Check out this article on ways to use infravision: www.pvv.ntnu.no/~leirbakk/rpg/adnd/society/adnd_society_infravision.html Patreon: bit.ly/QBPatreon Old-School DnD newsletter: bit.ly/TheGlatisant
@@VhaidraSaga alot of creatures had it. Personally I would be fine if none of the goblinoids, orcs or demi humans had them. I agree dark vision, infra vision has become overplayed.
Great video, Ben! I really agree with the notion that for a dungeon to be properly scary, it needs to be dark. I confirmed this with my players last week, when they returned to the dungeon where I ran their first 0 lvl funnel, only for them to remember that, in order to carry all the loot and weapons they found last time, they had dumped all but three of their torches in the last room of the dungeon. They genuinely felt unnerved as I described their last torches flickering and dimming in the hand of their torchbearer. Before they returned to town, they made a shopping list including MANY overlooked essential items like a ten foot pole, lockpicks, rope and of course, torches. It only took them two sessions deprived of the essentials provided to them by character creation in 5e to properly appreciate them.
( Maybe dark in a metaphorical sense, as in, the players method of information gathering is insufficient or unreliable to a certain degree in the situation, either falling behind some of the monster's own perception or interrupted by obstacles\the nature or positioning of the monster. Actual darkness is very useful and relatable, as light gives great detection for sensory organs compared to their upkeep cost, but is expensive to generate, making humans who rely on it greatly extremely vulnerable in its absence. If the diviner gets overconfident, health lost to unstable architecture and boss monsters being alerted by scrying sensors can help shift the mood. ) Good story. The primal fear of unseen things suddenly wrecking you and trying to make basic resources last just a little longer can be a very entertaining narrative. Level 0->2 DnD (numbers may depend on edition and DM) is almost a different game.
Hudson, "Look, I'm telling ya, there's somethin' movin' and it ain't us! They're all around us, man." Dietrich "Maybe they don't show up on infrared at all... "
The thing I don't really like about infravision is that a lot of people seem to think it _only_ works in the dark instead of being an expansion of one's visual spectrum that also provides information during the day - which has a _lot_ of possibilities.
I was always a little amused by 2E explaining the "basic infravision" rules then took a bit of segue under "optional infravision" to explain why Gygax was bad at physics. They had some valid points, but it was amusing none the less. My two main problems with 5E Darkvision are: 1) How ubiquitous it is among playable races. To my knowledge only humans, halflings and (weirdly) dragonborn lack darkvision. Also whilst many monsters have it, many animals (even nocturnal predators) don't. I will never not be irrationally angry that an actual cat in 5E doesn't have darkvision or any bonuses to see in the dark whilst catpeople Tabaxi do. 2) That it fails a "simple reading check". A player or DM who isn't really very rules focused will read the entry for Darkvision under a race entry at character gen at the start of the PHB "You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. You can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray." and understandably miss the nuances of the penalties of Dim Light, without specifically going to look them. Which is worse because even the "Vision and Light" section on p183 of the PHB then explains that "In a lightly obscured area, such as dim light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage, creatures have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight." - but it's only on the hiding sidebar on p177 in the description of Dexterity ability checks that introduces the Passive Perception score (a fixed score of 10+ Wisdom(Perception) modifier) and that you have a -5 penalty to it if you have disadvantage. So 5E darkvision isn't that great and there are some good reasons to still use light sources, but only if you take a bit of time to digest the spread out rules; and at a glance many 5E groups will effectively run it as you can see in the dark for 60'. Like many others I just go with "Darkvision lets you see better in dim light for the radius but you still need some source of light to see" Alongside this I'm very slowly trying to define an relatively system agnostic compilation of different ways for monsters to hunt in the dark, and what clues these give away to PCs and what they can do to counter this. Obviously beyond sight there is smell, taste, touch and hearing. But then we can branch out into more fantasy stuff. Tremorsense - sensing movement through solid surfaces like the ground. Echolocation - using emitted vocal sounds to locate. Electrosense - sensing electrical discharge like muscle movement (sharks and platypus) Lasereyes! - beams of light shone by magical creatures that illuminate areas so they can see, but likewise means the players can see what is being illuminated) Truesight/Soulvision - literally detecting thoughts and emotions. Likely going for the pseudo-physics approach that Gygax did.
I have always been troubled that darkvision was based on infrared. Heat sensing really doesn't really fit elves and dwarves. That is more snakemen's thing. I think ultravision would fit elves best (especially if magic items shine in ultraviolet, and because many animals also see in ultraviolet), and echolocation would be neat on dwarves (and echolocation is skill that actually can be learned, many blind people can hear echoes of their clicking tongues). And in Pathfinder I almost always pick races that has Scent ability. Ability to recognize danger, smell through illusion and following trails is really fun. Just ask Sergeant Angua. And I wish someone would do to 5e rules what Necrotic Gnome did to B/X rules with OSE: putting them in logical order and making them easy to use.
@@Dragoran5836 For close to 40 years I've wondered why AD&D didn't give elves ultravision instead of infra. I assume the trope they were originally going for with elves was Legolas having incredible vision, especially at night. Ultra just fits that so much better. Legolas didn't run off ahead in Moria to scout - he stayed in range of Gandalf's staff too.
I appreciate this extensive assessment. I’ve been playing since 1e in the early 80s and the various forms of vision have always been hazy on application. It hasn’t had a huge effect on play in my experience though. That said, the beauty of DnD is that the DM and players get to create the world they want to play in and explore. So your concept for new forms of vision are weird and awesome. They will present their own challenges to game play but the novelty sounds superbly interesting. Side note - in the LOTR animated movies by Bakshi Smaug has “laser-vision”. This was a representative of the dragons exceptional vision but comes off as what you have described.
The funny thing to me about 5E and everyone having Darkvision is that Light is a cantrip available to Clerics, Bards, Sorcerers, Wizards, and Artificers, so someone in your party can probably cast light every six seconds anyway.
@@QuestingBeast I mean, torches are cheap. And they're included in starting gear. And they hardly weigh anything, and encumbrance is extremely generous. And there's no rules for putting out or ruining torches. It seems as though the "limited and dwindling sources of light" concept has been systematically dismantled.
I adore your non-review videos Ben. Your reviews are exceptional, but you have a particularly insightful eye for game design and TTRPG history. Your deep-dives contain concise, well reasoned, and well researched advice/thoughts that make them higher quality than most D&D video content on UA-cam. I really appreciate your editing and writing efforts
I think an important detail about 5e’s Darkvision is that it gives Disadvantage on some skill checks, so even without removing it entirely, it makes it much more difficult to do things in the dark without a light source. Enemies have an easier time skulking about, and you can fuck with the party by having them see moving shadows that may or may not be creeping creatures to keep them paranoid and incentivize the use of torches. The only thing that directly messes with this is the Warlock’s witch sight, or whatever it’s called, which bumps your Darkvision up to 120 feet away and I think eliminates penalties, but that’s something you have to blow an entire Invocation on.
Generally, I think the shift from Infravision to Darkvision was a good move. But I must admit the idea of playing with the heat-centric vision has a certain appeal, and opens itself up to possibilities. Hand-waving away why skeletons can be seen is, I think, a missed opportunity. Instead, have creatures like undead, or cold-blooded creatures like Lizardfolk or Troglodytes, be invisible or near-invisible to Infravision. Thereby making these kinds of monsters more dangerous, and giving even those races with Infravision a reason to bust out a torch. Moreover, you could further play with even those assumptions. A vampire might normally be too cold to see, but if it's recently fed on warm blood, it would cause them to appear in Infravision. Same with cold-blooded monsters that feed on warm meat. Giving PCs a tool with which to solve problems, like by leaving a cooked sausage (or roasted body of another dungeon denizen) in a hallway where monsters may patrol. Or allowing themselves to be fed upon by a vampire attacking them, so it's easier to see.
I love this idea, and I totally want to use it... as soon as I can figure out a way to give my 5e players infravision XD (I'll probably give them a magic item of some sort).
@@kgoblin5084 Yeah, that's probably the most straightforward option. In fact, I might give some races ultravision instead to mix things up. Tabaxi, for instance, since cats can see some ultraviolet iirc.
