Blindsight is a catch-all for things like super-hearing, super-smell, and indeed specifies that it is "without relying on sight," so I would wager that Blindsight will join Tremorsense in the "not sight" category. But Darkvision and Truesight already specify that their creature can "see", so I'd wager that they will continue to. We'll have Blindsight and Tremorsense in one pile, and regular Vision, Darkvision, and Truesight in the other.
I'll take that bet. Tremorsense has never been a form of sight but people were often convinced it was, so the new definition being explicit is helpful. Blindsight has always been sight but people (including you, clearly!) have sometimes been convinced it wasn't, so hopefully it will be explicitly clarified in the other direction.
The "piles" have always been like this:
Tremorsense is functionally super-hearing - creatures within range that can be Tremorsensed are automatically located. It is the only one of the senses you listed that isn't sight.
Basic sight is you can see normally in bright light, with disadvantage in dim, and not at all in darkness, through non-darkness sources of heavily obscured, or when what you want to see is invisible.
Darkvision upgrades basic sight so you see normally in dim and with disadvantage + in black and white in darkness.
Truesight upgrades darkvision so you see normally in darkness, it has an explicit override letting you see normally in magical darkness that has text in it blocking darkvision, it lets you see invisible creatures, automatically "beats" visual illusions, miraculously "beats" shapechangers and magical transmutations to see the original form, and sees into the Ethereal Plane. A creature with both Truesight and Darkvision has no use at all for Darkvision.
Blindsight is generally an upgrade to Truesight - without special rules to the contrary you now see through almost all sources of something being heavily obscured, including opaque total cover. This will provide all of the benefits of Truesight for most purposes - no disadvantage in dim light or darkness (regardless of magical darkness that says it blocks darkvision) and Invisibility doesn't matter to you. You won't get the weirder Truesight benefits having to do with shapechangers and the Ethereal Plane, but you'll get a weaker version of illusion defeating: strictly visual illusions won't matter to you. On the other hand, under most DMs you'll be even worse off than Darkvision's black and white, as you won't be able to perceive anything that isn't a difference in texture (e.g. a tile mosaic will just look like tiles to you).
Reading again this specific answer, is the following sentence the general consensus?
Blindsight [...] - without special rules to the contrary you now see through almost all sources of something being heavily obscured, including opaque total cover.
After reading some post on DnD Beyond (i.e. Blindsight after Tasha's) and also on Role-playing Games Stack Exchange (i.e. this question and the answers), it appears that most people agree that a creature with blindsight cannot perceive objects behind total cover.
A creature with blindsight to a range of 20' walks up to the closed door of a small hut. Does the creature "see" the rogue hiding inside?
RAW, blindsight says A monster* with blindsight can perceive its surroundings without relying on sight, within a specific radius and makes no restrictions beyond that.
Non-RAW, make of this what you will:
* Basic rules and DMG say "a monster with blindsight..." while other sources say "a creature with blindsight..."
A creature with blindsight to a range of 20' walks up to the closed door of a small hut. Does the creature "see" the rogue hiding inside?
RAW, blindsight says A monster* with blindsight can perceive its surroundings without relying on sight, within a specific radius and makes no restrictions beyond that.
Non-RAW, make of this what you will:
* Basic rules and DMG say "a monster with blindsight..." while other sources say "a creature with blindsight..."
Perhaps as another discussion point, the rules on cover do NOT refer to being able to see the target at all. They only refer to what fraction of the creature is covered from the location where the attacker is located to the target. The cover rules don't mention seeing at all (except the clause under total cover that says a target that is completely concealed has total cover - which is the basis for the arguments on transparent total cover - which is a different discussion).
As a result, how a creature perceives their environment could be considered irrelevant to the effects of cover since it only requires that the target be "covered" and by how much. Cover might also be considered a more specific rule than the general rules on senses.
"Walls, trees, creatures, and other obstacles can provide cover during combat, making a target more difficult to harm. A target can benefit from cover only when an attack or other effect originates on the opposite side of the cover.
