Starting at 14th level, you can use the Hide action as a bonus action on your turn. Also, you can’t be tracked by nonmagical means, unless you choose to leave a trail.
Cunning Action
Starting at 2nd level, your quick thinking and agility allow you to move and act quickly. You can take a bonus action on each of your turns in combat. This action can be used only to take the Dash, Disengage, or Hide action.
Originally going to be a response in this thread that was turning into its own thing, so new thread.
This is an attempt at a full analysis of why Vanish is not just a poor feature in comparison, which on its own isn't enough to say the Ranger is a weak class, but as one part of the whole of the Ranger's negative attributes. If this were the ONLY problem with the Ranger, it would still be a bad feature but not make the Ranger bad as a whole. (The Necromancy Wizard's Grim Harvest leaves a lot to be desired, but the rest of the Necromancer and the base Wizard as a whole still make for a very strong character.)
I can read the two abilities in a vacuum and say "One gives me three new functions for my bonus action on universal combat features that normally take other classes their action to perform, interfering with that turn's attack. The other gives me one of those same functions, and instead of the other two functions I instead cannot be tracked by nonmagical means." If someone says these two abilities are equal, then that means they are claiming the following.
Bonus Action Hide = Bonus Action Hide. (This is simple. Direct equivalency.)
Bonus Action Dash + Bonus Action Disengage = Cannot be tracked by nonmagical means. (This is not so simple, and requires a lot of evidence to back it up.)
In so many cases where there are no numbers to crunch when comparing two features, you have to think in a more abstract way to determine cost vs benefits. (from here on out I will not be referring to the bonus action hide benefits as they are equivalent, and whenever I refer to Vanish I am only referring to being tracked by nonmagical means).
I will first compare them by their frequency of use, which includes HOW you activate or gain the benefits of the feature.
A bonus action to dash or disengage can be used in every single combat. The only conditions are that you be in combat, you can move, and you say you want to use it. It provides an immediate benefit, in this case, you get to move more than you normally would for that round or ignore opportunity attacks during your movement for the round, and can be used every single turn.
Vanish is a passive benefit, so it is always active and there is no "cost" to using the feature. But that is not the only condition required to gain the actual benefits. Someone has to actually be trying to track you. This is something entirely out of your control, and dependant entirely upon the DM deciding that there is an NPC that wants to try and find you.
It is one of the "highly situational niche" mechanics that are riddled throughout the Ranger. People dismiss this argument, completely disregarding how situational "you cannot be tracked by nonmagical means" is vs "you can only bonus action disengage in combat." Both are situational, though absolutely not to the same degree.
Active features are inherently more useful than reactive features. (although I am not sure if Vanish falls squarely into the category of "reactive" it is incredibly similar). Any feature where I get the benefits when I choose to do something grants me more control and versatility than a feature that only has benefits when someone else chooses to do something to me, further marred by the likelihood of someone actually attempting to track me (and having the skill to do so) vs. someone trying to hit me during combat or the need to move an extra 30 ft. per turn.
I can use Cunning Action actively and frequently. It is not dependant on the DMs plot. There WILL be combat. I can force combat if I desire, but that is unnecessary cause the DM always prepares combat encounters, and combat encounters are frequent and guaranteed eventually no matter what decisions I make. An NPC trying to track me is not guaranteed in any capacity. It is not nearly so common a scenario you will find yourself in, and if you do, you probably just end up in a fight where I am going to use Cunning Action.
The next issue comes with the opportunity for failure, this includes ways in which the feature can be circumvented. In what situation does dash or disengage fail? In what situation does Vanish fail?
For dash and disengage, generally, it is any situation where I can't move in combat. If I am in combat, my enemy wants me dead, and my combat abilities are directly tied to me not being dead, being able to move, avoiding anything that would prevent me from moving. Dash and disengage are features that directly assist me in avoiding situations where I could not use them again.
Vanish fails the moment magic is involved and capable of finding me. There are a lot of ways to magically track someone. If someone really really wants to find me, and they have the magic to do so, I can't stop them without very specific spells, often involving preparation ahead of time, and in some cases saving throws. If they fail, and their only goal is to find me, they can try again later. In most cases, I don't know that they are trying to magically find me.
If I am in combat and someone is attempting to stop my movement/kill me, I know that and I can respond right away. I have options and the knowledge to ensure that I can get back into a position or state where, if I wanted to dash or disengage again, I could. Once someone has magically found me, I can't make them unfind me if I am unaware. If I am aware that I have been magically tracked, my options to prevent further magical tracking are limited and costly, and Vanish is not one of them. If someone prevents me from using dash or disengage, once I regain movement, dash and disengage allow me to avoid being immobilized further for an incredibly low cost.
Remember that the "cost" of dash/disengage is nothing more than my bonus action for the turn. Every "cost" associated with preventing someone from magically tracking you that I can think of which is available to a player generally involves a spell slot or rarely a huge investment into another class for a niche class feature.
And then, Vanish only applies to me. Completely negated if I am traveling with a party and no one else has Vanish. Sure, I still can't be tracked, but if they are tracking the party then that provides yet another option for them to eventually find me. Then we're talking about the nature of most dnd games where anyone trying to find one person is probably trying to find the entire party.
The benefits of Vanish only apply when someone wants to track me. If someone really wants to find me, all they need is magic to do so which Vanish does nothing to prevent, or they just try to find my party member instead. Dash and disengage work every single time I am able to move. If you have the power and are in a position where you could prevent me from moving, I can respond to ensure I am still capable of movement without any significant cost.
Finally, what can be done to create a similar effect? I usually look for a spell that on its own is considered powerful and most closely resembles the benefits gained of a class feature, though in some cases you can just look to another class feature for a similar effect. It is telling that we are comparing lvl 2 Rogue's Cunning Action to a lvl 14 Ranger's Vanish, as Cunning Action is generally seen as superior to Vanish, but there are other options for Vanish as well.
Vanish most closely resembles the spell Pass Without a Trace, giving the exact same benefits as a portion of the spell. With no consideration as to the other benefits of Pass Without a Trace, you have the following:
Vanish: Cannot be tracked by nonmagical means, leaves no trail. Always active, costs nothing to activate. Level 14 Ranger.
PWaT: Cannot be tracked by nonmagical means, leaves no trail. Active for one hour (concentration), costs an action and a level 2 spell slot. Level 5 Ranger, 3 Druid or 3 Trickery Cleric.
This means you can duplicate a level 14 character's class feature as early as level 3 in another class, and within its own class, the Ranger can have its own level 14 feature as early as level 5 at the cost of a single spell slot. Maybe, MAYBE, if the feature and the spell were exactly the same, and the only difference was cost (spell slot/nothing) and duration (hour/always), you might come close to considering them equal. But then we throw in just how much more you gain from that spell slot. PWaT also gives +10 to Sleath checks and it applies to everyone within 30 ft. of you.
For roleplay purposes, you can cram a lot of people into a 30ft. radius, but even just putting it onto a battle grid and using that as the limitation you still have a potential 96 people that can fit into the range of your spell. The extra benefit of Vanish vs. PWaT? Bonus action Hide. But only for you.
Cunning Action is most similar to the Haste spell, giving the exact same benefits as a portion of the spell. With no consideration as to the other benefits of Pass Without a Trace, you have the following:
Cunning Action: Can use Hide, Dash, Disengage as a bonus action instead of action. Always active, uses your bonus action for the turn. Level 2 Rogue.
Haste: Gain an extra action for Hide, Dash or Disengage. Active for 1 minute (concentration), costs an action on the initial turn (you still gain the extra action for the initial turn) and a level 3 spell slot. Level 6 Sorceror/Wizard/LandDruid/Artificer or Level 9 Vengeance-Glory Paladin.
This instead provides the inverse. Instead of a low-level spell duplicating a higher-level feature, it is a low-level feature duplicating a higher-level spell. The fundamental similarity is that in many cases during normal combat, a player avoids using Dash, Hide, or Disengage because it takes an action that could otherwise be used for an attack. Cunning Action and Haste allow you to use such a feature while still getting to attack the same turn. With only these considerations they are close to equal but spending that 3rd level spell slot is still a hefty cost for only ten rounds. But then you include that Haste provides so much more in those ten rounds, the spell slot is well worth it.
We have a level 14 feature that is a weaker version of a 2nd level spell available to players up to 11 levels sooner, and 9 levels sooner in its own class, and a level 2 feature that is a weaker version of a 3rd level spell available to players 4 turns after you, and in niche cases 12 levels later in its own class if you are an Arcane Trickster.
And then, if a level 14 Ranger has Pass Without A trace cast on them, the benefits of Vanish become redundant. The similar features don't stack.
