Intuitively, this seems like a stupid question, because of course if you shoot an arrow into a ball of darkness you shouldn't be able to be as accurate as if you can see your target, but it looks like the rules paint a different picture when you read them:
PHB
When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll.
Seems straight forward, if you're in something like a fog cloud, or a darkness spell, or just everything is pitch black, anyone who attacks you should have disadvantage. This also makes total sense. But, then there's this rule
When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it.
Ok, so now being in total darkness or a fog cloud gives the attacker advantage because you can't see your attacker. And when you look at this rule
If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them, and you roll one d20. This is true even if multiple circumstances impose disadvantage and only one grants advantage or vice versa. In such a situation, you have neither advantage nor disadvantage.
So being in a fog cloud or total darkness reads as though it has 0 impact on combat. It seems like I'm missing something important, because 5 people blindfolded, or standing in pitch black and shooting arrows at each other would be just as effective as if they could see perfectly. Even weirder, now taking the dodge action or having other effects that cause disadvantage to your attackers is negated because multiple instances of advantage/disadvantage don't stack. Even more amusing, if you're trying to fight something invisible, then turn off all the lights or cast fog cloud or something similar. Now you can attack it as though you can see it because it can't see you (yes I'm aware you still sort of have to guess its position, but most people will argue to the death they can track things by sound, so I've given up fighting that, even though I'm convinced you wouldn't in the middle of a fight).
I just realized the most amusing version of this is someone with a long bow being 500 feet away using magical darkness of itself so it can attack normally instead of being penalized for the long range.
This seems completely ridiculous to me, but I can't find a good answer to it after looking. Am I interpreting this correctly, because I can't imagine this is correct, but I can't find anything in the rules to say it isn't?
Even if these scenarios cancel out both advantage and disadvantage, some species or feats can help you see through darkness, sometimes even magical darkness, which can be a bonus for them in the end.
Many D&D rules were designed to be simple to use and may not always be not the most realistic ones.
Sure, but this is a case where the problem isn't so much that the rules are unrealistic as it is that they're unsatisfactory. There's some very perverse outcomes of the rules working this way: as the OP pointed out, long-ranged attacks are actually easier in total darkness than they are in bright light. Rogues also can't activate their Sneak Attack feature if both they and their target are in the dark (unless they're using one of the rules that bypasses advantage). I really hope they address this in the 2024 books, because as is it's very disappointing.
Many D&D rules were designed to be simple to use and may not always be not the most realistic ones.
Sure, but this is a case where the problem isn't so much that the rules are unrealistic as it is that they're unsatisfactory. There's some very perverse outcomes of the rules working this way: as the OP pointed out, long-ranged attacks are actually easier in total darkness than they are in bright light. Rogues also can't activate their Sneak Attack feature if both they and their target are in the dark (unless they're using one of the rules that bypasses advantage). I really hope they address this in the 2024 books, because as is it's very disappointing.
If the rogue needing advantage to use a feature is offset by disadvantage it's normal that it now can't it's by design. It can still possibly use Sneak Attack in such circumstances though if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it and that enemy isn’t incapacitated.
A ranged attack with a weapon at long range is easier if the target can't see you than if it can, i think it's okay.
No, casting darkness on yourself or something that you are holding doesn't have that effect. The rules for Vision and Light in which darkness can create a Heavily Obscured area pertain to the location where you are looking TO, not the location where you ARE:
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.
If you are standing within a small area of darkness but you are shooting at something far away who is well illuminated, you can see that target perfectly fine, but that target cannot see you.
Yeah, but in my example, a ranged attack is easier if the attacker can't see the target, which is not ok.
No it's not easier it's as hard. If the attacker make a ranged weapon attack at long range;
1) The attack roll is made with disadvantage if the attacker can see the target.
2) The attack roll is made with disadvantage if the attacker can't see the target.
As you can see, wether the attacker can see the target or not doesn't grant any advantage. What does, is if the target can see the attacker or not. If the target received a ranged weapon attack at long range:
1) The attack roll is made with disadvantage if the target can see the attacker.
2) The attack roll is made normally if the target can't see the attacker.
In other words, in order to be easier to attack at long range, per Unseen Attackers and Targets, the attack must have advantage to offset the disadvantage, and this happen if he's unseen, regardless if he can see.
No, casting darkness on yourself or something that you are holding doesn't have that effect. The rules for Vision and Light in which darkness can create a Heavily Obscured area pertain to the location where you are looking TO, not the location where you ARE:
Both actually. An heavily obscured area such as Fog Cloud blocks vision entirely and a creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
So being in an area of darkness makes you unable to see through it, even with darkvision, unless you have a special ability to do so such the Devil's Sight trait or Devil's Sight Invocation for example.
