Limiting PC race darkvision

[TalksAlone]

I'm planning on DMing an online campaign semi-soon, and one of my favorite aspects of online play is the control of player light and vision. And I feel I'd miss much of that fun if I'd just allow all/most of them to just have darkvision as it tends to happen in 5e. And I want those who get to keep Darkvision to feel special about it.


So, what I've thought of doing to the PC races is:

Races with Normal Vision remain the same.

Races with Darkvision now have Normal Vision and a Skill proficiency.

Races with Superior Darkvision now have Darkvision and the Sunlight Sensitivity trait (if they didn't alredy have it).

Kobolds remain the same.


Is this sufficient ajustment? What are your thoughts?

[Unoriginal]

Darkvision is just being able to see short range as if it was in dim light.

There's no more reason to limit it than there is to forbid PCs from using torches.

[Trask]

Darkvision is just being able to see short range as if it was in dim light.

There's no more reason to limit it than there is to forbid PCs from using torches.

Come on man, not what the OP asked. It's a perfectly legitimate preference. Darkvision IS more common than it's ever been among the playable races and darkvision is fundamentally different from a torch because it's always on and has no downsides (like using a hand)

I think your idea would be fine, but you could instead bring back low-light vision from third edition and retool it so all dim light is bright light, but it doesn't turn darkness into dim light and give it to the races that normally have it, like elves and half elves.

That might be easier to swallow instead of just taking it away straight up, but I don't think it would be that big a deal if you just did that either and gave a free skill. I might also customize that skill to the race in question.

Elves might get proficiency in stealth or nature

Dwarves and Gnomes might get proficiency in investigation (for prospecting!)

Half Orcs might get athletics.

Half Elves get nothing because they already have way too much compared to the other races :P

Tieflings I might just leave alone since seeing in the dark feels pretty fiendish to me, and now they might be more special ("Im born of a devil....I can see in the dark"

"Uhhhh yeah we all can. Like 7/10ths of the races in the world can.")

I might actually give it to dragonborn, it makes way more sense for them to have it than most others. Seems like the only reason they don't have it is so not EVERY single phb race has it except humans and halflings.

Once you cut down on who has darkvision it becomes more of a thematic thing for a race to have, which I like.

[PhantomSoul]

Come on man, not what the OP asked. It's a perfectly legitimate preference. Darkvision IS more common than it's ever been among the playable races and darkvision is fundamentally different from a torch because it's always on and has no downsides (like using a hand)

Agreed -- it's so common it kind of feels like you're wasting your time trying to remember it or like you're supposed to give that variant human some darkvision item ASAP, which just feels boring.

Dwarves and Gnomes might get proficiency in investigation (for prospecting!)

I like that -- depending on your lore, Arcana could be a good pick too (especially for gnomes and/or the underdark options).

Half Elves get nothing because they already have way too much compared to the other races :P

Amen to that lol

Tieflings I might just leave alone since seeing in the dark feels pretty fiendish to me, and now they might be more special ("Im born of a devil....I can see in the dark"

I'd even be tempted to give them something different -- let them see in full darkness (like it's bright light or dim light, according to preference). Maybe Magical darkness if you're feeling daring.

[hitchhike79]

OP, i think you just need to take out Darkvision, thats essentially what your doing with how your scaling things up.
Just tell your PCs with any level of Darkvision that they have advantage on visual checks in dim light.
I think something like that might be easier for you and them to manage.

I play with a DM who is also tired of all Darkvision races so he makes us carry a light source or be disadvantaged in investigation/perception checks in dim or no light.


Side note Darkvision in DnD is dumb

Cats dont have Darkvision in DnD 5e?!
There is no accounting for your eyes adjusting to the light around you, because thats what eyes do and very quickly.
Anyways good luck on tuning your game

[Gale]

I think Darkvision is a bit overrated, personally. Unless everyone is trying to be stealthy, it isn't much better than carrying a torch. In fact, a torch is often superior because it actually creates bright and dim light. Conversely, trying to see into darkness with darkvision alone imposes disadvantage on all perception checks, as areas of darkness are still considered lightly obscured.

The counterargument is often that a torch requires a hand to be held, but not every character has their hands full, and a party probably doesn't need more than one or two light sources. Besides, the Light cantrip is available to nearly every spellcaster and invalidates darkness to nearly the same extent that darkvision does.

I don't think it makes much of a difference whether or not races get darkvision. With it characters have a lot more flexibility to explore dark areas without yelling out "I'M HERE" to any potential enemies by having a light source on them. Without it exploring the dark becomes a lot more troublesome, but also most other humanoids won't be able to spot them since they won't have darkvision either, so it's a bit of a wash.

It definitely makes the Darkvision spell and the Goggles of Night more valuable though. But also Shadowblade becomes much weaker, as you're likely going to find yourself fighting in total darkness more often than dim light, at least in my experience. Meanwhile, the Devil's Sight invocation becomes really powerful, to the extent that I would readily expect it to be nerfed or banned outright. Similarly, I would expect Twilight Clerics and Shadow Sorcerers to lose their classes' darkvision, or have it be nerfed significantly.

I have to wonder too if other various forms of gaining darkvision would also be removed from the player. Are Owl familiars still allowed? Does a Warlock's Imp familiar still have Devil's Sight? If a Druid wildshapes into a form with darkvision do they still have it? Can Artificers still replicate Goggles of Night? Can a Beast Master's companion still have darkvision? I don't mean to be pedantic, but there are a lot of ways for PCs to see in the darkness, especially while a fight isn't happening, and I'm curious if your goal is to eliminate them all or to simply make doing so a little bit harder.

Overall, I think it's better to just leave Darkvision as is. The game was built with it in mind, and I think it would take more effort than its worth to nerf it. I don't think it's at all overpowered, and there are still fun ways to play with darkness even if most PCs have access to darkvision. Always keep in mind that even with darkvision, darkness is considered light obscurement. Additionally, many monsters and enemies might have superior darkvision to the party and will be able to spot them before they do.

[TalksAlone]

Darkvision is just being able to see short range as if it was in dim light.

There's no more reason to limit it than there is to forbid PCs from using torches.

I feel you, but here's the thing:

There is a cost for having a lit torch: one hand. No shield for shield master shennanigans, no greatswords or bows flying around with +10 dmg with no downside, no free hand to make somatic components with a spellcasting focus. Are there solutions to that? Yes, but you have to adress it:

Perhaps a Light spell must be cast upon the fighter's greatsword. That's a cantrip selection spent.

Perhaps you can rely on another player to carry a torch and provide your spellcaster with the vision you need for line of sight. That's team coordination made in preparation.

Perhaps you can opt to build a one-handed strategy to guarantee your team has at least one light in every fight and focus on positioning and maneuvering yourself in combat to provide the light. That's one more combat "role".

All of those aspects are just "solved" with simply having darkvision, requiring little to no effort.

[Catullus64]

I think the changes proposed are fine, and I definitely agree on the negative impact that darkvision has, especially being so widely propagated. Torches and lanterns have actual disadvantages as tradeoffs; they make you highly visible, take up a hand, and are limited use. Darkvision negates all of the drama and tension you can milk from that. I would say that you can do something more interesting than replacing it with a generic skill proficiency.

When I came up with darkvision replacement features, I tried to still give each race something tied into vision or sensation. Elves got long-range vision a la Eagle Totem barbarians. Dwarves got 10-foot tremor sense. Tieflings got limited-use, one-round Devil's Sight. I like the idea of other races seeing differently from humans, even if I dislike current implementation.

I also approve of leaving Darkvision for Sunlight sensitivity races. When darkvision is no longer widely available, suddenly Sunlight Sensitivity becomes a more worthwhile tradeoff.

[Darth Credence]

Come on man, not what the OP asked. It's a perfectly legitimate preference. Darkvision IS more common than it's ever been among the playable races and darkvision is fundamentally different from a torch because it's always on and has no downsides

I make it have downsides. It hasn't mattered in my campaign, because three of the five players are human and the vast majority of stuff has happened outside, but going with no light is dangerous. There are things that go bump in the night, and fear of the dark is very real. Specifically, there is a monster called a grue, that will flee any source of light, but if it is dark, they are on the hunt. They are mostly found in the underdark, but they are also a possibility in the extreme reaches of the globe with much longer nights. They put off magical darkness larger than most darkvision ranges, so if you are relying on just darkvision, one would never know they are there until they are already too close.

(In complete agreement that it's a legitimate preference, BTW.)

[Kylar0990]

I'm planning on DMing an online campaign semi-soon, and one of my favorite aspects of online play is the control of player light and vision. And I feel I'd miss much of that fun if I'd just allow all/most of them to just have darkvision as it tends to happen in 5e. And I want those who get to keep Darkvision to feel special about it.


So, what I've thought of doing to the PC races is:

Races with Normal Vision remain the same.

Races with Darkvision now have Normal Vision and a Skill proficiency.

Races with Superior Darkvision now have Darkvision and the Sunlight Sensitivity trait (if they didn't alredy have it).

Kobolds remain the same.


Is this sufficient ajustment? What are your thoughts?

Are you nerfing the monsters the same way?

