Everyone has Darkvision!

[Lunali]

And this thread has highlighted for me some things I've been doing quite wrong with goblins, which have Darkvision and the ability to hide as a bonus action. In the dark, they should be harder to roll to spot and gain an effective +5 to their Stealth rolls against those using Darkvision to see them. I also am reminded that I have forgotten, when they're hidden, to give them Advantage on their attack rolls. Woops.

I have in my party a dwarven Gloomstalker Ranger. Can he turn off his class-granted invisibility to Darkvision? Or is he only visible to his fellows if they turn on the lights, no matter his wishes?

The only one in the party without Darkvision is the Vuman Monk, and he's taken to having the acolyte travelling with the party cast light on his weapon. It gives me all the excuse I need to claim things can make Hide checks (due to the wildly dancing shadows), but otherwise works just fine.

Darkness only grants light obscurement vs creatures with darkvision, not enough to hide unless you have an additional trait of some sort. Likewise for dim light + creatures without darkvision. On the other hand, if the goblins have something to use for actual concealment, they would get the effective +5 to stealth in the dark.

[ad_hoc]

The monsters are going to be more adjusted by...being more likely for the entire group of them having darkvision? Yes I agree one group all having darkvision is a substantial advantage over the other

Many monsters have extrasensory powers beyond Darkvision. They know the layout of their lairs. They are also not the ones moving around.

For reference through a combination of Pass Without Trace, bardic inspiration and Enhance Ability my party managed to achieve an average stealth score in the mid 20s the other day at level 4 (I think the lowest was 17?) which included several people in heavy armour with negative stealth scores. So perhaps very hard without expending resources.

Yes, Pass Without Trace is great. It doesn't make the party obscured though. If the enemy can see you or otherwise clearly detect you with a special ability then it doesn't matter what your stealth score could be because you don't get to have one.

I'm not sure what the mean by the party moving and the monsters waiting (do you mean the party are being ambushed or hunting down someone?). In my experience the party are usually the aggressors hunting down a foe who doesn't necessarily know where/when they're coming than the other way round and in that circumstance it seems to me stealth is a relatively important tool.

I mean exactly that. The party is the one moving about. The monsters are the predators who live there.

I agree if the DM ignores the guidance in the PHB on what constitutes darkness and dim light then darkvision is much less useful. For clarity - I would encourage a DM to ignore the guidance in the PHB on what constitutes darkness and dim light.

I never said that. Quite the opposite. If the DM goes by the book then darkvision is a good ribbon. Nothing more.

It doesn't matter how many winks you give, you're still wrong.

[opaopajr]

WotC's like Oprah, everyone gets a brand new car under their seat. "You get darkvision! And you get darkvision! Everyone gets darkvision!"

That said, I'd not drive my car out in the countryside if my headlamps worked like Darkvision. The cut off at 60' (even 120'), especially since it still has Disadv on Perception, makes driving at speed suicide. Oooh, I see a grey lump, swerve or barrel on throu... too late! Even carriage rides at speed would be suicidal.

Strong light sources are useful! Methinks the advantage is overblown.

[Dork_Forge]

Whether or not you'll want light is, of course, very situational, but let's take the typical dungeon. Light doesn't go too far around corners and no-one is going to be sniping at the lights in such close confines. As for sentries, well, by the time they've seen you, you're probably close enough to chase them down and prevent them from setting up those ambushes...and you can do it because you can see them (you know, because you have a light source and aren't taking dim light penalties to spot them slinking away).

Conversely, if you are up against a foe shooting at the lights in an open plain, that does open up the possibility of using a little deception. Setting up "false leads" is very much a possibility; it's not like shooting at distant torches is a precise science. Sending a party member, hireling or pack animal (or a few) with a light source as a distraction will divide their fire as well as give them the impression of being under attack by a much larger force. That's not even delving into magical or more compex plans that take advantage of the enemies assumptions. Light can be as much a weapon as a liability.

