no problem with my interpretation and you are using the "treats stuff as" since when you apply Darkvision, your characters are seeing in Dim Light, right?
2 - They're now treating the darkness like dim light as far as their sight is concerned.
3 - Devil's Sight kicks of what they're seeing, "can see normally in darkness".
4 - Saying "The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray" actually confirms that you can't stack Devil's Sight like you proposed before (it locks you into a single application regardless of other rules) and it makes no mention of the how Dim Light looks because Bright Light sets it to normal.
5 - my interpretation never once said Darkness turns into any other kind of light! But how you treat that darkness depends on certain abilities. Like Darkvision - says "can see as if not darkness" which changes the mechanics of that characters sight - they see Dim Light where everyone else sees Darkness.
6 - that's the title. read the rule - its any effect.
1) Wrong. When using Darkvision and seeing in darkness, you're seeing as if in dim light. You're not seeing in dim light.
2) No, they're not - again, they can't see color which they could if it actually was dim light.
3) Devil's Sight doesn't 'kick off what they're seeing'.
Devil’s Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
It's what you're seeing in that matters, not what you're seeing.
4) I never proposed stacking anything. They are separate effects that don't affect one another. It's not one or the other, it's not one plus the other, it's simply both.
5) No, they don't see dim light. They see things as if they were in dim light, except in tones of grey rather than colour. It's not about how you 'treat darkness'; it's about how darkness affects you.
6) The title is part of the rule.
1 - so if you're not "seeing in Dim Light" then what does "seeing as if in Dim Light" mean?? Because to me, it seems really easy to interpret those as the same thing as far as the mechanics of the ability go. Like describe the difference between how the effect would work between those two things. You see hung up on the idea that I believe it turns Darkness into Dim Light - Yes and No - its definitely still darkness, but as far as the character's sight goes, you "see as if it were Dim Light" - that means, as far as the darkvision character's perception of sight goes, its Dim. So I ask again, if you're not "seeing in Dim Light" then what does "seeing as if in Dim Light" mean? On its own - can you explain the difference to me?
2 - ok, then what are they doing if not seeing as though it were Dim Light?? The greyscale feature is a descriptive element pulled from Dim Light, which is how the character sees. The Darkvision made the Darkness into Dim for them as far as how they see - the character using the Darkvision already used Darkvision to see Darkness as Dim in greyscale. They don't get to upgrade their vision again because they already used it to see darkness as Dim through the same ability like you're suggesting.
3 - the abilities effect is based on what they see. That Darkness is now as if it was Dim Light. And "seeing into" is only used for the Ethereal Plane - so taking what you're saying, since the Ethereal Plane is pervasive/mirror's the material realm, you could almost see it as a Light Level. Therefore, one with Darkvision cannot use it until they are in the Dim Light or Darkness, yes? To be fair, every other place "in" shows up DOES mean "IN" the area of effect, like you suggest. I actually agree with that bit, but it doesn't mean the darkness still counts as the darkness when seeing it as dim light - they are to treat if differently, according to the rules. Which is why you need something like Simultaneous Effects to put it to bed versus reframe the speech of the rule in attempts to imply a different meaning.
However! This does lay bare the fact that if a character had both, they basically can't (or at least wouldn't) use both effects since they can only be in bright light, dim light, or darkness, therefore so there's no potential for conflict as you're only ever using one effect at a time - likely the most powerful for the level of light you're in. Sure you could say you use both 'Simultaneously' but it's not like you would then consider what a room looks like dark AND dim/greyscale or dim/greyscale AND normal/bright - you just take the one, likely the most descriptive.
THUS! If all you're saying is in order to use Darkvision/Devil's Sight, you have to be in the area of effect for the given light level to even use it - then yea. Right. But everything else we discussed is moot because of the previous statements on how you would really only ever use one at a time (and almost certainly, the strongest sense for the situation - Devil's in Darkness; Darkvision in dim)
Which brings us to 4! Stacking is a way to say "using two or more ongoing effects simultaneously" and most the character's senses, special or otherwise, are therefore stacked. Many, like myself, make the assumption you're using all your sense at once, so how they play together can create some interesting dynamics to say the least. I understand you're not proposing stacking, especially given your clarification on how they have to be literally in the area of effect of the light to use either sense, but I/the OP did since a character can have both those senses at the same time. Makes sense, right? lol
5 - the rule explicitly says the see the darkness as dim light. so they see dim light (specifically while under the effect of Darkvision - be it racial/class feat or spell)
6 - right, and the rest of the rule goes on to say "different game effects" - says "game effects" which goes well beyond just magical.
But the thing is, it doesn't matter what "order" you use them. Just because you perceive Darkness as Dim Light does not mean it is no longer Darkness. Devil's Sight says "You can see normally in Darkness". It DOES NOT MATTER that you see Darkness as Dim Light because IT IS STILL DARKNESS! Devil's Sight still applies! I would even argue that Devil's Sight should allow you to see normally in Dim Light, but that is tangential at this point.
I think we can all agree that Venyxos is just trying to argue for the sake of argument now. He is almost arguing with himself as his later points are contradicting his previous points. I think at this point the OP's question has been answered and we can abandon this thread and allow Venyxos to continue arguing with himself.
Actually, I've been very clear all along - I'm seeking rules which are clear and difficult to argue against. You guys keep offering interpretations which may affect other rules and aspects of the game. Part of the reason it may seem I'm arguing against myself is because I'm actually addressing the points you all are making and trying to illustrate how that interpretation could be applied the opposite way you intended.
Likewise, I'm also addressing your points which contest my interpretations since my interpretation could just as easily be tipped up on its head. I've already found 2 amazing general rules doing this (both in Xanathar's - Combing Magical Effects and Simultaneous Effects!). In other words, as rules/legislature goes - you literally have to debate them in order to figure them out. It's the whole point of Greek Debate - render knowledge which cannot be contested, or at least has held up to scrutiny.
Hence why I picked Devil's Sight and Darkvision - aaall sorts of things are open to interpretation with potential synergies as well as conflicts. The only way to uncover them is to debate them.
Now you're going way off the handles! Closing your eyes/being blind does not apply Darkness, it applies Blinded. If you close your eyes, you are not in Darkness all of a sudden. You are conflating two very separate and different game mechanics to make a terrible argument.
Rather than follow you further down this rabbit hole of insanity, I am going to unsubscribe from this thread. You are convincing no one and making worse and worse arguments as your points are refuted. I hope our paths do not cross in any other forums. Goodbye.
-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. -A heavily obscured area--such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage--blocks vision entirely. A creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
I didn't say you're in the Darkness cuz you closed your eyes. I'm saying, in response to someone else's point, you are under the effect of Darkness when you do. Because you are. Darkness = Blinded, RAW.
1 - there's no problem with my interpretation and you are using the "treats stuff as" since when you apply Darkvision, your characters are seeing in Dim Light, right?
2 - They're now treating the darkness like dim light as far as their sight is concerned.
3 - Devil's Sight kicks of what they're seeing, "can see normally in darkness".
4 - Saying "The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray" actually confirms that you can't stack Devil's Sight like you proposed before (it locks you into a single application regardless of other rules) and it makes no mention of the how Dim Light looks because Bright Light sets it to normal.
5 - my interpretation never once said Darkness turns into any other kind of light! But how you treat that darkness depends on certain abilities. Like Darkvision - says "can see as if not darkness" which changes the mechanics of that characters sight - they see Dim Light where everyone else sees Darkness.