[Lunali]

Deciding that there's effectively no darkvision also means deciding that there's effectively no stealth, at least in environments where the darkvision would matter.

If you want to make lighting matter, include area maps, signs etc. in your dungeon. Anyone looking at them while relying on darkvision sees a wall, light a torch and suddenly you know how to get through the dungeon.

[Dork_Forge]

IMO I think adding a skill prof in lieu of Darkvision is actually a buff, skills are useful and Darkvision isn't difficult to acquire elsewhere.

I run pretty much exclusively on Roll20 and I'd suggest that instead you just halve the distances, gut the nonesense that is the Twilight Cleric's ability and probably most importantly:

Remember and reiterate to players that Darkvision isn't seeing normally in the dark. They'll have disadvantage on perception checks and be unable to discern colour, which as a RP thing would be a depressing way to live large swathes of your life, Darkvision races still use lighting for a reason.

[Carpe Gonzo]

You could look up Darker Dungeons. It has rule adjustments for 5e to make lighting more important and darkness more of an issue. Main ones would be besides replacing darkvision with low-light vision and adjustments to light producing spells (adding concentration to light and other light-producing cantrips, limiting the duration of Continual Flame to 8 hours, etc.) They also have rules for light levels that are meant to replace ranges, but not sure how into that you'd be for VTT.

[No brains]

Instead of building on paperwork by nerfing darkvision, you'd be better off taking stock of what darkvision does and making good use of its limitations.

Creatures can't read with darkvision. Have the PCs go after lore written on paper to force them to light a candle rather than curse the darkness.

Creatures can't discern color with darkvision. Make use of colored molds hiding in among basic mold. Have color be a part of investigation and puzzle-solving.

Darkvision effectively makes everything lightly obscured. That's still enough for some creatures to hide in. Wood Elves, creatures with the Stalker feat, and others are effectively invisible in darkness.

Even without creatures hiding in it, light obscurement imposes disadvantage on sight-based Perception checks. Creatures and clues that want to stay hidden have an easier time of it even against creatures with darkvision.

Darkvision has a limted range. Make dark areas bigger than darkvision can see. Alternately, darkvision can't see through opaque matter. Foliage can help anyone hide anywhere.

If you insist on making changes, consider that Darkvision is a spell and consider how that would function. Also think about nerfing the blindsight of some familiars (bat and crab) as well as similar class features (rogue blindsense and blindfighting style).

In either case, you can encourage use of light by being fair to characters that choose to use light sources. Players won't worry about taking darkvision if they aren't getting sniped by longbows in the dark. Make sure that other creatures are similarly reliant on light to function and get around in the dark. You can enforce the usual drawbacks of needing light and include some creatures that get by without light, but abusing either will take away fun from the players. It's not just you at the table and you need to make sure others have as much fun with vision and light as you do.

[Witty Username]

Darkvision is just being able to see short range as if it was in dim light.

There's no more reason to limit it than there is to forbid PCs from using torches.

There is if you want PC's to ever use torches. Also dark vision can be an issue if the party composition is odd (I have a party of 5, one doesn't have dark vision), and it can lead to weird situations of everyone agreeing to put themselves at disadvantage or put the odd one out at disadvantage, neither of which anyone feels good about.
Admittedly, this is more of a problem if your table values provisioning and dungeon running, so if your table doesn't care for that anyway then you are right there is not much reason to limit dark vision.

One of the things I have been experimenting with is weak magical darkness in patches (bright light will suppress it), it works if it is already in theme of the area and has a side benefit of making your player that took devil's sight feel amazing about their life choices. Furthermore, Allowing monsters to (or using monsters that can) hide in dim light will make light sources relevant to keep on hand even if the party doesn't need them much of the time.

[Tanarii]

Deciding that there's effectively no darkvision also means deciding that there's effectively no stealth, at least in environments where the darkvision would matter.

Enemies lacking Darkvision makes stealth easier, not harder.

And don't forget in 5e you can move around fine in darkness. And depending on how your DM rules targeting, potentially you don't even have to guess enemy locations.

[Witty Username]

Creatures can't read with darkvision. Have the PCs go after lore written on paper to force them to light a candle rather than curse the darkness.

I thought 5e took that one out? I know that was true in 3.5 but I haven't seen it in 5e.

[No brains]

I thought 5e took that one out? I know that was true in 3.5 but I haven't seen it in 5e.

I might have to investigate this closer, but I see this as a subset of not being able to define color. Regular ink writing similar to what you're reading here might not be apparent to the visual experience of darkvision.

There are some exceptions I can think of. Carved letters that stand out against their background material could probably be seen. It's also possible that words could be heavily painted on a wall to the point that darkvision could find a topographical difference. Depending on how darkvision works, there may also be materials that are different enough in 'darkvision albedo' that they can be effectively written on. There might even be special invisible inks that are only visible in darkvision due to some quirk of 'radiation absorption' or alchemy. Lightless creatures can enjoy large-font cuneiform tablets, phosphorescent ink written against the same color, or pitch plastered on alabaster walls.

Of course, all of these neat tricks mean nothing if the players have no way to discover how their enemies were hiding info from them.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I might have to investigate this closer, but I see this as a subset of not being able to define color. Regular ink writing similar to what you're reading here might not be apparent to the visual experience of darkvision.

I don't really see how this makes sense, there would be significantly more impactful consequences to saying that similar colors blend together in darkvision. How would ink on paper function any differently than, say, a particularly savvy Orc just lying prone in a similarly green field.

The way I understand it, things just show up in their own distinct shade of grey. If they would have stood out from whatever surface/background you put them against in light, they'll stand out similarly for darkvision.

[No brains]

I don't really see how this makes sense, there would be significantly more impactful consequences to saying that similar colors blend together in darkvision. How would ink on paper function any differently than, say, a particularly savvy Orc just lying prone in a similarly green field.

The way I understand it, things just show up in their own distinct shade of grey. If they would have stood out from whatever surface/background you put them against in light, they'll stand out similarly for darkvision.

'Not seeing' how eyeballs in total darkness 'make the sense' of sight is what darkvision discussions are all about.

There's some vagueness to the exact experience of darkvision. The understanding I have or you have could be different that what a third person has. I don't know if darkvision is intended to be precise enough to see the grain of a wood, the striations in rock, or the spots on an animal. Going from what I know of these things being 'lightly obscured' in darkvision, those details might be hard to pick out. How easy is it to read with night vision goggles that are so weak they can't see anything further than 60' out? Different writers, DMs, and players may have different assumptions.

If a DM told me I could read in darkvision because dim light/lightly obscured is the same level of light as candlelight and people can read by candlelight, then I could accept that, but I tend to let my imagination run wild when thinking about how a creature experiences its extraordinary powers.

In the case of that 'particularly savvy Orc', the rules expression of that savviness might be some trait that lets them hide when lightly obscured. This monster feature or character feat lets them solve other problems apart from color blending, like texture, reflection, their own breathing, or the fact that they also need to hide its gear that isn't as green as them.

[ProsecutorGodot]

There's some vagueness to the exact experience of darkvision. The understanding I have or you have could be different that what a third person has. I don't know if darkvision is intended to be precise enough to see the grain of a wood, the striations in rock, or the spots on an animal. Going from what I know of these things being 'lightly obscured' in darkvision, those details might be hard to pick out. How easy is it to read with night vision goggles that are so weak they can't see anything further than 60' out? Different writers, DMs, and players may have different assumptions.

A lack of specifics doesn't always mean something is vague, a lack of specifics in this case could (and I think reasonable does) mean that there are no other changes to how a character with Darkvision sees in the dark aside from those listed. They don't see colors, that's all.

If a DM told me I could read in darkvision because dim light/lightly obscured is the same level of light as candlelight and people can read by candlelight, then I could accept that, but I tend to let my imagination run wild when thinking about how a creature experiences its extraordinary powers.

I can appreciate wanting to fantasize about how it feels to have these sorts of powers, but we can't start making wide and general statements about how it should actually work with information that we aren't explicitly given.

In the case of that 'particularly savvy Orc', the rules expression of that savviness might be some trait that lets them hide when lightly obscured. This monster feature or character feat lets them solve other problems apart from color blending, like texture, reflection, their own breathing, or the fact that they also need to hide its gear that isn't as green as them.

The example wasn't intended to be a distraction to be picked apart, so I'll just be entirely up front of its purpose: If you say that black text on white paper would be invisible because of a blending, what exactly prevents anything else of similar colors from just disappearing into the background? That's what doesn't make sense, saying that text on paper (and even potentially stretching it to carvings on a wall) would become invisible is, from my point of view, an entirely arbitrary restriction that would be imposed only to give Darkvision a weakness to be exploited.

From my admittedly limited understanding of previous editions, Darkvision (lighting in general in many instances) functioned differently in the rules, significantly so when it was still split into many different vision types like Infravision. That's not how it functions now though, and there's nothing to suggest that it's limitation of "not being able to make out specific colors" would translate into any severe penalty* like losing the ability to make a distinction between similarly shaded objects.
*Other than the standard penalty of having disadvantage on perception checks made in dim light.

