But then I got wondering, "why wouldn't they conflict? where's the rule?"
"Darkvision makes darkness seem like dim light so devil's sight only functions in magical darkness and/or if and where its range exceeds that of the darkvision effect - hilarious, I know."
The reason why everyone is repeating themselves is due to these statements in your original post.
In order for there to be a conflict in the rules, YOU had to change the rules to make it happen. None of the rules say that you have to see darkness for Devil's Sight to work. That is why your perception of the Darkness does not matter. The rules literally don't match what you are saying.
Well, that's because the rules don't define each other, they define themselves. When combining two conditions, you effectively create a third. This is the dynamic I'm discussing. I changed nothing; I simply added two rules together...
And I mean it straight up says, "You can see normally in Darkness" and has been clarified by Jeremy Crawford in Sage Advice (when that's how the posted official errata) the "in" means "into" and therefore suggests that's exactly what has to happen - you have to be looking/seeing into Darkness for any effect to manifest. Doesn't mean anything one way or the other though as most people agree "yea, darkness must be present" but... Now, everyone is in agreement, as there's clearly no effect listed on Dim Light, that it definitely does not apply to Dim Light on its own. Plus that's been clarified in then official errata. But what's the rule for seeing normally? Is it Bright Light? Probably, but then why didn't they say so? Or do they mean, "how you would otherwise see if there was no Darkness" to include those without normal vision? Now add Darkvision, the Darkness required, as present as it may be, would appear as Dim Light. Sure - it's still darkness but Darkvision straight up says, "can see in darkness as if it were dim light" thus Devil's Sight's "You can see normally in Darkness" and you are not seeing into Darkness anymore, so you don't see normally. It's that simple. And there is nothing in either rule that blocks that interpretation outside of it being very not cool to the player.
Therefore, I repeat my point: the verbiage of Darkvision and Devil's Sight alone does not share enough common language to be clear on how they might function together. I'm not saying my interpretations reign supreme - I'm saying no interpretations do unless published by the authors. Hence why it does indeed require additional rules (which already exist) to clarify the combination of the two.
"The presence or absence of light in an environment creates three categories of illumination: bright light, dim light, and darkness."
This rule states that Darkness is a part of the environment and tied directly to the presence of light.
But then Darkvision says "can see in Darkness as if it were Dim Light" making the visual effect for that character Dim Light. Therefore, Devil's Sight (You can see normally in darkness) would be trying see into Dim Light for that character. Remember: Jeremy Crawford confirmed the "in" implies or at least includes "into" to afford the benefit of not having to be standing in the effect - this could mean it really is what that character is seeing vs how it really is OR it could confirm that it truly is just the environmental effect, as you put it, that matters. Everyone who shares your opinion is ignoring that aspect. As I've illustrated, no one has to share your interpretation as there isn't anything between the two rules alone to fully confirm. Now don't get me wrong here - I play the way all of you have stated - use each to their full benefit; don't overthink it. I talk about this in the OP. But using those benefits together has given me insight into areas the rules aren't so clear as they seem at first. Which is why I sought an additional rule which would clarify this situation, as well as many others regarding other rules with completely different effects. But good news, Simultaneous Effects on page 5 of Xanathar's Guide to Everything eliminates that conflict. You no longer have to worry about the "states" and "conditions" - Devil's Sight and Darkvision is worded so that running Devil's Sight 1st, then Darkvision 2nd, according to that rule, gives you all the benefits and leaves no conflict. Another commenter shared that one. Kills this debate entirely.
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.
This rule does not alter the light in the environment in anyway.
No, not in the environment - but how that specific character or creature see in it. "as if it were" how is this not a change of effect for the character? I'm not saying it behaves like a torch or anything like that; simply the character is now seeing Dim Light. Devil's Sight is an effect on how they see in Darkness, not how they see in Dim Light. Environmentally, its still Darkness, but as far as that character and seeing, its now Dim Light. That is a completely legitimate interpretation, even if its totally not fun... ...And somewhat complicated which I believe the PHB says somewhere the rules aren't intended to be complex with multiple meanings. I hear you, "Oh-ho! But isn't that what you're doing here Venyxos??" A bit - however, I think Darkvision and Devil's Sight are abundantly clear when being used separately/independently. Its combining them things can become somewhat complex, particularly in odd situations, like targeting multiple creatures in different levels of sight, with different sense for a single spell, like scorching rays. Usually there's no conflict of language, but sometimes there is. For weird, even potentially grey areas, there is almost always a general rule which clarifies the situation. We can thank Farling for their early contribution with Simultaneous Effects which puts it to bed.
You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
This rule does not alter the light in the environment in anyway
It doesn't define what "normally" is - is this so it doesn't give something blind the ability to see? probably. And what about if the darkness you're trying to see in is as if it was dim light? Think about this. If according to Simultaneous Effects, you declared Darkvision first, Devil's Sight second, and look at another character who's in darkness, then they appear greyscale, as if they were in Dim Light so you're not seeing in darkness. Again - absolutely no fun. Would not recommend this interpretation, BUT if someone insisted, like I have, that's the way it is (I say could be), then you just apply Devil's Sight first, Darkvision second, once again, according to Simultaneous Effects and you're all good. It basically reads that the player picks, thus allowing the player to pick the interpretation. I honestly think that's pretty neat.
You can program digital platforms for DnD under the same rules and it would require less code as you wouldn't have to patch or plan for any weird conflicts as the software tried to decide how what you're looking at looks like while two effects run simultaneously which treat the same thing differently - that is to say, they take the same thing and try to make it two different things at once. Devil's Sight would make it so the software tried to render the thing "normally" and Darkvision would try to render it as "Dim" - and your game would crash. You could put spaghetti code in - OR "stack" the effects in a priority so the software knows to render one, then the other in a manner which appears simultaneous and seamless. And hopefully enjoy your experience.
There is no conflict within the rules as written.
but I can just as easily say "there is a conflict within the rules as written" as I just illustrated. Thankfully! Farling dropped Simultaneous Effects into the discussion on Page 1 of this thread and eliminates any need for our discussion - which of course we could still continue to have but as many have pointed out, I'm not really saying anything new... Heck, even I've pointed out that my OP includes all the points, more or less, each of us have made. This is the issue with RAI and why rules like Simultaneous Effects and, in my opinion, folks like Farling, are so rad - with DnD bringing it aaall together.
Saying there is conflict does not make it so. I have provided the rules. You have not provided anything to support that your vision changes the area of darkness per RAW and by RAW the only requirements to activate Darkvision and/or Devil's Sight is to see in or into Darkness.
