It's a similar problem to 2014 core rules for invisible creature still having (dis)advantage vs See Invisibility, which 2024 Invisible condition fixed by saying if a creature can somehow see you, you don’t gain this benefit against that creature. A similar wording should be added to the Blinded for example If you can somehow see you, you don’t gain this benefit.
INVISIBLE:Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Disadvantage, and your attack rolls have Advantage. If a creature can somehow see you, you don’t gain this benefit against that creature.
BLINDED: Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Advantage, and your attack rolls have Disadvantage.
Being able to see definitely sounds like a counter to "You can't see" in my book.
Being able to see while Blinded would cancel only part of the condition's effect you experience;
Blinded [Condition]
While you have the Blinded condition, you experience the following effects.
Can’t See. You can’t see and automatically fail any ability check that requires sight.
Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Advantage, and your attack rolls have Disadvantage.
Then cast Darkness on yourself and now all rolls become straight rolls and thus both effects are countered.
No seriously, this just shows how badly the rules for conditions are designed and I agree with you that Blinded needs some errata.
Any further discussion of this should probably be put into its own thread since this thread is mostly meant to be a collection of obvious errata, but I've always viewed the Darkness spell as being a buff on the creature that is inside of it, and in my opinion the 2024 rules make this even more clear to me. You are basically providing a Heavily Obscured area for yourself to lurk in, making you Unseen from many creatures:
2024 Darkness Spell:
For the duration, magical Darkness spreads from a point within range and fills a 15-foot-radius Sphere. Darkvision can’t see through it, and nonmagical light can’t illuminate it.
2024 Darkness environment rule (from Glossary):
An area of Darkness is Heavily Obscured.
2024 Heavily Obscured (from Glossary):
You have the Blinded condition while trying to see something in a Heavily Obscured space.
So, if you are in a well-lit space and I am standing in a Heavily Obscured space due to Darkness, and we are attempting to see each other, you would have the Blinded condition and I would not, giving me the advantage in that situation.
You forget an important thing, a Heavily Obscured area is opaque, which to me means you can't see through such area, wether inside our outside, effectively blocking line of sight.
Obscured Areas
An area might be Lightly or Heavily Obscured. In a Lightly Obscured area—such as an area with Dim Light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage—you have Disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight.
A Heavily Obscured area—such as an area with Darkness, heavy fog, or dense foliage—is opaque. You have the Blinded condition (see the rules glossary) when trying to see something there.
I believe that the opaque description is meant to apply to the area itself, meaning that it effectively covers up or conceals things that are within the area. Note that the Glossary entry does not include that portion of the description for what a Heavily Obscured area means and what the mechanical consequences are. Instead, it says only this:
Heavily Obscured
You have the Blinded condition while trying to see something in a Heavily Obscured space.
To me, that means that in the rule that you've quoted above, these are not two separate features on a Heavily Obscured area. Instead, a statement is made that a Heavily Obscured area is opaque, and what that word means in this context is then immediately defined and explained in the sentence which follows it -- and that provides the exact mechanical consequences of what it means when an area is opaque.
Exactly, the area is opaque which in common english means its not able to be seen through; not transparent.
That's exactly NOT what I'm saying. I said that the text indicates that opaque in this context means something exact that is specifically and explicitly defined in the sentence which follows it INSTEAD OF the common English meaning.
The writing structure of the game does this in many places. For example, the fact that the Invisible condition causes a "concealed" effect means something that is explicitly defined right after that term is used instead of the common English meaning for "concealed". Same idea here.
A Heavily Obscured area—such as an area with Darkness, heavy fog, or dense foliage—is opaque. You have the Blinded condition (see the rules glossary) when trying to see something there.
This is such a stupid rule. That last sentence should not exist and no condition should be involved. It should instead say something like "It blocks sight into, out of, within and through its area." Also it needs to be divided into two rules, one for darkness and a different one for fog or foliage (or other physical impediments).
It should instead say something like "It blocks sight into, out of, within and through its area." Also it needs to be divided into two rules, one for darkness and a different one for fog or foliage (or other physical impediments).
This isn't the concept of a heavily obscured area though. The idea is that the area is obscured. Meaning, you are unable to see something that's "in a Heavily Obscured space". This is a different concept and a different rule than the Line of Sight rule, which existed in the DMG in 2014 and I'm assuming it will exist in the DMG, potentially modified, in 2024 as well. In 2014, darkness was specifically not mentioned as an example of something that interrupts Line of Sight according to that rule from the DMG.
I'm not really sure that we need two different rules for a Heavily Obscured Area since we already have these two distinct rules, including the Line of Sight rule. Of course, many of the objects and effects which create a Heavily Obscured Area ALSO blocks line of sight, but that would have to be handled on a case-by-case basis depending on exactly which type of environmental obstruction we are talking about.
When we apply Darkness (including the actual rule for Darkness from the Glossary) to the concepts of Heavily Obscured Areas and Line of Sight Interruptions, we can pretty easily determine that Darkness creates a Heavily Obscured Area but does not block Line of Sight.
Polymorph in the 2024 Players Handbook: "The target gains a number of Temporary Hit Points equal to the Hit Points of the Beast form. The spell ends early on the target if it has no Temporary Hit Points left." Note it does not say that the Temporary Hit Points are lost if the spell ends due to time running out or the caster breaking concentration 😆 2024 rules have errata already but this is not mentioned.
Polymorph in the 2024 Players Handbook: "The target gains a number of Temporary Hit Points equal to the Hit Points of the Beast form. The spell ends early on the target if it has no Temporary Hit Points left." Note it does not say that the Temporary Hit Points are lost if the spell ends due to time running out or the caster breaking concentration 😆 2024 rules have errata already but this is not mentioned.
That's because concentration rules already say that all effects on a spell end if you break Concentration, and the THP is tied to the Beast Form which has a duration that requires concentration. In this case, Concentration is specific so it beats General. People are misreading this rule because it's convenient, and I assure you that no DM will allow you to drop concentration and gain an exorbitant amount of THP.
The line at the end there is specific to what happens if you lose all your THP while transformed, but again, people are willfully misreading it. They are also willfully misreading the THP rules on CH1 and how it interacts with Concentration.
Expertise is only for skill proficiencies. It is not relevant to tools. See Expertise in the rules glossary.
There is no RAW provision for swapping tool proficiencies.
If you want my personal opinion, Wayfarer is best suited to a "rogue-lite" character who wants to be able to pick locks and the like without being a member of the Rogue class. Wayfarer isn't a great choice for a Rogue from an ability score standpoint anyway; you want something to boost Dex and Int.
In any case, the presence of sub-optimal combinations doesn't constitute a mistake needing errata.
That would be a significant change, since in the 2014 rules, Rogues can choose their Thieves' Tools as one of their expertise choices. Note that lockpicking and trap disarming, at least per the 2024 thieves' tools tooltip, seem to be straight dex checks, so there is no actual relevant skill. Knowing the tool proficiency does not give them advantage in such tasks (as it would if there was a relevant skill) but it seems they can never be experts at using them, either.
Artificers are similar at 6th level but there at least the wording is 'double proficiency with all checks involving tools that involve your proficiency'
the rules on lockpicking have changed, its a slight of hand check now, if you are proficient with thieves tools you roll at advantage.
Polymorph in the 2024 Players Handbook: "The target gains a number of Temporary Hit Points equal to the Hit Points of the Beast form. The spell ends early on the target if it has no Temporary Hit Points left." Note it does not say that the Temporary Hit Points are lost if the spell ends due to time running out or the caster breaking concentration 😆 2024 rules have errata already but this is not mentioned.
the rules on concentration state that if you lose concentration on a spell the effects of that spell end, the temporary hit points are effects of that spell.
Expertise is only for skill proficiencies. It is not relevant to tools. See Expertise in the rules glossary.
There is no RAW provision for swapping tool proficiencies.
If you want my personal opinion, Wayfarer is best suited to a "rogue-lite" character who wants to be able to pick locks and the like without being a member of the Rogue class. Wayfarer isn't a great choice for a Rogue from an ability score standpoint anyway; you want something to boost Dex and Int.
In any case, the presence of sub-optimal combinations doesn't constitute a mistake needing errata.
That would be a significant change, since in the 2014 rules, Rogues can choose their Thieves' Tools as one of their expertise choices. Note that lockpicking and trap disarming, at least per the 2024 thieves' tools tooltip, seem to be straight dex checks, so there is no actual relevant skill. Knowing the tool proficiency does not give them advantage in such tasks (as it would if there was a relevant skill) but it seems they can never be experts at using them, either.
Artificers are similar at 6th level but there at least the wording is 'double proficiency with all checks involving tools that involve your proficiency'
the rules on lockpicking have changed, its a slight of hand check now, if you are proficient with thieves tools you roll at advantage.
Expertise is only for skill proficiencies. It is not relevant to tools. See Expertise in the rules glossary.
There is no RAW provision for swapping tool proficiencies.
If you want my personal opinion, Wayfarer is best suited to a "rogue-lite" character who wants to be able to pick locks and the like without being a member of the Rogue class. Wayfarer isn't a great choice for a Rogue from an ability score standpoint anyway; you want something to boost Dex and Int.
In any case, the presence of sub-optimal combinations doesn't constitute a mistake needing errata.
That would be a significant change, since in the 2014 rules, Rogues can choose their Thieves' Tools as one of their expertise choices. Note that lockpicking and trap disarming, at least per the 2024 thieves' tools tooltip, seem to be straight dex checks, so there is no actual relevant skill. Knowing the tool proficiency does not give them advantage in such tasks (as it would if there was a relevant skill) but it seems they can never be experts at using them, either.
Artificers are similar at 6th level but there at least the wording is 'double proficiency with all checks involving tools that involve your proficiency'
the rules on lockpicking have changed, its a slight of hand check now, if you are proficient with thieves tools you roll at advantage.
Presumably you still need to have tools though? Or have they decided that one can open key based locks just with one's fingers?
A Heavily Obscured area—such as an area with Darkness, heavy fog, or dense foliage—is opaque. You have the Blinded condition (see the rules glossary) when trying to see something there.
This is such a stupid rule. That last sentence should not exist and no condition should be involved. It should instead say something like "It blocks sight into, out of, within and through its area." Also it needs to be divided into two rules, one for darkness and a different one for fog or foliage (or other physical impediments).
Not to mention that, under the most literal (and nonsensical) interpretation, simply trying to look into a heavily obscured area gives everyone advantage to attack you. So standing in a brightly lit room and staring into a cave makes you blind to your own surroundings? I guess when you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares back :)
Previous editions (even 4e) did this better. IMO, the fundamental property here is "Can't see", not Blinded.
If you Can't See something, you have disadvantage to attack it, and it has advantage to attack you. Blinded means you "can't see" anything. Heavy Obscurement means you Can't See through the obscured area. Invisible means most things "Can't See" you. And special senses ( blindsight, darkvision ,see invisibility, truesight) can counter some of these effects to let you overcome "can't see" under applicable circumstances.
A Heavily Obscured area—such as an area with Darkness, heavy fog, or dense foliage—is opaque. You have the Blinded condition (see the rules glossary) when trying to see something there.
This is such a stupid rule. That last sentence should not exist and no condition should be involved. It should instead say something like "It blocks sight into, out of, within and through its area." Also it needs to be divided into two rules, one for darkness and a different one for fog or foliage (or other physical impediments).
Not to mention that, under the most literal (and nonsensical) interpretation, simply trying to look into a heavily obscured area gives everyone advantage to attack you. So standing in a brightly lit room and staring into a cave makes you blind to your own surroundings? [...]
I think we should play the game with at least a minimum of common sense. It's not the same to just look your surrounding as it is to focus on something because you need to target it.
That last sentence was also there in the 2014 PHB.
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.
A Heavily Obscured area—such as an area with Darkness, heavy fog, or dense foliage—is opaque. You have the Blinded condition (see the rules glossary) when trying to see something there.
This is such a stupid rule. That last sentence should not exist and no condition should be involved. It should instead say something like "It blocks sight into, out of, within and through its area." Also it needs to be divided into two rules, one for darkness and a different one for fog or foliage (or other physical impediments).
Not to mention that, under the most literal (and nonsensical) interpretation, simply trying to look into a heavily obscured area gives everyone advantage to attack you. So standing in a brightly lit room and staring into a cave makes you blind to your own surroundings? [...]
I think we should play the game with at least a minimum of common sense. It's not the same to just look your surrounding as it is to focus on something because you need to target it.
Yes, I agree we should. I guess the implication I'm making is that as the Rules have become more "codified" and resemble something more like "Magic:TG" rules, the more the gaps between RAW and RAI (or common sense) seem to widen (or at least the kinds of minds who look for exploits in video game code are more tempted to read these rules that way).
As a side note: there is a difference between "you effectively suffer ..." and "you have". The first actually makes it clearer that the effects are circumstantial. But that said, I think the 2014 rules were still less clear than the 4e rules on vision, LOS, and LOE. To my mind, leaning into the "gamification" of the rules made them clearer than the half-natural-language-half-code approach they used for 5e (which I, somewhat cynically, believe was to appease the 4e-haters). That doesn't make them terrible rules, mind you, just that there are some places that they became "clunky" like this. Also, my recollection of 4e is many years old now, and I'm obviously forgetting some of the most egregious holes in them too :) (Stealth has always been wonky in D&D, for example, and I don't recall it being better in 4e)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Being able to see while Blinded would cancel only part of the condition's effect you experience;
Then cast Darkness on yourself and now all rolls become straight rolls and thus both effects are countered.
No seriously, this just shows how badly the rules for conditions are designed and I agree with you that Blinded needs some errata.
It's a similar problem to 2014 core rules for invisible creature still having (dis)advantage vs See Invisibility, which 2024 Invisible condition fixed by saying if a creature can somehow see you, you don’t gain this benefit against that creature. A similar wording should be added to the Blinded for example If you can somehow see you, you don’t gain this benefit.
Any further discussion of this should probably be put into its own thread since this thread is mostly meant to be a collection of obvious errata, but I've always viewed the Darkness spell as being a buff on the creature that is inside of it, and in my opinion the 2024 rules make this even more clear to me. You are basically providing a Heavily Obscured area for yourself to lurk in, making you Unseen from many creatures:
2024 Darkness Spell:
2024 Darkness environment rule (from Glossary):
2024 Heavily Obscured (from Glossary):
So, if you are in a well-lit space and I am standing in a Heavily Obscured space due to Darkness, and we are attempting to see each other, you would have the Blinded condition and I would not, giving me the advantage in that situation.
You forget an important thing, a Heavily Obscured area is opaque, which to me means you can't see through such area, wether inside our outside, effectively blocking line of sight.
I believe that the opaque description is meant to apply to the area itself, meaning that it effectively covers up or conceals things that are within the area. Note that the Glossary entry does not include that portion of the description for what a Heavily Obscured area means and what the mechanical consequences are. Instead, it says only this:
To me, that means that in the rule that you've quoted above, these are not two separate features on a Heavily Obscured area. Instead, a statement is made that a Heavily Obscured area is opaque, and what that word means in this context is then immediately defined and explained in the sentence which follows it -- and that provides the exact mechanical consequences of what it means when an area is opaque.
Exactly, the area is opaque which in common english means its not able to be seen through; not transparent.
You can Hide while you’re Heavily Obscured but not while the enemy is simply Blinded so the action or the condition should get an errata to allow Hiding from people that can't see this way without needing being Heavily Obscured or behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover.
That's exactly NOT what I'm saying. I said that the text indicates that opaque in this context means something exact that is specifically and explicitly defined in the sentence which follows it INSTEAD OF the common English meaning.
The writing structure of the game does this in many places. For example, the fact that the Invisible condition causes a "concealed" effect means something that is explicitly defined right after that term is used instead of the common English meaning for "concealed". Same idea here.
This is such a stupid rule. That last sentence should not exist and no condition should be involved. It should instead say something like "It blocks sight into, out of, within and through its area." Also it needs to be divided into two rules, one for darkness and a different one for fog or foliage (or other physical impediments).
This isn't the concept of a heavily obscured area though. The idea is that the area is obscured. Meaning, you are unable to see something that's "in a Heavily Obscured space". This is a different concept and a different rule than the Line of Sight rule, which existed in the DMG in 2014 and I'm assuming it will exist in the DMG, potentially modified, in 2024 as well. In 2014, darkness was specifically not mentioned as an example of something that interrupts Line of Sight according to that rule from the DMG.
I'm not really sure that we need two different rules for a Heavily Obscured Area since we already have these two distinct rules, including the Line of Sight rule. Of course, many of the objects and effects which create a Heavily Obscured Area ALSO blocks line of sight, but that would have to be handled on a case-by-case basis depending on exactly which type of environmental obstruction we are talking about.
When we apply Darkness (including the actual rule for Darkness from the Glossary) to the concepts of Heavily Obscured Areas and Line of Sight Interruptions, we can pretty easily determine that Darkness creates a Heavily Obscured Area but does not block Line of Sight.
Polymorph in the 2024 Players Handbook:
"The target gains a number of Temporary Hit Points equal to the Hit Points of the Beast form. The spell ends early on the target if it has no Temporary Hit Points left."
Note it does not say that the Temporary Hit Points are lost if the spell ends due to time running out or the caster breaking concentration 😆
2024 rules have errata already but this is not mentioned.
That's because concentration rules already say that all effects on a spell end if you break Concentration, and the THP is tied to the Beast Form which has a duration that requires concentration. In this case, Concentration is specific so it beats General. People are misreading this rule because it's convenient, and I assure you that no DM will allow you to drop concentration and gain an exorbitant amount of THP.
The line at the end there is specific to what happens if you lose all your THP while transformed, but again, people are willfully misreading it. They are also willfully misreading the THP rules on CH1 and how it interacts with Concentration.
the rules on lockpicking have changed, its a slight of hand check now, if you are proficient with thieves tools you roll at advantage.
the rules on concentration state that if you lose concentration on a spell the effects of that spell end, the temporary hit points are effects of that spell.
Similar debate here: (2024 rules) Does Expertise in Sleight of Hand give any benefit to picking a lock?
Presumably you still need to have tools though? Or have they decided that one can open key based locks just with one's fingers?
Not to mention that, under the most literal (and nonsensical) interpretation, simply trying to look into a heavily obscured area gives everyone advantage to attack you. So standing in a brightly lit room and staring into a cave makes you blind to your own surroundings? I guess when you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares back :)
Previous editions (even 4e) did this better.
IMO, the fundamental property here is "Can't see", not Blinded.
If you Can't See something, you have disadvantage to attack it, and it has advantage to attack you. Blinded means you "can't see" anything. Heavy Obscurement means you Can't See through the obscured area. Invisible means most things "Can't See" you. And special senses ( blindsight, darkvision ,see invisibility, truesight) can counter some of these effects to let you overcome "can't see" under applicable circumstances.
I think we should play the game with at least a minimum of common sense. It's not the same to just look your surrounding as it is to focus on something because you need to target it.
That last sentence was also there in the 2014 PHB.
Yes, I agree we should. I guess the implication I'm making is that as the Rules have become more "codified" and resemble something more like "Magic:TG" rules, the more the gaps between RAW and RAI (or common sense) seem to widen (or at least the kinds of minds who look for exploits in video game code are more tempted to read these rules that way).
As a side note: there is a difference between "you effectively suffer ..." and "you have". The first actually makes it clearer that the effects are circumstantial. But that said, I think the 2014 rules were still less clear than the 4e rules on vision, LOS, and LOE. To my mind, leaning into the "gamification" of the rules made them clearer than the half-natural-language-half-code approach they used for 5e (which I, somewhat cynically, believe was to appease the 4e-haters). That doesn't make them terrible rules, mind you, just that there are some places that they became "clunky" like this. Also, my recollection of 4e is many years old now, and I'm obviously forgetting some of the most egregious holes in them too :) (Stealth has always been wonky in D&D, for example, and I don't recall it being better in 4e)