You can only see as far as that light reaches, but someone can see that light from much further away than you can see them. Even if you're in a dungeon that's twisty enough that there's no straight shot, they'll still see your light before they see you and any attempts at stealth instantly disappear.

Separately on the moon comment from before... no? Assuming you're outside, there's ZERO cloud cover AND it's a full moon sure, you can probably navigate and make out some general shapes, but it'd be difficult to see what you're stepping on, subtle movements etc.

In general on the topic: Darkvision shouldn't be on so many races, it becomes the norm and it flips it from being a benefit to not having it being a disadvantage. It could stand to be stripped out of a lot of race imo.

[Arkhios]

I guess it's somewhat a sacred cow situation. Humans (irl) have rather poor vision in the dark (yes yes, we can adjust to it, but no way we can see in the dark as well as cats for example), so of course non-human races must be special in that sense, as well as in other ways.

It does make sense (to me, anyway) that almost all other races than humans have darkvision. That way humans as a player maintain their "normalcy".

[JellyPooga]

You can only see as far as that light reaches, but someone can see that light from much further away than you can see them. Even if you're in a dungeon that's twisty enough that there's no straight shot, they'll still see your light before they see you and any attempts at stealth instantly disappear.

Ever try to spot someone using a modern torch (that's a "flashlight" to you guys over the pond ) on a dark night in an open field? I have. It's not as easy/obvious as you might think. Bullseye lanterns are also known as Smugglers Lanterns because, you know, Smugglers used them to be stealthy at night and in other dark places and guess what? It worked They very often avoided the very people that were quite intentionally looking for them at the precise time they were flashing their lanterns around.

Separately on the moon comment from before... no? Assuming you're outside, there's ZERO cloud cover AND it's a full moon sure, you can probably navigate and make out some general shapes, but it'd be difficult to see what you're stepping on, subtle movements etc.

Cloudless & full moon; I'll say it again. Bright as day. I've literally seen horizon on a really bright night, but I'll admit that was unusual. On a regular full moon, being able to see 100yrds really rather clearly (as in, I've happily done night work, outdoors, without a light source on such nights, including reading) is not unusual, even with a little cloud cover. Partial cloud cover and or less than full moon obviously things get dimmer, as well as other cover (e.g. trees or building) obscuring things will reduce this significantly, even to the point of being really rather dark, but generally speaking the night isn't often actually so dark as we like to imagine. In this modern age of ubiquitous light, you might even be surprised at just how bright things are in some places when those lights go out, especially those that are an open plain, like fields, deserts and at sea.

[Gignere]

My two pennies as DM, darkvision doesn’t really impact any party unless you made a party of human stealth specialists.

However rogues or anyone playing the scout role will definitely need darkvision. That’s my only beef with darkvision. However I also reward players that try to be creative to work around their limitations. Like using a shuttering lantern to basically turn the lights off and on.

I mean the tank / healer in plate and shield isn’t going to be stealthing around anyway.

Also I enforce the darkvision limitations hard and as long as it isn’t a non intelligent monster my darkvision races typically carry light sources too.

[Spiritchaser]

Cloudless & full moon; I'll say it again. Bright as day. I've literally seen horizon on a really bright night, but I'll admit that was unusual. On a regular full moon, being able to see 100yrds really rather clearly (as in, I've happily done night work, outdoors, without a light source on such nights, including reading) is not unusual, even with a little cloud cover. Partial cloud cover and or less than full moon obviously things get dimmer, as well as other cover (e.g. trees or building) obscuring things will reduce this significantly, even to the point of being really rather dark, but generally speaking the night isn't often actually so dark as we like to imagine. In this modern age of ubiquitous light, you might even be surprised at just how bright things are in some places when those lights go out, especially those that are an open plain, like fields, deserts and at sea.

I won’t disagree that a full moon can seem bright, but this probably has as much to do with our eyes being pretty incredible than anything else.