6 - that's the title. read the rule - its any effect.
1) Wrong. When using Darkvision and seeing in darkness, you're seeing as if in dim light. You're not seeing in dim light.
2) No, they're not - again, they can't see color which they could if it actually was dim light.
3) Devil's Sight doesn't 'kick off what they're seeing'.
Devil’s Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
It's what you're seeing in that matters, not what you're seeing.
4) I never proposed stacking anything. They are separate effects that don't affect one another. It's not one or the other, it's not one plus the other, it's simply both.
5) No, they don't see dim light. They see things as if they were in dim light, except in tones of grey rather than colour. It's not about how you 'treat darkness'; it's about how darkness affects you.
6) The title is part of the rule.
1 - so if you're not "seeing in Dim Light" then what does "seeing as if in Dim Light" mean?? Because to me, it seems really easy to interpret those as the same thing as far as the mechanics of the ability go. Like describe the difference between how the effect would work between those two things. You see hung up on the idea that I believe it turns Darkness into Dim Light - Yes and No - its definitely still darkness, but as far as the character's sight goes, you "see as if it were Dim Light" - that means, as far as the darkvision character's perception of sight goes, its Dim. So I ask again, if you're not "seeing in Dim Light" then what does "seeing as if in Dim Light" mean? On its own - can you explain the difference to me?
2 - ok, then what are they doing if not seeing as though it were Dim Light?? The greyscale feature is a descriptive element pulled from Dim Light, which is how the character sees. The Darkvision made the Darkness into Dim for them as far as how they see - the character using the Darkvision already used Darkvision to see Darkness as Dim in greyscale. They don't get to upgrade their vision again because they already used it to see darkness as Dim through the same ability like you're suggesting.
3 - the abilities effect is based on what they see. That Darkness is now as if it was Dim Light. And "seeing into" is only used for the Ethereal Plane - so taking what you're saying, since the Ethereal Plane is pervasive/mirror's the material realm, you could almost see it as a Light Level. Therefore, one with Darkvision cannot use it until they are in the Dim Light or Darkness, yes? To be fair, every other place "in" shows up DOES mean "IN" the area of effect, like you suggest. I actually agree with that bit, but it doesn't mean the darkness still counts as the darkness when seeing it as dim light - they are to treat if differently, according to the rules. Which is why you need something like Simultaneous Effects to put it to bed versus reframe the speech of the rule in attempts to imply a different meaning.
However! This does lay bare the fact that if a character had both, they're basically can't (or at least wouldn't) use both effects since they can only be in bright light, dim light, or darkness, therefore so there's no potential for conflict as you're only ever using one effect at a time - likely the most powerful for the level of light you're in. Sure you could say you use both 'Simultaneously' but it's not like you would then consider what a room looks like dark AND dim/greyscale or dim/greyscale AND normal/bright - you just take the one, likely the most descriptive.
THUS! If all you're saying is in order to use Darkvision/Devil's Sight, you have to be in the area of effect for the given light level to even use it - then yea. Right. But everything else we discussed is moot because of the previous statements on how you would really only ever use one at a time (and almost certainly, the strongest sense for the situation - Devil's in Darkness; Darkvision in dim)
Which brings us to 4! Stacking is a way to say "using two or more ongoing effects simultaneously" and most the character's sense, special or otherwise, are therefore stacked. Many, like myself, make the assumption you're using all your sense at once, so how they play together can create some interesting dynamics to say the least. I understand you're not proposing stacking, especially given your clarification on how they have to be literally in the area of effect of the light to use either sense, but I/the OP did since a character can have both those senses at the same time. Makes sense, right? lol
5 - the rule explicitly says the see the darkness as dim light. so they see dim light (specifically while under the effect of Darkvision - be it racial/class feat or spell)
6 - right, and the rest of the rule goes on to say "different game effects" - says "game effects" which goes well beyond just magical.
1) The difference is that one is actually dim light and the other is not. You're hung up on treating them as the same, but they're not. Seeing in dim light is not seeing in darkness, and seeing in darkness is not seeing in dim light. Darkvision changes how light conditions affect your vision, but that's irrelevant here. Devil's Sight doesn't depend on what you see, it depends on what you see inand only on what you see in.
2) Doesn't matter because, again, for Devil's Sight it doesn't matter what you see, only what you see in. It doesn't matter whether you see darkness or not. If a character with Devil's Sight is put in an illusion of darkness, for instance with Major Image, that character will see darkness but won't see in darkness and thus Devil's Sight won't work.
3) No. See above. The ability's effect is NOT based on what the character sees.
4) If I'm having my Wis enhanced, get temporary hit points from another character's use of Inspiring Leader, and someone is Aiding me in combat to give me advantage on my next attack, is that "stacking" effects? Most people will say it isn't, because all these effects are separate. If it was a Con boost and I was being healed instead of Aided, sure, I'd consider all those effects to be stacking in the sense that they all cumulatively would affect my hit point pool. But Devil's Sight and Darkvision aren't cumulative. They exist separate from and not affected by the other, and they don't add up to be better than each separately. They don't "stack" by any common parlance.
5) the rule, again, explicitly does NOT say that. "You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light." You can't take out that "in" without changing the meaning of the sentence.
6) The rule doesn't have to repeat "magical effects" over and over again because the title already specifies that. If the rule were meant to cover all game effects the title wouldn't be "Combining Magical Effects" and the rule more than likely wouldn't be in the spellcasting chapter.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
1 - there's no problem with my interpretation and you are using the "treats stuff as" since when you apply Darkvision, your characters are seeing in Dim Light, right?
2 - They're now treating the darkness like dim light as far as their sight is concerned.
3 - Devil's Sight kicks of what they're seeing, "can see normally in darkness".
4 - Saying "The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray" actually confirms that you can't stack Devil's Sight like you proposed before (it locks you into a single application regardless of other rules) and it makes no mention of the how Dim Light looks because Bright Light sets it to normal.
5 - my interpretation never once said Darkness turns into any other kind of light! But how you treat that darkness depends on certain abilities. Like Darkvision - says "can see as if not darkness" which changes the mechanics of that characters sight - they see Dim Light where everyone else sees Darkness.
6 - that's the title. read the rule - its any effect.
1) Wrong. When using Darkvision and seeing in darkness, you're seeing as if in dim light. You're not seeing in dim light.
2) No, they're not - again, they can't see color which they could if it actually was dim light.
3) Devil's Sight doesn't 'kick off what they're seeing'.
Devil’s Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
It's what you're seeing in that matters, not what you're seeing.
4) I never proposed stacking anything. They are separate effects that don't affect one another. It's not one or the other, it's not one plus the other, it's simply both.
5) No, they don't see dim light. They see things as if they were in dim light, except in tones of grey rather than colour. It's not about how you 'treat darkness'; it's about how darkness affects you.
6) The title is part of the rule.
Actually (and it's earlier in this thread), there's Sage Advice from ole' Jeremy Crawford which confirms they mean "see into" not "must be within" in regards to when and where you can use Darkvision/Devil's Sight.
To be clear, you do not need to be in the area of effect for the level of light to apply the rules to that area of effect.
1 - there's no problem with my interpretation and you are using the "treats stuff as" since when you apply Darkvision, your characters are seeing in Dim Light, right?
2 - They're now treating the darkness like dim light as far as their sight is concerned.