No, casting darkness on yourself or something that you are holding doesn't have that effect. The rules for Vision and Light in which darkness can create a Heavily Obscured area pertain to the location where you are looking TO, not the location where you ARE:
Both actually. An heavily obscured area such as Fog Cloud blocks vision entirely and a creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
So being in an area of darkness makes you unable to see through it, even with darkvision, unless you have a special ability to do so such the Devil's Sight trait or Devil's Sight Invocation for example.
No, that's not the rule. The rules for heavily obscured areas only make it difficult to see something that is within that heavily obscured area. The area obscures the thing that you are trying to see. Whether or not something in the environment also blocks line of sight to areas outside of the heavily obscured area will depend on the specific scenario. It is reasonable to determine that fog will block your vision -- it's a physical obstruction to your line of sight. Darkness, including magical darkness, doesn't do this.
For example, you could be hiding in the woods in a nighttime environment of total darkness. Some distance away there are monsters gathered around a campfire, which provides light for a certain radius -- you are located far outside of this radius, but the monsters are within this radius. You can see these monsters clearly and can attack them with advantage as an unseen attacker. Magical darkness is listed within the same category and behaves the same way:
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.
and also:
The presence or absence of light in an environment creates three categories of illumination: bright light, dim light, and darkness.
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.
Outdoors at night is listed together with an area of magical darkness here. So, for the purposes of the rules for a heavily obscured area due to an absence of light, a mundane outdoor environment at night is equivalent to magical darkness. The only difference with the darkness spell is that normally "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." So, normally such a creature can see through the darkness to find whatever they are looking for within the heavily obscured area. In the case of the darkness spell, such creatures with darkvision do not have this ability within this area.
But in all of these cases, there is nothing physically obstructing line of sight for any of these creatures within the area to be able to see something outside of this area that is not heavily obscured. Darkness doesn't block line of sight, it just obscures the area.
There's always been a problem with mundane darkness because while you can't see while in it, you should be able to see light source beyond otherwise you'd never be able to even see stars! But regardless, any heavily obscured area block vision, so heavy fog or snow, magical darkness etc... if people can't see you in it, so you too.
If you think that creatures can see through heavily obscured area of spell and can see clear spaces and creature on the other side, we're not understanding the rules the same way as to me that's not blocking vision entirely if you can see through.
The darkness spell states this, literally (emphasis mine):
[...] A creature with darkvisioncan't see through this darkness, and nonmagical light can't illuminate it. [...]
You cannot see through the magical darkness, even if you have darkvision. Logically, creatures without darkvision can't see through it either.
The spell also states light cannot illuminate the area, so there is no way of bringing in light from outside to stimulate your vision. If there is light outside the sphere, it is completely blocked by the spell. Even, if that light is magical:
If any of this spell's area overlaps with an area of light created by a spell of 2nd level or lower, the spell that created the light is dispelled.
Magical darkness is not like normal darkness, to begin with.
If you could see thru magical darkness it would either not be useful, or it would be an area invisibility spell. There's no other way for it to work. Not saying there's no other way to work except for magic... there's no other way for it to work period.
Take the scenario where you are in magical darkness and light can pass thru it. You look out and see a creature between you and a campfire. You can easily see its silhouette. Easy enough. BUT now imagine there's a 3rd creature outside the magical darkness on the direct opposite side of the fire as you. If light passes thru the darkness, it can see the light, except where you stand. It can now see you by your silhouette. For light to be able to pass thru the darkness but not be blocked by you, light would have to pass thru you as well. That's invisibility.
And as tarodnet pointed out, the spell says you can't see thru the darkness.
Imagine quotes, I'm on a phone
No it's not easier it's as hard. If the attacker make a ranged weapon attack at long range;
Nope, it's easier. You have disadvantage because you're 500 ft away. You create magical darkness, fog cloud, etc. Now you can't see the target, so you have disadvantage. But the target can't see you so you have advantage. You have 2 counts of disadvantage and 1 count of advantage. Since any amount of advantage cancels out any amount of disadvantage, you now attack without advantage or disadvantage. It's easier to attack that target 500 ft away with your longbow now that you can't see what you're shooting at and it can't see you.
If you could see thru magical darkness it would either not be useful, or it would be an area invisibility spell.
Yes, it's a little bit like an area invisibility spell, except that creatures would be able to see a big globe of darkness moving around. That darkness is not opaque though -- it just makes it so that you can't see things that are within it. If you cast darkness on yourself or on something that you are holding, it's basically a buff.
What a lot of people are imagining is that it's basically a blindness spell. It's not. There's another spell for that -- it's called blindness/deafness. In the case of the darkness spell, an area of darkness is created which causes ALL creatures (within the darkness and also outside of the darkness) to effectively suffer from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
It's sort of like if you had a painting with sort of a 3d view of the landscape, with objects in the foreground, the middleground and the background, this spell basically just takes a giant eraser and erases everything within the middleground. Objects in the foreground and background are still there and can be seen just fine, even those directly "behind" the middleground that was erased. If instead the spell was cast onto your location, then objects in the foreground get erased instead and you could still see the middleground and background.
