Alright, so I am completely confused by this mechanic as of the last 24 hours. It was brought to my attention unlike Darkvision andTruesight its not actually a sense.
I was informed that Devil's Sight is instead an improvement of Darkvision which isn't actually stated anywhere that I can find, to the best of my knowledge it appears that is just being stated based of context from Devils like Barbed Devil who have both the Darkvision sense and The Devil's Sight ability(?)
My problem is the more I looked into this the more I got confused because I found same tweets from Jeremy Crawford (which I know he said as of January (2019) his tweets aren't official rulings https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1105277917582389248) however the only thing I can find that tries to clear this whole thing up just muddies the water for me more.
Last January (2018) he had this exchange (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/957031642979221504) about Devil's Sight where he specifically says "Devil's Sight has no interaction with dim light. It alters only how you experience darkness." In this exchange, he never clarifies or states that Devil's Sight gives you Darkvision nor does anywhere else to the best of my knowledge.
So my question is as follows, as rules as written, does Devil's Sight give you Darkvision? If so where are you finding this at?
Because if not it completely changes how Devil's Sight works, as of my current understanding, it basically acts like everything in complete darkness is a torch for a warlock with Devil's Sight but all of the dim light outside of it would still be just regular dim light unless you have Darkvision (which I can't find anywhere that says Devil's Sight grants you).
Correct, Dim light is still dim for those with Devil's Sight, unless they have another sense that allows them to perceive dim light as bright (like Darkvision does)
This is one that I don't feel bad going against RAW with. It would be a pain to determine when a warlock is in dim lighting, and thus can't see very well, and when the lighting is officially darkness, and thus he can now see normally again. :/ "You chase the assassin outside." -"What time is it?" "It's twilight." -"Early twilight, or later twilight? I can see normally when it's later twilight, much better than I can at earlier twilight when it's lighter out."
As written, if you don't have darkvision you can see better in complete darkness than you can in dim light. This makes no sense so most people will homebrew it to work in dim light as well.
So this whole confusion is because both the rules are vague and D&D Beyond may be trying to help it by adding Darkvision to your sense's if you have it.
I will admit that I personally would really homebrew the same rule
You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
Whats so confusing about this?, You see normally, no matter the ligthning levels up to 120feet.
Its a superior tier/version of Darkvision.
now yes, the DnDbeyond app give you 120feet Darkvision in the senses box, but imo its just something they forgot, or just a placeholder until they update it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Normality is but an Illusion, Whats normal to the Spider, is only madness for the Fly"
You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
Whats so confusing about this?, You see normally, no matter the ligthning levels up to 120feet.
Its a superior tier/version of Darkvision.
now yes, the DnDbeyond app give you 120feet Darkvision in the senses box, but imo its just something they forgot, or just a placeholder until they update it.
Jeremy Crawford specifically stated ""Devil's Sight has no interaction with dim light. It alters only how you experience darkness."
You can see normally in darkness, both magical and nonmagical, to a distance of 120 feet.
Whats so confusing about this?, You see normally, no matter the ligthning levels up to 120feet.
Its a superior tier/version of Darkvision.
now yes, the DnDbeyond app give you 120feet Darkvision in the senses box, but imo its just something they forgot, or just a placeholder until they update it.
Jeremy Crawford specifically stated ""Devil's Sight has no interaction with dim light. It alters only how you experience darkness."
Exactly, although I'd point to part of the cause being the formalizing of 'darkness' as an official state. Being in 'dim light' is a distinct thing, and 'darkness' is another distinct thing. Once they make 'darkness' an official category of lighting, nothing in the game can talk about 'darkness' anymore without referring only to that specific condition.
The rule as it is written is actually pretty clear. You can see perfectly in darkness either normal or magical. The main issue is that folks read it and think "That doesn't make sense, how can I see really well in complete darkness but I can't see in dim light? They must have meant something else."
I admit that was the way I read it originally since I figured if they could see in darkness, seeing in dim light would be easier. However, that isn't what the rule actually says. This is one of those situations where a strict Rules As Written was what was Intended.
Anyway, to answer the OP, Devil's sight does not give a darkvision, it allows a creature to see perfectly when it is dark (keep in mind that this includes some lighting - it doesn't need to be pitch dark).
