GREAT VICTORY! Thank you @Farling for the slam dunk rule for the clarification of this type of scenario! "Simultaneous Effects" (XGtE; pg.5) clarifies the below leaving ALL language of the rules in tact - RAW (no-RAI)
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. *Of course, there are a number of ways a character may possess darkvision - from spells and equipment to race and class - but the only real differences in the ability, regardless the source, would be the range and duration of the darkvision effect.
Devil's Sight (Warlock Eldritch Invocation): You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet. *Once only available to Warlocks - now available to all via feat Eldritch Adept. Note there is another version of this ability; the monster trait (featured on devils - go figure) 'devil's sight' reads, "Magical darkness doesn't impede the [monster]'s darkvision." This NPC version is simply an enhancement/buff to their darkvision. A cause of confusion across many verses. Also notice there is no reference to dim light (whether the Eldritch Invocation or the monster trait) therefore devil's sight has no effect on dim light - characters see in 'greyscale' and have disadvantage on Perception checks.
Speaking of grey areas - there are none regarding light levels: The presence or absence of light in an environment creates three categories of illumination: bright light, dim light, and darkness. -Bright light lets most creatures see normally. Even gloomy days provide bright light, as do torches, lanterns, fires, and other sources of illumination within a specific radius. -Dim light, also called shadows, creates a lightly obscured area. An area of dim light is usually a boundary between a source of bright light, such as a torch, and surrounding darkness. The soft light of twilight and dawn also counts as dim light. A particularly brilliant full moon might bathe the land in dim light. -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.
Much of the discussion I've personally come across (which isn't a whole lot, frankly) regarding devil's sight and darkvision surrounds what happens in dim light, which is better than the other (or how), how they're different, and so on. What I'm more curious about is how folks may interpret these rules together - utilized by the same character. Consider the two following interpretations (or any others offer later):
1 - all the benefits; none of the conflicts. The character can use devil's sight in magical or nonmagical darkness to see normal (presumably bright light if your character has typical color vision and what not) and darkvision to see dim light as bright light, thus seeing all light levels (within range of the applicable effect) as normal/bright light. This is regardless of whether a character is using both benefits 'stacked' or if they simply choose which to utilize and when or whatever mechanic that allows the player to simply gain all the benefits of having both.
2 - all the conflicts; maybe some benefits. 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.
Now, the 1st seems to be less technical and easier for the player (and likely DM) as well as more fun and powerful. Honestly, I would think this is the most common interpretation because it's my first thought so statistically that's probably what most would have too, right?
But then I got wondering, "why wouldn't they conflict? where's the rule?" and struck out. Usually even the most complicated rules become quite clear, even when in conflict with another, by applying the principle "specific beats general" (that section under "How to Play" in the PHB cuts through forums like a hot knife through butter - pg. 7) and paying attention to key words. In this case, I struggle to find the language which would confirm one over the other, producing a "which first: the-chicken-or-the-egg" dilemma. Does the character see normally in darkness before darkvision makes as if it were dim light where devil's sight has no effect? Would you simply rely on the would "can" present in both rules to fudge your way around the conflict (say you're the DM and it's your discretion) or is there some level of specificity, perhaps another rule, which would shed some light on this subject - give us truesight?
And frankly - I'm not terribly concerned with the subject but find it an interesting example of potential conflict of interpretation and rather enjoy combing the rules like a lawyer 😀 Of course you can always make something up to make it work! But isn't it fun when you really skewer the point on some rules??
PS - consider Gloom Stalker's Umbral Sight paired with the feat Eldritch Adept - Devil's Sight.
When you're in an area of darkness, you're in an area of darkness. Whether you perceive it as dim light or not doesn't change that. Devil's Sight is triggered by being in darkness, not by your perception of your surroundings. Being blinded won't turn on Devil's Sight for instance, nor will an illusion of darkness around you. But being in actual darkness will, regardless of darkvision - that's simply not a factor.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I think it would be pretty illogical to state that someone with Devil's Sight sees worse in dim light than they do in darkness. I think the RAI is that you see normally in any light and in magical darkness. I would even rule that you see normally in magical dim light (like the Twilight Clerics Channel Divinity).
You would think that but it is neither RAW nor RAI if you follow Jeremy Crawford tweets. There is a tweet floating around where JC says that devils sight only works in darkness and not in dim light. Which happens to be exactly what it says but some folks prefer to run it otherwise.
P.S. Devils sight takes precedence over darkvision based on its wording and possibly the concept of specific beating general.
"Devil’s Sight
You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet."
It doesn't say "You can see normally in areas you perceive as darkness" .. it says you can "see normally in darkness" so all that is required is for the area to be dark and devils sight works. Darkvision has no interaction. If you have both darkvision and devils sight then you can see perfectly within the range of darkvision in all lighting conditions.
A shadow sorcerer/warlock multiclass for example could have both 120' darkvision and 120' devils sight which lets the character see perfectly within 120' in all lighting conditions.
P.P.S. The drawback of devils sight in dim light seems to only rarely come into play since most areas are either brightly lit or darkness - for a character without darkvision, when this does come up, it just means an area in view where the character has disadvantage on perception checks.
A character with devils sight (without darkvision) holding a torch - can see perfectly from 0-20' in the brightly lit area, has disadvantage on perception checks relying on sight and sees things in black and white in the 20'-40' dimly lit region and then can see perfectly again from 40'-120'. Douse the torch and make everything dark and they see perfectly from 0-120'.
And why would it make sense that there is a ring in between candlelight and pure darkness that is harder to see than in pure darkness?
It doesn't make sense. But the rules for darkness/vision in general doesn't make sense so it's not surprising when stuff that interacts with it gets iffy too.
I think it would be pretty illogical to state that someone with Devil's Sight sees worse in dim light than they do in darkness. I think the RAI is that you see normally in any light and in magical darkness. I would even rule that you see normally in magical dim light (like the Twilight Clerics Channel Divinity).
You would think that but it is neither RAW nor RAI if you follow Jeremy Crawford tweets. There is a tweet floating around where JC says that devils sight only works in darkness and not in dim light. Which happens to be exactly what it says but some folks prefer to run it otherwise.
P.S. Devils sight takes precedence over darkvision based on its wording and possibly the concept of specific beating general.
"Devil’s Sight
You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet."
It doesn't say "You can see normally in areas you perceive as darkness" .. it says you can "see normally in darkness" so all that is required is for the area to be dark and devils sight works. Darkvision has no interaction. If you have both darkvision and devils sight then you can see perfectly within the range of darkvision in all lighting conditions.
A shadow sorcerer/warlock multiclass for example could have both 120' darkvision and 120' devils sight which lets the character see perfectly within 120' in all lighting conditions.
P.P.S. The drawback of devils sight in dim light seems to only rarely come into play since most areas are either brightly lit or darkness - for a character without darkvision, when this does come up, it just means an area in view where the character has disadvantage on perception checks.
A character with devils sight (without darkvision) holding a torch - can see perfectly from 0-20' in the brightly lit area, has disadvantage on perception checks relying on sight and sees things in black and white in the 20'-40' dimly lit region and then can see perfectly again from 40'-120'. Douse the torch and make everything dark and they see perfectly from 0-120'.
The two tweets from Crawford you mentioned are contradictory. First, he says that you don't have to be in darkness for Devil's Sight to work, but then he said that you have to "douse that candle so the dark powers will lend me sight". The Invocations sections says that they "that imbue you with an abiding magical ability." So, you don't need darkness there to see better, it is innate.
no they don't - Crawford is saying you don't have to be IN the darkness to see in it normally and then says elsewhere it has no effect on Dim Light, just as RAW dictate... Its very specific so using Devil's Sight to see normally in Dim Light is 100% home-brew
And why would it make sense that there is a ring in between candlelight and pure darkness that is harder to see than in pure darkness?
cuz magic? its an eldritch invocation from making a pact with some extra-planar entity, lol
I'm curious in people's thoughts, ideas, and interpretations but like I said, I'm not trying to repeat a "devils sight works in dim light" debate you can find all over the web, lol
To cut the Devil's Sight in Dim Light debate short, I'd like to point out that it's effectively supposed to function as though darkness works for Devils the same way light does for everyone else - like, they can literally shine/cast darkness in order to see better (vs simply seeing in the dark real good). This is how RAW says it works mechanically and what RAI implies.
Again, I think the Monster Manual version of Devil's Sight confuses folks as that really is just an enhanced darkvision. However, the Eldritch Invocation Devil's Sight is clearly different comparing the two rules (is there an echo in here?). Hence why dim is still dim... It is neither Light or Dark so you don't see as if 'illuminated' by either lightness or darkness. This ability comes from pacts with typically evil or otherwise shadey entities and doesn't need to make sense from a scientific or Material-Plane viewpoint. The ability doesn't come from there.
I think it would be pretty illogical to state that someone with Devil's Sight sees worse in dim light than they do in darkness. I think the RAI is that you see normally in any light and in magical darkness. I would even rule that you see normally in magical dim light (like the Twilight Clerics Channel Divinity).
If you're thinking about Devil's Sight as Super-Darkvision, sure - then it seems illogical. But! As soon as you realize Devils simply use darkness as if it were light vs seeing really good in the dark, it makes a lot more sense.
Why isn't dim normal/bright? Given light and dark are opposites - they cancel out, not add together. Dim light is the lowest level of either.
Consider this: A human warlock w/ Devil's Sight in perpetual/pervasive dim light - perhaps a polar region in its summer season. They can see, but poorly just like everyone else without darkvision. They pull out a torch but cast Darkness on it instead of lighting it (maybe its storming or they don't want to be spotted so easily from a distance). It functions the exact same way it would if they had lit it. Clearly within the perimeter of the darkness spell with the edge of the darkness, shifting to dim light where they struggle to see. They must "illuminate" what they're trying to see with the darkness.
And you could certainly choose to run your game where it just works like super darkvision like in the monster manual, but it would be home-brew.
I'm not understanding what rules basis you think you've found for the two abilities conflicting in any way. Using a strict interpretation of Devil's Sight to have it not interact with Dim Light in any way, you get this:
Suppose a Twilight Cleric grants their 300 foot darkvision to a Warlock with Devil's Sight (which is range 120 feet) and the character has a bullseye lantern (light in a 120 foot cone: 60 of bright, then 60 of dim). The entire world is currently completely dark.
If the Warlock looks where the lantern isn't pointing, they see normally, in full color, out to 120 feet. For 180 feet past that, they see using standard Darkvision, so it's in grey and inflicts Disadvantage on seeing things.