In the real world, most “cold-blooded” creatures are actually warmer than their surroundings. They aren’t literally cold, they just can’t control their internal body temperature easily or automatically. If you want to follow that, then Sahuagin should be visible to infravision , but kinda dim or fuzzy-it would probably be a bit like picking out a well-camouflaged real animal. I don’t know if it was just us applying science or actually in the rules somewhere, but I definitely remember playing that undead blended right into the background with infravision.
@@natbarmore I mean yes, scientifically this is true. But we're running off magical BS DnD rules. Where it doesn't matter what's literally true. Only what's symbolically true.
I can just see you doing the famous Richard B. Riddick line, "You are not afraid of the dark are you?", before you start a campaign! Thank you for teaching me something I did not know that I needed to know.
Thanks for the investigation! I would love to hear about "save-or-die" and "health" in general since the way how PCs gain HP (from rest and potions) and die differs in old and modern d&d editions.
I would love this! The fact 5e expects me to actually cast cure spells instead of having a potion addiction is one of the things i loathe most about it. 4es healing surges and 3es wands of CLW are also acceptable, albeit not as iconic as literally dozens of pots.
I continue to believe that 4e's limited increase in sales and marketshare (more people played 4e than 3e, but they were almost all children) had less to do with any design decision inside the game, so much as a decision to stop support on a library of almost $3000 dollars worth of books the year the Great Recession started in the United States. Older players, at a time where money was limited, were incensed that a product line they felt they had been promised was evergreen was being phased out. I was working at a summer camp the year 4e released as the indoor activities coordinator, and the break between 4e and 3e really seems to me at the time to have come down to people with a pre-existing investment in a library of books and limited income versus people with available cash who were just starting out. I personally played 3.5 for almost the entire time 4e was out, because the only way I could afford to play D&D at all was with borrowed, second hand, and pirated books and theatre of the mind: I couldn't have afforded a single mini for my own character, let alone the boards and the figurines for all the monsters. What happened with 4e as a product was A: someone at wizards promised hasbro (if I remember the number correctly) a *300%* increase in revenue, B: the VTT product that was supposed to automate 4e (and based on the Matt Coleville Dusk lets play, works quite well now) was delayed interminably by the death of the company's only subject matter expert, and C: high school students in 2009 didn't have the kind of money to buy a $40 book every four months, when their parents were planning to lose their jobs. I could buy 3.5 supplements at Half Price books for like, $5 a piece at the same time.
Important note on how Darkvision works in 5e: it allows you to see in darkness as if it were dim light, and in dim light as if it were bright light. Dim light causes characters to have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight, causing them to take a -5 to passive perception, and making them easier to get surprised by monsters. It is therefore still beneficial to have a torch even if you've got Darkvision, the dim light it normally creates becomes bright light for you. This is something I think a lot of people miss because most Dungeon Masters either don't enforce the perception rule, or don't take advantage of the fact nobody thought to bring a torch with them.
Great video Ben, I love rules history. Infravision always felt very bitty and disjointed throughout the rules but definitely worth persevering with as it adds such a cool dynamic to the game.
I'm glad you mentioned that light and heat disrupt infravision. Unless your party all has infravision you'll need a light source, and that keeps the dungeon dark and mysterious.
A 5e party of darkvision-havers going without a light source in a dungeon is asking to be ambushed. Dim light imposes disadvantage on Perception checks and a -5 penalty to Passive Perception. Even with a dedicated scout, the party will be bumbling into lurking creatures and hidden traps that would have been more easily visible in torchlight. Also, a creature can hide in the open with dim light without needing anything to hide behind, meaning something standing in the middle of a bare hallway could still get the drop on you. Being in the dark with Darkvision still kinda sucks in 5e. Darkvision makes torches really good though, as 20’ of bright light and 20’ of dim light turns into 40’ of bright light and 20’ of dim. That’s twice the bright light, what a bargain!
@@antieverything1 " old-school apologists" heh, says a lot. Tracking torches was not about the fun of it, no one came to the table going "OH YEAH! counting torches! my day is complete!" No, resource management is about those times when it puts extra pressure on the players/PCs; do you try and keep going for more treasure and risk the loss of light? did you lose your light when you fell in that underground river? etc.
Most 5E players will not choose WIS as their dump stat and will likely choose Perception as a skill since it’s overused in 5E (DM David recommends using investigation instead of persuasion to detect traps). Disadvantage/-5 is not as big of a deal in that case, especially if standard DC’s are 15. And can you give me the reference that explicitly states that darkvision works with light sources (I don’t see it in the PHB-it doesn’t explicitly say it doesn’t either, so looks like a definite case of DM adjudication)?
@@robertnemeth5659 I don’t understand your question. Darkvision enables a creature to treat dim light as bright light and darkness as dim light. Light sources emit either dim light or bright light & dim light, both of which are mentioned in darkvision. What am I missing?
I'd be really interested in an exploration of how detect magic and similar spells have worked over different editions. I would like to see ways different editions have or haven't created secondary layers of information similar to the way infravision did. Great video like always. I really enjoy your work.
Low light vision still gives disadvantage on perception checks, so a party traveling in a pitch black dungeon using their darkvision will not spot traps even with high perception, and will be very easily ambushed. Also some monsters are stronger in total darkness.
In early versions, we used to use "Ultravision" as a sort of greyscale cat-like low-light vision (as per 3e became), and "Infravision" as low-fidelity greyscale IR-cameras. Both of which were disabled when in bright light and, for infravision, any nearby really hot object whether it actually glowed in the visible spectrum or not. It worked well for a few decades!
Three thoughts: 1) Modern weapons sighting systems have IR options which paint everything in shades of grey or black with hot things being white. 2) The Predator from the movie had the blue / purple vision and only saw hot things. 3) The LOTR movie had an interesting view when Frodo put on the ring.
I'm in agreement with you on darkvision. Low light vision is a much better alternative for elves and dwarves in my opinion. Dungeons ought to be dark, scary places to explore.
3:54 my understanding of this is that the openings would naturally be cooler/hotter due to fluctuations in temperatures between rooms, and the "radiate differently" part would be for example seeing magical 20 degree heated object vibrating in some strange mystic way but a 20 degree heated table would not have any sort of heat radiation coming off of it. Could also be meant in the way actual light sources work, where their temps are the same but their vibrations are different
This may be an unpopular opinion, but in 5e, the only races/species I allow to have Darkvision are Deep Gnomes, Mountain Dwarves, Dark Elves, and Dragonborn, who are serpents. The other three species live underground or under the Mountains, where they probably don't have access to natural light, such as Sunlight without bringing it to the underground world, possibly through the use of a series of mirrors.
The infravision spell in OD&D also had a minimum range. 40' to 60'. It's really only for peering down hallways or across large chambers. If something was closer than 40', you couldn't see it with infravision. I always assumed this limitation was specific to the spell version, and that monsters could see up close with their own version of infravision.
I am not sure about any other editions, but in 5e, darkvision isn't as good as it sounds. The rules spell out that things in dim light count as being lightly obscured. This means that all your perception checks are made at disadvantage and you take a -5 to your passive perception. Also based on the kinds of things that are described as causing light obscuration, I can't imagine that players would be able to do anything like reading or investigating in darkness, even with darkvision.
Video I would like to see and think you could do really well would be, Rule History: The history of hit point regeneration, evolution of resting and healing mechanics.
Very cool video! One of the things I’m hoping for the next iteration of DND (whatever they call it) will be darkvision limited to drow elves, half-drow (maybe), dwarves, and half orcs. Darkvision I think should be slightly different: dim light becomes bright light, and within a certain radius total darkness becomes dim light. Half elves (except half drow, maybe), elves, and tieflings should just get an additional rider to their Keen Senses - dim light is treated as bright light. That way, dim light works the same way for all the demihumans and has no radius (making it easy to remember and implement), and darkvision becomes a more useful and unique ability.