Take the scenario where you are in magical darkness and light can pass thru it. You look out and see a creature between you and a campfire. You can easily see its silhouette.
No. In D&D 5e, if that creature is outside of the radius of the campfire, standing in non-magical darkness, you cannot see it at all without some sort of special feature such as darkvision. There is no silhouette. In the real world, if you can see a distant light source, then there is at least some light between you and that source. That contrast creates the silhouette. The rules in this game are simplified such that a light source has a radius and then there is total darkness. That's the whole point. Darkness creates a "heavily obscured area", which, at nighttime is basically the entire world except for places where there is a light source.
So, if creature A is within the radius of the campfire, and creature B is outside of this radius, located within non-magical darkness (either on the near side or the far side of the fire), and creature C is within magical darkness that is way outside of the campfire's radius . . . the result is that creatures B and C cannot see each other at all, but they could both see creature A. Creature A cannot see either of the other creatures. Now . . . suppose both creature B and creature C both have darkvision. Now, creature C CAN see creature B as if he were in dim light. However, creature B cannot see creature C because creature C is within magical darkness. It's better to be within the magical darkness.
There's always been a problem with mundane darkness because while you can't see while in it, you should be able to see light source beyond otherwise you'd never be able to even see stars! But regardless, any heavily obscured area block vision, so heavy fog or snow, magical darkness etc... if people can't see you in it, so you too.
If you think that creatures can see through heavily obscured area of spell and can see clear spaces and creature on the other side, we're not understanding the rules the same way as to me that's not blocking vision entirely if you can see through.
Yes, this is because you are not interpreting these rules correctly. A heavily obscured area affects that area. It makes it so that you cannot see things that are in that area. This is a different concept than "line of sight", which is when there is some sort of physical obstruction that you cannot see through. Some effects such as foliage or fog create both of these types of obstacles. Darkness does not. You can see through darkness, there is nothing in the way. This is why you CAN see the stars when you look up at the night sky! You cannot see anything between you and the stars because that area is heavily obscured, but the star itself is not heavily obscured by darkness since it provides its own light source.
The rule of thumb of "if I can see the creature then the creature can see me" is a line of sight concept, not related to the concept of heavily obscured areas (unless, again, you are talking about something such as foliage or fog which creates both types of obstacles).
Sort of semi-related, there are also game concepts of a "clear path" and also "Cover".
So, these are 4 different game concepts: Heavily obscured areas, line of sight, clear path, and cover. Darkness only creates one of these hindrances -- a heavily obscured area.
The darkness spell states this, literally (emphasis mine):
[...] A creature with darkvisioncan't see through this darkness, and nonmagical light can't illuminate it. [...]
You cannot see through the magical darkness, even if you have darkvision. Logically, creatures without darkvision can't see through it either.
The spell also states light cannot illuminate the area, so there is no way of bringing in light from outside to stimulate your vision. If there is light outside the sphere, it is completely blocked by the spell. Even, if that light is magical:
If any of this spell's area overlaps with an area of light created by a spell of 2nd level or lower, the spell that created the light is dispelled.
Magical darkness is not like normal darkness, to begin with.
There are at least 3 different ways that you are misinterpreting the rules here.
Why do you think that this text is specifically talking about creatures with darkvision instead of all creatures? So, if you don't have darkvision, you're good? That makes no sense. You are saying that we should make this logical leap, but that's not what's written. If you take a step back and really look at what's written there, they are making a point about what is different for a creature with darkvision -- they are not making a general point about the darkness. Creatures with darkvision can normally "see through" darkness because it looks like dim light to them. So, they can normally see everything within an area of darkness. But, for this magical darkness, they cannot. They cannot "see through" this darkness within the area. In this context, it's better to think of "see through" as though there is some sort of blanket covering the objects within the area that you cannot see through. But, if you are not looking at anything within the area, you can still see just fine. The blanket covers the area, it's not a blindfold covering your face -- it's a heavily obscured area. It only effectively causes the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area. This detail about creatures with darkvision is the only difference between this magical darkness and any old non-magical darkness. Otherwise, they both just create a darkness-based heavily obscured area.
Second, while it is true that you cannot bring light into the sphere to be able to see things within the sphere, it is very much not true that you cannot see light that is outside of the sphere. You can see that light just fine -- there is no physical barrier blocking your line of sight to that light source.
Third, magical darkness is very much like non-magical darkness in almost every way. They are listed together in the rules for Vision and 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.
These are treated the same way in terms of the rules for heavily obscured areas.
