Darkness and invisible

6 posts / 0 new
Last post
Hi all,

If you are in darkness, and you don't have darkvision, are creatures in such darkness considered to be invisible to you?

I mean, it's obvious you cannot see them, but I want to know if they are considered invisible as per the rules compendium, so they benefit from total concealment, combat advantage, not provoking attack of opportunity from you, etc.

Thanks!
No being in darkness means you are in a totally obscured square and have total concealment but you are not invisible specifically.

RC 220 Totally Obscured: Squares of darkness are totally obscured.

RC 220 Total Concealment: An attacker takes a -5 penalty to melee and ranged attack rolls against a target that has total concealment. The attacker can’t see the target: It is invisible, in a totally obscured square, or in a heavily obscured square and not adjacent to the attacker.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Since all invisibility is is total concealment (unless you're hidden, which is a different thing), there really isn't any difference between being in a totally obscured square and being invisible.

community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758....
No being in darkness means you are in a totally obscured square and have total concealment but you are not invisible specifically.

RC 220 Totally Obscured: Squares of darkness are totally obscured.

RC 220 Total Concealment: An attacker takes a -5 penalty to melee and ranged attack rolls against a target that has total concealment. The attacker can’t see the target: It is invisible, in a totally obscured square, or in a heavily obscured square and not adjacent to the attacker.




Ok, but in that case, will the creature in darkness (assuming it has darkvision) be granted combat advantage and the benefit of not provoking opportunity attacks?
Yes the creature should have Combat Advantage against creatures it can see and shouldn't provoke Opportunity Attacks from creature who cannot see it.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Thank you! That matches more or less what happened in 3.x which I was unable to find in 4.