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

[Arial Black]

You could always multiclass rogue, then you can hide as bonus action.

No use.

In my OP I used a multiclass Rog/War as my example.

Briefly: I move to an area of dim light. I use my action to turn invisible via One With Shadows. I then use my bonus action to Hide via Cunning Action. Unfortunately, using that bonus action breaks my invisibility because One With Shadows ends if I take an action, and bonus actions are actions according to RAW.

So I've completely wasted my time! Never mind, I'll try again, but this time I'll do it the other way round:-

I move to an area of dim light, use my bonus action to Hide...oh wait! I can't Hide without cover, and it's the invisibility that gives me cover to Hide and I haven't got cover until I'm invisible.

It's a catch 22.

But wait! Why don't I just use the dim light as the cover I need for a Hide check? Well, if I could do that, what would I need One With Shadows for?

Remember, I'm not turning invisible to gain advantage or give my enemies disadvantage. I'm turning invisible because I don't want them to know where I am at all! But being invisible without also being 'hidden' doesn't do that, and One With Shadows prevents you from using your action to Hide.

This is the problem.

 

[Mirtek]

; then invisibility means nothing at all except to give disadvantage on attack rolls.

there you nailed the Problem with RAW and invisible creatures

Not in my book.

which means you're already correcting RAW

DM: You get in the room. You immediately notice an invisible sword on the ground. After all the sword can't take a hide action...

which Highlights the RAW nonesense even more, as stealth only applies to creatures for no logical reason

Sometimes, the RAW is right. Sometimes the RAI is way better.

RAI is definately better here, but doesn't help disussing the flaws of RAW

 

[Plaguescarred]

You don't use One With Shadow to make your location unknown, you use it to not seen from everyone in dim lights and from darkvision user in darkness. It's just an invisibility ability requiring you to be in dim light or darkness to use it. Unless the DM decide to run it this way.

Hiding is the by-the-book way to conceal your position both RAW and RAI.


@JeremyECrawford Being hidden is the by-the-book way to conceal your position. The DM may decide that other methods can also conceal it.

 

[Corwin]

there you nailed the Problem with RAW and invisible creatures

which means you're already correcting RAW
which Highlights the RAW nonesense even more, as stealth only applies to creatures for no logical reason
RAI is definately better here, but doesn't help disussing the flaws of RAW

Once more, with feeling...

RAW is *actually* that the DM determines whether an invisible something/someone is: A) seen, B) unseen, or C) it is uncertain and a die roll is called for. *That* is RAW.

 

[Arial Black]

You don't use One With Shadow to make your location unknown, you use it to not seen from everyone in dim lights and from darkvision user in darkness. It's just an invisibility ability requiring you to be in dim light or darkness to use it. Unless the DM decide to run it this way.

Hiding is the by-the-book way to conceal your position both RAW and RAI.


@JeremyECrawford Being hidden is the by-the-book way to conceal your position. The DM may decide that other methods can also conceal it.

Where did you get that JC quote?

What question (if any) was he answering?

 

[Plaguescarred]

Where did you get that JC quote?

What question (if any) was he answering?

https://thesageadvice.wordpress.com/tag/hidden/

@wax_eagle can you target a creature who is obscured but not hidden? More precisely, is hidden the only way to conceal position?
​

@JeremyECrawford Being hidden is the by-the-book way to conceal your position. The DM may decide that other methods can also conceal it.
​

 

[Helldritch]

Sometimes I think that by trying to be too simplistic, the devs increased the complexity of the rules.
That is why there are some RAI that are way better.
Previous edition can help. But nothing beats the DM judgment. When I make that kind of call, I read (with the players) the rule and we try to reach a common understanding.

If a rule is clearly badly written (as is the case presently) then we try to be as close as possible to what we believe to be the RAI.

With this ability, if the warlock uses it on the spot without previous preparation, he's probably toast. But who knows, you can be on the lucky side.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Once more, with feeling...

RAW is *actually* that the DM determines whether an invisible something/someone is: A) seen, B) unseen, or C) it is uncertain and a die roll is called for. *That* is RAW.

except the stealth rules specify otherwise, in this case. RAW is that generally the DM determines stuff like that, but RAW is also that being unseen doesn't make you hidden, only taking the Hide Action makes you hidden.

 

[Plaguescarred]

RAW is Rule As Written, which is independent of DM's determination. The rules are they they are regardless of the ruling the DM will make out of them. Barring any surpernatural means, you cannot see an invisible creature this with any kind of check but its location is otherwise not concealed unless it take the Hide action.

Wait who let people see invisible creature with a check???

 

[Helldritch]

Wait who let people see invisible creature with a check???

Certainly not me.

I still find strange that you automatically knows the location of invisible objects/peoples/creatures if they are not hidden. You can't see them but you sure know where they are... In my head, this does not add up.