Would it be unbalanced to allow the Darkvision spell to see through magical darkness?

Darkvision is so prevalent among races that the spell Darkvision rarely sees use. Even with casters who do not have darkvision, it still seems unlikely to be taken, as a cantrip is able to provide light, and the situations where the caster without darkvision cannot use light sources are rare enough that it does not justify the spell slot or even having the spell prepared/on their spell list. To add more value to the spell, I’d propose the following changes (bolded below):

Darkness
2nd-level transmutation
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Touch
Components: V, S, M (either a pinch of dried carrot or an agate)
Duration: 1 hour
You touch a willing creature to grant it the ability to see in the dark. For the duration, that creature has darkvision out to a range of 60 feet. This darkvision is able to see through magical darkness.

There are 2 changes present:

  1. Duration: With the other proposed changes, if this spell remained an 8 hour spell it would become a must have, basically ensuring multiple allies (Through multiple castings) can see through any darkness for a full adventuring day. Keeping this down to 1 hour puts pressure on using it at the right time, and the spell will not remain active through a short rest.
  2. Magical Darkness: This is the big change, that I think gives the spell appeal. If you are expecting magical darkness you can be prepared, or if you are planning on using magical darkness you can ensure you and maybe some allies are still able to function within it.

Does this appear balanced as a second level spell? Would it be better suited at a higher level? I think second level is still viable, as the other methods of obtaining darkvision in magical darkness are available to the Warlock at 2nd level (Devil’s Sight), and the Sorcerer at 3rd level (though only through their own Darkness spell).

How do Shadowdancer’s Hide in Plain Sight, Hellcat Stealth, and enemies’ darkvision interact?

I recently had a game where there was some uncertainty, so I’m here to ask you how this interaction works.

I have a character, a Shadowdancer. This character has also got the Hellcat Stealth feat. The character sneaks in pure darkness, no light at all, on an enemy with Darkvision. There is no cover. Does the character stealth with Hide in Plain Sight, Hellcat Stealth, or the character cannot attempt to stealth? Or does the character stealth with Hide in Plain Sight but with a penalty similar to Hellcat Stealth?

Does the wording of Darkvision align with accepted rules?

For this question let’s consider Dwarf racial feature Darkvision although the same wording is used for a number of different races.

The Dwarven Darkvision racial feature reads:

Darkvision
Accustomed to life underground, you have superior vision in dark and dim conditions. 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.

I understand that conventionally this means within 60 ft of you you can see in the dark/dim light. Reading the specific wording of the feature, however, it doesn’t seem to put a limit on the range of seeing in darkness as opposed to dim light?

"within 60 ft of you" appears to only modify the area that you can see in dim light. Removing that section leaves "You can see in darkness as if it were dim light." which provides no limitation on range.

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.

Compare this to

Within a range of 60 ft you can see in dim light as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light

or else

You can see in dim light within 60 ft of you as if it were bright light, and in *darkness within that range as if it were dim light

Am I grammatically confused or does the RAW text disagree with the commonly accepted RAI interpretation?

When sharing the Eyes of Night darkvision, does a creature needs to always be 10 feet close to the cleric to be granted the benefits?

The Eyes of Night feature from the Twilight Domain Cleric, introduced in Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything pg. 34, grants darkvision to the cleric:

You can see through the deepest gloom. You have darkvision out to a range of 300 feet.

It also allows the cleric to share this darkvision with willing creatures:

As an action, you can magically share the darkvision of this feature with willing creatures you can see within 10 feet of you, up to a number of creatures equal to your Wisdom modifier (minimum of one creature). The shared darkvision lasts for 1 hour. […]

It’s clear that the creature needs to be within 10 feet of the cleric for him to use an action to share the darkvision. But once shared, does that creature needs to be within 10 feet of the cleric to be granted the benefits of the darkvision from Eyes of Night? Since the sharing has a duration 1 hour I’m wondering what if a creature that wandered far away from the cleric would still be granted this benefit.

What happen if a Twilight Domain Cleric that shared his darkvision becomes unconscious or die?

The Eyes of Night feature from the Twilight Domain Cleric, introduced in Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything pg. 34, grants darkvision to the cleric:

You can see through the deepest gloom. You have darkvision out to a range of 300 feet.

It also allows the cleric to share this darkvision with willing creatures:

As an action, you can magically share the darkvision of this feature with willing creatures you can see within 10 feet of you, up to a number of creatures equal to your Wisdom modifier (minimum of one creature). The shared darkvision lasts for 1 hour. […]

But the description of the feature does not state what would happen if the cleric becomes unconcious or die, only state that it last for 1 hour. I can think of some interpretations for those cenarios:

  1. The cleric already used his action to share his darkvision, so he does not need to do anything and the sharing will last for the duration, regardless of what happen to the cleric.
  2. Since it is your (the cleric) darkvision, if the creatures goes unconscious that creature still have the darkvision and the feature, so it’s still shared. But if it died, a corpse does not have such a feature, so the sharing it’s cutted off.
  3. An unconcious creature cannot use it’s features, so, even though the cleric shared when he was conscious, once he becomes unconscious the sharing is canceled. Naturally, the same goes in the case if he dies.

Personally I think the second scenario it’s the more appropriate, but I’m not absolutely sure.

Is there any official rule that could help to determine what would happen in this cases?

D&D 5th Edition: Truesight and Darkvision, Why Does A Monster Have Both?

While creating a homebrew monster based around eyes and vision, I looked up monsters that had both darkvison and truesight, surprisingly only two have both, the Avatar of Death and Canoloth, I’ll use the Canoloth as the example here.

When reading the descriptions of both vision types, darkvision allows a creature to see in dim light as if it were bright light and darkness as if it were dim light but it can’t discern color and only sees shades of grey, with truesight not only can you see in normal darkness but also magical darkness, as well as many other benefits, so what confuses me is why any creature would have both forms of vision (especially when it only has darkvision out to 60 feet but truesight out to 120 feet) when truesight already has the only benefit of darkvision along with all its other benefits?

Have I misinterpreted the mechanics of these different sight types, is their a hidden reason behind having both? Or is it just a slipup of the designers to give a creature like the Canoloth both forms of vision?

Does someone with darkvision fools Nature’s Mantle when the wearer is in a dim light area and thus stops it from granting its benefit?

Looking at the rules in PHB p.183, it states that

dim light creates a lightly obscured area.

But is the area still a dim light area if someone with darkvision has that area in its darkvision range?

I think that there is a difference between the actual area lighting and the observer’s point of view of that area (darkvision considering dim light as bright light) but it is not that clear for me. Thus the question in the title as the requirements to grant the "hide as bonus action" is that the wearer be in a lightly obscured area.

thanks for helping out.

Can a character with darkvision see into Hunger of Hadar?

Can a character with darkvision see into Hunger of Hadar? This assumes the character is not inside the spells area, and therefore not blinded.

This has come up a few times on this stackexchange, but never really answered.

The hunger of Hadar spell (PHB, p. 251) creates a black void of darkness, which cannot be penetrated by light. This means that no one can see in […]

is stated in this question, without any rules to back it up.

I’m not even going to go into the debate about whether darkvision can see through hunger of hadar

From this question

Therefore I think a seperate question is warranted.

Which is the correct rules text for Darkvision?

Reading the PHB sections on races, e.g. Dwarf p. 20, it says …

Darkvision. Accustomed to life underground, you have superior vision in dark and dim conditions. 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.

But at PHB p.184 it doesn’t mention dim lighting conditions, only what Darkvision does in full darkness. It says …

Darkvision: Many creatures in the worlds of D&D, especially those that dwell underground, have darkvision. Within a specified range, a creature with darkvision can see in darkness as if the darkness were dim light, so areas of darkness are only lightly obscured as far as that creature is concerned. However, the creature can’t discern color in darkness, only shades of gray.

So the various character races can see in darkness as if it were dim, and in dim light as if it were bright, whereas "creatures" can only see in darkness as if it were dim?

Is twilight domain cleric’s unlimited darkvision balanced?

There’s Unearthed Arcana Twilight Domain Cleric subclass presented at dndbeyond.com (08/2020). It has feature

Eyes of Night
1st-level Twilight Domain feature

Your eyes are blessed, allowing you to see through the deepest gloom. You have darkvision with no maximum range; […]

As an action, you can magically give the benefit of this feature to any number of creatures you can see within 10 feet of you. The shared benefit lasts for 10 minutes. You can extend this benefit a number of times equal to your Wisdom modifier (a minimum of once), and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.

Considering how the "normal" superior darkvision is only 120′, unlimited range seems very powerful, even abusable. For example long bow range is 150/600. This immediately opens up a bunch of very powerful tactics even by a single crafty player. And then extending it for up to 20 other PC’s and NPC’s, for up to 5 times, essentially creating an archer force with the benefit of Greater Invisibility. It’s situational, but the situation happens every night…

The question: Is this feature unbalanced, especially when considered in the context of a higher level character taking 1 level multiclassing dip, being able to give both a solo advantage with no limits, and unparalleled option to buff allies all the way to highest levels of play?

  • If it is unbalanced, would reducing range to 120′ be enough to make it balanced, yet not worthless, or should range be even less?
  • If this feature is balanced as is, how so? For example, are there already options to achieve similar levels of power with similar opportunity cost?

Background for the question: The subclass is given at a sort-of official resource (DnDBeyond). So even if it is presented as play test material, I feel it has more legitimacy than most Unearthed Arcana material, which is why I am asking for… support on the idea that it should be nerfed before allowing it in a table, or arguments that it’s actually not a problem. I’m not asking for alternative ideas on how to nerf it, other than what is written above about the range.

The campaign settings that concern me are fantasy settings like Forgotten Realms and Exandria. If for example Eberron has content which demonstrates how this feature is not exceptional, that’s still fine in an answer, as long as it is stated that it might not apply to all settings.