That's my position as well. Your explanation works for magical darkness and for fog and for foliage, but the way it is written, it also applies to non-magical darkness and that's where a few words of errata could help clear things up. To tie this back to the OP, I believe that logically, Devil's Sight (and truesight) should apply to dim light, but it is clear that the rules do not provide for this and JC has even said "well, the rules don't say so, so no" but I don't know if that speaks to the design intent or just making a judgment based on the rules as they exist currently.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Should rules for seeing into/out of heavy obscurement apply to seeing through the obscurement to something on the other side that is not obscured?
This one, at least, should be a definitive 'yes'. If an effect is blocking your vision, it blocks your vision of anything on the other side of it as well--within the area encompassed by the projected vectors from yourself to the outer surface of the obstruction.
It sounds very simple when you say it that way .. but it still isn't.
Darkness provides heavy obscurement. However, darkness doesn't (in real life) prevent vision through it to something that is lit. Jungle provides heavy obscurement. Jungle does prevent vision through it to something that is not in jungle. The rules for "heavily obscured" need to be clarified when it comes to darkness since it should be treated differently from jungle for example.
Magical darkness also needs a clarification since the rules themselves don't specify differences in magical darkness except that you can't see through it with darkvision. Some folks think that you can't see creatures inside magical darkness but you CAN see creatures on the other side of magical darkness. Other DMs disagree and believe that magical darkness does block vision into AND through it.
It is a mess in terms of rules that I think could use some clarification and errata. Most DMs (myself included) go with what they consider common sense and how obstructions work in the real world but after several of these discussions - my interpretation of common sense for magical darkness isn't necessarily the same as what other folks think is common sense :)
Magical darkness also needs a clarification since the rules themselves don't specify differences in magical darkness except that you can't see through it with darkvision.
Weirdly enough, darkvision has no problem seeing into magical darkness. Darkvision makes no distinction between magical darkness and mundane darkness--only that "a creature with darkvision can see in dim light as if it were bright light and in darkness as if it were dim light, so areas of darkness are only lightly obscured as far as that creature is concerned." Any spell or magical effect that creates darkness that is intended to block darkvision must specify it.
That's my position as well. Your explanation works for magical darkness and for fog and for foliage, but the way it is written, it also applies to non-magical darkness and that's where a few words of errata could help clear things up. To tie this back to the OP, I believe that logically, Devil's Sight (and truesight) should apply to dim light, but it is clear that the rules do not provide for this and JC has even said "well, the rules don't say so, so no" but I don't know if that speaks to the design intent or just making a judgment based on the rules as they exist currently.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Ah, yeah, I see your point.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Add to that, "do truesight and blindsight provide immunity to the Blinded condition?"
and "what's REALLY the deal with invisible creatures that aren't hiding?" :p
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
It sounds very simple when you say it that way .. but it still isn't.
Darkness provides heavy obscurement. However, darkness doesn't (in real life) prevent vision through it to something that is lit. Jungle provides heavy obscurement. Jungle does prevent vision through it to something that is not in jungle. The rules for "heavily obscured" need to be clarified when it comes to darkness since it should be treated differently from jungle for example.
Magical darkness also needs a clarification since the rules themselves don't specify differences in magical darkness except that you can't see through it with darkvision. Some folks think that you can't see creatures inside magical darkness but you CAN see creatures on the other side of magical darkness. Other DMs disagree and believe that magical darkness does block vision into AND through it.
It is a mess in terms of rules that I think could use some clarification and errata. Most DMs (myself included) go with what they consider common sense and how obstructions work in the real world but after several of these discussions - my interpretation of common sense for magical darkness isn't necessarily the same as what other folks think is common sense :)
Weirdly enough, darkvision has no problem seeing into magical darkness. Darkvision makes no distinction between magical darkness and mundane darkness--only that "a creature with darkvision can see in dim light as if it were bright light and in darkness as if it were dim light, so areas of darkness are only lightly obscured as far as that creature is concerned." Any spell or magical effect that creates darkness that is intended to block darkvision must specify it.
I believe I also made your point for you :)
"Not all those who wander are lost"