If the Warlock looks at something brightly lit by the cone, they also see normally.
If the Warlock looks at something dimly lit by the cone, Devil's Sight does nothing but Darkvision kicks in, letting them see normally: Dim Light doesn't have any rules for making you see in grey and Darkvision does have rules for removing the Disadvantage Dim Light inflicts.
So as you can see, no conflict.
Also, I can't disagree with you any harder than I do on "specific beats general" being a remotely useful guideline, because it doesn't come with any clarity from WOTC whatsoever on measuring specificity vs. generality. Which is more specific, the text of a spell or the text of a subclass feature? The concept doesn't make sense.
I'm not understanding what rules basis you think you've found for the two abilities conflicting in any way. Using a strict interpretation of Devil's Sight to have it not interact with Dim Light in any way, you get this:
Suppose a Twilight Cleric grants their 300 foot darkvision to a Warlock with Devil's Sight (which is range 120 feet) and the character has a bullseye lantern (light in a 120 foot cone: 60 of bright, then 60 of dim). The entire world is currently completely dark.
If the Warlock looks where the lantern isn't pointing, they see normally, in full color, out to 120 feet. For 180 feet past that, they see using standard Darkvision, so it's in grey and inflicts Disadvantage on seeing things.
If the Warlock looks at something brightly lit by the cone, they also see normally.
If the Warlock looks at something dimly lit by the cone, Devil's Sight does nothing but Darkvision kicks in, letting them see normally: Dim Light doesn't have any rules for making you see in grey and Darkvision does have rules for removing the Disadvantage Dim Light inflicts.
So as you can see, no conflict.
Only if you apply the rule Devil's Sight before the rule Darkvision which I believe most people do. But there's absolutely nothing saying your DM couldn't enforce rules RAW (like in league play) and make you apply Darkvision before Devil's Sight, thus making all that darkness just dim light where Devil's Sight has no benefit. In other words, where is the language that puts one before the other? And if it helps, this is a thought experiment - not an actual dilemma.
For example, if you're familiar with modding games, this concept is no different than your load order and which 'mod' applies over others. In this case, what puts Devil's Sight before Darkvision. Consider the far simpler variant of Devil's Sight found on monsters in the MM - if somehow a NPC Devil lost their Darkvision, their Devil's Sight would be gone whereas if a PC Warlock w/ the invocation somehow lost their darkvision, their Devil's Sight remains in tact. The NPC Devil's Sight is automatically stacked behind Darkvision. There is no language dictating that for the PC version gained as a Eldritch Invocation (yes - that's right; there are two Devil's Sight which are different depending on who you are/how you got Devil Sight)
Now if you had said the inclusion of the word "can" allows the Player to decide which effect is applied first, then ok. Otherwise, you've missed the point I'm presenting. Again, I would agree with you on that's how they should function together - applying Devil's Sight BEFORE Darkvision so you can see normally in darkness of any kind, then darkvision to scrub out any dim light in range left behind by Devil's Sight - but where's the proof? I enjoy hunting for language which establishes such practices.
Let me illustrate what I mean... In your example, you're simply applying Devil's Sight first (which again, makes the most sense).
Suppose a Twilight Cleric grants their 300 foot darkvision to a Warlock with Devil's Sight (which is range 120 feet) and the character has a bullseye lantern (light in a 120 foot cone: 60 of bright, then 60 of dim). The entire world is currently completely dark. (not applicable - setting the scene)
If the Warlock looks where the lantern isn't pointing, they see normally, in full color, out to 120 feet. For 180 feet past that, they see using standard Darkvision, so it's in grey and inflicts Disadvantage on seeing things. (Devil's Sight first, Darkvision second - otherwise your Darkness is Dim beyond the effect of the Devil's Sight)
If the Warlock looks at something brightly lit by the cone, they also see normally. (neither rule applies here)
If the Warlock looks at something dimly lit by the cone, Devil's Sight does nothing but Darkvision kicks in, letting them see normally: Dim Light doesn't have any rules for making you see in grey and Darkvision does have rules for removing the Disadvantage Dim Light inflicts. (Devil's Sight doesn't apply so it doesn't matter - Darkvision could be first or second, same thing happens)
But, if for some reason you chose to apply Darkvision first: -Cleric casts Darkvision on a Warlock who only has Devil's Sight and a Bull's Eye Lantern. Everything is dark. (setting) -Anywhere the lantern isn't shining the character sees 300ft of Dim Light (including disadvantage and colorless descriptions) since Darkvision turned the Darkness to Dim Light out to 300ftp where Devil's Sight has no benefit. (darkvision then devil's sight) -The Warlock also sees normal within the bright light of the cone, as well as the dim part, because of Darkvision. (devils sight doesnt apply, darkvision only)
It's a thought experiment - So is it simply the word "can" within the rules which is to imply we pick how these buffs stack up with one another? I've read elsewhere where people have taken this interpretation to the point of a creature with darkvision and/or devil's sight could choose not to see with either ("can" suggesting a choice) but could still use their 'normal' vision, say by torchlight. Now, things like Sunlight Sensitivity have no "can" verbiage in them, removing the choice of applying the disadvantage or not suggesting including it with certain buffs/advantages, like darkvision, is to allow people flexibility in things like how to stack them in ways they believe would be best for them.
Also, I can't disagree with you any harder than I do on "specific beats general" being a remotely useful guideline, because it doesn't come with any clarity from WOTC whatsoever on measuring specificity vs. generality. Which is more specific, the text of a spell or the text of a subclass feature? The concept doesn't make sense.
Ah, I'm glad you mentioned it - whichever has the more specific context (its not that "spells" automatically are more specific than a "feature" categorically, but rather what they say)... Like a warforged trying to use the new 'Eldritch Armor' Invocation
Eldritch Armor: As an action, you can touch a suit of armor that isn’t being worn or carried by anyone and instantly don it, provided you aren’t wearing armor already. You are proficient with this suit of armor until it’s removed. Warforged Integrated Protection:
You gain a +1 bonus to Armor Class.
You can don only armor with which you have proficiency. To don armor, you must incorporate it into your body over the course of 1 hour, during which you remain in contact with the armor. To doff armor, you must spend 1 hour removing it. You can rest while donning or doffing armor in this way.
While you live, your armor can’t be removed from your body against your will.
Between the language of the too seemingly conflicting features - they could clearly use the Invocation due to the inclusion of the word "don"
Many focus on whether warforged can have their armor targeted by spells like Heat Metal when there's nothing to say they can't. Many see the "integrated as part of their body" but that offers zero specificity as far as the rules go as to whether that means an Warforged in armor is actually considered naked/in non-armor clothing (like perhaps a disguise or common clothes). Otherwise, the rule comes off the rails - do they need to worry about the weight of the armor since its now part of their body? Other races don't have to worry about how much their body weighs? Do they need to worry about strength requirements for Heavy Armor? AAALL these questions arise from trying to stretch the language (or limiting a rule by ignoring key language).
perhaps you have an example of two rules which conflict and there's no way to tell which would apply, RAW?
When you're in an area of darkness, you're in an area of darkness. Whether you perceive it as dim light or not doesn't change that. Devil's Sight is triggered by being in darkness, not by your perception of your surroundings. Being blinded won't turn on Devil's Sight for instance, nor will an illusion of darkness around you. But being in actual darkness will, regardless of darkvision - that's simply not a factor.
ok then - so why does Devil Sight automatically overwrite Darkvision's rules?? Darkvision and Devil's Sight are BOTH triggered by looking into Darkness simultaneously (as well as Dim Light w/ Darkvision) so which applies first. Does your character FIRST perceive the Darkness as Dim Light thru Darkvision, or can they see normally in it first w Devil's Sight? I made the same consideration you did, thinking to myself, "Well, yea, Darkvision makes the character Perceive Darkness as Dim Light, but they're still in Darkness suggesting they could see Normally" but then rapidly realized, "oh yea, Darkvision is doing the same thing - creating a perception triggered by actual darkness! so which does the character perceive?"
Now, I would think everyone could agree that it just makes the most sense to apply Devil's Sight first, then Darkvision - you should get aaall the benefits of both without the rules conflicting suggesting this is rule as RAI without any backup from RAW except for the inclusion of the word "can" in each rule. However, in this thought experiment, I wonder if there's some way I'm not seeing which confirms players get to choose which order their buffs and what not stack in so they may gain the greatest advantage with the fewest amounts of considerations and conflicts for smooth gameplay.
While this doesn't necessarily move the conversation forward, it's interesting to consider the MM's Devil's Sight for devils would not give them color vision in any kind of darkness. It truly is an enhanced darkvision. Why isn't it written this way for Players?
-a player may not have darkvision to run Devil's Sight off of (which could have been included); devil's always have darkvision so its probably easier for DMs to manage them this way. -simply allowing a player's darkvision to cut thru magical darkness may not carry enough weight to make it a strong pick for a Warlock (or as a feat) but eliminating Darkness entirely is pretty hot. -leaving dim light untouched by player's devil's sight gives differentiation to the abilities, so a warlock doesn't feel like a previous benefit is now dead weight. Darkvision as a racial or class feature always comes at a cost, thus, if Devil's Sight was just an enhanced Darkvision like in the MM, it would be far more valuable to a character who doesn't inherently have darkvision like a Warforged or Human (who get crazy bonuses, like an additional 6 attribute points for Human Variant or a whole slew of survival buffs for Warforged - if they can shrink or you have a cool DM, they can live indefinitely inside Bags of Holding for crying out loud) - the way it currently is, a human or warforged would still reap a massive benefit from Devil's Sight, however, there is still a great benefit to also/only having Darkvision.
I think a lot of people interpret Devil's Sight in a way that it should almost come with Sunlight Sensitivity - like an ultra-darkvision when it's really using darkness as anti-light. Darkness and light still cancel each other out, but either in sufficient amounts can be used for those w/ devil's sight to see with. Whereas a Drow's Superior Darkvision which includes Sunlight Sensitivity (indirectly) really is a turbo-charged darkvision, as the name suggests, but not without it's limitations - their eyes are so acclimated to darkness, they cannot tolerate extreme light, like sunlight/daylight.
Does anyone have any other "rule conflicts" we could use to have a similar conversation just not necessarily focusing on the mechanics of darkvision and related?
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 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.
When you're in an area of darkness, you're in an area of darkness. Whether you perceive it as dim light or not doesn't change that. Devil's Sight is triggered by being in darkness, not by your perception of your surroundings. Being blinded won't turn on Devil's Sight for instance, nor will an illusion of darkness around you. But being in actual darkness will, regardless of darkvision - that's simply not a factor.
1) ok then - so why does Devil Sight automatically overwrite Darkvision's rules??
2) Darkvision and Devil's Sight are BOTH triggered by looking into Darkness simultaneously (as well as Dim Light w/ Darkvision) so which applies first.
3) Does your character FIRST perceive the Darkness as Dim Light thru Darkvision, or can they see normally in it first w Devil's Sight? I made the same consideration you did, thinking to myself, "Well, yea, Darkvision makes the character Perceive Darkness as Dim Light, but they're still in Darkness suggesting they could see Normally" but then rapidly realized, "oh yea, Darkvision is doing the same thing - creating a perception triggered by actual darkness! so which does the character perceive?"
1) It doesn't. They're separate mechanics that don't affect the other.
2) They are applied simultaneously.
3) It doesn't matter, because it doesn't matter what the character perceives. What matters is what circumstances the character is in. An area of darkness is an area of darkness regardless of what kinds of vision the character might have. Darkvision doesn't make dim light in darkness. It doesn't make light at all. It lets a character see as if they were in dim light, that's all. Devil's Sight says you can see normally in darkness, not that you can see normally in what you perceive as 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" - not that you treat dim light as bright light and darkness as dim light.
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.
No, you're wrong.
The wording I quoted specifies "as if it were dim light". This means that it is still darkness, but you can see as IF it were dim light. Thus the wording of Devil's Sight can still be applied.
Other light/darkness spells actually change the level of light, so not relevant to this discussion where abilities are only working AS IF the lighting was something else rather than ACTUALLY something else.
Most effects in the game happen in succession, following an order set by the rules or the DM. In rare cases, effects can happen at the same time, especially at the start or end of a creature’s turn. If two or more things happen at the same time on a character or monster’s turn, the person at the game table — whether player or DM — who controls that creature decides the order in which those things happen. For example, if two effects occur at the end of a player character’s turn, the player decides which of the two effects happens first.
So a player can choose in which order to apply Darkvision and Devil's Sight, if they have both.
Most effects in the game happen in succession, following an order set by the rules or the DM. In rare cases, effects can happen at the same time, especially at the start or end of a creature’s turn. If two or more things happen at the same time on a character or monster’s turn, the person at the game table — whether player or DM — who controls that creature decides the order in which those things happen. For example, if two effects occur at the end of a player character’s turn, the player decides which of the two effects happens first.
So a player can choose in which order to apply Darkvision and Devil's Sight, if they have both
Thats the ticket! Badda-bing-badda-boom! Thank you for that! <queue Celestial Choir singing>
I was thinking, "there's no way WotC is just going to float something like that on RAI" lmao
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.
No, you're wrong.
The wording I quoted specifies "as if it were dim light". This means that it is still darkness, but you can see as IF it were dim light. Thus the wording of Devil's Sight can still be applied.
Other light/darkness spells actually change the level of light, so not relevant to this discussion where abilities are only working AS IF the lighting was something else rather than ACTUALLY something else.
no, you're wrong lol
"as if it were dim light" is to ensure that darkvision always has an opportunity to apply mechanically like with the phrasing in Find Familiar, "Finally, when you cast a spell with a range of touch, your familiar can deliver the spell as if it had cast the spell"
Its key phrasing they use to widen the criteria for application. In other words, you're applying that phrasing backwards. You're saying it basically only applies when you want it to and/or has a specific meaning when its actually designed to widen the application and usage. It makes it "as if it" were something different, even though its not.
Darkvision treats Darkness as if it were Dim Light, even though it isn't. 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"
And I get (and knew) you would contend "the actual light levels" change but that's all interpretation is the point. You nailed it w/ the Simultaneous Effect rule but you're stretching the Darkvision rule like under-sized yoga-pants rn, lol
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).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
GREAT VICTORY! Thank you @Farling for the slam dunk rule for the clarification of this type of scenario!
"Simultaneous Effects" (XGtE; pg.5) clarifies the below leaving ALL language of the rules in tact - RAW (no-RAI)
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.
*Of course, there are a number of ways a character may possess darkvision - from spells and equipment to race and class - but the only real differences in the ability, regardless the source, would be the range and duration of the darkvision effect.
Devil's Sight (Warlock Eldritch Invocation): You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
*Once only available to Warlocks - now available to all via feat Eldritch Adept. Note there is another version of this ability; the monster trait (featured on devils - go figure) 'devil's sight' reads, "Magical darkness doesn't impede the [monster]'s darkvision." This NPC version is simply an enhancement/buff to their darkvision. A cause of confusion across many verses. Also notice there is no reference to dim light (whether the Eldritch Invocation or the monster trait) therefore devil's sight has no effect on dim light - characters see in 'greyscale' and have disadvantage on Perception checks.
Speaking of grey areas - there are none regarding light levels:
The presence or absence of light in an environment creates three categories of illumination: bright light, dim light, and darkness.
-Bright light lets most creatures see normally. Even gloomy days provide bright light, as do torches, lanterns, fires, and other sources of illumination within a specific radius.