However we appear to be at an impasse. Good luck in your future endeavors.
The whole point of the discussion is how people can easily come to different conclusions when only looking at one or two rules at a time and therefore, what additional rules could help clarify.
There is no need for additional rules. The rules for Darkvision and Devil's Sight are all that's needed to come to the right conclusion. If you really only wanted more support for that, sure, ok, that'd be fine with me. But that's not the case - you refuse to accept that those rules by themselves offer all the information needed and keep claiming they don't say what they actually do say. That's, no offense, nonsense and can only serve to confuse others who do a search for clarification on Devil's Sight and stumble on this heap of silliness.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Do me a favor and explain what happens, as far as the gameplay is concerned, between: 1 - Sees in Darkness as if it were Dim Light. 2 - Sees Darkness as if it were Dim Light.
Easy.
Sees IN(or into) Darkness acknowledges that the room is still dark therefore there is no conflict between Darkvision and Devil's Sight as neither alters the state of the darkness. No matter how well you can see in it, it is still an area of Darkness. No where in the descriptions of Darkvision or Devil's Sight does it require you to "See Darkness" for either ability to work.
This. Seeing darkness requires perceiving darkness; darkness is what you see. Seeing in darkness requires there to be darkness to see into, but doesn't say anything about how you perceive it. And there's nothing subjective about this interpretation. It's a straightforward literal reading of what it says.
1) Straight up says "See in darkness as if it were dim light" - that changes the state of the darkness for how that character sees it. That is another interpretation suggesting both are subjective. Thus requiring an additional clarification rule to settle any disagreement (or perhaps a flip of a coin).
2) Also, they didn't actually explain the difference between the wording which you had stated there was a major difference in earlier where you said: "It doesn't matter what the darkness is seen as. Neither Darkvision nor Devil's Sight reference or rely on what the darkness, or anything else, is seen as. It's not about seeing the darkness, it's about seeing in darkness. And because it's not about seeing the darkness, or what it's seen as, it doesn't matter how Darkvision affects your vision. What you see is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is what you see in,and what you see inisn't changed by Darkvision. What you see is changed, but what you see inisn't."
Its the same effect then regardless of the wording? We would have to keep backing up to the previous points that led us there to continue this point.
1) It doesn't matter if it changes the state of the darkness for how that character sees it. Devil's Sight doesn't care how that character sees darkness. This is entirely moot. There's also nothing subjective about it. I agree the character's perception of darkness changes. That's objectively what the mechanic does. What it equally objectively doesn't do is change the darkness itself, and since that means darkness is still darkness the requirement for Devil's Sight is objectively still met.
2) I've explained the difference several times. Other have explained it too. Seeing in darkness is about your surroundings. Seeing darkness is about your perception of your surroundings.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I think my favorite part of trying to say that you must be able to "See Darkness" for Darkvision to work, is that would mean that it would shut off immediately after it activated since you can no longer "See Darkness". Darkvision or Devil's Sight would be a useless strobe light effect anytime you attempted to use it as it just flashes on and off as your ability to "See Darkness" would come and go.
I think my favorite part of trying to say that you must be able to "See Darkness" for Darkvision to work, is that would mean that it would shut off immediately after it activated since you can no longer "See Darkness". Darkvision or Devil's Sight would be a useless strobe light effect anytime you attempted to use it as it just flashes on and off as your ability to "See Darkness" would come and go.
Edit: Spelling
Only if you were applying the effect twice which is against RAW (Also XGtE, pg 5, Combining Magical Effects - which does go on to say "game effects") -See Darkness > Trigger Darkvision = All Darkness appears as Dim Light. (I'm glad that's your favorite part though especially since you refuse to see that dynamic when it favors my argument)
I think my favorite part of trying to say that you must be able to "See Darkness" for Darkvision to work, is that would mean that it would shut off immediately after it activated since you can no longer "See Darkness". Darkvision or Devil's Sight would be a useless strobe light effect anytime you attempted to use it as it just flashes on and off as your ability to "See Darkness" would come and go.
Not, "This is what how I think the rules should work - agree with me" I offered both interpretations in the OP the common interpretation with zero conflicts or complexity for the player and then separately a reaching example of how one might argue there are conflicts, thus prompting the question "which rules could you use to clear up those potential conflicts"
And I guess this is why you get the sort of responses that you get. There is no "both" here, the rules are clear and conflict free as written. The only reason you perceive there to be a conflict is that you misinterpret/misunderstand what the rules actually say. Doing so at first isn't a big deal but 4 pages in it starts to look more like you wanting there to be a problem than wanting to learn/understand and that gets somewhat annoying.
But then I got wondering, "why wouldn't they conflict? where's the rule?"
"Darkvision makes darkness seem like dim light so devil's sight only functions in magical darkness and/or if and where its range exceeds that of the darkvision effect - hilarious, I know."
The reason why everyone is repeating themselves is due to these statements in your original post.
In order for there to be a conflict in the rules, YOU had to change the rules to make it happen. None of the rules say that you have to see darkness for Devil's Sight to work. That is why your perception of the Darkness does not matter. The rules literally don't match what you are saying.
Well, that's because the rules don't define each other, they define themselves. When combining two conditions, you effectively create a third. This is the dynamic I'm discussing. I changed nothing; I simply added two rules together...
And I mean it straight up says, "You can see normally in Darkness" and has been clarified by Jeremy Crawford in Sage Advice (when that's how the posted official errata) the "in" means "into" and therefore suggests that's exactly what has to happen - you have to be looking/seeing into Darkness for any effect to manifest. Doesn't mean anything one way or the other though as most people agree "yea, darkness must be present" but... Now, everyone is in agreement, as there's clearly no effect listed on Dim Light, that it definitely does not apply to Dim Light on its own. Plus that's been clarified in then official errata. But what's the rule for seeing normally? Is it Bright Light? Probably, but then why didn't they say so? Or do they mean, "how you would otherwise see if there was no Darkness" to include those without normal vision? Now add Darkvision, the Darkness required, as present as it may be, would appear as Dim Light. Sure - it's still darkness but Darkvision straight up says, "can see in darkness as if it were dim light" thus Devil's Sight's "You can see normally in Darkness" and you are not seeing into Darkness anymore, so you don't see normally. It's that simple. And there is nothing in either rule that blocks that interpretation outside of it being very not cool to the player.