If your character has both darkvision AND Devil's sight then they can see perfectly in dim light out to the distance of their darkvision and they can see perfectly in darkness out to the distance of their devils's sight.
There are some interesting interactions with light sources.
Consider a human with devil's sight carrying a torch with a 20' radius of bright light and 40' radius dim light, darkness beyond 40'.
The human can see perfectly within 20', they have disadvantage on perception checks from 20'-40' because it is dimly lit. However, they can again see perfectly from 40'-120' due to it being darkness.
The rule as it is written is actually pretty clear. You can see perfectly in darkness either normal or magical. The main issue is that folks read it and think "That doesn't make sense, how can I see really well in complete darkness but I can't see in dim light? They must have meant something else."
I admit that was the way I read it originally since I figured if they could see in darkness, seeing in dim light would be easier. However, that isn't what the rule actually says. This is one of those situations where a strict Rules As Written was what was Intended.
Anyway, to answer the OP, Devil's sight does not give a darkvision, it allows a creature to see perfectly when it is dark (keep in mind that this includes some lighting - it doesn't need to be pitch dark).
I get what you're saying, I just think it would be irritating to have to adjudicate this as a DM. You have good vision in the 'dark'. As you say, doesn't have to be pitch black, but 'dark'. But it can't be too bright either, unless it's much brighter. So you've got a party of 4 in a given setting with 4 light sources. Is that 'dim' lighting? What if one of them puts their light source out? Is that now 'dark enough' for the vision to kick in? Blech.
That's just my personal blech :) If you want to mess with that, go ahead. But I'm going to be much happier treating it like it works in dim light as well.
Yeah @Brotherbock, I completely agree, for my players, if you have Devils Sight, you are going to get Darkvision out to the same range.
Trying to handle lighting in D&D is already annoying, I don't want to have to add other annoying mechanics to slow down the game because WoTC wrote Devils Sight as the most baffling thing in the entire book. Some things confused me because they were written to be vague, but this wasn't vague just weird worded and oddly restricting.
The rule as it is written is actually pretty clear. You can see perfectly in darkness either normal or magical. The main issue is that folks read it and think "That doesn't make sense, how can I see really well in complete darkness but I can't see in dim light? They must have meant something else."
I admit that was the way I read it originally since I figured if they could see in darkness, seeing in dim light would be easier. However, that isn't what the rule actually says. This is one of those situations where a strict Rules As Written was what was Intended.
Anyway, to answer the OP, Devil's sight does not give a darkvision, it allows a creature to see perfectly when it is dark (keep in mind that this includes some lighting - it doesn't need to be pitch dark).
I get what you're saying, I just think it would be irritating to have to adjudicate this as a DM. You have good vision in the 'dark'. As you say, doesn't have to be pitch black, but 'dark'. But it can't be too bright either, unless it's much brighter. So you've got a party of 4 in a given setting with 4 light sources. Is that 'dim' lighting? What if one of them puts their light source out? Is that now 'dark enough' for the vision to kick in? Blech.
That's just my personal blech :) If you want to mess with that, go ahead. But I'm going to be much happier treating it like it works in dim light as well.
It can be annoying to adjudicate, but I find it incredibly thematic! The fact that Devil's Sight allows Warlocks to use darkness to perceive, as well as light (from their natural senses), is pretty neat. Dim light, of course, has neither enough light nor enough darkness to properly allow them to perceive. It's as if in the D&D universe, darkness isn't merely "the absence of light", like it is in our universe, but rather an "active" phenomenon, which works directly counter to light, unless you've got some fiendish ability to use it to your advantage.
Imagine, if you will, a Warlock with Devil's Sight, adventuring around in a dark, damp cavern, having no problem seeing everything, and coming up to a room with torches on the walls, then running up to extinguish the torches, whose light interferes with their ability to use darkness to see. Now surrounded by darkness again, they notice a group of goblins, which were hiding just outside the range of the torches' bright light, using their dim light to their advantage... "Hello darkness my old friend..." :D
It can be annoying to adjudicate, but I find it incredibly thematic! The fact that Devil's Sight allows Warlocks to use darkness to perceive, as well as light (from their natural senses), is pretty neat. Dim light, of course, has neither enough light nor enough darkness to properly allow them to perceive. It's as if in the D&D universe, darkness isn't merely "the absence of light", like it is in our universe, but rather an "active" phenomenon, which works directly counter to light, unless you've got some fiendish ability to use it to your advantage.
