Shadows of Moil vs. Darkness with Devil's sight.

[th3g0dc0mp13x]

I'm creating a new thread so I don't derail another person's thread. trctelles has championed for the switch from darkness to shadow of moil as it does the same thing with a bonus if they hit you. Is this actually correct? The way shadow of moil reads it makes the caster heavily obscured and turns dim light into darkness within 10 feet. No issue so far, I'm not blinded by being heavily obscured and my enemy is; Disadvantage to him and Advantage to me.

My issue comes up when it's bright light which turns into dim light within 10'. Dim light does not impose blindness on my enemy so while he would have disadvantage attacking me I would not have advantage attacking him, since I can't find anything that states attacking from a heavily obscured area creates advantage the only conclusion that I can draw is that by RAW shadow of moil doesn't create advantage for me attacking someone else. Am I missing something integral or am i pretty much spot on?

[Asmotherion]

Shadows of Moil, an amazing spell by itself, makes you Heavily Obscured to Others; otherwise treat it like a Fire Shield.

So, even in bright light, you are Heavily Obscured to others. You also turn a 10 foot area around you 1 step closer to darkness.

Basically:

-Someone looking at you has the Blinded condition.
-You See normally, since you are unaffected by your spell.
-All Creatures have Disadvantage on attack rolls against you since they are effectivelly blinded towards you.
-You have advantage on attack rolls on all creatures, since they are effectivelly blinded towards you.
-Creatures with Blindsight, Truesight and similar abilities are imune to the effects of this spell. Depending on your DM and how good or bad he wants to make this spell (and the nature of his campain), creatures with Darkvision may also be imune to this spell's effects, due to it being caused by a sort of Darkness. On the other hand he may rule that it is caused by Magical Darkness (the most logical choice) and Darkvision does not help against it. However, keep in mind that Darkness has special text listed in the spell's description about beind impenetrable to Darkvision, thus this is very DM dependant.

[the secret fire]

Given that it's a 4th level spell, I think most reasonable DMs will not let it be defeated by darkvision, which is a 2nd level spell or a racial trait. Generally, the higher level effect should trump the lower level effect.

[th3g0dc0mp13x]

Shadows of Moil, an amazing spell by itself, makes you Heavily Obscured to Others; otherwise treat it like a Fire Shield.

So, even in bright light, you are Heavily Obscured to others. You also turn a 10 foot area around you 1 step closer to darkness.

Basically:
-Someone looking at you has the Blinded condition.
-All Creatures have Disadvantage on attack rolls against you since they are effectivelly blinded towards you.-You have advantage on attack rolls on all creatures, since they are effectivelly blinded towards you.


Is this stated anywhere specifically? The way it's worded in the PHB is a heavily obscured area blocks vision entirely. a creature in a heavily obscured area effectively suffers from the blinded condition. But they aren't in the heavily obscured area. they are in a lightly obscured area of dim light.

[Millstone85]

Is this stated anywhere specifically?It is stated in the PHB errata.
Vision and Light (p. 183). A heavily obscured area doesn’t blind you, but you are effectively blinded when you try to see something obscured by it.

But I think they made a mistake by bringing up the blinded condition at all. They could have just said that a heavily obscured creature can't be seen without special sight, and referred to Unseen Attackers and Targets on pages 194-195.

[Spiritchaser]

This is a minor nitpick, but the definition of truesight on page 185 contains nothing that would defeat the obscuring function of shadow of Moil (though the light dimming would be countered)

The obscuring flames effect is not magical darkness
Invisibility is not at play here
Illusions are not relevant here. Shadow of moil is not illusion magic, it is necromancy.
The form of a shape changer is not relevant here
The Ethereal plane is not relevant here.

I can easily see a semantic argument about “flame like shadows” being equivalent to “magical darkness”. If that’s the way you see it then by all means...



But my understanding is that this is to be interpreted literally,

And when even “magical blackness” doesn’t equal “magical darkness” for truesight, I think “flame like shadows” is a stretch.

[Millstone85]

And when even “magical blackness” doesn’t equal “magical darkness” for truesight, I think “flame like shadows” is a stretch.Well, the same guy who declared that Hadar's hungry blackness isn't darkness (https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/704828756616044544) also said that flame-like shadows totally are darkness (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/943256098869469184).

