Fog Cloud vs. Darkness

[JellyPooga]

Can someone tell me why I would ever bother using the lvl.2 Darkness spell instead of it's identically functioned but superior lvl.1 counterpart, Fog Cloud?

Let's take a look at the facts;

1) Effect: Creates an area of restricted vision. Fog cloud creates a heavily obscured area. Darkness creates, uh, darkness, which counts as a heavily obscured area. Some things can see in magical darkness. Nothing can see through fog (to my knowledge). Fog Cloud has the early lead.
2) Spell Level. Fog Cloud is lvl.1, Darkness is Lvl.2. Chalk one up for Fog Cloud. 2 points to Zero.
3) AoE: Fog Cloud: 20ft radius. Darkness: 15ft radius. Another one for Fog. Three : Nil.
4) Scalability: Fog Cloud: Scales. It scales really quite well, in fact. Darkness: Doesn't. 4:0.
5) Counters: Counterspell works equally well against either...unless you cast Fog Cloud in a lvl.4+ spell slot (arguably you cannot cast Darkness from a higher slot as it doesn't have an entry for it. Different discussion, though). Darkness supercedes light spells of 2nd or lower, 3rd+ supercedes Darkness. Fog Cloud dissipated by 10mph wind; Gust of Wind is 2nd level. This is one for Darkness, making it 4:1 in favour of Fog.
6-8) Range, Components, Duration: Fog Cloud, Fog Cloud, Fog Cloud wins with double the range, (V+S) vs. (V+M) and six times the duration. 7:1.

I'm struggling to think of anything that Darkness actually does better except be slightly more resistant to counters and even that's a stretch (I mean; how often do you actually see Gust of Wind in a game? or anyone give a monkeys about the local wind speed?). I know there's potential abuse for Warlocks with Darkness+Devil's Sight, but that's a fairly niche case.

Help me out here.

[severalservals]

Only thing you didn't mention is that Darkness can be cast on an object and moved around, whereas Fog Cloud stays centered where you cast it.


Can someone tell me why I would ever bother using the lvl.2 Darkness spell instead of it's identically functioned but superior lvl.1 counterpart, Fog Cloud?

Let's take a look at the facts;

1) Effect: Creates an area of restricted vision. Fog cloud creates a heavily obscured area. Darkness creates, uh, darkness, which counts as a heavily obscured area. Some things can see in magical darkness. Nothing can see through fog (to my knowledge). Fog Cloud has the early lead.
2) Spell Level. Fog Cloud is lvl.1, Darkness is Lvl.2. Chalk one up for Fog Cloud. 2 points to Zero.
3) AoE: Fog Cloud: 20ft radius. Darkness: 15ft radius. Another one for Fog. Three : Nil.
4) Scalability: Fog Cloud: Scales. It scales really quite well, in fact. Darkness: Doesn't. 4:0.
5) Counters: Counterspell works equally well against either...unless you cast Fog Cloud in a lvl.4+ spell slot (arguably you cannot cast Darkness from a higher slot as it doesn't have an entry for it. Different discussion, though). Darkness supercedes light spells of 2nd or lower, 3rd+ supercedes Darkness. Fog Cloud dissipated by 10mph wind; Gust of Wind is 2nd level. This is one for Darkness, making it 4:1 in favour of Fog.
6-8) Range, Components, Duration: Fog Cloud, Fog Cloud, Fog Cloud wins with double the range, (V+S) vs. (V+M) and six times the duration. 7:1.

I'm struggling to think of anything that Darkness actually does better except be slightly more resistant to counters and even that's a stretch (I mean; how often do you actually see Gust of Wind in a game? or anyone give a monkeys about the local wind speed?). I know there's potential abuse for Warlocks with Darkness+Devil's Sight, but that's a fairly niche case.

Help me out here.

[Segev]

Wind is a thing that can be a problem, depending on environment and the enemies' actions. Fog cloud can theoretically be overcome by mundane means of a big fan. Darkness also can occlude a greater area in a dungeon: by blacking out the light source entirely, natural darkness extends on the other side of the ball of magical lightlessness.

I won't say it's great, but those are some things that make a little bit of a difference. Add in the Devil's Sight interaction and it gets rather hefty.

[MaxWilson]

I think things with blindsight can probably see in fog. Ask your DM though.

The two big advantages of Darkness are:

(1) It's mobile. So you can bring it with you and have advantage on all your ranged attacks out of the darkness for the next ten minutes, and disadvantage to all your attackers, as well as no opportunity attacks.
(2) If you have Devil's Sight, you can see through it but your enemies cannot, which lets you have advantage even in melee range.

The longer duration on Fog Cloud has little impact because Fog Cloud is immobile.

[JellyPooga]

Only thing you didn't mention is that Darkness can be cast on an object and moved around, whereas Fog Cloud stays centered where you cast it.

I'd call this one in favour of Darkness, except that it's so limited because of the duration. If Darkness had a longer duration, I'd give this more credit. Even if we do (and I did for very minor attributes for Fog Cloud), it's still 7:2 (7:3 if you also count the Devil's Sight trick) in favour of Fog.


Wind is a thing that can be a problem, depending on environment and the enemies' actions. Fog cloud can theoretically be overcome by mundane means of a big fan.

True enough. The DM including such things on a regular basis smacks a little of intentional bias.
- "Nope, someone left a door open and there's a gust running through the building"
- "Sorry, the fan-slave you didn't notice sitting behind the throne just whipped up a strong enough breeze"
- "Oh look, another Large-sized creature with wings in a space too small for it to fly"
- "The Ogre has a mechanical gnome-driven turbine on his back"

I'm not saying it's something that can be ignored, but if it's addressed too often, then it can be frustrating and it can stretch the old suspension of disbelief on occasion.


Darkness also can occlude a greater area in a dungeon: by blacking out the light source entirely, natural darkness extends on the other side of the ball of magical lightlessness.

Arguably, Fog Cloud could or should do the same or similar.

[PeteNutButter]

See the thing about both of these spells is they are pretty useless aside from either running or possibly breaking up an encounter. Depending on the DM breaking up the encounter could be very useful or a waste of a spell. If it buys you a round from 3 goblins it's decent but maybe not amazing. The only really good garunteed use is to abuse the warlock invocation. Really I think the spells are balanced around that invocation.

[RickAllison]

See the thing about both of these spells is they are pretty useless aside from either running or possibly breaking up an encounter. Depending on the DM breaking up the encounter could be very useful or a waste of a spell. If it buys you a round from 3 goblins it's decent but maybe not amazing. The only really good garunteed use is to abuse the warlock invocation. Really I think the spells are balanced around that invocation.

Yes, they might have limited use aside from those two things, but how is that a problem? You are talking about a spell that, with proper placement, can potentially lock out the ranged enemies from contributing. It comes most in handy in dungeons, castles, and other enclosed areas, which non-coincidentally comprise a significant part of combat. It doesn't just buy a round from three goblins, it can potentially let the party take out half the encounter without worrying about the rest.

[MaxWilson]

See the thing about both of these spells is they are pretty useless aside from either running or possibly breaking up an encounter. Depending on the DM breaking up the encounter could be very useful or a waste of a spell. If it buys you a round from 3 goblins it's decent but maybe not amazing. The only really good garunteed use is to abuse the warlock invocation. Really I think the spells are balanced around that invocation.

I think you're underestimating the spells. Consider one application: Darkness + Booming Blade. Your enemies don't get opportunity attacks against you because they can't see you (seeing is a requirement for opportunity attacks), so you hit them and now they have to take the Booming Blade damage or be useless this turn.

Another application: gaining advantage in ranged combat. There are a number of DMs, influenced by older editions, who play heavy obscurement from Darkness as bidirectional, but by RAW at least you can see out of heavy obscurement but not in, which means you have advantage on ranged attacks against people outside the darkness. Inside the darkness (melee range) it's just a wash, which is still good for ranged attacks because at least you don't need Crossbow Expert or anything to cancel disadvantage.

Another application: making you immune to Counterspell or a number of other spells that require you to see the target, including all beholder eye rays.

Another application: giving a Rogue (or Rogue 2/Bladesinger X) something to hide in w/ Cunning Action during combat for safety. It's almost impossible to effectively fight something if you have to guess which locations to target each time, and don't even know whether you hit or not. (This is especially true for flying hiding enemies.) Note: you don't have to have Cunning Action in order to Hide during combat, but without it Hiding is purely defensive, whereas a Rogue can attack and then Hide.

Another application: giving allies with Blindsight and/or Tremorsense free advantage on their attacks, just as if they had Devil's Sight. This applies to Moon Druids in Earth Elemental form (CR 5, 10th level) or Giant Constrictor Snake form (CR 2, 6th level), and to Animated Objects, and to summoned king cobras (Giant Poisonous Snakes) and IIRC constrictor snakes. Probably others that I'm forgetting.

In many of these cases it should be easy to see how the mobility of Darkness is an advantage. Against a Fog Cloud filled with poisonous snakes with blindsight, well, you just stay out of the fog cloud. But if it's a sphere of darkness filled with poisonous snakes and it's chasing you, you may not have that option.

[Segev]

I had forgotten the mobility of darkness. That alone justifies the higher level.

[RickAllison]

I had forgotten the mobility of darkness. That alone justifies the higher level.

With a WotS monk in the party, it also makes an incredibly effective fallback position. He can skirmish and, if things start going bad, pop right back in a sphere of darkness!

[Mellack]

I have found fog cloud to have some issues when used outside. We ran a pirate campaign and the immobility of the fog meant ships quickly left it behind where darkness would be able to be placed on part of the ship and go with it. Also we had weather, including how strong the winds were (sailing ships, remember.) That led to many times where I knew if I cast fog cloud it would be blown away in a round or two. I like fog cloud, but depending on your adventures it could have issues.

[Zalabim]

Per RAW Fog Cloud does not disperse with wind, as it lacks the description at the end of the fairly similar "Stinking Cloud", which explicitly does. Unless later corrected as an oversight, I would say Fog Cloud stays where it is casted.

It lasts for the duration or until a wind of moderate or greater speed (at least 10 miles per hour) disperses it. That seems pretty straightforward.

It bothers me thematically that you can see through/out of a fog cloud. It appears that only something actually in the area is obscured. The 5e version plainly lacks any text to describe how much distance of fog it takes to obscure something behind it.

[JellyPooga]

It bothers me thematically that you can see through/out of a fog cloud.

OK, you're the second person to mention this, so my apologies if it's just me being dull, but where is the ruling on this?

As far as I cal tell;

a heavily obscured area - such as darkness, opaque fog or dense foliage - blocks vision entirely. A creature in a heavily obscured area effectively suffers from the blinded condition.
So it blocks vision entirely; you can't see through it or into it (much as you can't see through or into a solid rock wall, another thing that blocks vision entirely) and if you're in the area, you're blind; you can't see out of it.

If you ignore the statement "blocks vision entirely" as being mere fluff description rather than a rule, then there's an argument for being able to see in but not out. I can't see any argument for being able to see out but not in.

[Citan]

Can someone tell me why I would ever bother using the lvl.2 Darkness spell instead of it's identically functioned but superior lvl.1 counterpart, Fog Cloud?

Let's take a look at the facts;

1) Effect: Creates an area of restricted vision. Fog cloud creates a heavily obscured area. Darkness creates, uh, darkness, which counts as a heavily obscured area. Some things can see in magical darkness. Nothing can see through fog (to my knowledge). Fog Cloud has the early lead.
2) Spell Level. Fog Cloud is lvl.1, Darkness is Lvl.2. Chalk one up for Fog Cloud. 2 points to Zero.
3) AoE: Fog Cloud: 20ft radius. Darkness: 15ft radius. Another one for Fog. Three : Nil.
4) Scalability: Fog Cloud: Scales. It scales really quite well, in fact. Darkness: Doesn't. 4:0.
5) Counters: Counterspell works equally well against either...unless you cast Fog Cloud in a lvl.4+ spell slot (arguably you cannot cast Darkness from a higher slot as it doesn't have an entry for it. Different discussion, though). Darkness supercedes light spells of 2nd or lower, 3rd+ supercedes Darkness. Fog Cloud dissipated by 10mph wind; Gust of Wind is 2nd level. This is one for Darkness, making it 4:1 in favour of Fog.
6-8) Range, Components, Duration: Fog Cloud, Fog Cloud, Fog Cloud wins with double the range, (V+S) vs. (V+M) and six times the duration. 7:1.

I'm struggling to think of anything that Darkness actually does better except be slightly more resistant to counters and even that's a stretch (I mean; how often do you actually see Gust of Wind in a game? or anyone give a monkeys about the local wind speed?). I know there's potential abuse for Warlocks with Darkness+Devil's Sight, but that's a fairly niche case.

Help me out here.
Hi! :)

You raise some valid points, but a few notes here.
1. Mobility: most has been told already, I'd just like to put a small tip on Darkness use, would you ever need to cast it on a far range: just cast Darkness on an arrow then shoot the arrow. Very situational but helped me one or two times. :)

2. Counter (Level cast): that the Darkness's spell description does not provide additional effect for superior slot does not mean it's useless nor you can't cast it with a superior slot. Casting it at a higher level could prevent it to be dispelled by counterspells such as Daylight. Again, it's a very sitational benefit but still worth to keep in mind (although it's more the DM talking here ^^).

3. Effect: actually the rulings for seeing through would be the same for Darkness and Fog Cloud (unless I'm utterly wrong on reading PHB), see point below.


OK, you're the second person to mention this, so my apologies if it's just me being dull, but where is the ruling on this?

As far as I cal tell;

So it blocks vision entirely; you can't see through it or into it (much as you can't see through or into a solid rock wall, another thing that blocks vision entirely) and if you're in the area, you're blind; you can't see out of it.

If you ignore the statement "blocks vision entirely" as being mere fluff description rather than a rule, then there's an argument for being able to see in but not out. I can't see any argument for being able to see out but not in.
You seem to forget the Darkvision sense (and above: Blindsight, Tremor Sense, Truesight) which transforms heavily obscured in dim light for creatures benefitting it (either as a race ability or through spells such as Darkvision, Truesight or a class feature).

Note it would be the same result for Fog Cloud by RAW, although like some others I'm a bit puzzled by it as far as Darkvision is concerned: fog is not just lack of light, it's actually opaque matter, so I'm a bit saddened that they put this case together with lack of luminosity. I guess it was for the sake of simplicity...

[JellyPooga]

You seem to forget the Darkvision sense (and above: Blindsight, Tremor Sense, Truesight) which transforms heavily obscured in dim light for creatures benefitting it (either as a race ability or through spells such as Darkvision, Truesight or a class feature).

Darkvision (whether from racial or magical ability) is specifically exempted from working in the area of a Darkness spell (PHB pg.230). Fog Cloud creates a heavily obscured area and not an area of darkness; the latter is treated as the former, but the same is not true the other way around; thus Darkvision only works in, well, darkness :smallwink:.

Blindsight, Truesight and Tremorsense all work regardless of vision and obscurement; Fog Cloud and Darkness are equally ignored by these abilities. Devils (and some Warlocks) can see in magical Darkness, but they are a specific exemption from the norm, making Fog Cloud an effective foil against them, where the Darkness spell is not.

[Edenbeast]

Can someone tell me why I would ever bother using the lvl.2 Darkness spell instead of it's identically functioned but superior lvl.1 counterpart, Fog Cloud?

Let's take a look at the facts;

1) Effect: Creates an area of restricted vision. Fog cloud creates a heavily obscured area. Darkness creates, uh, darkness, which counts as a heavily obscured area. Some things can see in magical darkness. Nothing can see through fog (to my knowledge). Fog Cloud has the early lead.
2) Spell Level. Fog Cloud is lvl.1, Darkness is Lvl.2. Chalk one up for Fog Cloud. 2 points to Zero.
3) AoE: Fog Cloud: 20ft radius. Darkness: 15ft radius. Another one for Fog. Three : Nil.
4) Scalability: Fog Cloud: Scales. It scales really quite well, in fact. Darkness: Doesn't. 4:0.
5) Counters: Counterspell works equally well against either...unless you cast Fog Cloud in a lvl.4+ spell slot (arguably you cannot cast Darkness from a higher slot as it doesn't have an entry for it. Different discussion, though). Darkness supercedes light spells of 2nd or lower, 3rd+ supercedes Darkness. Fog Cloud dissipated by 10mph wind; Gust of Wind is 2nd level. This is one for Darkness, making it 4:1 in favour of Fog.
6-8) Range, Components, Duration: Fog Cloud, Fog Cloud, Fog Cloud wins with double the range, (V+S) vs. (V+M) and six times the duration. 7:1.

I'm struggling to think of anything that Darkness actually does better except be slightly more resistant to counters and even that's a stretch (I mean; how often do you actually see Gust of Wind in a game? or anyone give a monkeys about the local wind speed?). I know there's potential abuse for Warlocks with Darkness+Devil's Sight, but that's a fairly niche case.

Help me out here.

I think they both have their uses. Darkness is magical, so even creatures with darkvision won't be able to see through it.

Fog cloud has longer duration, but is weak to wind. Do you know what 10 mph wind is? A light breeze, 2 on the scale of Beaufort is 6-11 mph, so anything above 2 will dissipate your Fog Cloud if used outside, and even in caves there could be a draft strong enough to ruin FC. Depending on the setting, that could just as well mean always.. In which case Darkness is the better option as it will stay in place or with the target.

Darkness is not "slightly" more difficult to counter. Even at higher levels it takes a bit more effort. Even then, if the enemy has no magic or special ability to counter the spell, he can just walk out of the Fog Cloud, while Darkness will follow him (if cast on him as target). Take into account the environmental conditions and FC will literally be dust in the wind.

If cover and obscurity is an important part of your tactics, then you do well to have both, and use the one most appropriate for the situation.

[JellyPooga]

Darkness is not "slightly" more difficult to counter. It definitely is more difficult to counter. Take into account the environmental conditions and FC will just literally be dust in the wind.

I agree with the "natural wind" argument, absolutely. As another poster pointed out; Fog Cloud is all but useless in a naval game, for example and any campaign that takes place out of doors in any great capacity will see FC's use severely limited.

On the subject of Countering, though; Darkness is only slightly harder to counter because it's the difference between a 3rd level utility spell that's a fairly useless choice anyway (Daylight) and a 2nd level spell that is, give or take, equally undesirable (Gust of Wind) due to its Concentration requirement and limited effect. Daylight is also on more spell lists than Gust, making it more accessible. Unless you prepare either specifically to counter their respective spells, I doubt you're going to see much of either and even then, I'd more likely expect to see Counterspell prepared in either case. So yeah; whilst both D and FC have specific magical counters, the instances of those spells actually being used to counter them are so few in the first place that the difference is all but negligible.

[PeteNutButter]

I think you're underestimating the spells. Consider one application: Darkness + Booming Blade. Your enemies don't get opportunity attacks against you because they can't see you (seeing is a requirement for opportunity attacks), so you hit them and now they have to take the Booming Blade damage or be useless this turn.
Another application: gaining advantage in ranged combat. There are a number of DMs, influenced by older editions, who play heavy obscurement from Darkness as bidirectional, but by RAW at least you can see out of heavy obscurement but not in, which means you have advantage on ranged attacks against people outside the darkness. Inside the darkness (melee range) it's just a wash, which is still good for ranged attacks because at least you don't need Crossbow Expert or anything to cancel disadvantage.
Another application: making you immune to Counterspell or a number of other spells that require you to see the target, including all beholder eye rays.
Another application: giving a Rogue (or Rogue 2/Bladesinger X) something to hide in w/ Cunning Action during combat for safety. It's almost impossible to effectively fight something if you have to guess which locations to target each time, and don't even know whether you hit or not. (This is especially true for flying hiding enemies.) Note: you don't have to have Cunning Action in order to Hide during combat, but without it Hiding is purely defensive, whereas a Rogue can attack and then Hide.
Another application: giving allies with Blindsight and/or Tremorsense free advantage on their attacks, just as if they had Devil's Sight. This applies to Moon Druids in Earth Elemental form (CR 5, 10th level) or Giant Constrictor Snake form (CR 2, 6th level), and to Animated Objects, and to summoned king cobras (Giant Poisonous Snakes) and IIRC constrictor snakes. Probably others that I'm forgetting.
In many of these cases it should be easy to see how the mobility of Darkness is an advantage. Against a Fog Cloud filled with poisonous snakes with blindsight, well, you just stay out of the fog cloud. But if it's a sphere of darkness filled with poisonous snakes and it's chasing you, you may not have that option.

My underestimating the spells has little to do with my point. My point is the invocation is part of the balance of the spells. Everyone is saying that darkness is better because it can be movable, which while true, there is a reason you won't see a level one darkness spell that is unmovable: Devil's Sight.

As for why I underrate the spells, maybe I've seen them cast to no or ill effect too many times.

To break it down to bare bones most combat encounters have 2 or 3 objectives.

1.) Win the fight by living while all the foes are either dead or lost the will to fight.

2.) Use as little resources as possible to accomplish Objective 1.

3.) Complete a quest objective, such as save the princess, stop the ritual etc.

Now casting darkness with the invocation can clearly help with 1 or 2, as you have gained a significant one-sided advantage. Casting either fog cloud or darkness without any way to see into or through them takes some serious thought and coordination to affect 1 or 2. Objective 3 is too situational to debate, but it can shine there.

Let's break down your examples:

BB+Darkness, who's doing what? Are you casting darkness then BB? Is it a teamwork thing? If you do one then the other, how do you even see them to cast BB? It'd be much easier and wouldn't hurt the party if you just took an AoO or used one of the many ways(that don't turn off your party) to prevent that AoO.

The bidirectional thing, is total BS as mentioned above. The spell says it stops all vision.

Using total loss of vision for both parties as an attempt to turn disadvantage into a wash, will likely end up hurting more than helping, because as soon as something moves you now have to guess/hear where they are to attack them at all. You will miss if they aren't there.

Unless you are casting something that targets yourself or maybe a conjuration, you'll need to be able to see. If you are casting something like that, there is usually cover of some sort somewhere, that would save you a slot and a big annoyance for your teammates.

As for hiding, see above, although that is likely one of the better uses for the spell.

All of these examples ignore that darkness can hurt the team as much or more as it can help. Even with perfect coordination among the party members, things can come up in combat.

There are conceivable examples where darkness and fog cloud are optimal. If you can break up a fight without the enemies being able to walk right out of it, then that helps the party with a numbers game and can ultimately boost Objectives 1 and 2. By itself the spell doesn't actually cc any enemies as they can walk out and still attack. It doesn't deal damage, and it doesn't impose any advantage to your teammates.

In my experience nearly every time the spell is cast, it does little but buy time. Ultimately you are spending a resource (read Objective 2) to put you back where you started.

If you are low level it will rarely be worth one of your precious few spell slots or worse spells known, and if you are mid to high level there are much better vision blocking spells that are also hazards. Again all this based on having no way to turn these spells into something one-sided.

I realize the game is too complex and varied to say anything concrete, so in the end this is just my opinion.

If you are a DM though its fun to punish a party of humans by dispelling their light cantrips with it. Doing that at least makes it action for action(s). :smallbiggrin:

[Edenbeast]

I agree with the "natural wind" argument, absolutely. As another poster pointed out; Fog Cloud is all but useless in a naval game, for example and any campaign that takes place out of doors in any great capacity will see FC's use severely limited.

On the subject of Countering, though; Darkness is only slightly harder to counter because it's the difference between a 3rd level utility spell that's a fairly useless choice anyway (Daylight) and a 2nd level spell that is, give or take, equally undesirable (Gust of Wind) due to its Concentration requirement and limited effect. Daylight is also on more spell lists than Gust, making it more accessible. Unless you prepare either specifically to counter their respective spells, I doubt you're going to see much of either and even then, I'd more likely expect to see Counterspell prepared in either case. So yeah; whilst both D and FC have specific magical counters, the instances of those spells actually being used to counter them are so few in the first place that the difference is all but negligible.

Well, to be prepared is half the victory (and that's actually a quote). If you, or the enemy comes prepared for both, then yes, it doesn't matter that much. They will be just as easy to counter. But, if not taking into account spells, it requires a special ability to see through magical darkness (darkvision is not enough), while it doesn't require anything (except for being able to move) to walk out a Fog Cloud. And if you're lucky the environment (wind) will deal with it.

I think that is the biggest selling point for Darkness, it's not affected by environment. I will work everywhere, and if cast on the target, there's no way getting out. And it requires a special ability like blindsight or being able to see through magical darkness to ignore it.

[Citan]

I agree with the "natural wind" argument, absolutely. As another poster pointed out; Fog Cloud is all but useless in a naval game, for example and any campaign that takes place out of doors in any great capacity will see FC's use severely limited.

On the subject of Countering, though; Darkness is only slightly harder to counter because it's the difference between a 3rd level utility spell that's a fairly useless choice anyway (Daylight) and a 2nd level spell that is, give or take, equally undesirable (Gust of Wind) due to its Concentration requirement and limited effect. Daylight is also on more spell lists than Gust, making it more accessible. Unless you prepare either specifically to counter their respective spells, I doubt you're going to see much of either and even then, I'd more likely expect to see Counterspell prepared in either case. So yeah; whilst both D and FC have specific magical counters, the instances of those spells actually being used to counter them are so few in the first place that the difference is all but negligible.
I wouldn't say that Daylight is "fairly useless". It can be great in fights with light-sensitive enemies, or to lighten a whole room for a time. Sure, it's situational use, but that's actually true for many spells. :)
I would have loved a scaling effect though (dispelling any darkness spell cast from lower level instead of fixed "3rd or lower", and increase the effect area).

By the way, how would you rule a use of Dispel Magic?
Darkness: technically it should be possible if Darkness effect is "attached" to an object but...
- would it be possible even if you cannot see the object in itself?
- would you accept it even if Darkness is just emanating from a point?

Would it also work on Fog Cloud, considering the "gas" is created by magic?

I'd answer YES to all questions but not sure of myself...

[JellyPooga]

I think that is the biggest selling point for Darkness, it's not affected by environment. I will work everywhere, and if cast on the target, there's no way getting out. And it requires a special ability like blindsight or being able to see through magical darkness to ignore it.

You can't cast Darkness on a creature or anything they're wearing or holding;

Magical darkness spreads from a point you choose...If the point you choose is on an object you are holding or one that isn't being worn or carried, the darkness emanates from the object and moves with it

You can walk out of Darkness just as easily as you can walk out of a Fog Cloud, unless you can attach the object you cast it on to your foe somehow.


But, if not taking into account spells, it requires a special ability to see through magical darkness (darkvision is not enough), while it doesn't require anything (except for being able to move) to walk out a Fog Cloud. And if you're lucky the environment (wind) will deal with it.

The point remains that some things can see through a magical Darkness effect, but nothing can see through Fog Cloud that can't also see through Darkness (i.e. Blindsight, etc.).

Your comparison is disingenuous; being able to walk out of a Fog Cloud is not the same as being able to see in that same area or doing the same in an area of darkness or not. That's like claiming that it takes magic to walk through a wall, but costs nothing to climb over one; yeah, they're sort of related in certain circumstances, but if you can't climb over a wall, you'll need to go through it somehow.

Whether the impenetrability of fog is a boon over the conditional irrelevance of Darkness is a different matter. If you can take advantage of being able to see in magical darkness, there are very few enemies that also do. Big advantage. If you are unable to take that advantage, on the other hand, then fog is better because not only are those few enemies that see in magical darkness occluded by it, but it's also got greater range, AoE, etc. as detailed in my OP.

[Citan]

You can't cast Darkness on a creature or anything they're wearing or holding;

You can walk out of Darkness just as easily as you can walk out of a Fog Cloud, unless you can attach the object you cast it on to your foe somehow.


Circumvening the "creature" forbiddance is a tough one, but there are many ways to to it nevertheless if you want to have an "at-will movement" Darkness.

For a solo player, it's difficult: the fact that Darkness itself requires concentration means you cannot use spells to lift/levitate the target object, so it will require an allied creature of any kind: beast that you persuaded, familiar etc. just cast Darkness on a rock, stick or anything and ask the creature to carry it then stick close to an enemy.

With only 2 players though it becomes much easier: one will obviously be tasked with casting and concentrating on Darkness.
The other will have many ways to carry the rock.
The best is still having another creature that doesn't require actions on your part (such as conjured creatures).
But many other spells can work: Mage Hand, Levitate, Unseen Servant, Bigby's Hand -although that would be a waste of the spell unless DM allows Clenched Fist while carrying-, Animate Objects, Telekinesis...
You could even try some borderline combo depending on DM leniency, such as throwing water towards a creature, casting Darkness on it then freeze it any way so that the water becomes ice on the creature, just for the fun of it. :)

In short, although it's not trivial to enable, Darkness can be used to significantly hinders enemies (take a wizard: he can cast Darkvision, Dispel, Daylight, try and move faster than the source to escape it, or try and destroy the creature/object: in the meantime, he can't do anything harmful to the rest of the party) for a more or less important expense of resources.
It's certainly not the most efficient of all solutions, but may be the only one available when it really counts. :)

[MrStabby]

Fog cloud is a great, if very situational spell.

It is a lvl 1 spell so its strength is not wiping out encounters by itself, but it can give a huge advantage, more so than you would expect from a lvl 1 spell slot.

It may depend on your DM as to what type of encounters you face but I like it for a few circumstances.

1) Your party has disadvantage to hit. Disadvantage doesn't stack so you only penalise your enemy. Big area, level 1 slot: great value. If you are facing a warlock with darkness/devils sight for example or a caster with foresight up or even an invisible enemy.

2) Ambushes. If a fog cloud can be made to look natural then it can give your party a huge boost to hiding. Sometimes you can avoid encounters entirely this way. If it is your style, then why not hide some traps in the cloud as well?

3) Cheesy hit and run. Party sits inside a fog cloud and each in turn steps outside to fire off arrows or spells then steps back inside.

4) Combined with damage that uses saves not hit rolls. A couple of clerics running round with spiritual guardians up inside a fog cloud is a pain for people to deal with. To force a concentration save you actually have to hit them.

5) General party tactics - for example the barbarian grapples the nasty wizard of doom inside the fog cloud whilst the rest of the party mops up his minions. The wizard can't see much apart from Barbarian Armpit and his spells are hitting the toughest thing in the party.

6) Retreat. There is a fork in the passageway and you are being chased. This is one way to stop them knowing which way you will turn.

7) Protection from specific spells - some, like finger of death or heat metal, require the target to be seen. Others like hypnotic pattern require the target to see.


8) It makes a great diversion. A 20 ft radius sphere takes a little while to search. A 60 ft radius sphere will take about 40 turns for one creature to sweep out

9) Fighting medusas, basilisks etc.. Pretty strong here.

10) Useful if you have a party vulnerable to an enemy's abilities - if only they knew to use them. Hide your necromancer's undead minions so the clerics you are facing do not use turn undead as they cant see what is swinging at them.

[JellyPooga]

Fog cloud is a great, if very situational spell.

I first looked at Fog Cloud vs. Darkness because I was contemplating a Sorcerer/Warlock build and thought Fog Cloud would be thematic. The notion of casting it using Pact Magic out of (up to) a 5th level slot intrigued me...that's a 100ft radius of fog that specifically spreads around corners, usable (up to) 4 times per short rest. That's a lot of fog. Kinda puts the 15ft radius of Darkness to shame considering that you expend the same resources to cast it under these conditions.

[Zalabim]

OK, you're the second person to mention this, so my apologies if it's just me being dull, but where is the ruling on this?

As far as I cal tell;

So it blocks vision entirely; you can't see through it or into it (much as you can't see through or into a solid rock wall, another thing that blocks vision entirely) and if you're in the area, you're blind; you can't see out of it.

If you ignore the statement "blocks vision entirely" as being mere fluff description rather than a rule, then there's an argument for being able to see in but not out. I can't see any argument for being able to see out but not in.

It's from the errata. A heavily obscured area doesn't blind you, but you are effectively blinded when you try to see something obscured by it.

[JellyPooga]

It's from the errata. A heavily obscured area doesn't blind you, but you are effectively blinded when you try to see something obscured by it.

Ooookay...maybe I'm missing something, but how does this get interpreted as being able to see through or out of a heavily obscured area?

If an area is heavily obscured, whether you're within or outside that area, anything within, beyond or behind that area from your PoV is obscured by it, rendering you effectively blind in regard to it.

You do not have to be within a heavily obscured area for that area to obscure your line of sight. You can, for example, stand behind a wall and be obscured by it. Likewise, if an area is designated as "heavily obscured", such as the magical effect created by Fog Cloud, that entire area counts as an obscuring device; whether you're inside looking out, outside looking in or inside looking in, you are both obscured from others and they are obscured from you. The obscurement is between them and you, whichever way you look at it.

[Xetheral]

It's from the errata. A heavily obscured area doesn't blind you, but you are effectively blinded when you try to see something obscured by it.

Correct. It's left unsaid whether the effective blindness applies only to objects and creatures within the obscured area, or if it also applies to objects and creatures to whom your line-of-sight passes through the obscured area. Both are (arguably) RAW, but I run it using the latter non-silly method, and have no doubt that was the RAI.

The former interpretation would mean you can see things on the far side of a fog cloud just fine, and that falls into the ridiculous category for me.

Why they bothered with blinded and effecitvely blinded I'll never know. Just saying that a region of heavy obscurement blocks line of sight would have been sufficient.

Never mind. My interpretation of the errata cannot be correct without creating the same problem of torches being effectively invisible outside their own light radius when in natural darkness, which is the same problem the errata was created to fix. Since my interpretation fails to give the errata any effect, I concede that the better (if still stupid) interpretation is that you are only effectively blinded with respect to objects actually within a heavily obscured region. I won't run it that way, but it appears to be RAW.

Maybe they should have simply avoided making normal darkess count as heavy obscurement, and leave that term only for things that *do* block line-of-sight.

[MrStabby]

I first looked at Fog Cloud vs. Darkness because I was contemplating a Sorcerer/Warlock build and thought Fog Cloud would be thematic. The notion of casting it using Pact Magic out of (up to) a 5th level slot intrigued me...that's a 100ft radius of fog that specifically spreads around corners, usable (up to) 4 times per short rest. That's a lot of fog. Kinda puts the 15ft radius of Darkness to shame considering that you expend the same resources to cast it under these conditions.

So 100ft radius fog is pretty cool, but practically I think this might be better cast from a low level slot from a Sorc. Its big advantage is what it can do for such a low value resource.

[JellyPooga]

Never mind. My interpretation of the errata cannot be correct without creating the same problem of torches being effectively invisible outside their own light radius when in natural darkness

Natural darkness and light sources have been handled poorly by rules for a long time by many systems. I recommend heavy application of common sense and GM-fiat in these cases. The rules seem to be geared toward magical darkness and physical obscurement.


So 100ft radius fog is pretty cool, but practically I think this might be better cast from a low level slot from a Sorc. Its big advantage is what it can do for such a low value resource.

When using Pact Magic, however, all slots are 5th level slots after you've reached Warlock lvl.9; why not use that 1st level Sorcerer slot for something that doesn't scale?

[Segev]

One more thing to toss into the comparison pool, here: silent image.

It requires concentration and only lasts for up to 10 minutes, but the "fog cloud" created by it would move only as the caster willed, and a "blob of darkness" would still be pretty opaque. "Interacting" with the "fog cloud" might be feasible if you deliberately try to blow it away, but I don't know how you'd "interact" with the darkness blob.

[JellyPooga]

One more thing to toss into the comparison pool, here: silent image.

While it certainly has its advantages, the AoE of Silent Image is woefully small by comparison. A 15ft cube is nothing compared to a 15ft-radius, let alone the might AoE's Fog Cloud is capable of.

[MaxWilson]

Let's break down your examples:

BB+Darkness, who's doing what? Are you casting darkness then BB? Is it a teamwork thing? If you do one then the other, how do you even see them to cast BB? It'd be much easier and wouldn't hurt the party if you just took an AoO or used one of the many ways(that don't turn off your party) to prevent that AoO.

The bidirectional thing, is total BS as mentioned above. The spell says it stops all vision.

Using total loss of vision for both parties as an attempt to turn disadvantage into a wash, will likely end up hurting more than helping, because as soon as something moves you now have to guess/hear where they are to attack them at all. You will miss if they aren't there.

Unless you are casting something that targets yourself or maybe a conjuration, you'll need to be able to see. If you are casting something like that, there is usually cover of some sort somewhere, that would save you a slot and a big annoyance for your teammates.

As for hiding, see above, although that is likely one of the better uses for the spell.

RE: "who's doing that", usually it's the Shadow Monk casting Darkness, and typically for the blindsight combo with giant poisonous snakes and for defensive synergy via the Alert feat. The Booming Blade combo has been worked out as a contingency but hasn't been needed in practice yet.

================================================


It lasts for the duration or until a wind of moderate or greater speed (at least 10 miles per hour) disperses it. That seems pretty straightforward.

It bothers me thematically that you can see through/out of a fog cloud. It appears that only something actually in the area is obscured. The 5e version plainly lacks any text to describe how much distance of fog it takes to obscure something behind it.

I've kicked around a house rule that says there's an additional category of things called "heavy occlusion" which is like heavy obscurement on the fringes, but blocks vision entirely if there's more than 5' of it between you and the target. If Fog Cloud were "heavy occlusion" instead of "heavy obscurement", moving deeper into the fog would prevent you from seeing out.

I agree that it is bothersome that the PHB rules don't cover this. The errata'ed vision rules are better than the abominations in the original PHB, but they're still not ideal, and are ripe for improved variants. (I wish UA did more of this kind of thing instead of just floating new character classes. Maybe DMs' Guild will cover it though--or maybe I should write up a set of rules and post it on DMs' Guild.)

[JackPhoenix]

With a WotS monk in the party, it also makes an incredibly effective fallback position. He can skirmish and, if things start going bad, pop right back in a sphere of darkness!

He can't, unless he takes 2 levels of warlock for Devil Sight. He must see the space he's Shadow Stepping to. By the same token, races without Darkvision can only use Shadow Step to 'port into an area of dim light, because they can't see the target area in total darkness.

[Xetheral]

Natural darkness and light sources have been handled poorly by rules for a long time by many systems. I recommend heavy application of common sense and GM-fiat in these cases. The rules seem to be geared toward magical darkness and physical obscurement.

I agree entirely. But RAW, natural darkness is heavy obscurement, and the errata change was (presumably?) made to fix the stupid thing where you were unable to see a nearby lit torch (or the stars!) if you were in an area of natural darkness, because you were blind. If you interpret the errata such that heavy obscurement inherently blocks line of sight, you still have the problem, because natural darkness would block line of sight to light sources.

So, RAW, you're left with a choice between stupidity with natural darkness, OR (e.g.) fog clouds don't block line of sight, they just "effectively blind" everyone with respect only to creatures and objects within the cloud.

Who knows was RAI is. Personally I'll just go with not treating natural darkness as heavy obscurement, and that heavy obscurement blocks LoS, but RAW-wise, I think there are only bad options.

[Segev]

Personally, unless told otherwise by a DM for his game, I will assume that RAI and how things work is that magical darkness actually blocks light from the other side, fog (and illusions thereof) obscure your ability to see through it, but that if you're in natural darkness, you can see things in light.

The one thing I am fuzzy on is whether having devil's sight to sufficient range to see "beyond" magical darkness allows you to see things in the light still further out.

But for most purposes, I treat magical darkness as, practically, an illusion of blackness that permeates everything in its radius. Only those with Devil's Sight can see through it; to them, it's transparent (or at least "normal, natural darkness") out to the range of their magical vision.