Wanted to get peoples take on this spell. it says it creates darkness and people with dark vision can’t see into it. I’ve been advised the people shooting into it or possibly act disadvantage. This is correct and also is the person inside the area not also at disadvantage or are they able to see out okay?
It's total blackness so you're right that anyone shooting into it is at disadvantage but also anyone in it can't see out or see other people in it so all their attacks are also at disadvantage. The only exceptions would be a Warlock with Devil's Sight, which allows them to see in magical darkness, and the Shadow Sorcerer and the 2024 Shadows Monk both of who can see in Darkness they cast but not if someone else casts it
Normal sight and Darkvision can’t see through Darkness, and nonmagical light can’t illuminate it.
How i play it on a map i run Line of Sight between space squares to determine if it's blocked or not
Line of Sight: To determine whether there is line of sight between two spaces, pick a corner of one space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any part of another space. If you can trace a line that doesn’t pass through or touch an object or effect that blocks vision—such as a stone wall, a thick curtain, or a dense cloud of fog—then there is line of sight.
As CunningSmile stated, for the Darkness spell, it is total magical blackness and you cannot see in or out, even with Darkvision.
The only exception would be any character that has Truesightlike the exceptions mentioned above as well as any type of Fighter or Paladin that can take Blind Fighting (2014).
Breathe, dragons; sing of the First World, forged out of chaos and painted with beauty. Sing of Bahamut, the Platinum, molding the shape of the mountains and rivers; Sing too of Chromatic Tiamat, painting all over the infinite canvas. Partnered, they woke in the darkness; partnered, they labored in acts of creation.
It's total blackness so you're right that anyone shooting into it is at disadvantage but also anyone in it can't see out or see other people in it so all their attacks are also at disadvantage. The only exceptions would be a Warlock with Devil's Sight, which allows them to see in magical darkness, and the Shadow Sorcerer and the 2024 Shadows Monk both of who can see in Darkness they cast but not if someone else casts it
Something here that's worth clarifying: attacking someone you can't see is rolled with disadvantage, but attacking someone who can't see you is rolled with advantage. If you can't see them and they can't see you, your attacks have advantage and disadvantage at the same time, which cancels out, leading to a normal attack roll. This is important to keep in mind when people are operating in and around heavily obscured areas.
It was my turn, then the turn of a wall-phasing stone monster with brutal fist attacks that I was in melee range of. Dropped Darkness, moved away without provoking OAs as it couldn't see me. Monster's turn, missed all of its attacks on my low hp allies due to disadvantage. Fighter's turn, I drop concentration and he kills it.
It's total blackness so you're right that anyone shooting into it is at disadvantage but also anyone in it can't see out or see other people in it so all their attacks are also at disadvantage. The only exceptions would be a Warlock with Devil's Sight, which allows them to see in magical darkness, and the Shadow Sorcerer and the 2024 Shadows Monk both of who can see in Darkness they cast but not if someone else casts it
Something here that's worth clarifying: attacking someone you can't see is rolled with disadvantage, but attacking someone who can't see you is rolled with advantage. If you can't see them and they can't see you, your attacks have advantage and disadvantage at the same time, which cancels out, leading to a normal attack roll. This is important to keep in mind when people are operating in and around heavily obscured areas.
Um...no, it doesn't work this way. If you can't see the creature you're attacking, you have disadvantage. Period. If they can't see you, they also have disadvantage. You would only get advantage if you cansee them AND they can't see you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
It's total blackness so you're right that anyone shooting into it is at disadvantage but also anyone in it can't see out or see other people in it so all their attacks are also at disadvantage. The only exceptions would be a Warlock with Devil's Sight, which allows them to see in magical darkness, and the Shadow Sorcerer and the 2024 Shadows Monk both of who can see in Darkness they cast but not if someone else casts it
Something here that's worth clarifying: attacking someone you can't see is rolled with disadvantage, but attacking someone who can't see you is rolled with advantage. If you can't see them and they can't see you, your attacks have advantage and disadvantage at the same time, which cancels out, leading to a normal attack roll. This is important to keep in mind when people are operating in and around heavily obscured areas.
Um...no, it doesn't work this way. If you can't see the creature you're attacking, you have disadvantage. Period. If they can't see you, they also have disadvantage. You would only get advantage if you cansee them AND they can't see you.
Yes, it does. You have disadvantage when attacking creatures you can’t see. You have advantage when attacking creatures who can’t see you. (They also have disadvantage on attacks against you, but that’s not relevant here.)
This is described in the Player’s Handbook in the section on unseen targets in the combat rules.