Lastly, why do you all think that so much of the spell text is dedicated to describing what happens if you cast the spell on an object that you are holding? And also, why is the AoE so small? Because that's one of the main ways that the spell is designed to be used! It's a buff! It's good to be within this magical darkness! It makes you an unseen attacker and an unseen target! In ranged combat, this is really good! And, if an enemy closes the distance and gets within melee range (which is now inside of the AoE), you can choose to turn off this darkness by covering it up! Without even using an action! It potentially just requires an object interaction! So, yeah, don't cast this onto your enemies or in the enemy area because then you can't see them. Cast it on your rogue instead for some serious sneak attacks.
I'll be honest: I houserule this nonsense. The impetus is on the ACTIVE participant.
The person getting hit not being able to see you has no bearing on your inability to see them -- and hit -- them.
I acknowledge that's not technically the rules, but it's the only thing that makes sense to me. Yes, I know that NARRATIVELY you can just wave away that you "walked into the hit" or whatever. But it's just not satisfying for me. I concede the issue if a player wants it to "cancel out", but I've yet to play with that player.
Yes, it's a little bit like an area invisibility spell, except that creatures would be able to see a big globe of darkness moving around. That darkness is not opaque though -- it just makes it so that you can't see things that are within it. If you cast darkness on yourself or on something that you are holding, it's basically a buff
Ok.... if it's not blocking light, just making things invisible in it... where does the darkness come from? For darkness to exist, there can't be light, by definition. If it doesn't stop the light it isn't dark. Describe what something actually sees here. A globe of blackness that you can see thru.... so it's transparent because you can see thru it, but black so it's not transparent, but it can't be black because you can see thru it.... but it... and round and round we go.
What a lot of people are imagining is that it's basically a blindness spell. It's not. There's another spell for that -- it's called blindness/deafness. In the case of the darkness spell, an area of darkness is created which causes ALL creatures (within the darkness and also outside of the darkness) to effectively suffer from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
So silence spell doesn't block sound in or out or deafen creatures inside it because there's the blindness/deafness spell? That's the logic you're using here.
Also, 2 creatures both inside said darkness. Since they can see fine, can they see each other?
Ok.... if it's not blocking light, just making things invisible in it... where does the darkness come from? For darkness to exist, there can't be light, by definition. If it doesn't stop the light it isn't dark. Describe what something actually sees here.
Yeah, I didn't give a great example for this.
Picture you are outside on a bright sunny day. It's easy to see everything around you. But a little ways off in the distance there is this little area, about 30 feet across, where it's nighttime. Not just any nighttime -- the type you might find in a remote wilderness under a new moon and thick cloud cover under a thick forest canopy. So dark that you cannot see your hand in front of your face. But this just . . . exists in the middle of this bright sun-shiny day.
But now, think about if it was actually nighttime -- we're in that exact place in the forest that's just super dark. But, someone lights a campfire in the distance. Obviously, we can see the campfire. You can see through the darkness even though you cannot see your own hand in front of your face. So, the same is true in the sunshine example -- we can see what's on the other side of this area of darkness because that area is unaffected, we just cannot see anything within that darkness.
Now, in real life in the campfire example there would be at least a few photons of ambient light bouncing around in your immediate area so now maybe you could just barely make out your hand in front of your face where you couldn't before. 5e doesn't have that level of granularity for lighting. Instead, the light has a radius and then it's just dark.
Finally, going back to the sunshine scene again, narratively the area of darkness could be explained by the magic taking away ambient light within the area so that light photons do not actually bounce off of the objects -- they instead just pass right through them.
The only way that you actually see nearby objects is by the light bouncing off of them, or the light bouncing around a bunch of walls and other objects and eventually also bouncing off of the object you are looking at. But suppose on this sunny day you are sitting in your living room that has one window and no other way for light to get in. Now you cast a spell that makes it so that light which shines in through the window doesn't bounce off of anything in your living room at all. All of the objects in your room become completely black. The walls become black. The couch and the TV are black. So black that you cannot even detect the edges. It's just a room of total darkness. But you can still look out the window and see the light that comes straight into your eyes, just like you can see the campfire when the nearby area is total darkness with not even the tiniest bit of ambient "dim" light. Nothing is physically blocking you from seeing the ambient light coming from the unaffected areas outside.
Now I'm sure that scientifically in the real world some of that is wrong. We're talking about lighting rules and magical spells in a simplified game.
The rules are that darkness creates a heavily obscured area. By definition, a heavily obscured area makes it so that you cannot see anything within that area. The darkness spell takes it a step further in that even if you have darkvision you still cannot see anything within the area. That's all there is to it. The blinded Condition is mentioned -- this comes into play in a very specifically defined way. All creatures are "effectively" blinded when (and only when) trying to see something in the heavily obscured area.
We have to look at what the rules actually say, not what we think they should say.
Wait, are you saying that if you are in the center of magical darkness, you can see something outside of it even if you don't have some way to overcome the magical darkness?
Are you also saying that if you are on one side of the magical darkness, you can see something on the other side of the magical darkness?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
The darkness spell states this, literally (emphasis mine):
[...] A creature with darkvisioncan't see through this darkness, and nonmagical light can't illuminate it. [...]
