Replacing Darkvision with Low Light Vision

[Greywander]

Basically, I'm thinking of houseruling to replace Darkvision on most races with this:

Low Light Vision. Your eyes have adapted to see in dim conditions. You can see in dim light as if it were bright light.

The two major differences with Darkvision are:
You're still effectively blind when in darkness.
There is no range limit; you can see just fine for miles in dim light.

As far as I can tell, it's a fair trade-off.

I'm still trying to figure out which races would keep Darkvision and which ones would replace it with Low Light Vision. My first impression is to limit Darkvision proper to a short but broad list of categories; namely anything that lives in the Underdark (drow, sverfneblin, duergar), fiends (and by extension, tieflings), and undead. Everyone else gets Low Light Vision instead.

However, after looking up some racial features from 3e, I see they were a bit more generous in handing out Darkvision. In fact, the only PHB races that would get Low Light Vision instead would be elves, half-elves, and gnomes. In fact, 3e deep gnomes double up by getting both.

What are your thoughts on this? Is it useful to make the distinction between the two abilities? Does Low Light Vision feel balanced, or should it have a limited range of some kind? Which races would you give it to?

[Coffee_Dragon]

I've been thinking basically the same thing, and also leaning towards the same race selection (elves, half-elves and gnomes get low-light, along with some monster races), so thumbs up I guess? Maybe stick low-light on dragonborn. Why do fire genasi get darkvision again?

[Boci]

From a purely mechanical point, I don't think its a fair tradeoff. Yes you can see for miles in dim light, but the 60ft in front of you are usually much more important. If I was given a choice, I would never choose low light vision over dark vision.

[Greywander]

From a purely mechanical point, I don't think its a fair tradeoff. Yes you can see for miles in dim light, but the 60ft in front of you are usually much more important. If I was given a choice, I would never choose low light vision over dark vision.
And for this reason, I think Darkvision makes a lot of sense on underground-dwelling races, where quarters are tighter. But for surface dwelling races, I could see either one being useful. Darkvision would be better for melee, while Low Light Vision would be better for ranged. Remember, the range of a longbow is 150/600, which far outranges Darkvision. Even races with Darkvision would rather see their target lit up in dim light instead of darkness, as they still get disadvantage on Perception checks in darkness.


Why do fire genasi get darkvision again?
I think heat vision (infravision) used to be a thing, then got folded into Darkvision. So they probably have it because heat vision.

[Tiadoppler]

I've got a crazy off-the-cuff idea.

Get rid of Dim Light


3 lighting levels:

Bright Light/Light/Dark

Normal vision lets you see without penalty in Bright Light and Light, but you cannot see in the Dark.
Darkvision lets you see without penalty in Light and Dark, but you cannot see in Bright Light.

Most light sources only produce "Light" which represents artificially created light/torches/candles/a cloudy day/glowing mushrooms underground.
Some higher level spells produce "Daylight" or "Bright Light". A sunny day also produces Bright Light.
Darkness is loosely defined as any lighting level that a human's eyes cannot adjust to (in real life).


Darkvision is still better than normal vision: a drow can wear sunglasses to operate during the daytime without penalty, but a human would require some magic or light source to function in the dark.

[Boci]

Remember, the range of a longbow is 150/600, which far outranges Darkvision.

I find the range of an attack rarely matters beyond 100ft, unless the entire party is build around extreme range capabilities. Dark vision is better for range within 60ft if its at night, which is way more common than firing at someone 150ft away.

Fluff-wise yes, what you're saying makes sense. Mechanically, no, its not a fair trade off for adventurers.

[Greywander]

I've got a crazy off-the-cuff idea.

Get rid of Dim Light
There already are 3 light levels: bright light, dim light, and darkness. Your version of "bright light" is basically sunlight and only comes up when dealing with Sunlight Sensitivity.

Keep in mind that 2/3 of the PHB races have Darkvision, but only one subrace, the drow, has Sunlight Sensitivity. Do you want 2/3 of PCs to be blinded on sunny days?

It's not a terrible idea to scrap dim light, but I think it might prove to be a little too simplified. As it is, I'm curious if it would be interesting to split Darkness into Near Darkness and Total Darkness to differentiate between the night sky and a pitch-black cave. However, I think this would make more sense as a modification of Darkvision (i.e. some forms of Darkvision/Low Light Vision would allow you to see during the night, but not underground/in pitch blackness), similar to how Sunlight Sensitivity specifies a special case of bright light instead of creating an entirely new level of lighting.


Fluff-wise yes, what you're saying makes sense. Mechanically, no, its not a fair trade off for adventurers.
You've got a point. What about, as described above, treating "near darkness" (e.g. moonlight, but not pitch blackness) as dim light, as sort of a Darkvision-lite (still infinite range)?

Or, how would you balance this? What would make it fair?

[Boci]

You've got a point. What about, as described above, treating "near darkness" (e.g. moonlight, but not pitch blackness) as dim light, as sort of a Darkvision-lite (still infinite range)?

Not really. Even if your game doesn't have too many dungeons, I'd still rather see 60ft in pitch black than miles in dim light, because seeing for miles generally isn't that important.


