5E New Spell: Vanish

Xeviat

Explorer
Hi everyone. Coming off my threat aboud required class skills, and the ongoing Ranger discussions here, I'm putting the final touches on my table's Ranger rewrite (I figure half of all tables are using a variant ranger of someone's design, it's the cool thing to do). In that process, I'm cutting Hide in Plain Sight (this is getting worked into my Expanded Skills as a feature of Survival, as I don't feel like this is a 10th level ability) and dissolving Vanish (I'm giving the ranger a Cunning Action-style bonus action ability that will include Hide, and wriggling the trackless into the ranger's version of Land's Stride).

In the midst of this, though, I had another idea. Rather than having a class ability like Vanish that largely relies upon a skill that the ranger might not have proficiency in, why not move an ability like that into the Ranger's spells? They get to choose which spells they know, so a Ranger who doesn't care about stealth would simply not choose a stealth spell.

So, here's the spell I came up with.

VANISH
3rd-level illusion
Casting Time: 1 bonus action
Range: Self
Components: V, S, M (???)
Duration: Concentration, up to 1 minute

You become invisible until the spell ends. As part of the action used to cast this spell, you can also use the Hide action. Anything you are wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on your person. The spell ends for you if you attack or cast a spell.


I made this 1 level higher than Invisibility to account for the reduced action cost (akin to the Sorcerer's quicken spell). I reduced the duration to pay for the free Hide action built in. Using this spell, a Ranger or an Arcane Trickster could disappear under direct observation and get to a hiding place. This was a feature of 3.5's Ranger that I missed (camouflage and hide in plain sight), but that I now think belong more in the Ranger's spell's than as a class ability.

Thoughts?

 

Arvok

Explorer
Seems balanced.

Material component could be dirt or soot applied to the face as part of the casting. That would give it the right feel, IMO.
 

Flamestrike

Explorer
Hi everyone. Coming off my threat aboud required class skills, and the ongoing Ranger discussions here, I'm putting the final touches on my table's Ranger rewrite (I figure half of all tables are using a variant ranger of someone's design, it's the cool thing to do). In that process, I'm cutting Hide in Plain Sight (this is getting worked into my Expanded Skills as a feature of Survival, as I don't feel like this is a 10th level ability) and dissolving Vanish (I'm giving the ranger a Cunning Action-style bonus action ability that will include Hide, and wriggling the trackless into the ranger's version of Land's Stride).

In the midst of this, though, I had another idea. Rather than having a class ability like Vanish that largely relies upon a skill that the ranger might not have proficiency in, why not move an ability like that into the Ranger's spells? They get to choose which spells they know, so a Ranger who doesn't care about stealth would simply not choose a stealth spell.

So, here's the spell I came up with.

VANISH
3rd-level illusion
Casting Time: 1 bonus action
Range: Self
Components: V, S, M (???)
Duration: Concentration, up to 1 minute

You become invisible until the spell ends. As part of the action used to cast this spell, you can also use the Hide action. Anything you are wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on your person. The spell ends for you if you attack or cast a spell.


I made this 1 level higher than Invisibility to account for the reduced action cost (akin to the Sorcerer's quicken spell). I reduced the duration to pay for the free Hide action built in. Using this spell, a Ranger or an Arcane Trickster could disappear under direct observation and get to a hiding place. This was a feature of 3.5's Ranger that I missed (camouflage and hide in plain sight), but that I now think belong more in the Ranger's spell's than as a class ability.

Thoughts?

Why roll Hide into it?

Thats the benefit of having it quickened as a bonus action. Bonus action cast, Action to Hide, move away (or whatever).

Personally I would have duration be lowered to 'until the end of your next turn', and remove the auto-hide function.
 

Xeviat

Explorer
Why roll Hide into it?

Thats the benefit of having it quickened as a bonus action. Bonus action cast, Action to Hide, move away (or whatever).

Personally I would have duration be lowered to 'until the end of your next turn', and remove the auto-hide function.
Because I want the ranger to be able to use this to attack and then disappear. Without the Hide, they'd be noticed as they moved away.

I could probably remove that so it would be an escape spell or be used for setting up impromptu ambushes when the terrain offers little cover.

I don't think I'd want it to be a 1 round only spell. That would be purely for getting to a hiding place, and I wouldn't make it a higher level spell at that point.
 

Flamestrike

Explorer
Because I want the ranger to be able to use this to attack and then disappear. Without the Hide, they'd be noticed as they moved away.
They can attack [Attack action] and then dissapear [Cast spell as Bonus action] and move away.

Being invisible (but not yet hidden) they're immune to AoO's and most spells and class features that require a 'target you can see' (which is most of them). When they walk off, their opponent cant make an AOO against them.

Their target then gets their turn. Presumably they walk over and attack the Ranger (at disadvantage due to invisibility) making a few wild swings in his general direction.

It's the Rangers turn again now, so he Bonus action [Hides] seeing as you've given that ability to Rangers, and can do whatever they want with the rest of their turn.

There is no need to roll the Hide action into the spell. The Hide action immediately follows the spell (however it might be broken up by a turn ending and another one starting).

I shudder to think what a Lore Bard 6+/ Rogue X would do with the spell you have as written. It would be like 3.5's 'auto win, impossible to pin-point' invisibility, only useable as a bonus action.
 

ZenBear

Villager
Why roll Hide into it?

Thats the benefit of having it quickened as a bonus action. Bonus action cast, Action to Hide, move away (or whatever).

Personally I would have duration be lowered to 'until the end of your next turn', and remove the auto-hide function.
If the duration is one round, then it should be a lower level spell than Invisibility. That being said, I like this idea. I’m working on a spell list where every spell scales from cantrip to 9th level, and I’m definitely using this for low level invisibility.
 

Flamestrike

Explorer
If the duration is one round, then it should be a lower level spell than Invisibility.
But it's castable as a bonus action, meaning it comes with an action economy buff.

It allows someone who knows the spell to cast it [Bonus action] and immediately take the Hide action (rendering themselves largely immune to most attacks).

Reduced duration drops it a level; but improved action economy and usage brings it back up a level.
 

ZenBear

Villager
But it's castable as a bonus action, meaning it comes with an action economy buff.

It allows someone who knows the spell to cast it [Bonus action] and immediately take the Hide action (rendering themselves largely immune to most attacks).

Reduced duration drops it a level; but improved action economy and usage brings it back up a level.
Reduction of 1 hour to 1 round is, in my opinion, much more extreme a difference than the action economic efficiency of using a bonus action. A 2nd level spell hardly seems worth a single round of safety.
 

collin

Explorer
This is reminiscent of the Pathfinder Vanish spell, which I happen to like. I agree with other posters that 1 minute is too long, and that it should be a lower level spell that lasts for a much shorter period of time (although 1 round seems almost too short), but should not require concentration. I also agree the Hide action is unnecessary and just adds unneeded complexity.
 

77IM

Explorer!!!
If you shorten this to 1 round, then including Hide in the spell effect becomes essential. Otherwise it's generally weaker than misty step, which is a bonus action, and only 2nd level. Because if vanish is only 1 round, then you need to use that round to move behind cover and Hide. So the thing that makes it 3rd level (and better than misty step) would be the free Hide action.

That also strikes me as very ranger-ish: you attack, and then turn invisible and dive behind a nearby bush. Where did he go???
 

ParanoydStyle

Peace Among Worlds
Pretty cool. Personally, I'd rather see it as a 2nd Level spell with a duration of "until the end of your next turn".

Right now, it is better than Invisibility in every single way, and while it is true that many 3rd level spells are simply superior to their second level counterparts (Fireball is just plain better than scorching ray) in many other cases while they're better overall, they're different with different strengths and weaknesses.

Clairvoyance does not accomplish what Detect Thoughts does, Fear won't freeze an enemy in place quite like Hold Person, Mirror Image provides another kind of protection that overlaps with Blur/Blink, Gust of Wind (2nd Level) trumps some 3rd level spells (i.e. Stinking Cloud), Nondetection protects from magical surveillance but not the naked eye like Invisiblity, and so on.

Overall, though, I really quite like it vanish.
 

the Jester

Legend
I have a thing against re-using names from older editions if it's not a straight up conversion. Since there was a vanish spell in earlier editions (1e, at least; not sure how far along it made it), I would change the name. But that's a thing for me, not necessarily for other DMs, so feel free to ignore that.

The spell itself looks fine to me.
 

Advertisement

Top