Therefore, I repeat my point: the verbiage of Darkvision and Devil's Sight alone does not share enough common language to be clear on how they might function together. I'm not saying my interpretations reign supreme - I'm saying no interpretations do unless published by the authors. Hence why it does indeed require additional rules (which already exist) to clarify the combination of the two.
"The presence or absence of light in an environment creates three categories of illumination: bright light, dim light, and darkness."
This rule states that Darkness is a part of the environment and tied directly to the presence of light.
But then Darkvision says "can see in Darkness as if it were Dim Light" making the visual effect for that character Dim Light. Therefore, Devil's Sight (You can see normally in darkness) would be trying see into Dim Light for that character. Remember: Jeremy Crawford confirmed the "in" implies or at least includes "into" to afford the benefit of not having to be standing in the effect - this could mean it really is what that character is seeing vs how it really is OR it could confirm that it truly is just the environmental effect, as you put it, that matters. Everyone who shares your opinion is ignoring that aspect. As I've illustrated, no one has to share your interpretation as there isn't anything between the two rules alone to fully confirm. Now don't get me wrong here - I play the way all of you have stated - use each to their full benefit; don't overthink it. I talk about this in the OP. But using those benefits together has given me insight into areas the rules aren't so clear as they seem at first. Which is why I sought an additional rule which would clarify this situation, as well as many others regarding other rules with completely different effects. But good news, Simultaneous Effects on page 5 of Xanathar's Guide to Everything eliminates that conflict. You no longer have to worry about the "states" and "conditions" - Devil's Sight and Darkvision is worded so that running Devil's Sight 1st, then Darkvision 2nd, according to that rule, gives you all the benefits and leaves no conflict. Another commenter shared that one. Kills this debate entirely.
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.
This rule does not alter the light in the environment in anyway.
No, not in the environment - but how that specific character or creature see in it. "as if it were" how is this not a change of effect for the character? I'm not saying it behaves like a torch or anything like that; simply the character is now seeing Dim Light. Devil's Sight is an effect on how they see in Darkness, not how they see in Dim Light. Environmentally, its still Darkness, but as far as that character and seeing, its now Dim Light. That is a completely legitimate interpretation, even if its totally not fun... ...And somewhat complicated which I believe the PHB says somewhere the rules aren't intended to be complex with multiple meanings. I hear you, "Oh-ho! But isn't that what you're doing here Venyxos??" A bit - however, I think Darkvision and Devil's Sight are abundantly clear when being used separately/independently. Its combining them things can become somewhat complex, particularly in odd situations, like targeting multiple creatures in different levels of sight, with different sense for a single spell, like scorching rays. Usually there's no conflict of language, but sometimes there is. For weird, even potentially grey areas, there is almost always a general rule which clarifies the situation. We can thank Farling for their early contribution with Simultaneous Effects which puts it to bed.
You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
This rule does not alter the light in the environment in anyway
It doesn't define what "normally" is - is this so it doesn't give something blind the ability to see? probably. And what about if the darkness you're trying to see in is as if it was dim light? Think about this. If according to Simultaneous Effects, you declared Darkvision first, Devil's Sight second, and look at another character who's in darkness, then they appear greyscale, as if they were in Dim Light so you're not seeing in darkness. Again - absolutely no fun. Would not recommend this interpretation, BUT if someone insisted, like I have, that's the way it is (I say could be), then you just apply Devil's Sight first, Darkvision second, once again, according to Simultaneous Effects and you're all good. It basically reads that the player picks, thus allowing the player to pick the interpretation. I honestly think that's pretty neat.
You can program digital platforms for DnD under the same rules and it would require less code as you wouldn't have to patch or plan for any weird conflicts as the software tried to decide how what you're looking at looks like while two effects run simultaneously which treat the same thing differently - that is to say, they take the same thing and try to make it two different things at once. Devil's Sight would make it so the software tried to render the thing "normally" and Darkvision would try to render it as "Dim" - and your game would crash. You could put spaghetti code in - OR "stack" the effects in a priority so the software knows to render one, then the other in a manner which appears simultaneous and seamless. And hopefully enjoy your experience.
There is no conflict within the rules as written.
but I can just as easily say "there is a conflict within the rules as written" as I just illustrated. Thankfully! Farling dropped Simultaneous Effects into the discussion on Page 1 of this thread and eliminates any need for our discussion - which of course we could still continue to have but as many have pointed out, I'm not really saying anything new... Heck, even I've pointed out that my OP includes all the points, more or less, each of us have made. This is the issue with RAI and why rules like Simultaneous Effects and, in my opinion, folks like Farling, are so rad - with DnD bringing it aaall together.
Saying there is conflict does not make it so. I have provided the rules. You have not provided anything to support that your vision changes the area of darkness per RAW and by RAW the only requirements to activate Darkvision and/or Devil's Sight is to see in or into Darkness.
However we appear to be at an impasse. Good luck in your future endeavors.
The whole point of the discussion is how people can easily come to different conclusions when only looking at one or two rules at a time and therefore, what additional rules could help clarify.
There is no need for additional rules. The rules for Darkvision and Devil's Sight are all that's needed to come to the right conclusion. If you really only wanted more support for that, sure, ok, that'd be fine with me. But that's not the case - you refuse to accept that those rules by themselves offer all the information needed and keep claiming they don't say what they actually do say. That's, no offense, nonsense and can only serve to confuse others who do a search for clarification on Devil's Sight and stumble on this heap of silliness.
Do me a favor and explain what happens, as far as the gameplay is concerned, between: 1 - Sees in Darkness as if it were Dim Light. 2 - Sees Darkness as if it were Dim Light.
Easy.
Sees IN(or into) Darkness acknowledges that the room is still dark therefore there is no conflict between Darkvision and Devil's Sight as neither alters the state of the darkness. No matter how well you can see in it, it is still an area of Darkness. No where in the descriptions of Darkvision or Devil's Sight does it require you to "See Darkness" for either ability to work.
This. Seeing darkness requires perceiving darkness; darkness is what you see. Seeing in darkness requires there to be darkness to see into, but doesn't say anything about how you perceive it. And there's nothing subjective about this interpretation. It's a straightforward literal reading of what it says.
1) Straight up says "See in darkness as if it were dim light" - that changes the state of the darkness for how that character sees it. That is another interpretation suggesting both are subjective. Thus requiring an additional clarification rule to settle any disagreement (or perhaps a flip of a coin).