There are three degrees of cover. If a target is behind multiple sources of cover, only the most protective degree of cover applies; the degrees aren’t added together. For example, if a target is behind a creature that gives half cover and a tree trunk that gives three-quarters cover, the target has three-quarters cover."
"A target has half cover if an obstacle blocks at least half of its body. The obstacle might be a low wall, a large piece of furniture, a narrow tree trunk, or a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or a friend."
"A target has three-quarters cover if about three-quarters of it is covered by an obstacle. The obstacle might be a portcullis, an arrow slit, or a thick tree trunk."
"A target with total cover can’t be targeted directly by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach such a target by including it in an area of effect. A target has total cover if it is completely concealed by an obstacle."
The blindsight rules do NOT say that the sense ignores cover (as the Sacred Flame spell, as an example, does).
As a result, I think it is quite reasonable and within RAW, to have solid cover (like a wall or tree) affect blindsight as much as it would truesight, darkvision or regular vision.
A creature with blindsight to a range of 20' walks up to the closed door of a small hut. Does the creature "see" the rogue hiding inside?
RAW, blindsight says A monster* with blindsight can perceive its surroundings without relying on sight, within a specific radius and makes no restrictions beyond that.
Non-RAW, make of this what you will:
* Basic rules and DMG say "a monster with blindsight..." while other sources say "a creature with blindsight..."
To be honest, the first time I read about blindsight in the Monster Manual, I didn't consider that a creature with blindsight couldn't detect another creature behind half, three-quarters, or total cover. In fact, I thought it should depend on the specific creature, so for example a Bat might behave differently from a Violet Fungus (or not... 😅)
It was after reading on the Internet I realized some people agree with an idea similar to Jeremy Crawford's answer.
The blindsight rules do NOT say that the sense ignores cover (as the Sacred Flame spell, as an example, does).
Rules do what they say they do.
The rule for blindsight does not say it ignores cover, so it doesn't ignore cover.
The rule for blindsight says you perceive your surroundings within a specific radius. This rule makes no restriction for cover, therefore you perceive your target within its radius regardless of cover.
The blindsight rules do NOT say that the sense ignores cover (as the Sacred Flame spell, as an example, does).
Rules do what they say they do.
The rule for blindsight does not say it ignores cover, so it doesn't ignore cover.
The rule for blindsight says you perceive your surroundings within a specific radius. This rule makes no restriction for cover, therefore you perceive your target within its radius regardless of cover.
Basically, take your pick.
"The rules for Darkvision say that you can see in the dark within a certain radius. This rule makes no restriction for cover, therefore you can see your target within its radius in the dark regardless of cover"?
"The rules for Truesight say that you can see in the Dark and magical Darkness within a certain radius. This rule makes no restriction for cover, therefore you can see your target within its radius in the dark regardless of cover"?
If you pick option 2 - then both of the above statements are equally valid.
The rules for Darkvision say:
"A monster with darkvision can see in the dark within a specific radius. The monster can see in dim light within the radius as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. The monster can’t discern color in darkness, only shades of gray. Many creatures that live underground have this special sense."
of for a PC
"Darkvision. Accustomed to twilit forests and the night sky, you have superior vision in dark and dim conditions. You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. You can’t discern color in darkness, only shades of gray."
or for Truesight:
"A monster with truesight can, out to a specific range, see in normal and magical darkness, see invisible creatures and objects, automatically detect visual illusions and succeed on saving throws against them, and perceive the original form of a shapechanger or a creature that is transformed by magic. Furthermore, the monster can see into the Ethereal Plane within the same range."
or Blindsight:
"A monster with blindsight can perceive its surroundings without relying on sight, within a specific radius."
---------------
Darkvision and Truesight allow the creature to see in Darkness within a specified radius. They make no mention of cover either.
Note that the cover rules do NOT mention sight or any other method of perceiving. They only talk about an obstruction between the two creatures. The fraction of obstruction determines the amount of cover.
