But the rays from the brighter background can't penetrate the area of darkness, thus the thing inside the darkness won't appear silhouetted by any light on the far side of the darkness.
That's only true if darkness prevents seeing through it, rather than preventing seeing into it.
Even then, you’d be able to see objects within the magical darkness as black silhouettes if they stand between you and a brighter background, which is frequently the case with a confined area of magical darkness created by the spell.
But the rays from the brighter background can't penetrate the area of darkness, thus the thing inside the darkness won't appear silhouetted by any light on the far side of the darkness.
If that's the case, then people inside the darkness can't see anything outside, because to see something light needs to reach you from it, at least according to real physics.
Though another interesting proposal would be that light can enter the darkness but not leave. But in that case the darkness would do nothing to prevent creatures inside the darkness from seeing other objects inside the darkness.
Part of the problem, I think, is trying to apply modern theories of light and vision, which say that you see something by light proceeding from it to your eye. Thus the same phenomenon that illuminates an object also transmits the information from that object to you. However, it might be more appropriate to a game about magic set in medieval times to apply medieval theories of vision, which were that your eye emits rays, and when those rays intersect an object, and the object is also illuminated, you can see it. This theory makes vision and light two distinct phenomena. A sensible interpretation of magical darkness arises when you assume it blocks light but not vision.
Creatures outside the darkness cannot see creatures inside the darkness, because there is no light in the darkness, and they are not illuminated. We have vision but not light. Likewise, creatures inside the darkness also cannot see objects inside the darkness. Creatures inside the darkness can see objects outside the darkness, however, because the objects are in light and the darkness does nothing to block vision. Creatures outside the darkness can also see objects behind the darkness.
The explicit exception is darkvision. Magical darkness created by the spell does block dark vision, in much the same way as fog blocks ordinary vision. You can't see into, out of, or through it with darkvision. Although a literal reading of the description would suggest that having darkvision means your normal vision is also blocked, I'm going to assume that wasn't the intent.
You would also still be able to perceive objects in the darkness by their silhouettes according to this interpretation, as they don't become transparent to vision as they would if they were invisible. If they did, Darkness would become a very useful spell, as it would allow you to see through walls.
We get mostly the same effects with this theory as with the theory that light does not reflect inside magical darkness, since reflected light rays replace the vision rays of the medieval theory.
If that's the case, then people inside the darkness can't see anything outside, because to see something light needs to reach you from it, at least according to real physics.
That's correct. Somebody within a darkness spell cannot see anything (either inside or outside) unless they have an alternate form of vision such as Devil's sight, Tremor sense or Blind Sight. That's the whole point of the spell. Use it in large battles to block line of sight, sow confusion, limit lines of approach and prevent effective communication between commanders and units. It really isn't rocket science.
I wish the darkness spell was more clear about its effects. I looked for Jeremy Crawford tweets and Sage Advice on this.
The way *I* would do it. Assuming you don't have something like Devil's Sight to see in magical darkness..
(1) If you are in the effect, you cannot see in or out.
(2) If you are outside the effect, you cannot see in.
(3) If you are on opposite ends of the effect, there is a black blob obstructing your vision.
The way you see is that light enters the pupils of your eyes. Within the effect, there is no light to enter your pupils. If there's no light entering your pupils, it is impossible to see in OR out of the effect.
But the rays from the brighter background can't penetrate the area of darkness, thus the thing inside the darkness won't appear silhouetted by any light on the far side of the darkness.
That's only true if darkness prevents seeing through it, rather than preventing seeing into it.
I am specifically referring to wording of the darkness spell, not to darkness in general.
Something to consider: The Darkness blocks vision through the affected area, just like the movement rules prevent movement through a hostile creature's space. I know there's a practical difference between the two effects/scenarios, but seeing as the rules are phrased in the same manner perhaps they are meant to work the same way mechanically?
Have a fight in the space. First hit wins. Be sure to time it. Then blindfold the participants and try it again. See which fight takes longer.
I have seen it tried, with larp weapons dusted with chalk.
"First hit wins" does not win - the most effective hit wins. Without the ability to parry or dodge, the fighters were hitting at about the same rate, but the hits were more effective, hitting vulnerable parts of the body, like neck and joints, that normally would never be hit becausae you'd shift your helm or greaves to cover them.
With larger weapons it was even more brutal. If you have a 6ft long sword, pretty mnuch every hit is conencts with some part of the defender. :-)
Interestingly, we saw that darkness favours swords. With axes and hammers and the like, in darkness you couldn't reliably land the impact point on the foe. With the sword, it didn't matter if you hit at 2ft, 2¼ft, 2½ft, and so on.
The way you see is that light enters the pupils of your eyes. Within the effect, there is no light to enter your pupils.
That's not exactly clear. Nowhere does the spell specifically say that it blocks light from entering or passing through it. It does say, "nonmagical light can't illuminate it", but illuminating is a specific effect of light, not the light itself, and the effect of illuminating is only suppressed within the area of the darkness. I'm not sure light entering your eyes would be said to be "illuminating" your retina. And certainly light that passes through the area of darkness to be perceived by someone on the other side is not illuminating anything in the area.
There is the general rule that darkness is heavily obscured. It "blocks vision entirely", and "a creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area." But it doesn't seem that in general a heavily obscured area blocks vision through that area, because that would also apply to non-magical darkness, and clearly you can see through non-magical darkness to an illuminated area beyond.
The Darkness spell is historically thought of as anti-torch: just like a torch makes things brighter, a darkness spell makes things dimmer (and, in fact, it can be put into a lantern to have an anti-lantern). This implies that the darkness can't pass through objects, and thus someone in a darkness spell would have anti-shadows (areas that were in normal illumination because the darkness was blocked), though I don't think D&D has ever really thought through that implication.
