Caveat: This is a discussion about rules as written. In my opinion RAW is not very realistic when dealing with things like blindness, darkness, and invisibility, so it's understandable if a table house-rules some changes.
Situation: The Darkness Spell falls upon PC's and enemies alike, and neither can see in magic darkness.
The title is a very common sentiment, but I saw and read some knowledgeable people who argued that, since neither can see each other, they have both advantage and disadvantage, making it a wash. Attack as normal (setting aside spell that requires the caster to see the target). So I looked up the rule, and it reads as follows:
Unseen Attackers and Targets
Combatants often try to escape their foes' notice by hiding, casting the invisibility spell, or lurking in darkness.
When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you're guessing the target's location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target's location correctly.
When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it. If you are hidden--both unseen and unheard--when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
To me it seems they are correct. If a Warlock with Devil's Sight casts darkness on himself and jumps into the fray among friendlies and foes... everyone else carries on with normal attacks. Does anyone here disagree? It seems clear to me, but there are a lot of people who see it differently.
Second question - I interpret magic darkness to have the effect that those who are inside the effect can neither see in, nor out of the field. And those outside of it cannot see in. Is this correct?
If any of your allies had advantage, you just just took it away.
The enemies are now free to move anywhere they like without provoking attacks of opportunity from your allies.
99% of non-attack roll, non-area spells require sight (e.g.Sacred Flame, Vicious Mockery, Bane, Slow, Counterspell) so you're still limiting your friends' options. In some cases you're taking away their basic damaging action altogether.
Some class features also require seeing the target, e.g. the Barbarian's Danger Sense.
If there's any cover nearby, enemies only need to break line of sight with you. They might be able to hide in what would've been plain view of your allies if they weren't blinded by darkness.
This will probably slow the game down if your friends weren't expecting it, since they'll probably have to ask the DM if they can do this or that.
If any of your allies had advantage, you just just took it away.
The enemies are now free to move anywhere they like without provoking attacks of opportunity from your allies.
99% of non-attack roll, non-area spells require sight (e.g.Sacred Flame, Vicious Mockery, Bane, Slow, Counterspell) so you're still limiting your friends' options. In some cases you're taking away their basic damaging action altogether.
Some class features also require seeing the target, e.g. the Barbarian's Danger Sense.
If there's any cover nearby, enemies only need to break line of sight with you. They might be able to hide in what would've been plain view of your allies if they weren't blinded by darkness.
This will probably slow the game down if your friends weren't expecting it, since they'll probably have to ask the DM if they can do this or that.
These are all excellent points, most of which I had not considered. I'm considering a Devil's Sight / Darkness build, and clearly it requires a conversation and some coordination with my fellow players.
Yup. It's a powerful trick but you really want to bring it up to the rest of the group and also have other tricks in your bag because it might not be the best move every time.
I forgot another caveat: if anyone in the party relies on the Light cantrip for vision, there's a very good chance you're going to dispel it unless they stay 40 feet away from the edge of the Darkness spell. That's often not possible in cramped rooms and hallways.
If I am an intelligent opponent and you hit me and my allies with darkness, then I am going to use it to snipe you from that darkness.
Move until I leave the darkness, hit you with advantage from range because you could not see me, then drop back into the darkness with the rest of my movement.
Move until I leave the darkness, hit you with advantage from range because you could not see me, then drop back into the darkness with the rest of my movement.
You're not going to have advantage because you can't see them either. They end up canceling out.
This is why at my table you only have advantage against a target that can't see you if you can see it. Makes mutually-blind attackers behave like you'd expect.
If I am an intelligent opponent and you hit me and my allies with darkness, then I am going to use it to snipe you from that darkness.
Move until I leave the darkness, hit you with advantage from range because you could not see me, then drop back into the darkness with the rest of my movement.
If I have Devil's Sight and you don't, whether you're in or out of the Darkness field I can see you (unless you're hiding behind an object), but you but you can't see me.
Darkness can be used to help your allies by effectively giving them cover, to some extent it depnds on how much the enemy know about your parties location and how the DM rules things but :
You cast darkness putting your party in darkness but leaving the enemies outside its area
No attacks against the party can be at advantage (as there is already advantage and disadvantage) (this is a bigger avantage no attacks have disadvantage). The enemy might have ot guess where the party members are.
When it is the turn of someone ifn your party they step out the darkness and attack something they can see, if they just peak out the edge of the area of darkness they may be classed as hidden to get advantage.
Intelligent enemies might get into the darkness to even things up but the warlock, if they cast darnkness on some can move to reveal an enemy (at least until it is their turn) this does however raise questions of if theparty know where the warlock (and hence the border of the darkness) is.
It is about hitting the plural you (the rest of your party) not about hitting the devil sight monkey.
Situation:
Rest of party in darkness, enemies in darkness: Neither has advantage nor disadvantage.
Rest of party in darkness, enemies not in darkness: Neither has advantage nor disadvantage.
Rest of party not in darkness, enemies in darkness: Neither has advantage nor disadvantage.
Rest of party not in darkness, enemies not in darkness: Neither has advantage nor disadvantage (assuming neither condition is caused by something else).
darkness and Devil's sight /can/ be party friendly, however it requires a bit of work on your part. It's a tool in the box, not something that you can spam. What it requires is careful positioning. If you have large, open areas, you can move out of the way, then put darkness on /yourself/ and not ruin things for your friends.
the situation you described at the top came up once for me. I was playing a half-drow with darkness (no devil's sight) as a racial and we were fighing an assassin. The assassin had an ability to darkness and see through his own darkness, which clearly gave the monster a massive edge. I countered with my own darkness, which the assassin could not see through and brought the odds back to even.
The melees are less impacted than spell casters by darkness issues, because many spells require LOS. Darkness balls stop healing and most control options. They often take AOE off the table. Additonally, my table has house-ruled blind attacks like that. If you can't see your target you do not have advantage, even if the target cannot see you. Your attack is blind, therefore you do not have advantage. All attacks are at disadvantage. Now, I grant you that IS a houserule, but it's a fairly common one I believe and my experience is that DMs who get nailed with cheese and rules lawyers too often will respond in kind. if someone tried to throw darkness/devil's sight at me and try to argue the whole neutral advantage argument so they could spam it, they'd rapidly find themselves in Avernus with true masters of the technique using it on them constantly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
No attacks against the party can be at advantage (as there is already advantage and disadvantage) (this is a bigger avantage no attacks have disadvantage).
Good point. In particular, the darkness counters the Elven Accuracy feat.
Having played a character with a polearm that cast darkness, I can say that yes, it screws the party. The paladin wouldn't stand next to my ranger, so no aura. The bard couldn't see my ranger, so no healing word or mass healing word (though Bardic Inspiration is still an option). The archers wouldn't stand behind my character (magical darkness was opaque), so they got no benefit from having a melee fighter between them and their targets.
Two blind/in darkness combatants will not in any way realistically fight with the same ability as two combatants that can see each other.
Yes, I understand the ad/dis RAW cancel out but it doesn't make any kind of sense.
Hence, the preface to my OP: Caveat: This is a discussion about rules as written. In my opinion RAW is not very realistic when dealing with things like blindness, darkness, and invisibility, so it's understandable if a table house-rules some changes.
darkness and Devil's sight /can/ be party friendly, however it requires a bit of work on your part. It's a tool in the box, not something that you can spam. What it requires is careful positioning. If you have large, open areas, you can move out of the way, then put darkness on /yourself/ and not ruin things for your friends.
the situation you described at the top came up once for me. I was playing a half-drow with darkness (no devil's sight) as a racial and we were fighing an assassin. The assassin had an ability to darkness and see through his own darkness, which clearly gave the monster a massive edge. I countered with my own darkness, which the assassin could not see through and brought the odds back to even.
The melees are less impacted than spell casters by darkness issues, because many spells require LOS. Darkness balls stop healing and most control options. They often take AOE off the table. Additonally, my table has house-ruled blind attacks like that. If you can't see your target you do not have advantage, even if the target cannot see you.Your attack is blind, therefore you do not have advantage. All attacks are at disadvantage. Now, I grant you that IS a houserule, but it's a fairly common one I believe and my experience is that DMs who get nailed with cheese and rules lawyers too often will respond in kind. if someone tried to throw darkness/devil's sight at me and try to argue the whole neutral advantage argument so they could spam it, they'd rapidly find themselves in Avernus with true masters of the technique using it on them constantly.
The part in green is actually rules as written. In red, that's the house rule part (if both can't see each other)
It isn't raw but I did actually like how Dungeons Of Drakenheim handled it.
People in darkness could see those outside of it. People outside of darkness couldn't see people inside it. People inside darkness couldn't see each other unless they had the darksight perk (devils sight).
Never came up in my games so not sure how I would rule it but this does follow reality a little closer. Of course making a magical ball of darkness is hardly reality so there is that too ...
It isn't raw but I did actually like how Dungeons Of Drakenheim handled it.
People in darkness could see those outside of it. People outside of darkness couldn't see people inside it. People inside darkness couldn't see each other unless they had the darksight perk (devils sight).
Never came up in my games so not sure how I would rule it but this does follow reality a little closer. Of course making a magical ball of darkness is hardly reality so there is that too ...
I didn’t like that at all. Essentially, cast darkness over the enemies to give them a HUGE buff.
No, casting darkness on themselves gave them a huge buff.
Makes sense - if you are in deep shadow (a cave for example) it is hard to see into the darkness, but you can easily see anyone outside of the darkness. However I am the first to agree that this is not a simulation, D&D is a game. So fully happy to do away with reality to fit into the game rules.
I just thought it was an interesting way of doing things that I hadn't seen done elsewhere.
Additonally, my table has house-ruled blind attacks like that. If you can't see your target you do not have advantage, even if the target cannot see you.Your attack is blind, therefore you do not have advantage. All attacks are at disadvantage.
The part in green is actually rules as written. In red, that's the house rule part (if both can't see each other)
The green text is in fact a house rule. RAW you unconditionally have advantage against a target that can't see you. The green text says advantage also requires seeing the target. In a double blind situation, that leaves both parties with the disadvantage of not seeing their target, but no advantage.
It isn't raw but I did actually like how Dungeons Of Drakenheim handled it.
People in darkness could see those outside of it. People outside of darkness couldn't see people inside it. People inside darkness couldn't see each other unless they had the darksight perk (devils sight).
This is how natural darkness works RAW. The Darkness spell is special and basically creates an area that blocks vision.
RAW, if you can't see your opponent, you have disadvantage. If your opponent can't see you, you have advantage. If both apply, they cancel out and you have no adv or dadv.
RAW however makes no sense to us, so we houseruled it. We take away the part where sight mutually cancels any advantage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Caveat: This is a discussion about rules as written. In my opinion RAW is not very realistic when dealing with things like blindness, darkness, and invisibility, so it's understandable if a table house-rules some changes.
Situation: The Darkness Spell falls upon PC's and enemies alike, and neither can see in magic darkness.
The title is a very common sentiment, but I saw and read some knowledgeable people who argued that, since neither can see each other, they have both advantage and disadvantage, making it a wash. Attack as normal (setting aside spell that requires the caster to see the target). So I looked up the rule, and it reads as follows:
To me it seems they are correct. If a Warlock with Devil's Sight casts darkness on himself and jumps into the fray among friendlies and foes... everyone else carries on with normal attacks. Does anyone here disagree? It seems clear to me, but there are a lot of people who see it differently.
Second question - I interpret magic darkness to have the effect that those who are inside the effect can neither see in, nor out of the field. And those outside of it cannot see in. Is this correct?
Yes, with some caveats:
The Forum Infestation (TM)
These are all excellent points, most of which I had not considered. I'm considering a Devil's Sight / Darkness build, and clearly it requires a conversation and some coordination with my fellow players.
Yup. It's a powerful trick but you really want to bring it up to the rest of the group and also have other tricks in your bag because it might not be the best move every time.
I forgot another caveat: if anyone in the party relies on the Light cantrip for vision, there's a very good chance you're going to dispel it unless they stay 40 feet away from the edge of the Darkness spell. That's often not possible in cramped rooms and hallways.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
If I am an intelligent opponent and you hit me and my allies with darkness, then I am going to use it to snipe you from that darkness.
Move until I leave the darkness, hit you with advantage from range because you could not see me, then drop back into the darkness with the rest of my movement.
You're not going to have advantage because you can't see them either. They end up canceling out.
This is why at my table you only have advantage against a target that can't see you if you can see it. Makes mutually-blind attackers behave like you'd expect.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
If I have Devil's Sight and you don't, whether you're in or out of the Darkness field I can see you (unless you're hiding behind an object), but you but you can't see me.
It is about hitting the plural you (the rest of your party) not about hitting the devil sight monkey.
Darkness can be used to help your allies by effectively giving them cover, to some extent it depnds on how much the enemy know about your parties location and how the DM rules things but :
You cast darkness putting your party in darkness but leaving the enemies outside its area
No attacks against the party can be at advantage (as there is already advantage and disadvantage) (this is a bigger avantage no attacks have disadvantage). The enemy might have ot guess where the party members are.
When it is the turn of someone ifn your party they step out the darkness and attack something they can see, if they just peak out the edge of the area of darkness they may be classed as hidden to get advantage.
Intelligent enemies might get into the darkness to even things up but the warlock, if they cast darnkness on some can move to reveal an enemy (at least until it is their turn) this does however raise questions of if theparty know where the warlock (and hence the border of the darkness) is.
Situation:
Rest of party in darkness, enemies in darkness: Neither has advantage nor disadvantage.
Rest of party in darkness, enemies not in darkness: Neither has advantage nor disadvantage.
Rest of party not in darkness, enemies in darkness: Neither has advantage nor disadvantage.
Rest of party not in darkness, enemies not in darkness: Neither has advantage nor disadvantage (assuming neither condition is caused by something else).
darkness and Devil's sight /can/ be party friendly, however it requires a bit of work on your part. It's a tool in the box, not something that you can spam. What it requires is careful positioning. If you have large, open areas, you can move out of the way, then put darkness on /yourself/ and not ruin things for your friends.
the situation you described at the top came up once for me. I was playing a half-drow with darkness (no devil's sight) as a racial and we were fighing an assassin. The assassin had an ability to darkness and see through his own darkness, which clearly gave the monster a massive edge. I countered with my own darkness, which the assassin could not see through and brought the odds back to even.
The melees are less impacted than spell casters by darkness issues, because many spells require LOS. Darkness balls stop healing and most control options. They often take AOE off the table. Additonally, my table has house-ruled blind attacks like that. If you can't see your target you do not have advantage, even if the target cannot see you. Your attack is blind, therefore you do not have advantage. All attacks are at disadvantage. Now, I grant you that IS a houserule, but it's a fairly common one I believe and my experience is that DMs who get nailed with cheese and rules lawyers too often will respond in kind. if someone tried to throw darkness/devil's sight at me and try to argue the whole neutral advantage argument so they could spam it, they'd rapidly find themselves in Avernus with true masters of the technique using it on them constantly.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Good point. In particular, the darkness counters the Elven Accuracy feat.
Having played a character with a polearm that cast darkness, I can say that yes, it screws the party. The paladin wouldn't stand next to my ranger, so no aura. The bard couldn't see my ranger, so no healing word or mass healing word (though Bardic Inspiration is still an option). The archers wouldn't stand behind my character (magical darkness was opaque), so they got no benefit from having a melee fighter between them and their targets.
I have to say I'm with crzyhawk.
Two blind/in darkness combatants will not in any way realistically fight with the same ability as two combatants that can see each other.
Yes, I understand the ad/dis RAW cancel out but it doesn't make any kind of sense.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Hence, the preface to my OP: Caveat: This is a discussion about rules as written. In my opinion RAW is not very realistic when dealing with things like blindness, darkness, and invisibility, so it's understandable if a table house-rules some changes.
The part in green is actually rules as written. In red, that's the house rule part (if both can't see each other)
It isn't raw but I did actually like how Dungeons Of Drakenheim handled it.
People in darkness could see those outside of it. People outside of darkness couldn't see people inside it. People inside darkness couldn't see each other unless they had the darksight perk (devils sight).
Never came up in my games so not sure how I would rule it but this does follow reality a little closer. Of course making a magical ball of darkness is hardly reality so there is that too ...
I didn’t like that at all. Essentially, cast darkness over the enemies to give them a HUGE buff.
No, casting darkness on themselves gave them a huge buff.
Makes sense - if you are in deep shadow (a cave for example) it is hard to see into the darkness, but you can easily see anyone outside of the darkness. However I am the first to agree that this is not a simulation, D&D is a game. So fully happy to do away with reality to fit into the game rules.
I just thought it was an interesting way of doing things that I hadn't seen done elsewhere.
The green text is in fact a house rule. RAW you unconditionally have advantage against a target that can't see you. The green text says advantage also requires seeing the target. In a double blind situation, that leaves both parties with the disadvantage of not seeing their target, but no advantage.
This is how natural darkness works RAW. The Darkness spell is special and basically creates an area that blocks vision.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
^^ is right.
RAW, if you can't see your opponent, you have disadvantage. If your opponent can't see you, you have advantage. If both apply, they cancel out and you have no adv or dadv.
RAW however makes no sense to us, so we houseruled it. We take away the part where sight mutually cancels any advantage.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha