A Heavily Obscured area—such as an area with Darkness, heavy fog, or dense foliage—is opaque
No. It's clear that that's not what's intended and that's not what's happening here in context. This line in the main text is meant to be just a flavor text transition / introductory description of the concept and how it differs from the previous concept of a Lightly Obscured area. This line does not appear at all within the Rules Glossary entry for this concept, which is where the actual game mechanics for it are listed.
Further, this was intentionally changed away from the phrase "blocks vision entirely" that appeared in the 2014 rules (after some cycles of errata if I recall) presumably because it was never the intent that you cannot see through the area -- only that you cannot see what is within the area, which is the actual concept of an obscured area in this game. The concept that dictates whether or not you can see through things is covered by the rules and mechanics for Line of Sight, which is an entirely different rule.
So, in context, this description of the area being "opaque" is an attempt to describe how well you can see what is within the area (not at all) in comparison to how well you can see what is within a Lightly Obscured area (you can see things there, but with some difficulty / disadvantage).
Again, if you just use the rules and mechanics that are laid out clearly in the Rules Glossary for these concepts then you will be using the correct and intended rules and mechanics:
Lightly Obscured
You have Disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks to see something in a Lightly Obscured space.
. . .
Heavily Obscured
You have the Blinded condition while trying to see something in a Heavily Obscured space.
It is the area itself that is obscured from view.
DMs should adjudicate issues related to line of sight by using the guidelines in the DMG which discuss Line of Sight instead of trying to apply the rules for obscured areas to that.
Line of Sight
To determine whether there is line of sight between two spaces, pick a corner of one space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any part of another space. If you can trace a line that doesn't pass through or touch an object or effect that blocks vision—such as a stone wall, a thick curtain, or a dense cloud of fog—then there is line of sight.
This is just getting tiring, the rules clearly state that an area of Darkness is Opaque, your entire post appears to be just trying to argue that Darkness doesn't block light despite the rules clearly stating that an Area of Darkness IS Opaque, which would mean it does block light. It's clear, it's in RAW, you're just trying to support your earlier arguments and fighting against what's written in the rules/PHB at this point.
No, I am just able to recognize that the rules are very clearly providing a concept and mechanic that makes things within an area obscured from view and that this is totally separate from anything related to Line of Sight.
I believe that what trips most people up on this is that in almost every case the thing that causes an area to be heavily obscured will also block Line of Sight -- such as thick foliage or dense fog or an intense sandstorm or a large pile of clothes or whatever. Really the only notable exception is Darkness which quite obviously does not impede Line of Sight. Note that Darkness is conspicuously absent in the list of examples that are given in the DMG guidelines for how to properly adjudicate issues related to Line of Sight.
Note that Darkness is conspicuously absentin the list of examples that are given in the DMG guidelines for how to properly adjudicate issues related to Line of Sight.
Foliage is also missing from that list, it clearly isn't an exhaustive list (the "such as" is a big clue too).
I believe that what trips most people up on this is that in almost every case the thing that causes an area to be heavily obscured will also block Line of Sight -- such as thick foliage or dense fog or an intense sandstorm or a large pile of clothes or whatever. Really the only notable exception is Darkness which quite obviously does not impede Line of Sight.
No. The Vision and Light section says that Darkness(and dense foliage or heavy fog) creates an Heavily Obscured area and that such an area is opaque. The glossary for Heavily Obscured area points us to also read the entry for Darkness and both those entries also points us back to the Vision and Light section. All those rules are connected and all say the same thing and none of them says that Darkness is treated differently than dense foliage or heavy fog. If you have something that explicitly proves otherwise you are welcome to post it, but it really needs to be explicit because all these rules are explicit in their wordings.
Don't get me wrong though, I can totally see where you are coming from. The RAW about vision and light (and a lot about perception in general) are utterly stupid, illogical and completely opposite all we know about darkness from the real life. I would never demand or even suggest that anyone should play in a world where mundane darkness blocks line of sight and the sky is an inky blackness without any moon or stars (I certainly don't play in such a world with the people I play with). But there is a big difference between creating a homebrew rule to fix a failure of the designers and just refusing to accept that such a failure exists.
Don't get me wrong though, I can totally see where you are coming from. The RAW about vision and light (and a lot about perception in general) are utterly stupid, illogical and completely opposite all we know about darkness from the real life. I would never demand or even suggest that anyone should play in a world where mundane darkness blocks line of sight and the sky is an inky blackness without any moon or stars (I certainly don't play in such a world with the people I play with). But there is a big difference between creating a homebrew rule to fix a failure of the designers and just refusing to accept that such a failure exists.
I think that explains 90% of replies in the threads of Rules and Game Mechanics, too many areas where the rules aren't explicit enough and leave too much open to interpretation. Which is why I'd always encourage people to avoid getting stuck on a single interpretation and to also never take things personally in such debates, it's too easy to get heated in them.
Sometimes rules work in not common sense ways, if people took the bright light/dim light/darkness rules seriously, somebody walking past a light source does not block the light if they are technically in darkness, which is just nonsensical from a common sense perspective but is how the rules work.
All those rules are connected and all say the same thing and none of them says that Darkness is treated differently than dense foliage or heavy fog.
I completely agree that Darkness should be treated in exactly the same way as dense foliage and heavy fog when applying the rule for Heavily Obscured areas. In every single one of those examples, the correct ruling is that the phenomenon in question causes the area itself along with anything inside of that area to become totally obscured from view. In addition, in every single one of those examples, when located inside one of those areas you can see objects that are outside of the area just fine since that outside area and the objects within that outside area are not obscured from view.
Next, after that has been resolved, as a dungeon master, we might ask the question of which of these phenomena would block someone's Line of Sight while they are standing within the area. For that, we look to a different rule (or guideline) that is given in the DMG -- the mechanics for Line of Sight. At that point, it is up to the dungeon master to declare whether or not the specific phenomenon in question is something that is capable of blocking Line of Sight since the examples given are not an exhaustive list. The dungeon master then informs the players of this determination and subsequently the overall ruling that is constructed from a combination of these two different rules.
Yes. Those are the words that are used, I agree. It clearly wasn't the best choice given the constant misinterpretation of the rule where it is being used. In this context, the term "opaque" is not referring to the difficulty of seeing through something. Instead, in this context, it is being used to explain the degree to which you are able to see something that is located in a particular area. We know this because that is the concept that is being described in this section of the rules. Note that the word is not one that is actually defined anywhere in the game.
The rules need to be read in context. It's a very significant mistake to always read through the rules one independent word at a time and always apply the top dictionary definition to every word that is used. The English language doesn't work that way. There are tons of cases where words will have alternate meanings in context and there are tons of cases where a phrase will have a completely different meaning than the sum of the definitions of the individual words which make up that phrase. In this context, the word "opaque" is being used to describe how well you can see something that is located in a particular area. It just is, I don't know what else to tell you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is just getting tiring, the rules clearly state that an area of Darkness is Opaque, your entire post appears to be just trying to argue that Darkness doesn't block light despite the rules clearly stating that an Area of Darkness IS Opaque, which would mean it does block light. It's clear, it's in RAW, you're just trying to support your earlier arguments and fighting against what's written in the rules/PHB at this point.
No, I am just able to recognize that the rules are very clearly providing a concept and mechanic that makes things within an area obscured from view and that this is totally separate from anything related to Line of Sight.
I believe that what trips most people up on this is that in almost every case the thing that causes an area to be heavily obscured will also block Line of Sight -- such as thick foliage or dense fog or an intense sandstorm or a large pile of clothes or whatever. Really the only notable exception is Darkness which quite obviously does not impede Line of Sight. Note that Darkness is conspicuously absent in the list of examples that are given in the DMG guidelines for how to properly adjudicate issues related to Line of Sight.
Foliage is also missing from that list, it clearly isn't an exhaustive list (the "such as" is a big clue too).
No. The Vision and Light section says that Darkness (and dense foliage or heavy fog) creates an Heavily Obscured area and that such an area is opaque. The glossary for Heavily Obscured area points us to also read the entry for Darkness and both those entries also points us back to the Vision and Light section.
All those rules are connected and all say the same thing and none of them says that Darkness is treated differently than dense foliage or heavy fog. If you have something that explicitly proves otherwise you are welcome to post it, but it really needs to be explicit because all these rules are explicit in their wordings.
Don't get me wrong though, I can totally see where you are coming from. The RAW about vision and light (and a lot about perception in general) are utterly stupid, illogical and completely opposite all we know about darkness from the real life. I would never demand or even suggest that anyone should play in a world where mundane darkness blocks line of sight and the sky is an inky blackness without any moon or stars (I certainly don't play in such a world with the people I play with). But there is a big difference between creating a homebrew rule to fix a failure of the designers and just refusing to accept that such a failure exists.
I think that explains 90% of replies in the threads of Rules and Game Mechanics, too many areas where the rules aren't explicit enough and leave too much open to interpretation. Which is why I'd always encourage people to avoid getting stuck on a single interpretation and to also never take things personally in such debates, it's too easy to get heated in them.
Sometimes rules work in not common sense ways, if people took the bright light/dim light/darkness rules seriously, somebody walking past a light source does not block the light if they are technically in darkness, which is just nonsensical from a common sense perspective but is how the rules work.
I completely agree that Darkness should be treated in exactly the same way as dense foliage and heavy fog when applying the rule for Heavily Obscured areas. In every single one of those examples, the correct ruling is that the phenomenon in question causes the area itself along with anything inside of that area to become totally obscured from view. In addition, in every single one of those examples, when located inside one of those areas you can see objects that are outside of the area just fine since that outside area and the objects within that outside area are not obscured from view.
Next, after that has been resolved, as a dungeon master, we might ask the question of which of these phenomena would block someone's Line of Sight while they are standing within the area. For that, we look to a different rule (or guideline) that is given in the DMG -- the mechanics for Line of Sight. At that point, it is up to the dungeon master to declare whether or not the specific phenomenon in question is something that is capable of blocking Line of Sight since the examples given are not an exhaustive list. The dungeon master then informs the players of this determination and subsequently the overall ruling that is constructed from a combination of these two different rules.
Yes. Those are the words that are used, I agree. It clearly wasn't the best choice given the constant misinterpretation of the rule where it is being used. In this context, the term "opaque" is not referring to the difficulty of seeing through something. Instead, in this context, it is being used to explain the degree to which you are able to see something that is located in a particular area. We know this because that is the concept that is being described in this section of the rules. Note that the word is not one that is actually defined anywhere in the game.
The rules need to be read in context. It's a very significant mistake to always read through the rules one independent word at a time and always apply the top dictionary definition to every word that is used. The English language doesn't work that way. There are tons of cases where words will have alternate meanings in context and there are tons of cases where a phrase will have a completely different meaning than the sum of the definitions of the individual words which make up that phrase. In this context, the word "opaque" is being used to describe how well you can see something that is located in a particular area. It just is, I don't know what else to tell you.