D&D 5E (2014) How much cover is peeking through a wall?

[Asisreo]

Let's say you are behind a corner and have full cover against a ranged enemy. They know you like to peek out from a corner and wants to ready an action to shoot you when you pop out. You want to pop out slightly to get as much cover as you can, three-fourths or half, while still being able to shoot at your target. Would you successfully benefit from cover when the enemy uses their reaction to fire at you when you peek your head from hiding?

 

[Oofta]

I would rule 3/4 cover. You don't have to expose much to peak out.

 

[Prakriti]

There are only three levels of cover in 5E: 1/2, 3/4, and Total.

Peeking around a corner clearly isn't 1/2, and it's clearly not Total, so that only leaves 3/4.

Edit: I missed the part about the character attacking from around the corner. I definitely wouldn't allow that. You lose all cover when you come out to attack.

 

[jaelis]

I would let you choose 3/4 or 1/2, but I’d apply the same cover bonus to your enemy.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I would let you choose 3/4 or 1/2, but I’d apply the same cover bonus to your enemy.

I'd agree with this. Now if someone was to ask why the enemy would get a "cover bonus to AC" as well (even though they might not actually be behind any cover)... my response would be more of semantics--

To try and fire or throw a ranged weapon out from behind a piece of vertical cover (say around a corner), you can't do so effectively just due to the body motion required to make the attack. Your attack would be hindered by trying to fire a longbow by leaning out around a corner (because you wanted to maintain the +2 AC bonus due to half-cover). So that would give the attacker a -2 to their attack roll, which is the equivalent to the enemy gaining a +2 bonus to their AC. Thus my response of whatever cover bonus you wish to claim from the enemy's readied attacks, the enemy gains likewise from your attack (just changing the -2 to your attack to a +2 to the enemy's AC so that I as DM can deal with the number crunching rather than making the player do it.)

And if the player doesn't like that option... they can do what any normal person would do-- step out entirely from behind cover, fire/throw your weapon without any issues (while receiving any readied action attacks against you), and then step back behind cover for the rest of the round. These aren't guns we're firing (where you can stick your arm out from around the corner and fire them at full strength with no mechanical issue whatsoever)... these are weapons that require full body motion needed to generate the power to cause damage.

 

[Nebulous]

I'd agree with this. Now if someone was to ask why the enemy would get a "cover bonus to AC" as well (even though they might not actually be behind any cover)... my response would be more of semantics--

To try and fire or throw a ranged weapon out from behind a piece of vertical cover (say around a corner), you can't do so effectively just due to the body motion required to make the attack. Your attack would be hindered by trying to fire a longbow by leaning out around a corner (because you wanted to maintain the +2 AC bonus due to half-cover). So that would give the attacker a -2 to their attack roll, which is the equivalent to the enemy gaining a +2 bonus to their AC. Thus my response of whatever cover bonus you wish to claim from the enemy's readied attacks, the enemy gains likewise from your attack (just changing the -2 to your attack to a +2 to the enemy's AC so that I as DM can deal with the number crunching rather than making the player do it.)

And if the player doesn't like that option... they can do what any normal person would do-- step out entirely from behind cover, fire/throw your weapon without any issues (while receiving any readied action attacks against you), and then step back behind cover for the rest of the round. These aren't guns we're firing (where you can stick your arm out from around the corner and fire them at full strength with no mechanical issue whatsoever)... these are weapons that require full body motion needed to generate the power to cause damage.

Damn. I never thought about that firing from behind cover adds the same AC bonus to the enemy.

 

[jaelis]

Damn. I never thought about that firing from behind cover adds the same AC bonus to the enemy.

Interpreting it this way makes adjudicating cover very simple, makes in-game sense like 95% of the time, and helps quite a bit with resolving stealth situations. (ie, the rogue wants to stay hidden while he pokes his head into the doorway? That's fine but the enemy gets a 3/4 cover bonus. That seems pretty fair to everyone IMO.)

Just to note though, it isn't really consistent with the detailed cover rules in the DMG, which I think don't handle a situation like this well.

 

[Iry]

The strength of Sharpshooter and Spell Sniper. Of course, the enemy can also use them against you.

 

[Nebulous]

Interpreting it this way makes adjudicating cover very simple, makes in-game sense like 95% of the time, and helps quite a bit with resolving stealth situations. (ie, the rogue wants to stay hidden while he pokes his head into the doorway? That's fine but the enemy gets a 3/4 cover bonus. That seems pretty fair to everyone IMO.)

Just to note though, it isn't really consistent with the detailed cover rules in the DMG, which I think don't handle a situation like this well.

And that's the problem, my players WILL ARGUE that this is a house rule, it's not a core rule, and we have never used it before.

 

[jaelis]

Core rules say you can’t attack from around a corner without moving into the open, so you can stick with that if players insist.