Does covering an object with Darkness cast upon it count as using an object as described in the combat actions?

Question

In the rules for Darkness spell it states:

Completely covering the source of the darkness with an opaque object, such as a bowl or a helm, blocks the darkness

So my question basically boils down to this, does completely covering the object count as "Using an Object" for the purposes of actions in combat?

For a little more context, I have a character concept where I have cast Darkness on an object either worn or carried by my character then during my turn I completely cover the object, take the attack action, and then uncover the object with Darkness cast upon it before the end of my turn, so that on enemy turns the character remains in darkness, however it depends on whether covering/uncovering the object counts as an Using an Object.

Answer 1

This would count as two object interactions, so it doesn't work.

The rules for object interactions state:

You can also interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action. For example, you could open a door during your move as you stride toward a foe, or you could draw your weapon as part of the same action you use to attack.

If you want to interact with a second object, you need to use your action. Some magic items and other special objects always require an action to use, as stated in their descriptions.

Additionally, the rules feature a "Interacting with objects around you" sidebar that gives numerous examples of the types of activities that count as one of these free object interactions:

Here are a few examples of the sorts of thing you can do in tandem with your movement and action:

• draw or sheathe a sword
• open or close a door
• withdraw a potion from your backpack
• pick up a dropped axe
• take a bauble from a table
• [...]

And there are many more. It seems quite straightforward that either covering the object or uncovering the object is one of these things. However, doing both is two of these things. Since covering and unconvering are both object interactions, it would require the use of your action to do both.

Answer 2

Generally, that sort of thing is up to the DM

As stated at the beginning of Actions in Combat:

When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, or an action that you improvise. Many monsters have action options of their own in their stat blocks.
When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to determine success or failure.

Since "covering and uncovering an object" is not one of the predefined Actions, it's up to the DM to say if it's "Use an object", a whole Action, a Bonus Action, or Other activity on your turn (sometimes referred to as a "Free action").

As a rule of thumb, you can do one thing as your Action. In your case, this would be your attack. So the covering and uncovering all on the same turn is asking a lot. A DM might say you can either cover or uncover (as a free action) and still get an Attack in, but not both.

Depending on how you cover/uncover they may also rule that it is an "Use an Action" Action taking up your whole turn. Such as taking it out and putting it in a Bag of Holding.

It also depends on if both of your hands are full with weapon(s), shield, arcane focus, components, holy symbol, and what-have-you.

Answer 3

You might be able to pull this off with a lenient DM

While lifting a cover from the darkness-ensocerelled object will cost you your free object interaction, the intent of the rules is that just dropping an item is free and does not cost an object interaction. This was confirmed by Jeremy Crawford on twitter:

The intent is that letting go of something requires no appreciable effort. But picking it up does.

Now, Crawford's missives are not official Sage Advice rulings any more. But considering he is one of the game's rules authors, and his intent was for dropping to be free, you may use this as an argument to convince your DM that it should be.

You then could have your darkness emitting object, for example, on a string over your shirt, pull up the shirt over it with your free object interaction to remove the darkness around yourself, use your action to attack, and then let go of the shirt for free, which due to gravity will slip back down exposing your darkness bauble yet again.

I personally would probably not be so lenient, as I think this is to some extend an exploit, and unfair to players who invest into abilities such as the blind-figthing feat to be able to operate in magical darkness. The DM might rule that holding the shirt up while attacking is hampering you and imposes disadvantage on your attack, making this more symmetrical. On the other hand, you do not benefit from advantage during your attack as someone with blindsight does against a blinded opponent, so maybe it is not that bad, and the DM might be OK with it. It does cost you a casting of darkness, after all.