Unless he didn't understand the question, that is.

Anyway...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Spiritchaser]

Well, the same guy who declared that Hadar's hungry blackness isn't darkness (https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/704828756616044544) also said that flame-like shadows totally are darkness (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/943256098869469184).

Unless he didn't understand the question, that is.

Anyway...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The problem is, it’s not the darkness of shadow of Moil we care about, so...

that just makes it confusing

[the secret fire]

True Seeing is a 6th level spell. It should not be defeated by a 4th level spell and some silly semantics.

[Malifice]

The way I read it you are heavily obscured by the 'flames of shadow' and not by darkness.

Being heavily obscured, you gain advantage to hit, and critters get disadvantage to hit you and all the other goodies of being 'unseen' (immunity to attacks of opportunity etc).

Darkvision and Devils sight doesnt help one iota. You're obscured by flames of shadow, not darkness.

The spell also radiates darkness or total obscurement (out to 10') and shadows or light obscurement another 10'.

Both of those effects can be seen through normally with darkvision.

[th3g0dc0mp13x]

It is stated in the PHB errata.

But I think they made a mistake by bringing up the blinded condition at all. They could have just said that a heavily obscured creature can't be seen without special sight, and referred to Unseen Attackers and Targets on pages 194-195.

Thank you, this was driving me nuts.

[Tanarii]

Thank you, this was driving me nuts.
One thing worth noting, for this errata to make sense for things like Fog or Smoke or anything opaque (ie not normal darkness), you need to read "obscured by it" as "within or on the other side of it". Not just within it. Otherwise you can see targets on the other side of opaque heavy obscuring just fine.

Opaque obscuring would also would also obscure seeing something out of it too, effectively blinding those in it.

For translucent obscuring (normal darkness) it's just fine to be able to see something on the other side or out of it. In fact, it'd be kind of weird not to.

[Mikal]

Shadows of Moil, an amazing spell by itself, makes you Heavily Obscured to Others; otherwise treat it like a Fire Shield.

So, even in bright light, you are Heavily Obscured to others. You also turn a 10 foot area around you 1 step closer to darkness.

Basically:

-Someone looking at you has the Blinded condition.
-You See normally, since you are unaffected by your spell.
-All Creatures have Disadvantage on attack rolls against you since they are effectivelly blinded towards you.
-You have advantage on attack rolls on all creatures, since they are effectivelly blinded towards you.
-Creatures with Blindsight, Truesight and similar abilities are imune to the effects of this spell. Depending on your DM and how good or bad he wants to make this spell (and the nature of his campain), creatures with Darkvision may also be imune to this spell's effects, due to it being caused by a sort of Darkness. On the other hand he may rule that it is caused by Magical Darkness (the most logical choice) and Darkvision does not help against it. However, keep in mind that Darkness has special text listed in the spell's description about beind impenetrable to Darkvision, thus this is very DM dependant.

Actually, Truesight can't pierce this. Truesight helps with illusion effects, which this is not.

[Dudewithknives]

Actually, Truesight can't pierce this. Truesight helps with illusion effects, which this is not.

According to JC it is.

Then again he also said that Devil's Sight can't see into Hunger of Hadar even though it is magical darkness.

Essentially DS only really sees through the spell Darkness.

Is there any other kind of magical darkness that DS actually does work on?

[Mikal]

According to JC it is.

Then again he also said that Devil's Sight can't see into Hunger of Hadar even though it is magical darkness.

Essentially DS only really sees through the spell Darkness.

Is there any other kind of magical darkness that DS actually does work on?

So it's a necromantic spell that's actually an illusion spell, without anything in the spells description saying it's an illusion? Seriously?
If you're talking about the above link, that's about the darkness. The darkness doesn't create the obscurement, that comes from the flame-like shadows. The darkness is a separate effect.

I can see truesight piercing the 10 ft. radius darkness, since that's just natural darkness created by a magical effect.

[Dudewithknives]

So it's a necromantic spell that's actually an illusion spell, without anything in the spells description saying it's an illusion? Seriously?
If you're talking about the above link, that's about the darkness. The darkness doesn't create the obscurement, that comes from the flame-like shadows. The darkness is a separate effect.

I can see truesight piercing the 10 ft. radius darkness, since that's just natural darkness created by a magical effect.

I read it the same way you do, it ignores the darkness but not the obscuring effect of the flames.
However, 95% of everyone else reads it as "True Seeing ignores the effects of Shadow of Moil"

[Spiritchaser]

So it's a necromantic spell that's actually an illusion spell, without anything in the spells description saying it's an illusion? Seriously?
If you're talking about the above link, that's about the darkness. The darkness doesn't create the obscurement, that comes from the flame-like shadows. The darkness is a separate effect.

I can see truesight piercing the 10 ft. radius darkness, since that's just natural darkness created by a magical effect.

Millstone85 dug up the link earlier in the thread, and while it is not bulletproof, I think that it looks more like JC is saying that truesight would penetrate all aspects of shadow of Moil, though it certainly is confusing.

I think in this case I’m going to file this one to my rules clarification sheet, since I do see a possible conflict here.

Edit, for the record i’ll Rule that true sight penetrates the darkness as expected, but not the obscurement.

That seems more in keeping with the PHB, though (most likely) less in keeping with JC’s post.

[Mikal]

I read it the same way you do, it ignores the darkness but not the obscuring effect of the flames.
However, 95% of everyone else reads it as "True Seeing ignores the effects of Shadow of Moil"

Not our fault if people can't see that JC specifically says the darkness effect, not the flame-like shadows effect.


Millstone85 dug up the link earlier in the thread, and while it is not bulletproof, I think that it looks more like JC is saying that truesight would penetrate all aspects of shadow of Moil, though it certainly is confusing.

I think in this case I’m going to file this one to my rules clarification sheet, since I do see a possible conflict here.

The specific wording is as follows:

Truesight sees through darkness, including the darkness created by shadow of Moil. In contrast, truesight doesn't penetrate physical concealment, such as what would be created by a dense sandstorm or a blanket.

It seems simple- Darkness effects seen through via Truesight, physical concealment from the flame-like shadows which specifically create the concealment effect are not.

If the flame-like shadows were just darkness, then they wouldn't be listed as a separate effect from that darkness. 5E has (usually) been very good about lumping same types of effects together in that manner.

[Millstone85]

The specific wording is as follows:
Truesight sees through darkness, including the darkness created by shadow of Moil. In contrast, truesight doesn't penetrate physical concealment, such as what would be created by a dense sandstorm or a blanket
It seems simple- Darkness effects seen through via Truesight, physical concealment from the flame-like shadows which specifically create the concealment effect are not.It would be simple if his tweet read:
Truesight sees through darkness, including the darkness created by shadow of Moil. In contrast, truesight doesn't penetrate physical concealment, such as the flame-like shadows also created by shadow of Moil.

Instead, the tweet seems to contrast shadow of Moil against physical concealment.

You make a convincing point about what Crawford really meant, but the confusion is on him.

[Mikal]

It would be simple if his tweet read:

Instead, the tweet seems to contrast shadow of Moil against physical concealment.

You make a convincing point about what Crawford really meant, but the confusion is on him.

Oh, I agree, he muddied up the waters to a degree, but generally speaking, in 5e things have been divided very specifically, so if he's talking about darkness, then that means the darkness portion specified in the spell, which is separate from the concealment granting portion.

At least until he specifically says otherwise.

[Millstone85]

At least with HoH, we have 4e lore to make sense of the ruling.
Hadar: Hadar is the extinguished cinder of a star lurking within the cloaking nebula of Ihbar. This suggests the blackness/void could be some kind of wildspace smoke instead of, or in addition to, magical darkness.

Or maybe it is squid ink, to go with all the tentacles.

Now, Google tells me Moil is a city of the undead, lost in a dark plane. Neat, but no help with visualizing necromantic flame-like shadows.

[Mikal]

At least with HoH, we have 4e lore to make sense of the ruling. This suggests the blackness/void could be some kind of wildspace smoke instead of, or in addition to, magical darkness.

Or maybe it is squid ink, to go with all the tentacles.

Now, Google tells me Moil is a city of the undead, lost in a dark plane. Neat, but no help with visualizing necromantic flame-like shadows.

That's why I try and ignore the fluff as much as possible when it comes to mechanical rulings. The fluff has, at best, a tangential connection to the mechanics a lot of the time. Unless there's a clear link, like you know, Red Wizards being from Thay.

[Lonely Tylenol]

My question is, between the heavily obscuring flames and the dimming effect that this creates, to what extent does the spell prevent me, the caster, from seeing through it, without darkvision? With darkvision, but without Devil’s Sight? The obscuring effect doesn’t obscure my vision, but the dimming effect does, but only provided I’m already in dim light without it?

[Vaz]

My question is, between the heavily obscuring flames and the dimming effect that this creates, to what extent does the spell prevent me, the caster, from seeing through it, without darkvision? With darkvision, but without Devil’s Sight? The obscuring effect doesn’t obscure my vision, but the dimming effect does, but only provided I’m already in dim light without it?
The darkness stacks into interger overflow like a reverse Ghandi, and now you have all the vision and visually nuke sight obscuring things. You can see all the things so well that you can right through them so perfectly you can just keep seeing until there is no light, and thus you can return to seeing nothing, because it's dark. If you have devil's sight, you can see through this.

[Mikal]

The darkness stacks into interger overflow like a reverse Ghandi, and now you have all the vision and visually nuke sight obscuring things. You can see all the things so well that you can right through them so perfectly you can just keep seeing until there is no light, and thus you can return to seeing nothing, because it's dark. If you have devil's sight, you can see through this.

Or, you know, you see through the darkness as per your normal vision abilities.
You aren't affected by the flame like shadows specifically though

[Vaz]

Or, you know, you see through the darkness as per your normal vision abilities.
You aren't affected by the flame like shadows specifically though
It's a joke.

[Mikal]

It's a joke.

I figured, but others might not. You'd be surprised.

[Millstone85]

One thing worth noting, for this errata to make sense for things like Fog or Smoke or anything opaque (ie not normal darkness), you need to read "obscured by it" as "within or on the other side of it".
My question is, between the heavily obscuring flames and the dimming effect that this creates, to what extent does the spell prevent me, the caster, from seeing through it, without darkvision? With darkvision, but without Devil’s Sight? The obscuring effect doesn’t obscure my vision, but the dimming effect does, but only provided I’m already in dim light without it?The easiest way to think of magical darkness is as a kind of fog or smoke.

Easiest, but perhaps completely wrong.

And with this new spell making a creature heavily obscured but independently from an area and without turning the creature invisible... I am even having trouble imagining it. Like, the dark flames are small enough that you still see a humanoid silhouette, but big enough that you might hit where there is nothing underneat?

Also, is an area of darkness created by a spell necessarily magical darkness? I would think so, but I am no longer sure of anything.

[Tanarii]

The easiest way to think of magical darkness is as a kind of fog or smoke.

Easiest, but perhaps completely wrong.Yup. It's highly debatable in 5e how the Darkness spell is supposed to work.

But in the case of Shadows of Moil, irrelevant. The spell lowers the light level. It doesn't generate magical darkness.

The heavily obscured effect for the caster is independent of the light-level change. It's caused by "Flame-like shadows [which] wreath your body". In other words, also nothing to do with darkness. It's actually something obscuring vision, just like fog or smoke.

So, in summary, the spell does two independent things:
1) Wreaths the body of the caster in flame-like shadows, which causes them to be heavily obscured.
2) lowers the light levels to either dim light or normal darkness in the 10ft area around the caster.

[Zalabim]

The easiest way to think of magical darkness is as a kind of fog or smoke.

Easiest, but perhaps completely wrong.

And with this new spell making a creature heavily obscured but independently from an area and without turning the creature invisible... I am even having trouble imagining it. Like, the dark flames are small enough that you still see a humanoid silhouette, but big enough that you might hit where there is nothing underneat?
It's like a really small, mobile, circle-type Wall of Fire (another spell which blocks line of sight).

[Tanarii]

It's like a really small, mobile, circle-type Wall of Fire (another spell which blocks line of sight).
The shadow flames only encompass the casters body, not the 10ft circle.

[Malifice]

The shadow flames only encompass the casters body, not the 10ft circle.

Looks like an 8' tall bonfire of black flame I guess.