Imagine, if you will, a Warlock with Devil's Sight, adventuring around in a dark, damp cavern, having no problem seeing everything, and coming up to a room with torches on the walls, then running up to extinguish the torches, whose light interferes with their ability to use darkness to see. Now surrounded by darkness again, they notice a group of goblins, which were hiding just outside the range of the torches' bright light, using their dim light to their advantage... "Hello darkness my old friend..." :D
I like it! :D If a DM wants to go that route, I can roll with it. I've had to deal with far more difficult things in my life than having to badger a DM about how much dimness is too much dimness, lol.
But now I'm imagining a Warlock like Monk from the TV show, who's constantly going around adjusting the lighting of rooms very carefully. "Look people, it's either got to be a bit brighter than this, or a bit dimmer. Let's make up our minds!"
I like it! :D If a DM wants to go that route, I can roll with it.
Bear in mind "that route" is the official, RAW, route, though. I was merely offering a thematic in-game explanation that meshes properly with the rules as written. (Hm, déjà vu... didn't we have this conversation before? :D)
I like it! :D If a DM wants to go that route, I can roll with it.
Bear in mind "that route" is the official, RAW, route, though. I was merely offering a thematic in-game explanation that meshes properly with the rules as written. (Hm, déjà vu... didn't we have this conversation before? :D)
LOL. :D So, here's a story that will help explain my position.
1st Edition. 'Weapon Speeds'. This was a mechanic that was almost universally despised by everyone who ever played the game, and was generally thought to make the game terrible and almost unplayable by almost anyone who did not also have a to-scale miniature replica of multiple Civil War battles in their basement. The idea was that different weapons were slower than other weapons, and so should get combat advantages (not 'Advantage', that wasn't a thing yet). Swinging a two-handed sword was thought to be slower than attacking with a dagger, so there of course needed to be some statistical way to acknowledge this.
That way was, when two opponents are tied for initiative, the opponent with the faster weapon actually got to go first. And so, if he killed his opponent with that strike, the opponent wouldn't get to attack, even with simultaneous initiatives. And...because that's not enough, if the differences in speed were significant enough, the attacker with the faster weapon could even get two attacks before the slower opponent got one. And, if they were super-duper faster, they could get two attacks before, and one attack at the same time as the opponent.
So
There was no mention in that passage of whether the faster opponent had to have the ability to attack twice already granted to them by their class. It didn't say "if you get to attack twice in a round, you may make both attacks before your opponent." It just said "If the difference is twice the factor of the lower...the opponent with the lower factored weapon is entitled to two attacks before the opponent with the higher weapon factor is allowed any attack whatsoever." (I looked this up just now to get it right, so much is my hatred for this rule.)
This gave someone who only would otherwise get one attack in a round two attacks, if only they tie in initiative with their opponent.
But initiative was supposed to be rolled for the whole party, not for individuals.
This left the barbarian with the two-handed sword at Initiative 6 (you rolled init on a d6) attacking before the dagger-wielding thief on Init 5. But if they were both at 5, the Thief would attack twice (whether or not he could have attacked twice had they not tied), and then maybe even attack again as the Barbarian attacks.
But that leaves you still with simultaneous attacks, the very thing that these weapon speeds were supposed to do away with. Just that now they really, really are simultaneous. Because Gary and Friends couldn't think of any other way to nickel and dime you into rolling more dice or keeping more stats.
So that was RAW weapon speeds. And I just simply would not play a game with a DM who used them. They were awful. (They also got badly interpreted soooooo frequently so as to make them even worse, but that's beside the point.)
My perspective, to make a long story long, rests on the assumption that not all RAW is great RAW :D
As written, if you don't have darkvision you can see better in complete darkness than you can in dim light. This makes no sense so most people will homebrew it to work in dim light as well.
It makes perfect sense for a spooky character who has stolen power from some eldritch source.
"Put out the candle, boy. Let the darkness guide my sight."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Alright, so I am completely confused by this mechanic as of the last 24 hours. It was brought to my attention unlike Darkvision andTruesight its not actually a sense.
