My dm and I had a question regarding the Eyes of Night feature granted by the Twilight domain. It states that I get darkvision, but. it doesn't list that "You can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray." Since this is missing from Eyes of Night, would that mean that Twilight Clerics can still see color, or is there an over arcing rule that covers that?
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.
That is directly from the PHB under senses in chapter 12
but also darkvision it being left out frankly I believe comes down to that fact that Tasha's was simply released at a time where they felt they no longer need to repeat what a keyword means. Like how MTG stops telling you what Cycle means because they assume you know what it does.
MTG relies a lot less on general/common language than 5e does (which is why MTG always has a correct ruling and 5e often has long debates on what 1 word means).
Since eyes of night completely defines darkvision excluding color blindness, I would say that it doesn't have color blindness. The darkvision is distinctly magical in this instance. I would describe it as if the range was illuminated by a golden glow (like twilight), that description isn't RAW, but...
Darkvision is a defined game term - see the text I linked. Are you telling me that the definition of senses in monster stats which fail to say “shades of grey” do not follow the above quoted text from the PHB?
darkvision is defined in chapter 12 of not being able to see colors. Something lacking that sentence does not change it as if you go and read what darkvision is it states it right there in the book.
Darkvision is a defined game term - see the text I linked. Are you telling me that the definition of senses in monster stats which fail to say “shades of grey” do not follow the above quoted text from the PHB?
darkvision is defined in chapter 12 of not being able to see colors. Something lacking that sentence does not change it as if you go and read what darkvision is it states it right there in the book.
The above quoted text is from the monster manual and applies to monsters and NPC stat blocks, not player characters (there is no chapter 12 in the PHB).
"Darkvision" is a sense for monster stat blocks and the name of a common racial trait/class feature. The only time it is used as a general term besides monster stats is on magic items. Class features and racial traits always define their effects.
All instances of darkvision in the PHB and every expansion of player options define what darkvision looks like for that instance of it (for example fire genasi see shades of red because it's darkvision is historically infrared based). This instance of darkvision does not say it is color blind, so it isn't. Period.
Darkvision is a defined game term - see the text I linked. Are you telling me that the definition of senses in monster stats which fail to say “shades of grey” do not follow the above quoted text from the PHB?
darkvision is defined in chapter 12 of not being able to see colors. Something lacking that sentence does not change it as if you go and read what darkvision is it states it right there in the book.
The above quoted text is from the monster manual and applies to monsters and NPC stat blocks, not player characters (there is no chapter 12 in the PHB).
"Darkvision" is a sense for monster stat blocks and the name of a common racial trait/class feature. The only time it is used as a general term besides monster stats is on magic items. Class features and racial traits always define their effects.
All instances of darkvision in the PHB and every expansion of player options define what darkvision looks like for that instance of it (for example fire genasi see shades of red because it's darkvision is historically infrared based). This instance of darkvision does not say it is color blind, so it isn't. Period.
I would be inclined to agree with you, but it’s worth mentioning that “All instances of darkvision in the PHB and every expansion of player options define what darkvision looks like for that instance of it” is not actually true. Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything’s custom lineage rules grant the option of a 60 foot darkvision but offer no description of what darkvision actually means. This could just be an oversight, but it could also be that, contrary to your position, the Monster Manual’s description of darkvision is a universal standard that applies to PCs as well.
Other examples that would support “MM descriptions are a universal standard” include the spell True Seeing, which doesn’t define truesight, and the magic item gem of seeing for which the same holds true (ha ha ha).
Darkvision is a defined game term - see the text I linked. Are you telling me that the definition of senses in monster stats which fail to say “shades of grey” do not follow the above quoted text from the PHB?
darkvision is defined in chapter 12 of not being able to see colors. Something lacking that sentence does not change it as if you go and read what darkvision is it states it right there in the book.
The above quoted text is from the monster manual and applies to monsters and NPC stat blocks, not player characters (there is no chapter 12 in the PHB).
"Darkvision" is a sense for monster stat blocks and the name of a common racial trait/class feature. The only time it is used as a general term besides monster stats is on magic items. Class features and racial traits always define their effects.
All instances of darkvision in the PHB and every expansion of player options define what darkvision looks like for that instance of it (for example fire genasi see shades of red because it's darkvision is historically infrared based). This instance of darkvision does not say it is color blind, so it isn't. Period.
I would be inclined to agree with you, but it’s worth mentioning that “All instances of darkvision in the PHB and every expansion of player options define what darkvision looks like for that instance of it” is not actually true. Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything’s custom lineage rules grant the option of a 60 foot darkvision but offer no description of what darkvision actually means. This could just be an oversight, but it could also be that, contrary to your position, the Monster Manual’s description of darkvision is a universal standard that applies to PCs as well.