A level 2 Rogue that has Haste cast on them still has an Action, Bonus Action and Hasted Action. A Hasted Rogue can still use their Cunning Action to use their bonus action for Hide, Dash or Disengage.
Cunning Action in this case is the clear winner over Vanish.
Even in the incredibly niche ideal scenario for Vanish to shine on its own and I don't have Pass Without A Trace prepared, where my character is separated from the party and there is an NPC trying to track me through nonmagical means without my knowledge, I still have to rely on the DM to remember that I have Vanish without giving it away that someone is following me.
Even when taken in a vacuum, the two features show a clear winner in Cunning Action. It gets worse when you expand on the cost of actually gaining the separate features.
Because we are specifically comparing Vanish and Cunning Action, the final determination comes to making a Level 14 character that chose between either of these features. What do we gain/lose as a Level 14 Ranger vs a Level 12 Ranger/Level 2 Rogue. For this determination, we will make the assumption that Vanish and Cunning Action are actually equivalent, despite our evidence that Cunning Action is proven superior, so that this determination can be given its own weight before tipping the scales in favor of Cunning Action.
Vanish Ranger gains (assuming "maximum" power of spells available) a single 4th-level spell (usable 1/day), their final Favored Enemy Improvement, and a d10 HD. Cunning ActionRanger gains a Rogue Skill Proficiency, Thieve's Tools Proficiency, +1d6 Sneak Attack, Expertise in two skills (which can include the ones you just gained), Thieve's Cant, and a d8 HD. so the Cunning Action Ranger certainly gains quantity, what about quality?
Let's break down Favored Enemy Improvement. Choose a creature. Advantage on Wisdom (Survival) checks and Intelligence Checks to recall info about that creature, and a language spoken by it.
When choosing a language, your mileage may vary depending on DM. Whether I get any use out of Thieve's Cant vs a new FE language is somewhat equivalent. You can argue the likelihood that you will talk to a gnoll vs an elemental vs a thief, but ultimately the determination is dependant upon the DM. There is still a glaring exception to where if you pick Beasts as your favored enemy, you don't get any useful languages. The only beasts that speak are a Giant Owl, Giant Eagle, and Giant Elk which speaks the languages known as Giant Owl, Giant Eagle, or Giant Elk, respectively.
You can then compare advantage on Survival and Intelligence checks with Expertise. The fundamental benefits they share in common is getting bonuses on skill checks. Advantage is equivalent to an average +5 on a roll, whereas Expertise is a static doubling of your proficiency. At this point we are level 13 or higher, meaning our proficiency bonus is +5 doubled to +10. So the static Expertise is equal to the average Advantage roll. There is never a clear winner between Advantage and Expertise seeing as advantage applies to untrained skill checks as well, and Expertise eventually surpasses the average bonus of Advantage.
But where Expertise is higher quality is in the choices, versatility, and frequency of use over only getting Advantage over a single creature type. If I have expertise in Survival, I always have expertise in survival which applies to every single creature as well as situations that don't apply to that creature. I can take Expertise in Nature and I have proficiency in every single Nature check vs only Advantage if the Nature check pertains to info regarding a certain creature.
I'm also not restricted to choosing Survival or Knowledge checks. I can use my Expertise for any proficient skill, of which I have plenty to choose from.
From a quality standpoint, Expertise in any two proficient skills outweighs gaining a highly situational, DM dependant Advantage roll against a single creature type.
The hardest comparison to make is with the Vanish Ranger's 4th-level spell slot. Every spell slot is incredibly versatile for every class but is only usable once per day. A direct comparison can be made with Guardian of Nature and Sneak Attack. GoN gives the choice of for 10 minutes (concentration) you get +1d6 damage and a bunch of other good benefits or 10 temp hp and a different set of good benefits, but SA lets you always get +1d6 damage under conditions which are very easy to force as a Ranger/Rogue, and then the Cunning action Ranger still has the skill and tool proficiencies.
With Vanish Ranger, you may forego combat buffs with any utility spell, and it is still difficult to compare that with always active skill proficiencies and Sneak Attack.
With the versatility of getting to choose a 4th-level spell, the spell slot generally comes out ahead. Whether or not a spell is "more powerful" than Sneak Attack + skill/tool proficiencies is dependant on whether or not you would actually take said spell in the first place. Some spells may even be objectively weaker than these two features but you still like the option of having benefits for those situations in which it would apply. Comparing a feature with a spell slot is much more difficult than comparing a feature to an individual spell.
We now have the following:
Expertise + Thieve's Cant > Favored Enemy. Not a huge win, but significant. Static, always active bonuses to skill checks vs highly situational advantage skill checks, and roughly equivalent languages.
Sneak Attack + Skill/Tool Proficiency < 4th-level Spell. A narrow win carried by the versatility of the spell slot. If you choose a weaker spell or never get to use the spell due to the necessity to cast other spells or lack of opportunity, that particular choice falls short of the always active Sneak Attack and proficiency, but generally spell slots are superior. The spell slot itself isn't wasted if you use it for something besides combat buffs.
For the purposes of these comparisons, I didn't consider Cunning Action and Vanish. Without consideration for those two features, a level 14 Ranger vs a Level 12 Ranger/Level 2 Rogue seems somewhat equivalent. But then you throw in just how clearly better Cunning Action is over Vanish, and you have an example of just how much Vanish brings down the quality of the Ranger. And you're still a Ranger. If you take two levels in Rogue you can still cast Pass Without a trace and be a better Level 14 Ranger than the Level 14 Ranger, you never actually lose Vanish in any practical sense. The only other thing you lose is the equivalent of a d4 in permanent HP.
Vanish is such a poor ability that it significantly hampers the growth your character gains through a single 4th-level spell slot. And that's not even at Level 14. The spell slot is gained at Level 13, so if you really want it then take that 13th level in Ranger and start going Rogue from there on out.
This is on top of other objectively bad features. Though the focus is on Vanish it should be noted a bad feature on top of other bad features is far worse than a bad feature on top of good features.
This same thing applies to every bad feature of the Ranger. Vanish still provides useful functionality, but at that level of commitment to a single class, I shouldn't be getting less at level 14 than a character at level 2.
When comparing two 14th level characters, one of them multiclass, some of the faults are not exclusive to the Ranger. 5e has front-loaded strong features into the majority of classes while higher-level features often fall short for the majority of classes.
At 14 level you gain the ability to take the hide action as a bonus action, and you cannot be tracked by non-magical means (unless you choose to be able to). This is excellent for Rangers who choose to play a hit and run game from range in the right environments, or even fast-moving melee Rangers. You quickly throw some javelins at the raiders from the rubble, then with a burst of speed run to the nearby trees and disappear from view, the skilled trackers employed by the raiders are unable to find any trace of your passage, you’re simply gone.
Yes, Rogue’s do get an arguably better ability at level 2, but Rogues need something to make them appealing. This has far more roleplay possibility because you can’t be tracked by mundane means, not even another Ranger can track you now. The biggest issue this really faces is if you’re already heavily invested in bonus action economy you will not get the use out of this that deserves in combat.
Again, a very thematic feature for the ranger. It is also mechanically better than many of their other features. However, it is not without its faults. First, it competes with every other bonus action option that the ranger gets (which is a buttload of them. They seriously get more bonus action options than basically any other class). Second, it is slightly more than just 1/3rd of a level 2 feature that rogues get. That doesn't make it useless, but its very disappointing when compared to similar level features from other classes. Third, I do not recommend using javelins as a ranger.
Not arguably, it's objectively better. Also, rogues have a lot of things that make them appealing at those levels without Cunning Action (such as Sneak Attack and Expertise).
It's not a bad or useless feature, but again, compared to Blindsense, Reliable Talent, or Slippery Mind, Cleansing Touch, Tongue of the Sun and Moon, Diamond Soul, or Tireless Body, or even more uses of Indomitable, this feature just pales in comparison.
In my opinion, this level 14 feature should matter for this class a bit more than "YOU CAN HIDE QUIK AND CAN'T BE TRAKKED".
When comparing cunning action to vanish, One thing not mentioned was that rangers have zypher strike which is dash disengage and extra damage all for the cost of a first level spell slot. So the ranger could already have the equivalent of the two "Missing" cunning action abilities. It seems like you down played ranger spell casting entirely in your class comparison Not to mention, armor(AC) and equipment and hit die Or the fact that favored terrain and Favored enemy can both apply to the same check.
I specifically compared the abilities in a vacuum, which is necessary for an honest comparison. If you throw in the benefits of how some spells/features synergize with Vanish, you MUST do the same with Cunning Action. At this point, especially with the inclusion of spell slots, you can make any bad feature SEEM good.