---------------
Unless, the interpretation is based on the word "perceives" having an entirely different meaning from "sees" (which doesn't make much sense since seeing is just another form of perception) and the DM decides to treat them completely differently, I really don't see how, RAW, blindsignt can ignore cover but Darkvision, Truesight and other forms of perception can't.
Adding to this, the description of blind fighting in Tasha's makes it clear that blindsight is affected by cover:
"You have blindsight with a range of 10 feet. Within that range, you can effectively see anything that isn’t behind total cover, even if you’re blinded or in darkness."
Unless the blindsight mentioned in this fighting style is different from the blindsight that other creatures have (while using the exact same term for the sense) - then it clarifies that you can see anything that isn't behind total cover (and thus that blindsight is affected by cover including total cover).
-----------------
P.S. Some of my favorite science fiction novels have a "sense of perception" that works much like you are describing blindsight - where a creature can perceive everything within a certain radius including the insides of walls, structures, creatures - and it is certainly a possible option for running blindsight in D&D if a DM wants to rule it that way. However, the cover rules make no mention of seeing or using any specific sense. In addition, the blindsight rules do not include any special exemption to ignore cover (neither do Darkvision or Truesight or even just basic sight). Since none of them contain a clause exempting them from the cover rules, RAW, the cover rules would apply to all of them. If the DM wants to house rule differently that is totally fine, I might do that if I wanted to have a special blindsight sense more like those in some of the books.
Darkvision and truesight are enhancements to normal linear vision. Blindsight is a replacement for vision, which gives you the benefits of vision for the purposes of spells and features that require you to see your target. This is why blindsight works when you are blinded and the other senses don't.
"You have blindsight with a range of 10 feet. Within that range, you can effectively see anything that isn’t behind total cover, even if you’re blinded or in darkness."
This pretty well settles it as far as I'm concerned.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Not all those who wander are lost"
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Reading again this specific answer, is the following sentence the general consensus?
Blindsight [...] - without special rules to the contrary you now see through almost all sources of something being heavily obscured, including opaque total cover.
After reading some post on DnD Beyond (i.e. Blindsight after Tasha's) and also on Role-playing Games Stack Exchange (i.e. this question and the answers), it appears that most people agree that a creature with blindsight cannot perceive objects behind total cover.
A creature with blindsight to a range of 20' walks up to the closed door of a small hut. Does the creature "see" the rogue hiding inside?
RAW, blindsight says A monster* with blindsight can perceive its surroundings without relying on sight, within a specific radius and makes no restrictions beyond that.
Non-RAW, make of this what you will:
* Basic rules and DMG say "a monster with blindsight..." while other sources say "a creature with blindsight..."
"Not all those who wander are lost"
UA does specify that total cover blocks blindsight, but existing rules are silent on that.
Perhaps as another discussion point, the rules on cover do NOT refer to being able to see the target at all. They only refer to what fraction of the creature is covered from the location where the attacker is located to the target. The cover rules don't mention seeing at all (except the clause under total cover that says a target that is completely concealed has total cover - which is the basis for the arguments on transparent total cover - which is a different discussion).
As a result, how a creature perceives their environment could be considered irrelevant to the effects of cover since it only requires that the target be "covered" and by how much. Cover might also be considered a more specific rule than the general rules on senses.
"Walls, trees, creatures, and other obstacles can provide cover during combat, making a target more difficult to harm. A target can benefit from cover only when an attack or other effect originates on the opposite side of the cover.
There are three degrees of cover. If a target is behind multiple sources of cover, only the most protective degree of cover applies; the degrees aren’t added together. For example, if a target is behind a creature that gives half cover and a tree trunk that gives three-quarters cover, the target has three-quarters cover."
"A target has half cover if an obstacle blocks at least half of its body. The obstacle might be a low wall, a large piece of furniture, a narrow tree trunk, or a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or a friend."
"A target has three-quarters cover if about three-quarters of it is covered by an obstacle. The obstacle might be a portcullis, an arrow slit, or a thick tree trunk."