It's total blackness so you're right that anyone shooting into it is at disadvantage but also anyone in it can't see out or see other people in it so all their attacks are also at disadvantage. The only exceptions would be a Warlock with Devil's Sight, which allows them to see in magical darkness, and the Shadow Sorcerer and the 2024 Shadows Monk both of who can see in Darkness they cast but not if someone else casts it
Something here that's worth clarifying: attacking someone you can't see is rolled with disadvantage, but attacking someone who can't see you is rolled with advantage. If you can't see them and they can't see you, your attacks have advantage and disadvantage at the same time, which cancels out, leading to a normal attack roll. This is important to keep in mind when people are operating in and around heavily obscured areas.
Um...no, it doesn't work this way. If you can't see the creature you're attacking, you have disadvantage. Period. If they can't see you, they also have disadvantage. You would only get advantage if you cansee them AND they can't see you.
Yes, it does. You have disadvantage when attacking creatures you can’t see. You have advantage when attacking creatures who can’t see you. (They also have disadvantage on attacks against you, but that’s not relevant here.)
This is described in the Player’s Handbook in the section on unseen targets in the combat rules.
"When you make an attack roll against a target you can’t see, you have Disadvantage on the roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you miss.
When a creature can’t see you, you have Advantage on attack rolls against it."
That's the section you're referring to, but I disagree with your interpretation - nothing in that section addresses a situation where neither you nor your target can see each other. I still interpret the last sentence to mean that you get advantage if you can see the target but they can't see you - you're hidden, invisible, etc. Getting a normal attack roll while standing in a pitch black space where you can see literally nothing makes no sense.
I mean, I guess by your interpretation your opponent would ALSO get a normal attack roll which largely defeats the purpose of the spell. You put your enemy in and area of magical darkness: you can't see them, they can't see you, but you both attack normally?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
I mean, I guess by your interpretation your opponent would ALSO get a normal attack roll which largely defeats the purpose of the spell. You put your enemy in and area of magical darkness: you can't see them, they can't see you, but you both attack normally?
The spell still has all kinds of uses. Really the main thing holding it back is how much it usually inconveniences the rest of your group.
It's total blackness so you're right that anyone shooting into it is at disadvantage but also anyone in it can't see out or see other people in it so all their attacks are also at disadvantage. The only exceptions would be a Warlock with Devil's Sight, which allows them to see in magical darkness, and the Shadow Sorcerer and the 2024 Shadows Monk both of who can see in Darkness they cast but not if someone else casts it
Something here that's worth clarifying: attacking someone you can't see is rolled with disadvantage, but attacking someone who can't see you is rolled with advantage. If you can't see them and they can't see you, your attacks have advantage and disadvantage at the same time, which cancels out, leading to a normal attack roll. This is important to keep in mind when people are operating in and around heavily obscured areas.
Which is why I houserule that if you are blind you are always at disadvantage that can not be negated. If you are blind you shouldn't suddenly be able to hit more often just because your target is also blind. Yes, I know, RAW they negate - but that's why I houserule it. Two blind people shooting at each other should each hit less than if both could see, not the same as if both could see.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
It's total blackness so you're right that anyone shooting into it is at disadvantage but also anyone in it can't see out or see other people in it so all their attacks are also at disadvantage. The only exceptions would be a Warlock with Devil's Sight, which allows them to see in magical darkness, and the Shadow Sorcerer and the 2024 Shadows Monk both of who can see in Darkness they cast but not if someone else casts it
Something here that's worth clarifying: attacking someone you can't see is rolled with disadvantage, but attacking someone who can't see you is rolled with advantage. If you can't see them and they can't see you, your attacks have advantage and disadvantage at the same time, which cancels out, leading to a normal attack roll. This is important to keep in mind when people are operating in and around heavily obscured areas.
Um...no, it doesn't work this way. If you can't see the creature you're attacking, you have disadvantage. Period. If they can't see you, they also have disadvantage. You would only get advantage if you cansee them AND they can't see you.
Yes, it does. You have disadvantage when attacking creatures you can’t see. You have advantage when attacking creatures who can’t see you. (They also have disadvantage on attacks against you, but that’s not relevant here.)
This is described in the Player’s Handbook in the section on unseen targets in the combat rules.
"When you make an attack roll against a target you can’t see, you have Disadvantage on the roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you miss.
When a creature can’t see you, you have Advantage on attack rolls against it."
That's the section you're referring to, but I disagree with your interpretation - nothing in that section addresses a situation where neither you nor your target can see each other. I still interpret the last sentence to mean that you get advantage if you can see the target but they can't see you - you're hidden, invisible, etc. Getting a normal attack roll while standing in a pitch black space where you can see literally nothing makes no sense.