Daylight comes in around 10000 lux (this would be around the level where the sunny 16 rule for photography actually works... though I’m not sure if anyone uses that anymore)


Moonlight is much much less, below 1 lux. Our eyes can of course adapt. For some reason When they do this our sensitivity to red and blue light increases, and sensitivity to green decreases. Maybe those parts of our eyes are more scalable

I’ve no idea if that also applies to elves or goblins.

In any case I wouldn’t, and don’t define that level of light as darkness in game, whatever the PHB might say. To my mind that should still count as dim light.

[Tanarii]

My experience running a game that pays close attention to light levels, in a mix of close set dungeons and above ground medium-to-dense terrain /w structures adventuring sites, is that darkvision is pretty much critical for scouts. And ranges from merely occasionally handy to totally meh for everyone else. And that Human and Halfling rogues will move mountains to get their hands on Googles of Night in such a setting.

Edit: Also I was very surprised the first time someone pointed out the RAW for moonlit nights is darkness. At first it's counter-intuitive. OTOH since darkness only results in disadvantage on attacks, no restrictions on movement, and depending on your DM possibly not even having to guess the location of non-hiding enemies, maybe it's not all that far off. Of course, the game really needs a new level of obscuring: "Pitch Black / Can't see ****". Must guess enemy locations even if they are in front of you, dex checks to move without falling, take away the battle mat if playing with one, etc.

[Dork_Forge]

Ever try to spot someone using a modern torch (that's a "flashlight" to you guys over the pond ) on a dark night in an open field? I have. It's not as easy/obvious as you might think. Bullseye lanterns are also known as Smugglers Lanterns because, you know, Smugglers used them to be stealthy at night and in other dark places and guess what? It worked They very often avoided the very people that were quite intentionally looking for them at the precise time they were flashing their lanterns around.



Cloudless & full moon; I'll say it again. Bright as day. I've literally seen horizon on a really bright night, but I'll admit that was unusual. On a regular full moon, being able to see 100yrds really rather clearly (as in, I've happily done night work, outdoors, without a light source on such nights, including reading) is not unusual, even with a little cloud cover. Partial cloud cover and or less than full moon obviously things get dimmer, as well as other cover (e.g. trees or building) obscuring things will reduce this significantly, even to the point of being really rather dark, but generally speaking the night isn't often actually so dark as we like to imagine. In this modern age of ubiquitous light, you might even be surprised at just how bright things are in some places when those lights go out, especially those that are an open plain, like fields, deserts and at sea.

Actually I'm Welsh, so still a torch (and I'm torch enthusiast) ;) I also work permanent night shift in an area surrounded by unlit farm land and have lived in a simlarly rural area my entire life, I can't agree about moonlight to the same extent. Our eyes can adjust to a good degree, but I don't think I've ever seen a night as bright as you describe. You also said that true darkness is a rarity and that also doesn't sound right. Whilst creatures with darkvision would want their homes etc. lit, intelligent enemies may forgo lighting on the outside to conceal their domiciles/sentries. Enemies like Drow would certainly rely on their superior darkvision over a lightsource for sentry work for example. In terms of dungeons anything that's a natural cavern, or an unkept made structure (be it underground or a building) won't have any light at all if its inhabitants are things like undead, anything with blindsense, there's a substantial amount of the Monster Manual where the creatures aren't exactly intelligent enough to harness light sources.

If you're trying to be stealthy, then a lightsource is just a bad idea a lot of the time (if not most), even if it's a bullseye lantern you're still most likely heading towards the things you don't want seeing you, so that directional light is pointed in their direction.

[ad_hoc]

My experience running a game that pays close attention to light levels, in a mix of close set dungeons and above ground medium-to-dense terrain /w structures adventuring sites, is that darkvision is pretty much critical for scouts. And ranges from merely occasionally handy to totally meh for everyone else. And that Human and Halfling rogues will move mountains to get their hands on Googles of Night in such a setting.