You cannot see through the magical darkness, even if you have darkvision. Logically, creatures without darkvision can't see through it either.
The spell also states light cannot illuminate the area, so there is no way of bringing in light from outside to stimulate your vision. If there is light outside the sphere, it is completely blocked by the spell. Even, if that light is magical:
If any of this spell's area overlaps with an area of light created by a spell of 2nd level or lower, the spell that created the light is dispelled.
Magical darkness is not like normal darkness, to begin with.
Why do you think that this text is specifically talking about creatures with darkvision instead of all creatures?
Because creatures with darkvision usuallly "can see in dim light as if it were bright light and in darkness as if it were dim light", but this does not apply if you are inside the sphere. The spell entry describes a specific case not covered by the general rules.
In this context, it's better to think of "see through" as though there is some sort of blanket covering the objects within the area that you cannot see through.
No, it's better to consider what 'through' means in English. For example: "They walked slowly through the woods."
Second, while it is true that you cannot bring light into the sphere to be able to see things within the sphere, it is very much not true that you cannot see light that is outside of the sphere. You can see that light just fine -- there is no physical barrier blocking your line of sight to that light source.
Yes, there is a barrier: the darkness that emanates from the point you choose and affects the Area of Effect. Natural darkness is the absence of light, but in this case, darkness is created and spread magically. It's not just about turning off the light in a room, as in the examples you're suggesting in your posts.
Third, magical darkness is very much like non-magical darkness in almost every way. They are listed together in the rules for Vision and Light: [...]
Because both kind of darkness create a heavily obscured area. That's all.
But both types are not similar at all:
With a source of light (i.e. a candle), you create light to avoid normal or natural darkess. If you extinguish the candle, then you have normal darkness.
With the darkness spell, you are creating darkness from a point, destroying light in the process (sometimes, even if the light is magical). Light cannot pass trough in either direction, so as I mentioned in my previous post, you cannot get light from outside the sphere.
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.
These are treated the same way in terms of the rules for heavily obscured areas.
You're reading the rules in a strange way.
This is the good one:
Darkness creates a heavily obscured area ---> a heavily obscured area ... blocks vision entirely ---> (spell entry) through this darkness
Intuitively, this seems like a stupid question, because of course if you shoot an arrow into a ball of darkness you shouldn't be able to be as accurate as if you can see your target, but it looks like the rules paint a different picture when you read them:
PHB
Seems straight forward, if you're in something like a fog cloud, or a darkness spell, or just everything is pitch black, anyone who attacks you should have disadvantage. This also makes total sense. But, then there's this rule
Ok, so now being in total darkness or a fog cloud gives the attacker advantage because you can't see your attacker. And when you look at this rule
So being in a fog cloud or total darkness reads as though it has 0 impact on combat. It seems like I'm missing something important, because 5 people blindfolded, or standing in pitch black and shooting arrows at each other would be just as effective as if they could see perfectly. Even weirder, now taking the dodge action or having other effects that cause disadvantage to your attackers is negated because multiple instances of advantage/disadvantage don't stack. Even more amusing, if you're trying to fight something invisible, then turn off all the lights or cast fog cloud or something similar. Now you can attack it as though you can see it because it can't see you (yes I'm aware you still sort of have to guess its position, but most people will argue to the death they can track things by sound, so I've given up fighting that, even though I'm convinced you wouldn't in the middle of a fight).
I just realized the most amusing version of this is someone with a long bow being 500 feet away using magical darkness of itself so it can attack normally instead of being penalized for the long range.
This seems completely ridiculous to me, but I can't find a good answer to it after looking. Am I interpreting this correctly, because I can't imagine this is correct, but I can't find anything in the rules to say it isn't?
Yup, this is all correct according to the rules.
You're right.
You also have this post on DnD Beyond with a similar question and some interesting answers: Heavily Obscured - from the inside, outside, or both?
Even if these scenarios cancel out both advantage and disadvantage, some species or feats can help you see through darkness, sometimes even magical darkness, which can be a bonus for them in the end.
Many D&D rules were designed to be simple to use and may not always be not the most realistic ones.
Sure, but this is a case where the problem isn't so much that the rules are unrealistic as it is that they're unsatisfactory. There's some very perverse outcomes of the rules working this way: as the OP pointed out, long-ranged attacks are actually easier in total darkness than they are in bright light. Rogues also can't activate their Sneak Attack feature if both they and their target are in the dark (unless they're using one of the rules that bypasses advantage). I really hope they address this in the 2024 books, because as is it's very disappointing.
If the rogue needing advantage to use a feature is offset by disadvantage it's normal that it now can't it's by design. It can still possibly use Sneak Attack in such circumstances though if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it and that enemy isn’t incapacitated.
A ranged attack with a weapon at long range is easier if the target can't see you than if it can, i think it's okay.