I mean, I guess by your interpretation your opponent would ALSO get a normal attack roll which largely defeats the purpose of the spell. You put your enemy in and area of magical darkness: you can't see them, they can't see you, but you both attack normally?
Unfortunately that is rules as written - which is why I houserule it as my post above describes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
It's total blackness so you're right that anyone shooting into it is at disadvantage but also anyone in it can't see out or see other people in it so all their attacks are also at disadvantage. The only exceptions would be a Warlock with Devil's Sight, which allows them to see in magical darkness, and the Shadow Sorcerer and the 2024 Shadows Monk both of who can see in Darkness they cast but not if someone else casts it
Something here that's worth clarifying: attacking someone you can't see is rolled with disadvantage, but attacking someone who can't see you is rolled with advantage. If you can't see them and they can't see you, your attacks have advantage and disadvantage at the same time, which cancels out, leading to a normal attack roll. This is important to keep in mind when people are operating in and around heavily obscured areas.
Which is why I houserule that if you are blind you are always at disadvantage that can not be negated. If you are blind you shouldn't suddenly be able to hit more often just because your target is also blind. Yes, I know, RAW they negate - but that's why I houserule it. Two blind people shooting at each other should each hit less than if both could see, not the same as if both could see.
Consider that combatants are also actively dodging and blocking all the time. That's part of what AC is. If you both were in darkness you could take wild swings in your opponent's general direction and they wouldn't see them coming. Defense is just as important as attack, and blindness hurts both.
The main problem is that D&D has streamlined all bonuses and penalties into adv/dis which sacrifices description for simplicity. People would have less of a problem if it made the defender "flat-footed" which happened to give an AC penalty that was equal to their "concealment bonus" for being in darkness.
I mean, I guess by your interpretation your opponent would ALSO get a normal attack roll which largely defeats the purpose of the spell. You put your enemy in and area of magical darkness: you can't see them, they can't see you, but you both attack normally?
Yes because you have an advantage to attack targets that can't see you but disadvantage to attack targets you can't see, and when you have both, you roll 1d20. I rule similarly with spells creating Heavily Obscured area such as Fog Cloud for example.
Also, any attack or effect targeting a creature you can see is impossible to use against an unseen target.
It's total blackness so you're right that anyone shooting into it is at disadvantage but also anyone in it can't see out or see other people in it so all their attacks are also at disadvantage. The only exceptions would be a Warlock with Devil's Sight, which allows them to see in magical darkness, and the Shadow Sorcerer and the 2024 Shadows Monk both of who can see in Darkness they cast but not if someone else casts it
Something here that's worth clarifying: attacking someone you can't see is rolled with disadvantage, but attacking someone who can't see you is rolled with advantage. If you can't see them and they can't see you, your attacks have advantage and disadvantage at the same time, which cancels out, leading to a normal attack roll. This is important to keep in mind when people are operating in and around heavily obscured areas.
Which is why I houserule that if you are blind you are always at disadvantage that can not be negated. If you are blind you shouldn't suddenly be able to hit more often just because your target is also blind. Yes, I know, RAW they negate - but that's why I houserule it. Two blind people shooting at each other should each hit less than if both could see, not the same as if both could see.
Agreed, I think this is one of those times RAW doesn't follow the logic of the real world and I'd rather go with the real world. If you go by RAW then the disadvantage of you being blind and the advantage of your opponent being blind cancel each other out to the point the spell might as well not have been cast which isn't satisfying for anyone
Well, I think the point of Darkness is more so you can Hide or otherwise cause chaos rather gain Advantage per se.
Still, I agree with the House Rule. RAW exemplifies what makes me uncomfortable with the Advantage/Disadvantage system.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Well, I think the point of Darkness is more so you can Hide or otherwise cause chaos rather gain Advantage per se.
Still, I agree with the House Rule. RAW exemplifies what makes me uncomfortable with the Advantage/Disadvantage system.
I think it's just a matter of applying common sense to RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Wanted to get peoples take on this spell. it says it creates darkness and people with dark vision can’t see into it. I’ve been advised the people shooting into it or possibly act disadvantage. This is correct and also is the person inside the area not also at disadvantage or are they able to see out okay?
It's total blackness so you're right that anyone shooting into it is at disadvantage but also anyone in it can't see out or see other people in it so all their attacks are also at disadvantage. The only exceptions would be a Warlock with Devil's Sight, which allows them to see in magical darkness, and the Shadow Sorcerer and the 2024 Shadows Monk both of who can see in Darkness they cast but not if someone else casts it
Normal sight and Darkvision can’t see through Darkness, and nonmagical light can’t illuminate it.
