I'm looking specifically for items that can mitigate issues with light sensitivity. I asked here: Are there official items for mitigating light sensitivity? and it got closed as a duplicate of How can I get around the drow's light sensitivity?

Problem is, older question does not focus on items. It does not focus on anything in particular at all and all but two answers (one short, one with heavily negative score) are even relevant to what I want to know.

So, how I can obtain answer I want without being redirected to answers I'm specifically not interested in, because they does not solve my roleplaying needs?

I don't care about question with id 188204 being closed or open, or form me to be "right" or "wrong". I only want to get Answers to the Question I really have. That's what this Q&A format is about, isn't it? So.... how?

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ So to be clear, you’re not asking if your question is a dupe, you’re asking how to change your question so that it’s not a dupe? \$\endgroup\$ – Thomas Markov Jun 16 at 13:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov I don't care for semantics, at all. I care about getting answers for the question I have, solutions to the specific problem I have. I don't care in what particular way I'll get them. I don't care to prove I'm right or anything. I just want to be able to get answers, the very reason people are on this site. I don't believe my question is duplicate because best answers for the linked one have nothing to do with mine, but hey, If I can get answers specifically about items in any way I don't particularly care if my Q is open or closed. \$\endgroup\$ – Mołot Jun 16 at 13:52
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Is there a reason the answer that I did leave on your question prior to closing it was insufficient? \$\endgroup\$ – Thomas Markov Jun 16 at 13:56
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov I'm not asking for the reason you closed my question as a duplicate of question that attracts answers I specifically don't want. I'm asking for a way to get the answer in the scope I'm interested in. You didn't provide any guidance on that so far. \$\endgroup\$ – Mołot Jun 16 at 13:59
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I’m not sure I can solve a problem that doesn’t exist. The linked question contains a complete and correct answer to the scope of your question. One of the reasons it was closed as a dupe is that the linked question already has the answer you are looking for. So I’m not sure what the problem is. \$\endgroup\$ – Thomas Markov Jun 16 at 14:03
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov it shows only one item, and that item is outside of the "most wanted" rulebooks in my question. Are you 100% sure it is the only item for that purpose, ever? \$\endgroup\$ – Mołot Jun 16 at 14:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ Note for future readers: The mainsite question has since been edited to not be a duplicate, and so it has been reopened. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Mod Jun 16 at 20:08

The dupe target does care about items.

The dupe target asks, without restricting the scope to any one category of features:

Are there any ways you have used to mitigate this flaw?

This means the question is properly concerned with any game feature that solves the problem of Sunlight Sensitivity, and to quote the Dungeon Master's Guide:

Game features include spells, class features, feats, racial traits, monster abilities, and magic items.

Consequently, this answer provides a correct and complete response to your question:

The Waterdeep: Dragon Heist adventure (p. 191) has the Knave’s Eye Patch magic item:

Wondrous item, rare (requires attunement)

While wearing this eye patch, you gain these benefits:

  • You have advantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight.
  • If you have the Sunlight Sensitivity trait, you are unaffected by the trait.
  • You are immune to magic that allows other creatures to read your thoughts or determine whether you are lying. Creatures can communicate telepathically with you only if you allow it.

This item would remove all Sunlight Sensitivity effects at the cost of an attunement slot.

Before your question was closed, I did provide an answer, in which I have included the following justification for the uniqueness of the Knave's eye Patch, as well as included it in the relevant answer to the dupe target:

I am quite confident that this is the only official item with this effect. It is the only item that comes up in a DND Beyond search for "sunlight sensitivity", and based on some search engine sleuthing, discussions of similar items prior to the release of Dragon Heist revolved around homebrewing items to deal with this, while discussions after the release of Dragon Heist never mention any items but this one.

Given these things, I'm not seeing how your question is different, or that it hasn't been answered.

Our duplicate criteria.

Our guidance for closing duplicate questions can be found here. In particular there are three criteria that we use:

  • It's the same question, or Question A is already covered obviously as a subset of Question B. Obvious here means I can tell at a glance it's there.

  • Question B has an obvious answer to Question A. Obvious here means I get a straightforward answer without hard searching — a couple of sentences buried in the middle of a post, or an answer which only sort of implies an answer to Question A, doesn't count as obvious.

  • There is not some strong compelling reason to covering Question A alone, separately from Question B. (If the above bullet points are met this rarely happens.)

I've explained above that the dupe target is actually concerned with items that can solve the problem. This means that your question is covered as an obvious subset of the target. Additionally, I have pointed to the answer that directly addresses your specific situation on the dupe target. Therefore, the first two criteria are satisfied.