I was informed that Devil's Sight is instead an improvement of Darkvision which isn't actually stated anywhere that I can find, to the best of my knowledge it appears that is just being stated based of context from Devils like Barbed Devil who have both the Darkvision sense and The Devil's Sight ability(?)
My problem is the more I looked into this the more I got confused because I found same tweets from Jeremy Crawford (which I know he said as of January (2019) his tweets aren't official rulings https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1105277917582389248) however the only thing I can find that tries to clear this whole thing up just muddies the water for me more.
Last January (2018) he had this exchange (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/957031642979221504) about Devil's Sight where he specifically says "Devil's Sight has no interaction with dim light. It alters only how you experience darkness." In this exchange, he never clarifies or states that Devil's Sight gives you Darkvision nor does anywhere else to the best of my knowledge.
So my question is as follows, as rules as written, does Devil's Sight give you Darkvision? If so where are you finding this at?
Because if not it completely changes how Devil's Sight works, as of my current understanding, it basically acts like everything in complete darkness is a torch for a warlock with Devil's Sight but all of the dim light outside of it would still be just regular dim light unless you have Darkvision (which I can't find anywhere that says Devil's Sight grants you).
Correct, Dim light is still dim for those with Devil's Sight, unless they have another sense that allows them to perceive dim light as bright (like Darkvision does)
Site Rules & Guidelines || How to Tooltip || Contact Support || Changelog || Pricing FAQ || Homebrew FAQ
If you have questions/concerns, please Private Message me or another moderator.
Wary the wizard who focuses on homebrew, for he can create nightmares that you wouldn't even dream of
I'm sure part of the confusion is that DDB has devil's sight grant 120ft of darkvision, when it technically doesn't.
Devil's sight is not an improved darkvision, it is a similar, but separate effect.
This is one that I don't feel bad going against RAW with. It would be a pain to determine when a warlock is in dim lighting, and thus can't see very well, and when the lighting is officially darkness, and thus he can now see normally again. :/ "You chase the assassin outside." -"What time is it?" "It's twilight." -"Early twilight, or later twilight? I can see normally when it's later twilight, much better than I can at earlier twilight when it's lighter out."
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
As written, if you don't have darkvision you can see better in complete darkness than you can in dim light. This makes no sense so most people will homebrew it to work in dim light as well.
So this whole confusion is because both the rules are vague and D&D Beyond may be trying to help it by adding Darkvision to your sense's if you have it.
I will admit that I personally would really homebrew the same rule
Whats so confusing about this?, You see normally, no matter the ligthning levels up to 120feet.
Its a superior tier/version of Darkvision.
now yes, the DnDbeyond app give you 120feet Darkvision in the senses box, but imo its just something they forgot, or just a placeholder until they update it.
"Normality is but an Illusion, Whats normal to the Spider, is only madness for the Fly"
Kain de Frostberg- Dark Knight - (Vengeance Pal3/ Hexblade 9), Port Mourn
Kain de Draakberg-Dark Knight lvl8-Avergreen(DitA)
Jeremy Craw
Jeremy Crawford specifically stated ""Devil's Sight has no interaction with dim light. It alters only how you experience darkness."
Exactly, although I'd point to part of the cause being the formalizing of 'darkness' as an official state. Being in 'dim light' is a distinct thing, and 'darkness' is another distinct thing. Once they make 'darkness' an official category of lighting, nothing in the game can talk about 'darkness' anymore without referring only to that specific condition.
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
I get that, that's why I think WoTC really needs to come out with Errata for Devils Sight, just to simplify things and make them more clear.
Agreed entirely.
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
The rule as it is written is actually pretty clear. You can see perfectly in darkness either normal or magical. The main issue is that folks read it and think "That doesn't make sense, how can I see really well in complete darkness but I can't see in dim light? They must have meant something else."
I admit that was the way I read it originally since I figured if they could see in darkness, seeing in dim light would be easier. However, that isn't what the rule actually says. This is one of those situations where a strict Rules As Written was what was Intended.
Anyway, to answer the OP, Devil's sight does not give a darkvision, it allows a creature to see perfectly when it is dark (keep in mind that this includes some lighting - it doesn't need to be pitch dark).
If your character has both darkvision AND Devil's sight then they can see perfectly in dim light out to the distance of their darkvision and they can see perfectly in darkness out to the distance of their devils's sight.
There are some interesting interactions with light sources.
Consider a human with devil's sight carrying a torch with a 20' radius of bright light and 40' radius dim light, darkness beyond 40'.
The human can see perfectly within 20', they have disadvantage on perception checks from 20'-40' because it is dimly lit. However, they can again see perfectly from 40'-120' due to it being darkness.
In bright light you see by the light, in darkness you see as if darkness was illumination, in dim light, neither allows you to see very well.
I get what you're saying, I just think it would be irritating to have to adjudicate this as a DM. You have good vision in the 'dark'. As you say, doesn't have to be pitch black, but 'dark'. But it can't be too bright either, unless it's much brighter. So you've got a party of 4 in a given setting with 4 light sources. Is that 'dim' lighting? What if one of them puts their light source out? Is that now 'dark enough' for the vision to kick in? Blech.
That's just my personal blech :) If you want to mess with that, go ahead. But I'm going to be much happier treating it like it works in dim light as well.
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
Yeah @Brotherbock, I completely agree, for my players, if you have Devils Sight, you are going to get Darkvision out to the same range.
Trying to handle lighting in D&D is already annoying, I don't want to have to add other annoying mechanics to slow down the game because WoTC wrote Devils Sight as the most baffling thing in the entire book. Some things confused me because they were written to be vague, but this wasn't vague just weird worded and oddly restricting.
It can be annoying to adjudicate, but I find it incredibly thematic! The fact that Devil's Sight allows Warlocks to use darkness to perceive, as well as light (from their natural senses), is pretty neat. Dim light, of course, has neither enough light nor enough darkness to properly allow them to perceive. It's as if in the D&D universe, darkness isn't merely "the absence of light", like it is in our universe, but rather an "active" phenomenon, which works directly counter to light, unless you've got some fiendish ability to use it to your advantage.
Imagine, if you will, a Warlock with Devil's Sight, adventuring around in a dark, damp cavern, having no problem seeing everything, and coming up to a room with torches on the walls, then running up to extinguish the torches, whose light interferes with their ability to use darkness to see. Now surrounded by darkness again, they notice a group of goblins, which were hiding just outside the range of the torches' bright light, using their dim light to their advantage... "Hello darkness my old friend..." :D
I like it! :D If a DM wants to go that route, I can roll with it. I've had to deal with far more difficult things in my life than having to badger a DM about how much dimness is too much dimness, lol.
But now I'm imagining a Warlock like Monk from the TV show, who's constantly going around adjusting the lighting of rooms very carefully. "Look people, it's either got to be a bit brighter than this, or a bit dimmer. Let's make up our minds!"
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
Bear in mind "that route" is the official, RAW, route, though. I was merely offering a thematic in-game explanation that meshes properly with the rules as written. (Hm, déjà vu... didn't we have this conversation before? :D)
LOL. :D So, here's a story that will help explain my position.
1st Edition. 'Weapon Speeds'. This was a mechanic that was almost universally despised by everyone who ever played the game, and was generally thought to make the game terrible and almost unplayable by almost anyone who did not also have a to-scale miniature replica of multiple Civil War battles in their basement. The idea was that different weapons were slower than other weapons, and so should get combat advantages (not 'Advantage', that wasn't a thing yet). Swinging a two-handed sword was thought to be slower than attacking with a dagger, so there of course needed to be some statistical way to acknowledge this.
That way was, when two opponents are tied for initiative, the opponent with the faster weapon actually got to go first. And so, if he killed his opponent with that strike, the opponent wouldn't get to attack, even with simultaneous initiatives. And...because that's not enough, if the differences in speed were significant enough, the attacker with the faster weapon could even get two attacks before the slower opponent got one. And, if they were super-duper faster, they could get two attacks before, and one attack at the same time as the opponent.
So
So that was RAW weapon speeds. And I just simply would not play a game with a DM who used them. They were awful. (They also got badly interpreted soooooo frequently so as to make them even worse, but that's beside the point.)
My perspective, to make a long story long, rests on the assumption that not all RAW is great RAW :D
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
It makes perfect sense for a spooky character who has stolen power from some eldritch source.
"Put out the candle, boy. Let the darkness guide my sight."