Great video, but you overstate the power of Darkvision in 5e. In 5e, Darkvision does let you treat Dim Light as Bright Light, but actual Darkness is as Dim Light. RAW Dim Light means Disadvantage on Perception checks (or a -5 to passive Perception). They aren't Blind, but can't make out details. A party of all elves (or whatever) going without a light in a dungeon are begging to stumble into an otherwise obvious trap, or to be ambushed by any monster capable of *attempting* Stealth. That doesn't mean a lot of DMs don't ignore this and let Darkvision cancel the rules for lighting, but they aren't playing by RAW.
The problem is that your interpretation inverts the rules. We don't check what kind of light you're standing in to assess the penalty. We check what kind of light the *monster* is standing in. If you are holding a torch *you* are illuminated. The *monster* is still in darkness. It does assist with searching and trap finding, but holding a light source makes you *easier* to ambush, not harder.
@@nicholascarter9158 That's true. The lighting level where the monster is is the one that determines the penalty for the PCs. So in an infinite plane of darkness, a ranged enemy in the Dark *would* have the advantage in getting an ambush. I don't disagree. However, many monsters do not have such ranged options. And many dungeons are too claustrophobic to make "shoot arrows from 80 feet away" viable. Using a torch is basically forfeiting their own Stealth, so there are certainly times a party that all has Darkvision would want to do without. But when they do so, they are accepting a risk. There are situations monsters might be expecting you other than seeing your torch light. There are monsters with Blindsight, Truesight, or Treamorsense that don't care about the light. There are monsters that lay in wait like ambush predators that may detect the party despite their Stealth when they walk right by them. And of course, detecting traps will be difficult.
Great video! My 5e game has two flavors of dungeon… one where light cantrip and dark vision works, and further down, the Underworld where those things do not work. They know when they dip into the Underworld the risks have gone up, but so have the rewards. I find it a nice way to let them have their stuff from the books, but let’s me have my “the dungeon hates you” as Ben has put it in past videos :)
Great Video. I'm having a lot of trouble imaging the flow of a game that focuses heavily on the dark and dangerous dungeons. Does anyone know of a good video where I could watch like a half hour of dungeon crawling in the old style?
Great video. Really gives more nuance to the argument against Darkvision! Maybe do the history of Armor Class next? It's simple but I think worthwhile to discuss.
I've always held that infravision was great for knowing something was there (a large bipedal creature) but that nobody with infravision would have the resolution to say that bipedal blob as "Joe from room 45". That meant that (in my dungeons) creatures with infravision would make use of light sources as well, though they might place guards in the dark (or better guards with missile weapons in a dark area peering into a lamplit area). Of course this would not be an issue for creatures using echolocation or smell to "see". Torches would still be needed but they would be used by both sides, depending on the underground areas in question.
Different substances can radiate differently at the same temperature based on how closely they approximate an ideal blackbody radiator, and that kind of nerdery is exactly what I would expect from gygax
Absolutely loving your Content, sir. My buddy and I were 'livechatting' game system theory, and he directed me to you. I've wondered about the Darkvision / Infra-vision topic and have also greatly considered reward systems. Your discussion about gold = XP is fabulous, and it's being implemented in our next session.
Great video as usual, on a really interesting subject ! I initially thought that OD&D dwarves could see in the dark but it was only a rule in Chainmail, that wasn't incorporated into D&D : "Because their natural habitat is deep under the ground, these stout folk operate equally well day or night"
2 points, 1, even monochrome vision can see texture. Consider a black and white photo of a mono-colored object or room. 2, air is not transparent for infrared light, rather it is merely translucent, like colored glass, which limits visibility, leading to a blurring of vision at a distance until nothing is visible at all, though granted, in the real world the distances are much greater.
If we go by the assumption that infravision works in the same way as it would in reality then there are really good reasons as to why you can distinguish objects of the same temperature from the surrounding air: the temperature of a black body radiator determines the wavelength of light an object emits, the intensity of that radiation is also determined by the objects density. Now a skeleton pressed up against a wall completely motionless, and i mean completely motion less, would be very hard to see. If it's not as close to the wall as possible the air absorbing the inrared light would again make it quite obvious, which is also the reason why infravision can only see for around 20 meters, which makes air really weird in dnd. The skeleton pressed against the wall only would work if you don't consider the info you get from ultravision, because skeletons are animated by magic, they must also be radiating high energy radiation, which would be absorbed by the matter comprising them and turned into heat, ie infrared light, clearly distinguishing them from their surroundings.
On a side note with sensitive enough thermal imaging equipment you can actually see things that are seemingly the same temperature because different surfaces will reflect more or less of your own body heat back at you. Also looking at a pain of glass through thermal imagers looks like a mirror You cannot see through. Unlike typical night vision which you can drive a car with.
A thought on infravision - aren't the PCs basically walking heat lamps, albeit rather weak ones? Breathing out hot air that causes all sorts of swirly currents which kind of probe ahead. This could explain some of the faint visibility.
I did this the easy way. There is no darkvision/infravision/ultravision for PCs. Some critters do, but I keep that limited enough where even new players can manage if they do nothing more than pay attention. Makes light spells worthwhile again, and of course Tolkienien swords which glow for a particular foe are even nicer now 8>D
Whenever you upload a video, you make my week! Thanks! I love your detailed breakdown of Darkvision. Keep up the amazing work! You are as inspirational as OSR books!
Fun history, but I think the last part about 5e not requiring much exploration is false. With darkvision, all perception checks are at disadvantage, so passive takes a negative 5 and active is two dice take the lowest. They are going to miss a ton of secret doors and get ambushed sometimes. This forces them to make a choice between that and using torches or light spells and thereby have the best chance of finding secret doors but also notify monsters more and therefore be surprised more. Decisions have consequences. In my 5e Barrowmaze campaign, the party almost always chooses to use light because they don’t want to miss things.
You're correct! I should have clarified that 5e dark vision gives you disadvantage in dark environments. It's still possible to navigate through dark dungeons without using torches, but it's probably a bad idea.
That is some enlightening, I mean revealing… I can’t find an un-punny way to say it, but that is some history of dark vision I didn’t know that I’m glad to know. I always struggled with torches and infra vision as a young DM and just hoped everyone would put continual light on lots of stuff and end the troubles.
Thank you for the walk down memory lane. I had forgotten about infravision. If you're taking requests, I'd enjoy a similar treatment for resting rules.
After I saw military grade night vision as a teen and researched how it actually worked it's how I said surface demihuman night vision functioned. Elves, half-elves and all halflings have night vision that looks like modern night vision and functions the same way. Their retinas gather and refract the light of night time conditions making the darkness brighter to their sight. Depending on how much ambient light there is makes for how bright their night vision is. Essentially they cannot see in total darkness. That ability is reserved for races that evolved in the Underdark including all dwarves. These races see in the infared scale. Their vision looks like how the Predator saw through his helmet. They can see and operate in total darkness. Both kinds of enhanced visions are very vulnerable to sudden bright light.
Nice video. It brought back memories of trying to describe dungeon surroundings in infravision when I was a kid and just getting into the game. I wouldn't mind seeing a similar one on initiative (and the effect of weapons on it).
Right now I have pretty much stepped away from D&D entirely for other game systems. That said, when I was last playing 5E, I started to notice some specifics about the rules that were helpful and allowed for some DM prerogative in things like Darkvision. Darkvision only allows a character to see in the dark as well if they were in dim light -- meaning disadvantage on sight-based checks, difficulty making out details, inability to read, etc. I think of it as the light of late dusk, except _also_ that you can only make out any details at all up to 60ft... which is actually worse because IRL you can see somewhat (make out the general shape of things) in the gloom of late dusk up to the horizon. Furthermore, "dim light" can be rather fuzzy -- it's easier to mistake things, to think there's someone standing right over there only to realize it's just a bush once you get up to it. Also worth noting that 5E rather quietly fixed a problem I had with the 3E/4E era of games: the critcal success/failure. So, it turns out that you can actually only have a critcal success or failure on attacks and death saves. Skill checks never should have crits or fumbles -- it's too easily mis-handled by a DM to make a character look stupid or incompetent, or to have the reality of the world fall apart.
I've taken a little bit if a middle ground between 5e and your version, when it comes to darkvision. Basically, I treat darkvision like many animals' ability to see in the dark. I keep the element that lets them see in dim light like bright light, but remove their ability to see in darkness like dim light. It makes no sense to me that they'd be able to see in absolute darkness anyway, and since dungeons are underground, and many monsters use other senses than vision, dungeons are dark and players need light. An even bigger concern, in my opinion, is that the light spell is a cantrip. It is trivial for players to always have a bright, reliable light source with absolutely no resource management. I've had to move this to a first level spell so that there's at least a LITTLE consideration for light sources. (I've actually removed all cantrips, but that's another story.)
I grew up with AD&D and the red box set. The vision rules always confused us as players, and pushed players towards the races that had infravision if we were doing heavy dungeon crawls.
The biggest problem with darkvision is DMs forgetting that players still have disadvantage on perception checks if they walk around in pitch darkness. Traps are not looking for you, and -5 to see a deadly pit automatically can hurt.
Great synopsis & analysis as always! Low resolution infravision can retain some of the challenges if slimes, undead and similarly "cold" creatures are not visible or very poorly distinguishable. I do prefer GMing with only human PCs as the primal fear of darkness is an indispensable tool for generating tension!
I honestly think Infravision / Dark vision was one of the big game design mistakes of Early DnD. As you said by making a form of darkvision very common you remove a lot of the scariness of the Dungeon, and actually would imply that ANY group that went exploring without creatures that could see in the dark would be very foolish indeed. Also for infravision in particular although it opens up a lot of possibilities it is very complex, and requires a lot more thought and work from the DM. The solution that I use is to give Elves Starvision/Moonvision, and Dwarves improved low light vision. This allows elves to see in the Dark very well outside, in Dungeons they are as blind as everyone else, and Dwarves can see well in low light but still require SOME light to see. Gnomes, Halflings, Dragonborn, etc all lose there darkvision, with only Half-Orcs and Tieflings getting the Dwarves Improved low light vision. Of course, the big solution is to run OSR only allowing Human Characters....
To push back against relying on DV with no torches - remember that dim light gives Disadvantage. I also take a cue from the Gloomstalker and make certain things that would be obvious to regular sight invisible to DV. Also things that play with color *(the writing on the wall is a different color than the stone, but doesn't add any real depth to it)
My issue with the first argument is the fact that monsters will also have disadvantage in the dark. This is assuming the dungeon isn't lit up in the first place by the monsters living there, since y'know they're living there, and would probably like to see properly.
@@ayoutubewatcher2849 True of intelligent monsters without blindsighr or greater, but old abandoned ruins full of slimes, molds, giant spiders and the occasional grick... not every dungeon obviously but a good change of pace once in a while
@@MstrCorrin That's fair, although personally most of the really fun enemies are intelligent so it is a shame. One thing i've thought about doing is just giving intelligent monsters superior darkvision without the sunlight sensitivity depending on if the creature often hunts during the day. Alternatively, giving non-playable monsters a version of devilsight like warlocks get could be a decent option.
Please remember, in 5e you still want some light even if you have darkvision. Darkvision let's you see as if it is dimly lit, meaning you have disadvantage on perception. Edit: Not ranged attack rolls as well, I was incorrect.
My version of darkvision, is toned down: it detects warmth, so you would not be able to read, and you would not see: undead, constructs (unless they have engines etc) and cold blooded creatures. This makes it useful but not something you feel comfortable relying on. You still don't like dangling your foot out of the bed, there may be monsters.
You really can see everything around you with infrared light. Air, wood, stone, cloth, they all radiate and reflect differently. Glass, for example, is opaque in infrared.
Different materials looking different to infravision does make sense from a physics perspective. Different materials at the same temperature do in fact put out different amounts of infrared light, through the same mechanism as materials have colors in the visible spectrum. Color is a result of the fact that different materials absorb and emit different amounts of light at different wavelengths. Plants look green because they tend to reflect green light and absorb others. But also, if a material reflects X% of incoming light at a given wavelength, it'll also emit X% less light at that wavelength. So the light emitted by thermal radiation will end up looking a bit like a photographic negative, but with the brightness scaled by the heat of the object.
I came here to say this. The emissivity of the surface of a material is its effectiveness in emitting thermal (including infrared) energy. Different objects at the same temperature would appear differently.
objects that reflect infrared radiation might have noticable edges due to ambient occlusion, but real life infravision isn't nearly as high res as a thermal camera. Snakes just use it as a supporting sense like smell or hearing, not as their main source of vision.
I'll tell you what, as a GM I hate special vision rules for an entirely different reason than that it makes the dungeon less scary: if one party member has some sort of "see in the dark" power, now I have to think about the difference between what that PC can see, and what everyone else can see, and I've got too many other plates to keep spinning to spend mental resources on
5e darkvision makes darkness just ... slightly less dark. Basically makes ranged attacks really difficult. The edition has codified light rules (that noone uses because they assume darkvision cancels it)
Just going to say it, I don’t like Darkvision / Infravision / Night Vision etc. in my TTRPGs. It should be rare or spell based. But that’s just me. Great video and overview ! Always learn things ! 🍻
There is a way skeletons and similar room temperature creatures and objects could be believably be seen with infravision -- through the reflection of ambient infrared light bouncing around the room, as can be seen with 21st century infrared goggles. Such goggles did not exist in the 70s or 80s, so the closest thing game designers of that era would be familiar with were low resolution infrared cameras that typically used a red-to-blue color scale to represent temperature. Such cameras were well know through science documentaries and science shows for children, and almost certainly where the basic D&D description came from. As having one or two characters with short-range, low-resolution infravision only helps in niche situations it did not have the impact that would come from practically everyone having "darkvision."
About 5e being the most old school influenced edition in decades... I had that feeling at the beginning of the edition, but with supplements like XGE and Tasha's it seems like they are going back to 4e approach, then I just stopped playing dnd.
Yes, I feel like the critical role fans crowd came up with a new style of roleplay and all of sudden old school roleplay was branded "that's not real roleplay". And then most companies are focusing on that audience.
i remove darkvision across the board unless the character who has it is of a species that is native to either the underdark, the shadowfell, or the shroud and the races from those places balance it out by having light sensitivity
Can you talk about mage familiars being small animals and acting like a minimap in the dungeon? I have a mage with a small snake familiar. I gave some limitations, he needs to succeed in stealth and perception to enter a room with monsters without being eaten. And if he fails in steslth and gets a good perception he can risk entering the new chamber
Check out this article on ways to use infravision: www.pvv.ntnu.no/~leirbakk/rpg/adnd/society/adnd_society_infravision.html
Patreon: bit.ly/QBPatreon
Old-School DnD newsletter: bit.ly/TheGlatisant
i liked infra vision, i just didnt like that so many creatures had it
@@brianc9374 not many creatures having it was good, now almost everyone has dark vision except humans in 5e, although it is easy to get.
@@VhaidraSaga alot of creatures had it. Personally I would be fine if none of the goblinoids, orcs or demi humans had them. I agree dark vision, infra vision has become overplayed.
Great video, Ben! I really agree with the notion that for a dungeon to be properly scary, it needs to be dark. I confirmed this with my players last week, when they returned to the dungeon where I ran their first 0 lvl funnel, only for them to remember that, in order to carry all the loot and weapons they found last time, they had dumped all but three of their torches in the last room of the dungeon. They genuinely felt unnerved as I described their last torches flickering and dimming in the hand of their torchbearer. Before they returned to town, they made a shopping list including MANY overlooked essential items like a ten foot pole, lockpicks, rope and of course, torches. It only took them two sessions deprived of the essentials provided to them by character creation in 5e to properly appreciate them.
( Maybe dark in a metaphorical sense, as in, the players method of information gathering is insufficient or unreliable to a certain degree in the situation, either falling behind some of the monster's own perception or interrupted by obstacles\the nature or positioning of the monster. Actual darkness is very useful and relatable, as light gives great detection for sensory organs compared to their upkeep cost, but is expensive to generate, making humans who rely on it greatly extremely vulnerable in its absence. If the diviner gets overconfident, health lost to unstable architecture and boss monsters being alerted by scrying sensors can help shift the mood. )
Good story. The primal fear of unseen things suddenly wrecking you and trying to make basic resources last just a little longer can be a very entertaining narrative. Level 0->2 DnD (numbers may depend on edition and DM) is almost a different game.
