Hello! I've spent a few days looking but it seems nobody has wondered this yet, maybe it's obvious but here we go:
Darkness, Mythic wrote:
The illumination level in the area drops to darkness regardless of the existing lighting conditions. Non-mythic spells and effects can’t increase the light level in the area.
Creatures with darkvision and the power to see in darkness have difficulty seeing through this darkness, and can see as well as a human can in dim light.
Creatures in the area of darkness take a –2 penalty on saves against fear.
My confusion comes from the "and", the way I see it there are two possibilities, either a creature needs both Darkvision and See in Darkness to be able to see as if they were in dim light, or it's meant to be an "or" and you only need one of these abilities. What's stopping me from following my gut and pick option B is that Deeper Darkness, a 3rd level spell, might be more powerful than a mythic one in some respects while effectively doing the same thing, because creatures with Darkvision which is the most common cannot see at all in Deeper Darkness's supernatural darkness, you need See in Darkness for that. At the same time Mythic Darkness doesn't even mention creating an area of supernatural darkness, just dropping the light level to darkness regardless. Finally, there are plenty of creatures that have SiD without having Darkvision as well, like the Dark Creeper.
So, is Darkvision enough to see through this? Would you need See in Darkness instead? Or both? Bonus question just to hear what you think, what does a character with both DV and SiD who also has Low Light Vision see? No matter the interpretation the first two abilities let them see as if they were in dim light... Does LLV kick in at this point and turn it into normal light? I'd say no on that one but I'm curious if anyone wants to answer.
mythic darkness references the darkness spell which contains text about perception, so it is modifying that. Mythic is also over-the-top and requires some GM decisions.
RAW is in common english so the "OR" is inclusive.
The rules are about at what effective level perception operates at as the actual lighting/illumination in an area (environmental) does not change based on a creature's perception.
Mythic Darkness means Darkvision and See in Darkness give the creature the effective perception as Dim rather than Normal illumination. As both are usually ranged to 60ft low-light vision will not increase their range. Low-light vision impacts the penalty per square(s) to perception made at range (normally +1DC/10ft to +1DC/20ft).
Sorry, should have specified, I'm the DM and this ability is one I put on a monster, one of my player characters has Darkvision but not See in Darkness, that was my question: does he see anything or not at all? I don't know what you mean by "the "OR" is inclusive", my issue specifically is there's an "and" where I hoped to see an "or"
the part about Low Light Vision wasn't about the range but more so the penalties, a human in dim light has 20% chance to miss attacks, but I'd say whatever the first answer turns out to be LLV doesn't help, that kind of ability still works on the visible spectrum of light and an area of mythic darkness has none of that at all for sure
inclusive OR means one or the other and both, A or B and A & B. see logical disjunction.
A creature with Darkvision (60ft) and/or See in Darkness (60ft) in Mythic Darkness sees as if in Dim lighting within 60ft; concealment 20% miss chance, can make a Stealth check. At 65 ft things are in Darkness. Low-light does not change or improve the range, 60 ft is the limit of the ability (unlike normal vision).
If a target makes a Stealth check, say 35, then perceivers need to make a perception check vs 35 (or higher with GM adding +2 or something due to Dim lighting) with range penalties of 1/10ft or with low-light 1/20ft (see Perception skill). Within 60ft that's going to be 6 to 3.
With PF1 it's not about seeing in UV or IR or some other range of the visible spectrum. That rationalization is seeking a reason whereas PF1 is a system of rules.
Sadly with low-light RAW babbles on rather than just state the mechanical rule. It is the issue of forming english word problems for math and interpretation.
A normal darkness spell reduces the illumination of an area by one step (typically). From bright to normal to dim (20% miss chance, partial concealment) to dark (50% miss chance, total concealment). A creature with darkvision is not affected by dim light or darkness. A creature that sees through darkness is similarly unaffected.