"A target with total cover can’t be targeted directly by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach such a target by including it in an area of effect. A target has total cover if it is completely concealed by an obstacle."
The blindsight rules do NOT say that the sense ignores cover (as the Sacred Flame spell, as an example, does).
As a result, I think it is quite reasonable and within RAW, to have solid cover (like a wall or tree) affect blindsight as much as it would truesight, darkvision or regular vision.
To be honest, the first time I read about blindsight in the Monster Manual, I didn't consider that a creature with blindsight couldn't detect another creature behind half, three-quarters, or total cover. In fact, I thought it should depend on the specific creature, so for example a Bat might behave differently from a Violet Fungus (or not... 😅)
It was after reading on the Internet I realized some people agree with an idea similar to Jeremy Crawford's answer.
Rules do what they say they do.
Basically, take your pick.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
"The rules for Darkvision say that you can see in the dark within a certain radius. This rule makes no restriction for cover, therefore you can see your target within its radius in the dark regardless of cover"?
"The rules for Truesight say that you can see in the Dark and magical Darkness within a certain radius. This rule makes no restriction for cover, therefore you can see your target within its radius in the dark regardless of cover"?
If you pick option 2 - then both of the above statements are equally valid.
The rules for Darkvision say:
"A monster with darkvision can see in the dark within a specific radius. The monster can see in dim light within the radius as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. The monster can’t discern color in darkness, only shades of gray. Many creatures that live underground have this special sense."
of for a PC
"Darkvision. Accustomed to twilit forests and the night sky, you have superior vision in dark and dim conditions. You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. You can’t discern color in darkness, only shades of gray."
or for Truesight:
"A monster with truesight can, out to a specific range, see in normal and magical darkness, see invisible creatures and objects, automatically detect visual illusions and succeed on saving throws against them, and perceive the original form of a shapechanger or a creature that is transformed by magic. Furthermore, the monster can see into the Ethereal Plane within the same range."
or Blindsight:
"A monster with blindsight can perceive its surroundings without relying on sight, within a specific radius."
---------------
Darkvision and Truesight allow the creature to see in Darkness within a specified radius. They make no mention of cover either.
Note that the cover rules do NOT mention sight or any other method of perceiving. They only talk about an obstruction between the two creatures. The fraction of obstruction determines the amount of cover.
---------------
Unless, the interpretation is based on the word "perceives" having an entirely different meaning from "sees" (which doesn't make much sense since seeing is just another form of perception) and the DM decides to treat them completely differently, I really don't see how, RAW, blindsignt can ignore cover but Darkvision, Truesight and other forms of perception can't.
Adding to this, the description of blind fighting in Tasha's makes it clear that blindsight is affected by cover:
"You have blindsight with a range of 10 feet. Within that range, you can effectively see anything that isn’t behind total cover, even if you’re blinded or in darkness."
Unless the blindsight mentioned in this fighting style is different from the blindsight that other creatures have (while using the exact same term for the sense) - then it clarifies that you can see anything that isn't behind total cover (and thus that blindsight is affected by cover including total cover).
-----------------
P.S. Some of my favorite science fiction novels have a "sense of perception" that works much like you are describing blindsight - where a creature can perceive everything within a certain radius including the insides of walls, structures, creatures - and it is certainly a possible option for running blindsight in D&D if a DM wants to rule it that way. However, the cover rules make no mention of seeing or using any specific sense. In addition, the blindsight rules do not include any special exemption to ignore cover (neither do Darkvision or Truesight or even just basic sight). Since none of them contain a clause exempting them from the cover rules, RAW, the cover rules would apply to all of them. If the DM wants to house rule differently that is totally fine, I might do that if I wanted to have a special blindsight sense more like those in some of the books.
Darkvision and truesight are enhancements to normal linear vision. Blindsight is a replacement for vision, which gives you the benefits of vision for the purposes of spells and features that require you to see your target. This is why blindsight works when you are blinded and the other senses don't.
That being said...
This pretty well settles it as far as I'm concerned.
"Not all those who wander are lost"