Other examples that would support “MM descriptions are a universal standard” include the spell True Seeing, which doesn’t define truesight, and the magic item gem of seeing for which the same holds true (ha ha ha).
Ok, there is 1 instance in an optional rule where the darkvision trait is not defined that I missed. And I need to add spells to the list of things that use general sense terms.
Apologies. I must understood where DDB took me. It took me to chapter 12 of the BASIC RULES. I at quick glance thought I was on chapter 12 of the PHB.
however I have STILL shown quoted rules that agree with my statements.
I still stand by that when a sense is specifically defined (as it is with eyes of night), that it overrules other general uses of the term. "Specific beats general" and all that.
I think part of the problem might be the hyperlinking in the D&D Beyond site...this is a case where I'd like to see the real text to see how it reads (if it treats Darkvision like a "term" or just a word). One issue with the wording of the MM description of darkvision is that is says "a monster with darkvision..." PCs are creatures, but aren't usually described as "monsters".
The other thing is that the second paragraph of the Eyes of Night feature mentions sharing "the darkvision of this feature" which heavily implies this is a singular type of "darkvision"
It's always DM's choice. But i believe in general Darkvision is colorblind by default. For the number of time this very odd aspect played any role in all the campaigns i have run or played in it'd say it matter very little, if at all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
My dm and I had a question regarding the Eyes of Night feature granted by the Twilight domain. It states that I get darkvision, but. it doesn't list that "You can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray." Since this is missing from Eyes of Night, would that mean that Twilight Clerics can still see color, or is there an over arcing rule that covers that?
That is directly from the PHB under senses in chapter 12
but also darkvision it being left out frankly I believe comes down to that fact that Tasha's was simply released at a time where they felt they no longer need to repeat what a keyword means. Like how MTG stops telling you what Cycle means because they assume you know what it does.
MTG relies a lot less on general/common language than 5e does (which is why MTG always has a correct ruling and 5e often has long debates on what 1 word means).
Since eyes of night completely defines darkvision excluding color blindness, I would say that it doesn't have color blindness. The darkvision is distinctly magical in this instance. I would describe it as if the range was illuminated by a golden glow (like twilight), that description isn't RAW, but...
Darkvision is a defined game term - see the text I linked. Are you telling me that the definition of senses in monster stats which fail to say “shades of grey” do not follow the above quoted text from the PHB?
darkvision is defined in chapter 12 of not being able to see colors. Something lacking that sentence does not change it as if you go and read what darkvision is it states it right there in the book.
The above quoted text is from the monster manual and applies to monsters and NPC stat blocks, not player characters (there is no chapter 12 in the PHB).
"Darkvision" is a sense for monster stat blocks and the name of a common racial trait/class feature. The only time it is used as a general term besides monster stats is on magic items. Class features and racial traits always define their effects.
All instances of darkvision in the PHB and every expansion of player options define what darkvision looks like for that instance of it (for example fire genasi see shades of red because it's darkvision is historically infrared based). This instance of darkvision does not say it is color blind, so it isn't. Period.
I would be inclined to agree with you, but it’s worth mentioning that “All instances of darkvision in the PHB and every expansion of player options define what darkvision looks like for that instance of it” is not actually true. Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything’s custom lineage rules grant the option of a 60 foot darkvision but offer no description of what darkvision actually means. This could just be an oversight, but it could also be that, contrary to your position, the Monster Manual’s description of darkvision is a universal standard that applies to PCs as well.
Other examples that would support “MM descriptions are a universal standard” include the spell True Seeing, which doesn’t define truesight, and the magic item gem of seeing for which the same holds true (ha ha ha).
Apologies. I must understood where DDB took me. It took me to chapter 12 of the BASIC RULES. I at quick glance thought I was on chapter 12 of the PHB.
however I have STILL shown quoted rules that agree with my statements.
Ok, there is 1 instance in an optional rule where the darkvision trait is not defined that I missed. And I need to add spells to the list of things that use general sense terms.
I still stand by that when a sense is specifically defined (as it is with eyes of night), that it overrules other general uses of the term. "Specific beats general" and all that.
I think part of the problem might be the hyperlinking in the D&D Beyond site...this is a case where I'd like to see the real text to see how it reads (if it treats Darkvision like a "term" or just a word). One issue with the wording of the MM description of darkvision is that is says "a monster with darkvision..." PCs are creatures, but aren't usually described as "monsters".
The other thing is that the second paragraph of the Eyes of Night feature mentions sharing "the darkvision of this feature" which heavily implies this is a singular type of "darkvision"
So I would say it is DM's choice on how it works
It's always DM's choice. But i believe in general Darkvision is colorblind by default. For the number of time this very odd aspect played any role in all the campaigns i have run or played in it'd say it matter very little, if at all.