2) Also, they didn't actually explain the difference between the wording which you had stated there was a major difference in earlier where you said: "It doesn't matter what the darkness is seen as. Neither Darkvision nor Devil's Sight reference or rely on what the darkness, or anything else, is seen as. It's not about seeing the darkness, it's about seeing in darkness. And because it's not about seeing the darkness, or what it's seen as, it doesn't matter how Darkvision affects your vision. What you see is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is what you see in,and what you see inisn't changed by Darkvision. What you see is changed, but what you see inisn't."
Its the same effect then regardless of the wording? We would have to keep backing up to the previous points that led us there to continue this point.
1) It doesn't matter if it changes the state of the darkness for how that character sees it. Devil's Sight doesn't care how that character sees darkness. This is entirely moot. There's also nothing subjective about it. I agree the character's perception of darkness changes. That's objectively what the mechanic does. What it equally objectively doesn't do is change the darkness itself, and since that means darkness is still darkness the requirement for Devil's Sight is objectively still met.
2) I've explained the difference several times. Other have explained it too. Seeing in darkness is about your surroundings. Seeing darkness is about your perception of your surroundings.
Except it says "as if it were" - And it doesn't matter how much you all say there is only one way to interpret the rule. This back and forth stuff proves it. We're arguing which interpretation is accurate. Yes, you can say mine is wrong, but one can simply say the same back unless you have a clarifying rule.
Take a different effect with the same language - Incorporeal Movement: [Creature] can move through other creatures and objects as if they were difficult terrain. And then imagine they another effect like the feat Mobile: When you use the Dash action, difficult terrain doesn't cost you extra movement on that turn. You are exceptionally speedy and agile. You gain the following benefits: Your speed increases by 10 feet. When you use the Dash action, difficult terrain doesn't cost you extra movement on that turn. When you make a melee attack against a creature, you don't provoke opportunity attacks from that creature for the rest of the turn, whether you hit or not. According to your interpretation of the same/similar language with Devil's Sight & Darkvision - A character/creature who hypothetically had those rules would still have the difficult terrain penalty because its not 'actually' difficult terrain.
Now, if we drop the internal language of the rules and instead take a rule like Simultaneous Effects, the controlling player/DM simply picks. End of discussion. (unless you wanna hold that the Mobile feat still wouldn't work with Incorporeal Movement if they appeared together - but now you're me except its not a thought experiment anymore)
Now add Darkvision, the Darkness required, as present as it may be, would appear as Dim Light. Sure - it's still darkness but Darkvision straight up says, "can see in darkness as if it were dim light" thus Devil's Sight's "You can see normally in Darkness" and you are not seeing into Darkness anymore, so you don't see normally. It's that simple. And there is nothing in either rule that blocks that interpretation outside of it being very not cool to the player.
Yes you are! I really don't get how you can still refuse to accept that.
If someone is looking into an area of Darkness then they will always be looking into and area of Darkness (until someone adds a light source of some sort). It doesn't matter which (or how many) special senses that someone has, the lighting conditions for the area will not change in any way, it will still be an area of Darkness.
But what's the rule for seeing normally? Is it Bright Light? Probably, but then why didn't they say so? Or do they mean, "how you would otherwise see if there was no Darkness" to include those without normal vision?
They do!
It's explicitly stated even, "Bright light lets most creatures see normally". And even without that the rules are written in natural language so "normally" means just that , normally, not whatever convoluted argument that can be cobbled together.
I think my favorite part of trying to say that you must be able to "See Darkness" for Darkvision to work, is that would mean that it would shut off immediately after it activated since you can no longer "See Darkness". Darkvision or Devil's Sight would be a useless strobe light effect anytime you attempted to use it as it just flashes on and off as your ability to "See Darkness" would come and go.
Edit: Spelling
Only if you were applying the effect twice which is against RAW (Also XGtE, pg 5, Combining Magical Effects - which does go on to say "game effects") -See Darkness > Trigger Darkvision = All Darkness appears as Dim Light. (I'm glad that's your favorite part though especially since you refuse to see that dynamic when it favors my argument)
It isn't applying anything twice. If "Seeing Darkness" is required, when the Darkness can no longer be seen by you, then you no longer meet the requirement.
I think my favorite part of trying to say that you must be able to "See Darkness" for Darkvision to work, is that would mean that it would shut off immediately after it activated since you can no longer "See Darkness". Darkvision or Devil's Sight would be a useless strobe light effect anytime you attempted to use it as it just flashes on and off as your ability to "See Darkness" would come and go.
Edit: Spelling
Only if you were applying the effect twice which is against RAW (Also XGtE, pg 5, Combining Magical Effects - which does go on to say "game effects") -See Darkness > Trigger Darkvision = All Darkness appears as Dim Light. (I'm glad that's your favorite part though especially since you refuse to see that dynamic when it favors my argument)
It isn't applying anything twice. If "Seeing Darkness" is required, when the Darkness can no longer be seen by you, then you no longer meet the requirement.
I mean if want to interpret "zero" applications of the effect, then yea, the rule wouldn't work for you as you interpret it. But I seriously doubt they wrote a rule that couldn't apply itself. Seems like a waste of time. Plus, I've been clear about single applications: You present the "strobe effect" - not me, which kind of proves we're not looking at this the same way (which isn't shocking, given we're arguing interpretation/opinion). That's on you.
Thus, what I'm saying (unless you want to turn this into how you interpret my interpretation that you've been saying you can't see/agree w/) is the rule by itself suggests a single application when Seeing/Reacting to Darkness (how vs what respectively - matters not, like I've maintained) which allows you to see that as if it were Dim Light, according to Combining Magic Effects and/or Simultaneous Effects (Combining says one application; Simultaneous Effects says "player picks" so in your example, the player picks whether it's dark or dim, just like the rule says w/ "can" - unless of course you're not actually arguing a endlessly repeating stack of Darkvision, running simultaneous like a strobe which suggests your "favorite part" isn't actually something I presented)
I think my favorite part of trying to say that you must be able to "See Darkness" for Darkvision to work, is that would mean that it would shut off immediately after it activated since you can no longer "See Darkness". Darkvision or Devil's Sight would be a useless strobe light effect anytime you attempted to use it as it just flashes on and off as your ability to "See Darkness" would come and go.
Edit: Spelling
Only if you were applying the effect twice which is against RAW (Also XGtE, pg 5, Combining Magical Effects - which does go on to say "game effects") -See Darkness > Trigger Darkvision = All Darkness appears as Dim Light. (I'm glad that's your favorite part though especially since you refuse to see that dynamic when it favors my argument)
It isn't applying anything twice. If "Seeing Darkness" is required, when the Darkness can no longer be seen by you, then you no longer meet the requirement.
I mean if want to interpret "zero" applications of the effect, then yea, the rule wouldn't work for you as you interpret it. But I seriously doubt they wrote a rule that couldn't apply itself. Seems like a waste of time.
You are so close, yet you can't seem to see what's right there. They indeed wouldn't write a rule like that. They didn't in this case. The only way for your interpretation to be correct would be for them to have done that, but they didn't. So... do you see what we're getting at?
Devil's Sight ( and Darkvision) is a conditional effect. It applies as long as the required condition (seeing in darkness) is met, and stops applying as soon as the condition is no longer met. Neither Devil's Sight nor Darkvision actually affects their respective required conditions, because that would be silly and result in mechanical nonsense. But even if they did, it wouldn't result in potentially applying the same effect twice. Checking for a condition to be present or not is not applying an effect.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Chapter 8: Adventuring of the Players Hand Book, Section titled The Environment subsection Vision and Light pg.183-185 define a creatures ability to see.
Darkness: an absence of light in an environment.
Darkvision: Within a specified range , a creature with Darkvision can see in Darkness as if the Darkness were dim light, so areas of Darkness are only lightly obscured as far as that creature is concerned. However, the creature can't discern color in Darkness, only Shades of Gray.
The bolded parts define what darkvision does as it's effect, turns areas of darkness within the specified range of the effect into dimly lit shades of gray. [ imagine the creature sees darkness within the specified range as a black and white movie or show with a low brightness setting. ]
if a creature has a light source on or near itself, then the defined level of brightness defined by the light source mechanics allow the creature to see color within the limits of the light source mechanics. [ Bright light - full color ; dim light - faded color ; darkness ( w/ darkvision - grayscale ; w/out darkvision - nothing/blinded )
Therefore, a creature with darkvision knows areas of darkness because those areas are visually seen in grayscale within the specified range of the DarkVision effect.
Devils Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet. Player´s Handbook (SRD) → DnD 5e Eldritch Invocations.
This defines that in an area of darkness, regardless of any light source, within the 120 foot radius of the Devils Sight effect point of origin becomes brightly lit to the creatures perception.
So, with all that what does it mean?
First, there would no condition where Darkvision and Devils Sight would conflict each other. This is because the Devils Sight effect would supersede the Darkvision effect per the Simultaneous Effects rule of XGtE.
Second, a creature with darkvision will perceive an area of magical darkness as a dark void even if the magical darkness is nested within an area of darkness. [ that dimly lit darkness grayscale now has a perceivable black void in it, creature figures that area is magically created darkness and thinks to itself "WTF?" ]
Third and finally, versions of Darkvision say that light sources with dim light ranges turn said dim light area into an area of bright light, but that is it nothing more. Why, because for the creature it would become a lesser version of the Devils Sight Effect when a light source is added to the mix, and a perceivable difference becomes apparent to the creature between an area that is lit and darkness.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
The bolded parts define what darkvision does as it's effect, turns areas of darkness within the specified range of the effect into dimly lit shades of gray.
...
Third and finally, versions of Darkvision say that light sources with dim light ranges turn said dim light area into an area of bright light, but that is it nothing more.
I appreciate your measured and thorough response, but these two parts are inaccurate. Darkvision doesn't turn areas of darkness or dim light into something else. Darkvision allows someone to see in such surroundings as if they were something else, but those areas stay the same. They can just be perceived differently by the character with Darkvision. May sound pedantic, but this is crux of this entire thread's back and forth.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The bolded parts define what darkvision does as it's effect, turns areas of darkness within the specified range of the effect into dimly lit shades of gray.
...
Third and finally, versions of Darkvision say that light sources with dim light ranges turn said dim light area into an area of bright light, but that is it nothing more.
I appreciate your measured and thorough response, but these two parts are inaccurate. Darkvision doesn't turn areas of darkness or dim light into something else. Darkvision allows someone to see in such surroundings as if they were something else, but those areas stay the same. They can just be perceived differently by the character with Darkvision. May sound pedantic, but this is crux of this entire thread's back and forth.
I use the word "turn(s)" as more of a general concept of the perceptional view of the creature. From a outsider perception and viewpoint, nothing changes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
The bolded parts define what darkvision does as it's effect, turns areas of darkness within the specified range of the effect into dimly lit shades of gray.
...
Third and finally, versions of Darkvision say that light sources with dim light ranges turn said dim light area into an area of bright light, but that is it nothing more.
I appreciate your measured and thorough response, but these two parts are inaccurate. Darkvision doesn't turn areas of darkness or dim light into something else. Darkvision allows someone to see in such surroundings as if they were something else, but those areas stay the same. They can just be perceived differently by the character with Darkvision. May sound pedantic, but this is crux of this entire thread's back and forth.
I use the word "turn(s)" as more of a general concept of the perceptional view of the creature. From a outsider perception and viewpoint, nothing changes.
That's ok, it's just that not everyone in this thread has argued that way. The fact that nothing but the perception of the character with Darkvision changes is what should have put this whole discussion to bed from day one.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I think my favorite part of trying to say that you must be able to "See Darkness" for Darkvision to work, is that would mean that it would shut off immediately after it activated since you can no longer "See Darkness". Darkvision or Devil's Sight would be a useless strobe light effect anytime you attempted to use it as it just flashes on and off as your ability to "See Darkness" would come and go.
Edit: Spelling
Only if you were applying the effect twice which is against RAW (Also XGtE, pg 5, Combining Magical Effects - which does go on to say "game effects") -See Darkness > Trigger Darkvision = All Darkness appears as Dim Light. (I'm glad that's your favorite part though especially since you refuse to see that dynamic when it favors my argument)
It isn't applying anything twice. If "Seeing Darkness" is required, when the Darkness can no longer be seen by you, then you no longer meet the requirement.
I mean if want to interpret "zero" applications of the effect, then yea, the rule wouldn't work for you as you interpret it. But I seriously doubt they wrote a rule that couldn't apply itself. Seems like a waste of time.
You are so close, yet you can't seem to see what's right there. They indeed wouldn't write a rule like that. They didn't in this case. The only way for your interpretation to be correct would be for them to have done that, but they didn't. So... do you see what we're getting at?