Or, how would you balance this? What would make it fair?

Give them advantage on visual based perception checks in bright light?

[BeefGood]

I’m considering removing darkvision from player characters and replacing it with a +1 to any one ability score that does not currently get a racial bonus. Thoughts?

[Boci]

I’m considering removing darkvision from player characters and replacing it with a +1 to any one ability score that does not currently get a racial bonus. Thoughts?

Even for drow?

As for how good it is, its worth much more for elves and dwarves than half-elves. I'd probably consider it a downgrade overall.

[BeefGood]

Even for drow?
.
Yes. The party is a darkvision-free zone. Except of course goggles of night, spells....a PC can still get darkvision those ways.
And, just to be clear, all the other drow dwarves gnomes elves halfelves in the world still do have darkvision. This is only for player characters. When a drow etc. takes up adventuring, he loses his darkvision.
I’m going to fluff it like this: “I think the game’s implementation of darkvision makes it less fun, and I’m the DM.”

[Boci]

Yes. The party is a darkvision-free zone. Except of course goggles of night, spells....a PC can still get darkvision those ways.
And, just to be clear, all the other drow dwarves gnomes elves halfelves in the world still do have darkvision. This is only for player characters. When a drow etc. takes up adventuring, he loses his darkvision.
I’m going to fluff it like this: “I think the game’s implementation of darkvision makes it less fun, and I’m the DM.”

That sounds like a terrible idea to me.

[Tanarii]

What are your thoughts on this? Is it useful to make the distinction between the two abilities? Does Low Light Vision feel balanced, or should it have a limited range of some kind? Which races would you give it to?
As a house rule: It's not really a "fair" trade off, but I think it's a good idea anyway. But also I think that a house rule that all but the most moonless nights should be Dim Light, provided it's not heavily overcast. (Overcast should make any night Darkness.) That'd make unlimited outdoor night sight much more useful.

Going a different direction, you could introduce a new level of Darkness: Pitch Black. Applies to indoor, underground, or darkness spell. Require players in it to stumble about randomly (mechanics up to you) unless they have Super Darkvision (Drow, Duergar, Svirf) to penetrate it. I like the low light vision house rule better for simplicity and less rewriting of rules. But IMO this would address there really should have been a level of mechanical effects between Dim Light and Darkness to begin with. I understand why they didn't .. it's fiddly.

[Greywander]

As a house rule: It's not really a "fair" trade off, but I think it's a good idea anyway. But also I think that a house rule that all but the most moonless nights should be Dim Light, provided it's not heavily overcast. (Overcast should make any night Darkness.) That'd make unlimited outdoor night sight much more useful.

Going a different direction, you could introduce a new level of Darkness: Pitch Black. Applies to indoor, underground, or darkness spell. Require players in it to stumble about randomly (mechanics up to you) unless they have Super Darkvision (Drow, Duergar, Svirf) to penetrate it. I like the low light vision house rule better for simplicity and less rewriting of rules. But IMO this would address there really should have been a level of mechanical effects between Dim Light and Darkness to begin with. I understand why they didn't .. it's fiddly.
I decided to sort of find a middle ground between these two options.

Low Light Vision. Your eyes have adapted to see in dim conditions. You can see in dim light as if it were bright light, and you can see in near-darkness, such as by moonlight, as if it were dim light. You can’t discern color in darkness, only shades of gray. You cannot see in pitch-blackness.

Generally speaking, Near Darkness and Pitch Black would function exactly the same, acting as dim light for creatures with Darkvision and effectively blinding creatures without, except for creatures with Low Light Vision. Thus, instead of creating a new light level, I just defined (albeit broadly) which types of darkness Low Light Vision works in and which it does not.

[Tanarii]

Oh hey, nicely done! Threaded the needle with skill right there.

[UrielAwakened]

Basically, I'm thinking of houseruling to replace Darkvision on most races with this:

Low Light Vision. Your eyes have adapted to see in dim conditions. You can see in dim light as if it were bright light.

The two major differences with Darkvision are:
You're still effectively blind when in darkness.
There is no range limit; you can see just fine for miles in dim light.

As far as I can tell, it's a fair trade-off.

I'm still trying to figure out which races would keep Darkvision and which ones would replace it with Low Light Vision. My first impression is to limit Darkvision proper to a short but broad list of categories; namely anything that lives in the Underdark (drow, sverfneblin, duergar), fiends (and by extension, tieflings), and undead. Everyone else gets Low Light Vision instead.

However, after looking up some racial features from 3e, I see they were a bit more generous in handing out Darkvision. In fact, the only PHB races that would get Low Light Vision instead would be elves, half-elves, and gnomes. In fact, 3e deep gnomes double up by getting both.

What are your thoughts on this? Is it useful to make the distinction between the two abilities? Does Low Light Vision feel balanced, or should it have a limited range of some kind? Which races would you give it to?

Let them see twice as far thanks to standard lighting as well.

For instance if a torch illuminates 30 feet of light, and 30 feet of dim light, they see 60 feet as if it were bright, and another 60 as if it were dim.