For mythic darkness, the illumination level drops to darkness regardless of normal light (in a candlelit room or outside in full daylight).
It might have been clearer to say 'Creatures with darkvision and creatures with the power to see in darkness have trouble seeing in this [mythic] darkness...' but, wordcount and such are a thing, and what they have is not incorrect.
So the 'and' is correct, in that it is inclusive. It's like saying 'ants and bees start sneezing in the area', you don't have to be an ant and a bee.
I'm almost satisfied with your answers, just one clarifying question: deeper darkness states that darkvision isn't enough if the area was at most dim to begin with (lowers it by 2 steps, dim to dark to supernaturally dark), see in darkness is the only way to see in that supernatural darkness (as if it was well lit, to be precise), my doubt stemmed primarily from this, because it means that in dim light a non-mythic spell is stronger than a mythic one in some aspects, do you still feel this interpretation is correct?
... it means that in dim light a non-mythic spell is stronger than a mythic one in some aspects...
Well, yes. But only because that's comparing two different spells, mythic darkness (2nd level spell) and non-mythic deeper darkness (3rd level spell).
There are edge cases in which deeper darkness is the better choice. For example when the prevailing condition is already dim light or darkness and your enemies have no magical light sources and do not have the see in darkness ability. For most other cases, mythic darkness is more powerful.
It's entirely reasonable that a higher-level non-mythic spell can be better than a lower-level mythic spell, especially when that's only true in specific conditions.
Deeper darkness is a whole different spell. It will be better than mythic darkness in almost all ways (already mentioned by Belafon). It will last 10 times longer, and have 3 times the radius, and will reduce the illumination by two, and potentially take it into supernatural territory. The only benefit for mythic darkness is the inability (or reduced efficiency) of the See in Darkness power to negate it (and the lower spell level for casting, but the trade off is that it's easier for [light] spells to nullify).
The only benefit for mythic darkness is the inability (or reduced efficiency) of the See in Darkness power to negate it (and the lower spell level for casting, but the trade off is that it's easier for [light] spells to nullify).
Non-mythic light spells have no effect in the area of mythic darkness, which basically means the only thing that can stop it is mythic daylight.
Mythic darkness is really good for a creature that wants to be in darkness. Automatically darkness around the targeted object (like your clothes), even in full sun. Vampire's best friend! Even against creatures with darkvision or see in darkness anyone inside the mythic darkness has 20% concealment, so you can make stealth checks and deny (core) rogues sneak attack damage.
Thank you both so much, by chance do you know at this point what would be a counter to mythic darkness? we established DV helps just as much as SiD, having both has no further effect, LLV doesn't apply (I understand if you disagree on that last part, but I enjoy ruling it that way), so yes a lone boss will have the ability of almost neutralizing multiple heroes, depending on their abilities. But the boss still might have to deal with the same consequences, and since I'm talking about the creature who cast it it wouldn't make sense to also cast mythic daylight. I only know of one counter, which the creature I used has (it's a nightwalker with Darksense which is effectively Truesight when in dim light or darkness) but as far as I know only nightshades have that, what could another kind of monster have as a precaution? what could a player get to be prepared if this happens again?
Belafon wrote:
deny (core) rogues sneak attack damage.
small edit, if you mean rogues not being able to sneak attack creatures with concealment, I just checked and unchained rogues also suffer from that limitation (didn't even know, I'll have to keep that in mind)
Any form of blindsight works. (Lifesense, echolocation, etc.)
Psigh wrote:
Belafon wrote:
deny (core) rogues sneak attack damage.
small edit, if you mean rogues not being able to sneak attack creatures with concealment, I just checked and unchained rogues also suffer from that limitation (didn't even know, I'll have to keep that in mind)
Unchained rogues can sneak attack creatures with concealment (20% miss chance) but not total concealment (50% miss). Core rogues can't sneak attack if the target has any level of concealment. Dim light provides 20% concealment.