Hudson, "Look, I'm telling ya, there's somethin' movin' and it ain't us! They're all around us, man."
Dietrich "Maybe they don't show up on infrared at all... "
The thing I don't really like about infravision is that a lot of people seem to think it _only_ works in the dark instead of being an expansion of one's visual spectrum that also provides information during the day - which has a _lot_ of possibilities.
I was always a little amused by 2E explaining the "basic infravision" rules then took a bit of segue under "optional infravision" to explain why Gygax was bad at physics. They had some valid points, but it was amusing none the less.
My two main problems with 5E Darkvision are:
1) How ubiquitous it is among playable races. To my knowledge only humans, halflings and (weirdly) dragonborn lack darkvision. Also whilst many monsters have it, many animals (even nocturnal predators) don't. I will never not be irrationally angry that an actual cat in 5E doesn't have darkvision or any bonuses to see in the dark whilst catpeople Tabaxi do.
2) That it fails a "simple reading check".
A player or DM who isn't really very rules focused will read the entry for Darkvision under a race entry at character gen at the start of the PHB "You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. You can't discern color in darkness, only shades of gray." and understandably miss the nuances of the penalties of Dim Light, without specifically going to look them.
Which is worse because even the "Vision and Light" section on p183 of the PHB then explains that "In a lightly obscured area, such as dim light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage, creatures have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight." - but it's only on the hiding sidebar on p177 in the description of Dexterity ability checks that introduces the Passive Perception score (a fixed score of 10+ Wisdom(Perception) modifier) and that you have a -5 penalty to it if you have disadvantage.
So 5E darkvision isn't that great and there are some good reasons to still use light sources, but only if you take a bit of time to digest the spread out rules; and at a glance many 5E groups will effectively run it as you can see in the dark for 60'.
Like many others I just go with "Darkvision lets you see better in dim light for the radius but you still need some source of light to see"
Alongside this I'm very slowly trying to define an relatively system agnostic compilation of different ways for monsters to hunt in the dark, and what clues these give away to PCs and what they can do to counter this. Obviously beyond sight there is smell, taste, touch and hearing.
But then we can branch out into more fantasy stuff.
Tremorsense - sensing movement through solid surfaces like the ground.
Echolocation - using emitted vocal sounds to locate.
Electrosense - sensing electrical discharge like muscle movement (sharks and platypus)
Lasereyes! - beams of light shone by magical creatures that illuminate areas so they can see, but likewise means the players can see what is being illuminated)
Truesight/Soulvision - literally detecting thoughts and emotions.
Likely going for the pseudo-physics approach that Gygax did.
I have always been troubled that darkvision was based on infrared. Heat sensing really doesn't really fit elves and dwarves. That is more snakemen's thing.
I think ultravision would fit elves best (especially if magic items shine in ultraviolet, and because many animals also see in ultraviolet), and echolocation would be neat on dwarves (and echolocation is skill that actually can be learned, many blind people can hear echoes of their clicking tongues).
And in Pathfinder I almost always pick races that has Scent ability. Ability to recognize danger, smell through illusion and following trails is really fun. Just ask Sergeant Angua.
And I wish someone would do to 5e rules what Necrotic Gnome did to B/X rules with OSE: putting them in logical order and making them easy to use.
@@Dragoran5836 Or Hugi from 3 Hearts and 3 Lions! He could also recognize the faint smells of various monsters.
@@Dragoran5836 For close to 40 years I've wondered why AD&D didn't give elves ultravision instead of infra. I assume the trope they were originally going for with elves was Legolas having incredible vision, especially at night. Ultra just fits that so much better. Legolas didn't run off ahead in Moria to scout - he stayed in range of Gandalf's staff too.
I appreciate this extensive assessment. I’ve been playing since 1e in the early 80s and the various forms of vision have always been hazy on application. It hasn’t had a huge effect on play in my experience though.
That said, the beauty of DnD is that the DM and players get to create the world they want to play in and explore. So your concept for new forms of vision are weird and awesome. They will present their own challenges to game play but the novelty sounds superbly interesting. Side note - in the LOTR animated movies by Bakshi Smaug has “laser-vision”. This was a representative of the dragons exceptional vision but comes off as what you have described.
There's 44 races that don't have darkvision out of the ~126 unique races (not reprints like MMM or DMG NPC races).
The funny thing to me about 5E and everyone having Darkvision is that Light is a cantrip available to Clerics, Bards, Sorcerers, Wizards, and Artificers, so someone in your party can probably cast light every six seconds anyway.
Yeah, cantrips ended up eliminating lots of aspects of old-school games
@@QuestingBeast I mean, torches are cheap. And they're included in starting gear. And they hardly weigh anything, and encumbrance is extremely generous. And there's no rules for putting out or ruining torches.
It seems as though the "limited and dwindling sources of light" concept has been systematically dismantled.
I adore your non-review videos Ben. Your reviews are exceptional, but you have a particularly insightful eye for game design and TTRPG history. Your deep-dives contain concise, well reasoned, and well researched advice/thoughts that make them higher quality than most D&D video content on UA-cam. I really appreciate your editing and writing efforts
I think an important detail about 5e’s Darkvision is that it gives Disadvantage on some skill checks, so even without removing it entirely, it makes it much more difficult to do things in the dark without a light source. Enemies have an easier time skulking about, and you can fuck with the party by having them see moving shadows that may or may not be creeping creatures to keep them paranoid and incentivize the use of torches.
The only thing that directly messes with this is the Warlock’s witch sight, or whatever it’s called, which bumps your Darkvision up to 120 feet away and I think eliminates penalties, but that’s something you have to blow an entire Invocation on.
Laughs in Human Paladin. I can't see in the dark, but I fear nothing!
Generally, I think the shift from Infravision to Darkvision was a good move. But I must admit the idea of playing with the heat-centric vision has a certain appeal, and opens itself up to possibilities.
Hand-waving away why skeletons can be seen is, I think, a missed opportunity. Instead, have creatures like undead, or cold-blooded creatures like Lizardfolk or Troglodytes, be invisible or near-invisible to Infravision. Thereby making these kinds of monsters more dangerous, and giving even those races with Infravision a reason to bust out a torch.
Moreover, you could further play with even those assumptions. A vampire might normally be too cold to see, but if it's recently fed on warm blood, it would cause them to appear in Infravision. Same with cold-blooded monsters that feed on warm meat. Giving PCs a tool with which to solve problems, like by leaving a cooked sausage (or roasted body of another dungeon denizen) in a hallway where monsters may patrol. Or allowing themselves to be fed upon by a vampire attacking them, so it's easier to see.
I love this idea, and I totally want to use it... as soon as I can figure out a way to give my 5e players infravision XD
(I'll probably give them a magic item of some sort).
@@kyzer42 Be bold, house rule it - there is no dark vision, there is only infravision.
@@kgoblin5084 Yeah, that's probably the most straightforward option. In fact, I might give some races ultravision instead to mix things up. Tabaxi, for instance, since cats can see some ultraviolet iirc.
In the real world, most “cold-blooded” creatures are actually warmer than their surroundings. They aren’t literally cold, they just can’t control their internal body temperature easily or automatically.
If you want to follow that, then Sahuagin should be visible to infravision , but kinda dim or fuzzy-it would probably be a bit like picking out a well-camouflaged real animal.
I don’t know if it was just us applying science or actually in the rules somewhere, but I definitely remember playing that undead blended right into the background with infravision.
@@natbarmore I mean yes, scientifically this is true. But we're running off magical BS DnD rules. Where it doesn't matter what's literally true. Only what's symbolically true.
I can just see you doing the famous Richard B. Riddick line, "You are not afraid of the dark are you?", before you start a campaign! Thank you for teaching me something I did not know that I needed to know.
Thanks for the investigation! I would love to hear about "save-or-die" and "health" in general since the way how PCs gain HP (from rest and potions) and die differs in old and modern d&d editions.
I would love this!
The fact 5e expects me to actually cast cure spells instead of having a potion addiction is one of the things i loathe most about it.
4es healing surges and 3es wands of CLW are also acceptable, albeit not as iconic as literally dozens of pots.
I continue to believe that 4e's limited increase in sales and marketshare (more people played 4e than 3e, but they were almost all children) had less to do with any design decision inside the game, so much as a decision to stop support on a library of almost $3000 dollars worth of books the year the Great Recession started in the United States. Older players, at a time where money was limited, were incensed that a product line they felt they had been promised was evergreen was being phased out.
I was working at a summer camp the year 4e released as the indoor activities coordinator, and the break between 4e and 3e really seems to me at the time to have come down to people with a pre-existing investment in a library of books and limited income versus people with available cash who were just starting out. I personally played 3.5 for almost the entire time 4e was out, because the only way I could afford to play D&D at all was with borrowed, second hand, and pirated books and theatre of the mind: I couldn't have afforded a single mini for my own character, let alone the boards and the figurines for all the monsters.
What happened with 4e as a product was A: someone at wizards promised hasbro (if I remember the number correctly) a *300%* increase in revenue, B: the VTT product that was supposed to automate 4e (and based on the Matt Coleville Dusk lets play, works quite well now) was delayed interminably by the death of the company's only subject matter expert, and C: high school students in 2009 didn't have the kind of money to buy a $40 book every four months, when their parents were planning to lose their jobs. I could buy 3.5 supplements at Half Price books for like, $5 a piece at the same time.
^^ This, I would love for someone to explore 4e through this perspective.
Important note on how Darkvision works in 5e: it allows you to see in darkness as if it were dim light, and in dim light as if it were bright light. Dim light causes characters to have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight, causing them to take a -5 to passive perception, and making them easier to get surprised by monsters. It is therefore still beneficial to have a torch even if you've got Darkvision, the dim light it normally creates becomes bright light for you. This is something I think a lot of people miss because most Dungeon Masters either don't enforce the perception rule, or don't take advantage of the fact nobody thought to bring a torch with them.
Great video Ben, I love rules history. Infravision always felt very bitty and disjointed throughout the rules but definitely worth persevering with as it adds such a cool dynamic to the game.
I'm glad you mentioned that light and heat disrupt infravision. Unless your party all has infravision you'll need a light source, and that keeps the dungeon dark and mysterious.
A 5e party of darkvision-havers going without a light source in a dungeon is asking to be ambushed. Dim light imposes disadvantage on Perception checks and a -5 penalty to Passive Perception. Even with a dedicated scout, the party will be bumbling into lurking creatures and hidden traps that would have been more easily visible in torchlight. Also, a creature can hide in the open with dim light without needing anything to hide behind, meaning something standing in the middle of a bare hallway could still get the drop on you. Being in the dark with Darkvision still kinda sucks in 5e.
Darkvision makes torches really good though, as 20’ of bright light and 20’ of dim light turns into 40’ of bright light and 20’ of dim. That’s twice the bright light, what a bargain!
Good point! They might not need torches, but it certainly helps. I wonder how many DMs really track that sort of thing, though.
@@antieverything1 " old-school apologists" heh, says a lot.
Tracking torches was not about the fun of it, no one came to the table going "OH YEAH! counting torches! my day is complete!" No, resource management is about those times when it puts extra pressure on the players/PCs; do you try and keep going for more treasure and risk the loss of light? did you lose your light when you fell in that underground river? etc.
@@antieverything1 well than, you sir have pulled my chain well and I bow to you
Most 5E players will not choose WIS as their dump stat and will likely choose Perception as a skill since it’s overused in 5E (DM David recommends using investigation instead of persuasion to detect traps). Disadvantage/-5 is not as big of a deal in that case, especially if standard DC’s are 15. And can you give me the reference that explicitly states that darkvision works with light sources (I don’t see it in the PHB-it doesn’t explicitly say it doesn’t either, so looks like a definite case of DM adjudication)?
@@robertnemeth5659 I don’t understand your question. Darkvision enables a creature to treat dim light as bright light and darkness as dim light. Light sources emit either dim light or bright light & dim light, both of which are mentioned in darkvision. What am I missing?
I'd be really interested in an exploration of how detect magic and similar spells have worked over different editions. I would like to see ways different editions have or haven't created secondary layers of information similar to the way infravision did.
Great video like always. I really enjoy your work.
Low light vision still gives disadvantage on perception checks, so a party traveling in a pitch black dungeon using their darkvision will not spot traps even with high perception, and will be very easily ambushed. Also some monsters are stronger in total darkness.
This was some fun history to listen to. Great video as usual Ben!
This is a Great Informational D&D Video, simply exceptional.
In early versions, we used to use "Ultravision" as a sort of greyscale cat-like low-light vision (as per 3e became), and "Infravision" as low-fidelity greyscale IR-cameras. Both of which were disabled when in bright light and, for infravision, any nearby really hot object whether it actually glowed in the visible spectrum or not. It worked well for a few decades!
Great to hear your analysis of this, good stuff!
Your incisive analysis of the various editions’ design philosophies is just as valuable as your discussion of vision. Great work as usual!
Three thoughts: 1) Modern weapons sighting systems have IR options which paint everything in shades of grey or black with hot things being white. 2) The Predator from the movie had the blue / purple vision and only saw hot things. 3) The LOTR movie had an interesting view when Frodo put on the ring.
I'm in agreement with you on darkvision. Low light vision is a much better alternative for elves and dwarves in my opinion. Dungeons ought to be dark, scary places to explore.
Great work Ben. I really appreciate your effort and discussions. Look forward to all your videos!
3:54 my understanding of this is that the openings would naturally be cooler/hotter due to fluctuations in temperatures between rooms, and the "radiate differently" part would be for example seeing magical 20 degree heated object vibrating in some strange mystic way but a 20 degree heated table would not have any sort of heat radiation coming off of it. Could also be meant in the way actual light sources work, where their temps are the same but their vibrations are different
This may be an unpopular opinion, but in 5e, the only races/species I allow to have Darkvision are Deep Gnomes, Mountain Dwarves, Dark Elves, and Dragonborn, who are serpents. The other three species live underground or under the Mountains, where they probably don't have access to natural light, such as Sunlight without bringing it to the underground world, possibly through the use of a series of mirrors.
Do you give them the light sensitivity too?
@@Silkspar Mainly the Dark Elves.
The infravision spell in OD&D also had a minimum range. 40' to 60'. It's really only for peering down hallways or across large chambers. If something was closer than 40', you couldn't see it with infravision. I always assumed this limitation was specific to the spell version, and that monsters could see up close with their own version of infravision.
excellent video thanks
I am not sure about any other editions, but in 5e, darkvision isn't as good as it sounds. The rules spell out that things in dim light count as being lightly obscured. This means that all your perception checks are made at disadvantage and you take a -5 to your passive perception. Also based on the kinds of things that are described as causing light obscuration, I can't imagine that players would be able to do anything like reading or investigating in darkness, even with darkvision.
Great video. As a follow-on, you could look at the evolution of rules for torches and lanterns.
Infra vision got my ranger/investigator gears turning but Ultra vision activated my whole brain and I definitely want to bring that back in some way.
Video I would like to see and think you could do really well would be, Rule History: The history of hit point regeneration, evolution of resting and healing mechanics.
Love these old-school theory studies. Definitely my favorite Questing Beast videos.
Hands down the best breakdown of this subject and its impact on the game that I have seen. Thank you.
How about the history of saving throws?
Very cool video! One of the things I’m hoping for the next iteration of DND (whatever they call it) will be darkvision limited to drow elves, half-drow (maybe), dwarves, and half orcs. Darkvision I think should be slightly different: dim light becomes bright light, and within a certain radius total darkness becomes dim light.
Half elves (except half drow, maybe), elves, and tieflings should just get an additional rider to their Keen Senses - dim light is treated as bright light.
That way, dim light works the same way for all the demihumans and has no radius (making it easy to remember and implement), and darkvision becomes a more useful and unique ability.
Great video, but you overstate the power of Darkvision in 5e.
In 5e, Darkvision does let you treat Dim Light as Bright Light, but actual Darkness is as Dim Light.
RAW Dim Light means Disadvantage on Perception checks (or a -5 to passive Perception). They aren't Blind, but can't make out details.
A party of all elves (or whatever) going without a light in a dungeon are begging to stumble into an otherwise obvious trap, or to be ambushed by any monster capable of *attempting* Stealth.
That doesn't mean a lot of DMs don't ignore this and let Darkvision cancel the rules for lighting, but they aren't playing by RAW.
The problem is that your interpretation inverts the rules. We don't check what kind of light you're standing in to assess the penalty. We check what kind of light the *monster* is standing in. If you are holding a torch *you* are illuminated. The *monster* is still in darkness. It does assist with searching and trap finding, but holding a light source makes you *easier* to ambush, not harder.
@@nicholascarter9158 That's true. The lighting level where the monster is is the one that determines the penalty for the PCs.
So in an infinite plane of darkness, a ranged enemy in the Dark *would* have the advantage in getting an ambush.
I don't disagree.
However, many monsters do not have such ranged options. And many dungeons are too claustrophobic to make "shoot arrows from 80 feet away" viable.
Using a torch is basically forfeiting their own Stealth, so there are certainly times a party that all has Darkvision would want to do without. But when they do so, they are accepting a risk. There are situations monsters might be expecting you other than seeing your torch light. There are monsters with Blindsight, Truesight, or Treamorsense that don't care about the light. There are monsters that lay in wait like ambush predators that may detect the party despite their Stealth when they walk right by them.
And of course, detecting traps will be difficult.
Great video!
My 5e game has two flavors of dungeon… one where light cantrip and dark vision works, and further down, the Underworld where those things do not work. They know when they dip into the Underworld the risks have gone up, but so have the rewards. I find it a nice way to let them have their stuff from the books, but let’s me have my “the dungeon hates you” as Ben has put it in past videos :)
Love this take! I’m going use it!
Great Video.
I'm having a lot of trouble imaging the flow of a game that focuses heavily on the dark and dangerous dungeons. Does anyone know of a good video where I could watch like a half hour of dungeon crawling in the old style?
Great video. Really gives more nuance to the argument against Darkvision!
Maybe do the history of Armor Class next? It's simple but I think worthwhile to discuss.
I've always held that infravision was great for knowing something was there (a large bipedal creature) but that nobody with infravision would have the resolution to say that bipedal blob as "Joe from room 45". That meant that (in my dungeons) creatures with infravision would make use of light sources as well, though they might place guards in the dark (or better guards with missile weapons in a dark area peering into a lamplit area). Of course this would not be an issue for creatures using echolocation or smell to "see". Torches would still be needed but they would be used by both sides, depending on the underground areas in question.
Different substances can radiate differently at the same temperature based on how closely they approximate an ideal blackbody radiator, and that kind of nerdery is exactly what I would expect from gygax
Absolutely loving your Content, sir. My buddy and I were 'livechatting' game system theory, and he directed me to you. I've wondered about the Darkvision / Infra-vision topic and have also greatly considered reward systems. Your discussion about gold = XP is fabulous, and it's being implemented in our next session.
Great video as usual, on a really interesting subject !
I initially thought that OD&D dwarves could see in the dark but it was only a rule in Chainmail, that wasn't incorporated into D&D : "Because their natural habitat is deep under the ground, these stout folk operate equally well day or night"
2 points,
1, even monochrome vision can see texture. Consider a black and white photo of a mono-colored object or room.
2, air is not transparent for infrared light, rather it is merely translucent, like colored glass, which limits visibility, leading to a blurring of vision at a distance until nothing is visible at all, though granted, in the real world the distances are much greater.
If we go by the assumption that infravision works in the same way as it would in reality then there are really good reasons as to why you can distinguish objects of the same temperature from the surrounding air: the temperature of a black body radiator determines the wavelength of light an object emits, the intensity of that radiation is also determined by the objects density. Now a skeleton pressed up against a wall completely motionless, and i mean completely motion less, would be very hard to see. If it's not as close to the wall as possible the air absorbing the inrared light would again make it quite obvious, which is also the reason why infravision can only see for around 20 meters, which makes air really weird in dnd. The skeleton pressed against the wall only would work if you don't consider the info you get from ultravision, because skeletons are animated by magic, they must also be radiating high energy radiation, which would be absorbed by the matter comprising them and turned into heat, ie infrared light, clearly distinguishing them from their surroundings.
Do flanking / attacks of opportunity.
On a side note with sensitive enough thermal imaging equipment you can actually see things that are seemingly the same temperature because different surfaces will reflect more or less of your own body heat back at you. Also looking at a pain of glass through thermal imagers looks like a mirror You cannot see through. Unlike typical night vision which you can drive a car with.
I am very much enjoying these history videos on game mechanics, they're super insightful!
Fantastic video Ben, I really like this idea for a series, tracking how rules evolve over editions.
A thought on infravision - aren't the PCs basically walking heat lamps, albeit rather weak ones? Breathing out hot air that causes all sorts of swirly currents which kind of probe ahead. This could explain some of the faint visibility.
Very good video. Would love to see this become a series: Initiative, Backstab, Thief skills, etc. Enlightening.
Really interesting video. Your video on dungeon crawling procedures made a huge difference to my games.
I did this the easy way. There is no darkvision/infravision/ultravision for PCs. Some critters do, but I keep that limited enough where even new players can manage if they do nothing more than pay attention. Makes light spells worthwhile again, and of course Tolkienien swords which glow for a particular foe are even nicer now 8>D
A video about the evolution of xp would be cool.
Whenever you upload a video, you make my week! Thanks! I love your detailed breakdown of Darkvision. Keep up the amazing work! You are as inspirational as OSR books!
Can you share your rules tweaks and dungeon crawling procedures for 5e?
Fun history, but I think the last part about 5e not requiring much exploration is false. With darkvision, all perception checks are at disadvantage, so passive takes a negative 5 and active is two dice take the lowest. They are going to miss a ton of secret doors and get ambushed sometimes. This forces them to make a choice between that and using torches or light spells and thereby have the best chance of finding secret doors but also notify monsters more and therefore be surprised more. Decisions have consequences. In my 5e Barrowmaze campaign, the party almost always chooses to use light because they don’t want to miss things.
You're correct! I should have clarified that 5e dark vision gives you disadvantage in dark environments. It's still possible to navigate through dark dungeons without using torches, but it's probably a bad idea.
That is some enlightening, I mean revealing… I can’t find an un-punny way to say it, but that is some history of dark vision I didn’t know that I’m glad to know. I always struggled with torches and infra vision as a young DM and just hoped everyone would put continual light on lots of stuff and end the troubles.
Thank you for the walk down memory lane. I had forgotten about infravision. If you're taking requests, I'd enjoy a similar treatment for resting rules.
Excellent content! Very interesting and educational! Thank you!
After I saw military grade night vision as a teen and researched how it actually worked it's how I said surface demihuman night vision functioned. Elves, half-elves and all halflings have night vision that looks like modern night vision and functions the same way. Their retinas gather and refract the light of night time conditions making the darkness brighter to their sight. Depending on how much ambient light there is makes for how bright their night vision is. Essentially they cannot see in total darkness. That ability is reserved for races that evolved in the Underdark including all dwarves. These races see in the infared scale. Their vision looks like how the Predator saw through his helmet. They can see and operate in total darkness. Both kinds of enhanced visions are very vulnerable to sudden bright light.
Nice video. It brought back memories of trying to describe dungeon surroundings in infravision when I was a kid and just getting into the game. I wouldn't mind seeing a similar one on initiative (and the effect of weapons on it).
You do great work.
Look forward to more D&D history.
Right now I have pretty much stepped away from D&D entirely for other game systems.
That said, when I was last playing 5E, I started to notice some specifics about the rules that were helpful and allowed for some DM prerogative in things like Darkvision. Darkvision only allows a character to see in the dark as well if they were in dim light -- meaning disadvantage on sight-based checks, difficulty making out details, inability to read, etc. I think of it as the light of late dusk, except _also_ that you can only make out any details at all up to 60ft... which is actually worse because IRL you can see somewhat (make out the general shape of things) in the gloom of late dusk up to the horizon. Furthermore, "dim light" can be rather fuzzy -- it's easier to mistake things, to think there's someone standing right over there only to realize it's just a bush once you get up to it.