3 - Devil's Sight kicks of what they're seeing, "can see normally in darkness".
4 - Saying "The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray" actually confirms that you can't stack Devil's Sight like you proposed before (it locks you into a single application regardless of other rules) and it makes no mention of the how Dim Light looks because Bright Light sets it to normal.
5 - my interpretation never once said Darkness turns into any other kind of light! But how you treat that darkness depends on certain abilities. Like Darkvision - says "can see as if not darkness" which changes the mechanics of that characters sight - they see Dim Light where everyone else sees Darkness.
6 - that's the title. read the rule - its any effect.
1) Wrong. When using Darkvision and seeing in darkness, you're seeing as if in dim light. You're not seeing in dim light.
2) No, they're not - again, they can't see color which they could if it actually was dim light.
3) Devil's Sight doesn't 'kick off what they're seeing'.
Devil’s Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
It's what you're seeing in that matters, not what you're seeing.
4) I never proposed stacking anything. They are separate effects that don't affect one another. It's not one or the other, it's not one plus the other, it's simply both.
5) No, they don't see dim light. They see things as if they were in dim light, except in tones of grey rather than colour. It's not about how you 'treat darkness'; it's about how darkness affects you.
6) The title is part of the rule.
Actually (and it's earlier in this thread), there's Sage Advice from ole' Jeremy Crawford which confirms they mean "see into" not "must be within" in regards to when and where you can use Darkvision/Devil's Sight.
Which still isn't the same as "see". Try again.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
1 - there's no problem with my interpretation and you are using the "treats stuff as" since when you apply Darkvision, your characters are seeing in Dim Light, right?
2 - They're now treating the darkness like dim light as far as their sight is concerned.
3 - Devil's Sight kicks of what they're seeing, "can see normally in darkness".
4 - Saying "The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray" actually confirms that you can't stack Devil's Sight like you proposed before (it locks you into a single application regardless of other rules) and it makes no mention of the how Dim Light looks because Bright Light sets it to normal.
5 - my interpretation never once said Darkness turns into any other kind of light! But how you treat that darkness depends on certain abilities. Like Darkvision - says "can see as if not darkness" which changes the mechanics of that characters sight - they see Dim Light where everyone else sees Darkness.
6 - that's the title. read the rule - its any effect.
1) Wrong. When using Darkvision and seeing in darkness, you're seeing as if in dim light. You're not seeing in dim light.
2) No, they're not - again, they can't see color which they could if it actually was dim light.
3) Devil's Sight doesn't 'kick off what they're seeing'.
Devil’s Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
It's what you're seeing in that matters, not what you're seeing.
4) I never proposed stacking anything. They are separate effects that don't affect one another. It's not one or the other, it's not one plus the other, it's simply both.
5) No, they don't see dim light. They see things as if they were in dim light, except in tones of grey rather than colour. It's not about how you 'treat darkness'; it's about how darkness affects you.
6) The title is part of the rule.
Actually (and it's earlier in this thread), there's Sage Advice from ole' Jeremy Crawford which confirms they mean "see into" not "must be within" in regards to when and where you can use Darkvision/Devil's Sight.
Which still isn't the same as "see". Try again.
No, but the actual rule explicitly says so: Darkvision (sense): A monster with darkvision can see in the dark within a specific radius. The monster can see in dim light within the radius as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray. Many creatures that live underground have this special sense. Devil's Sight (Warlock Eldritch Invocation): You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet. Devil's Sight (Monster Manual - various devils): Magical darkness doesn't impede the [monster]'s darkvision.
And like we've said elsewhere, - "can" opens the rules up to easily avoid any potential conflict of language - and Simultaneous Effects puts a nail in it.
Now, we can debate the status of Darkness all day - but we have to ask ourselves "how does it impact the game?" - most of what you're presenting doesn't answer the question presented by the OP and wouldn't have any impact on play. Now bear in mind, most of what's been presented throughout this thread (including my comments and/or the possible conflicts I've pointed out!) would never apply/come up in a live session. Its a thought experiment - no reason to get frustrated.
I actually agree with every point you've made but I'm looking for things that are difficult to argue. Whereas, for the most part, I hardly have to think to come up with a rebuttal most of the time within this thread - just flip what you said with respect to General Rules. You'd have to have a VERY conservative DM (conservative as in one who follows the rules to the letter; will not entertain any interpretation not explicitly written within the rule whereas liberal is the opposite and embrace/are open to different interpretations - not talking politics here) for any of this to actually be an issue during play.
1 - there's no problem with my interpretation and you are using the "treats stuff as" since when you apply Darkvision, your characters are seeing in Dim Light, right?
2 - They're now treating the darkness like dim light as far as their sight is concerned.
3 - Devil's Sight kicks of what they're seeing, "can see normally in darkness".
4 - Saying "The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray" actually confirms that you can't stack Devil's Sight like you proposed before (it locks you into a single application regardless of other rules) and it makes no mention of the how Dim Light looks because Bright Light sets it to normal.
5 - my interpretation never once said Darkness turns into any other kind of light! But how you treat that darkness depends on certain abilities. Like Darkvision - says "can see as if not darkness" which changes the mechanics of that characters sight - they see Dim Light where everyone else sees Darkness.
6 - that's the title. read the rule - its any effect.
1) Wrong. When using Darkvision and seeing in darkness, you're seeing as if in dim light. You're not seeing in dim light.
2) No, they're not - again, they can't see color which they could if it actually was dim light.
3) Devil's Sight doesn't 'kick off what they're seeing'.
Devil’s Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
It's what you're seeing in that matters, not what you're seeing.
4) I never proposed stacking anything. They are separate effects that don't affect one another. It's not one or the other, it's not one plus the other, it's simply both.
5) No, they don't see dim light. They see things as if they were in dim light, except in tones of grey rather than colour. It's not about how you 'treat darkness'; it's about how darkness affects you.
6) The title is part of the rule.
Actually (and it's earlier in this thread), there's Sage Advice from ole' Jeremy Crawford which confirms they mean "see into" not "must be within" in regards to when and where you can use Darkvision/Devil's Sight.
Which still isn't the same as "see". Try again.
No, but the actual rule explicitly says so: Darkvision (sense): A monster with darkvision can see in the dark within a specific radius. The monster can see in dim light within the radius as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray. Many creatures that live underground have this special sense. Devil's Sight (Warlock Eldritch Invocation): You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet. Devil's Sight (Monster Manual - various devils): Magical darkness doesn't impede the [monster]'s darkvision.
And like we've said elsewhere, - "can" opens the rules up to easily avoid any potential conflict of language - and Simultaneous Effects puts a nail in it.
Now, we can debate the status of Darkness all day - but we have to ask ourselves "how does it impact the game?" - most of what you're presenting doesn't answer the question presented by the OP and wouldn't have any impact on play. Now bear in mind, most of what's been presented throughout this thread (including my comments and/or the possible conflicts I've pointed out!) would never apply/come up in a live session. Its a thought experiment - no reason to get frustrated.
I actually agree with every point you've made but I'm looking for things that are difficult to argue. Whereas, for the most part, I hardly have to think to come up with a rebuttal most of the time within this thread - just flip what you said with respect to General Rules. You'd have to have a VERY conservative DM (conservative as in one who follows the rules to the letter; will not entertain any interpretation not explicitly written within the rule whereas liberal is the opposite and embrace/are open to different interpretations - not talking politics here) for any of this to actually be an issue during play.
You're still ignoring the point. "See in darkness" rather than "see darkness" is a meaningful difference. It indicates that it doesn't matter what you see - darkness, dim light, bright light, heat vision, echolocation, fireworks and rainbows, whatever - but only what you see in. And what you see in has nothing to do with your perception. It can't be changed by how you see it. It just is what it is. "As if it were" applies only to your perception, not to reality, and only reality determines whether you can use Devil's Sight - not perception.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
1 - there's no problem with my interpretation and you are using the "treats stuff as" since when you apply Darkvision, your characters are seeing in Dim Light, right?
2 - They're now treating the darkness like dim light as far as their sight is concerned.
3 - Devil's Sight kicks of what they're seeing, "can see normally in darkness".
4 - Saying "The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray" actually confirms that you can't stack Devil's Sight like you proposed before (it locks you into a single application regardless of other rules) and it makes no mention of the how Dim Light looks because Bright Light sets it to normal.
5 - my interpretation never once said Darkness turns into any other kind of light! But how you treat that darkness depends on certain abilities. Like Darkvision - says "can see as if not darkness" which changes the mechanics of that characters sight - they see Dim Light where everyone else sees Darkness.
6 - that's the title. read the rule - its any effect.
1) Wrong. When using Darkvision and seeing in darkness, you're seeing as if in dim light. You're not seeing in dim light.
2) No, they're not - again, they can't see color which they could if it actually was dim light.
3) Devil's Sight doesn't 'kick off what they're seeing'.
Devil’s Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
It's what you're seeing in that matters, not what you're seeing.
4) I never proposed stacking anything. They are separate effects that don't affect one another. It's not one or the other, it's not one plus the other, it's simply both.
5) No, they don't see dim light. They see things as if they were in dim light, except in tones of grey rather than colour. It's not about how you 'treat darkness'; it's about how darkness affects you.
6) The title is part of the rule.
Actually (and it's earlier in this thread), there's Sage Advice from ole' Jeremy Crawford which confirms they mean "see into" not "must be within" in regards to when and where you can use Darkvision/Devil's Sight.
Which still isn't the same as "see". Try again.
No, but the actual rule explicitly says so: Darkvision (sense): A monster with darkvision can see in the dark within a specific radius. The monster can see in dim light within the radius as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray. Many creatures that live underground have this special sense. Devil's Sight (Warlock Eldritch Invocation): You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet. Devil's Sight (Monster Manual - various devils): Magical darkness doesn't impede the [monster]'s darkvision.
And like we've said elsewhere, - "can" opens the rules up to easily avoid any potential conflict of language - and Simultaneous Effects puts a nail in it.
Now, we can debate the status of Darkness all day - but we have to ask ourselves "how does it impact the game?" - most of what you're presenting doesn't answer the question presented by the OP and wouldn't have any impact on play. Now bear in mind, most of what's been presented throughout this thread (including my comments and/or the possible conflicts I've pointed out!) would never apply/come up in a live session. Its a thought experiment - no reason to get frustrated.
I actually agree with every point you've made but I'm looking for things that are difficult to argue. Whereas, for the most part, I hardly have to think to come up with a rebuttal most of the time within this thread - just flip what you said with respect to General Rules. You'd have to have a VERY conservative DM (conservative as in one who follows the rules to the letter; will not entertain any interpretation not explicitly written within the rule whereas liberal is the opposite and embrace/are open to different interpretations - not talking politics here) for any of this to actually be an issue during play.
You're still ignoring the point. "See in darkness" rather than "see darkness" is a meaningful difference. It indicates that it doesn't matter what you see - darkness, dim light, bright light, heat vision, echolocation, fireworks and rainbows, whatever - but only what you see in. And what you see in has nothing to do with your perception. It can't be changed by how you see it. It just is what it is. "As if it were" applies only to your perception, not to reality, and only reality determines whether you can use Devil's Sight - not perception.
I'm not ignoring anything - check yourself. "See in darkness" and "see darkness" is a meaningful difference. However, what I'm saying is if it says, "Sees Darkness as if its Dim Light (in greyscale)" then that means darkness, as far as your character's sight/seeing is concerned, is as if its Dim Light (even tho yes, it is still "Darkness" regardless of how that particular character sees it - you typically have more than one character in a game so the rule literally MUST say in some way how it effects the light levels for that specific character separately from all the others. So yes, the darkness is still darkness. But Darkvision says "as if it were Dim Light" - Devil's Sight says 100% independently "see in darkness normally" which works for the rule. But you're ignoring that when you combine the rules or go to apply both or apply one over the other that Darkness is as if it were Dim Light due to Darkvision for the character's sense of sight.
The "In Darkness" could be said to only imply "trying to see in the area of effect of Darkness" or it could imply what you're saying, "In darkness means you just do a check for darkness and if it present, you can apply it" - either interpretation is valid by the language, hence why we would need another rule to truly clarify which is which. You're not wrong, but neither am I, so how to proceed? We can fudge the rule by trying to infer different meanings from things which are, in practice, supposed to be specific and limited meaning OR find something that takes rule language as is and makes it abundantly clear how you should go about it.
And the good news is it exists! And says you're right! It just have a completely different rationale as to why. The more rationale's you have pointing to the same thing, the stronger your RAW/RAI (either) becomes. So its not even that "I'm right, you're wrong" or vice versa - but what RULE ends our debate. You and I together out-right prove that simply looking at the two rules by themselves can only lead to RAI decisions; not a confirmed RAW. Yes, we are debating how/why/whatever the Rules As Written mean what they mean, but those are all 100% Rules as Interpreted aka subjective opinions over objective procedures.
To wrap OUR points up, RAW: Devil's Sight, Darkvision, Light Level Rules (including Heavily Obscured/Blinded), Simultaneous Effects, and I would say most importantly, the inclusion of "Can" - You can definitely use Devil's Sight to see in Darkness normally as well as see Dim Light as if it were Bright if Devil's Sight applied first according to the rules already mention, RAW, and Simultaneous Effects. OR you could almost certainly use the word "can" to cherry pick applications/benefits however, consider this for sake of silly example: in an attack action, you shoot scorching ray at more than 1 target. At least one target is standing in Darkness, and at least one in Dim - do you shoot one ray under Darkvision, and another as Devil Sight? What's stopping your DM from saying "ok, which sense are you using for your attack?" We've kind of already pigeon-holed the "can" inclusion into picking one or the other depending on the circumstances but even ignoring that, when you go to say "both" then they can ask which order they apply in or even contest you're doing both. Simultaneous Effects clears the debate. Player can use both. Player can pick, if need be (although, w/ the example of Darkvision w/ Devil's Sight, I think just about everyone would just let it fly, full benefits, no conflict, without really considering the mechanics and its RAW - good to go in League play regardless of who your DM/ref is).
Otherwise, spells which create conditions of all kinds would lose traction if RAI carried RAW. Say hypothetically, you had a spell which makes it "as if you were" poisoned - does that mean you can use Cure Poison on it or that you can? Of course it means you can, even if the effect isn't a source wouldn't ordinarily be considered a poison - it says to respond to it as if it were a poison (we'll call this hypothetical "as if you were poisoned" condition "a hangover" hehe). Your character can, and if they're being honest, should say, "I'm not/wasn't poisoned" even if that's the mechanical condition and resulting procedures creating the effect. They can not suddenly pretend they're not poisoned to avoid disadvantage on an ability check, could they? Likewise, I'm saying you shouldn't be able to take Darkness you're perceiving/seeing as if it were Dim Light and turn around and treat it as though that's not what you're seeing.
