I just started playing in a campaign which will mostly be dungeon delving. For my 5th level Kobold character, (whom I am roleplaying as an experienced underdark guide), I decided to player a ranger/rogue combo and went with Gloomstalker for the ranger archetype. I have done a bit of internet browser to on Gloomstalker and I see there are some mixed opinions as to whether this archetype is a little over-powered or not.
There are 5 players in my party, and everyone has darkvision. Accordingly, we generally do not delve with a light source -- just the occasional casting of Dancing Lights.
The second benefit of Umbral Sight states "While in darkness, you are invisible to any creature that relies on darkvision to see you in that darkness."
Given the nature of this campaign, it seems like this is a pretty powerful ability since I will be generally invisible to many of the creatures in the areas we will be travelling, and this invisibility doesn't go away when I attack. (I'm sure we will at some time encounter creatures with light sources, or blindsight, but for the most part it sounds a little too good to believe to be true.)
I guess this could be a bit problematic too, as during battle if any ally wanted to target me with a beneficial spell (i.e. cure wounds) they would not be able to cast this -- or even know of my current wound status (well, aside from my "brave" kobold crying out in pain and maybe running up beside an ally to make contact with them, in the hopes they may be able to cast a spell on me -- I think based on RAW, even if I am in contact with them, they still can't see me, so they wouldn't be able to cast a spell with the affected area as: "target"?)
My specific questions are:
1. Has there ever been any comments provided by of the WotC team about Gloomstalkers and the power balance of their abilities?
2. Has anyone come up with a way to tweak the Umbral Sight ability to make it a little less powerful?
3. This feature seems to be "always on" regardless of whether I am unconscious or dead?
Note: invisibility does not mean automatically hidden. By RAW, you still have to Hide for people not to know your location. If you do not people know where you are, they simply cannot get a visual bead on you. That does turn off a lot of spellcasting both friendly and enemy, yes, but it's also easier to disarm than a lot of folks figure. Light one torch and throw it into the middle of the battlefield and your Umbral invisibility is gone in a forty-foot radius circle. Plenty of room for a lot of critters to fight in, especially in the tight confines of caves or dungeons.
As to your questions:
1.) Not that I know of. The Gloom Stalker is specifically meant to be very good in dark environments. 2.) I don't think it's necessary. And as I've never seen anyone make mention of weakening it, I would imagine that's a common viewpoint. 3.) As written, yes. But it's easy enough for a DM to rule otherwise if they find that more realistic for their game. Whatever techniques Gloom Stalkers use to dodge darkvision need them to be awake to work.
I'd say simply play it as written for now, and if it becomes overbearing you and your DM can work something out. Especially if you're an Experienced Underdark Guide. You're supposed to be good down there, lean into it and see what the DM does. Could be that more enemies than you thought carry or can generate light. Could be they start working tricks within the limits of darkvision, such as the lack of color differentiation and its shorter-than-you-think range. Seriously - we checked. The given sixty-foot reach of Darkvision would not allow me to see my own garage from the back porch of my house. I couldn't see all the way across my suburban back lawn with darkvision. Umbral Sight is stronger, but that works for you, not your whole team.
A DM who's clever enough can very much juke Darkvision. Let your DM have a chance to be clever, don't nerf yourself before it's necessary.
If you're concerned, I'd play a different race that doesn't have darkvision - that'd reduce Umbral Sight from 90' to 60' at least.
Otherwise, I think that while it's a pretty powerful start...the later subclass abilities aren't exactly overwhelming and it's not like the Ranger is known for it's OPness. I really wouldn't worry. It'll be pretty powerful at the start, but it won't be long before your teammates and monsters will catch up.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
If you do not people know where you are, they simply cannot get a visual bead on you. That does turn off a lot of spellcasting both friendly and enemy, yes, but it's also easier to disarm than a lot of folks figure.
To expand on this: magic in 5E requires a clear path, but not that the caster can see their target. Spells involving an attack roll can still be cast at an invisible target, it's just that the attack roll will be made with disadvantage. The caster does need to know the target's location, so likely Stealth and Perception checks will be called for.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
If you do not people know where you are, they simply cannot get a visual bead on you. That does turn off a lot of spellcasting both friendly and enemy, yes, but it's also easier to disarm than a lot of folks figure.
