D&D 5E Is It Impossible To Benefit From 'One With Shadows'?

[Arial Black]

The warlock invocation, 'One With Shadows' reads,"When you are in an area of dim light or darkness, you can use your action to become invisible until you move or take an action or a reaction."

Brilliant! So, I just take my action to do this and I'm invisible, hidden from view and able to attack from hidden to get advantage on my attack. Right?

No. being invisible is not enough. To be hidden, you have to take the Hide action while in cover, and if your cover goes away then you are no longer 'hidden'. Invisibility counts as that cover, but you still have to take the Hide action in order to count as 'hidden'.

Okay, I move to an area of dim light, use my Action to use One With Shadows to become invisible, then use my bonus action to Hide, congratulating myself on being a multiclass rogue/warlock.

As soon as you use your bonus action to Hide, your One With Shadows ends. It ends because it says that you are invisible until you use an Action, ans a bonus action counts as an Action. Since your invisibility ends, you no longer have cover so you are not 'hidden'.

Okay, I'll do it the other way around! I'll move to an area of dim light, use my bonus action to Hide and then....

No! You can't use your bonus action to Hide at this point because you don't have cover! You're not invisible yet.

What? Then how can One With Shadows actually work? Maybe we could say that the dim light I move to counts as enough cover to use a Hide action to become 'hidden'?

Yes, we could.

Er...if I can become 'hidden' without becoming invisible...then what's the point of One With Shadows?

Anyone?

 

[jaelis]

Hide first. In dim light you'll need some other kind of cover or concealment (or another ability) to help. But then if you're later exposed you remain invisible and hidden. Also the ability is useful outside of combat where hiding is generally more flexible. Be invisible while you sleep!

 

[CapnZapp]

You do gain advantage from being invisible even if not hidden.

But the simplest answer - you become invisible. That's the point of the invocation!

Now people can't see you, which means they might attack somebody else, not spot you and walk past you, and any other number of utility cases.

You, on the other hand, seem to be fixated on invisibility helping you to hide. What if the invocation's language is cunningly and intentionally phrased to prevent exactly this?

 

[Arial Black]

I was wondering how being invisible without being 'hidden' (because you didn't use an action to Hide) interacts with Perception/Stealth.

 

[CapnZapp]

I was wondering how being invisible without being 'hidden' (because you didn't use an action to Hide) interacts with Perception/Stealth.

Since those rules are practically incomprehensible, nobody knows!

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Good catch.

In dim light you can use a the hide action because you have concealment. You are not seen clearly enough.

So maybe the intention really is hide first. If noone is around you have total cover from everybody. And then just become invisible after that and wait.
It may not be meant for combat. And actually that is how I imagined it. What is it good if you can't move
I rather saw it as a surprise attack or better way to use the dodge action.
So hide in shadow. Become invisible. Surprise.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I was wondering how being invisible without being 'hidden' (because you didn't use an action to Hide) interacts with Perception/Stealth.

By my reading, it you are invisible but not hidden, you have the benefits of being invisible but not those of being hidden. In other words, you have advantage on attacks against opponents who can't see you, opponents who can't see you have disadvantage on their attack rolls, and opponents who would normally be aware of you know which space you currently occupy (because you're not hidden).

EDIT
So, in effect, it doesn't interact with the Perception/Stealth rules any more so than if you were not invisible. (Apart from invisibility allowing you to hide without cover.)

 

[KahlessNestor]

Unless you're a wood elf or have the Skulker feat, that's not true. Dim light doesn't provide enough obscurity (there is no concealment in 5e). Dim light only provides disadvantage on Perception.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

[Giant2005]

I wouldn't use it in combat in the first place. Losing an action in order to take the next action with advantage is just plain bad action economy. Instead treat it like a beefed up version of the Ranger's Hide in Plain Sight - you hide somewhere where you expect your enemies to pass by and then turn invisible. It is basically HiPS except you get to be invisible too.

 

[Dausuul]

One more example of why the Stealth rules need to be junked and redone. They're designed to handle "a rogue ducking behind cover." They don't do any other scenario well.