Edit: Also I was very surprised the first time someone pointed out the RAW for moonlit nights is darkness. At first it's counter-intuitive. OTOH since darkness only results in disadvantage on attacks, no restrictions on movement, and depending on your DM possibly not even having to guess the location of non-hiding enemies, maybe it's not all that far off. Of course, the game really needs a new level of obscuring: "Pitch Black / Can't see ****". Must guess enemy locations even if they are in front of you, dex checks to move without falling, take away the battle mat if playing with one, etc.

Wow, I really should have looked that up.

In a forest it's going to be too dark to see anything even with a full moon. In a field with stars though, that's different. I can see my way around. I wouldn't be able to spot anything hiding, but I can move about and see people who are also moving about. Even with cloud cover unless it is heavy there should be enough light to see.

Looking at the book - full moon, twilight, and dawn is dim light - most regular moonlit nights are darkness. Looks like dim light is pretty broad too with dawn/twilight counting. Interestingly gloomy days count as bright. FWIW twilight and dawn are the best times to take photographs without flash as the light is dispersed so there are no shadows. I think if the light is bright enough to take pictures without a flash, it should be considered bright.

On the topic of scouting, it's the most dangerous job to have. I think sneaking characters tend to get away with more than they should. Even with an infinite amount of stealth if the enemy can see you then you aren't hidden.

Since darkness causes the 'blinded' condition I think we can extrapolate that to have consequences beyond what is plainly written under the condition. I certainly don't feel blind on moonlit nights.

[Tanarii]

On the topic of scouting, it's the most dangerous job to have. I think sneaking characters tend to get away with more than they should. Even with an infinite amount of stealth if the enemy can see you then you aren't hidden.

Side topic, but agreed. One of the more common reasons for non-TPK character deaths IMC is scouts sticking their neck out, getting in over their head, and getting killed before the party can respond.

[KorvinStarmast]

Back in AD&D, the non-human races had many advantages over human, infravision being one of them. Humans didn't get any stat bonuses, yet every non-human race did. The non-human races were better in multiple ways than humans. The completely arbitrary balancing tool was humans could rise to unlimited levels, but non-humans had a maximum level they could reach in a particular class. I don't have my old AD&D books around for reference anymore, but IIRC most of the non-human level limits were in the high single digits. Once the level limits came off it just gave non-humans a list of benefits at effectively no cost.

Yes. Nice summary.

[Spiritchaser]

New spell: Tanarii’s really really dark darkness.

Level 4
Evocation
1 Action
Range: 60 feet
Components: V,M (a really dark square of chocolate, 90% coco or more, and some Sumatran coffee beans)
Duration: Concentration up to 10 minutes


Magical extra dark darkness spreads to fill a 15 ft. radius sphere from the point you choose which could be an object. The darkness spreads through cracks and around corners. Unlike regular darkness, this darkness is seriously dark, as in, you just can’t see f*** ***.
Creatures within the area of effect are blinded, fully obscured and considered to be moving over difficult terrain because they can’t see ****. Any light spell under 5th level which effects the same region as this spell will curl up in a foetal position and mutter uncontrollably. Creatures with Devil’s sight will be unable to see through really really dark darkness because it’s really really dark. Creatures with blindsight that relies on thermal imaging will also be unable to see through really really dark darkness because again, it’s really really dark. What? It doesn’t say which blindsight is thermal imaging? Well that sucks. Ok, sort that one out for yourselves.

Also you can eat the chocolate if you want to.

[NNescio]

New spell: Tanarii’s really really dark darkness.

Level 4
Evocation
1 Action
Range: 60 feet
Components: V,M (a really dark square of chocolate, 90% coco or more, and some Sumatran coffee beans)
Duration: Concentration up to 10 minutes


Magical extra dark darkness spreads to fill a 15 ft. radius sphere from the point you choose which could be an object. The darkness spreads through cracks and around corners. Unlike regular darkness, this darkness is seriously dark, as in, you just can’t see f*** ***.
Creatures within the area of effect are blinded, fully obscured and considered to be moving over difficult terrain because they can’t see ****. Any light spell under 5th level which effects the same region as this spell will curl up in a foetal position and mutter uncontrollably. Creatures with Devil’s sight will be unable to see through really really dark darkness because it’s really really dark. Creatures with blindsight that relies on thermal imaging will also be unable to see through really really dark darkness because again, it’s really really dark. What? It doesn’t say which blindsight is thermal imaging? Well that sucks. Ok, sort that one out for yourselves.