[Tanarii]

A lack of specifics doesn't always mean something is vague, a lack of specifics in this case could (and I think reasonable does) mean that there are no other changes to how a character with Darkvision sees in the dark aside from those listed. They don't see colors, that's all.

Its also dim light. If a DM doesn't let characters read in dim light, or see clear details in dim light, they also won't be able to with Darkvision.

[Lunali]

Rather than saying it's difficult to perceive things that are similar color, a more accurate to the rules interpretation is that you can see the shape of things within your range, but can't tell what color it is at all. This would mean that text carved into a wall would be completely visible despite being the exact same color, while a colorful mosaic would be completely invisible.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Its also dim light. If a DM doesn't let characters read in dim light, or see clear details in dim light, they also won't be able to with Darkvision.

Fair, though that wouldn't be a limitation of Darkvision then.

Rather than saying it's difficult to perceive things that are similar color, a more accurate to the rules interpretation is that you can see the shape of things within your range, but can't tell what color it is at all. This would mean that text carved into a wall would be completely visible despite being the exact same color, while a colorful mosaic would be completely invisible.

I think a more accurate rules interpretation here is that you see many different shades of gray, but if the color of that mosaic is something relevant you would need a light to know what those colors are.

[Magicspook]

In all our serious canpaigns, my group has banned darkvision or presented a new set of playable races, none of whom has darkvision. No 'compensation' has been offered for the loss of darkvision and honestly it's been great. We actually need to think about packing torches, magical lanterns or darkvision spells and potions. It also helps that everyone is in the same boat and there is no 'darkvision racism' between party members.

[Rukelnikov]

I'm planning on DMing an online campaign semi-soon, and one of my favorite aspects of online play is the control of player light and vision. And I feel I'd miss much of that fun if I'd just allow all/most of them to just have darkvision as it tends to happen in 5e. And I want those who get to keep Darkvision to feel special about it.


So, what I've thought of doing to the PC races is:

Races with Normal Vision remain the same.

Races with Darkvision now have Normal Vision and a Skill proficiency.

Races with Superior Darkvision now have Darkvision and the Sunlight Sensitivity trait (if they didn't alredy have it).

Kobolds remain the same.


Is this sufficient ajustment? What are your thoughts?

Maybe consider giving them double distance for light sources. They will still need to carry torches, lanters and the like, but will get better vision than the races that didn't have darkvision to begin with.

[Tanarii]

I think a more accurate rules interpretation here is that you see many different shades of gray, but if the color of that mosaic is something relevant you would need a light to know what those colors are.

I computer color terms, I'd think only colors achromatic greys (equal RBG, no hue value) would count.

Having converted pictures to black and white before using them as a reference pic for sketching, that's exactly how I do it. Remove the hue. But leave the other factors in place.

[ciopo]

I'll say this is meh,I don't feel banning or softbanning darkvision will actually introduce meaningful choice. At most one of the cantrips of the party will be light/dancing lights instead of something else and that's if they didn't have it already. All that'll change is that they'll have to spend 5 seconds at the start of the session to remind you they turn on the light and move on as if nothing is different.
Because it isn't. You will still describe whatever room they are in with what they see. How they see is kind of irrelevant to the meat of exploration game, if you describe them not seeing *stuff* because it's dark, they turn on the light with what means they have, it is not really all that meaningful. The only impact you're having is making sneaking harder and being ambushed easier, is that what you want? Why?

And if you take racial darkvision out, a direct conseguence is that inhabited places will be lighted up by whoever lives there, anyway, so in encounters with sentient beings the party don't even need to bring their own light

[Azuresun]

Deciding that there's effectively no darkvision also means deciding that there's effectively no stealth, at least in environments where the darkvision would matter.

As we all know, no human in the real world is able to be stealthy in a dark environment. Totally impossible.

[Samayu]

OP, i think you just need to take out Darkvision, thats essentially what your doing with how your scaling things up.
Just tell your PCs with any level of Darkvision that they have advantage on visual checks in dim light.
I think something like that might be easier for you and them to manage.

I play with a DM who is also tired of all Darkvision races so he makes us carry a light source or be disadvantaged in investigation/perception checks in dim or no light.

Disadvantage on perception checks in dim light, and in darkness with darkvision (because that equals dim light), is the rule as written.

I'm planning on DMing an online campaign semi-soon, and one of my favorite aspects of online play is the control of player light and vision.

I'm curious what you mean by this.

If you think there's some power imbalance caused by darkvision, I suggest you merely tighten up the rules surrounding it. If you want darkness to be part of the plot, or the mood you're setting up in your campaign, then consider something to reduce its prevalence. If your goal is something else, I'd like to know what that is.