On the third criterion, I'm not seeing a reason, so it is up to you to provide the reason your question should remain open, despite the first two criteria being satisfied.


It's a dupe, you want to Bounty

Both questions are asking how to mitigate sunlight sensitivity: that makes your question a duplicate.

The answers to the older one do fully include an aspect you are interested in. You'd like to see more than just that, so in these situations where you are asking the same thing but not getting the type or quality of answer you want or need, then the proper thing to do is to place a bounty with the additional missing or extra information on the older question.

Specifics vs general

The older question gives a very general problem to solve: How can sunlight sensitivity be mitigated.

Your question asks a specific question: what items mitigate sunlight sensitivity.

You are asking about a specific solution to a problem, rather than asking about generally how to solve the problem. Asking generally clearly encompasses the specific piece you have, but if that isn't really what you're asking, then clarifying what your exact problem is may help determine if the other question is a duplicate.

  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Is it worth mentioning that, to the extent OP asked specifically about items rather than the general "deal with sensitivity" issue, it's veering into XY-land? I.e. the two questions don't really look identical for dupe-purposes, but the distinction (seems to me) is only the assumed "an item is the solution to my problem" constraint. \$\endgroup\$ – nitsua60 Jun 16 at 14:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ @nitsua60 How's that? \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Jun 16 at 14:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ Out of 5 bounties only 3 succeeded. And one of them was to award existing answer. So, my success rate with bounties is mediocore at best. Second point, these questions have different scopes and best answers to the older one (game type, spell selection, embracing problems) are out of scope for mine. And items are actually bad to mediocre answers from the older question. So I don't believe these are duplicates. \$\endgroup\$ – Mołot Jun 16 at 14:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ @nitsua60 my problem is that thorough real life history there were mundane items mitigating light sensitivity issues. And having such item, losing it, not being able to put it in time, et cetera, opens new roleplaying opportunities even if does not give any real power boost to the character. These roleplaying opportunities won't be open by good answers to the older Q. \$\endgroup\$ – Mołot Jun 16 at 14:19
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Mołot I"m sorry you feel this way, but you are asking a subset of "how do i mitigate?" If that's your question, then it is a duplicate. The other question does ask "how do I mitigate", which clearly includes items. Answers don't include items, so a bounty asking for that is appropriate. Bounties don't always work, but that doesn't mean it' not the proper action. \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Jun 16 at 14:19
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Mołot Are you expecting an answer other than "ask your DM about using real-world items that don't have mechanics in 5e?" \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Jun 16 at 14:20
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch There’s an answer that does include items. \$\endgroup\$ – Thomas Markov Jun 16 at 14:24
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Mołot Additionally there seems to be unwarranted assumption that sunlight sensitivity is the result of vision being affected, which conflicts for e.g. disadvantage not being cancelled by BlindFighting. There are no real-life items that protect your strength being magically sapped while in the sunlight because you are cursed by the gods (exact lore may vary based on setting). \$\endgroup\$ – SilentAxe Jun 16 at 14:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch Part of my Q is " I do not want to get rid of the disadvantage completely", pretty much opposite to the original. And D&D did have such items. I'm asking if they exist in this edition. "I did a cursory search like this [description] and it appears there are no such items / only these 2 or 3 magical items, so your DM would have to homebrew mundane ones / adapt from older edition" would be accepted answer - if that is true. \$\endgroup\$ – Mołot Jun 16 at 14:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Mołot But mitigation is still mitigation. Partial mitigation would still be under that umbrella. \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Jun 16 at 14:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov Ah, even better! Then the answers to the older question are already considering items and it is more of a duplicate. \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Jun 16 at 14:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch but the original question attract answers that mitigate it as fully as possible. Without substantial edit it won't attract answers that shows faulty ways of partial mitigation. And indeed it includes one item. Quite powerful magic item that exists only in the adventure I'm not playing... \$\endgroup\$ – Mołot Jun 16 at 14:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Mołot It attracted those answers, but did not ask for them. If a question is the same, but the answers are coming up short, then you bounty asking for whats missing - you don't ask the same question again. \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Jun 16 at 14:32
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Mołot That's for a question that isn't clear. This is clear, and is bounded by ways to mitigate sunlight sensitivity but it includes solutions that include all mechanics (which includes items.) \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Jun 16 at 14:36
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @Mołot We are not discussing if the older question should be closed. If you believe that, then you can VTC or even post a meta. But we aren't, and the question is currently open and I believe legitimate and yours is a duplicate. Given that you have asked for a solution to get your answer, but you do not like that solution, it may be better for you to self-answer your meta and see if others agree. \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Jun 16 at 14:39

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .