Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
EN Publishing
Cover Clarifications
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TheHirumaChico" data-source="post: 9038662" data-attributes="member: 7022501"><p>My apologies TreChiron, but I'm going to continue your thread topic with some additional questions of my own related to Cover. Your subject line is good, so I figure having more Cover Clarifications discussed within this same thread could be helpful for anyone looking to get their Cover questions answered rather than starting another thread on essentially the same topic.</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><u>Positional Effects</u>: On p. 150 of the NOW and OLD Core rulebook (p. 169 in NEW), there are a couple of handy charts of positional effects (<a href="https://www.woinrules.com/the-rules/combat/positional-effects" target="_blank">these can also be found in the WRRD</a>). In the <strong><em>Ranged Modifiers</em></strong> section of all these charts, there is an entry for "<strong><span style="color: rgb(85, 57, 130)">Cover</span></strong>" which is -2d6, a separate entry for "Firing into melee" which is also -2d6, and a separate entry for "Obscured (smoke, darkness, etc.)" which is again -2d6. The NEW chart adds one more entry for "Suppressive fire" which is once more -2d6. In the NOW Core rulebook on the same page, but not in the charts, are text descriptions of these modifiers. In the text description section entitled <strong><em>Other Modifiers</em></strong>, it says that making a ranged attack at someone engaged in melee combat "takes a -2d6 <strong><span style="color: rgb(85, 57, 130)">cover</span></strong> penalty." And then it goes on to say "Similarly, in darkness or under cover of obscuring fog or smoke, a –2d6 <strong><span style="color: rgb(85, 57, 130)">cover</span></strong> penalty is inflicted." I'm curious whether these conditions mean that the targets are considered as being "<strong><span style="color: rgb(85, 57, 130)">in cover</span></strong>" for reasons that I go into below. Also, do these penalties stack or not because they are all <strong><span style="color: rgb(85, 57, 130)">cover</span></strong> penalties? I'm inclined to say they do stack since they are listed separately in the handy charts and because I could see it being exceedingly difficult to shoot at a target engaged in melee with one's ally while they are behind a half-wall or a bar in a smoky room. Even more so if that target is also benefitting from their ally's Suppressive Fire.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Follow on question to this is whether one can "pin down" a target that is in darkness, smoke, fog, etc. by "chipping away" its cover. I'm inclined to say no as one doesn't really chip away at darkness or obfuscating vapors, which would then imply that these targets are not "<strong><span style="color: rgb(85, 57, 130)">in cover</span></strong>". In the same vein, I don't think one can chip away at the cover of a target that is engaged in melee as that would imply you're chipping away at an ally!</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><u>Exploits</u>: A few exploits are also dependent on whether a target is defined as "<strong><span style="color: rgb(85, 57, 130)">in cover</span></strong>":<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Dodge (per WRRD): "You may use a reaction to dodge one attack you are aware of, as long as you are not <strong><span style="color: rgb(85, 57, 130)">in cover</span></strong>. State your intention before the attack roll. The attacker suffers a -2d6 penalty for that attack."<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Does this mean that one cannot Dodge if they are in darkness/smoke/fog?<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I don't see why not, but I'd love to know what others think.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Does this mean that one cannot Dodge if they are engaged in melee?<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I can understand not being able to Dodge a Ranged Attack while engaged in melee with someone other than the shooter, but I also believe one can certainly Dodge a melee attack by the melee opponent. </li> </ul></li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Spray (per WRRD): "When using a weapon with the auto trait you may spend all your actions to spray a 30’ cone, making one attack against every target <strong><u><em>not in cover</em></u></strong> within the cone. Make one attack roll and apply it to the RANGED DEFENSE of all within that area."<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Does this mean one cannot use the Spray exploit to fire a 30' cone at a group of persons engaged in melee?<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">My opinion is that Spray can be used, albeit with the consequence that the shooter may hit targets they would not wish to hit, though I'm keen to hear others' thoughts.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Does this also mean that one cannot use the Spray exploit against targets in a foggy area or a smoky corridor?<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">My opinion is that Spray can be used, but with a -2d6 penalty to the single attack roll, though again I'm keen to hear others' thoughts.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Would a single target that is benefitting from an ally's Suppressive Fire, who is amongst several possible targets within the potential 30' cone of a Spray attack, be immune to the Spray attack while the others are not?<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">My opinion is less formed on this one. I'm inclined to say that Spray can still be used, but I don't think I would apply the -2d6 Suppressive Fire penalty because that would defy the definition of Suppressive Fire providing the benefit of Cover to a "specific ally." Again, the opinions of others would be most welcome and much appreciated.</li> </ul></li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Hunker down (p. 215 of NOW): 'Marines take half damage when "<strong><span style="color: rgb(85, 57, 130)">in cover</span></strong>" '. I could see this working when the marine is engaged in melee with an ally the shooter doesn't want to hit, but I'm not sure I can convince myself that darkness/smoke/fog would trigger this benefit. It seems to be a benefit that depends on the presence of more solid cover that can take the damage instead of the marine.</li> </ul></li> </ul><p>I know that's a bunch to digest, but these are questions that are coming up as my crew and I continue to play a WOIN NOW campaign. We love the system and are making some collective judgments as needed about the rules as we go, but we're curious to know how others are interpreting them.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TheHirumaChico, post: 9038662, member: 7022501"] My apologies TreChiron, but I'm going to continue your thread topic with some additional questions of my own related to Cover. Your subject line is good, so I figure having more Cover Clarifications discussed within this same thread could be helpful for anyone looking to get their Cover questions answered rather than starting another thread on essentially the same topic. [LIST] [*][U]Positional Effects[/U]: On p. 150 of the NOW and OLD Core rulebook (p. 169 in NEW), there are a couple of handy charts of positional effects ([URL='https://www.woinrules.com/the-rules/combat/positional-effects']these can also be found in the WRRD[/URL]). In the [B][I]Ranged Modifiers[/I][/B] section of all these charts, there is an entry for "[B][COLOR=rgb(85, 57, 130)]Cover[/COLOR][/B]" which is -2d6, a separate entry for "Firing into melee" which is also -2d6, and a separate entry for "Obscured (smoke, darkness, etc.)" which is again -2d6. The NEW chart adds one more entry for "Suppressive fire" which is once more -2d6. In the NOW Core rulebook on the same page, but not in the charts, are text descriptions of these modifiers. In the text description section entitled [B][I]Other Modifiers[/I][/B], it says that making a ranged attack at someone engaged in melee combat "takes a -2d6 [B][COLOR=rgb(85, 57, 130)]cover[/COLOR][/B] penalty." And then it goes on to say "Similarly, in darkness or under cover of obscuring fog or smoke, a –2d6 [B][COLOR=rgb(85, 57, 130)]cover[/COLOR][/B] penalty is inflicted." I'm curious whether these conditions mean that the targets are considered as being "[B][COLOR=rgb(85, 57, 130)]in cover[/COLOR][/B]" for reasons that I go into below. Also, do these penalties stack or not because they are all [B][COLOR=rgb(85, 57, 130)]cover[/COLOR][/B] penalties? I'm inclined to say they do stack since they are listed separately in the handy charts and because I could see it being exceedingly difficult to shoot at a target engaged in melee with one's ally while they are behind a half-wall or a bar in a smoky room. Even more so if that target is also benefitting from their ally's Suppressive Fire. [*] [*]Follow on question to this is whether one can "pin down" a target that is in darkness, smoke, fog, etc. by "chipping away" its cover. I'm inclined to say no as one doesn't really chip away at darkness or obfuscating vapors, which would then imply that these targets are not "[B][COLOR=rgb(85, 57, 130)]in cover[/COLOR][/B]". In the same vein, I don't think one can chip away at the cover of a target that is engaged in melee as that would imply you're chipping away at an ally! [*] [*][U]Exploits[/U]: A few exploits are also dependent on whether a target is defined as "[B][COLOR=rgb(85, 57, 130)]in cover[/COLOR][/B]": [LIST] [*]Dodge (per WRRD): "You may use a reaction to dodge one attack you are aware of, as long as you are not [B][COLOR=rgb(85, 57, 130)]in cover[/COLOR][/B]. State your intention before the attack roll. The attacker suffers a -2d6 penalty for that attack." [LIST] [*]Does this mean that one cannot Dodge if they are in darkness/smoke/fog? [LIST] [*]I don't see why not, but I'd love to know what others think. [/LIST] [*]Does this mean that one cannot Dodge if they are engaged in melee? [LIST] [*]I can understand not being able to Dodge a Ranged Attack while engaged in melee with someone other than the shooter, but I also believe one can certainly Dodge a melee attack by the melee opponent. [/LIST] [/LIST] [*]Spray (per WRRD): "When using a weapon with the auto trait you may spend all your actions to spray a 30’ cone, making one attack against every target [B][U][I]not in cover[/I][/U][/B][I] [/I]within the cone. Make one attack roll and apply it to the RANGED DEFENSE of all within that area." [LIST] [*]Does this mean one cannot use the Spray exploit to fire a 30' cone at a group of persons engaged in melee? [LIST] [*]My opinion is that Spray can be used, albeit with the consequence that the shooter may hit targets they would not wish to hit, though I'm keen to hear others' thoughts. [/LIST] [*]Does this also mean that one cannot use the Spray exploit against targets in a foggy area or a smoky corridor? [LIST] [*]My opinion is that Spray can be used, but with a -2d6 penalty to the single attack roll, though again I'm keen to hear others' thoughts. [/LIST] [*]Would a single target that is benefitting from an ally's Suppressive Fire, who is amongst several possible targets within the potential 30' cone of a Spray attack, be immune to the Spray attack while the others are not? [LIST] [*]My opinion is less formed on this one. I'm inclined to say that Spray can still be used, but I don't think I would apply the -2d6 Suppressive Fire penalty because that would defy the definition of Suppressive Fire providing the benefit of Cover to a "specific ally." Again, the opinions of others would be most welcome and much appreciated. [/LIST] [/LIST] [*]Hunker down (p. 215 of NOW): 'Marines take half damage when "[B][COLOR=rgb(85, 57, 130)]in cover[/COLOR][/B]" '. I could see this working when the marine is engaged in melee with an ally the shooter doesn't want to hit, but I'm not sure I can convince myself that darkness/smoke/fog would trigger this benefit. It seems to be a benefit that depends on the presence of more solid cover that can take the damage instead of the marine. [/LIST] [/LIST] I know that's a bunch to digest, but these are questions that are coming up as my crew and I continue to play a WOIN NOW campaign. We love the system and are making some collective judgments as needed about the rules as we go, but we're curious to know how others are interpreting them. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
EN Publishing
Cover Clarifications
Top