-Dim light, also called shadows, creates a lightly obscured area. An area of dim light is usually a boundary between a source of bright light, such as a torch, and surrounding darkness. The soft light of twilight and dawn also counts as dim light. A particularly brilliant full moon might bathe the land in dim light.
-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.
Much of the discussion I've personally come across (which isn't a whole lot, frankly) regarding devil's sight and darkvision surrounds what happens in dim light, which is better than the other (or how), how they're different, and so on. What I'm more curious about is how folks may interpret these rules together - utilized by the same character. Consider the two following interpretations (or any others offer later):
1 - all the benefits; none of the conflicts. The character can use devil's sight in magical or nonmagical darkness to see normal (presumably bright light if your character has typical color vision and what not) and darkvision to see dim light as bright light, thus seeing all light levels (within range of the applicable effect) as normal/bright light. This is regardless of whether a character is using both benefits 'stacked' or if they simply choose which to utilize and when or whatever mechanic that allows the player to simply gain all the benefits of having both.
2 - all the conflicts; maybe some benefits. 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.
Now, the 1st seems to be less technical and easier for the player (and likely DM) as well as more fun and powerful. Honestly, I would think this is the most common interpretation because it's my first thought so statistically that's probably what most would have too, right?
But then I got wondering, "why wouldn't they conflict? where's the rule?" and struck out. Usually even the most complicated rules become quite clear, even when in conflict with another, by applying the principle "specific beats general" (that section under "How to Play" in the PHB cuts through forums like a hot knife through butter - pg. 7) and paying attention to key words. In this case, I struggle to find the language which would confirm one over the other, producing a "which first: the-chicken-or-the-egg" dilemma. Does the character see normally in darkness before darkvision makes as if it were dim light where devil's sight has no effect? Would you simply rely on the would "can" present in both rules to fudge your way around the conflict (say you're the DM and it's your discretion) or is there some level of specificity, perhaps another rule, which would shed some light on this subject - give us truesight?
And frankly - I'm not terribly concerned with the subject but find it an interesting example of potential conflict of interpretation and rather enjoy combing the rules like a lawyer 😀 Of course you can always make something up to make it work! But isn't it fun when you really skewer the point on some rules??
PS - consider Gloom Stalker's Umbral Sight paired with the feat Eldritch Adept - Devil's Sight.
When you're in an area of darkness, you're in an area of darkness. Whether you perceive it as dim light or not doesn't change that. Devil's Sight is triggered by being in darkness, not by your perception of your surroundings. Being blinded won't turn on Devil's Sight for instance, nor will an illusion of darkness around you. But being in actual darkness will, regardless of darkvision - that's simply not a factor.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
You would think that but it is neither RAW nor RAI if you follow Jeremy Crawford tweets. There is a tweet floating around where JC says that devils sight only works in darkness and not in dim light. Which happens to be exactly what it says but some folks prefer to run it otherwise.
https://www.sageadvice.eu/does-warlock-devils-sight-see-in-darkness-as-if-it-were-dim-light-or-as-if-it-were-bright-light/
Jeremy Crawford: "Devil's Sight has no interaction with dim light. It alters only how you experience darkness."
https://www.sageadvice.eu/devils-sight-vision/
P.S. Devils sight takes precedence over darkvision based on its wording and possibly the concept of specific beating general.
"Devil’s Sight
You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet."
It doesn't say "You can see normally in areas you perceive as darkness" .. it says you can "see normally in darkness" so all that is required is for the area to be dark and devils sight works. Darkvision has no interaction. If you have both darkvision and devils sight then you can see perfectly within the range of darkvision in all lighting conditions.
A shadow sorcerer/warlock multiclass for example could have both 120' darkvision and 120' devils sight which lets the character see perfectly within 120' in all lighting conditions.
P.P.S. The drawback of devils sight in dim light seems to only rarely come into play since most areas are either brightly lit or darkness - for a character without darkvision, when this does come up, it just means an area in view where the character has disadvantage on perception checks.
A character with devils sight (without darkvision) holding a torch - can see perfectly from 0-20' in the brightly lit area, has disadvantage on perception checks relying on sight and sees things in black and white in the 20'-40' dimly lit region and then can see perfectly again from 40'-120'. Douse the torch and make everything dark and they see perfectly from 0-120'.
It doesn't make sense. But the rules for darkness/vision in general doesn't make sense so it's not surprising when stuff that interacts with it gets iffy too.
no they don't - Crawford is saying you don't have to be IN the darkness to see in it normally and then says elsewhere it has no effect on Dim Light, just as RAW dictate... Its very specific so using Devil's Sight to see normally in Dim Light is 100% home-brew
cuz magic? its an eldritch invocation from making a pact with some extra-planar entity, lol
I'm curious in people's thoughts, ideas, and interpretations but like I said, I'm not trying to repeat a "devils sight works in dim light" debate you can find all over the web, lol
To cut the Devil's Sight in Dim Light debate short, I'd like to point out that it's effectively supposed to function as though darkness works for Devils the same way light does for everyone else - like, they can literally shine/cast darkness in order to see better (vs simply seeing in the dark real good). This is how RAW says it works mechanically and what RAI implies.
Again, I think the Monster Manual version of Devil's Sight confuses folks as that really is just an enhanced darkvision. However, the Eldritch Invocation Devil's Sight is clearly different comparing the two rules (is there an echo in here?). Hence why dim is still dim... It is neither Light or Dark so you don't see as if 'illuminated' by either lightness or darkness. This ability comes from pacts with typically evil or otherwise shadey entities and doesn't need to make sense from a scientific or Material-Plane viewpoint. The ability doesn't come from there.
If you're thinking about Devil's Sight as Super-Darkvision, sure - then it seems illogical. But! As soon as you realize Devils simply use darkness as if it were light vs seeing really good in the dark, it makes a lot more sense.
Why isn't dim normal/bright? Given light and dark are opposites - they cancel out, not add together. Dim light is the lowest level of either.
Consider this: A human warlock w/ Devil's Sight in perpetual/pervasive dim light - perhaps a polar region in its summer season. They can see, but poorly just like everyone else without darkvision. They pull out a torch but cast Darkness on it instead of lighting it (maybe its storming or they don't want to be spotted so easily from a distance). It functions the exact same way it would if they had lit it. Clearly within the perimeter of the darkness spell with the edge of the darkness, shifting to dim light where they struggle to see. They must "illuminate" what they're trying to see with the darkness.
And you could certainly choose to run your game where it just works like super darkvision like in the monster manual, but it would be home-brew.
I'm not understanding what rules basis you think you've found for the two abilities conflicting in any way. Using a strict interpretation of Devil's Sight to have it not interact with Dim Light in any way, you get this:
So as you can see, no conflict.
Also, I can't disagree with you any harder than I do on "specific beats general" being a remotely useful guideline, because it doesn't come with any clarity from WOTC whatsoever on measuring specificity vs. generality. Which is more specific, the text of a spell or the text of a subclass feature? The concept doesn't make sense.
Only if you apply the rule Devil's Sight before the rule Darkvision which I believe most people do. But there's absolutely nothing saying your DM couldn't enforce rules RAW (like in league play) and make you apply Darkvision before Devil's Sight, thus making all that darkness just dim light where Devil's Sight has no benefit. In other words, where is the language that puts one before the other? And if it helps, this is a thought experiment - not an actual dilemma.
For example, if you're familiar with modding games, this concept is no different than your load order and which 'mod' applies over others. In this case, what puts Devil's Sight before Darkvision. Consider the far simpler variant of Devil's Sight found on monsters in the MM - if somehow a NPC Devil lost their Darkvision, their Devil's Sight would be gone whereas if a PC Warlock w/ the invocation somehow lost their darkvision, their Devil's Sight remains in tact. The NPC Devil's Sight is automatically stacked behind Darkvision. There is no language dictating that for the PC version gained as a Eldritch Invocation (yes - that's right; there are two Devil's Sight which are different depending on who you are/how you got Devil Sight)
Now if you had said the inclusion of the word "can" allows the Player to decide which effect is applied first, then ok. Otherwise, you've missed the point I'm presenting. Again, I would agree with you on that's how they should function together - applying Devil's Sight BEFORE Darkvision so you can see normally in darkness of any kind, then darkvision to scrub out any dim light in range left behind by Devil's Sight - but where's the proof? I enjoy hunting for language which establishes such practices.
Let me illustrate what I mean... In your example, you're simply applying Devil's Sight first (which again, makes the most sense).
But, if for some reason you chose to apply Darkvision first:
-Cleric casts Darkvision on a Warlock who only has Devil's Sight and a Bull's Eye Lantern. Everything is dark. (setting)
-Anywhere the lantern isn't shining the character sees 300ft of Dim Light (including disadvantage and colorless descriptions) since Darkvision turned the Darkness to Dim Light out to 300ftp where Devil's Sight has no benefit. (darkvision then devil's sight)
-The Warlock also sees normal within the bright light of the cone, as well as the dim part, because of Darkvision. (devils sight doesnt apply, darkvision only)
It's a thought experiment - So is it simply the word "can" within the rules which is to imply we pick how these buffs stack up with one another? I've read elsewhere where people have taken this interpretation to the point of a creature with darkvision and/or devil's sight could choose not to see with either ("can" suggesting a choice) but could still use their 'normal' vision, say by torchlight. Now, things like Sunlight Sensitivity have no "can" verbiage in them, removing the choice of applying the disadvantage or not suggesting including it with certain buffs/advantages, like darkvision, is to allow people flexibility in things like how to stack them in ways they believe would be best for them.
Ah, I'm glad you mentioned it - whichever has the more specific context (its not that "spells" automatically are more specific than a "feature" categorically, but rather what they say)... Like a warforged trying to use the new 'Eldritch Armor' Invocation
Eldritch Armor: As an action, you can touch a suit of armor that isn’t being worn or carried by anyone and instantly don it, provided you aren’t wearing armor already. You are proficient with this suit of armor until it’s removed.