The Darkness spell is historically thought of as anti-torch: just like a torch makes things brighter, a darkness spell makes things dimmer (and, in fact, it can be put into a lantern to have an anti-lantern). This implies that the darkness can't pass through objects, and thus someone in a darkness spell would have anti-shadows (areas that were in normal illumination because the darkness was blocked), though I don't think D&D has ever really thought through that implication.
I don't think so. "The darkness spreads around corners." It's more like a fog of darkness. You can completely cover the source of darkness to temporarily stop in from darkening, but you can't create a bullseye dark lantern.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That's only true if darkness prevents seeing through it, rather than preventing seeing into it.
If that's the case, then people inside the darkness can't see anything outside, because to see something light needs to reach you from it, at least according to real physics.
Though another interesting proposal would be that light can enter the darkness but not leave. But in that case the darkness would do nothing to prevent creatures inside the darkness from seeing other objects inside the darkness.
Part of the problem, I think, is trying to apply modern theories of light and vision, which say that you see something by light proceeding from it to your eye. Thus the same phenomenon that illuminates an object also transmits the information from that object to you. However, it might be more appropriate to a game about magic set in medieval times to apply medieval theories of vision, which were that your eye emits rays, and when those rays intersect an object, and the object is also illuminated, you can see it. This theory makes vision and light two distinct phenomena. A sensible interpretation of magical darkness arises when you assume it blocks light but not vision.
Creatures outside the darkness cannot see creatures inside the darkness, because there is no light in the darkness, and they are not illuminated. We have vision but not light. Likewise, creatures inside the darkness also cannot see objects inside the darkness. Creatures inside the darkness can see objects outside the darkness, however, because the objects are in light and the darkness does nothing to block vision. Creatures outside the darkness can also see objects behind the darkness.
The explicit exception is darkvision. Magical darkness created by the spell does block dark vision, in much the same way as fog blocks ordinary vision. You can't see into, out of, or through it with darkvision. Although a literal reading of the description would suggest that having darkvision means your normal vision is also blocked, I'm going to assume that wasn't the intent.
You would also still be able to perceive objects in the darkness by their silhouettes according to this interpretation, as they don't become transparent to vision as they would if they were invisible. If they did, Darkness would become a very useful spell, as it would allow you to see through walls.
We get mostly the same effects with this theory as with the theory that light does not reflect inside magical darkness, since reflected light rays replace the vision rays of the medieval theory.
That's correct. Somebody within a darkness spell cannot see anything (either inside or outside) unless they have an alternate form of vision such as Devil's sight, Tremor sense or Blind Sight. That's the whole point of the spell. Use it in large battles to block line of sight, sow confusion, limit lines of approach and prevent effective communication between commanders and units. It really isn't rocket science.
I wish the darkness spell was more clear about its effects. I looked for Jeremy Crawford tweets and Sage Advice on this.
The way *I* would do it. Assuming you don't have something like Devil's Sight to see in magical darkness..
(1) If you are in the effect, you cannot see in or out.
(2) If you are outside the effect, you cannot see in.
(3) If you are on opposite ends of the effect, there is a black blob obstructing your vision.
The way you see is that light enters the pupils of your eyes. Within the effect, there is no light to enter your pupils. If there's no light entering your pupils, it is impossible to see in OR out of the effect.
I am specifically referring to wording of the darkness spell, not to darkness in general.
Something to consider: The Darkness blocks vision through the affected area, just like the movement rules prevent movement through a hostile creature's space. I know there's a practical difference between the two effects/scenarios, but seeing as the rules are phrased in the same manner perhaps they are meant to work the same way mechanically?
I have seen it tried, with larp weapons dusted with chalk.
"First hit wins" does not win - the most effective hit wins. Without the ability to parry or dodge, the fighters were hitting at about the same rate, but the hits were more effective, hitting vulnerable parts of the body, like neck and joints, that normally would never be hit becausae you'd shift your helm or greaves to cover them.
With larger weapons it was even more brutal. If you have a 6ft long sword, pretty mnuch every hit is conencts with some part of the defender. :-)
Interestingly, we saw that darkness favours swords. With axes and hammers and the like, in darkness you couldn't reliably land the impact point on the foe. With the sword, it didn't matter if you hit at 2ft, 2¼ft, 2½ft, and so on.
That's not exactly clear. Nowhere does the spell specifically say that it blocks light from entering or passing through it. It does say, "nonmagical light can't illuminate it", but illuminating is a specific effect of light, not the light itself, and the effect of illuminating is only suppressed within the area of the darkness. I'm not sure light entering your eyes would be said to be "illuminating" your retina. And certainly light that passes through the area of darkness to be perceived by someone on the other side is not illuminating anything in the area.
There is the general rule that darkness is heavily obscured. It "blocks vision entirely", and "a creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area." But it doesn't seem that in general a heavily obscured area blocks vision through that area, because that would also apply to non-magical darkness, and clearly you can see through non-magical darkness to an illuminated area beyond.
The Darkness spell is historically thought of as anti-torch: just like a torch makes things brighter, a darkness spell makes things dimmer (and, in fact, it can be put into a lantern to have an anti-lantern). This implies that the darkness can't pass through objects, and thus someone in a darkness spell would have anti-shadows (areas that were in normal illumination because the darkness was blocked), though I don't think D&D has ever really thought through that implication.
I don't think so. "The darkness spreads around corners." It's more like a fog of darkness. You can completely cover the source of darkness to temporarily stop in from darkening, but you can't create a bullseye dark lantern.