To expand on this: magic in 5E requires a clear path, but not that the caster can see their target. Spells involving an attack roll can still be cast at an invisible target, it's just that the attack roll will be made with disadvantage. The caster does need to know the target's location, so likely Stealth and Perception checks will be called for.
Don't they need to guess the location as well?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special sense. For the purpose of hiding, the creature is heavily obscured. The creature's location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves.
Attack rolls against the creature have disadvantage, and the creature's attack rolls have advantage.
Above are the rules for invisible. The only thing it does is make it so they cannot see you. Unless you successfully Hide they know where you are by the noises, tracks in dust, etc. that you make.
If you do not people know where you are, they simply cannot get a visual bead on you. That does turn off a lot of spellcasting both friendly and enemy, yes, but it's also easier to disarm than a lot of folks figure.
To expand on this: magic in 5E requires a clear path, but not that the caster can see their target. Spells involving an attack roll can still be cast at an invisible target, it's just that the attack roll will be made with disadvantage. The caster does need to know the target's location, so likely Stealth and Perception checks will be called for.
Don't they need to guess the location as well?
Yes, though that doesn't have to be a pure guess. The attacker can try to perceive the location of their target by other means than the strictly visual. In the case of a friendly caster, that might be made a little bit more easy too.
Darkvision lets you see as you were in dim light, but it also doesn't prevent the fact that if you are only in dim light, you get permanent disadvantage on all wisdom perception checks that rely on sight. Which means a -5 to all passive perception checks. This is a limitation most DMs don't put on because they just go darkvision = vision. It doesn't. It just prevents the blind condition. This inherently changes a lot of balance issues when dungeon delving because if the party has a -5/disadvantage to checks and the enemy has advantage due to darkness? Ambushes WILL happen.
The second clause of that is you are invisible TO ANY CREATURE. Including your party, which you pointed out.
Mike Mearls has tweeted specifically that you can choose if you are visible or not, and Crawford has tweeted that the See Invisibility spell would foil the particular gloomstalker feature. Yurei also points out correctly that just because you're invisible doesn't mean you're inperceptible. Invisibilty makes the target heavily obscured, but you can find them via noises, tracks, smells etc.
So I've answered 1 because of the tweets from game designers. Number 2 is I don't think its overpowered. It provides an advantage and a disadvantage.
Number 3 boils down to wording, and the way I read the first part of "You are also adept at evading creatures that rely on darkvision", you aren't evading people if you are dead. This ability can't function because you no longer are functional. To the points of turning it off and on, if you walk up to your healer and shake them, they can see you. You made it a point to see you. Now, if I'm the DM in that case, I might ask them to make a perception check to see if they notice its you(at disadvantage because they're in dim light). If you start yelling saying HEY IM OVER HERE HEAL ME, well, now the enemy can see you too. You are no longer making an attempt to evade and your class feature turns off.
When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you're guessing the target's location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target's location correctly.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you're guessing the target's location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target's location correctly.
It absolutely applies for attack rolls that arent spells, but being fair, considerations have to be made in the cases of "Are we doing theater of the mind or do we have maps", because maps inherently change the dynamic of it. Knowing the exact rules in this case is paramount to having an understanding of where your abilities are on or off and what their limitations are.
Chapter 10 of the SRD states for spellcasting:
A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell's magic. A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect (described below).
Unless a spell has a perceptible effect, a creature might not know it was targeted by a spell at all. An effect like crackling lightning is obvious, but a more subtle effect, such as an attempt to read a creature's thoughts, typically goes unnoticed, unless a spell says otherwise.
A Clear Path to the Target
To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover. If you place an area of effect at a point that you can't see and an obstruction, such as a wall, is between you and that point, the point of origin comes into being on the near side of that obstruction.
If the spell specifically states that you need to see the target? Unless you have some way of perceiving them, it would fail. Cure Wounds has a clause about touch. It just needs you to be able to touch something. Healing Word has a sight clause.
When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you're guessing the target's location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target's location correctly.
I read that as “guessing” is when they successfully hide, but you know they’re around (you were fighting them when they hid or something) so you are attacking hoping you hit. Or targeting a creature you can hear (they are invisible but not hidden so you know their location, 5’ square). Either way you have disadvantage but if you are guessing and it is not the right square, even two nat 20’s won’t help.
Darkvision in darkness allows dim light vision which qualifies as light obscurity giving you disadvantage. You have advantage because the opponent has the same problem, which means any other sources of advantage or disadvantage are canceled. A few feet of blindsight is valuable for this reason, since you can fully detect a foe and they can only partially detect you.
You also have disadvantage on perception checks at all distance you can see, which means its hard to detect any traps as you travel. Practically speaking, most darkvision adventures still want to have a light when they are traveling, they can see fully in dim light so they have better range with small light sources, but utter darkness is a hazard either way. A bullseye lantern or special light sources might be valuable for secrecy, but traveling in darkness isn't what most players think it is.
You also have disadvantage on perception checks at all distance you can see, which means its hard to detect any traps as you travel.
The exact wording means that disadvantage on perception checks is only for checks that rely on sight - which does apply to most traps - but sometimes perception is using one of your other senses.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I just started playing in a campaign which will mostly be dungeon delving. For my 5th level Kobold character, (whom I am roleplaying as an experienced underdark guide), I decided to player a ranger/rogue combo and went with Gloomstalker for the ranger archetype. I have done a bit of internet browser to on Gloomstalker and I see there are some mixed opinions as to whether this archetype is a little over-powered or not.
There are 5 players in my party, and everyone has darkvision. Accordingly, we generally do not delve with a light source -- just the occasional casting of Dancing Lights.
The second benefit of Umbral Sight states "While in darkness, you are invisible to any creature that relies on darkvision to see you in that darkness."
Given the nature of this campaign, it seems like this is a pretty powerful ability since I will be generally invisible to many of the creatures in the areas we will be travelling, and this invisibility doesn't go away when I attack. (I'm sure we will at some time encounter creatures with light sources, or blindsight, but for the most part it sounds a little too good to believe to be true.)
I guess this could be a bit problematic too, as during battle if any ally wanted to target me with a beneficial spell (i.e. cure wounds) they would not be able to cast this -- or even know of my current wound status (well, aside from my "brave" kobold crying out in pain and maybe running up beside an ally to make contact with them, in the hopes they may be able to cast a spell on me -- I think based on RAW, even if I am in contact with them, they still can't see me, so they wouldn't be able to cast a spell with the affected area as: "target"?)
My specific questions are:
1. Has there ever been any comments provided by of the WotC team about Gloomstalkers and the power balance of their abilities?
2. Has anyone come up with a way to tweak the Umbral Sight ability to make it a little less powerful?
3. This feature seems to be "always on" regardless of whether I am unconscious or dead?
healing
Note: invisibility does not mean automatically hidden. By RAW, you still have to Hide for people not to know your location. If you do not people know where you are, they simply cannot get a visual bead on you. That does turn off a lot of spellcasting both friendly and enemy, yes, but it's also easier to disarm than a lot of folks figure. Light one torch and throw it into the middle of the battlefield and your Umbral invisibility is gone in a forty-foot radius circle. Plenty of room for a lot of critters to fight in, especially in the tight confines of caves or dungeons.
As to your questions:
1.) Not that I know of. The Gloom Stalker is specifically meant to be very good in dark environments.
2.) I don't think it's necessary. And as I've never seen anyone make mention of weakening it, I would imagine that's a common viewpoint.
3.) As written, yes. But it's easy enough for a DM to rule otherwise if they find that more realistic for their game. Whatever techniques Gloom Stalkers use to dodge darkvision need them to be awake to work.
I'd say simply play it as written for now, and if it becomes overbearing you and your DM can work something out. Especially if you're an Experienced Underdark Guide. You're supposed to be good down there, lean into it and see what the DM does. Could be that more enemies than you thought carry or can generate light. Could be they start working tricks within the limits of darkvision, such as the lack of color differentiation and its shorter-than-you-think range. Seriously - we checked. The given sixty-foot reach of Darkvision would not allow me to see my own garage from the back porch of my house. I couldn't see all the way across my suburban back lawn with darkvision. Umbral Sight is stronger, but that works for you, not your whole team.
A DM who's clever enough can very much juke Darkvision. Let your DM have a chance to be clever, don't nerf yourself before it's necessary.
Please do not contact or message me.
If you're concerned, I'd play a different race that doesn't have darkvision - that'd reduce Umbral Sight from 90' to 60' at least.
Otherwise, I think that while it's a pretty powerful start...the later subclass abilities aren't exactly overwhelming and it's not like the Ranger is known for it's OPness. I really wouldn't worry. It'll be pretty powerful at the start, but it won't be long before your teammates and monsters will catch up.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
To expand on this: magic in 5E requires a clear path, but not that the caster can see their target. Spells involving an attack roll can still be cast at an invisible target, it's just that the attack roll will be made with disadvantage. The caster does need to know the target's location, so likely Stealth and Perception checks will be called for.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Don't they need to guess the location as well?
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Above are the rules for invisible. The only thing it does is make it so they cannot see you. Unless you successfully Hide they know where you are by the noises, tracks in dust, etc. that you make.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Yes, though that doesn't have to be a pure guess. The attacker can try to perceive the location of their target by other means than the strictly visual. In the case of a friendly caster, that might be made a little bit more easy too.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So a few points overall, right.
Darkvision lets you see as you were in dim light, but it also doesn't prevent the fact that if you are only in dim light, you get permanent disadvantage on all wisdom perception checks that rely on sight. Which means a -5 to all passive perception checks. This is a limitation most DMs don't put on because they just go darkvision = vision. It doesn't. It just prevents the blind condition. This inherently changes a lot of balance issues when dungeon delving because if the party has a -5/disadvantage to checks and the enemy has advantage due to darkness? Ambushes WILL happen.
The second clause of that is you are invisible TO ANY CREATURE. Including your party, which you pointed out.
Mike Mearls has tweeted specifically that you can choose if you are visible or not, and Crawford has tweeted that the See Invisibility spell would foil the particular gloomstalker feature. Yurei also points out correctly that just because you're invisible doesn't mean you're inperceptible. Invisibilty makes the target heavily obscured, but you can find them via noises, tracks, smells etc.
So I've answered 1 because of the tweets from game designers. Number 2 is I don't think its overpowered. It provides an advantage and a disadvantage.
Number 3 boils down to wording, and the way I read the first part of "You are also adept at evading creatures that rely on darkvision", you aren't evading people if you are dead. This ability can't function because you no longer are functional. To the points of turning it off and on, if you walk up to your healer and shake them, they can see you. You made it a point to see you. Now, if I'm the DM in that case, I might ask them to make a perception check to see if they notice its you(at disadvantage because they're in dim light). If you start yelling saying HEY IM OVER HERE HEAL ME, well, now the enemy can see you too. You are no longer making an attempt to evade and your class feature turns off.
From the Basic Rules:
Does this not apply?
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It absolutely applies for attack rolls that arent spells, but being fair, considerations have to be made in the cases of "Are we doing theater of the mind or do we have maps", because maps inherently change the dynamic of it. Knowing the exact rules in this case is paramount to having an understanding of where your abilities are on or off and what their limitations are.
Chapter 10 of the SRD states for spellcasting:
If the spell specifically states that you need to see the target? Unless you have some way of perceiving them, it would fail. Cure Wounds has a clause about touch. It just needs you to be able to touch something. Healing Word has a sight clause.
I read that as “guessing” is when they successfully hide, but you know they’re around (you were fighting them when they hid or something) so you are attacking hoping you hit. Or targeting a creature you can hear (they are invisible but not hidden so you know their location, 5’ square). Either way you have disadvantage but if you are guessing and it is not the right square, even two nat 20’s won’t help.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Darkvision in darkness allows dim light vision which qualifies as light obscurity giving you disadvantage. You have advantage because the opponent has the same problem, which means any other sources of advantage or disadvantage are canceled. A few feet of blindsight is valuable for this reason, since you can fully detect a foe and they can only partially detect you.
You also have disadvantage on perception checks at all distance you can see, which means its hard to detect any traps as you travel. Practically speaking, most darkvision adventures still want to have a light when they are traveling, they can see fully in dim light so they have better range with small light sources, but utter darkness is a hazard either way. A bullseye lantern or special light sources might be valuable for secrecy, but traveling in darkness isn't what most players think it is.
The exact wording means that disadvantage on perception checks is only for checks that rely on sight - which does apply to most traps - but sometimes perception is using one of your other senses.