Topic: Attacking in Darkness with Darkvision

[jaranka]

Magical darkness descends over my opponent and I.  I have darkvision.  My opponent has -100 to hit me.  What bonus do I have to hit him?

[RandalThor]

Well, he would not be able to defend, so his DB would be seriously hindered. I would say you get the same bonuses as if you were attacking from behind. (+35 if I am not mistaken.)

For me, I would say the non-darkvision individual would have maybe half their normal DB, and if they were going to go all-out defense (like weaving their sword around them and turning to cover as much area as possible (not a gret defense, but something), they would be able to take about 25% of their total OB and put it towards defense. Of course, the combatant that does have darkvision still gets the +35, mentioned above. So, while not completely defenseless, the effectively blind person is at a serious disadvantage.

Other senses could help them. Like if they had exceptional hearing (much better - and/or extensively trained - than a normal humans), they may be able to get a better idea at where their opponent is. This would give them a better ability to defend. There are many ways how to handle that situation, from making them do an Awareness Senses: Hearing check and using the results to modify how well they defend, to just saying they have superior hearing so they are able to defend at 50% (2 points of OB for 1 point of DB).

[yammahoper]

+20 for surprise.  If you take the time to flank him, an additional +15.  Getting behind him would add an additional +20.

Attacks against invisible foes are at -100.  .  Parry only applies against foes you can see, so yes, utterdark is a TPK kinda spell if no one has darkvision but the enemy does.  In the example given, the PC should romp through the poor soul in the utterdark, unless he has some sort of SLA or enhanced senses.

[jaranka]

+20 for surprise.  If you take the time to flank him, an additional +15.  Getting behind him would add an additional +20.

This is what my GM did.

Attacks against invisible foes are at -100.

This is what I thought, so I looked it up.  Turns out it's only -50.  It makes sense it would be less than attacking while blinded.  At least you can see the environment when attacking someone invisible.  I imagine it would be very tough to keep your balance attacking while blind.

[RandalThor]

Personally, I wouldn't go with the +20 for surprise, but that is a personal judgment call. It is a very sucky situation to be sure. (For the poor soul without DV, that is.)

Heck, if it was a PC with DV, going against just some random thug, I would likely not even roll it out, just say the PC finishes the unfortunate individual/creature. Only if it was the PC on the receiving end, or it was a special NPC or creature would I bother rolling it out.

[yammahoper]

I should have been more clear: I consider someone in utterdark to be blind: no points of reference at all, it is pitch black with no light.

I do agree that I would probably not roll out the entire attack, just a "don't fumble" roll by the PC, then let the player describe how he incapacitates or kills the target...always provide a little rope for the players, lol.

[jaranka]

After some thought, I think I wouldn't give a bonus to the attack, but instead remove any parry and quickness bonuses from the defender.  AT still has to count for something.  I'd halve shield bonuses and Adrenal Defense.

If he had Blind Fighting he'd make one roll (as a Moving Maneuver on the Extremely Hard column) and use a numeric result as the percentage of his weapon OB he can spend on attacking and parrying that round.

If you wanted to be a bit more deadly, add +20 to any resulting critical.

[yammahoper]

If you want to be a bit more deadly, you have options.

Core rule inspired: 1/2 ambush ranks.

House rule inspired: full ambush ranks, or ranks in weapon, or ranks in weapon plus ambush ranks to modify crit.

One note, adrenal defense can only be used against a percieved attack.  Utterdark would negate adrenal defense.

[jdale]

I would require an Ambush roll in order to get the benefits of Ambush. Of course it would be at +40 for pitch black.

Is there a difference between Utterdark and a regular Darkness spell for these purposes?

[providence13]

We use the "-50 Detected but not seen" as well.

Spatial Location Awareness is a good skill to have.  You can get up to +10 to off-set the -100. Although Restricted, it is pretty cheap for most Professions. It does take at least 1rnd to get your bearings and the more time you can do this, +5/rnd up to +50 max on the Awareness Senses chart.
Keep your opponent talking, jump behind some cover for a few rounds, then attack.

On Utterdark and Darkness, they're both magical darkness.. Ah, Light Molding and Light Law have slightly different wording. One specifically states magical light gets an RR, the other doesn't say.

[yammahoper]

Darkeness spells produces normall darkness.  I assume darkness equall to a starless/moonless night.  You can see your hand in front of your face but foes are "invisible", melee is at -50 without nightvision/darkvision.

Utterdark spells eliminate ALL light.  Utterlight gets and rr verus utterdark and vice versa, so theycan cancel each other or one can cancel the other.  Utterlight is equivalent to sunlight (IMO it affects vampires and creatures effected by sunlight).  Utterdark can only be seen in with darkvision.  Attacks in utterdark are at -100 and those in it should be treated as blind.

Utterdark is a very powerful spell. 

[Ynglaur]

Casting area of effect Utterdark while you have Darkvision up is indeed devastating.  "Fish in a barrel", so to speak.

Basically you count as invisible, putting them at -100OB, which means the target gets a lot less OB to parry with.

I wouldn't give surprise (they know the attack is coming); flank and rear would depend on position. I think part of their bonus is not having to deal with the other guy waving a pointed or edged implement in your direction.

If you're on the receiving end and your OB is less than 100, might as well go full attack and not parry: it's not going to help you any with a -100 OB, and you might just roll open-ended.  If your OB is greater than 100, it may be worth going full parry for the extra +5DB until a friendly magic-user can dispel the effect (you did bring someone with Cancel Essence, right?).

[jaranka]

If I cast darkness on my sword, and sheathed it, would the darkness go away?

[RandalThor]

If I cast darkness on my sword, and sheathed it, would the darkness go away?

No, you need therapy for that.

Now, for the more serious answer. I would leave that up to the GM. As a GM, it would depend upon the type of game I was running; in a gritty, dark game I would probably say no, but in a moer heroic, actiony type of game I would probably say yes. (But remember, everything the PCs can do, so can the NPcs.)

[providence13]

If I cast darkness on my sword, and sheathed it, would the darkness go away?

Of course GM has final say. With that in mind, the spell does state "if cast on a mobile object or being, it will move with the object or being."

So now ask yourself if the magical spell radius really cares if it's in a sheath or not. If it were a Light spell, most people might say it's blocked by the sheath. If placed in a lantern with directional mirrors, could you have a directed beam; bullseye lantern? Does Darkness work the same? Up to GM, but I'd be willing to let it be off/on depending on sheathed or not.
Goose/Gander.

[yammahoper]

Say the spell is cast on a clay mug.  Now shatter the mug.  Is the spell ended, or can 10 people carry away a piece of the mug with the spell effect still active on each peice?

Break the sword: does the spell end or does each peiece have a fully active spell effect, portable?  Is the spell active but deminished?  For example, the spell has a 20'radius.  If broken in two, will each piece have an active spell at 10'radius?  Or do I have to whip out geometry and calculate the square foot area of the original radius and make sure the split radii do not exceed the original?

It's magic.  This arguement goes WAY back (any continual light users here want to put a stone with the spell on it in a scroll case and invent the flashlight?). 

If the spell is cast on an object, obscuring the object would obscure the light, however, if the spell is cast on the area in general, then no obscuring can occur, other than being behind a barrier.

Interesting effect wold be for magical light and darkness to affect the area regardless of barriers. 

[GrumpyOldFart]

(any continual light users here want to put a stone with the spell on it in a scroll case and invent the flashlight?)

A long standing magic item in my games is a "sticky light". It's a ball of tar or gum coated in clay. Break the clay coating, the light comes on. Throw it against a surface hard enough, it breaks the clay coating and sticks to the surface.

[markc]

(any continual light users here want to put a stone with the spell on it in a scroll case and invent the flashlight?)

A long standing magic item in my games is a "sticky light". It's a ball of tar or gum coated in clay. Break the clay coating, the light comes on. Throw it against a surface hard enough, it breaks the clay coating and sticks to the surface.

 Nice, I have to remember that one. Maybe even a potion of light that where applied it glows as if a light spell had been cast upon it. Or light cream, even.
MDC

[jdale]

If I cast darkness on my sword, and sheathed it, would the darkness go away?

Depends on your theory of how Darkness works. Does it work by pulling all the light towards it? If so, possibly intervening objects could block it. But I think usually Darkness is envisioned as a sphere, not something that fails to go around corners.

Of course these are the same considerations that apply to Light if you subscribe to Darksucker theory. https://www.msu.edu/user/dynicrai/physics/dark.htm

[VladD]

I think there could be many ways to induce a darkness:

I kind of envision the darkness spell to "exude" darkness, much like a light spell. If a light and darkness area meet: they cancel each other.

Another way of adjudicating a darkness spell is having a magical barrier at the perimeter that blocks all light.

An utter dark spell in my games  would be much like the light sucking effect.

Then there is the dark fog/ smoke like darkness. Blocking light by a dense cloud of particles.

Also there could be an illusion based darkness, making the eyes see nothing but darkness.

A mentalism based darkness that shuts down the optic part of the brain.

A channeling based darkness, where the gods deny a certain area their feeding and warming light...