I totally understand you're saying "its just darkness so the rule simply kicks off that, regardless of what other rules may be in play/effect" - sure. But if someone is trying to be difficult, where's the rule to stick them on it? I would say, apply both effects w/ respect to simultaneous effects and let them dig thru the rulebook if they still disagree (at this point, I think they would have to agree with you and I that one can absolutely have their cake and eat it too when it comes to Devil's Sight paired w/ Darkvision (its not a cheap skill set - it should be powerful - so where's the language that 100% no ifs, ands, or buts confirms that?) Simply saying "I'm using Devil's Sight and then Darkvision simultaneously to get aaall the benefits and none of the conflicts, it would be extremely hard to contest, would it not? You technically "can" use both together - the rules don't say you can't. So badda-bing-badda-boom.
And this stuff may seem silly and trivial, but here's a scenario I recently encountered in an actual game: Can a familiar hold an object (assuming its light enough) while you cast a ritual through it? (I was trying to use Identify without touching the object of course) I would say yes but my DM said no. Rules seem pretty clear, but because there's nothing that says you can cast a ritual through the familiar, they said no. Having the wherewithal to say, "But DM! it doesn't say I can't either and all other conditions are clearly satisfied" is what prompts me to seek a stronger understanding of the rules as a collection, vs one off examples and scenarios that can be easy to write off without fully considering the implications.
Take a look at my OP (and earlier editions if you feel so inclined) - I offer your scenarios as a possibility right from the get go as an obvious interpretation of the rules and follow it up w/ highly technical arguments (which I've seen people make online and in real life) which one might challenge the common interpretation with. I may not have highlighted all the nuances you did, but I'm not saying that one "cannot" use the benefits together for a sum greater than the parts either. I think its very obvious that's what was intended. But RAW rules supreme, hence my hunt for additional rules with this thread so a DM can't fudge my strategies (like casting a ritual thru a familiar, lol) into irrelevancy as well as allowing me to run a more fair game if/when I DM.
I'm not ignoring anything - check yourself. "See in darkness" and "see darkness" is a meaningful difference. However, what I'm saying is if it says, "Sees Darkness as if its Dim Light (in greyscale)"
Let me check this right here. It does not say "Sees Darkness as if its Dim Light (in greyscale)". It says "The monster can see in dim light within the radius as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light." If you agree that "see in darkness" and "see darkness" is a meaningful difference, then please stop arguing like it isn't and use the actual text of the ability, to the letter.
you typically have more than one character in a game so the rule literally MUST say in some way how it effects the light levels for that specific character separately from all the others.
No, it doesn't. Nothing in the rule would otherwise say or imply that one character's perception changes another character's perception (never mind that it would change that other character's reality).
But Darkvision says "as if it were Dim Light" - Devil's Sight says 100% independently "see in darkness normally" which works for the rule. But you're ignoring that when you combine the rules or go to apply both or apply one over the other that Darkness is as if it were Dim Light due to Darkvision for the character's sense of sight.
Darkvision says you can see in darkness as if it were dim light. It doesn't say darkness becomes dim light. It doesn't say darkness gets treated as dim light. It doesn't say it creates dim light. It doesn't say you see the darkness as dim light. What it says is that it changes how you see things when certain conditions are met. Again, for the umptieth time, it doesn't change those conditions. As such, it doesn't change anything about darkness being darkness and thus can't change anything about darkness relevant to other mechanics.
Take a look at my OP (and earlier editions if you feel so inclined) - I offer your scenarios as a possibility right from the get go as an obvious interpretation of the rules and follow it up w/ highly technical arguments (which I've seen people make online and in real life) which one might challenge the common interpretation with. I may not have highlighted all the nuances you did, but I'm not saying that one "cannot" use the benefits together for a sum greater than the parts either. I think its very obvious that's what was intended. But RAW rules supreme, hence my hunt for additional rules with this thread so a DM can't fudge my strategies (like casting a ritual thru a familiar, lol) into irrelevancy as well as allowing me to run a more fair game if/when I DM.
I'm just going to wrap up everything else from your earlier post together with this one: none of the scenarios you offer as a possibility are actually possible under the rules. They're just not. That's what makes all this arguing pointless. None of the premisses you offer stand up to correctly reading the rules exactly as written.
And this stuff may seem silly and trivial, but here's a scenario I recently encountered in an actual game: Can a familiar hold an object (assuming its light enough) while you cast a ritual through it? (I was trying to use Identify without touching the object of course) I would say yes but my DM said no. Rules seem pretty clear, but because there's nothing that says you can cast a ritual through the familiar, they said no. Having the wherewithal to say, "But DM! it doesn't say I can't either and all other conditions are clearly satisfied" is what prompts me to seek a stronger understanding of the rules as a collection, vs one off examples and scenarios that can be easy to write off without fully considering the implications.
In this case your DM was wrong°, but not because "it doesn't say I can't either". That's never an argument. The Fireball spell doesn't say I can't use it to summon a pink water buffalo to carry my dirty laundry for me either, and that really does mean I can't. A mechanic has to say you can do something with it for you to be able to do that something with it.
° wrong only in the sense of applying the rules as written. Intent is something else. Identify's intent may be to require touching the object yourself for a minute, rather than having the spell delivered through your familiar. And regardless, the DM has final say.
"As if it cast it itself" literally means "it's like it cast it itself, but it didn't". Your familiar doesn't cast your spell for you. It delivers a touch spell that you cast as if it had cast it, that's all.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Interesting. So if you are standing outside on a sunny day and you close your eyes then it becomes obvious that you are standing in darkness because everything is dark? Perception does not affect the number of photons reaching your eyes each second. Perception allows you to make the most of those photons. The perception of darkness and actual darkness are fundamentally different things - I don't see how you can possibly say that they are the same. :) ... the amount of light in the environment defines the actual lighting conditions every creature is subject to while whether you are blind, have normal vision, can see in the dark with darkvision or devils sigh. These only affects how the character perceives the surrounding lighting conditions. What is actually there and how you perceive it ARE fundamentally different in an objective reality.
Darkness, dim light and brightly lit are objective conditions, not subjective ones. How you perceive them does NOT affect what is actually there. Both darkvision and devil's sight modify how you perceive your surroundings. Neither changes the amount of light in the environment. The wording of both effects refers to the light in the environment not how you perceive it.
If how you perceive it matters ... all you need to do on a sunny day is close your eyes so that you are then in darkness and no one can see you.
the rules literally say they do... you quote them all over.
No, it says, "see in darkness" as in, "into" - there's nothing that says you have to be in the darkness to use the sense/effect
I'm saying, "a character with darkvision sees it as dim light" as in as far as their sight is concerned, it is effectively dim light if using Darkvision (not both Dim and Dark) - otherwise, the darkness is still darkness. Not you treat the character as if they're standing in Dim Light. They would be visible still and everything. This is why the "as if it" language is so key. It's simply to separate the character with darkvision's sight from all other effects which may be in play. This is why I'm saying if you apply Darkvision before Devil's Sight, then running off what the character sees, it would not apply to the dim light. You would have to declare (if your DM required such things, the vast majority wouldn't) you're using Devil Sight first, and then Darkvision.