Also worth noting that 5E rather quietly fixed a problem I had with the 3E/4E era of games: the critcal success/failure. So, it turns out that you can actually only have a critcal success or failure on attacks and death saves. Skill checks never should have crits or fumbles -- it's too easily mis-handled by a DM to make a character look stupid or incompetent, or to have the reality of the world fall apart.
I remember infravision well.
You can actually use it as an unnerving element if you're willing to put in the extra work.
Awesome video
The history of: Dragonlance, Greyhawk, Darksun, Planescapes, Ravenloft, and Spelljammer. Please!!
Best place for that is the Jorphdan channel
I've taken a little bit if a middle ground between 5e and your version, when it comes to darkvision. Basically, I treat darkvision like many animals' ability to see in the dark. I keep the element that lets them see in dim light like bright light, but remove their ability to see in darkness like dim light. It makes no sense to me that they'd be able to see in absolute darkness anyway, and since dungeons are underground, and many monsters use other senses than vision, dungeons are dark and players need light.
An even bigger concern, in my opinion, is that the light spell is a cantrip. It is trivial for players to always have a bright, reliable light source with absolutely no resource management. I've had to move this to a first level spell so that there's at least a LITTLE consideration for light sources. (I've actually removed all cantrips, but that's another story.)
I grew up with AD&D and the red box set. The vision rules always confused us as players, and pushed players towards the races that had infravision if we were doing heavy dungeon crawls.
The biggest problem with darkvision is DMs forgetting that players still have disadvantage on perception checks if they walk around in pitch darkness. Traps are not looking for you, and -5 to see a deadly pit automatically can hurt.
Great synopsis & analysis as always! Low resolution infravision can retain some of the challenges if slimes, undead and similarly "cold" creatures are not visible or very poorly distinguishable. I do prefer GMing with only human PCs as the primal fear of darkness is an indispensable tool for generating tension!
Love the vids.
I think an interesting follow up to this video would be the evolution of Perception, the statistic, and how we make checks to perceive.
I honestly think Infravision / Dark vision was one of the big game design mistakes of Early DnD.
As you said by making a form of darkvision very common you remove a lot of the scariness of the Dungeon, and actually would imply that ANY group that went exploring without creatures that could see in the dark would be very foolish indeed.
Also for infravision in particular although it opens up a lot of possibilities it is very complex, and requires a lot more thought and work from the DM.
The solution that I use is to give Elves Starvision/Moonvision, and Dwarves improved low light vision. This allows elves to see in the Dark very well outside, in Dungeons they are as blind as everyone else, and Dwarves can see well in low light but still require SOME light to see.
Gnomes, Halflings, Dragonborn, etc all lose there darkvision, with only Half-Orcs and Tieflings getting the Dwarves Improved low light vision.
Of course, the big solution is to run OSR only allowing Human Characters....
To push back against relying on DV with no torches - remember that dim light gives Disadvantage. I also take a cue from the Gloomstalker and make certain things that would be obvious to regular sight invisible to DV. Also things that play with color *(the writing on the wall is a different color than the stone, but doesn't add any real depth to it)
My issue with the first argument is the fact that monsters will also have disadvantage in the dark. This is assuming the dungeon isn't lit up in the first place by the monsters living there, since y'know they're living there, and would probably like to see properly.
@@ayoutubewatcher2849 True of intelligent monsters without blindsighr or greater, but old abandoned ruins full of slimes, molds, giant spiders and the occasional grick... not every dungeon obviously but a good change of pace once in a while
@@MstrCorrin That's fair, although personally most of the really fun enemies are intelligent so it is a shame. One thing i've thought about doing is just giving intelligent monsters superior darkvision without the sunlight sensitivity depending on if the creature often hunts during the day. Alternatively, giving non-playable monsters a version of devilsight like warlocks get could be a decent option.
Good video
I always thought dark vision was more popular each edition too
Great stuff, love hearing about how the game has evolved!
Please remember, in 5e you still want some light even if you have darkvision. Darkvision let's you see as if it is dimly lit, meaning you have disadvantage on perception.
Edit: Not ranged attack rolls as well, I was incorrect.
Not ranged attack rolls.
@@CJWproductions Shoot, you're totally right. My bad.
My version of darkvision, is toned down: it detects warmth, so you would not be able to read, and you would not see: undead, constructs (unless they have engines etc) and cold blooded creatures.
This makes it useful but not something you feel comfortable relying on.
You still don't like dangling your foot out of the bed, there may be monsters.
You really can see everything around you with infrared light. Air, wood, stone, cloth, they all radiate and reflect differently. Glass, for example, is opaque in infrared.
When “radiate” is mention i think it means the “waves” of heat coming off it
Very good video, Ben.
Thank you very much 😊
Great video as always. Definitely going to impede PC's darkvision in my next 5e dungeon. The darkness is a foe just as much as any monster I say!
Different materials looking different to infravision does make sense from a physics perspective. Different materials at the same temperature do in fact put out different amounts of infrared light, through the same mechanism as materials have colors in the visible spectrum. Color is a result of the fact that different materials absorb and emit different amounts of light at different wavelengths. Plants look green because they tend to reflect green light and absorb others. But also, if a material reflects X% of incoming light at a given wavelength, it'll also emit X% less light at that wavelength. So the light emitted by thermal radiation will end up looking a bit like a photographic negative, but with the brightness scaled by the heat of the object.
I came here to say this. The emissivity of the surface of a material is its effectiveness in emitting thermal (including infrared) energy. Different objects at the same temperature would appear differently.
objects that reflect infrared radiation might have noticable edges due to ambient occlusion, but real life infravision isn't nearly as high res as a thermal camera. Snakes just use it as a supporting sense like smell or hearing, not as their main source of vision.
I'll tell you what, as a GM I hate special vision rules for an entirely different reason than that it makes the dungeon less scary: if one party member has some sort of "see in the dark" power, now I have to think about the difference between what that PC can see, and what everyone else can see, and I've got too many other plates to keep spinning to spend mental resources on
Great stuff friend 👏 👍
rewatching this I still snort laugh at, "strong independent PCs who don't need torches."
5e darkvision makes darkness just ... slightly less dark. Basically makes ranged attacks really difficult. The edition has codified light rules (that noone uses because they assume darkvision cancels it)
Just going to say it, I don’t like Darkvision / Infravision / Night Vision etc. in my TTRPGs.
It should be rare or spell based. But that’s just me.
Great video and overview ! Always learn things ! 🍻
There is a way skeletons and similar room temperature creatures and objects could be believably be seen with infravision -- through the reflection of ambient infrared light bouncing around the room, as can be seen with 21st century infrared goggles. Such goggles did not exist in the 70s or 80s, so the closest thing game designers of that era would be familiar with were low resolution infrared cameras that typically used a red-to-blue color scale to represent temperature. Such cameras were well know through science documentaries and science shows for children, and almost certainly where the basic D&D description came from. As having one or two characters with short-range, low-resolution infravision only helps in niche situations it did not have the impact that would come from practically everyone having "darkvision."
About 5e being the most old school influenced edition in decades...
I had that feeling at the beginning of the edition, but with supplements like XGE and Tasha's it seems like they are going back to 4e approach, then I just stopped playing dnd.
Yeah, the success of Critical Role is really pushing them away from the Old School influences
Yes, I feel like the critical role fans crowd came up with a new style of roleplay and all of sudden old school roleplay was branded "that's not real roleplay".
And then most companies are focusing on that audience.
Here’s a question I’ve had for a long time: what good is the hide in shadows skill if all the monsters can see in the dark anyway?
Could you do a video of transitioning into realm play when players get fortresses?
You mentioned you have a video on old school dungeon crawling. Can you post a link to that?
i remove darkvision across the board unless the character who has it is of a species that is native to either the underdark, the shadowfell, or the shroud and the races from those places balance it out by having light sensitivity
Can you talk about mage familiars being small animals and acting like a minimap in the dungeon? I have a mage with a small snake familiar. I gave some limitations, he needs to succeed in stealth and perception to enter a room with monsters without being eaten. And if he fails in steslth and gets a good perception he can risk entering the new chamber