Devil's Sight ( and Darkvision) is a conditional effect. It applies as long as the required condition (seeing in darkness) is met, and stops applying as soon as the condition is no longer met. Neither Devil's Sight nor Darkvision actually affects their respective required conditions, because that would be silly and result in mechanical nonsense. But even if they did, it wouldn't result in potentially applying the same effect twice. Checking for a condition to be present or not is not applying an effect.
I was replying to someone else's point - They were trying to counter my point with that, so I'm like, "why would they right it that way" - obviously they wouldn't so I wasn't trying to say that.
We're saying the same thing here and you should have sent that to the other fella. Not hatin', just sayin' :)
The bolded parts define what darkvision does as it's effect, turns areas of darkness within the specified range of the effect into dimly lit shades of gray.
...
Third and finally, versions of Darkvision say that light sources with dim light ranges turn said dim light area into an area of bright light, but that is it nothing more.
I appreciate your measured and thorough response, but these two parts are inaccurate. Darkvision doesn't turn areas of darkness or dim light into something else. Darkvision allows someone to see in such surroundings as if they were something else, but those areas stay the same. They can just be perceived differently by the character with Darkvision. May sound pedantic, but this is crux of this entire thread's back and forth.
I use the word "turn(s)" as more of a general concept of the perceptional view of the creature. From a outsider perception and viewpoint, nothing changes.
That's ok, it's just that not everyone in this thread has argued that way. The fact that nothing but the perception of the character with Darkvision changes is what should have put this whole discussion to bed from day one.
Thank you for acknowledging you weren't reading my posts thoroughly - I say that repeatedly throughout :/
Chapter 8: Adventuring of the Players Hand Book, Section titled The Environment subsection Vision and Light pg.183-185 define a creatures ability to see.
Darkness: an absence of light in an environment.
Darkvision: Within a specified range , a creature with Darkvision can see in Darkness as if the Darkness were dim light, so areas of Darkness are only lightly obscured as far as that creature is concerned. However, the creature can't discern color in Darkness, only Shades of Gray.
The bolded parts define what darkvision does as it's effect, turns areas of darkness within the specified range of the effect into dimly lit shades of gray. [ imagine the creature sees darkness within the specified range as a black and white movie or show with a low brightness setting. ]
if a creature has a light source on or near itself, then the defined level of brightness defined by the light source mechanics allow the creature to see color within the limits of the light source mechanics. [ Bright light - full color ; dim light - faded color ; darkness ( w/ darkvision - grayscale ; w/out darkvision - nothing/blinded )
Therefore, a creature with darkvision knows areas of darkness because those areas are visually seen in grayscale within the specified range of the DarkVision effect.
Devils Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet. Player´s Handbook (SRD) → DnD 5e Eldritch Invocations.
This defines that in an area of darkness, regardless of any light source, within the 120 foot radius of the Devils Sight effect point of origin becomes brightly lit to the creatures perception.
So, with all that what does it mean?
First, there would no condition where Darkvision and Devils Sight would conflict each other. This is because the Devils Sight effect would supersede the Darkvision effect per the Simultaneous Effects rule of XGtE.
Second, a creature with darkvision will perceive an area of magical darkness as a dark void even if the magical darkness is nested within an area of darkness. [ that dimly lit darkness grayscale now has a perceivable black void in it, creature figures that area is magically created darkness and thinks to itself "WTF?" ]
Third and finally, versions of Darkvision say that light sources with dim light ranges turn said dim light area into an area of bright light, but that is it nothing more. Why, because for the creature it would become a lesser version of the Devils Sight Effect when a light source is added to the mix, and a perceivable difference becomes apparent to the creature between an area that is lit and darkness.
Thank you for summarizing this thread so eloquently and well-articulated! I didn't have the Simultaneous Effects/Combining Magical Effects when I wrote the OP which rounds out any potential conflicts thus satisfying the OP which I wish presented more like your post I quoted here, lol. I'm far too casual and undisciplined in my writing. Great work! :)
The bolded parts define what darkvision does as it's effect, turns areas of darkness within the specified range of the effect into dimly lit shades of gray.
...
Third and finally, versions of Darkvision say that light sources with dim light ranges turn said dim light area into an area of bright light, but that is it nothing more.
I appreciate your measured and thorough response, but these two parts are inaccurate. Darkvision doesn't turn areas of darkness or dim light into something else. Darkvision allows someone to see in such surroundings as if they were something else, but those areas stay the same. They can just be perceived differently by the character with Darkvision. May sound pedantic, but this is crux of this entire thread's back and forth.
I use the word "turn(s)" as more of a general concept of the perceptional view of the creature. From a outsider perception and viewpoint, nothing changes.
That's ok, it's just that not everyone in this thread has argued that way. The fact that nothing but the perception of the character with Darkvision changes is what should have put this whole discussion to bed from day one.
Thank you for acknowledging you weren't reading my posts thoroughly - I say that repeatedly throughout :/
Yet you don't acknowledge what it means, so you saying it is pointless. Since Darkvision doesn't change darkness, there is no potential conflict with Devil's Sight. If there is no potential conflict, there's no need for 5 pages of posts discussing other arguments and causing confusion about how Darkvision and Devil's Sight work. I know you said, after much wrangling, that Darkvision doesn't change darkness. But that's not the same as saying Darkvision can't interfere with Devil's Sight because it doesn't change darkness.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Yet you don't acknowledge what it means, so you saying it is pointless. Since Darkvision doesn't change darkness, there is no potential conflict with Devil's Sight. If there is no potential conflict, there's no need for 5 pages of posts discussing other arguments and causing confusion about how Darkvision and Devil's Sight work. I know you said, after much wrangling, that Darkvision doesn't change darkness. But that's not the same as saying Darkvision can't interfere with Devil's Sight because it doesn't change darkness.
How about a rephrasing? Does the ability to see normally under normal lighting conditions interfere with Darkvision? Does the ability to hear while seeing things interfere with Darkvision? If you are using detect magic to see magical auras, does that interfere with Darkvision, Devil's sight, or even just normal vision? If you have blindsight, does it fail to function in situations where you can see normally, even in detecting anyone invisible within your blindsight radius? If you have 10' if blindsight, does that mean you cannot see normally outside of that 10' radius, lighting and other conditions permitting?
Those are all situations with competing sensory capabilities, but there are no stated incompatibilities.
Unless there is something specifically indicating an incompatibility, why would there be an incompatibility?
There wouldn't be. But the opening post suggests Darkvision and Devil's Sight as written indicate there might be an incompatibility, and that's simply inaccurate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The bolded parts define what darkvision does as it's effect, turns areas of darkness within the specified range of the effect into dimly lit shades of gray.
...
Third and finally, versions of Darkvision say that light sources with dim light ranges turn said dim light area into an area of bright light, but that is it nothing more.
I appreciate your measured and thorough response, but these two parts are inaccurate. Darkvision doesn't turn areas of darkness or dim light into something else. Darkvision allows someone to see in such surroundings as if they were something else, but those areas stay the same. They can just be perceived differently by the character with Darkvision. May sound pedantic, but this is crux of this entire thread's back and forth.
I use the word "turn(s)" as more of a general concept of the perceptional view of the creature. From a outsider perception and viewpoint, nothing changes.
That's ok, it's just that not everyone in this thread has argued that way. The fact that nothing but the perception of the character with Darkvision changes is what should have put this whole discussion to bed from day one.
Thank you for acknowledging you weren't reading my posts thoroughly - I say that repeatedly throughout :/
Yet you don't acknowledge what it means, so you saying it is pointless. Since Darkvision doesn't change darkness, there is no potential conflict with Devil's Sight. If there is no potential conflict, there's no need for 5 pages of posts discussing other arguments and causing confusion about how Darkvision and Devil's Sight work. I know you said, after much wrangling, that Darkvision doesn't change darkness. But that's not the same as saying Darkvision can't interfere with Devil's Sight because it doesn't change darkness.
Yes I have - the whole point is "what if someone is arguing between the interpretation of the language of the rules by themselves?" You can say, "This is how it's supposed to be" all day long, but without an additional rule, it's just your word against theirs's. This is why I say you need an addition rule that says, "The fact that Darkvision could have the Darkness as if it were Dim Light when the character goes to apply their Devil's Sight on the Darkness they don't see in as Darkness."
So, like I've been saying since the Simultaneous Effects rule was introduced, there is no conflict even there due to additional rules.
The only reason we've been discussing this for 5 pages is because so many refuse to acknowledge others could have a non-traditional interpretation which flies in the face of your current understanding of the rules presented - that's it. I even suggest in the OP it's kind of ridiculous (I say, "hilarious, I know" as in - "how ridiculous of an interpretation - but what's an additional rule to stop it?" Welp, that'd be Simultaneous Effects (and listed on the same page of Xanathar's to stop other even more ridiculous interpretations, Combining Magical Effects).
I've never said anyone has to play this way or anything - just to stop the argument, you basically need another rule. Since so few people have introduced new rules/other interpretations beyond that of the OP; we only got a chance to discuss a few dynamics in those 5-6 pages of comments.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Saying there is conflict does not make it so. I have provided the rules. You have not provided anything to support that your vision changes the area of darkness per RAW and by RAW the only requirements to activate Darkvision and/or Devil's Sight is to see in or into Darkness.
However we appear to be at an impasse. Good luck in your future endeavors.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
There is no need for additional rules. The rules for Darkvision and Devil's Sight are all that's needed to come to the right conclusion. If you really only wanted more support for that, sure, ok, that'd be fine with me. But that's not the case - you refuse to accept that those rules by themselves offer all the information needed and keep claiming they don't say what they actually do say. That's, no offense, nonsense and can only serve to confuse others who do a search for clarification on Devil's Sight and stumble on this heap of silliness.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
1) It doesn't matter if it changes the state of the darkness for how that character sees it. Devil's Sight doesn't care how that character sees darkness. This is entirely moot. There's also nothing subjective about it. I agree the character's perception of darkness changes. That's objectively what the mechanic does. What it equally objectively doesn't do is change the darkness itself, and since that means darkness is still darkness the requirement for Devil's Sight is objectively still met.
2) I've explained the difference several times. Other have explained it too. Seeing in darkness is about your surroundings. Seeing darkness is about your perception of your surroundings.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I think my favorite part of trying to say that you must be able to "See Darkness" for Darkvision to work, is that would mean that it would shut off immediately after it activated since you can no longer "See Darkness". Darkvision or Devil's Sight would be a useless strobe light effect anytime you attempted to use it as it just flashes on and off as your ability to "See Darkness" would come and go.
Edit: Spelling
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Only if you were applying the effect twice which is against RAW (Also XGtE, pg 5, Combining Magical Effects - which does go on to say "game effects")
-See Darkness > Trigger Darkvision = All Darkness appears as Dim Light.
(I'm glad that's your favorite part though especially since you refuse to see that dynamic when it favors my argument)
Except it says "as if it were" - And it doesn't matter how much you all say there is only one way to interpret the rule. This back and forth stuff proves it. We're arguing which interpretation is accurate. Yes, you can say mine is wrong, but one can simply say the same back unless you have a clarifying rule.
Take a different effect with the same language - Incorporeal Movement: [Creature] can move through other creatures and objects as if they were difficult terrain.
And then imagine they another effect like the feat Mobile: When you use the Dash action, difficult terrain doesn't cost you extra movement on that turn.
You are exceptionally speedy and agile. You gain the following benefits:
Your speed increases by 10 feet.
When you use the Dash action, difficult terrain doesn't cost you extra movement on that turn.
When you make a melee attack against a creature, you don't provoke opportunity attacks from that creature for the rest of the turn, whether you hit or not.
According to your interpretation of the same/similar language with Devil's Sight & Darkvision - A character/creature who hypothetically had those rules would still have the difficult terrain penalty because its not 'actually' difficult terrain.
Now, if we drop the internal language of the rules and instead take a rule like Simultaneous Effects, the controlling player/DM simply picks. End of discussion. (unless you wanna hold that the Mobile feat still wouldn't work with Incorporeal Movement if they appeared together - but now you're me except its not a thought experiment anymore)
Yes you are! I really don't get how you can still refuse to accept that.
If someone is looking into an area of Darkness then they will always be looking into and area of Darkness (until someone adds a light source of some sort). It doesn't matter which (or how many) special senses that someone has, the lighting conditions for the area will not change in any way, it will still be an area of Darkness.
They do!
It's explicitly stated even, "Bright light lets most creatures see normally". And even without that the rules are written in natural language so "normally" means just that , normally, not whatever convoluted argument that can be cobbled together.
It isn't applying anything twice. If "Seeing Darkness" is required, when the Darkness can no longer be seen by you, then you no longer meet the requirement.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I mean if want to interpret "zero" applications of the effect, then yea, the rule wouldn't work for you as you interpret it. But I seriously doubt they wrote a rule that couldn't apply itself. Seems like a waste of time. Plus, I've been clear about single applications: You present the "strobe effect" - not me, which kind of proves we're not looking at this the same way (which isn't shocking, given we're arguing interpretation/opinion). That's on you.
Thus, what I'm saying (unless you want to turn this into how you interpret my interpretation that you've been saying you can't see/agree w/) is the rule by itself suggests a single application when Seeing/Reacting to Darkness (how vs what respectively - matters not, like I've maintained) which allows you to see that as if it were Dim Light, according to Combining Magic Effects and/or Simultaneous Effects (Combining says one application; Simultaneous Effects says "player picks" so in your example, the player picks whether it's dark or dim, just like the rule says w/ "can" - unless of course you're not actually arguing a endlessly repeating stack of Darkvision, running simultaneous like a strobe which suggests your "favorite part" isn't actually something I presented)
You are so close, yet you can't seem to see what's right there. They indeed wouldn't write a rule like that. They didn't in this case. The only way for your interpretation to be correct would be for them to have done that, but they didn't. So... do you see what we're getting at?
Devil's Sight ( and Darkvision) is a conditional effect. It applies as long as the required condition (seeing in darkness) is met, and stops applying as soon as the condition is no longer met. Neither Devil's Sight nor Darkvision actually affects their respective required conditions, because that would be silly and result in mechanical nonsense. But even if they did, it wouldn't result in potentially applying the same effect twice. Checking for a condition to be present or not is not applying an effect.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Chapter 8: Adventuring of the Players Hand Book, Section titled The Environment subsection Vision and Light pg.183-185 define a creatures ability to see.
Darkness: an absence of light in an environment.
Darkvision: Within a specified range , a creature with Darkvision can see in Darkness as if the Darkness were dim light, so areas of Darkness are only lightly obscured as far as that creature is concerned. However, the creature can't discern color in Darkness, only Shades of Gray.
The bolded parts define what darkvision does as it's effect, turns areas of darkness within the specified range of the effect into dimly lit shades of gray. [ imagine the creature sees darkness within the specified range as a black and white movie or show with a low brightness setting. ]
if a creature has a light source on or near itself, then the defined level of brightness defined by the light source mechanics allow the creature to see color within the limits of the light source mechanics. [ Bright light - full color ; dim light - faded color ; darkness ( w/ darkvision - grayscale ; w/out darkvision - nothing/blinded )
Therefore, a creature with darkvision knows areas of darkness because those areas are visually seen in grayscale within the specified range of the DarkVision effect.
Devils Sight: You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet. Player´s Handbook (SRD) → DnD 5e Eldritch Invocations.
This defines that in an area of darkness, regardless of any light source, within the 120 foot radius of the Devils Sight effect point of origin becomes brightly lit to the creatures perception.
So, with all that what does it mean?
First, there would no condition where Darkvision and Devils Sight would conflict each other. This is because the Devils Sight effect would supersede the Darkvision effect per the Simultaneous Effects rule of XGtE.
Second, a creature with darkvision will perceive an area of magical darkness as a dark void even if the magical darkness is nested within an area of darkness. [ that dimly lit darkness grayscale now has a perceivable black void in it, creature figures that area is magically created darkness and thinks to itself "WTF?" ]
Third and finally, versions of Darkvision say that light sources with dim light ranges turn said dim light area into an area of bright light, but that is it nothing more. Why, because for the creature it would become a lesser version of the Devils Sight Effect when a light source is added to the mix, and a perceivable difference becomes apparent to the creature between an area that is lit and darkness.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
I appreciate your measured and thorough response, but these two parts are inaccurate. Darkvision doesn't turn areas of darkness or dim light into something else. Darkvision allows someone to see in such surroundings as if they were something else, but those areas stay the same. They can just be perceived differently by the character with Darkvision. May sound pedantic, but this is crux of this entire thread's back and forth.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I use the word "turn(s)" as more of a general concept of the perceptional view of the creature. From a outsider perception and viewpoint, nothing changes.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
That's ok, it's just that not everyone in this thread has argued that way. The fact that nothing but the perception of the character with Darkvision changes is what should have put this whole discussion to bed from day one.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I was replying to someone else's point - They were trying to counter my point with that, so I'm like, "why would they right it that way" - obviously they wouldn't so I wasn't trying to say that.
We're saying the same thing here and you should have sent that to the other fella. Not hatin', just sayin' :)
Thank you for acknowledging you weren't reading my posts thoroughly - I say that repeatedly throughout :/
Thank you for summarizing this thread so eloquently and well-articulated! I didn't have the Simultaneous Effects/Combining Magical Effects when I wrote the OP which rounds out any potential conflicts thus satisfying the OP which I wish presented more like your post I quoted here, lol. I'm far too casual and undisciplined in my writing. Great work! :)
Yet you don't acknowledge what it means, so you saying it is pointless. Since Darkvision doesn't change darkness, there is no potential conflict with Devil's Sight. If there is no potential conflict, there's no need for 5 pages of posts discussing other arguments and causing confusion about how Darkvision and Devil's Sight work. I know you said, after much wrangling, that Darkvision doesn't change darkness. But that's not the same as saying Darkvision can't interfere with Devil's Sight because it doesn't change darkness.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
There wouldn't be. But the opening post suggests Darkvision and Devil's Sight as written indicate there might be an incompatibility, and that's simply inaccurate.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Yes I have - the whole point is "what if someone is arguing between the interpretation of the language of the rules by themselves?" You can say, "This is how it's supposed to be" all day long, but without an additional rule, it's just your word against theirs's. This is why I say you need an addition rule that says, "The fact that Darkvision could have the Darkness as if it were Dim Light when the character goes to apply their Devil's Sight on the Darkness they don't see in as Darkness."
So, like I've been saying since the Simultaneous Effects rule was introduced, there is no conflict even there due to additional rules.
The only reason we've been discussing this for 5 pages is because so many refuse to acknowledge others could have a non-traditional interpretation which flies in the face of your current understanding of the rules presented - that's it. I even suggest in the OP it's kind of ridiculous (I say, "hilarious, I know" as in - "how ridiculous of an interpretation - but what's an additional rule to stop it?" Welp, that'd be Simultaneous Effects (and listed on the same page of Xanathar's to stop other even more ridiculous interpretations, Combining Magical Effects).
I've never said anyone has to play this way or anything - just to stop the argument, you basically need another rule. Since so few people have introduced new rules/other interpretations beyond that of the OP; we only got a chance to discuss a few dynamics in those 5-6 pages of comments.