Yeah, but in my example, a ranged attack is easier if the attacker can't see the target, which is not ok.
No, casting darkness on yourself or something that you are holding doesn't have that effect. The rules for Vision and Light in which darkness can create a Heavily Obscured area pertain to the location where you are looking TO, not the location where you ARE:
If you are standing within a small area of darkness but you are shooting at something far away who is well illuminated, you can see that target perfectly fine, but that target cannot see you.
No it's not easier it's as hard. If the attacker make a ranged weapon attack at long range;
1) The attack roll is made with disadvantage if the attacker can see the target.
2) The attack roll is made with disadvantage if the attacker can't see the target.
As you can see, wether the attacker can see the target or not doesn't grant any advantage. What does, is if the target can see the attacker or not. If the target received a ranged weapon attack at long range:
1) The attack roll is made with disadvantage if the target can see the attacker.
2) The attack roll is made normally if the target can't see the attacker.
In other words, in order to be easier to attack at long range, per Unseen Attackers and Targets, the attack must have advantage to offset the disadvantage, and this happen if he's unseen, regardless if he can see.
Both actually. An heavily obscured area such as Fog Cloud blocks vision entirely and a creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
So being in an area of darkness makes you unable to see through it, even with darkvision, unless you have a special ability to do so such the Devil's Sight trait or Devil's Sight Invocation for example.
No, that's not the rule. The rules for heavily obscured areas only make it difficult to see something that is within that heavily obscured area. The area obscures the thing that you are trying to see. Whether or not something in the environment also blocks line of sight to areas outside of the heavily obscured area will depend on the specific scenario. It is reasonable to determine that fog will block your vision -- it's a physical obstruction to your line of sight. Darkness, including magical darkness, doesn't do this.
For example, you could be hiding in the woods in a nighttime environment of total darkness. Some distance away there are monsters gathered around a campfire, which provides light for a certain radius -- you are located far outside of this radius, but the monsters are within this radius. You can see these monsters clearly and can attack them with advantage as an unseen attacker. Magical darkness is listed within the same category and behaves the same way:
and also:
Outdoors at night is listed together with an area of magical darkness here. So, for the purposes of the rules for a heavily obscured area due to an absence of light, a mundane outdoor environment at night is equivalent to magical darkness. The only difference with the darkness spell is that normally "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." So, normally such a creature can see through the darkness to find whatever they are looking for within the heavily obscured area. In the case of the darkness spell, such creatures with darkvision do not have this ability within this area.
But in all of these cases, there is nothing physically obstructing line of sight for any of these creatures within the area to be able to see something outside of this area that is not heavily obscured. Darkness doesn't block line of sight, it just obscures the area.
There's always been a problem with mundane darkness because while you can't see while in it, you should be able to see light source beyond otherwise you'd never be able to even see stars! But regardless, any heavily obscured area block vision, so heavy fog or snow, magical darkness etc... if people can't see you in it, so you too.
If you think that creatures can see through heavily obscured area of spell and can see clear spaces and creature on the other side, we're not understanding the rules the same way as to me that's not blocking vision entirely if you can see through.
.
The darkness spell states this, literally (emphasis mine):
You cannot see through the magical darkness, even if you have darkvision. Logically, creatures without darkvision can't see through it either.
The spell also states light cannot illuminate the area, so there is no way of bringing in light from outside to stimulate your vision. If there is light outside the sphere, it is completely blocked by the spell. Even, if that light is magical:
Magical darkness is not like normal darkness, to begin with.
If you could see thru magical darkness it would either not be useful, or it would be an area invisibility spell. There's no other way for it to work. Not saying there's no other way to work except for magic... there's no other way for it to work period.
Take the scenario where you are in magical darkness and light can pass thru it. You look out and see a creature between you and a campfire. You can easily see its silhouette. Easy enough. BUT now imagine there's a 3rd creature outside the magical darkness on the direct opposite side of the fire as you. If light passes thru the darkness, it can see the light, except where you stand. It can now see you by your silhouette. For light to be able to pass thru the darkness but not be blocked by you, light would have to pass thru you as well. That's invisibility.
And as tarodnet pointed out, the spell says you can't see thru the darkness.
Imagine quotes, I'm on a phone
No it's not easier it's as hard. If the attacker make a ranged weapon attack at long range;
Nope, it's easier. You have disadvantage because you're 500 ft away. You create magical darkness, fog cloud, etc. Now you can't see the target, so you have disadvantage. But the target can't see you so you have advantage. You have 2 counts of disadvantage and 1 count of advantage. Since any amount of advantage cancels out any amount of disadvantage, you now attack without advantage or disadvantage. It's easier to attack that target 500 ft away with your longbow now that you can't see what you're shooting at and it can't see you.
