There was discussion in our game on whether or not creatures with darkvision can see into the Hunger of Hadar sphere of darkness. The spell description only says that it is a sphere of darkness. It doesn't have the same text as the spell "Darkness". What's others opinions on this? Is it an unfortunate omission from the spell description or is it intended?
We've gone back and forth on this many times ourselves. As written the 5e24 version of the spell seems to suggest that darkvision can see thru it (both ways). The 5e24 version appears to be just an area of darkness that light can't penetrate (not an area of magical darkness spreading outward, but rather an area where light can't enter - hence the blind condition of those within. It makes no mention of blocking darkvision. And since spells do what spells say they do, and nothing more. It appears that in 5e24 anyone with darkvision can see thru it.
Not thrilled at that, makes the spell a lot less useful, but that does appear to be what it is saying.
But I can also see a reading which interprets it to say that only those with darkvision outside the sphere can see thru it, because it does specifically mention that those with have the blindness condition.
I'm on the fence. Once again their horrible choice of wording makes things more confusing than they needed to be.
I'll be starting a campaign in a few months, and this is one of the things I'm thinking i'm just going to have to flip a coin on. On the one hand it is one level higher than darkness so it stands to reason that it could be just like the darkness spell + damage... on the other hand, they keep saying that spells only do what they say they do, and it makes no mention of darkvision...
And since they no longer accept community submitted questions for Sage Advice (and Sage Advice doesn't touch this issue), then your guess is as good as mine. I don't think there is a clear answer.
I'd go with what HarmAssassin said, spell does what it says, it's an area of darkness and unlike the darkness spell, nothing indicates that it hampers darkvision. Of course inside of it you have the blinded condition, but if you have an allied archer with darkvision next to you, they can probably shoot at targets inside of your spell area relatively well.
Sage Advice addressed the general issue of magical darkness blocking darkvision here. While it doesn't mention Hunger of Hadar specifically, what it says is pretty clear:
Does all magical Darkness block Darkvision?
Magical Darkness blocks Darkvision only if the rules text for a particular instance of Darkness says it does. For example, the Darkness spell specifies that Darkvision can’t see through it. That obstruction is a feature of the spell, not a feature of magical Darkness in general.
So, this spell doesn't stop a creature outside its effect from seeing into the affected area using darkvision, because it doesn't say it does. However, since it explicitly applies the Blinded condition to creatures inside the area separate from the darkness, darkvision does not help if you're inside.
Sage Advice addressed the general issue of magical darkness blocking darkvision here. While it doesn't mention Hunger of Hadar specifically, what it says is pretty clear:
Does all magical Darkness block Darkvision?
Magical Darkness blocks Darkvision only if the rules text for a particular instance of Darkness says it does. For example, the Darkness spell specifies that Darkvision can’t see through it. That obstruction is a feature of the spell, not a feature of magical Darkness in general.
So, this spell doesn't stop a creature outside its effect from seeing into the affected area using darkvision, because it doesn't say it does. However, since it explicitly applies the Blinded condition to creatures inside the area separate from the darkness, darkvision does not help if you're inside.
Actually this is the problem. Your quote of Sage Advice actually says the opposite of what you intended.
Q: Does all magical darkness block darkvision A: "Magical darkness blocks darkvision..."
The darkness spell specifically says it is "magical darkness spreads from a point within range..." Hunger of Hardar spell does not. Hunger of Hadar says, "A 20-foot-radius Sphere of Darkness appears". No where does it say it is magical darkness. Instead it says, "No light, magical or otherwise, can illuminate the area..." thus explaining the darkness.
The magic of Hunger of Hadar doesn't create magical darkness, it instead blocks light from entering. That's the key difference.
The only real argument is over whether the blinded condition is applied to those within because they are in an area with no light (which means Darkvision would work both in and out of the sphere), or is the blind condition applied as a result of the magic of the spell (in which case darkvision could see in, but those within can't see out with it because they are blinded).
In any case, there is nothing in the spell (or anywhere else) that suggests that Hunger of Hadar creates "Magical Darkness".
Again, the only real question is whether the blinded condition comes from being in an area without light... or does the blinded condition get applied because of the magic of the spell.
Here's more food for thought. The blindness spell is 2nd level. If upcast, you can blind one additional creature per additional level. Hunger of Hadar is a 3rd level spell, that 'blinds' in a 20' radius. So an argument could be made that the blindness from Hunger of Hadar is simply a function of there being no light, otherwise it becomes a better blindness spell than the blindness spell. That would suggest that darkvision would work both out and into Hunger of Hadar.
I don't claim to know the answer, i'm just trying to work it through to figure it out.
I'd say the Darkness from Hunger of Hadar doesn't block Darkvision (EDIT: from outside, I mean), based on that SAC answer:
Magical Darkness blocks Darkvisiononly if the rules text for a particular instance of Darkness says it does.
That obstruction is a feature of the Darkness spell, not a feature of magical Darkness in general.
Also, to me the Darkness from Hunger of Hadar is magical, since it's created by a spell and counts as a Magical Effect, so you could dispel it with Dispel Magic, for example.
The magic of Hunger of Hadar doesn't create magical darkness, it instead blocks light from entering. That's the key difference.
You're using real world physics instead of the game mechanics.
First of all, yes, the darkness created by Hunger of Hadar is indeed magical darkness, by virtue of being darkness created by a spell. See the definition of "magical effect":
Magical Effect
An effect is magical if it is created by a spell, a magic item, or a phenomenon that a rule labels as magical
Secondly, Darkvision says that you can see in darkness (no matter of deep) as if it was lightly obscured. How the spell's description justifies that darkness is irrelevant. What the SAC entry about magical darkness means is that no darkness can block Darkvision unless a rule says otherwise.
Besides, the "no light, magical or otherwise, can illuminate the area" bit is there to indicate that it doesn't matter if someone uses a torch or Dancing Lights or even Dawn, no light can remove that darkness (except for the Daylight, because it specifically says that it dispels spells that create darkness).
Creatures are blinded inside the area because, again, the spell says so. There needn't be a logical reason for it. Hell, the Blindness/Deafness straight up blinds you, period. It's magic!
I think one should use Occam's Razor when reading these rules: if there's a simple explanation, no need to search of a complicated one.
In any case, there is nothing in the spell (or anywhere else) that suggests that Hunger of Hadar creates "Magical Darkness".
And this is where you go wrong. "Magical Darkness" isn't a single concept, instead it should be read as "Magical" "Darkness" and that makes the rules clear because those two concepts are clearly defined.
The magic of Hunger of Hadar doesn't create magical darkness, it instead blocks light from entering. That's the key difference.
No that's fluff (or artistic freedom of the writers). In 2014 the spell called it "blackness" instead and that was problematic as it wasn't clearly defined, in 2024 the spell conforms to the set definitions (which, IMO at least, is a good choice).
Again, the only real question is whether the blinded condition comes from being in an area without light... or does the blinded condition get applied because of the magic of the spell.
Well that's easy, it is the latter. The former might well be the "behind the curtain" logic for why they designed the spell the way they did but that doesn't mean we should use it to try to talk ourself out of following the set rule definitions for the game.
There are some features/rules/concepts that still are somewhat/mostly undefined where one might need to go in search for a logical explanation to guide us to a DM ruling, but this one really isn't that.
Assuming it will not emit light, doesn't that imply it is a magical darkness?
It implies nothing. In general, there is VERY little that you can imply with D&D rules. Unless that implication is unequivocal and unambiguous, to the point that it excludes every other possible interpretation (which is almost never the case).
For example, here's an attack taken from the Arch-Hag stat block:
Crackling Wave.Dexterity Saving Throw: DC 22, each creature in a 60-foot Cone. Failure: 32 (5d12) Lightning damage. Success: Half damage. Failure or Success: The target is cursed until the end of the hag’s next turn. The target can’t take Reactions until the curse ends.
According to the rules, that Crackling Wave is not magical. It's not a spell, it's not made by a magic item, and its description doesn't mention any kind of "magic". So it's not magic. You could pop an Antimagic Field right in her face and she'd still be able to use it... Does it make sense? No, but that's RAW.
For example, here's an attack taken from the Arch-Hag stat block:
Crackling Wave.Dexterity Saving Throw: DC 22, each creature in a 60-foot Cone. Failure: 32 (5d12) Lightning damage. Success: Half damage. Failure or Success: The target is cursed until the end of the hag’s next turn. The target can’t take Reactions until the curse ends.
According to the rules, that Crackling Wave is not magical. It's not a spell, it's not made by a magic item, and its description doesn't mention any kind of "magic". So it's not magic. You could pop an Antimagic Field right in her face and she'd still be able to use it... Does it make sense? No, but that's RAW.
I may consider Crackling Wave as magical as alluded in it's description;
Arch-Hag: Most arch-hags avoid battle, but if forced to fight, they unleash dangerous magic, such as spectral claws, arcing lightning, and mind-bending spells.
If I am in that circle of darkness, could I light a torch or an oil flask Does it emit light?
Assuming it will not emit light, doesn't that imply it is a magical darkness?
The spell specifically says no light can illuminate that area, so no, it doesn't emit light.
Regardless of that, it's magical darkness because it's darkness created by magic. The phrase "magical darkness" does not have a specific definition in D&D other than that.
The way it functions (gives creatures inside the area blinded, but does not block darkvision) is actually quite useful for an offensive spell, as it generally means that attacking creatures within the area, unless they have blindsight, is at advantage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There was discussion in our game on whether or not creatures with darkvision can see into the Hunger of Hadar sphere of darkness. The spell description only says that it is a sphere of darkness. It doesn't have the same text as the spell "Darkness". What's others opinions on this? Is it an unfortunate omission from the spell description or is it intended?
We've gone back and forth on this many times ourselves. As written the 5e24 version of the spell seems to suggest that darkvision can see thru it (both ways). The 5e24 version appears to be just an area of darkness that light can't penetrate (not an area of magical darkness spreading outward, but rather an area where light can't enter - hence the blind condition of those within. It makes no mention of blocking darkvision. And since spells do what spells say they do, and nothing more. It appears that in 5e24 anyone with darkvision can see thru it.
Not thrilled at that, makes the spell a lot less useful, but that does appear to be what it is saying.
But I can also see a reading which interprets it to say that only those with darkvision outside the sphere can see thru it, because it does specifically mention that those with have the blindness condition.
I'm on the fence. Once again their horrible choice of wording makes things more confusing than they needed to be.
I'll be starting a campaign in a few months, and this is one of the things I'm thinking i'm just going to have to flip a coin on. On the one hand it is one level higher than darkness so it stands to reason that it could be just like the darkness spell + damage... on the other hand, they keep saying that spells only do what they say they do, and it makes no mention of darkvision...
And since they no longer accept community submitted questions for Sage Advice (and Sage Advice doesn't touch this issue), then your guess is as good as mine. I don't think there is a clear answer.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I'd go with what HarmAssassin said, spell does what it says, it's an area of darkness and unlike the darkness spell, nothing indicates that it hampers darkvision. Of course inside of it you have the blinded condition, but if you have an allied archer with darkvision next to you, they can probably shoot at targets inside of your spell area relatively well.
Sage Advice addressed the general issue of magical darkness blocking darkvision here. While it doesn't mention Hunger of Hadar specifically, what it says is pretty clear:
So, this spell doesn't stop a creature outside its effect from seeing into the affected area using darkvision, because it doesn't say it does. However, since it explicitly applies the Blinded condition to creatures inside the area separate from the darkness, darkvision does not help if you're inside.
pronouns: he/she/they
Actually this is the problem. Your quote of Sage Advice actually says the opposite of what you intended.
Q: Does all magical darkness block darkvision
A: "Magical darkness blocks darkvision..."
The darkness spell specifically says it is "magical darkness spreads from a point within range..."
Hunger of Hardar spell does not. Hunger of Hadar says, "A 20-foot-radius Sphere of Darkness appears". No where does it say it is magical darkness. Instead it says, "No light, magical or otherwise, can illuminate the area..." thus explaining the darkness.
The magic of Hunger of Hadar doesn't create magical darkness, it instead blocks light from entering. That's the key difference.
The only real argument is over whether the blinded condition is applied to those within because they are in an area with no light (which means Darkvision would work both in and out of the sphere), or is the blind condition applied as a result of the magic of the spell (in which case darkvision could see in, but those within can't see out with it because they are blinded).
In any case, there is nothing in the spell (or anywhere else) that suggests that Hunger of Hadar creates "Magical Darkness".
Again, the only real question is whether the blinded condition comes from being in an area without light... or does the blinded condition get applied because of the magic of the spell.
Here's more food for thought. The blindness spell is 2nd level. If upcast, you can blind one additional creature per additional level. Hunger of Hadar is a 3rd level spell, that 'blinds' in a 20' radius. So an argument could be made that the blindness from Hunger of Hadar is simply a function of there being no light, otherwise it becomes a better blindness spell than the blindness spell. That would suggest that darkvision would work both out and into Hunger of Hadar.
I don't claim to know the answer, i'm just trying to work it through to figure it out.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I'd say the Darkness from Hunger of Hadar doesn't block Darkvision (EDIT: from outside, I mean), based on that SAC answer:
Also, to me the Darkness from Hunger of Hadar is magical, since it's created by a spell and counts as a Magical Effect, so you could dispel it with Dispel Magic, for example.
You're using real world physics instead of the game mechanics.
First of all, yes, the darkness created by Hunger of Hadar is indeed magical darkness, by virtue of being darkness created by a spell.
See the definition of "magical effect":
Secondly, Darkvision says that you can see in darkness (no matter of deep) as if it was lightly obscured. How the spell's description justifies that darkness is irrelevant. What the SAC entry about magical darkness means is that no darkness can block Darkvision unless a rule says otherwise.
Besides, the "no light, magical or otherwise, can illuminate the area" bit is there to indicate that it doesn't matter if someone uses a torch or Dancing Lights or even Dawn, no light can remove that darkness (except for the Daylight, because it specifically says that it dispels spells that create darkness).
Creatures are blinded inside the area because, again, the spell says so. There needn't be a logical reason for it.
Hell, the Blindness/Deafness straight up blinds you, period. It's magic!
I think one should use Occam's Razor when reading these rules: if there's a simple explanation, no need to search of a complicated one.
I'm going to mostly echo what the others have said.
And this is where you go wrong. "Magical Darkness" isn't a single concept, instead it should be read as "Magical" "Darkness" and that makes the rules clear because those two concepts are clearly defined.
No that's fluff (or artistic freedom of the writers). In 2014 the spell called it "blackness" instead and that was problematic as it wasn't clearly defined, in 2024 the spell conforms to the set definitions (which, IMO at least, is a good choice).
Well that's easy, it is the latter. The former might well be the "behind the curtain" logic for why they designed the spell the way they did but that doesn't mean we should use it to try to talk ourself out of following the set rule definitions for the game.
There are some features/rules/concepts that still are somewhat/mostly undefined where one might need to go in search for a logical explanation to guide us to a DM ruling, but this one really isn't that.
A magical Darkness doesn't block Darkvision unless noted otherwise, which Hunger of Hadar does not.
If I am in that circle of darkness, could I light a torch or an oil flask Does it emit light?
Assuming it will not emit light, doesn't that imply it is a magical darkness?
"No light, magical or otherwise, can illuminate the area".
It implies nothing. In general, there is VERY little that you can imply with D&D rules.
Unless that implication is unequivocal and unambiguous, to the point that it excludes every other possible interpretation (which is almost never the case).
And yes, sometimes it can get a bit absurd...
For example, here's an attack taken from the Arch-Hag stat block:
According to the rules, that Crackling Wave is not magical. It's not a spell, it's not made by a magic item, and its description doesn't mention any kind of "magic". So it's not magic.
You could pop an Antimagic Field right in her face and she'd still be able to use it... Does it make sense? No, but that's RAW.
I may consider Crackling Wave as magical as alluded in it's description;
Haha, well spotted :)
If only that also worked for a Lich's Eldritch Burst as well (I've just checked)...
The spell specifically says no light can illuminate that area, so no, it doesn't emit light.
Regardless of that, it's magical darkness because it's darkness created by magic. The phrase "magical darkness" does not have a specific definition in D&D other than that.
pronouns: he/she/they
The way it functions (gives creatures inside the area blinded, but does not block darkvision) is actually quite useful for an offensive spell, as it generally means that attacking creatures within the area, unless they have blindsight, is at advantage.