Think of it this way: You're programming a software platform for the game and wanted to code the buffs - you would have to stack the effects Devil's Sight and then Darkvision, otherwise you would have conflicts - the platform would crash or the effect wouldn't work as intended. You could code Simultaneous Effects and Combining Magical Effects in to assist in organizing the stack too. That's how the Rules are supposed to work. If you plug them into a computer, all conditions would be satisfied to create the desired effect. No human brain required to mull it over and imagine one scenario where someone might see it differently.
Once again, I'm not debating whether you can use Devil's Sight and Darkvision together where you see Bright and Dark normally, and Dim Light as Bright (so full standard vision within range of the twos effects, regardless of the light level or whether its magical or not). I'm looking for the rules which say explicitly that you can. I know this post is a bit older than the others but I just saw it.
1 - there's no problem with my interpretation and you are using the "treats stuff as" since when you apply Darkvision, your characters are seeing in Dim Light, right? They're now treating the darkness like dim light as far as their sight is concerned. Devil's Sight kicks of what they're seeing, "can see normally in darkness". Saying "The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray" actually confirms that you can't stack Devil's Sight like you proposed before (it locks you into a single application regardless of other rules) and it makes no mention of the how Dim Light looks because Bright Light sets it to normal. Magical darkness can have other effects, so they "see normally" but still are affected by anything else in specific darkness spells (beyond simple Darkness).
2 - my interpretation never once said Darkness turns into any other kind of light! But how you treat that darkness depends on certain abilities. Like Darkvision - says "can see as if not darkness" which changes the mechanics of that characters sight - they see Dim Light where everyone else sees Darkness. Others see them as though they are in Darkness but they see others in the same darkness as though Dim. This language leaves the potential for conflict. "If I'm seeing the Darkness as if it was Dim Light and reaping the benefits of that effect, how can I also say I'm seeing in Darkness which would leave me blind?" If the rule said, "Darkness no longer heavily obscures your vision; you see it in greyscale" then ok - it says "see/treat it as if it were Dim; you see the Darkness in greyscale" so again, I can just as easily say "the Character is using Seeing in Dim Light mechanics, therefore, Devil's Sight has no benefit" - there's absolutely nothing in the rules from stopping me from making that interpretation based on those rules alone. It's all there. (again, you can have both benefits, no conflicts - you just need to mention the general rule "Simultaneous Effects" if this or similar ever comes up)
3 - that's the title. read the rule - its any effect.
1) There is no "treat as" in the definition of Darkvision.
Darkvision
Accustomed to twilit forests and the night sky, you have superior vision in dark and dim conditions. You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. You can’t discern color in darkness, only shades of gray.
So no, that's literally not what they do.
2) And I'm saying darkness is not effectively dim light when using Darkvision. It's still darkness. For one, because the character with Darkvision can't see color in darkness but can in dim light; they can't be effectively the same since there's a clear and meaningful difference. For another, because "as if it were" literally means "it seems like it even if it's not". And for yet another, because Darkvision doesn't create light.
"It's simply to separate the character with darkvision's sight from all other effects which may be in play" - no, it's not, because it doesn't have to do that. Darkvision and Devil's Sight don't have to be separated, they are separate to begin with and don't affect one another. Devil's Sight only working when seeing in darkness isn't affected by Darkvision, because Darkvision doesn't stop you from seeing in darkness. Seeing in darkness as if it were dim light is still, literally, absolutely, without a doubt, seeing in darkness.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
At some point, some had said Darkness is simply the absence of light - so I pointed out Darkness is just a perception of the light level, and you could easily argue that fact based on RAW.
But focusing first on the objective light level rules - of course they determine the light level for every creature/character to utilize, regardless of whether they're blind, have darkvision, whatever. But how does Darkvision work for a Blind character? It doesn't - because they can't see - they treat even Bright Light as Heavily Obscured, which is the main mechanic of Darkness. The Blind character, who may have darkvision if they could see, sees Darkness even in Bright so that's how they respond to the games mechanics. Therefore, the character in Darkness applying Darkvision before Devil's Sight would only see Dim, just like the Blind guy only seeing Darkness.
Now RAW reflects the "perception" of light/darkness indirectly, established through other common rules, like being able to see and hear ordinarily or if you have a movement speed that you can walk. Now darkness might be objectively darkness since ordinarily or without a special rule the character's sight is heavily obscured by darkness. But (due to special effects/rules) how you see or what you see changes the function. Darkness for others might not be Darkness for you, RAW. The wording actually confirms their perception: Sight (up to and including affects on Perception checks - go figure).
You say, "If how you perceive it matters ... all you need to do on a sunny day is close your eyes so that you are then in darkness and no one can see you. Your analogy actually proves my point" when actually - you just proved mine. In spite of the fact its Bright Light/Daylight - I'm blind. Doesn't matter where I am, if I choose to close my eyes, its dark to me. One might say, "I see bright light as if it were darkness" --- This is how running Darkvision before Devil's Sight (Simultaneous Effects) works. I'm in a dark cave and use Darkvision - the Darkness is Dim Light; I cannot use Devil's Sight to see the Dim as Bright just like if I closed my eyes and tried Devil's Sight, I would see nothing. Returning to your quip, if I have Devil's Sight and close my eyes, to I see "normally"? Outside of the fact that Blind is Normal sight for closing your eyes, lol, no - I do not. Therefore you would not apply the bonus of Devil's Sight after applying the bonus for Devil's Sight - you would want to do it the other way around, under Simultaneous Effects, if it ever became a point of contention, which it really shouldn't.
I've said this time and time again within this thread - I'm not debating the functionality, that darkvision/devil's sight can't be stacked, none of that. I'm looking for specific rules you can't offer a opposite counter argument and leave it up to RAI/DM decision/flipping a coin.
We found it in this thread - OP updated yesterday: Simultaneous Effects on Page 5 on Xanathars confirms w/ specific rules that one ABSOLUTELY can reap the benefits of both darkvision and devil's sight - just if it came up, you would want to say you applied Devil's Sight first, then Darkvision (and then there's zero conflict, RAW)
1) Wrong. When using Darkvision and seeing in darkness, you're seeing as if in dim light. You're not seeing in dim light.
2) No, they're not - again, they can't see color which they could if it actually was dim light.
3) Devil's Sight doesn't 'kick off what they're seeing'.
Devil’s Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
It's what you're seeing in that matters, not what you're seeing.
4) I never proposed stacking anything. They are separate effects that don't affect one another. It's not one or the other, it's not one plus the other, it's simply both.
5) No, they don't see dim light. They see things as if they were in dim light, except in tones of grey rather than colour. It's not about how you 'treat darkness'; it's about how darkness affects you.
6) The title is part of the rule.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
A reminder that if you can't post in a civil and respectful manner, you should not post at all. Be nice, or be quiet.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
1 - so if you're not "seeing in Dim Light" then what does "seeing as if in Dim Light" mean?? Because to me, it seems really easy to interpret those as the same thing as far as the mechanics of the ability go. Like describe the difference between how the effect would work between those two things. You see hung up on the idea that I believe it turns Darkness into Dim Light - Yes and No - its definitely still darkness, but as far as the character's sight goes, you "see as if it were Dim Light" - that means, as far as the darkvision character's perception of sight goes, its Dim. So I ask again, if you're not "seeing in Dim Light" then what does "seeing as if in Dim Light" mean? On its own - can you explain the difference to me?
2 - ok, then what are they doing if not seeing as though it were Dim Light?? The greyscale feature is a descriptive element pulled from Dim Light, which is how the character sees. The Darkvision made the Darkness into Dim for them as far as how they see - the character using the Darkvision already used Darkvision to see Darkness as Dim in greyscale. They don't get to upgrade their vision again because they already used it to see darkness as Dim through the same ability like you're suggesting.
3 - the abilities effect is based on what they see. That Darkness is now as if it was Dim Light. And "seeing into" is only used for the Ethereal Plane - so taking what you're saying, since the Ethereal Plane is pervasive/mirror's the material realm, you could almost see it as a Light Level. Therefore, one with Darkvision cannot use it until they are in the Dim Light or Darkness, yes? To be fair, every other place "in" shows up DOES mean "IN" the area of effect, like you suggest. I actually agree with that bit, but it doesn't mean the darkness still counts as the darkness when seeing it as dim light - they are to treat if differently, according to the rules. Which is why you need something like Simultaneous Effects to put it to bed versus reframe the speech of the rule in attempts to imply a different meaning.
However! This does lay bare the fact that if a character had both, they basically can't (or at least wouldn't) use both effects since they can only be in bright light, dim light, or darkness, therefore so there's no potential for conflict as you're only ever using one effect at a time - likely the most powerful for the level of light you're in. Sure you could say you use both 'Simultaneously' but it's not like you would then consider what a room looks like dark AND dim/greyscale or dim/greyscale AND normal/bright - you just take the one, likely the most descriptive.
THUS! If all you're saying is in order to use Darkvision/Devil's Sight, you have to be in the area of effect for the given light level to even use it - then yea. Right. But everything else we discussed is moot because of the previous statements on how you would really only ever use one at a time (and almost certainly, the strongest sense for the situation - Devil's in Darkness; Darkvision in dim)
Which brings us to 4! Stacking is a way to say "using two or more ongoing effects simultaneously" and most the character's senses, special or otherwise, are therefore stacked. Many, like myself, make the assumption you're using all your sense at once, so how they play together can create some interesting dynamics to say the least. I understand you're not proposing stacking, especially given your clarification on how they have to be literally in the area of effect of the light to use either sense, but I/the OP did since a character can have both those senses at the same time. Makes sense, right? lol
5 - the rule explicitly says the see the darkness as dim light. so they see dim light (specifically while under the effect of Darkvision - be it racial/class feat or spell)
6 - right, and the rest of the rule goes on to say "different game effects" - says "game effects" which goes well beyond just magical.
Actually, I've been very clear all along - I'm seeking rules which are clear and difficult to argue against. You guys keep offering interpretations which may affect other rules and aspects of the game. Part of the reason it may seem I'm arguing against myself is because I'm actually addressing the points you all are making and trying to illustrate how that interpretation could be applied the opposite way you intended.
Likewise, I'm also addressing your points which contest my interpretations since my interpretation could just as easily be tipped up on its head. I've already found 2 amazing general rules doing this (both in Xanathar's - Combing Magical Effects and Simultaneous Effects!). In other words, as rules/legislature goes - you literally have to debate them in order to figure them out. It's the whole point of Greek Debate - render knowledge which cannot be contested, or at least has held up to scrutiny.
Hence why I picked Devil's Sight and Darkvision - aaall sorts of things are open to interpretation with potential synergies as well as conflicts. The only way to uncover them is to debate them.
-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.
-A heavily obscured area--such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage--blocks vision entirely. A creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
I didn't say you're in the Darkness cuz you closed your eyes. I'm saying, in response to someone else's point, you are under the effect of Darkness when you do. Because you are. Darkness = Blinded, RAW.
The rest isn't worth addressing...
1) The difference is that one is actually dim light and the other is not. You're hung up on treating them as the same, but they're not. Seeing in dim light is not seeing in darkness, and seeing in darkness is not seeing in dim light. Darkvision changes how light conditions affect your vision, but that's irrelevant here. Devil's Sight doesn't depend on what you see, it depends on what you see in and only on what you see in.
2) Doesn't matter because, again, for Devil's Sight it doesn't matter what you see, only what you see in. It doesn't matter whether you see darkness or not. If a character with Devil's Sight is put in an illusion of darkness, for instance with Major Image, that character will see darkness but won't see in darkness and thus Devil's Sight won't work.
3) No. See above. The ability's effect is NOT based on what the character sees.
4) If I'm having my Wis enhanced, get temporary hit points from another character's use of Inspiring Leader, and someone is Aiding me in combat to give me advantage on my next attack, is that "stacking" effects? Most people will say it isn't, because all these effects are separate. If it was a Con boost and I was being healed instead of Aided, sure, I'd consider all those effects to be stacking in the sense that they all cumulatively would affect my hit point pool. But Devil's Sight and Darkvision aren't cumulative. They exist separate from and not affected by the other, and they don't add up to be better than each separately. They don't "stack" by any common parlance.
5) the rule, again, explicitly does NOT say that. "You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light." You can't take out that "in" without changing the meaning of the sentence.
6) The rule doesn't have to repeat "magical effects" over and over again because the title already specifies that. If the rule were meant to cover all game effects the title wouldn't be "Combining Magical Effects" and the rule more than likely wouldn't be in the spellcasting chapter.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Actually (and it's earlier in this thread), there's Sage Advice from ole' Jeremy Crawford which confirms they mean "see into" not "must be within" in regards to when and where you can use Darkvision/Devil's Sight.
To be clear, you do not need to be in the area of effect for the level of light to apply the rules to that area of effect.
Which still isn't the same as "see". Try again.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
No, but the actual rule explicitly says so:
Darkvision (sense): A monster with darkvision can see in the dark within a specific radius. The monster can see in dim light within the radius as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. The monster can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray. Many creatures that live underground have this special sense.
Devil's Sight (Warlock Eldritch Invocation): You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
Devil's Sight (Monster Manual - various devils): Magical darkness doesn't impede the [monster]'s darkvision.
And like we've said elsewhere,
- "can" opens the rules up to easily avoid any potential conflict of language
- and Simultaneous Effects puts a nail in it.
Now, we can debate the status of Darkness all day - but we have to ask ourselves "how does it impact the game?" - most of what you're presenting doesn't answer the question presented by the OP and wouldn't have any impact on play. Now bear in mind, most of what's been presented throughout this thread (including my comments and/or the possible conflicts I've pointed out!) would never apply/come up in a live session. Its a thought experiment - no reason to get frustrated.
I actually agree with every point you've made but I'm looking for things that are difficult to argue. Whereas, for the most part, I hardly have to think to come up with a rebuttal most of the time within this thread - just flip what you said with respect to General Rules. You'd have to have a VERY conservative DM (conservative as in one who follows the rules to the letter; will not entertain any interpretation not explicitly written within the rule whereas liberal is the opposite and embrace/are open to different interpretations - not talking politics here) for any of this to actually be an issue during play.
yaaay thought experiments...!
🥳🥺🥳
You're still ignoring the point. "See in darkness" rather than "see darkness" is a meaningful difference. It indicates that it doesn't matter what you see - darkness, dim light, bright light, heat vision, echolocation, fireworks and rainbows, whatever - but only what you see in. And what you see in has nothing to do with your perception. It can't be changed by how you see it. It just is what it is. "As if it were" applies only to your perception, not to reality, and only reality determines whether you can use Devil's Sight - not perception.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I'm not ignoring anything - check yourself. "See in darkness" and "see darkness" is a meaningful difference. However, what I'm saying is if it says, "Sees Darkness as if its Dim Light (in greyscale)" then that means darkness, as far as your character's sight/seeing is concerned, is as if its Dim Light (even tho yes, it is still "Darkness" regardless of how that particular character sees it - you typically have more than one character in a game so the rule literally MUST say in some way how it effects the light levels for that specific character separately from all the others. So yes, the darkness is still darkness. But Darkvision says "as if it were Dim Light" - Devil's Sight says 100% independently "see in darkness normally" which works for the rule. But you're ignoring that when you combine the rules or go to apply both or apply one over the other that Darkness is as if it were Dim Light due to Darkvision for the character's sense of sight.
The "In Darkness" could be said to only imply "trying to see in the area of effect of Darkness" or it could imply what you're saying, "In darkness means you just do a check for darkness and if it present, you can apply it" - either interpretation is valid by the language, hence why we would need another rule to truly clarify which is which. You're not wrong, but neither am I, so how to proceed? We can fudge the rule by trying to infer different meanings from things which are, in practice, supposed to be specific and limited meaning OR find something that takes rule language as is and makes it abundantly clear how you should go about it.
And the good news is it exists! And says you're right! It just have a completely different rationale as to why. The more rationale's you have pointing to the same thing, the stronger your RAW/RAI (either) becomes. So its not even that "I'm right, you're wrong" or vice versa - but what RULE ends our debate. You and I together out-right prove that simply looking at the two rules by themselves can only lead to RAI decisions; not a confirmed RAW. Yes, we are debating how/why/whatever the Rules As Written mean what they mean, but those are all 100% Rules as Interpreted aka subjective opinions over objective procedures.
To wrap OUR points up, RAW: Devil's Sight, Darkvision, Light Level Rules (including Heavily Obscured/Blinded), Simultaneous Effects, and I would say most importantly, the inclusion of "Can" - You can definitely use Devil's Sight to see in Darkness normally as well as see Dim Light as if it were Bright if Devil's Sight applied first according to the rules already mention, RAW, and Simultaneous Effects. OR you could almost certainly use the word "can" to cherry pick applications/benefits however, consider this for sake of silly example: in an attack action, you shoot scorching ray at more than 1 target. At least one target is standing in Darkness, and at least one in Dim - do you shoot one ray under Darkvision, and another as Devil Sight? What's stopping your DM from saying "ok, which sense are you using for your attack?" We've kind of already pigeon-holed the "can" inclusion into picking one or the other depending on the circumstances but even ignoring that, when you go to say "both" then they can ask which order they apply in or even contest you're doing both. Simultaneous Effects clears the debate. Player can use both. Player can pick, if need be (although, w/ the example of Darkvision w/ Devil's Sight, I think just about everyone would just let it fly, full benefits, no conflict, without really considering the mechanics and its RAW - good to go in League play regardless of who your DM/ref is).
Otherwise, spells which create conditions of all kinds would lose traction if RAI carried RAW. Say hypothetically, you had a spell which makes it "as if you were" poisoned - does that mean you can use Cure Poison on it or that you can? Of course it means you can, even if the effect isn't a source wouldn't ordinarily be considered a poison - it says to respond to it as if it were a poison (we'll call this hypothetical "as if you were poisoned" condition "a hangover" hehe). Your character can, and if they're being honest, should say, "I'm not/wasn't poisoned" even if that's the mechanical condition and resulting procedures creating the effect. They can not suddenly pretend they're not poisoned to avoid disadvantage on an ability check, could they? Likewise, I'm saying you shouldn't be able to take Darkness you're perceiving/seeing as if it were Dim Light and turn around and treat it as though that's not what you're seeing.
I totally understand you're saying "its just darkness so the rule simply kicks off that, regardless of what other rules may be in play/effect" - sure. But if someone is trying to be difficult, where's the rule to stick them on it? I would say, apply both effects w/ respect to simultaneous effects and let them dig thru the rulebook if they still disagree (at this point, I think they would have to agree with you and I that one can absolutely have their cake and eat it too when it comes to Devil's Sight paired w/ Darkvision (its not a cheap skill set - it should be powerful - so where's the language that 100% no ifs, ands, or buts confirms that?) Simply saying "I'm using Devil's Sight and then Darkvision simultaneously to get aaall the benefits and none of the conflicts, it would be extremely hard to contest, would it not? You technically "can" use both together - the rules don't say you can't. So badda-bing-badda-boom.
And this stuff may seem silly and trivial, but here's a scenario I recently encountered in an actual game: Can a familiar hold an object (assuming its light enough) while you cast a ritual through it? (I was trying to use Identify without touching the object of course) I would say yes but my DM said no. Rules seem pretty clear, but because there's nothing that says you can cast a ritual through the familiar, they said no. Having the wherewithal to say, "But DM! it doesn't say I can't either and all other conditions are clearly satisfied" is what prompts me to seek a stronger understanding of the rules as a collection, vs one off examples and scenarios that can be easy to write off without fully considering the implications.
Take a look at my OP (and earlier editions if you feel so inclined) - I offer your scenarios as a possibility right from the get go as an obvious interpretation of the rules and follow it up w/ highly technical arguments (which I've seen people make online and in real life) which one might challenge the common interpretation with. I may not have highlighted all the nuances you did, but I'm not saying that one "cannot" use the benefits together for a sum greater than the parts either. I think its very obvious that's what was intended. But RAW rules supreme, hence my hunt for additional rules with this thread so a DM can't fudge my strategies (like casting a ritual thru a familiar, lol) into irrelevancy as well as allowing me to run a more fair game if/when I DM.
Let me check this right here. It does not say "Sees Darkness as if its Dim Light (in greyscale)". It says "The monster can see in dim light within the radius as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light." If you agree that "see in darkness" and "see darkness" is a meaningful difference, then please stop arguing like it isn't and use the actual text of the ability, to the letter.
No, it doesn't. Nothing in the rule would otherwise say or imply that one character's perception changes another character's perception (never mind that it would change that other character's reality).
Darkvision says you can see in darkness as if it were dim light. It doesn't say darkness becomes dim light. It doesn't say darkness gets treated as dim light. It doesn't say it creates dim light. It doesn't say you see the darkness as dim light. What it says is that it changes how you see things when certain conditions are met. Again, for the umptieth time, it doesn't change those conditions. As such, it doesn't change anything about darkness being darkness and thus can't change anything about darkness relevant to other mechanics.
I'm just going to wrap up everything else from your earlier post together with this one: none of the scenarios you offer as a possibility are actually possible under the rules. They're just not. That's what makes all this arguing pointless. None of the premisses you offer stand up to correctly reading the rules exactly as written.
I will make a little addendum for this though:
In this case your DM was wrong°, but not because "it doesn't say I can't either". That's never an argument. The Fireball spell doesn't say I can't use it to summon a pink water buffalo to carry my dirty laundry for me either, and that really does mean I can't. A mechanic has to say you can do something with it for you to be able to do that something with it.
° wrong only in the sense of applying the rules as written. Intent is something else. Identify's intent may be to require touching the object yourself for a minute, rather than having the spell delivered through your familiar. And regardless, the DM has final say.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].