D&D 5E Xanathar's: Ranger - Gloom Stalker

[fuindordm]

When I read this subclass, I immediately imagined a team of gloom stalkers entering a region of total darkness, and then bumping into each other and getting confused because they can't see each other!

I think the ability is badly worded. Here's how I would rule the L3 ability: A gloom stalker in full darkness is allowed to hide from enemies with darkvision as if they had total cover, even if no physical cover is available. Hence, it's an active ability (not passive), takes an action, and can be interpreted more sanely with respect to both enemies and allies. Remember that even with total cover, you can't hide if the enemy is watching you and can see where you go. But this at least allows the gloom stalker to lay an ambush, or potentially hide if enemies are distracted.

Ben

 

[thethain]

When I read this subclass, I immediately imagined a team of gloom stalkers entering a region of total darkness, and then bumping into each other and getting confused because they can't see each other!

I think the ability is badly worded. Here's how I would rule the L3 ability: A gloom stalker in full darkness is allowed to hide from enemies with darkvision as if they had total cover, even if no physical cover is available. Hence, it's an active ability (not passive), takes an action, and can be interpreted more sanely with respect to both enemies and allies. Remember that even with total cover, you can't hide if the enemy is watching you and can see where you go. But this at least allows the gloom stalker to lay an ambush, or potentially hide if enemies are distracted.

Ben

This is not the actual wording of the ability.

The wording is you are invisible to a target if it can only see you due to darkvision.

 

[guachi]

Of course it's not the actual wording of the spell. That's why he says "Here's how I would rule the L3 ability". He doesn't like the wording and would change how it works to something he likes better.

 

[mellored]

Well, the wording is invisible. with no text when or if that invisibility breaks.

But underground most tunnels do not have a straight line of 60ft. So umbral sight can be countered with 1CP(a damn torch) or a cantrip(light). Because even dim light from it will reveal the ranger.

Bullseye lanter has bright light 60ft and dim light for 120ft. Unless you are ambushed by drow ranger(heh) with 150ft darkvision you are ok. But if you are in Underdark and ambushed by a drow ranger you are frakked whatever ranger he is

I think that the Gloom Stalker’s invisibility is the sort of thing that will depend a lot on your DM. If the DM loves the idea, then your campaign will feature teams of Duergar and Orcs trying to sneak around in the dark, prime pickings for the Stalker; but if (s)he doesn’t fancy it, then everyone will carry a torch, and it won’t matter. It’s a super cool ability though, so if I get a player using it, I’ll try to be the former.

High elve gloomstalker, with control flames as the bonus cantrip. 60' range to extinguish a 40' torch, and it's only S, so you won't spoil your sneaking.

I can just see the a kobold fortress, lights flickering out, their eyes switching to night vision and seeing no one, only to suddenly have an 3 arrows sticking out of them from an unseen enemy.