Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
It is a flaw in 5E that the vast majority of races have darkvision.
so even elves or half elves don't actually have darkvision (someone correct me if i'm wrong). hence i asked the question if the ring of darkvision has any use?
1) None: Humans and Halflings, for example, have no Darkvision so the ring would be helpful to them.
2) Normal: Dwarves and Elves, for example, have Darkvision (60 feet or 12 squares) but Perception rolls in darkness are made with Disadvantage.
3) Superior: Soraks, for example, can see in darkness normally with no penalties and twice the distance (120 feet or 24 squares).
Uh, no?
You only get one sneak attack per turn, no matter what you're using. With hand crossbows, they're ranged weapons, so such things as dual wielding and two-weapon fighting are irrelevant. It's... basically compeletely worthless to dual-wield hand crossbows unless they are two magical crossbows with wildly different properties and you're dealing with a mix of enemies where you need to constantly switch, *and* you either have extra arms or they're magically self-loading along the lines of Repeating Shot infusion. Ranged weapons don't get opportunity attacks either, so to get a second sneak attack with one you basically rely on something like an Order cleric or a Battlemaster fighter teammate using an ability to allow you to take a weapon attack as a reaction.
One hand crossbow + XBE is consistently superior.
I don't agree. Sure, there are other ways to deal with it, but they're all more of a nuisance, especially if you have more than one character in the party without darkvision.
So yes. Even though I don't encourage racism AT ALL, in D&D you just don't want to play without Darkvision or you constantly have to have cantrip "Light" on you or a torch.
Also just think about it that way: If you get the Ring of Darkvision you have to attune to it iirc so you have 1 dead slot of attunement.
One dead slot, BUT you gain an ability you did not have. That is not a dead slot.
As for the value of the ring? It depends on what you want. IF you want the ability to play ANY race, and do so without all of the lighting issues, then yes, it has huge value. If you are ONLY going to play Elven parties, or always 4 with dark vision anyway, then no, it wont have much value at all.
You can get around that by equipping an orb in his main hand or is you are playing Lost Valley you can use one of the craft able wands in the main hand or a wand of identify. You will lose out on any chance to do a reactive attack but you cast that way while using a torch.
If you do scoundrel background you get a guaranteed ring of darkvision early in the original campaign (and longsword +2 (don't turn it in until later) and random misc magic item).
There are many ways around not being able to see in the dark and so many races can see in the dark that ring of darkvision is usually not a high value item...
OK, thanks. It's not like my sorcerer is going to help much making AoOs anyway.