Also you can eat the chocolate if you want to.

Hunger of Hadar already does something similar. Creatures fully within the radius are also blinded, darkvision or no (but creatures outside with darkvision can see inside).

(But I really like your spell, regardless.)

[Spiritchaser]

Hunger of Hadar already does something similar. Creatures fully within the radius are also blinded, darkvision or no (but creatures outside with darkvision can see inside).

(But I really like your spell, regardless.)

I break most blindsight into either echolocation or thermal imaging, such that I can rationalize how rogues might defeat it... so this would actually be a fairly strong effect against the right creatures.

[JellyPooga]

Actually I'm Welsh

I lived/worked a farm up Carmarthen way (Pencader, if you know it) for nearly a decade, which is where I'm coming from Experience differs, I guess, but I have many fond memories of nipping out in the middle of the night to check on the spring newborns and the like and perhaps time of year/location is giving me a bias, but I don't recall too many occasions when I really needed additional light. I can certainly only recall a handful of times I would ever call it true dark, as opposed to merely dim. Then again, maybe I just have good night-vision!

[Luccan]

Back in AD&D, the non-human races had many advantages over human, infravision being one of them. Humans didn't get any stat bonuses, yet every non-human race did. The non-human races were better in multiple ways than humans. The completely arbitrary balancing tool was humans could rise to unlimited levels, but non-humans had a maximum level they could reach in a particular class. I don't have my old AD&D books around for reference anymore, but IIRC most of the non-human level limits were in the high single digits. Once the level limits came off it just gave non-humans a list of benefits at effectively no cost.

Not as familiar with certain editions, but yes if you just took away level limits in AD&D it was completely unbalanced. The problem I see with 5e human is not that, though. In 3e, in order to maintain human viability, humans got more skills and a bonus feat. Without stat drawbacks like everyone else, this made them flexible enough to be one of the better choices for almost anything. No low-light or Darkvision (infravision) needed. No stat bonuses, either, in an edition where you wanted bonuses from pretty much every stat depending on your class.

5e wanted everyone to feel equally viable for almost every class and thus scaled humans back. Still flexible, but default human is just a less useful option 90% of the time. Variant human is still a really good option, though, so I think we're past level limits as a necessary balancing tool.

[Contrast]

Many monsters have extrasensory powers beyond Darkvision. They know the layout of their lairs. They are also not the ones moving around.

I don't know if I would say many (admittedly I have not done a comprehensive survey). Some certainly do, often at reduced ranges compared to darkvision.

I feel like a lot of this probably depends how you play the game and campaign specifics. I have almost never done typical dungeoneering. Most of my game time has been spent above ground in the open air (notwithstanding my comment earlier regarding currently being in the underdark) where you're much less likely to encounter creatures adapted for caves and the like with these adaptations.

In short, my experience does not match your experience that darkvision is almost worthless because your opponents will likely have darkvision+.

To a certain extent I would argue this point just makes 120ft darkvision amazing, darkvision obligatory and no darkvision a handicap.

I mean exactly that. The party is the one moving about. The monsters are the predators who live there.

If someone says 'do you mean x or y?' the answer 'yes I mean that' is not helpful in itself I'm still not sure I quite understand what you're driving at. The party don't need to stealth because they're going into unknown territory? Surely that makes it even more important to make sure you retain the initiative otherwise you're going to be fighting on the enemies terms, which is Bad^TM.

We may just be working under different assumptions again here. If I had to classify typical PC interactions as a predator or prey relationship in my games, the PCs would definitely fall into the predator category, rather than prey for the monsters.

I never said that. Quite the opposite. If the DM goes by the book then darkvision is a good ribbon. Nothing more.

It doesn't matter how many winks you give, you're still wrong.