How i play it on a map i run Line of Sight between space squares to determine if it's blocked or not
Greetings Darkcrescent,
As CunningSmile stated, for the Darkness spell, it is total magical blackness and you cannot see in or out, even with Darkvision.
The only exception would be any character that has Truesight like the exceptions mentioned above as well as any type of Fighter or Paladin that can take Blind Fighting (2014).
Cheers!
Breathe, dragons; sing of the First World, forged out of chaos and painted with beauty.
Sing of Bahamut, the Platinum, molding the shape of the mountains and rivers;
Sing too of Chromatic Tiamat, painting all over the infinite canvas.
Partnered, they woke in the darkness; partnered, they labored in acts of creation.
Other exceptions exist, a creature with Blindsight or Imp's Devil Sight for example.
Something here that's worth clarifying: attacking someone you can't see is rolled with disadvantage, but attacking someone who can't see you is rolled with advantage. If you can't see them and they can't see you, your attacks have advantage and disadvantage at the same time, which cancels out, leading to a normal attack roll. This is important to keep in mind when people are operating in and around heavily obscured areas.
pronouns: he/she/they
It was my turn, then the turn of a wall-phasing stone monster with brutal fist attacks that I was in melee range of. Dropped Darkness, moved away without provoking OAs as it couldn't see me. Monster's turn, missed all of its attacks on my low hp allies due to disadvantage. Fighter's turn, I drop concentration and he kills it.
That was pretty fantastic value.
Um...no, it doesn't work this way. If you can't see the creature you're attacking, you have disadvantage. Period. If they can't see you, they also have disadvantage. You would only get advantage if you can see them AND they can't see you.
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
Yes, it does. You have disadvantage when attacking creatures you can’t see. You have advantage when attacking creatures who can’t see you. (They also have disadvantage on attacks against you, but that’s not relevant here.)
This is described in the Player’s Handbook in the section on unseen targets in the combat rules.
pronouns: he/she/they
"When you make an attack roll against a target you can’t see, you have Disadvantage on the roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you miss.
When a creature can’t see you, you have Advantage on attack rolls against it."
That's the section you're referring to, but I disagree with your interpretation - nothing in that section addresses a situation where neither you nor your target can see each other. I still interpret the last sentence to mean that you get advantage if you can see the target but they can't see you - you're hidden, invisible, etc. Getting a normal attack roll while standing in a pitch black space where you can see literally nothing makes no sense.
I mean, I guess by your interpretation your opponent would ALSO get a normal attack roll which largely defeats the purpose of the spell. You put your enemy in and area of magical darkness: you can't see them, they can't see you, but you both attack normally?
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
The spell still has all kinds of uses. Really the main thing holding it back is how much it usually inconveniences the rest of your group.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Which is why I houserule that if you are blind you are always at disadvantage that can not be negated. If you are blind you shouldn't suddenly be able to hit more often just because your target is also blind. Yes, I know, RAW they negate - but that's why I houserule it. Two blind people shooting at each other should each hit less than if both could see, not the same as if both could see.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
Unfortunately that is rules as written - which is why I houserule it as my post above describes.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I agree, it would make a lot more sense that way.
pronouns: he/she/they
Consider that combatants are also actively dodging and blocking all the time. That's part of what AC is. If you both were in darkness you could take wild swings in your opponent's general direction and they wouldn't see them coming. Defense is just as important as attack, and blindness hurts both.
The main problem is that D&D has streamlined all bonuses and penalties into adv/dis which sacrifices description for simplicity. People would have less of a problem if it made the defender "flat-footed" which happened to give an AC penalty that was equal to their "concealment bonus" for being in darkness.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Yes because you have an advantage to attack targets that can't see you but disadvantage to attack targets you can't see, and when you have both, you roll 1d20. I rule similarly with spells creating Heavily Obscured area such as Fog Cloud for example.
Also, any attack or effect targeting a creature you can see is impossible to use against an unseen target.
Agreed, I think this is one of those times RAW doesn't follow the logic of the real world and I'd rather go with the real world. If you go by RAW then the disadvantage of you being blind and the advantage of your opponent being blind cancel each other out to the point the spell might as well not have been cast which isn't satisfying for anyone
Well, I think the point of Darkness is more so you can Hide or otherwise cause chaos rather gain Advantage per se.
Still, I agree with the House Rule. RAW exemplifies what makes me uncomfortable with the Advantage/Disadvantage system.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
In Menzoberranzan the point of Darkness is to cover up a rival house cleanup :)
I think it's just a matter of applying common sense to RAW.
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."