I was also discussing Ranger heavy builds of the same level. This means that both Vanish Ranger and Cunning Action Ranger both have access to Zephyr Strike, both can have the same AC, equipment, HP (give or take up to 4 points), Favored Enemy, and Natural Explorer. The benefits of these can not be used to support a Level 14 Ranger and yet disregarded for a Level 12 Ranger/Level 2 Rogue.
In regards to Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer bonuses applying to the same check, this is far too niche and rare of an occurrence. You have to have chosen the right Favored Terrain, the right Favored Enemy, and be making a check where both apply at the same time. Two highly situational benefits that are completely dependent on the DMs campaign for a single roll of double proficiency with advantage, left up to the DMs interpretation that both would apply here. Maybe you get even luckier and you have a series of checks during these encounters. This is nowhere near enough of a benefit to warrant the accusation that I have downplayed or disregarded such circumstances entirely in my analysis.
Regarding Zephyr Strike specifically, you are correct that I had overlooked this spell, so let's do that now.
Zephyr Strike is available to all Ranger's beginning at level 2, and only on the Ranger spell list. Looking at only the similar benefits, you have the following:
Cunning Action: Can use Dash, Disengage as a bonus action instead of action. Always active, uses your bonus action for the turn. Level 2 Rogue.
Zephyr Strike: A Disengage effect for the duration of the spell, and a one-time Dash-equivalent effect. Active for 1 minute, costs your bonus action for the initial turn. Level 2 Ranger.
In a similar fashion to Haste and Pass Without a Trace, you have a feature that duplicates a portion of a spell, but in this case, the spell and feature are gained at the same level. Considering nothing more than the costs associated with gaining the benefits, the two a fairly equal except that a Spell Slot is a greater, additional cost over that of Cunning Action. Thankfully Zephyr Strike has an additional boon in the form of Advantage on an attack with extra damage on a hit one time during the duration of the spell.
In practice, your character can be in 20 rounds of combat during a day and cast Zephyr Strike twice in order to gain a benefit greater than Cunning Action while still having your bonus actions available for 18 of those turns. Cunning Action is always active, is not dependant on spell slots. When the Ranger runs out of spell slots, the Rogue still has Cunning Action available. These two abilities are equivalent, difficult to gauge how much in favor of one or the other as Cunning Action still grants a bonus action Hide, which is appropriate seeing as they are gained at the same level of their respective classes.
(as a side note, discussing level 2 as a whole for the Ranger vs the Rogue actually brings Ranger on top by a fair margin. Whether Cunning Action is superior or equal to Zephyr Strike, the versatility of 2 spell slots, 2 known spells, and a Fighting Style objectively outweigh the benefits of Cunning Action)
So, a Level 14 Ranger can gain the two "missing" Cunning Actions with a spell slot, meaning their level 2 feature, and it is an equivalent ability. Vanish can be gained using Pass Without A Trace, meaning their level 5 feature, and it is a much stronger ability than the level 14 Vanish, even considering that PWaT does not give a bonus action to hide.
And again, Pass Without A Trace does not work in conjunction with the similar benefits of Vanish. You can not gain "unable to be tracked by nonmagical means" twice. A Level 12 Ranger/Level 2 Rogue can cast Zephyr Strike the first turn, gaining a permanent Disengage effect for 10 rounds at the cost of a bonus action. Then for the next nine rounds, the Cunning Action Ranger can still use their bonus action for dash or hide while still getting to attack.
Being part Rogue, the Advantage to an attack roll granted by Zephyr Strike allows us yet another opportunity to force Sneak Attack, so another d6 on top of the d8 if we hit.
Zephyr Strike provides no synergy to Vanish that Cunning Action does not also gain. Even if you use Vanish or Cunning Action to successfully hide, and then attack, being hidden grants you Advantage so you cannot stack it with the Advantage from Zephyr Strike.
An interesting note that Zephyr Strike is made very slightly better on a Ranger whose base speed is less than 30 ft.
You don't need permission to respond. If you expect to be taken seriously you can not lie, use fallacious arguments, misinterpret my position or be dishonest in any way.
Ok. This is your post. The Dude abides. I’ll just ask questions.
How do you justify comparing class features of different classes at different levels just because they are similar? Fighters don’t get anything like either of these two abilities at any level, do they?
Is your question specifically in regards to comparing features at different levels, just so I understand your question?
So like, comparing Cunning Action with Zephyr Strike is cool because they are gained at the same level, but comparing Cunning Action with Vanish is not because they are at different levels. This is how I interpret your question and I want to make sure that is the case before continuing.
Either, really. But more, why compare an ability the base rogue gets at level 2 with an ability the base ranger gets at level 14 with an ability the other base classes don’t get at all?
To avoid going into yet another 10,000-word explanation (for me it is late and I need to get ready for sleep), I'll make a few points and get back to you later if you have more questions.
If I am a 14th level character and I take 14 levels in Ranger, then Vanish is a level 14 ability.
If I am a 2nd level character and I take 2 levels in Rogue, then Cunning Action is a level 2 ability.
If I am a 14th level character and I take my first 12 levels in Ranger, and my 13th and 14th levels in Rogue, then Cunning Action is a level 14 ability.
You do the same comparisons. Every time you number crunch DPR, that is comparing features between classes. Every time you say the Ranger is unrivaled in tracking/exploration, you have made the comparisons of the Ranger's tracking abilities with other classes' abilities at various levels, and from those comparisons you have determined the Ranger is superior.
Determining whether two dissimilar features are equivalent is often very tricky. Sometimes you just look at DPR, that simplifies many comparisons, but the game isn't solely combat focused.
How do you compare Cunning Action with Jack of all Trades? They do two completely different things. Well, you look at the other aspects I used earlier such as Frequency of Use and Opportunity to Fail. These are not the only determinations, just the simplest and most universal ones I have come up with which applies to every single feature I can think of.
It would be fair to say that in Chess, the Queen is the single most powerful piece. It has the most versatility, the most range of any other piece in the game. It has the most opportunity of all the pieces to be used to capture an opponent's piece, and the least likely to be captured given how far away it can run to escape a dangerous situation.
If combat is incredibly common in dnd games, can be considered a guaranteed aspect of any game no matter what, then a combat feature is more likely to be used than a feature that is only available in regards to a specific creature type, and in that capacity only in limited, non-combat uses. Action Surge and Favored Enemy cannot be compared on the basis of DPR. They don't share that in common. They can be compared by how often I get to use Action Surge vs how often I get to use Favored Enemy. If I can pick between one feature I get to use once every single rest and one feature I only get to use IF I am interacting with a specific creature type, by the metric Action Surge is superior.
These are really only the simplest explanations I can give at this time. There is so much more nuance that matters when trying to determine objective vs subjective, but the frequency of use and opportunity for failure are objective measurements one can make.
My argument is that it isn't worth it because you can already do most of the cunning action stuff via spells and at that point the loss of progression delays or other abilities (He defines as Bad) hurts more (unless you have a specific build you are going for). I think multiclassing rogue is limiting and your better off taking a multiclass in a wisdom caster or staying ranger till 18. I do not believe his comparisons are fair because of the way they are isolated from the whole picture. I do not believe the situational abilities are as bleak as they make it. Table top rpgs are they way they are because of situations. almost all 1-3 level dips seem OP when you don't care about the capstone. Some people only measure damage and forget about the fights you avoid or the people saved along the way. He has clearly put time into thinking about it but it seems to start from a place of dissatisfaction.
He seems to dismiss situational ranger abilities but require situational setups and comparisons to prove points. You aren't always tracked but apparently they always have magic to track you if they want to. Your dm will not provide this. You will be in situations that wont let you use this feature. What if your playing a game that doesn't allow multiclassing Then a ranger will be grateful for vanish. There is a mentality that separating from the group is a bad thing but when a rogue scouts its more dangerous when he messes up than when a ranger does. Some times you need to climb a wall to unlock a gate or hide on your own for a while waiting to see if the rest are being followed. Sometimes you need to run off and find a pet then rejoin the party later. Some times you have to fight a hundred small enemies instead of one big smite target.
Could the ranger have been designed better? sure but it is not the crap a select few make it out to be. Ranger is not for ever one but Many campaigns have MVP rangers.
Ok. This is your post. The Dude abides. I’ll just ask questions.
How do you justify comparing class features of different classes at different levels just because they are similar? Fighters don’t get anything like either of these two abilities at any level, do they?
Fighter class is more of the front line tank-style so they don't have this within the class. On the other hand, the Ranger and Rogue classes are more of a secondary front line style or range style. That is why they have it in their class.
The Fighter has some subclass to make them a range-style or range-style. We could compare Cunning Action vs Manifest Echo from Echo Knight in the Fighter or Rogue forum.
Also, although the title is "Vanish vs Cunning Action", the comparison is more of lv 14 ranger vs lv11~12 ranger + lv 2 rogue. It is comparing two different builds within the same class not actually comparing two different classes.
The Ranger and the Rogue while at a glance seem similar are very different. The Ranger is a mix between the Fighter and the Druid with a little bit of stealth mixed in for good measure. That is very different from the stealth heavy and skill based class that is the rogue. So the rogue may hide better but ultimately the Ranger is going to fight better and supplement some of that skill work or combat prowess with spells.
That being said I want to touch on a few other things and I'm sorry if i missed them in reading all this. Firstly, I am willing to say that Vanish probably should have come at a lower level instead of at the point that it does. It would still be thematic and have more use if we had gotten it somewhere in the 6th to 10th level range instead of at 14. But that's an overall feeling that ranger gives anyway. That from level 6 up to level 14 many of it's abilities feel like they should have come at the level of the previous one. This is true for Hide in plain sight and it's true for favored enemy as well. They just feel like they would have been more fitting to get at a bit lower level. That particular issue now said and out of the way.
Onto Vanish. Vanish does not have a magical aura like Pass without trace does. So it cannot give you away like the spell can. You might not be able to be tracked but a savvy spell caster with Detect Magic can find you. This is part of the give or take between these two particular similar affects from different sources. Even worse there are a couple of ways to kind of end up in a situation where Detect magic can basically cost effectively be always on under certain circumstances. When your worried about being magically tracked this is one distinct point about the two that leans heavily in the favor of Rogues, Rangers, and possibly some monks to actually have an advantage over spells like pass without trace which make it easier to stealth groups but with certain logistical issues attached.
Now. For the issue of being magically tracked more specifically. While there is a variety of solutions that will block a variety ways of trying to do this. There is only one that covers almost all of the ways at once. And conveniently enough comes in the form of magical items that are even coveted by Rogues without the ability to go unmagically tracked and must simply rely on their skill rolls. This one handy dandy form is non-detection. This conveniently enough is a spell that the Ranger actually gets on his spell list though it isn't until 9th level since it is a 3rd level spell. It also has some hilarious little interactions with certain things about the ranger that I won't get into here. But with the blocking targeting of all divination spells and scrying sensors this makes you extremely hard to track under any circumstances. Should you do this through a magical item. My suggestion is to get a mage friend with Nystul's magical aura to make the ring or cloak and everything about you seem non-magical through 30 days of repeated castings. I make the same suggestion to rogues. Taking this out of the white room isolation environment becomes even more important here for other reasons as well. the Ranger may not have means to detect those that are attempting to magically track you or your party but other of your parties can easily have it if they invest in it. Some of them show up quite clearly to things like See invisible for example. Which is a nice low level magic spell that is easy to get by several kinds of caster.
Every martial class is jealous as hell of cunning action. It is probably half the reason to take 2 levels of Rogue, just like Hunter's Mark/Ranger spell casting/fighting style is half the reason to take 2 levels of Ranger. As a signature Rogue ability I don't believe it is fair to compare to Vanish. No one is getting all of Cunning Action at 14th or any level.
Moreover its not all you get at 14th level you also get a Favored Foe/Enemy improvement.
I don't think the argument is a fair comparison. Not saying that Vanish doesn't feel a little weak, but I think its the wrong comparison.
Thanks for the write up Korbin_Orion, I appreciate it. Definitely food for thought, and some good follow up comments from others. It is a really difficult comparison to make, and I think you've done a really good job of comparing it it one of the only ways we have. I'd be interested in seeing a comparison of the benefits of taking the 2 Rogue levels at different points in progression (start off with rogue then go 12 ranger, take it at level 5 etc.), but that is way too deep a dive haha.
On a side note, one thing I have seen a lot of is people saying advantage is equivalent to a +5 on a roll, which it is not. I know Wizards said for passive checks advantage is equivalent to +5 but the average roll on a d20 is 10.5, whilst the average roll with advantage is 13.825. The beauty of advantage is that it gives different benefits depending on the difficulty of the check, so at mid range it is equivalent to +5, but at the ends of the bell curve it is quite different, which means +5 is better overall. If the target is 20 with no bonuses and advantage on average I will succeed 9.75% of the time, whereas with +5 I have a 30% chance of succeeding, if the target is 11 with no bonuses and advantage I have a 75% chance of succeeding, whilst with +5 I also have a 75% chance. Sorry for this tangent.
This still seems like a convoluted effort to compare Late level ability enhancement to core class defining features. By level 3 every class is established in it's game play loop. At those levels many rogues realize they need to stay away from the danger and so disengage isn't used nearly as much but it does provide an option for players that want to take the risk. rangers gameplay loop is look at your available tools and setup the scenario in your favor. The section on frequency of use doesn't take into account that rangers already have an option for those same abilities. The argument equates the option to preform said action as always useful vs the practical times where it is actually useful. Sometimes you actually want to try and engage a enemy reaction just to save the rest of the party. The usefulness of cunning action-doge/dash at is different at higher levels for different classes. A ranger has other ways to do similar things by that point. At higher levels with Higher CR more monsters you see more specialized information but with expertise you have selected a specific skill rather than an a extensive one. You should have indicators as to what foe should be selected by that point but How do you chose if Archana would be more useful than investigation? Which check applies for Things like finding immunity or resistance (I've seen investigation, arcana, nature all used by different DMS or in different Scenario's)? what about tool proficiencies (disguise kit, gaming sets, poison kit, forgery are all great for interacting with a foe)? At higher levels you will more likely be required to make more varied checks than focus on one. Not having that information can cause the ranger and possibly other party members to waste their turns. The Weight of any given ability changes with growing encounter design and level. Your knowledge of a monster may give the whole party more damage to said monster outweighing the sneak attack.
The Section on cost of failure does not take into account creatures that can grapple. Many creatures come with free grapple attacks especially at higher levels. Most spell casters forget that their high-level abilities can be shut down by simple third level or lower-slots (counterspell, silence, fogcloud).
I had a group of mostly casters go into curse of strahd. They all picked optimal classes for the campaign. light cleric, necromancer wizard, Warlock. When they got to a certain tower no one realized that it was covered in something that worked like a silence bubble for spells only(no spells could be cast while inside). the warlock had literally sold or given away all his weapons. They then had an encounter where some witches on brooms out side threw magic at the party but the party had limited ability to return fire. It took more rounds than normal and turned what should have been an easy fight into a very hard one. The warlock was particularly pissed but after cooling down he realized every skill had a weakness and from then on carried a crossbow.
The HP loss is downplayed, It is stated like you lose a d4 and its no big deal but the loss grows with each level (Because your never going back to ranger because of ability overlap loss) but your also now losing that extra bonus when you spend that same hit die and it continues as you gain levels not to mention you now loose access to higher level features.
Comparing thieves can't and a regular language you did a huge disservice. A percentage of the population that speaks thieves can't vs a regular Language doesn't even compare. This helps out even if the actual enemy never comes into play. You could share that language with a party member for secret conversations or it could fill a gap that wasn't previously covered in the group and now you still get vanish to better be able to listen in on conversations. How about a note to cause a group to blame/frame favored foe in their own language allowing better chance to succeed.
In the end the statement "Vanish is such a poor ability that it significantly hampers the growth your character" . Does moving higher in level hamper a character? Does adding an ability Hamper a character? No. It might not be as beneficial under certain situations but it does not hamper the character. Loosing out on higher ranger spells or class features Might Hamper a character. Comparing any regular multi-class build to a single class will lead to positive synergies in favor of the multi-class just because all classes are Lvl 1-3 frontloaded. Is ranger the best candidate for Multiclassing? Probably but rogue may not be the best option. However, the rogue might be the best option to control the discussion to make vanish look as bad as possible. Vanish opens up options and allows you to stay ranger. Even if you never use Favored enemy ranger spellcasting progression still helps keep pace with other classes. That simple 4th level slot that you begrudgingly admit is good but suggest might not be used includes options like "Guardian of nature and conjure woodland beings". These are both powerful and flexible even if you don't get to choose the "woodland beings". Not to mention upcasting potential. Upcasting fog cloud or cure wounds can be a huge boon when those are needed.
Thanks for the write up Korbin_Orion, I appreciate it. Definitely food for thought, and some good follow up comments from others. It is a really difficult comparison to make, and I think you've done a really good job of comparing it it one of the only ways we have. I'd be interested in seeing a comparison of the benefits of taking the 2 Rogue levels at different points in progression (start off with rogue then go 12 ranger, take it at level 5 etc.), but that is way too deep a dive haha.
On a side note, one thing I have seen a lot of is people saying advantage is equivalent to a +5 on a roll, which it is not. I know Wizards said for passive checks advantage is equivalent to +5 but the average roll on a d20 is 10.5, whilst the average roll with advantage is 13.825. The beauty of advantage is that it gives different benefits depending on the difficulty of the check, so at mid range it is equivalent to +5, but at the ends of the bell curve it is quite different, which means +5 is better overall. If the target is 20 with no bonuses and advantage on average I will succeed 9.75% of the time, whereas with +5 I have a 30% chance of succeeding, if the target is 11 with no bonuses and advantage I have a 75% chance of succeeding, whilst with +5 I also have a 75% chance. Sorry for this tangent.
The middle of the bell curve is actually where you need the most help hitting a target number. Too low on the curve and your unlikely to make it even with help and too high on the bell curve and the excess doesn't do that much if anything for you. What you want to do is have that middle part be more successful not just guarantee that the high end exceeds the point of usefulness more often. Since that is true that means the general concept of Advantage being +5 is a solid one even if it's not necessarily specifically accurate in all circumstances. That's why it's considered a general rule of thumb and not a specific one.
Oh, for sure, no issues with it as a general rule of thumb as it is clear and easy to apply, just saying if you're using it to compare actual situations where you roll I think applying the +5 is overly generous to advantage. So if making a comparison like Korbin_Orion has done above you should consider that.
I'm not sure I agree that the middle is where you need the most help, surely the higher targets are where you need the most help? Certainly the middle is where you get the best benefit though, and it is likely it is also where you'll have the most targets. Apologies if I misread that statement.
One other thing that you can consider is targets that are 21 or over, with no bonus and advantage you could never naturally roll that high, whereas with +5 you could still make it with a 16+. Just food for thought is all, I like advantage a lot and comparing it to expertise/proficiency is actually quite interesting, to see what point does advantage outweigh proficiency outweigh expertise.
I'm not saying that I had this prepared weeks ago, but I did, I was super excited about the Rune Knight (still am) runes giving advantage to skills so needed to compare things. First column of each field is the amount of results possible, so disadvantage and advantage there are 400 combinations each, regular has 20 possible rolls. The second column is just working out the average rolls for each, first percentage column is the percent chance of rolling that particular number, the second percentage column is the possibility of rolling that number or above. This helps work things out a little, if you want to dive deeper.
Apologies for formatting, not sure how to edit the tables
Originally going to be a response in this thread that was turning into its own thing, so new thread.
This is an attempt at a full analysis of why Vanish is not just a poor feature in comparison, which on its own isn't enough to say the Ranger is a weak class, but as one part of the whole of the Ranger's negative attributes. If this were the ONLY problem with the Ranger, it would still be a bad feature but not make the Ranger bad as a whole. (The Necromancy Wizard's Grim Harvest leaves a lot to be desired, but the rest of the Necromancer and the base Wizard as a whole still make for a very strong character.)
I can read the two abilities in a vacuum and say "One gives me three new functions for my bonus action on universal combat features that normally take other classes their action to perform, interfering with that turn's attack. The other gives me one of those same functions, and instead of the other two functions I instead cannot be tracked by nonmagical means." If someone says these two abilities are equal, then that means they are claiming the following.
In so many cases where there are no numbers to crunch when comparing two features, you have to think in a more abstract way to determine cost vs benefits. (from here on out I will not be referring to the bonus action hide benefits as they are equivalent, and whenever I refer to Vanish I am only referring to being tracked by nonmagical means).
I will first compare them by their frequency of use, which includes HOW you activate or gain the benefits of the feature.
A bonus action to dash or disengage can be used in every single combat. The only conditions are that you be in combat, you can move, and you say you want to use it. It provides an immediate benefit, in this case, you get to move more than you normally would for that round or ignore opportunity attacks during your movement for the round, and can be used every single turn.
Vanish is a passive benefit, so it is always active and there is no "cost" to using the feature. But that is not the only condition required to gain the actual benefits. Someone has to actually be trying to track you. This is something entirely out of your control, and dependant entirely upon the DM deciding that there is an NPC that wants to try and find you.
It is one of the "highly situational niche" mechanics that are riddled throughout the Ranger. People dismiss this argument, completely disregarding how situational "you cannot be tracked by nonmagical means" is vs "you can only bonus action disengage in combat." Both are situational, though absolutely not to the same degree.
Active features are inherently more useful than reactive features. (although I am not sure if Vanish falls squarely into the category of "reactive" it is incredibly similar). Any feature where I get the benefits when I choose to do something grants me more control and versatility than a feature that only has benefits when someone else chooses to do something to me, further marred by the likelihood of someone actually attempting to track me (and having the skill to do so) vs. someone trying to hit me during combat or the need to move an extra 30 ft. per turn.
I can use Cunning Action actively and frequently. It is not dependant on the DMs plot. There WILL be combat. I can force combat if I desire, but that is unnecessary cause the DM always prepares combat encounters, and combat encounters are frequent and guaranteed eventually no matter what decisions I make. An NPC trying to track me is not guaranteed in any capacity. It is not nearly so common a scenario you will find yourself in, and if you do, you probably just end up in a fight where I am going to use Cunning Action.
The next issue comes with the opportunity for failure, this includes ways in which the feature can be circumvented. In what situation does dash or disengage fail? In what situation does Vanish fail?
For dash and disengage, generally, it is any situation where I can't move in combat. If I am in combat, my enemy wants me dead, and my combat abilities are directly tied to me not being dead, being able to move, avoiding anything that would prevent me from moving. Dash and disengage are features that directly assist me in avoiding situations where I could not use them again.
Vanish fails the moment magic is involved and capable of finding me. There are a lot of ways to magically track someone. If someone really really wants to find me, and they have the magic to do so, I can't stop them without very specific spells, often involving preparation ahead of time, and in some cases saving throws. If they fail, and their only goal is to find me, they can try again later. In most cases, I don't know that they are trying to magically find me.
If I am in combat and someone is attempting to stop my movement/kill me, I know that and I can respond right away. I have options and the knowledge to ensure that I can get back into a position or state where, if I wanted to dash or disengage again, I could. Once someone has magically found me, I can't make them unfind me if I am unaware. If I am aware that I have been magically tracked, my options to prevent further magical tracking are limited and costly, and Vanish is not one of them. If someone prevents me from using dash or disengage, once I regain movement, dash and disengage allow me to avoid being immobilized further for an incredibly low cost.
Remember that the "cost" of dash/disengage is nothing more than my bonus action for the turn. Every "cost" associated with preventing someone from magically tracking you that I can think of which is available to a player generally involves a spell slot or rarely a huge investment into another class for a niche class feature.
And then, Vanish only applies to me. Completely negated if I am traveling with a party and no one else has Vanish. Sure, I still can't be tracked, but if they are tracking the party then that provides yet another option for them to eventually find me. Then we're talking about the nature of most dnd games where anyone trying to find one person is probably trying to find the entire party.
The benefits of Vanish only apply when someone wants to track me. If someone really wants to find me, all they need is magic to do so which Vanish does nothing to prevent, or they just try to find my party member instead. Dash and disengage work every single time I am able to move. If you have the power and are in a position where you could prevent me from moving, I can respond to ensure I am still capable of movement without any significant cost.
Finally, what can be done to create a similar effect? I usually look for a spell that on its own is considered powerful and most closely resembles the benefits gained of a class feature, though in some cases you can just look to another class feature for a similar effect. It is telling that we are comparing lvl 2 Rogue's Cunning Action to a lvl 14 Ranger's Vanish, as Cunning Action is generally seen as superior to Vanish, but there are other options for Vanish as well.
Vanish most closely resembles the spell Pass Without a Trace, giving the exact same benefits as a portion of the spell. With no consideration as to the other benefits of Pass Without a Trace, you have the following:
This means you can duplicate a level 14 character's class feature as early as level 3 in another class, and within its own class, the Ranger can have its own level 14 feature as early as level 5 at the cost of a single spell slot. Maybe, MAYBE, if the feature and the spell were exactly the same, and the only difference was cost (spell slot/nothing) and duration (hour/always), you might come close to considering them equal. But then we throw in just how much more you gain from that spell slot. PWaT also gives +10 to Sleath checks and it applies to everyone within 30 ft. of you.
For roleplay purposes, you can cram a lot of people into a 30ft. radius, but even just putting it onto a battle grid and using that as the limitation you still have a potential 96 people that can fit into the range of your spell. The extra benefit of Vanish vs. PWaT? Bonus action Hide. But only for you.
Cunning Action is most similar to the Haste spell, giving the exact same benefits as a portion of the spell. With no consideration as to the other benefits of Pass Without a Trace, you have the following:
This instead provides the inverse. Instead of a low-level spell duplicating a higher-level feature, it is a low-level feature duplicating a higher-level spell. The fundamental similarity is that in many cases during normal combat, a player avoids using Dash, Hide, or Disengage because it takes an action that could otherwise be used for an attack. Cunning Action and Haste allow you to use such a feature while still getting to attack the same turn. With only these considerations they are close to equal but spending that 3rd level spell slot is still a hefty cost for only ten rounds. But then you include that Haste provides so much more in those ten rounds, the spell slot is well worth it.
We have a level 14 feature that is a weaker version of a 2nd level spell available to players up to 11 levels sooner, and 9 levels sooner in its own class, and a level 2 feature that is a weaker version of a 3rd level spell available to players 4 turns after you, and in niche cases 12 levels later in its own class if you are an Arcane Trickster.
And then, if a level 14 Ranger has Pass Without A trace cast on them, the benefits of Vanish become redundant. The similar features don't stack.
A level 2 Rogue that has Haste cast on them still has an Action, Bonus Action and Hasted Action. A Hasted Rogue can still use their Cunning Action to use their bonus action for Hide, Dash or Disengage.
Cunning Action in this case is the clear winner over Vanish.
Even in the incredibly niche ideal scenario for Vanish to shine on its own and I don't have Pass Without A Trace prepared, where my character is separated from the party and there is an NPC trying to track me through nonmagical means without my knowledge, I still have to rely on the DM to remember that I have Vanish without giving it away that someone is following me.
Even when taken in a vacuum, the two features show a clear winner in Cunning Action. It gets worse when you expand on the cost of actually gaining the separate features.
Because we are specifically comparing Vanish and Cunning Action, the final determination comes to making a Level 14 character that chose between either of these features. What do we gain/lose as a Level 14 Ranger vs a Level 12 Ranger/Level 2 Rogue. For this determination, we will make the assumption that Vanish and Cunning Action are actually equivalent, despite our evidence that Cunning Action is proven superior, so that this determination can be given its own weight before tipping the scales in favor of Cunning Action.
Vanish Ranger gains (assuming "maximum" power of spells available) a single 4th-level spell (usable 1/day), their final Favored Enemy Improvement, and a d10 HD. Cunning Action Ranger gains a Rogue Skill Proficiency, Thieve's Tools Proficiency, +1d6 Sneak Attack, Expertise in two skills (which can include the ones you just gained), Thieve's Cant, and a d8 HD. so the Cunning Action Ranger certainly gains quantity, what about quality?
Let's break down Favored Enemy Improvement. Choose a creature. Advantage on Wisdom (Survival) checks and Intelligence Checks to recall info about that creature, and a language spoken by it.
When choosing a language, your mileage may vary depending on DM. Whether I get any use out of Thieve's Cant vs a new FE language is somewhat equivalent. You can argue the likelihood that you will talk to a gnoll vs an elemental vs a thief, but ultimately the determination is dependant upon the DM. There is still a glaring exception to where if you pick Beasts as your favored enemy, you don't get any useful languages. The only beasts that speak are a Giant Owl, Giant Eagle, and Giant Elk which speaks the languages known as Giant Owl, Giant Eagle, or Giant Elk, respectively.
You can then compare advantage on Survival and Intelligence checks with Expertise. The fundamental benefits they share in common is getting bonuses on skill checks. Advantage is equivalent to an average +5 on a roll, whereas Expertise is a static doubling of your proficiency. At this point we are level 13 or higher, meaning our proficiency bonus is +5 doubled to +10. So the static Expertise is equal to the average Advantage roll. There is never a clear winner between Advantage and Expertise seeing as advantage applies to untrained skill checks as well, and Expertise eventually surpasses the average bonus of Advantage.
But where Expertise is higher quality is in the choices, versatility, and frequency of use over only getting Advantage over a single creature type. If I have expertise in Survival, I always have expertise in survival which applies to every single creature as well as situations that don't apply to that creature. I can take Expertise in Nature and I have proficiency in every single Nature check vs only Advantage if the Nature check pertains to info regarding a certain creature.
I'm also not restricted to choosing Survival or Knowledge checks. I can use my Expertise for any proficient skill, of which I have plenty to choose from.
From a quality standpoint, Expertise in any two proficient skills outweighs gaining a highly situational, DM dependant Advantage roll against a single creature type.
The hardest comparison to make is with the Vanish Ranger's 4th-level spell slot. Every spell slot is incredibly versatile for every class but is only usable once per day. A direct comparison can be made with Guardian of Nature and Sneak Attack. GoN gives the choice of for 10 minutes (concentration) you get +1d6 damage and a bunch of other good benefits or 10 temp hp and a different set of good benefits, but SA lets you always get +1d6 damage under conditions which are very easy to force as a Ranger/Rogue, and then the Cunning action Ranger still has the skill and tool proficiencies.
With Vanish Ranger, you may forego combat buffs with any utility spell, and it is still difficult to compare that with always active skill proficiencies and Sneak Attack.
With the versatility of getting to choose a 4th-level spell, the spell slot generally comes out ahead. Whether or not a spell is "more powerful" than Sneak Attack + skill/tool proficiencies is dependant on whether or not you would actually take said spell in the first place. Some spells may even be objectively weaker than these two features but you still like the option of having benefits for those situations in which it would apply. Comparing a feature with a spell slot is much more difficult than comparing a feature to an individual spell.
We now have the following:
For the purposes of these comparisons, I didn't consider Cunning Action and Vanish. Without consideration for those two features, a level 14 Ranger vs a Level 12 Ranger/Level 2 Rogue seems somewhat equivalent. But then you throw in just how clearly better Cunning Action is over Vanish, and you have an example of just how much Vanish brings down the quality of the Ranger. And you're still a Ranger. If you take two levels in Rogue you can still cast Pass Without a trace and be a better Level 14 Ranger than the Level 14 Ranger, you never actually lose Vanish in any practical sense. The only other thing you lose is the equivalent of a d4 in permanent HP.
Vanish is such a poor ability that it significantly hampers the growth your character gains through a single 4th-level spell slot. And that's not even at Level 14. The spell slot is gained at Level 13, so if you really want it then take that 13th level in Ranger and start going Rogue from there on out.
This is on top of other objectively bad features. Though the focus is on Vanish it should be noted a bad feature on top of other bad features is far worse than a bad feature on top of good features.
This same thing applies to every bad feature of the Ranger. Vanish still provides useful functionality, but at that level of commitment to a single class, I shouldn't be getting less at level 14 than a character at level 2.
When comparing two 14th level characters, one of them multiclass, some of the faults are not exclusive to the Ranger. 5e has front-loaded strong features into the majority of classes while higher-level features often fall short for the majority of classes.
I felt it was appropriate to add Third_Sundering's comments on the feature as well for some perspective that I didn't go into.
When comparing cunning action to vanish, One thing not mentioned was that rangers have zypher strike which is dash disengage and extra damage all for the cost of a first level spell slot. So the ranger could already have the equivalent of the two "Missing" cunning action abilities. It seems like you down played ranger spell casting entirely in your class comparison Not to mention, armor(AC) and equipment and hit die Or the fact that favored terrain and Favored enemy can both apply to the same check.
May I respond?
I specifically compared the abilities in a vacuum, which is necessary for an honest comparison. If you throw in the benefits of how some spells/features synergize with Vanish, you MUST do the same with Cunning Action. At this point, especially with the inclusion of spell slots, you can make any bad feature SEEM good.
I was also discussing Ranger heavy builds of the same level. This means that both Vanish Ranger and Cunning Action Ranger both have access to Zephyr Strike, both can have the same AC, equipment, HP (give or take up to 4 points), Favored Enemy, and Natural Explorer. The benefits of these can not be used to support a Level 14 Ranger and yet disregarded for a Level 12 Ranger/Level 2 Rogue.
In regards to Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer bonuses applying to the same check, this is far too niche and rare of an occurrence. You have to have chosen the right Favored Terrain, the right Favored Enemy, and be making a check where both apply at the same time. Two highly situational benefits that are completely dependent on the DMs campaign for a single roll of double proficiency with advantage, left up to the DMs interpretation that both would apply here. Maybe you get even luckier and you have a series of checks during these encounters. This is nowhere near enough of a benefit to warrant the accusation that I have downplayed or disregarded such circumstances entirely in my analysis.
Regarding Zephyr Strike specifically, you are correct that I had overlooked this spell, so let's do that now.
Zephyr Strike is available to all Ranger's beginning at level 2, and only on the Ranger spell list. Looking at only the similar benefits, you have the following:
In a similar fashion to Haste and Pass Without a Trace, you have a feature that duplicates a portion of a spell, but in this case, the spell and feature are gained at the same level. Considering nothing more than the costs associated with gaining the benefits, the two a fairly equal except that a Spell Slot is a greater, additional cost over that of Cunning Action. Thankfully Zephyr Strike has an additional boon in the form of Advantage on an attack with extra damage on a hit one time during the duration of the spell.
In practice, your character can be in 20 rounds of combat during a day and cast Zephyr Strike twice in order to gain a benefit greater than Cunning Action while still having your bonus actions available for 18 of those turns. Cunning Action is always active, is not dependant on spell slots. When the Ranger runs out of spell slots, the Rogue still has Cunning Action available. These two abilities are equivalent, difficult to gauge how much in favor of one or the other as Cunning Action still grants a bonus action Hide, which is appropriate seeing as they are gained at the same level of their respective classes.
(as a side note, discussing level 2 as a whole for the Ranger vs the Rogue actually brings Ranger on top by a fair margin. Whether Cunning Action is superior or equal to Zephyr Strike, the versatility of 2 spell slots, 2 known spells, and a Fighting Style objectively outweigh the benefits of Cunning Action)
So, a Level 14 Ranger can gain the two "missing" Cunning Actions with a spell slot, meaning their level 2 feature, and it is an equivalent ability. Vanish can be gained using Pass Without A Trace, meaning their level 5 feature, and it is a much stronger ability than the level 14 Vanish, even considering that PWaT does not give a bonus action to hide.
And again, Pass Without A Trace does not work in conjunction with the similar benefits of Vanish. You can not gain "unable to be tracked by nonmagical means" twice. A Level 12 Ranger/Level 2 Rogue can cast Zephyr Strike the first turn, gaining a permanent Disengage effect for 10 rounds at the cost of a bonus action. Then for the next nine rounds, the Cunning Action Ranger can still use their bonus action for dash or hide while still getting to attack.
Being part Rogue, the Advantage to an attack roll granted by Zephyr Strike allows us yet another opportunity to force Sneak Attack, so another d6 on top of the d8 if we hit.
Zephyr Strike provides no synergy to Vanish that Cunning Action does not also gain. Even if you use Vanish or Cunning Action to successfully hide, and then attack, being hidden grants you Advantage so you cannot stack it with the Advantage from Zephyr Strike.
An interesting note that Zephyr Strike is made very slightly better on a Ranger whose base speed is less than 30 ft.
You don't need permission to respond. If you expect to be taken seriously you can not lie, use fallacious arguments, misinterpret my position or be dishonest in any way.
Ok. This is your post. The Dude abides. I’ll just ask questions.
How do you justify comparing class features of different classes at different levels just because they are similar? Fighters don’t get anything like either of these two abilities at any level, do they?
Is your question specifically in regards to comparing features at different levels, just so I understand your question?
So like, comparing Cunning Action with Zephyr Strike is cool because they are gained at the same level, but comparing Cunning Action with Vanish is not because they are at different levels. This is how I interpret your question and I want to make sure that is the case before continuing.
Either, really. But more, why compare an ability the base rogue gets at level 2 with an ability the base ranger gets at level 14 with an ability the other base classes don’t get at all?
To avoid going into yet another 10,000-word explanation (for me it is late and I need to get ready for sleep), I'll make a few points and get back to you later if you have more questions.
If I am a 14th level character and I take 14 levels in Ranger, then Vanish is a level 14 ability.
If I am a 2nd level character and I take 2 levels in Rogue, then Cunning Action is a level 2 ability.
If I am a 14th level character and I take my first 12 levels in Ranger, and my 13th and 14th levels in Rogue, then Cunning Action is a level 14 ability.
You do the same comparisons. Every time you number crunch DPR, that is comparing features between classes. Every time you say the Ranger is unrivaled in tracking/exploration, you have made the comparisons of the Ranger's tracking abilities with other classes' abilities at various levels, and from those comparisons you have determined the Ranger is superior.
Determining whether two dissimilar features are equivalent is often very tricky. Sometimes you just look at DPR, that simplifies many comparisons, but the game isn't solely combat focused.
How do you compare Cunning Action with Jack of all Trades? They do two completely different things. Well, you look at the other aspects I used earlier such as Frequency of Use and Opportunity to Fail. These are not the only determinations, just the simplest and most universal ones I have come up with which applies to every single feature I can think of.
It would be fair to say that in Chess, the Queen is the single most powerful piece. It has the most versatility, the most range of any other piece in the game. It has the most opportunity of all the pieces to be used to capture an opponent's piece, and the least likely to be captured given how far away it can run to escape a dangerous situation.
If combat is incredibly common in dnd games, can be considered a guaranteed aspect of any game no matter what, then a combat feature is more likely to be used than a feature that is only available in regards to a specific creature type, and in that capacity only in limited, non-combat uses. Action Surge and Favored Enemy cannot be compared on the basis of DPR. They don't share that in common. They can be compared by how often I get to use Action Surge vs how often I get to use Favored Enemy. If I can pick between one feature I get to use once every single rest and one feature I only get to use IF I am interacting with a specific creature type, by the metric Action Surge is superior.
These are really only the simplest explanations I can give at this time. There is so much more nuance that matters when trying to determine objective vs subjective, but the frequency of use and opportunity for failure are objective measurements one can make.
My argument is that it isn't worth it because you can already do most of the cunning action stuff via spells and at that point the loss of progression delays or other abilities (He defines as Bad) hurts more (unless you have a specific build you are going for). I think multiclassing rogue is limiting and your better off taking a multiclass in a wisdom caster or staying ranger till 18. I do not believe his comparisons are fair because of the way they are isolated from the whole picture. I do not believe the situational abilities are as bleak as they make it. Table top rpgs are they way they are because of situations. almost all 1-3 level dips seem OP when you don't care about the capstone. Some people only measure damage and forget about the fights you avoid or the people saved along the way. He has clearly put time into thinking about it but it seems to start from a place of dissatisfaction.
He seems to dismiss situational ranger abilities but require situational setups and comparisons to prove points. You aren't always tracked but apparently they always have magic to track you if they want to. Your dm will not provide this. You will be in situations that wont let you use this feature. What if your playing a game that doesn't allow multiclassing Then a ranger will be grateful for vanish. There is a mentality that separating from the group is a bad thing but when a rogue scouts its more dangerous when he messes up than when a ranger does. Some times you need to climb a wall to unlock a gate or hide on your own for a while waiting to see if the rest are being followed. Sometimes you need to run off and find a pet then rejoin the party later. Some times you have to fight a hundred small enemies instead of one big smite target.
Could the ranger have been designed better? sure but it is not the crap a select few make it out to be. Ranger is not for ever one but Many campaigns have MVP rangers.
Fighter class is more of the front line tank-style so they don't have this within the class. On the other hand, the Ranger and Rogue classes are more of a secondary front line style or range style. That is why they have it in their class.
The Fighter has some subclass to make them a range-style or range-style. We could compare Cunning Action vs Manifest Echo from Echo Knight in the Fighter or Rogue forum.
Also, although the title is "Vanish vs Cunning Action", the comparison is more of lv 14 ranger vs lv11~12 ranger + lv 2 rogue. It is comparing two different builds within the same class not actually comparing two different classes.
The Ranger and the Rogue while at a glance seem similar are very different. The Ranger is a mix between the Fighter and the Druid with a little bit of stealth mixed in for good measure. That is very different from the stealth heavy and skill based class that is the rogue. So the rogue may hide better but ultimately the Ranger is going to fight better and supplement some of that skill work or combat prowess with spells.
That being said I want to touch on a few other things and I'm sorry if i missed them in reading all this. Firstly, I am willing to say that Vanish probably should have come at a lower level instead of at the point that it does. It would still be thematic and have more use if we had gotten it somewhere in the 6th to 10th level range instead of at 14. But that's an overall feeling that ranger gives anyway. That from level 6 up to level 14 many of it's abilities feel like they should have come at the level of the previous one. This is true for Hide in plain sight and it's true for favored enemy as well. They just feel like they would have been more fitting to get at a bit lower level. That particular issue now said and out of the way.
Onto Vanish. Vanish does not have a magical aura like Pass without trace does. So it cannot give you away like the spell can. You might not be able to be tracked but a savvy spell caster with Detect Magic can find you. This is part of the give or take between these two particular similar affects from different sources. Even worse there are a couple of ways to kind of end up in a situation where Detect magic can basically cost effectively be always on under certain circumstances. When your worried about being magically tracked this is one distinct point about the two that leans heavily in the favor of Rogues, Rangers, and possibly some monks to actually have an advantage over spells like pass without trace which make it easier to stealth groups but with certain logistical issues attached.
Now. For the issue of being magically tracked more specifically. While there is a variety of solutions that will block a variety ways of trying to do this. There is only one that covers almost all of the ways at once. And conveniently enough comes in the form of magical items that are even coveted by Rogues without the ability to go unmagically tracked and must simply rely on their skill rolls. This one handy dandy form is non-detection. This conveniently enough is a spell that the Ranger actually gets on his spell list though it isn't until 9th level since it is a 3rd level spell. It also has some hilarious little interactions with certain things about the ranger that I won't get into here. But with the blocking targeting of all divination spells and scrying sensors this makes you extremely hard to track under any circumstances. Should you do this through a magical item. My suggestion is to get a mage friend with Nystul's magical aura to make the ring or cloak and everything about you seem non-magical through 30 days of repeated castings. I make the same suggestion to rogues. Taking this out of the white room isolation environment becomes even more important here for other reasons as well. the Ranger may not have means to detect those that are attempting to magically track you or your party but other of your parties can easily have it if they invest in it. Some of them show up quite clearly to things like See invisible for example. Which is a nice low level magic spell that is easy to get by several kinds of caster.
Every martial class is jealous as hell of cunning action. It is probably half the reason to take 2 levels of Rogue, just like Hunter's Mark/Ranger spell casting/fighting style is half the reason to take 2 levels of Ranger. As a signature Rogue ability I don't believe it is fair to compare to Vanish. No one is getting all of Cunning Action at 14th or any level.
Moreover its not all you get at 14th level you also get a Favored Foe/Enemy improvement.
I don't think the argument is a fair comparison. Not saying that Vanish doesn't feel a little weak, but I think its the wrong comparison.
Some are really too busy having fun wading into lines of enemies and just swinging away to care about Cunning Action.
Thanks for the write up Korbin_Orion, I appreciate it. Definitely food for thought, and some good follow up comments from others. It is a really difficult comparison to make, and I think you've done a really good job of comparing it it one of the only ways we have. I'd be interested in seeing a comparison of the benefits of taking the 2 Rogue levels at different points in progression (start off with rogue then go 12 ranger, take it at level 5 etc.), but that is way too deep a dive haha.
On a side note, one thing I have seen a lot of is people saying advantage is equivalent to a +5 on a roll, which it is not. I know Wizards said for passive checks advantage is equivalent to +5 but the average roll on a d20 is 10.5, whilst the average roll with advantage is 13.825. The beauty of advantage is that it gives different benefits depending on the difficulty of the check, so at mid range it is equivalent to +5, but at the ends of the bell curve it is quite different, which means +5 is better overall. If the target is 20 with no bonuses and advantage on average I will succeed 9.75% of the time, whereas with +5 I have a 30% chance of succeeding, if the target is 11 with no bonuses and advantage I have a 75% chance of succeeding, whilst with +5 I also have a 75% chance. Sorry for this tangent.
This still seems like a convoluted effort to compare Late level ability enhancement to core class defining features. By level 3 every class is established in it's game play loop. At those levels many rogues realize they need to stay away from the danger and so disengage isn't used nearly as much but it does provide an option for players that want to take the risk. rangers gameplay loop is look at your available tools and setup the scenario in your favor. The section on frequency of use doesn't take into account that rangers already have an option for those same abilities. The argument equates the option to preform said action as always useful vs the practical times where it is actually useful. Sometimes you actually want to try and engage a enemy reaction just to save the rest of the party. The usefulness of cunning action-doge/dash at is different at higher levels for different classes. A ranger has other ways to do similar things by that point. At higher levels with Higher CR more monsters you see more specialized information but with expertise you have selected a specific skill rather than an a extensive one. You should have indicators as to what foe should be selected by that point but How do you chose if Archana would be more useful than investigation? Which check applies for Things like finding immunity or resistance (I've seen investigation, arcana, nature all used by different DMS or in different Scenario's)? what about tool proficiencies (disguise kit, gaming sets, poison kit, forgery are all great for interacting with a foe)? At higher levels you will more likely be required to make more varied checks than focus on one. Not having that information can cause the ranger and possibly other party members to waste their turns. The Weight of any given ability changes with growing encounter design and level. Your knowledge of a monster may give the whole party more damage to said monster outweighing the sneak attack.
The Section on cost of failure does not take into account creatures that can grapple. Many creatures come with free grapple attacks especially at higher levels. Most spell casters forget that their high-level abilities can be shut down by simple third level or lower-slots (counterspell, silence, fogcloud).
I had a group of mostly casters go into curse of strahd. They all picked optimal classes for the campaign. light cleric, necromancer wizard, Warlock. When they got to a certain tower no one realized that it was covered in something that worked like a silence bubble for spells only(no spells could be cast while inside). the warlock had literally sold or given away all his weapons. They then had an encounter where some witches on brooms out side threw magic at the party but the party had limited ability to return fire. It took more rounds than normal and turned what should have been an easy fight into a very hard one. The warlock was particularly pissed but after cooling down he realized every skill had a weakness and from then on carried a crossbow.
The HP loss is downplayed, It is stated like you lose a d4 and its no big deal but the loss grows with each level (Because your never going back to ranger because of ability overlap loss) but your also now losing that extra bonus when you spend that same hit die and it continues as you gain levels not to mention you now loose access to higher level features.
Comparing thieves can't and a regular language you did a huge disservice. A percentage of the population that speaks thieves can't vs a regular Language doesn't even compare. This helps out even if the actual enemy never comes into play. You could share that language with a party member for secret conversations or it could fill a gap that wasn't previously covered in the group and now you still get vanish to better be able to listen in on conversations. How about a note to cause a group to blame/frame favored foe in their own language allowing better chance to succeed.
In the end the statement "Vanish is such a poor ability that it significantly hampers the growth your character" . Does moving higher in level hamper a character? Does adding an ability Hamper a character? No. It might not be as beneficial under certain situations but it does not hamper the character. Loosing out on higher ranger spells or class features Might Hamper a character. Comparing any regular multi-class build to a single class will lead to positive synergies in favor of the multi-class just because all classes are Lvl 1-3 frontloaded. Is ranger the best candidate for Multiclassing? Probably but rogue may not be the best option. However, the rogue might be the best option to control the discussion to make vanish look as bad as possible. Vanish opens up options and allows you to stay ranger. Even if you never use Favored enemy ranger spellcasting progression still helps keep pace with other classes. That simple 4th level slot that you begrudgingly admit is good but suggest might not be used includes options like "Guardian of nature and conjure woodland beings". These are both powerful and flexible even if you don't get to choose the "woodland beings". Not to mention upcasting potential. Upcasting fog cloud or cure wounds can be a huge boon when those are needed.
The middle of the bell curve is actually where you need the most help hitting a target number. Too low on the curve and your unlikely to make it even with help and too high on the bell curve and the excess doesn't do that much if anything for you. What you want to do is have that middle part be more successful not just guarantee that the high end exceeds the point of usefulness more often. Since that is true that means the general concept of Advantage being +5 is a solid one even if it's not necessarily specifically accurate in all circumstances. That's why it's considered a general rule of thumb and not a specific one.
Oh, for sure, no issues with it as a general rule of thumb as it is clear and easy to apply, just saying if you're using it to compare actual situations where you roll I think applying the +5 is overly generous to advantage. So if making a comparison like Korbin_Orion has done above you should consider that.
I'm not sure I agree that the middle is where you need the most help, surely the higher targets are where you need the most help? Certainly the middle is where you get the best benefit though, and it is likely it is also where you'll have the most targets. Apologies if I misread that statement.
One other thing that you can consider is targets that are 21 or over, with no bonus and advantage you could never naturally roll that high, whereas with +5 you could still make it with a 16+. Just food for thought is all, I like advantage a lot and comparing it to expertise/proficiency is actually quite interesting, to see what point does advantage outweigh proficiency outweigh expertise.
I'm not saying that I had this prepared weeks ago, but I did, I was super excited about the Rune Knight (still am) runes giving advantage to skills so needed to compare things.
First column of each field is the amount of results possible, so disadvantage and advantage there are 400 combinations each, regular has 20 possible rolls. The second column is just working out the average rolls for each, first percentage column is the percent chance of rolling that particular number, the second percentage column is the possibility of rolling that number or above.
This helps work things out a little, if you want to dive deeper.
Apologies for formatting, not sure how to edit the tables