I note you appear to have missed where I flagged up the dim light/darkness moonlit nights thing. Regardless I will endeavour to to refrain from such profligate smiley usage in future.

Spoiler

Show

[HappyDaze]

Accidental comma missing. Read again with a comma between DM and not.

OK, that makes more sense.

[Segev]

I mean, if you want to blind devil’s sight warlocks, you can just use Silent Image or Fog Cloud.

[Reynaert]

I lived/worked a farm up Carmarthen way (Pencader, if you know it) for nearly a decade, which is where I'm coming from Experience differs, I guess, but I have many fond memories of nipping out in the middle of the night to check on the spring newborns and the like and perhaps time of year/location is giving me a bias, but I don't recall too many occasions when I really needed additional light. I can certainly only recall a handful of times I would ever call it true dark, as opposed to merely dim. Then again, maybe I just have good night-vision!

I believe there is a significant difference, human to human, on how well our eyes can adjust to low-light conditions.
Having been out in the dark in forests and fields without a light source, with a couple of friends. Some of them complained about not seeing anything while I could see quite clearly.

[Segev]

I believe there is a significant difference, human to human, on how well our eyes can adjust to low-light conditions.
Having been out in the dark in forests and fields without a light source, with a couple of friends. Some of them complained about not seeing anything while I could see quite clearly.

Have you checked your family tree for elven ancestry?

[goodpeople25]

If you're trying to be stealthy, then a lightsource is just a bad idea a lot of the time (if not most), even if it's a bullseye lantern you're still most likely heading towards the things you don't want seeing you, so that directional light is pointed in their direction.

I don't know how easy it was for others to see me but when I went camping as a kid, the direction of my flashlight was mostly angled downward or at least not pointed at where there might be people. (To not be rude to other campers, pretty sure we weren't smuggling or otherwise trying to avoid detection)

I think the military officers I was trying to sneak past in a forest that one time (Okay I'm exaggerating .... I can't remember for sure if it was the officers) had flashlights, but my memories are foggy (I was 12) on how easy they were to spot though I'd lean towards them not being too obvious.

[HappyDaze]

I don't know how easy it was for others to see me but when I went camping as a kid, the direction of my flashlight was mostly angled downward or at least not pointed at where there might be people. (To not be rude to other campers, pretty sure we weren't smuggling or otherwise trying to avoid detection)

I think the military officers I was trying to sneak past in a forest that one time (Okay I'm exaggerating .... I can't remember for sure if it was the officers) had flashlights, but my memories are foggy (I was 12) on how easy they were to spot though I'd lean towards them not being too obvious.

Forests can get dark, but caves (and many dungeons) can be totally black. Any light is going to show up--I remember being in a cave system in China and, after a short time down there, even the glowing watch faces looked really bright from 30+ feet away.

Of course, D&D seems to base surprise almost entirely on vision, and the fact that sound tends to travel a long way (even if you can't necessarily make out the direction) in many of the underground environments is ignored entirely.

[Tanarii]

Forests can get dark, but caves (and many dungeons) can be totally black. Any light is going to show up--I remember being in a cave system in China and, after a short time down there, even the glowing watch faces looked really bright from 30+ feet away.

Of course, D&D seems to base surprise almost entirely on vision, and the fact that sound tends to travel a long way (even if you can't necessarily make out the direction) in many of the underground environments is ignored entirely.

IRL Light at any distance just also just tends to give away presence and an approximate direction/location. In pitch black it's hard to make out anything except the light, which is (relatively) blinding, so looking at it directly isn't a great idea, and even if you do you can't really see who is holding it or others around them easily. Certainly the idea that you could accurately shoot arrows from the darkness at a party holding lanterns or torches at any significant distance is off.

Game mechanics wise, it's definitely possible though.

[KrakiiPedia]

First post here, so "hi, all!" Just got started reading these recently--been following the comic for years--but this one I had to speak to.

JellyPooga said, "seriously, go out for a walk on a cloudless full-moon, somewhere there's no light pollution; it's bright as day. Even on a partially cloudy night, you can still navigate."

Dork_Forge said, "Separately on the moon comment from before... no? Assuming you're outside, there's ZERO cloud cover AND it's a full moon sure, you can probably navigate and make out some general shapes, but it'd be difficult to see what you're stepping on, subtle movements etc."

Yeah.... no. You're thinking of standing in your backyard, with streetlights shining down the street, and that one light that's super-bright that your one annoying neighbor has on his porch, and like that.

Do what JellyPooga said: go stand out in the country somewhere, with no light pollution, on a full-moon night. If you can see something normally--I am nearsighted--you can see it really well in moonlight.

I speak from experience here. One evening at Philmont it was about 2:00am and I had to hit the latrine; full-moon night. With my glasses on, I could make out INDIVIDUAL BLADES OF GRASS in my walk, from normal standing height.
This is not "stumbling around in the half-dark." There Is Light, and plenty of it.
The grass appeared as a *light* surface; the 'dark' was the shadows being cast BY the grass.

Sure, it is in the realm of "more light would make this easier" (just like as a kid when your parents would walk past and say, "You need more light"), but I would still have been able to read a paperback book/normal print copy, at arms length/normal reading distance, just fine.

Light pollution really does destroy your nightvision, so grass (calling out my specific example) largely appears as "that dark stuff on the ground where you're walking" when you're in your average neighborhood.

[Willie the Duck]

Yeah.... no. You're thinking of standing in your backyard, with streetlights shining down the street, and that one light that's super-bright that your one annoying neighbor has on his porch, and like that.

Do what JellyPooga said: go stand out in the country somewhere, with no light pollution, on a full-moon night. If you can see something normally--I am nearsighted--you can see it really well in moonlight.

I speak from experience here. One evening at Philmont it was about 2:00am and I had to hit the latrine; full-moon night. With my glasses on, I could make out INDIVIDUAL BLADES OF GRASS in my walk, from normal standing height.
This is not "stumbling around in the half-dark." There Is Light, and plenty of it.
The grass appeared as a *light* surface; the 'dark' was the shadows being cast BY the grass.

Sure, it is in the realm of "more light would make this easier" (just like as a kid when your parents would walk past and say, "You need more light"), but I would still have been able to read a paperback book/normal print copy, at arms length/normal reading distance, just fine.

Light pollution really does destroy your nightvision, so grass (calling out my specific example) largely appears as "that dark stuff on the ground where you're walking" when you're in your average neighborhood.

Can we please not assume that other people are deliberately lying about the situation they are describing? If Dark Forge says they are talking about being in the countryside without light pollution, then they are talking about being in the countryside without light pollution. They may still be mistaken or think their own low-light vision is representative of the norm when it is not, and we can discuss that.

[CapnWildefyr]

I've been following this thread and have picked up a lot of little bits of advice, so thanks all!

To speak to the original question, in my group there is always at least one person holding a light. The way we play, it works out.

One new point I'd like to make is about surprise. Yes, you can see a light from a long way off in the night-- but only if you are looking. If the guards are not attentive, or there is no reason to be wary-- especially when humans carrying light is common enough to not be suspicious-- then the party is not going to be set back. Consider the Underdark. If you are coming down a trade route, and if people carrying light regularly use that route, then why would a group of drow (assuming they have not been warned of danger) just start shooting? OK, if you've already started fighting and survivors have spread word, then maybe, but OW why attack your potential business partners? Who else roams the Underdark regularly? I know this is a very specific example, I am just saying that light down a hall or coming in under the door is only a telltale when someone is actively searching for it, and wary of trouble, and that is not all the time.

Also some beings actually have disadvantage when targets are in bright light (drow for ex).

[JackPhoenix]

Also some beings actually have disadvantage when targets are in bright light (drow for ex).

Only cloakers, shadow demons, darklings and meenlocks have light sensitivity. Everything else only cares about sunlight, and isn't bothered by other sources of light.