Yes, it's a little bit like an area invisibility spell, except that creatures would be able to see a big globe of darkness moving around. That darkness is not opaque though -- it just makes it so that you can't see things that are within it. If you cast darkness on yourself or on something that you are holding, it's basically a buff.
What a lot of people are imagining is that it's basically a blindness spell. It's not. There's another spell for that -- it's called blindness/deafness. In the case of the darkness spell, an area of darkness is created which causes ALL creatures (within the darkness and also outside of the darkness) to effectively suffer from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
It's sort of like if you had a painting with sort of a 3d view of the landscape, with objects in the foreground, the middleground and the background, this spell basically just takes a giant eraser and erases everything within the middleground. Objects in the foreground and background are still there and can be seen just fine, even those directly "behind" the middleground that was erased. If instead the spell was cast onto your location, then objects in the foreground get erased instead and you could still see the middleground and background.
No. In D&D 5e, if that creature is outside of the radius of the campfire, standing in non-magical darkness, you cannot see it at all without some sort of special feature such as darkvision. There is no silhouette. In the real world, if you can see a distant light source, then there is at least some light between you and that source. That contrast creates the silhouette. The rules in this game are simplified such that a light source has a radius and then there is total darkness. That's the whole point. Darkness creates a "heavily obscured area", which, at nighttime is basically the entire world except for places where there is a light source.
So, if creature A is within the radius of the campfire, and creature B is outside of this radius, located within non-magical darkness (either on the near side or the far side of the fire), and creature C is within magical darkness that is way outside of the campfire's radius . . . the result is that creatures B and C cannot see each other at all, but they could both see creature A. Creature A cannot see either of the other creatures. Now . . . suppose both creature B and creature C both have darkvision. Now, creature C CAN see creature B as if he were in dim light. However, creature B cannot see creature C because creature C is within magical darkness. It's better to be within the magical darkness.
Yes, this is because you are not interpreting these rules correctly. A heavily obscured area affects that area. It makes it so that you cannot see things that are in that area. This is a different concept than "line of sight", which is when there is some sort of physical obstruction that you cannot see through. Some effects such as foliage or fog create both of these types of obstacles. Darkness does not. You can see through darkness, there is nothing in the way. This is why you CAN see the stars when you look up at the night sky! You cannot see anything between you and the stars because that area is heavily obscured, but the star itself is not heavily obscured by darkness since it provides its own light source.
The rule of thumb of "if I can see the creature then the creature can see me" is a line of sight concept, not related to the concept of heavily obscured areas (unless, again, you are talking about something such as foliage or fog which creates both types of obstacles).
Sort of semi-related, there are also game concepts of a "clear path" and also "Cover".
So, these are 4 different game concepts: Heavily obscured areas, line of sight, clear path, and cover. Darkness only creates one of these hindrances -- a heavily obscured area.
There are at least 3 different ways that you are misinterpreting the rules here.
Why do you think that this text is specifically talking about creatures with darkvision instead of all creatures? So, if you don't have darkvision, you're good? That makes no sense. You are saying that we should make this logical leap, but that's not what's written. If you take a step back and really look at what's written there, they are making a point about what is different for a creature with darkvision -- they are not making a general point about the darkness. Creatures with darkvision can normally "see through" darkness because it looks like dim light to them. So, they can normally see everything within an area of darkness. But, for this magical darkness, they cannot. They cannot "see through" this darkness within the area. In this context, it's better to think of "see through" as though there is some sort of blanket covering the objects within the area that you cannot see through. But, if you are not looking at anything within the area, you can still see just fine. The blanket covers the area, it's not a blindfold covering your face -- it's a heavily obscured area. It only effectively causes the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area. This detail about creatures with darkvision is the only difference between this magical darkness and any old non-magical darkness. Otherwise, they both just create a darkness-based heavily obscured area.
Second, while it is true that you cannot bring light into the sphere to be able to see things within the sphere, it is very much not true that you cannot see light that is outside of the sphere. You can see that light just fine -- there is no physical barrier blocking your line of sight to that light source.
Third, magical darkness is very much like non-magical darkness in almost every way. They are listed together in the rules for Vision and Light:
These are treated the same way in terms of the rules for heavily obscured areas.
Lastly, why do you all think that so much of the spell text is dedicated to describing what happens if you cast the spell on an object that you are holding? And also, why is the AoE so small? Because that's one of the main ways that the spell is designed to be used! It's a buff! It's good to be within this magical darkness! It makes you an unseen attacker and an unseen target! In ranged combat, this is really good! And, if an enemy closes the distance and gets within melee range (which is now inside of the AoE), you can choose to turn off this darkness by covering it up! Without even using an action! It potentially just requires an object interaction! So, yeah, don't cast this onto your enemies or in the enemy area because then you can't see them. Cast it on your rogue instead for some serious sneak attacks.
I'll be honest: I houserule this nonsense. The impetus is on the ACTIVE participant.
The person getting hit not being able to see you has no bearing on your inability to see them -- and hit -- them.