Warforged Integrated Protection:
Between the language of the too seemingly conflicting features - they could clearly use the Invocation due to the inclusion of the word "don"
Many focus on whether warforged can have their armor targeted by spells like Heat Metal when there's nothing to say they can't. Many see the "integrated as part of their body" but that offers zero specificity as far as the rules go as to whether that means an Warforged in armor is actually considered naked/in non-armor clothing (like perhaps a disguise or common clothes). Otherwise, the rule comes off the rails - do they need to worry about the weight of the armor since its now part of their body? Other races don't have to worry about how much their body weighs? Do they need to worry about strength requirements for Heavy Armor? AAALL these questions arise from trying to stretch the language (or limiting a rule by ignoring key language).
perhaps you have an example of two rules which conflict and there's no way to tell which would apply, RAW?
ok then - so why does Devil Sight automatically overwrite Darkvision's rules?? Darkvision and Devil's Sight are BOTH triggered by looking into Darkness simultaneously (as well as Dim Light w/ Darkvision) so which applies first. Does your character FIRST perceive the Darkness as Dim Light thru Darkvision, or can they see normally in it first w Devil's Sight? I made the same consideration you did, thinking to myself, "Well, yea, Darkvision makes the character Perceive Darkness as Dim Light, but they're still in Darkness suggesting they could see Normally" but then rapidly realized, "oh yea, Darkvision is doing the same thing - creating a perception triggered by actual darkness! so which does the character perceive?"
Now, I would think everyone could agree that it just makes the most sense to apply Devil's Sight first, then Darkvision - you should get aaall the benefits of both without the rules conflicting suggesting this is rule as RAI without any backup from RAW except for the inclusion of the word "can" in each rule. However, in this thought experiment, I wonder if there's some way I'm not seeing which confirms players get to choose which order their buffs and what not stack in so they may gain the greatest advantage with the fewest amounts of considerations and conflicts for smooth gameplay.
The point of the topic is to over think this, lol
While this doesn't necessarily move the conversation forward, it's interesting to consider the MM's Devil's Sight for devils would not give them color vision in any kind of darkness. It truly is an enhanced darkvision. Why isn't it written this way for Players?
-a player may not have darkvision to run Devil's Sight off of (which could have been included); devil's always have darkvision so its probably easier for DMs to manage them this way.
-simply allowing a player's darkvision to cut thru magical darkness may not carry enough weight to make it a strong pick for a Warlock (or as a feat) but eliminating Darkness entirely is pretty hot.
-leaving dim light untouched by player's devil's sight gives differentiation to the abilities, so a warlock doesn't feel like a previous benefit is now dead weight. Darkvision as a racial or class feature always comes at a cost, thus, if Devil's Sight was just an enhanced Darkvision like in the MM, it would be far more valuable to a character who doesn't inherently have darkvision like a Warforged or Human (who get crazy bonuses, like an additional 6 attribute points for Human Variant or a whole slew of survival buffs for Warforged - if they can shrink or you have a cool DM, they can live indefinitely inside Bags of Holding for crying out loud) - the way it currently is, a human or warforged would still reap a massive benefit from Devil's Sight, however, there is still a great benefit to also/only having Darkvision.
I think a lot of people interpret Devil's Sight in a way that it should almost come with Sunlight Sensitivity - like an ultra-darkvision when it's really using darkness as anti-light. Darkness and light still cancel each other out, but either in sufficient amounts can be used for those w/ devil's sight to see with. Whereas a Drow's Superior Darkvision which includes Sunlight Sensitivity (indirectly) really is a turbo-charged darkvision, as the name suggests, but not without it's limitations - their eyes are so acclimated to darkness, they cannot tolerate extreme light, like sunlight/daylight.
Does anyone have any other "rule conflicts" we could use to have a similar conversation just not necessarily focusing on the mechanics of darkvision and related?
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.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
1) It doesn't. They're separate mechanics that don't affect the other.
2) They are applied simultaneously.
3) It doesn't matter, because it doesn't matter what the character perceives. What matters is what circumstances the character is in. An area of darkness is an area of darkness regardless of what kinds of vision the character might have. Darkvision doesn't make dim light in darkness. It doesn't make light at all. It lets a character see as if they were in dim light, that's all. Devil's Sight says you can see normally in darkness, not that you can see normally in what you perceive as 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" - not that you treat dim light as bright light and darkness as dim light.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
No, you're wrong.
The wording I quoted specifies "as if it were dim light". This means that it is still darkness, but you can see as IF it were dim light. Thus the wording of Devil's Sight can still be applied.
Other light/darkness spells actually change the level of light, so not relevant to this discussion where abilities are only working AS IF the lighting was something else rather than ACTUALLY something else.
See Xanathar's Guide, https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/xgte/dungeon-masters-tools#SimultaneousEffects
So a player can choose in which order to apply Darkvision and Devil's Sight, if they have both.
Thats the ticket! Badda-bing-badda-boom! Thank you for that! <queue Celestial Choir singing>
I was thinking, "there's no way WotC is just going to float something like that on RAI" lmao
no, you're wrong lol
"as if it were dim light" is to ensure that darkvision always has an opportunity to apply mechanically like with the phrasing in Find Familiar, "Finally, when you cast a spell with a range of touch, your familiar can deliver the spell as if it had cast the spell"
Its key phrasing they use to widen the criteria for application. In other words, you're applying that phrasing backwards. You're saying it basically only applies when you want it to and/or has a specific meaning when its actually designed to widen the application and usage. It makes it "as if it" were something different, even though its not.
Darkvision treats Darkness as if it were Dim Light, even though it isn't. 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"
And I get (and knew) you would contend "the actual light levels" change but that's all interpretation is the point. You nailed it w/ the Simultaneous Effect rule but you're stretching the Darkvision rule like under-sized yoga-pants rn, lol
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).