Personally, I don’t like infravision as a demihuman ability, and I haven’t run a game with demihuman infravision (or “darkvision”!) for years. But hey, that’s just me. There is, of course, nothing wrong with running a game using infravision. I’ve run and played in games with infravision and had a blast. However, in the original Dungeon & Dragons three booklets, the classic demihuman choices (dwarves, elves, and halflings) did not have infravision. Men & Magic contains no mention of this ability in the demihuman descriptions. The ability exists, but it is a 3rd-level magic-user spell.
Infravision: This spell allows the recipient to see infra-red light waves, thus enabling him to see in total darkness. Duration: 1 day. Range of infravision: 40-60′.
Dungeon & Dragons, Men & magic Vol. 1
Volume 3, Underworld & Wilderness, is clear that characters will need a light source or an “infravision spell” to navigate. Additionally, the same paragraph points out that only monsters not serving characters have “permanent infravision.” It wasn’t until the Greyhawk supplement that infravision became a demihuman ability. This is nothing new for players of OD&D, and I am certainly not the first person to discuss this point.
Like others, I find that infravision as a permanent character ability, instead of a limited resource (e.g., a spell slot), alters the style of play when it comes to light management and the players’ approach to dark environments. There are many ways for DMs to create tensions and present the players with situations filled with opportunities for meaningful, important, and sometimes foolhardy decisions. I feel that the DM’s use of darkness is one such way. I have run games both with and without the infravision ability. This is anecdotal, but the games without the infravision ability took the logistics of light management much more seriously, and the atmosphere and tension resulting from concerns about running out of light in the depths of a dark dungeon produced a more rewarding dungeon experience for the players (if I can take my players at their word).
I’m not making a claim for “good” games vs. “bad” games, or the “right way” to play vs. the “wrong way.” I’m simply observing that infravision changes the style of play in terms of decision making and resource management pertaining to light sources, and that I have a personal preference for games without infravision as an ability. You simply get a different game if any old dwarf or elf can see in the dark (however defined). I feel that players should actively consider the implications of darkness and what might be lurking out in the darkness. Then, players can make choices and take actions. My opinion is that permanent infravision (a passive ability) undermines, at least partially, many of the potential threats posed by darkness and the need for player-determined logistics planning and strategy.
OD&D is not without issues and wonkiness, but I certainty prefer how the game originally handled infravision. What’s your preference?
Peace.