I acknowledge that's not technically the rules, but it's the only thing that makes sense to me. Yes, I know that NARRATIVELY you can just wave away that you "walked into the hit" or whatever. But it's just not satisfying for me. I concede the issue if a player wants it to "cancel out", but I've yet to play with that player.
Yes, it's a little bit like an area invisibility spell, except that creatures would be able to see a big globe of darkness moving around. That darkness is not opaque though -- it just makes it so that you can't see things that are within it. If you cast darkness on yourself or on something that you are holding, it's basically a buff
Ok.... if it's not blocking light, just making things invisible in it... where does the darkness come from? For darkness to exist, there can't be light, by definition. If it doesn't stop the light it isn't dark. Describe what something actually sees here. A globe of blackness that you can see thru.... so it's transparent because you can see thru it, but black so it's not transparent, but it can't be black because you can see thru it.... but it... and round and round we go.
What a lot of people are imagining is that it's basically a blindness spell. It's not. There's another spell for that -- it's called blindness/deafness. In the case of the darkness spell, an area of darkness is created which causes ALL creatures (within the darkness and also outside of the darkness) to effectively suffer from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
So silence spell doesn't block sound in or out or deafen creatures inside it because there's the blindness/deafness spell? That's the logic you're using here.
Also, 2 creatures both inside said darkness. Since they can see fine, can they see each other?
No, neither creature can see the other in that case because you cannot see anything that is within the heavily obscured area.
Yeah, I didn't give a great example for this.
Picture you are outside on a bright sunny day. It's easy to see everything around you. But a little ways off in the distance there is this little area, about 30 feet across, where it's nighttime. Not just any nighttime -- the type you might find in a remote wilderness under a new moon and thick cloud cover under a thick forest canopy. So dark that you cannot see your hand in front of your face. But this just . . . exists in the middle of this bright sun-shiny day.
But now, think about if it was actually nighttime -- we're in that exact place in the forest that's just super dark. But, someone lights a campfire in the distance. Obviously, we can see the campfire. You can see through the darkness even though you cannot see your own hand in front of your face. So, the same is true in the sunshine example -- we can see what's on the other side of this area of darkness because that area is unaffected, we just cannot see anything within that darkness.
Now, in real life in the campfire example there would be at least a few photons of ambient light bouncing around in your immediate area so now maybe you could just barely make out your hand in front of your face where you couldn't before. 5e doesn't have that level of granularity for lighting. Instead, the light has a radius and then it's just dark.
Finally, going back to the sunshine scene again, narratively the area of darkness could be explained by the magic taking away ambient light within the area so that light photons do not actually bounce off of the objects -- they instead just pass right through them.
The only way that you actually see nearby objects is by the light bouncing off of them, or the light bouncing around a bunch of walls and other objects and eventually also bouncing off of the object you are looking at. But suppose on this sunny day you are sitting in your living room that has one window and no other way for light to get in. Now you cast a spell that makes it so that light which shines in through the window doesn't bounce off of anything in your living room at all. All of the objects in your room become completely black. The walls become black. The couch and the TV are black. So black that you cannot even detect the edges. It's just a room of total darkness. But you can still look out the window and see the light that comes straight into your eyes, just like you can see the campfire when the nearby area is total darkness with not even the tiniest bit of ambient "dim" light. Nothing is physically blocking you from seeing the ambient light coming from the unaffected areas outside.
Now I'm sure that scientifically in the real world some of that is wrong. We're talking about lighting rules and magical spells in a simplified game.
The rules are that darkness creates a heavily obscured area. By definition, a heavily obscured area makes it so that you cannot see anything within that area. The darkness spell takes it a step further in that even if you have darkvision you still cannot see anything within the area. That's all there is to it. The blinded Condition is mentioned -- this comes into play in a very specifically defined way. All creatures are "effectively" blinded when (and only when) trying to see something in the heavily obscured area.
We have to look at what the rules actually say, not what we think they should say.
Wait, are you saying that if you are in the center of magical darkness, you can see something outside of it even if you don't have some way to overcome the magical darkness?
Are you also saying that if you are on one side of the magical darkness, you can see something on the other side of the magical darkness?
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Because creatures with darkvision usuallly "can see in dim light as if it were bright light and in darkness as if it were dim light", but this does not apply if you are inside the sphere. The spell entry describes a specific case not covered by the general rules.
I said the opposite. Please read my answer carefully.
No, it's better to consider what 'through' means in English. For example: "They walked slowly through the woods."
Yes, there is a barrier: the darkness that emanates from the point you choose and affects the Area of Effect. Natural darkness is the absence of light, but in this case, darkness is created and spread magically. It's not just about turning off the light in a room, as in the examples you're suggesting in your posts.
Because both kind of darkness create a heavily obscured area. That's all.
But both types are not similar at all:
You're reading the rules in a strange way.
This is the good one: