PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next Drow Light Blindness



Number Seven
2016-06-12, 11:15 AM
Alright, so the drow get some decent perks on top of the elven abilities, but I think that weakness is a bit heavy handed. Removing it entirely would unbalance things, of course, but I was thinking that there could at least be some way to counteract their light sensitivity. Here's what I was thinking.

Alchemically Treated Lenses: These goggles are held in place with a sturdy leather strap. Costs 50gp. Negates the light blindness while worn, -1 for vision-based Perception checks.

50gp is a hefty chunk for a level 1, but not unreachable. It would make it a choice the player would have to weigh carefully (in my opinion, the best kind of choice), but it would allow them access to the gear fairly quickly. Easily by level 2, meaning that the drow player would have at least a few sessions under their belt of having to deal with the light blindness before it grew old (which it does, trust me). Since it's a piece of gear, it's vulnerable to being stolen, confiscated or destroyed - though a GM would have to be careful about overdoing it. I could see a savvy enemy "disarming" the drow's lenses by yanking them off, which could make for an interesting turn of events to keep a fight lively.

Background: Surface Adapted: Skill Proficiencies: Perception, Survival; Languages: Undercommon; Tool Proficiencies: Disguise kit

Feature: You no longer suffer disadvantage in bright light conditions.

The above is a bare-bones example of what such a background might look like. It's not mutually exclusive with having goggles (maybe some deep folk adapt naturally, maybe some just put on Ye Olde Sunglasses), but the next idea might be.

A Feat or Something: This would be my least preferred method. The feat would have to do something pretty good for it not to becoe a feat tax. Maybe grants the user darkvision of 30' (or disables light blindness if they have it), advantage on Perception checks involving hearing, and advantage on Initiative checks useable a number of times per day equal to their Wis modifier + 1 (minimum 1). I don't know. What do you guys think?

zeek0
2016-06-14, 03:56 PM
First, welcome to the forum!

I think that I like the first option the best. After all, a background should be something tangible and positive, not a negative quality such as "Not From the Underdark". And a feat is a poor solution.


But in the end, I don't think that Sunlight Sensitivity [I]should be amended. Yes, it is difficult to deal with. But its a challenge to work around, a part of your character that stays with you. To find some way to remove it... you might as well not have the detriment at all.

The lenses are an obvious choice for any drow to take to fix a detriment, which makes them a tax in my opinion. Either you pay 500 gp: you have a minimal -1 to perception, or you don't have them: you are stupid.

Maybe Sunlight Sensitivity is a core part of the character, a behavioral modifier, a token part of their past. To remove that removes them from their origins, and diminishes them.

Bharaeth
2016-06-15, 03:58 AM
A Feat or Something: This would be my least preferred method. The feat would have to do something pretty good for it not to becoe a feat tax. Maybe grants the user darkvision of 30' (or disables light blindness if they have it), advantage on Perception checks involving hearing, and advantage on Initiative checks useable a number of times per day equal to their Wis modifier + 1 (minimum 1). I don't know. What do you guys think?

Not so much commenting on ameliorating the drows' weakness per se, but I would be interested in exploring that feat. I've been thinking of brewing a 'Deep Downer' [working title] feat which might be similar, and was wondering if the feat granting a limited version of blindsight out to 10' or so would be overpowered or not? Perhaps it could have a prerequisite of being proficient in Perception?

Gr7mm Bobb
2016-06-15, 11:15 PM
Weren't those glasses called sundark goggles from 3.5? I used them when i wanted to play a Kobold on the surface. Good stuff. I dont see an issue with porting most basic tools like that over from older editions. Nice to see someone draw it up though.

LudicSavant
2016-06-15, 11:44 PM
Weren't those glasses called sundark goggles from 3.5? I used them when i wanted to play a Kobold on the surface. Good stuff. I dont see an issue with porting most basic tools like that over from older editions. Nice to see someone draw it up though.

Sundark goggles only worked for light sensitivity, not light blindness.

Gr7mm Bobb
2016-06-16, 09:02 AM
Sundark goggles only worked for light sensitivity, not light blindness.

Mechanically in 3.5 kobolds and drow had the same flaw, and the goggles worked for both of them. I understand that the names of the flaws are different, but they are from 2 separate editions. Their isn't always a perfect translation.

Number Seven
2016-06-16, 11:05 AM
First, welcome to the forum!

I think that I like the first option the best. After all, a background should be something tangible and positive, not a negative quality such as "Not From the Underdark". And a feat is a poor solution.


But in the end, I don't think that Sunlight Sensitivity [I]should be amended. Yes, it is difficult to deal with. But its a challenge to work around, a part of your character that stays with you. To find some way to remove it... you might as well not have the detriment at all.

The lenses are an obvious choice for any drow to take to fix a detriment, which makes them a tax in my opinion. Either you pay 500 gp: you have a minimal -1 to perception, or you don't have them: you are stupid.

Maybe Sunlight Sensitivity is a core part of the character, a behavioral modifier, a token part of their past. To remove that removes them from their origins, and diminishes them.

Thanks for the warm welcome! The more I look, the more I tend to agree that a background wouldn't work - odd, since I was more leaning towards that one initially. It does seem kind of like a "feat tac," now that you mention it. And yeah, I'm still not liking the idea of a feat. I think, then that I'll borrow the sundark goggles idea. A character can buy them at chargen for 50g, but on the surface they're more rare and hence expensive - say 150-200g. That way they're within reach at level 1, if the character wants to sink a goodly portion of their gold into the item, but if they decide to wait then it'll be at least a few adventures before they can afford it.

I have to disagree on your second point though: I think the penalty is too strong for what you get. Besides, the goggles won't entirely remove the problem as it's a piece of gear that can be stolen, disarmed, lost, etc. It just makes it so that the problem becomes less ubiquitous. I can see (sparsely done) having the enemy snatch the goggles from the drow player in a fight, causing a sudden moment of tension as he is now forced to adjust on the fly to compensate, which is what makes for memorable moments in my humble opinion.

Thank you all for your feedback; I appreciate it!

LudicSavant
2016-06-16, 02:00 PM
Mechanically in 3.5 kobolds and drow had the same flaw

Incorrect. In 3.5 Kobolds had Light Sensitivity, while Drow had the much more severe Light Blindness.

Gr7mm Bobb
2016-06-16, 02:31 PM
Incorrect. In 3.5 Kobolds had Light Sensitivity, while Drow had the much more severe Light Blindness.
"The smoked lenses of these goggles block light. They are typically fi xed into a band of canvas that clasps together at the back to keep the goggles from falling off. Sundark goggles negate the dazzled condition experienced by a creature with light sensitivity while in bright illumination. As a side effect, they grant the wearer a +2 circumstance bonus on saving throws against gaze attacks. A creature wearing sundark goggles can’t use a gaze attack, since other creatures can’t see its eyes. Creatures without low-light vision or darkvision that wear sundark goggles take a –2 penalty on Search and Spot checks."

Fair, i'll try to be less reliant on mis-remembered info from 3.5. It seems pretty clear about light sensitivity. Whether that means it can help Light Blindness creature is honestly a judgement call. Light Blindness could be seen as a form of light sensitivity.

Ludic: +1
Bobb: 0

Drow and Kobolds have the same negative trait now though. Would it be reasonable to argue that they can gain the same benefit? Or would you just veto it and say that it does work for either?

Number Seven
2016-06-16, 10:23 PM
"The smoked lenses of these goggles block light. They are typically fi xed into a band of canvas that clasps together at the back to keep the goggles from falling off. Sundark goggles negate the dazzled condition experienced by a creature with light sensitivity while in bright illumination. As a side effect, they grant the wearer a +2 circumstance bonus on saving throws against gaze attacks. A creature wearing sundark goggles can’t use a gaze attack, since other creatures can’t see its eyes. Creatures without low-light vision or darkvision that wear sundark goggles take a –2 penalty on Search and Spot checks."

Fair, i'll try to be less reliant on mis-remembered info from 3.5. It seems pretty clear about light sensitivity. Whether that means it can help Light Blindness creature is honestly a judgement call. Light Blindness could be seen as a form of light sensitivity.

Ludic: +1
Bobb: 0

Drow and Kobolds have the same negative trait now though. Would it be reasonable to argue that they can gain the same benefit? Or would you just veto it and say that it does work for either?

It's 5th Edition. I don't know if 5e kobolds are sensitive to light; if so, then I'd say it translates well enough to benefit everyone. There's no reason to get too muddled down in the details; after all, if you find a suit of plate armor in some moldy old dungeon it would make a lot more sense to have to pay for it to be cleaned, resized and whatnot - as well as finding a smith to do it. But if that gets in the way of your group's fun, then there's no sense in putting in such a detail.

This would be a case of verisimilitude getting in the way, I think.